Bronze criteria

Team registration.
We registered a team.

Complete Judging form.
We completed the judging form in time.

Team Wiki.
As you can see, we’ve managed to complete our Wiki.

Present a poster and a talk at the iGEM Jamboree.
We can’t wait to present our results at the Giant Jamboree!

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.
See our Parts for various examples, e. g. BBa_K1497000.

Silver criteria

Experimentally validate that at least one new BioBrick Part or Device of your own design and construction works as expected.
See BBa_K1497020 and BBa_K1497022, as well as other parts.

Document the characterization of this part in the “Main Page” section of that Part’s/Device’s Registry entry.
See BBa_K1497020 and BBa_K1497022, as well as other parts.

Submit this new part to the iGEM Parts Registry (submissions must adhere to the iGEM Registry guidelines).
See BBa_K1497020 and BBa_K1497022, as well as other parts.

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.
See our application scenario as well as our techno-morale vignette.

Gold criteria

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.

We improved the BioBricks BBa_K771105, BBa_K771107 and BBa_K771103 by codon-optimizing the sequence for E. coli and adding BglII/BamHI restriction sites that enable the construction of various scaffold variants. See BBa_K1497024, BBa_K1497025 and BBa_K1497026 respectively or take a look at our results page.

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 helped Freiburg spreading their survey and wrote together with the other iGEM teams a letter to the iGEM HQ concerning property rights. See also our collaborations.

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). We encourage thoughtful and creative approaches, and those that draw on past Policy & Practice (formerly Human Practices) activities.
We used a new Policy & Practice approach to address possible application scenarios. We also investigated unwanted impacts of our project in a techno-morale vignette. As a result we adopted our pathway under the aspect of downstream processing.