Team:TEC COSTA RICA/Human Practices

Human Practices

Based on principles such as responsibility, accountability, dedication, creativity, tolerance to opinion, awareness of the human being and its environment, we have managed to determine the synergies between synthetic biology and the ethical, moral, social, educational aspects that revolve around it.

Introduction

After more than two years of having begun this experience, we are very proud to share with the world how much we have learned. It’s our hope to give back to society the knowledge received from the experience of many professionals and potential users who correctly expressed what we wanted to reflect with our project.

Color key

Team formation and our track up to iGEM
Project shaping and feedback
Capacitation for the team
Dissemination of the project and synthetic biology
Highlights
Collaborations

2019

November

Team creation: 3 biotechnologists (Jimena Fuentes, Ysis Lanzoni and Mariana Sáenz)
First brainstorm meetings
PI definition (David García)

December

First main project idea obtention: antibodies and snake venom
Team member addition: computer engineer (Gustavo Segura)
Participation in Startup Weekend Competition: Winners
Team member addition: biotechnologist (Jose Lizano)
First feedback meeting about our snake venom related project: Clodomiro Picado Institute experts: idea finally oriented to bee venom
Talk with the member of the Academic Division in the Clodomiro Picado Institute of the University of Costa Rica Ph.D. José María Gutiérrez

2020

January

Team member addition: industrial design engineer (Camila Flores)
Meeting with the NGO “Apicultores de Costa Rica” director Juan Bautista Alvarado
First benchmarking group workshop for project image and name definition: ScFbee
Team member addition: computer engineer (Marco Herrera)

February

First SCRUM group workshop for project organization
First international feedback regarding our project from M.Sc.Eng, Ph.D. Andreas Hougaard Laustsen, associate Professor of Tropical Pharmacology & Biotherapeutics at Technical University of Denmark: whole project idea rejection given its complexity and relevance.

March

Second brainstorm meetings
Team member addition: electronics engineer (Johan Guillén)
Second main project idea obtention: Kill switch for waste water treatment (Proluo)
Idea validation with Prof. PhD. Karla Meneses Montero
Team member addition: (Alonso Segura)
Pandemic starts: team readjusts to virtuality, university is suspended
Human Practices redefinition: Start of interactive labs development

April

First iGEM latam teams meeting: exposure of our projects and feedback UANL 2019 team meeting: feedback about our killswitch, modeling and counter ideas
Team member addition: industrial design engineer (Andrea Vargas)
Wiki compilation research according to areas of work of each member

May

Shift of focus: from direct application in waste-water treatment to foundational advance involving a suicide circuit
Second benchmarking group workshop for project image and name definition: Chronobacter
Development of genetic counter circuit
Workshops between team members: introduction to coding, basic mathematical modeling in biology, synthetic biology for non-biologists, among others

June

Feedback meeting with the ex iGEMer (MSc. student) Pablo Vargas from Prostal (iGEM Costa Rica 2016) team: project orientation about on basic keys for mathematical modeling in biology and stochastic processes recommendations
The Markov chain is implemented in the project
Attendance to measurement committee’s Webinars about math modeling

July

Feedback meeting with Ph.D. Juan Gabriel Calvo Alpízar about how to randomize a deterministic system to extract information by the Gillespie algorithm
Gillespie algorithm implementation on our project
Second international feedback meeting about our project with Dr. Jerome Bonnet and Dr. Pakpoom Subsoontorn: implications of circuit overcounts and recommendation for the use of serine recombinases
Feedback meeting with Ph.D. Maikol Solís Chacón, who gave us the approval of the implemented markov chain
Since we were unable to obtain the necessary funding for the team’s inscription, we could not participate in the iGEM 2020 event. Nonetheless, we chose to keep improving our project for iGEM 2021
Final assignment of roles to team members

September

LabXChange meeting

October

Participation as speakers at “II Jornadas de Bioinformática Clínica” organized by Consejo Técnico de Bioinformática Clínica (CTBC) from the Unit of Health Technologies of Costa Rica's Ministry of Health, with the topic: “Diseño de contador genético: implicaciones y aplicaciones”

November

Narrative publication of two team members on LabXchange Harvard’s platform
First algorithm/software proposal - new shift in our project

2021

February

Publication of virtual labs in LabXchange Harvard’s platform
Team member addition: industrial design engineer (Josué Montoya)
Definition of new objectives for human practices

March

Synthetic biobots meeting
Fundraising
The concept of decision tree that allowed to model the behavior of our circuit was developed
Feedback meeting with Ph.D. Daniel Campos Salas, who helped us with the ordinary differential equations

April

Feedback meeting with Ph.D. Alexandra Pokhilko, who corrected some mistakes and gave us advice about different ways to adapt our equations to simulate the functioning of our genetic circuit.
Obtention of funding for bio parts, laboratory reagents and consumable materials ($2.000.00)
CONARE’s approval for our iGEM team official inscription’s funding support

May

Social media activation: Instagram (@igem_costarica), Facebook (igemCR)
Feedback from Lic. Samanta García, iGEM LATAM Ambassador and ex iGEMer from Costa Rica
Attendance at the iGEM 2021 Opening Weekend Festival
First contact with other teams for collaborations through iGEM Global Slack channel
Collaboration with iGEM Estambul’s team: feedback meeting
Attendance at the 1st Engineering Committee Webinar series
TEC Costa Rica iGEM team official inscription payment
Project presentation for MedSci Week for Student Chapters CAS y EMBS
Collaboration with iGEM BOKU-Vienna team: implementation feedback meeting

June

Collaboration for iGEM IISER Berhampur team: comic strip
TEC Costa Rica iGEM team official register
Feedback meeting with iGEM FCB_UANL 2020’s team: about biosafety and intellectual property
Collaboration with iGEM MSU team: mutual feedback meeting
Collaboration with Ioannina Greece team: feedback meeting
Feedback meeting with iGEM CR 2019 team, Diffeasy for technical advices and general iGEM recommendations
Potential users feedback meeting: a total of 9 people: Karla Meneses, Karla Valerín, Jason Pérez, Randall Chacón, Laura Calvo, Monserrat Jarquín, Carolina Centeno, Raúl Trejos, Alejandro Hernández
Collaboration with iGEM Concordia, iGEM LMSU, and iGEM KCL teams: Pledge Campaign for Diversity & Inclusion
Collaboration for iGEM Patras team: SDGs Video
Collaboration with iGEM NCKU-Tainan and iGEM Vienna teams: #DeStressiGEM challenge to promote mental health

