IGEM:IMPERIAL/2006/Presentation

Page where we should discuss ideas about the Jamboree presentation.
And also where you should post draft versions to be reviewed.

General: The Jamboree Presentation

• The presentations will be the same duration as last year:
  • 20 minutes presentation
  • 5 minutes questions
  • 5 minutes to change to the next team

Versions and alterations

07 oct 06

• This is not finished and is still being worked on but in the current climate of ignoring the past contributions of another team member I thought I would update this page .

• I have edited slides 12-18 and made the following changes
  • Included the idea of adding diferent cells dependent on the oscilator
  • Folowing the progression of the idea
  • I changed the engineering cycle picture to powerpoint format so it can be used more effectively and with a larger combinations of backgrounds and color schemes, this has not been done to all slides
  • Everyone should look at slides 17 and 14 to see the ultra flashy animations. NB 17 may not display propperly on macs, slow PCs or old versions of powerpoint.
  • I added the lotka voltarra model into the presentation

JohnChattaway 13:10, 7 October 2006 (EDT)

Ideas

Possible format to the presentation in line with the documentation that we should have:

• Introduction
  • What is an oscillator?
  • What is the motivation behind a biological oscillator?
  • What has been done in the past? - but of course not to step on anyone's toes
• Design
  • How our design is different to previous designs (MIT & Repressilator)
  • The funky stuff we though of to control our oscillator, including the riboswitch, Cre/Lox system, chemostat
  • Our quest for the holy AiiA...and Vincent's chemostat
• Modelling
  • Our mathematical models for the entire system
  • I don't think we need to go into detail about the models for the individual testing constructs..we can just say that we obtained the values...as like MIT did in their 2004 IAP presentation
• Results/Implementation
  • After all that testing, the results we obtained from our testing constructs
  • Did our final assembly work in the end? if not, can we explain our errors?
  • Video of working system? or at least a nice animation of what it is supposed to look like?
• Conclusion
  • What have we learned to do and not to do with synthetic biology?
  • Is synthetic biology worth pursuing in the future?
  • Future developments with our biological oscillator
  • Analysis of our project, suggestions for future iGEM teams wishing to tackle the problem of the biological oscillator.
• Any other suggestions?

Draft Versions

• Cambridge presentation (july 2006)[1]
• ...