Difference between revisions of "Team:Linkoping Sweden/Collaborations"
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
<h3>Cambridge JIC-team, England </h3> | <h3>Cambridge JIC-team, England </h3> | ||
| − | <h3>The Cambrige JIC-team were genereating a chloroplast transformation toolkit and were interested in expressing a CRISPR/Cas9-system in the chloroplats of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. The purpose of the project was to achieve homoplasmy quicker, in a matter of days rather than months since no selective plating would be required. <h3> | + | <h3>The Cambrige JIC-team were genereating a chloroplast transformation toolkit and were interested in expressing a CRISPR/Cas9-system in the chloroplats of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. The purpose of the project was to achieve homoplasmy quicker, in a matter of days rather than months since no selective plating would be required. </h3> |
| − | <h3>This has been an ongoing cooperation in the form of e-mail contact, skype meeting and weekly reports about the week that was. The exchange has included discussions, questions about the model organism, gibson assembly and other approaches, different protocols and other things that felt unclear.<h3> | + | <h3>This has been an ongoing cooperation in the form of e-mail contact, skype meeting and weekly reports about the week that was. The exchange has included discussions, questions about the model organism, gibson assembly and other approaches, different protocols and other things that felt unclear.</h3> |
| − | USP/UNIFESP, Brazil | + | <h3>USP/UNIFESP, Brazil</h3> |
| − | The Brazil team USP/UNIFESP also work with C. reinhardtii and wanted to try CRISPR/Cas9 with RNPs but encountered som difficulties when it turned out that another team worked on a similar project. The team needed a new approach which we helped them with. This was done by exchancing protocols and regular updates from both teams. | + | <h3>The Brazil team USP/UNIFESP also work with C. reinhardtii and wanted to try CRISPR/Cas9 with RNPs but encountered som difficulties when it turned out that another team worked on a similar project. The team needed a new approach which we helped them with. This was done by exchancing protocols and regular updates from both teams.</h3> |
| − | Northwestern, USA | + | <h3>Northwestern, USA </h3> |
| − | Received protocols for several experiments and exchanged ideas to optimize protocols. The main collaboration was in the beginning of the period. | + | <h3>Received protocols for several experiments and exchanged ideas to optimize protocols. The main collaboration was in the beginning of the period.</h3> |
| − | Collaborations via surveys | + | <h3> </h3> |
| − | Surveys are a easy way to reach the public, LiU iGEM both answered and shared surveys from other teams in order to help them in their work. | + | <h3>Collaborations via surveys</h3> |
| + | <h3>Surveys are a easy way to reach the public, LiU iGEM both answered and shared surveys from other teams in order to help them in their work. <h3> | ||
| − | Collaborations via surveys were with following teams: | + | <h3>Collaborations via surveys were with following teams:</h3> |
| − | Team Chalmers, Sweden | + | <h3>Team Chalmers, Sweden</h3> |
| − | Team XMU, China | + | <h3>Team XMU, China</h3> |
| − | Team Aachen, Germany | + | <h3>Team Aachen, Germany</h3> |
| − | LMU and TU Münich, Germany | + | <h3>LMU and TU Münich, Germany</h3> |
<html> | <html> | ||
Revision as of 18:19, 6 October 2016
LiU iGEM
Contents
- 1 Collaborations
- 2 Cambridge JIC-team, England
- 3 The Cambrige JIC-team were genereating a chloroplast transformation toolkit and were interested in expressing a CRISPR/Cas9-system in the chloroplats of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. The purpose of the project was to achieve homoplasmy quicker, in a matter of days rather than months since no selective plating would be required.
- 4 This has been an ongoing cooperation in the form of e-mail contact, skype meeting and weekly reports about the week that was. The exchange has included discussions, questions about the model organism, gibson assembly and other approaches, different protocols and other things that felt unclear.
- 5 USP/UNIFESP, Brazil
- 6 The Brazil team USP/UNIFESP also work with C. reinhardtii and wanted to try CRISPR/Cas9 with RNPs but encountered som difficulties when it turned out that another team worked on a similar project. The team needed a new approach which we helped them with. This was done by exchancing protocols and regular updates from both teams.
- 7 Northwestern, USA
- 8 Received protocols for several experiments and exchanged ideas to optimize protocols. The main collaboration was in the beginning of the period.
- 9
- 10 Collaborations via surveys
- 11 Surveys are a easy way to reach the public, LiU iGEM both answered and shared surveys from other teams in order to help them in their work. <h3> <h3>Collaborations via surveys were with following teams:
- 12 Team Chalmers, Sweden
- 13 Team XMU, China
- 14 Team Aachen, Germany
- 15 LMU and TU Münich, Germany
Collaborations
Cambridge JIC-team, England
The Cambrige JIC-team were genereating a chloroplast transformation toolkit and were interested in expressing a CRISPR/Cas9-system in the chloroplats of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. The purpose of the project was to achieve homoplasmy quicker, in a matter of days rather than months since no selective plating would be required.
This has been an ongoing cooperation in the form of e-mail contact, skype meeting and weekly reports about the week that was. The exchange has included discussions, questions about the model organism, gibson assembly and other approaches, different protocols and other things that felt unclear.
USP/UNIFESP, Brazil
The Brazil team USP/UNIFESP also work with C. reinhardtii and wanted to try CRISPR/Cas9 with RNPs but encountered som difficulties when it turned out that another team worked on a similar project. The team needed a new approach which we helped them with. This was done by exchancing protocols and regular updates from both teams.
Northwestern, USA
Received protocols for several experiments and exchanged ideas to optimize protocols. The main collaboration was in the beginning of the period.
Collaborations via surveys
Team Chalmers, Sweden
Team XMU, China
Team Aachen, Germany
LMU and TU Münich, Germany
★ ALERT!
This page is used by the judges to evaluate your team for the team collaboration silver medal criterion.
Delete this box in order to be evaluated for this medal. See more information at Instructions for Evaluated Pages .
Sharing and collaboration are core values of iGEM. We encourage you to reach out and work with other teams on difficult problems that you can more easily solve together.
Which other teams can we work with?
You can work with any other team in the competition, including software, hardware, high school and other tracks. You can also work with non-iGEM research groups, but they do not count towards the iGEM team collaboration silver medal criterion.
In order to meet the silver medal criteria on helping another team, you must complete this page and detail the nature of your collaboration with another iGEM team.
Here are some suggestions for projects you could work on with other teams:
- Improve the function of another team's BioBrick Part or Device
- Characterize another team's part
- Debug a construct
- Model or simulating another team's system
- Test another team's software
- Help build and test another team's hardware project
- Mentor a high-school team