July

Potential users feedback meetings: a total of 3 people: ​​Miguel Rojas, Johan Morales and Silvia Castro
Feedback: Q&A with Ediner Fuentes
A mathematical model was developed with the ability to calculate the force of promoters according to the fluorescence reported over time
Collaboration for iGEM Moscow team: Russian Meetup
Collaboration for iGEM Düsseldorf: Postcard project
Collaboration with iGEM MSU team: biocontainment round table
font color="green">Collaboration for iGEM CCU Taiwan: picture book project

August

Shipping policies data compilation from Costa Rican bio entrepreneurs and researchers: a total of 10 people: Mario Porras, Eng. Andrea Fuentes, Eng. Victoria Portuguez, Eng. Mónica Zamora, Andriu Brenes, Eng. Richard Carit, M. Eng.Randal Chacón, M.Sc. Luis Barboza, Miguel Rojas, Eng. David García
Feedback meeting about ethics and legislation of GMOs with M.Sc. Carolina Peláez
Participation at iGEM LATAM Meetup
First session of the Synbio Club: “¿what is synthetic biology?”
Potential users feedback meetings: a total of 21 people: Carola Scholz, Luis Barboza, Rossy Guillén, Laura Chaves, Kendall Alfaro, Kattia Núñez, Olman Gómez, Juan Carlos Hernández, Victoria Zamora, Alexander Schmidt, Catalina Rosales, Carolina Sánchez, Pablo Jiménez, Stefany Solano, Alejandra Chaverri, Alexandra Martínez, Abad Rodríguez, Frank Solano, Rodrigo Mora, Pablo Bolaños, David García
Collaboration for iGEM ULaval, iGEM Concordia, iGEM Patras and iGEM Thessaloniki teams: “Rosalind Chronicles” to honor the contribution of Women in STEM
Shipping Policies Project meeting with the Shipping Policy Project Team members Eng. María José Durán and M. Sc. Osman Padilla

September

Project presentation at the University of Costa Rica mathematical colloquiums with the topic: “Applying mathematics to synthetic biology in the context of a global competition”
Potential users feedback meetings: a total of 4 people: César Rodríguez, Adrian Pinto, Silver Ceballos and Aníbal Mora
Peruvian Journal Club
Second session of the Synbio Club: “main genetic pieces”
Participation at iGEM LATAM Fest
Collaboration with iGEM Guelph team: interview for the creation of in-depth summaries regarding iGEM projects and team experiences

October

Third session of the Synbio Club: “chassis selection in synthetic biology: ¿what should I know?”

The search for ways to mitigate the impact of man on the planet, to repay it the benefits that has given to us as growing professionals and human beings or simply to try to find solutions based on what it is already around us, is part of the task in which not only dedicated or enthusiastic scientists should be involved, but it must be a whole network of circular support. Environmental and moral concerns should be involved from the process of having an idea, making this idea a creation, to each of its ramifications and resulting coincidences.

Through this process of ethical evaluation, we do not intend to just write it down on paper, but to ensure that it is put into practice and serve as a reference for those projects that involve genetic modification systems and their biocontainment methods.
As a starting point, we consider the concept of biosafety mentioned by Munshi & Sharma (2018) which described it “as an asset of actions or concerns to minimize or erase the potential risks to environment or living beings derived from development, implementation, or commercialization of biotechnology or bioengineering or to counteract the negative impact of these two fields”.
On the basis of the above-mentioned concept, our main values considered in order to cover all the potential risks and keep them in mind are: integrity, responsibility, balance, accountability, commitment, perseverance and innovation; all of them with the intention of having under control not only the specific project parts and their interactions but also the whole range of applications, as seen on the implementation section. The possibilities are not limited for the users applications. It’s also our responsibility to make sure we are giving them a safe and assessed result that has previous confirmation of the development process step by step by multiple and highly prepared professionals.

It can be difficult to validate the idea of a project whose technical basis is not only a specific area, in this case synthetic biology, but other complements such as our framework and circuit, that function as tools and whose specific application has not yet been elucidated. Nonetheless, it’s important to submit all projects to a rigorous evaluation of the implications of this interaction of elements for the environment and its impact on society. The elaboration of a risk assessment, as detailed in the implementation section, is essential to achieve an integral project.
In addition, as a foundational advance project, the elaboration of a good assessment is complicated, since it involves a balance between looking profoundly into the tools and their possible applications and impact, without biasing or limiting their application. A great tool is both made by its wide range and its effectiveness when applied to specific issues. However, to have a truly valuable tool, it’s not its creator who determines this value, but its prospective users. This is why we went to them to evaluate our tool, orient it towards their actual needs, and optimize it accordingly. With these interviews we also wanted to demonstrate that fresh ideas from competent professionals can have a significant contribution to the development of the project, even when in opposition to the initial proposals. The real enrichment is about finding convergences between differences.

Reference
Munshi, A., & Sharma, V. (2018). Safety and Ethics in Biotechnology and Bioengineering. Omics Technologies and Bio-Engineering, 577–590. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-804659-3.00025-7

Biocontainment

Genetically engineered organisms, despite their many advantages, continue to be regarded as threatening to human and environmental health, as uncontrolled modification and development of specifically constructed gene assemblies by using advanced techniques has meant continuous disagreement (Munshi & Sharma, 2018). That is why, together with the iGEM MSU team, we believe that it is essential to facilitate discussion and evaluation spaces for biocontainment systems and other relevant safety-related subjects of interest for the participating iGEM teams. You can take a look at the explanation of the activity in the Collaborations section.

At the round table, the teams agreed that from the moment the idea was conceived, it’s really necessary to assess if implementing synthetic biology is the best method to solve a problem or if there are better alternatives that do not require complex systems, given the risk regarding the release release of synthetic, possibly detrimental, genetic material and organisms to the environment. Concern was raised about current biocontainment techniques; including evaluation of chassis type, metabolic burden efficiency, mutations, homologous gene transfer, whether it is better to implement a physical or biological retention and even if there really should be biocontainment, considering that synbio will always be interacting with the environment in some way.

Regardless of which organism you are working with inside or outside iGEM, there is no excuse not to consider the biosafety of genetically engineered organisms. This is necessary in order to avoid the project being considered an irresponsible or lacking of scientific justification, and to prevent pressure campaigns and opponents to synthetic biology, which would imply a regression to the progress achieved to date (Christiansen, 2016). Ensuring that there is an efficient and effective way to limit the metabolism, development, mobility, life in general of a micro-organism or in general the retention and removal of human-modified genetic fragments, allow for greater credibility and a better image of what is being done in synthetic biology. In this way, we are hoping for a better reception of the tools and products generated, which ultimately are expected to be new solutions which, in contrast to existing ones, will be more beneficial in their use and impact on the environment and society.

