Team:Hong Kong HKUST/human practice/start-up kit/report

From 2014.igem.org

(Difference between revisions)

Revision as of 18:14, 3 October 2014

Data Analysis Report of Past Human Practice Project

Synthetic biology is, compared to emerging technology such as nanotechnology, a relatively new subject and nowadays, most of the teams in iGEM are promoting iGEM and synthetic biology. It is important for societies to accept the conditions of a science for the sake of a more advanced research and development. The current status of knowledge distribution of synthetic biology is still yet to be even. Therefore iGEM community encourage teams to do some projects, aside from the main project, to communicate synthetic biology to the world.

This year our HKUST iGEM team decided to make specific project which analyse the evolution of human practice from year 2008 till 2013. We have taken more than 700 teams in the past 5 years and study the trend of human practice projects with the help of graphs. Our aim is to find out what is the impression of human practice in the eyes of the team members. The focus of our report for the trends are not only limited to a certain region. We widened our scope to analyse the whole entire iGEM team across the globe. Our motives are mainly classified to observe the mode of projects that were done for the past 5 years.

From this report, we hope that future iGEM teams might look into it and understand the classification of different projects being done and decide on their own about the most effective way to introduce iGEM and synthetic biology to the world. You can download the complete report here.

Introduction

As the iGEM headquarters put effort to bring the topic of synthetic biology close to the society, more and more attention was given to human practice. In year 2008 to 2013, there was a total of 707 teams who joined the iGEM jamboree and received medals, and a total of 1387 human practice projects were conducted.

But how well exactly has human practice developed over the years? How much attribution was made in each region? Are some types more commonly done than others? To answer these questions, HKUST iGEM 2014 team gathered all the information since the year 2008, hoping to see some correlation between regions and types of projects done, and some possible trends over the years.

Teams who did HP each year

1. The graph shows the percentage change of teams who did human practice for the period from 2008 to 2013. It can be clearly seen that there has been a large increase in the percentage of iGEM teams who participated in human practice. The percentage of teams who did human practice has risen considerably over the time period. In 2008 there were nearly 80 percent of the teams who did not participate in human practice. This percentage decreased to approximately 40 percent in 2010, and then dropped dramatically to 5 percent only after three years. Since 2008 there has been a steady increase in the number of the teams who participated in human practice, with around 20 teams increase annually.

There are multiple reasons for this phenomenon. First of all, it could be caused by the increase of interest towards human practice within the iGEM participants. With the rapid development of synthetic biology, promoting the correct information about this area of science became important. Since the main goal of human practice is to promote synthetic biology and explore different topics towards the work, students are willing to promote synthetic biology in creative ways through human practice.

Secondly, the increasing trend in human practice may have been led by emphasis on human practice by the iGEM headquarters. Human practice is crucial for building safe and sustainable projects that serve the public. The value of human practice has been increasing recognized with the abrupt emergence of issues regarding bioterrorism. Furthermore, being able to communicate is as equally important as doing the lab work. For the reasons mentioned above, the role of human practice grew in iGEM.

To sum up, human practice has become an increasingly popular destination for iGEM teams, especially in recent years.

Fig 1 .

TTeams who did HP each year

Fig 2 .

Here is the description of the potato: it is a potato!

Projects done for each type

Fig 1 . Here is the potato. Here is the description of the potato: it is a potato!
Put your text here	put your text here

Projects done for each type in each region

Fig 1 . Here is the potato. Here is the description of the potato: it is a potato!
Put your text here	put your text here

Teams who did HP in each region

Some text can go here.

In each region, it can be deduced that the number of teams who did human practice project in each region differ from one another. Graph 4.1 indicates the relationship between the percentage of teams who did human practice project in each region whereas graph 4.2 indicates the number of teams in each region. The results from graph 4.1 indicates that approximately 90% of the teams in Latin America did human practice project and roughly 79% of the teams in Europe and Asia. North America scores the lowest among the region with approximately 62% of the teams did human practice project.

The evidence shown from the 2 graphs is quite surprising especially towards North America. Despite the fact that North America has the most number of teams, it seems that compare to the other regions, North America did not show as much attitude towards human practice, in reference to the data in graph 4.1. It can be concluded that from the values of the percentage of number of team who did human practice project in each region is different from one another.

Projects done for each type in each year

Fig 1 . Here is the potato.

Here is the description of the potato: it is a potato!

Put your text here

Conclusion

Fig 1 . Here is the potato.

Here is the description of the potato: it is a potato!

After reviewing the past human practice projects in a detailed manner, it is safe to say that human practice is becoming a large part of iGEM. Furthermore, the space for improvement and future development was found by looking in to regions and types of projects done.

@@ Line 334: / Line 334: @@
 			</td>
 			<td style="background-color: #FFFFAA" align=center">
-			<div class="ienlarger"><a href="#nogo"><https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/3/3d/IGEM_report_4_%282%29.jpg" width="400" height="200" alt="large" /><span>
+			<div class="ienlarger"><a href="#nogo"><img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/3/3d/IGEM_report_4_%282%29.jpg" width="400" height="200" alt="large" /><span>
      <img src="https://static.igem.org/mediawiki/2014/3/3d/IGEM_report_4_%282%29.jpg" alt="thumb" class="resize_thumb" /><br />
      Some text can go here.</span></a></div>

Team:Hong Kong HKUST/human practice/start-up kit/report

From 2014.igem.org

Revision as of 18:14, 3 October 2014

Data Analysis Report of Past Human Practice Project

Introduction

Teams who did HP each year

Fig 1 .

TTeams who did HP each year

Fig 2 .

Here is the description of the potato: it is a potato!

Projects done for each type

Fig 1 . Here is the potato.

Here is the description of the potato: it is a potato!

Projects done for each type in each region

Fig 1 . Here is the potato.

Here is the description of the potato: it is a potato!

Teams who did HP in each region

Projects done for each type in each year

Fig 1 . Here is the potato.

Here is the description of the potato: it is a potato!

Conclusion

Fig 1 . Here is the potato.

Here is the description of the potato: it is a potato!

Home

Pneumosensor

Riboregulator

Human Practice

Team

WetLab

Achievement