Team:NRP-UEA-Norwich/Judging Criteria
From 2014.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
Line 107: | Line 107: | ||
<div class="container"> | <div class="container"> | ||
- | <table width="70%" border="1" summary="Bronze" align="center" cellspacing=" | + | <h1 align="center"><font color="996633" size="20"><b>Bronze</b></font></h1> |
- | + | ||
- | + | <table width="70%" border="1" summary="Bronze" align="center" cellspacing="10" cellpadding="20"> | |
- | + | ||
<col width="300"> | <col width="300"> | ||
Line 157: | Line 157: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | <h1 align="center"><font color="999999" size="20"><b>Silver</b></font></h1> | ||
<table width="70%" border="1" summary="Silver" align="center" cellspacing="5" cellpadding="10"> | <table width="70%" border="1" summary="Silver" align="center" cellspacing="5" cellpadding="10"> | ||
- | + | ||
- | + | ||
- | + | ||
- | + | ||
<col width="300"> | <col width="300"> | ||
<col width="300"> | <col width="300"> | ||
Line 199: | Line 198: | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
+ | |||
+ | <h1 align="center"><font color="e9c500" size="20"><b>Gold</b></font></h1> | ||
<table width="70%" border="1" summary="Gold" align="center" cellspacing="5" cellpadding="10"> | <table width="70%" border="1" summary="Gold" align="center" cellspacing="5" cellpadding="10"> | ||
- | + | ||
- | + | ||
- | + | ||
- | + | ||
<col width="300"> | <col width="300"> | ||
<col width="300"> | <col width="300"> |
Revision as of 15:14, 13 October 2014
Judging Criteria
& how NRP-UEA iGEM have fulfilled it!
Bronze
Requirement | Notes |
---|---|
Team Registration. | Team is registered. |
Complete Judging Form. | Judging Form completed. |
Team Wiki. | Wiki is live. |
Present a poster and talk at the iGEM Jamboree. | Poster and Presentation in final stages. |
The description of each project must clearly attribute work done by the students and distinguish it from work done by others, including host labs, advisors, instructors, sponsors, professional website designers, artists, and commercial services. | Attributions of those outside of the team are stated within the Attributions page |
Document at least one new standard BioBrick Part or Device used in your project/central to your project and submit this part to the iGEM Registry. | The plant specific promoter MAS which is constitutively expressed. |
Silver
Requirement | Notes |
---|---|
Experimentally validate that at least one new BioBrick Part or Device of your own design and construction works as expected. | INSERT LINK TO PARTS PAGE. |
Document the characterization of this part in the “Main Page” section of that Part’s/Device’s Registry entry. | INSERT LINK TO PARTS PAGE. |
Submit this new part to the iGEM Parts Registry. | INSERT LINK TO PARTS PAGE. |
iGEM projects involve important questions beyond the bench, for example relating to (but not limited to) ethics, sustainability, social justice, safety, security, or intellectual property rights. Articulate at least one question encountered by your team, and describe how your team considered the(se) question(s) within your project. Include attributions to all experts and stakeholders consulted. | Please see the Policy and Practices and the Attributions pages. |
Gold
Requirement | Notes |
---|---|
Improve the function OR characterization of an existing BioBrick Part or Device (created by another team or your own institution in a previous year), enter this information in the Registry. | Please see part number BBa_J04450 for details. |
Help any registered iGEM team from another school or institution by, for example, characterizing a part, debugging a construct, or modeling or simulating their system. | We sent Team Valencia chromoproteins (amilCP and AmilGFP in Golden Gate form) so that they could use these as reporters to check that their gene constructs were successfully transfected into their plant chassis. |
iGEM projects involve important questions beyond the bench, for example relating to (but not limited to) ethics, sustainability, social justice, safety, security, or intellectual property rights. Describe an approach that your team used to address at least one of these questions. Evaluate your approach, including whether it allowed you to answer your question(s), how it influenced the team’s scientific project, and how it might be adapted for others to use (within and beyond iGEM). | Please see the Policy and Practices and the Attributions pages. |