At the beginning we thought of conducting a round of surveys to probe the perception of the development, use and regulation of genetically modified organisms in Costa Rica; however, because it is advisable to have an adequate sample in terms of its characteristics and number, and because of the virtuality of the moment, it was difficult to contact people beyond the academic environment of those who participate in the team. We instead decided to focus our efforts on analyzing synthetic biology from a social perspective along with other considerations such as science communication that we believe should be raised by the rest of the iGEM teams in their projects. To learn more about synthetic biology’s questions about the social sciences, please refer to the section {Involvement of the social sciences}; more information regarding communication, storytelling and design are found at Design.

Reference
Christiansen, A. (2016). The Ethics of Synthetic Biology: Respecting Life and Managing Risk. Det Humanistiske Fakultet, Københavns Universitet.
Munshi, A., & Sharma, V. (2018). Safety and Ethics in Biotechnology and Bioengineering. Omics Technologies and Bio-Engineering, 577–590. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-804659-3.00025-7

Involvement of the social sciences

This bidirectional exchange with the social sciences students of University of Costa Rica (UCR), turned into something that, although not usually considered with the deserved relevance, demonstrates the weight of these considerations and the impact it can have on what synthetic biologists develop. Particularly in the way in which it can be received by others, because the results should, after all, be oriented towards their usefulness, impact and benefits for society and the environment.
Within the conversation certain counterpoints for the synbio community were shown. These are not capricious demands, on the contrary, they managed to evaluate our own criteria as a team with respect to what we have learned before and during the competition. Some of the highlights collected are shown below:

  • It is fundamental to question the interests that are pursued with the development of our project and if it will really get where it is needed, since it is not new that many of the scientific and technological developments have a tendency to lean mainly for political and economic reasons.
  • The fact that humans have had a dominant role over nature was put on the balance, including its alteration and grabbing of resources without looking to pay its debt to the environment despite the pressures of climate change, always under the justification that it is finally a benefit for the human being. As scientists we must avoid being and portraying ourselves as ecological imperialism and extractivism supporters at all cost.
  • Policy often tends to manipulate environmental issues to leave benefits in the hands of very few, promoting an imbalance and bringing down the sustainable development that is desirable. The political classes, in order to win the favoritism of the population, take advantage to sell themselves as supporters of the green movements, making the real environmental initiatives lose credibility when they really do seek to support and strengthen bioethics.
  • Sometimes the problem appears to be solved, but it is vital to ensure that the resolution of that problem isn’t just that it becomes someone else's, thus becoming a cyclical and time-consuming "export of the problem", which tends to fall on countries or sectors that are unlikely to have the resources to mitigate its the impact.
  • Science should always comply with ethical and moral commitments, but it should also seek a socio-political commitment, since science is governed by the supply and demand dictated by the needs of the population and its own values. We should keep in mind that decisions take power in the hands of the people if there is adequate communication, proper accountability and dissemination of the information that they should know to make responsible choices. Misinformation generates contagious rejection, whereas well-founded opinion generates responsible criteria construction on individuals.
  • It is of major importance to change the negative connotation of the term "transgenic", since what we want to avoid is the pressure to disguise that perception either by using false information or by omission of details that can be decisive for its approval or rejection by society. That is why they proposed, as an ideal situation, the investment in the primary education of children to build adults, whose new, broader and more informed perspective modify social structure and roles to achieve the proper development of the sciences applied to real life.
  • If we want to educate on topics such as synthetic biology or biotechnology in general, we must first ensure that everyone is being educated without leaving out those who have had fewer opportunities. The universalization of education, the reduction of social gaps and inequality are key points for the formation of the activist spirit in the future agents of change.
  • In retrospect, thanks to this dialogue we understood that synbio depends on people in a holistic way, and that, consequently, a problem is not truly solved if it is still a problem in the social realm.
  • To learn more about these constructive criticisms, reflections and suggestions that they offered us, consult the section of {Excellence in another area}.

Sustainable development goals

As young people in science, we are committed to being agents of change and that is why we decided to participate in the initiative of the iGEM Patras team, activity detailed in the Collaborations section.

As a team we chose four main initial sustainable development goals to work with and established for each one a vision of what we hope to accomplish during the development of the project and that is reflected in its expected implementation by other teams in the future:

  1. Good health and wellbeing: as mentioned by some of the experts consulted, our circuit could be used in areas as biomedicine that includes the pharmaceutical industry and private biomedical companies. As examples: our framework could be useful to treat specific diseases in a more accurate way, the sequential logic implemented could determine a disease’s state, avoiding the use of invasive methods, and the whole system could help to indicate when it’s necessary to change a treatment, such as chemotherapy or immunotherapy, also allowing to establish diseases as a state machine in order to develop decision pathways to treat more efficiently a certain sickness based on its progression. All of them thought with the objective to save valuable time and lives.
  2. Clean water and sanitation: some consulted experts noted that our circuit has potential in water treatment techniques and environmental assays. From the beginning, our project was conceived by our team as useful for bioremediation applications, because we know that water is a valuable and limited resource and even more so in developing countries like ours. Hence, a system like ours, which contemplates biocontainment, is the minimum expected if someone wants to work with synthetic biology and be responsible towards health and the environment at the same time.
  3. Responsible consumption and production: as told by some experts, this system could also be a highly useful industrial tool and that, with our framework, the industry procedures could be optimized according to the users’ needs. The exploration of different pathways would potentialize the production of specific compounds by determining the most efficient routes and applying metabolic engineering to reduce costs and improve methodologies of production, therefore reducing the number of toxic reagents and resources, such as water, needed by production. This would make the final products more sustainable and, when applying sequential logic, even make available the opportunity for circular processes. Nevertheless, the most important part is that our counter circuit enables the autonomous time management of our engineered bacteria, making the kill-switch independent from environmental conditions. The way this mechanism could be so independent is both an advantage and a potential risk because biology and human interest are uncertain, a fact we have been aware of throughout the process and been keen to contemplate as much as possible in our project.
  4. Partnerships for the goals: our team, as many others in iGEM, reflect the necessity for interdisciplinarity and cooperation to achieve not only the completion of a project but for it to be as optimal and functional as possible. We strongly believe that, as society, we need the integration of different points of view to be considered as true game changers on the proposal of solutions that push for change in the country’s policies and laws and in society itself. In parallel, encouraging communication between the scientific and non-scientific communities is key to convert strategies into more than just a bait to be well perceived by the general public, government or other countries and also to demonstrate that there is a bidirectional relationship between society, policy and development, making it relevant for everyone to have the basic knowledge necessary to make decisions.


