Difference between revisions of "Team:Newcastle/Diary/Minutes/2707"

(Created page with "<html> <ol style="list-style-type: decimal"> <li><blockquote> <p>The minutes from the previous meeting were unanimously approved.</p> </blockquote></li> <li><blockquote> <p>It...")
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
<html>
 
<html>
 +
<table>
 +
<thead>
 +
<tr class="header">
 +
<th>Date</th>
 +
<th>13<sup>th</sup> June 2016</th>
 +
</tr>
 +
</thead>
 +
<tbody>
 +
<tr class="odd">
 +
<td>Time</td>
 +
<td>From 15:00</td>
 +
</tr>
 +
<tr class="even">
 +
<td>Place</td>
 +
<td>CBCB Level 2 Meeting Room</td>
 +
</tr>
 +
<tr class="odd">
 +
<td>Attendees</td>
 +
<td><em>Rupert (chair), Jake (minutes), Emilijia, Josh, Kerry</em></td>
 +
</tr>
 +
<tr class="even">
 +
<td>Apologies</td>
 +
<td>Kristina, Ollie, Lauren</td>
 +
</tr>
 +
<tr class="odd">
 +
<td>Previous Meeting</td>
 +
<td>13<sup>th</sup> July 2016</td>
 +
</tr>
 +
</tbody>
 +
</table>
 
<ol style="list-style-type: decimal">
 
<ol style="list-style-type: decimal">
 
<li><blockquote>
 
<li><blockquote>

Revision as of 09:55, 29 July 2016

Date 13th June 2016
Time From 15:00
Place CBCB Level 2 Meeting Room
Attendees Rupert (chair), Jake (minutes), Emilijia, Josh, Kerry
Apologies Kristina, Ollie, Lauren
Previous Meeting 13th July 2016

  1. The minutes from the previous meeting were unanimously approved.

  2. It was noted that the content for the iGEM page on the CSBB website has been sent around. Neil says that there are a few spelling mistakes that need to be fixed.

  3. It was highlighted that our documents are on Google Drive (e.g. cloning protocols), some members noted that they didn’t have access to this resource. Action to send around the Google Drive link again.

  4. The issue of constructs was raised. We have not yet received our construct back from DNA 2.0. Action to chase this up. Need to check with Wendy whether we asked for the plasmid to be sent back to us before and after it has been cloned into the pSB1C3 vector.

    1. Additionally we need to investigated having the other DNA constructs made via the IDT free allowance. Action to identify easiest ones to make and prepare cloning strategies for these (most likely arabinose controlled ion uptake). Action to have them checked and then ordered. Also order the alternative lightbulb constructs.

    2. We also need to investigate using the iLOV protein.

  5. Feedback was given on the temperature/current experiments performed in CBCB and an explanation of the microfluidics system was given.

    1. Action to order the temperature measurement dye for measuring the temperature in the microfluidic devices.

    2. Action to produce E. coli growth curves in TAE, TBE and various concentrations of NaCl solution. Also need to double check that it is indeed Hydrogen gas given off when a current is passed through TAE and TBE (from the Hs in the acid components). If we continue to use salt solutions we need to consider ways of dealing with the chlorine gas production.

    3. It was also discussed that without the buffer agarose gel melts when a current is passed through it. An alternative strategy would be to perhaps embed the bacteria in the gel which would then heat them. Action to experiment with heating effects on various concentrations of agarose.

    4. All future experiments regarding the components is to take place in CBCB, there is a bench in the level 2 with our stuff on it. Martin will supervise so please let him know when you are there, Neil would like us to be there on a regular basis so that we can make some headway with getting the right materials. If we need to pour any more PBMS wait for Lucy.

    5. Action to source some platinum wire for electrodes as the copper wire degrades.

    6. Neil has ordered some UV LEDs for use in the components but is currently looking for smaller pieces, if we find any first send him an Amazon link.

  6. It was noted that we need to follow up with the specific heat capacity experiments (action to contact Rob).

  7. We ran through the presentation for the Scottish iGEM meetup and made corrections. Action to prepare feedback for next week after the event.

  8. Could we add a plug for SBOL visual to the wiki with some explanation as to why we are using it (e.g. most SBIO journals are requiring it these days) (action).

  9. It was brought up that the track selection deadline is the 12th of August as is the title and abstract deadline. We have set a draft deadline of next Wednesday (3rd August) and a soft deadline for the following Wednesday (10 August). Track selection information will have to be sent out (action distribute pros and cons for the foundational advance track and resend the previous two tracks) as some instructors will be absent from the subsequent meetings.

  10. Look into how Reading and Bielefeld made improvements to their respective fuel cells. One idea that was discussed was engineering the bacteria so that electrons could be transferred to the mediator M. blue faster (e.g. by making the cell more porous (action to investigate further).

  11. We should talk to Goksel Misirli regarding our simulator design and standard virtual parts (action to follow up: http://homepages.cs.ncl.ac.uk/goksel.misirli/).

  12. The laser cut components were shown and feedback sought. It was suggested that we fix the washer size as the currently flexibility might prevent a good electrical connection to be made. It was also suggested that we make all the connecting parts identical so that all the pieces were standardised and it was easier to put them together (action to remake connectors).

  13. All the meetups have been arranged but we have not yet registered for the Jamboree (deadline August 31st) as we need discount codes from Neil and Tom as they are judges this year (action to chase up).

  14. Future apologies were made, Neil and Dana will not be in the meeting next week then Neil is away from the 15th of August for 3 weeks.