Adapted from The SDGs in action [Photograph], by United Nations Development Programme, 2021, UNDP (https://www.undp.org/sustainable-development-goals)

We selected these 4 main SDGs because they could perfectly​​ cover up some main issues listed as “society group’s worries” by Christiansen (2016): objections related with the human relationship to life and nature, opinions about risk and uncertainty; and on negative socio economic repercussions; all problems which must be solved through collective actions
For more detailed info about how we expect our project to be applied in real life, please go to the subsection applications in the implementation segment.

Reference
United Nations Development Programme. (2021). The SDGs in action [Photograph]. UNDP. https://www.undp.org/sustainable-development-goals

Synthetic biology has the potential to have a high impact on the development of solutions to problems that already exist or have not yet come to light. That’s why, like any valuable tool, it needs to be protected and handled responsibly. This is achieved effectively only if there is a good communication process between those who understand its technicalities and those who will be directly or indirectly involved in its manipulation, use or understanding of it in order to achieve a good transfer of knowledge with society.

We consulted several experts, in the quality of potential users, for a realistic evaluation of our tool’s value and its efficiency at targeting their needs. The professionals consulted in meetings with a duration between one and two hours, really broke the expected scheme in the best of ways, as they drastically changed the vision of all areas of the project, in a technical and social level, as well as the direction to which it should be oriented in order to be a tool with real use, applicability and impact. They looked far and beyond the ideal of doing something unique and changing the world all the way to its real impact in practical scenarios.

The meetings per se involved our presenting of the tools without hinting at their possible applications, which was particularly enriching since we made a point of assembling experts with different backgrounds and perspectives. Our presentation skills and storytelling improved along the way, allowing us to have more daunting meetings and making better follow-up questions to their inputs. Hence, each meeting was more enriching than the last, allowing us to slowly cover all the gaps in our project and expand the possibilities for its implementation.

The main questions made were about what kind of changes would they change and what kind of applications do they suggest. Below, the potential users and their feedback:

M.Sc. Mauricio Chicas Romero

pointed out the circuit’s potential for industrial setting to eliminate contamination from product before harvest, Also commented the possibility of our algorithm break the limits of photosynthesis, or metabolite production by segmentation

PhD. Karla Meneses and M. Sc. Raúl Trejos

mentioned that as industrial applications for our circuit it could be very useful as a biocontrol system for bacteria and for diminishing production costs in optimized systems as fermentations, respectively.

M.B.A Karla Valerín Berrocal,

visualized our algorithm on gene silencing, metabolic engineering, manipulating regulation of existing genes.

M. Sc. Carola Scholz, M. Eng. Randall Chacón, PhD. Frank Solano Campos, Lic. Juan Carlos Hernández and Ph.D. Candidate Kattia Nuñez Montero

saw the circuit potential for bioremediation applications; specifying water treatment techniques and environmental assays and metal remotion.

M.Sc. Jason Pérez Chaves

related the algorithm with helping plants to change their behavior; and for the circuit, he said it was just like a synthetic biological clock with many uses in life.

PhD. Monserrat Jarquín, PhD. Pablo Jiménez and PhD. Stefany Solano González

suggested industry applications related with the potential functionality of our system for studying different pathways in just one circuit, determining the interaction of specific synthetic compounds with its sub-products and for inducing production after a certain time.

Lic. Kendall Alfaro Jiménez and PhD. Carolina Centeno Cerdas

said our system could be useful to know when is necessary to change a treatment such as chemotherapy and to establish diseases as a state machines to develop decision pathways to treat more efficiently a certain sickness.

Dr.rer.nat Miguel Rojas Chaves

suggested biosensing applications for our genetic circuit, for testing how a specific bacteria reacts to certain components to obtain models of effectiveness of these compounds.

M. Sc. Alejandro Hernández Soto and M. Sc. Luis Barboza Fallas

respectively said that the circuit could avoid protein or recombinant protein alterations like misfolding or aggregation of recombinant proteins for industrial production by coupling killswitch to protein state and concentration, and keep it variable depending on needs as release certain protein to the media or by triggering death before it happens.

M. Sc. Silvia Castro Piedra

denoted biomedicine and therapeutics as areas for implementation of the genetic circuit, in order to attack pathogenic infections, to prevent severe immune responses, as a COVID-19 treatment and to develop human cell-cultures treatments.

Ing. Johan Morales Sánchez and Lic. Rossy Guillén Watson

suggested that our system could be useful for waste-water treatment and for antibiotic traceability under different conditions, respectively.

Bach. Laura Chaves, PhD. Candidate Olman Gómez Espinoza and M.Ed. Carolina Sancho Blanco,

mentioned some applications of the framework for industry as the formulation and development of nanoparticles for large scale metabolic engineering and determining the production and interaction of desired product with its subproducts that could also have potential to our designed system.

Ph.D. Candidate Olman Gómez Espinoza and Lic. Juan Carlos Hernández

told us our system’s framework could be useful to study different degradation pathways and for allocating resources or changing qualities for periods of time while maintaining balance in a complex environment.

Lic. Victoria Zamora and Lic. Juan Carlos Hernández

suggested as a framework application that could be useful for bioremediation of multiple substances according to the present stimuli, environment and followed pathway could allow the following of the correct order to maintain balance and be able to execute the task efficiently.

PhD. Candidate (M.Eng) Alexander Schmidt Durán

said that we are probably generating the scaffold that solves the problem of trying a thousand of things in a laboratory and that anyone could do whatever they imagine. He added that sequential logic applies to everything in life.

PhD. candidate MSc. Catalina Rosales López

talked about the algorithm that can optimize further characterization by knowing exactly the desired behavior, that is very useful for investigation and it has several applications.

PhD. Candidate (M.Eng) Alexander Schmidt Durán

told us our system’s framework could be useful to study different degradation pathways and for allocating resources or changing qualities for periods of time while maintaining balance in a complex environment.

PhD. candidate MSc. Catalina Rosales López

mentioned that as industrial applications for our circuit it could be very useful as a biocontrol system for bacteria and for diminishing production costs in optimized systems as fermentations, respectively.

M.Ed Jorengeth Abad Rodríguez Rodríguez,

commented that the circuit could be implemented in Industrial processes like bioelectronics in relationship to the attack against multiresistant bacterias to get them to self destruct, to provoke resistance elimination or other potential changes. In this process they also could die and then the electric circuit becomes constructive involving intracellular metabolites. And for the algorithm, suggested Industrial applications as metabolic optimization and engineering. Specifically, substrate consumption to improve efficiency via sequential steps.

PhD. Pablo Bolaños Villegas

mentioned directed evolution as an area for both the circuit and the algorithm.

PhD. Rodrigo Mora Rodríguez

told us that with our system it could be interesting to analyze the mechanism of action of new types of antibiotics.

PhD. César Rodríguez Sánchez and Lic. Rossy Guillén Watson

talked about the potential interest in applying the circuit for making in vivo assays regarding interaction between bacteria and the organism; and for experimentation with different pathogenic bacterias, respectively.

PhD. Rodrigo Mora Rodríguez

told us that with our system it could be interesting to analyze the mechanism of action of new types of antibiotics.

PhD. César Rodríguez Sánchez and Lic. Rossy Guillén Watson

talked about the potential interest in applying the circuit for making in vivo assays regarding interaction between bacteria and the organism; and for experimentation with different pathogenic bacterias, respectively.

PhD. Adrián Pinto

proposed the circuit as a resource for investigating toxin expression and also for studies between correlation phenotype and virulence. Also talked about the ideas of using the algorithm related to biological control with entomopathogenic fungi, by masking toxins until fungus is established in order to allow infection; or even by incorporating it for quorum sensing phenomenon studies.

MSc. candidate Silver Ceballos

about the circuit mentioned the implementation related to co-culture in fermentations in order to align resources so that one organism produces a certain product and then dies for the other one to take over, like a relay.

Dr.rer.nat. Anibal Mora

suggested the estimation of generation times as an application for our suicide circuit and thought that the software could be a good option for assaying circuits, given the very small computational capacity it requires; particular interest in the output filters.

We believe that the potential for resolution of various problems given in the world is already in nature; therefore our duty is to commit ourselves to unify those pieces and to pave the way.

Together with the commitment to a proper management of the various inputs and outputs that could come out of the development of our project, we gave ourselves the task of researching directly with professionals from a wide range of expertise inside and outside synthetic biology. You can see in detail each of their project-modifying contributions in the {Integrated Human Practices section}. Specifically in this section, the multiple meetings held, were to receive technical advice, validation and in some cases correction of the advances made on the genetic counter and characterization of it, as well as the software developed. This was based on the actual implementation needs on which our contributions could be adapted. Some specific examples are:

Expert(s) Section of improvement Technical improvement
Eng. Pablo Delgado Genetic suicide circiut- Wet Lab Guided the optimization and building of constructs and helped review their final version.
PhD. Jerome Bonnet and PhD. Pakpoom Subsoontorn Genetic suicide circuit- Design- Engineering Aided the development of the counter circuit through several versions of its engineering
Ex iGEMer Diego Rojas Genetic suicide circiut- Wet Lab Suggested the use of a flow cytometer for the wet-lab characterization and aided the troubleshooting of our lab work.
MSc. candidate Silver Ceballos & PhD. César Rodríguez Sánchez Genetic suicide circiut- Wet Lab Suggestion of DNA sequencing as a characterization method.
PhD. candidate Pablo Vargas Rosales Model Guidance and orientation regarding project modelling, basic considerations for biological processes, mainly their stochasticity
PhD. Juan Gabriel Calvo Alpízar Model Introduced the Gillespie algorithm
PhD. Maikol Solís Chacón Model Looked over our Markov chain model
PhD. Daniel Campos Salas Model Aided us in our ODE’s model
PhD. Alexandra Pokhilko Model Helped us correctly adapt the equations from her paper to our ODE’s model
Dr. rer. Nat. Aníbal Mora Genetic suicide circuit- Characteristics
Software 		Suggested the inclusion of evolutionary stability considerations in the design and gave feedback for the software definitions and interaction requirements.
MSc. Mauricio Chicas Genetic suicide circuit- Characterization
Model 		Oriented our characterization by dismissing the use of real-time PCR and advised us on the kinds of modelling we should take into account.
M.Eng. Randal Chacón Model Validated our modeling approach
PhD. Carolina Centeno, PhD. candidate Kattia Nuñez and M.Sc Silvia Castro Implementation Expressed concerns regarding the impact of our circuit, which guided the implementation section development
M.Sc Alexander Schmidt Genetic suicide circuit- Design
Model 		Proposed the quorum sensing additional approach and validated our population model
M.Sc. Catalina Rosales Genetic suicide circuit- Design
Software 		Suggested the consideration of mutations and evolution and the further development of the software to include practical recommendations and experimental data
PhD. candidate Kattia Nuñez & Lic. Victoria Zamora Software Proposed the inclusion of an add on or the expansion of the software to include the validation of the parts used according to chassis and orthogonality.
PhD. Frank Solano Genetic suicide circuit - Design Confirmed the need for RBS and degradation tag use and their optimization relevance
PhD. Rodrigo Mora
 Genetic suicide circuit - Design Highlighted the modularity of the genetic circuit proposal, particularly related to the counter circuit. Also proposed the use of an incoherent feed forward loop to optimize the induction of the counter circuit.
PhD. Alexandra Martínez Software Advisory on the implementation of filters

Overview

Costa Rica, despite being considered a green and environmentally committed country in search of I+D+I (Investigation, Development and Innovation), has evolved slowly, and even adversely, compared to other countries that have felt pressure not only on their natural resources, but also on their economic, scientific and technological resources. For this reason and motivation of the Shipping Policies Collaboration by After iGEM, we decided to talk directly with 10 professionals with different profiles in the range of researchers to entrepreneurs in the biotechnology area, who have had to deal with different impediments to their work; such as:

  • Retention of laboratory material or reagents in customs agencies
  • Delay in approval of requested permits
  • Lack of knowledge regarding administrative and legal procedures
  • Bureaucratic impediments to working with biological samples from the country
  • Difficulty to communicate with administrative professionals from different entities, due to technicalities that lead to misunderstandings, blockades or rejections of the proceedings.
  • Changing policy and ambiguous regulation
  • The stock of products from trade companies in Costa Rica is limited, and this can imply delays by bringing them here externally.
  • The information is present but difficult to access, integrate or comprehend.

Costa Rica’s shipping panorama

At first we thought of making a guide for making decisions before possible scenarios both related to the request of permits and to the orders of reagents, inputs, strains and genetic parts, whose usual national or international request imply a great delay in research or specific suppliers and therefore, economic losses or other repercussions to projects. However, as the areas and procedures to be followed vary tremendously according to subtle technical differences, we should define it in the form of a compilation that allows a global view of the national panorama in this area as a primary step for future consultations.

The previous information, helped us obtain certain recommendations drawn from the experiences of the interviewed:

Recommendations for change

The previous information, helped us obtain certain recommendations drawn from the experiences of the interviewed:

  • Gather contacts of interest as administrative staff in customs, investors, people who may have similar experiences and even from similar areas, lawyers who understand their rights and related legal terms, among other intermediaries, and in that way make networking with people who can bring each other closer to the answers they need for their project development and promotion.
  • Verify advantages and disadvantages of being inside or outside a public institution for the development of a project, and thus weigh in the benefits of being a part of a public vs private institution for the request for permits, the import and export of reagents and organisms, the availability of opportunities and resources and the kind of impression given in specific bureaucratic procedures.
  • It is important to look at the reality that surrounds us as a country, to avoid projects getting held back because of tardiness in the acquisition of resources; a very uncommon issue for first world countries who usually have resources at hand or at least imply less complications in their access.
  • Staying in constant training on different areas is useful to meet people from academia, industry and commerce; and also to know better how the country goes about each of them and where one stands in these relationships.
  • It is not only necessary to know the relevant laws to do something, it is also important that people are guided on how to access that information, how to complete forms and applications, and that the technicalities be explained to them, because these aspects could be obfuscating for someone who is not very well informed or has not had a similar experience before, such as when starting a research project or own entrepreneurship. This should be of governmental relevance, in order to reduce the tendency to make incorrect decisions or, in the worst and undesirable cases, abnormal within the law.
  • Related to the previous point, the training could also be bidirectional. Young people like us can guide and contribute fresh ideas to the people who create policies and they can find a space to better understand and discuss the implications of their decision-making and thus reach a point of equilibrium on the same page.
  • There should be spaces and people in charge of clarification of technical terms and product specifications in both kind of scenarios: in customs agencies in case a product is solicited and received directly from out of the country by researchers or entrepreneurs themselves, or if it is done through intermediaries by mailbox or through the departments in charge of receiving and delivering supplies at universities or public institutions in general. This should be a process of coordination between the academy, industry and the commercial sector mainly.

Legal framework for biotechnology in Costa Rica

In addition, together with members of the After iGEM division in charge of shipping policies guidance, it was possible to establish communication with people involved in the national and international law development, such as M.Sc. Carolina Peláez, with whom we had a discussion on national strategies for legislation, concluding that the current system could lead to purely bureaucratic processes that delay progress in the development of new technologies like GMOs. This was further asserted when consulting a Law Student who explained that in Costa Rica the legislation is unstable, since every year law reforms are made. These tend to be very general, without really getting into the details that, as professionals in sciences, afflict us most either for profit or research purposes. This also leaves regulation and policy making to the institutions who handle these issues, which have little consistency throughout the years, since their conformation changes every four years with the presidential elections.

A real solution for this issue would be to create a whole new package of laws based on current problems, as defined by scientists -mainly-, and not making insignificant article reforms that include enough infractions and prohibitions to almost ensure that it consumes so much time for us to take action that when finally finished, they could change them again and invalidate whatever is not longer applying.

The fact that the laws and regulation on biotechnology lack homogeneity and consistency in our country causes legal insecurity and in some cases instability in project’s development. Here we compile some laws and regulations of biotechnological interest in Costa Rica:

Having the privilege of participating in international experiences such as iGEM, receiving quality higher education and at the same time to be first-hand trained by experts from multiple areas, encouraged us to prevent misinformation from taking part in unjustified regulations, slow bureaucracy or incongruities of the laws. We are now called to be agents for change, as advisors and counselors for a population sample beyond the university environment.

Law or regulation Description
General Health Law (N ° 5395) (translated from spanish Ley General de Salud) For example, this law considers as biological laboratories as “Those who for the elaboration of their products use microorganisms or their toxins, or blood and its derivatives” (Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica, 1973, Article 83), but unfortunately, biotechnologists, geneticists, and molecular and cellular biologists, and other related professionals have legal limitations to practice as health professionals (with professional freedom) at them in Costa Rica. Currently, some reforms have been proposed that will boost the country's scientific and technological development if approved (Calvo Castro, 2020).
Phytosanitary Protection Law (No. 7664) (translated from spanish Ley de Protección Fitosanitaria) It includes important sections like the phytosanitary regulation of biotechnology organisms or products, that reveal the competences of the National Technical Commission of Biosafety, as an advisory body of the Phytosanitary Service State (Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica, 1997, Article 40).
Law for the Promotion of Scientific and Technological Development (No. 7169) (translated from spanish Ley de Promoción del Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico) The incentive and cooperation for scientific professional formation, development of companies and research and extension projects of a scientific and technological nature is promoted, giving priority to those that are linked to state higher education institutions in favor of innovation. Some of the entities involved in these regulations are: National Council for Scientific Research and Technological (CONICIT), National Council of Rectors (CONARE) and Ministry of Science, Technology and Telecommunications (MICITT). (Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica, 1990).
Plant Variety Protection Law (No. 8631) (translated from spanish Ley de Protección de las Obtenciones Vegetales) This law advocates for the protection of breeders' rights related to plant varieties, as well as the right to use by the small and medium farmer (Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica, 2007, Article 1).
The obtentions includes “ sexual and asexual seed, nursery plants and multiplication or propagation material produced by biotechnological techniques” (Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica, 2007, Article 4).
Nagoya - Kuala Lumpur Protocol (translated from spanish Protocolo Nagoya - Kuala Lumpur) Among its main objectives is the equitable and fair distribution of those derived from the exploitation of the country's genetic resources (Rocha, n.d.).
It serves as a supplementary protocol of the Convention on Biological Diversity, by making available international standards and procedures on liability and compensation derived from living modified organisms, thus promoting sustainability and balanced biological conservation (International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2018).
Biodiversity Law (No. 7788) (translated from spanish Ley de Biodiversidad) This law has scope on those elements of biodiversity hosted by the sovereignty of the State, on the processes and activities carried out in its jurisdiction, regulating in a fair way the costs and benefits obtained from the use, management, associated knowledge and distribution of the elements of biodiversity (Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica, 1998, Article 3).
It establishes, among other aspects, ”the biochemical and genetic properties of the wild or domesticated elements of biodiversity” (Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica, 1998, Article 6).
Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety of the Convention on Biological Diversity (Supranational law No. 8537) (translated from spanish Protocolo de cartagena sobre seguridad de la biotecnología del convenio sobre la diversidad biológica, ley supranacional) This protocol contributes to the achievement of an adequate level of protection for the safe transfer, handling and use of living modified organisms that are the product of modern biotechnology and that may have potential adverse effects, in order to ensure conservation and sustainable use, of biological diversity, assessing risks to human health (Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica, 2006).
General Law of the National Animal Health Service (No. 8495) (translated from spanish Ley General del Servicio Nacional de Salud Animal) This law seeks animal wellness and its regulated productivity to maintain environmental balance; as well as the protection of human health, this through supervision by veterinary controls for the prevention of the risks of the use, commercialization and release of genetically modified organisms of animal origin, for example (General Law of the National Animal Health Service, 2006, Articles 2, 3).
Law for the Development, Promotion and Foment of Organic Agricultural Activity (No. 8591) (translated from spanish Ley de Desarrollo, Promoción y Fomento de la Actividad Agropecuaria Orgánica) This law, in regards to biotechnology, controls the genetically modified materials implemented in the organic farming activity for the prevention of the combination with local genetic material; as well as safeguards its prohibition to be applied in agricultural activities of an organic nature (Law for the Development, Promotion and Foment of Organic Agricultural Activity, 2007, Article 21).
Regulation of Agricultural Biosafety Audits of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock (Executive Order No. 32486) (translated from spanish Reglamento de Auditorías en Bioseguridad Agrícola del Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería) Watches over the regulation and control of all those activities related to Living Modified Organisms (LMOs), as well as by the auditing entities, so that they carry out the inspections that must be taken as mandatory compliance by the supervised companies, and in case of disregard, it must be reported to Biotechnology Management of the Phytosanitary State Service (Regulation of Agricultural Biosafety Audits of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock No. 32486 of June 20, 2005)
Environmental Organic law (No.7554) (translated from spanish Ley Orgánica del Ambiente) Among other purposes, this law seeks to cover basic human needs, without compromising options for future generations or the conservation of the environment (Environmental Organic law, 1995, Article 4).
It also values as a priority those actions that promote the protection and improvement of the human environment, such as scientific research in environmental epidemiology and the control, prevention and dissemination of physical, chemical, biological and social factors that can affect physical, mental and physical wellbeing of the population and the environment (Environmental Organic law, 1995, Article 26).
Regulation of Registration and Control of Biological Medicines (No. 37006-S) (translated from spanish Reglamento de Inscripción y Control de Medicamentos Biológicos) Mainly, here are included the requirements and procedures necessary for the registration and control of medicines of biological or biotechnological origin for human use, applying in the same way for all related products of national origin or imported (Regulation of Registration and Control of Biological Medicines No. 37006-S of November 15, 2011).

References

Calvo Castro, L. (April 22, 2020). The TEC School of Biology promotes reform of the General Health Law and other related laws. Hoy en el TEC. https://www.tec.ac.cr/hoyeneltec/2020/04/22/escuela-biologia-tec-impulsa-reforma-ley-general-salud-otras-leyes-relacionadas

Executive order No. 32486. Regulation of Agricultural Biosafety Audits of the Ministry of Agriculture and Livestock, June 20, 2005. http://www.pgrweb.go.cr/scij/Busqueda/Normativa/Normas/nrm_texto_completo.aspx?param1=NRTC&nValor1=1&nValor2=55169&nValor3=60445&strTipM=TC

Executive order No. 37006-S. Regulation of Registration and Control of Biological Medicines, November 15, 2011. http://www.pgrweb.go.cr/scij/Busqueda/Normativa/Normas/nrm_texto_completo.aspx?nValor1=1&nValor2=72232

International Institute for Sustainable Development. (2018). Supplementary Protocol on Liability and Redress for LMOs Enters into Force. https://sdg.iisd.org/news/supplementary-protocol-on-liability-and-redress-for-lmos-enters-into-force/

Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica. (1973). Law N° 5395. General Health Law. October 30, 1973. http://www.pgrweb.go.cr/scij/Busqueda/Normativa/Normas/nrm_texto_completo.aspx?param1=NRTC&nValor1=1&nValor2=6581&nValor3=96425&strTipM=TC

Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica. (1990). Law N° 7169. Law for the Promotion of Scientific and Technological Development. June 26, 1990. http://www.pgrweb.go.cr/scij/Busqueda/Normativa/Normas/nrm_texto_completo.aspx?param1=NRTC&nValor1=1&nValor2=11908&nValor3=91174&strTipM=TC

Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica. (1995). Law N° 7554. Environmental Organic law. October 4, 1995. . https://www.pgrweb.go.cr/scij/Busqueda/Normativa/Normas/nrm_texto_completo.aspx?param1=NRTC&nValor1=1&nValor2=27738&nValor3=93505&strTipM=TC

Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica. (1997). Law N° 7664. Phytosanitary Protection Law. April 8, 1997. http://www.pgrweb.go.cr/scij/Busqueda/Normativa/normas/nrm_texto_completo.aspx?param2=1&nValor1=1&nValor2=43939&nValor3=92806&nValor4=NO&strTipM=TC

Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica. (1998). Law N° 7788. Biodiversity Law. April 30, 1998. http://www.pgrweb.go.cr/scij/Busqueda/Normativa/Normas/nrm_texto_completo.aspx?param1=NRTC&nValor1=1&nValor2=6581&nValor3=96425&strTipM=TC

Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica. (2006). Law N° 8495. General Law of the National Animal Health Service. April 6, 2006. https://www.pgrweb.go.cr/scij/Busqueda/Normativa/Normas/nrm_texto_completo.aspx?param1=NRTC&nValor1=1&nValor2=57137&nValor3=80913&strTipM=TC#:~:text=La%20presente%20Ley%20tiene%20como,armon%C3%ADa%20con%20el%20medio%20ambiente.&text=e)%20Vigilar%20y%20regular%20el,animales%2C%20sus%20productos%20y%20subproductos.

Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica. (2006). Law N° 8537. Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety of the Convention on Biological Diversity August 28, 2006. http://www.pgrweb.go.cr/scij/Busqueda/Normativa/Normas/nrm_texto_completo.aspx?param1=NRTC&nValor1=1&nValor2=58504&nValor3=64861&strTipM=TC

Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica. (2007). Law N° 8591. Law for the Development, Promotion and Foment of Organic Agricultural Activity. June 28, 2007. http://www.pgrweb.go.cr/scij/Busqueda/Normativa/Normas/nrm_texto_completo.aspx?param1=NRTC&nValor1=1&nValor2=60741&nValor3=0&strTipM=TC

Legislative Assembly of the Republic of Costa Rica. (2008). Law N° 8631. Plant Variety Protection Law. Marzo 6, 2008. http://www.pgrweb.go.cr/scij/Busqueda/Normativa/Normas/nrm_texto_completo.aspx?param1=NRTC&nValor1=1&nValor2=62233&nValor3=70978&strTipM=TC

Rocha, P. J. (n.d.). Why is biotechnology safe?. https://www.iica.int/es/visiones-iica/por-que-es-segura-la-biotecnologia

The objective of the involvement with the population and consequent divulgation of synbio, is not to convince people that it is the only way to make something revolutionary, but to make evident the existence of options to solve problems using nature with some additional human help to provide more solutions and bring them closer to those who need them.

It’s important for people to feel personally involved with biotechnological development, to make scientific communication not just a real two-way feedback enrichment, but also to make the general public feel listened to and encourage their involvement through which responsibility for having an informed opinion can be developed. This can have a profound impact on the science that will propose tomorrow’s solutions, it’s public perception, available resources, and possibilities.

In the modern world, in which there are so many sources of information, it has a huge importance for people to be targeted not to persuade them to display a blind approval of synthetic biology or acceptance of science as an absolute, but instead to see all the synergies that are generated between multiple fields, the interaction of science with everyday life, and the possibility to make decisions with the objective of generating a benefit whose impact is fair and responsible.

In short, since probably not everyone has a robust technical vocabulary to understand the totality of a scientific topic, in this section we seek to explain science using much more understandable elements to society, allowing the complex problems to permeate their thinking more easily and enabling the comprehension of the versatility of the field.

Synbio Club

This idea emerged from the need to democratize synthetic biology in the university environment and to divulge the topic even further in Costa Rica, particularly to non-biotechnology engineers. It was also our intent to motivate participation in research or competitions such as iGEM, to demonstrate that anyone can be part of these spaces, make valuable contributions through discussion, brainstorming, and innovate with ideas that previously only seemed to belong to science fiction.

Synbio Club Organizing Team, 2021

In these online sessions, of approximately one hour, and with the participation of approximately 25 people on average during the first three sessions offered, not only has open participation been encouraged to all those enthusiasts of synthetic biology, but a pleasant and trustworthy two-way teaching space has been opened in peer-to-peer mode, in which the knowledge we bring as a team of iGEM and students of biological backgrounds in majority, is strengthened by the reception of feedback and direct dialogue to know the interests and needs of the young scientific community.

Here we add the presentations we developed as reference:

Session I
Session II
Session III

During each session, in addition to giving technical training on concepts, bioinformatics tools and applications of synthetic biology, there are also dynamics of learned knowledge corroboration for the participants and updating activities related to the review of news or relevant research, and even shows, related to synthetic biology and biotechnology; even deliberation about some possible alternatives involving environmental, health and ethics liability as main axes.

The growing participation motivates us to continue creating these spaces and to believe that it is possible to enthuse and train people as long as there are adequate communication channels. Her are some of the comments received:

Also, we ask some questions based on our desire to know the basal knowledge and interests of the target audience:

Synthetic biology examples

  • “Insuline production”
  • “Antibody production in microbial vectors”
  • “Biological batteries”
  • “Modify some bacteria ha can eat plastic”
  • “Bioremediation”
  • “Production of silk or synthetic materials for material design”
  • “Petroleum eater bacteria”
  • “Creation of biosensors sensitive to certain solutes”
  • “Biofuel production”
  • “Insuline (genetic engineering)”
  • “For vaccines”
  • “Guided evolution?”

What topics would you like to cover in this club?

  • “Examples that are currently made”
  • “Possibilities for entrepreneurship or projects”
  • “Synthetic biology and its relationship with other disciplines”
  • “Logistical and legal challenges in the development of synthetic biology”
  • “Bioinformatics tools that are used”
  • “Fundamentals of synthetic biology”
  • “Mechanisms (a not so specific summary)”
  • “Impediments to exercising or working in that”
  • “Relationship to environmental conservation”
  • “Strategies to find financing”
  • “See the current state of synthetic biology in the world and in CR, because theoretical ideas can go very far (as in all fields), but I would like to know what companies/universities are doing right now”
  • “Synthetic biology history”
  • “An overview of how it can be applied in different groups of organisms”
  • “Flow of Synbio examples (from problem to solution) and focus on how”

Participation in various events

Participation on MedSci Week

Virtual event on science and technology applied in the field of medicine in which we presented our project to the general public, organized by the CAS and EMBS student chapters of the ITCR IEEE.

Jornadas de Bioinformática Clínica (Conference on Clinical Bioinformatics)

An open and prestigious event organized by the Technical Council of Clinical Bioinformatics in which we presented our project alongside high-level experts in several projects whose intersection was found in the use of bioinformatics for possible clinical applications.

Talk for the Mathematics School of the University of Costa Rica

We were invited to give a talk on our project and the general involvement of mathematics in the iGEM competition by the professors of the Mathematics School of the University of Costa Rica in order to promote the involvement of students of this area in the competition and biology related areas in general.

We’ve developed material that can be implemented for the teaching of virtualized labs, which in a global situation like the current pandemic, works as an interactive tool that not only simulates what a science student would do in real life, but receives detailed step-by-step information according to progress in practice. In fact, that material was implemented to the guidance for the previously mentioned Club Synbio initiative.

The virtual laboratories were developed with a focus in techniques, subjects and methods that were not already available in our reference platform, Harvard’s LabXchange, For more information on the development of interactives, virtual labs and their launch on the LabXchange platform, see the {Education & communication} main section.

iGEM TEC_ Costa Rica’s Instagram profile with a reach potential of more than 1K people.

Also, social media like Instagram and e-mail are common but always useful ways to break the distance between experts and iGEMers colleagues. They help us to spread our project and explain it not only in words, because they could make communication difficult due to the technical vocabulary and complexity of the project, rather allowing us to use graphic and dynamic elements through posts or the establishment of video-call meetings (respectively) to expose previous basic concepts that we consider ideal to gradually understand the project; as well as part of the collaborations and events carried out by the team

The creation of each product must be guided by the demand that is generated in a specific market, since the options with the most innovation and best viability, rentability and scientific backup are sought. To validate our project as a tool we focused on the search for all possible profiles that could provide a real technical approach to ensure our project is useful and functional from the raw to the cooked version of Chronobacter.

Implementation & Human Practices

The context of a project, including the country's legal, political and commercial frameworks, although usually undervalued and considered in afterthought, is one of the most important considerations that make a project possible. As a reflection of this, we received valuable first-hand information from entrepreneurs and researchers who have had to face limitations that probably go beyond their basal professional expertise and who have somehow had to learn how to carry on on their own. They, at the same time, realizing that it was a complex process, have decided to share with us what they know in order to involve us as communicators of the experiences and recommendations collected, from, to and for the biotechnology field. For the implementation, as detailed previously, we directly contacted users for our tools and our knowledge, making sure that the problem we decided to tackle was real and that our solution and vision were correctly portrayed and received with interest.

Shipping meetings, 2021

Project Description & Modelling

Along the way we had the great opportunity to contact experts from the circuit and modelling areas, along with others related to the project in different ways, that somehow became the scaffold that served as a guide to present a quality project and at the same time capable of becoming a real and useful {Foundational advance} of reference to be implemented horizontally by providing the groundwork for future teams, and that way continue supporting and building of scientific research as it has been done on this proiect with the feedback received, as detailed in the {Experts feedback section}.

PhD. Jerome Bonnet and PhD. Pakpoom Subsoontorn meeting