Background
We began our journey by reflecting on the values we wanted reflected in our project. During the first project idea brainstorming sessions it became clear that our team values environmental protection, health and sustainability. The idea of identifying endocrine-disrupting compounds (EDCs) reflected these values perfectly. After researching and deciding on the project idea, we defined the required stakeholders and laid out a plan of engagement.
The inspiration for our project
When brainstorming project ideas, a recent scandal from the Danish news came up - the Nordic Waste scandal [1]. Nordic Waste was a waste dump site where contaminated soil was discarded. When a landslide of the contaminated soil began, the Nordic Waste company (owned by one of the wealthiest families in Denmark) declared bankruptcy, thus leaving the situation unsolved for the Danish government. This not only left a dangerous situation for the nearby town of Ølst but also presented a potential biohazard of contaminated nearby soil and water in the Alling river [1].
After more research, it became apparent that contaminated water is not only an issue present in this incident but is an increasing issue in Denmark. Data from the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland (GEUS) show that 55% of Danish drinking water wells are contaminated with pesticides [2]. Data from the GEUS report is shown in Figure 2 below.
This highlights that the issue of water pollution has been increasing since 2016. The issue of water pollution in Denmark shows that clean water is an issue not only in developing countries but also in developed ones. Particularly, one class of water pollutants - endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) - grabbed our attention. The harm caused by EDCs can be summarized with this quote:
Quote from a report by OECD Studies on Water [3].
Additionally, we identified three Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) directly impacted by water pollution from EDCs. These are shown below.
EDCs in water compromise the quality and the safety of drinking water. This can compromise health and fertility [3].
EDCs can cause reproductive and developmental issues, hormonal imbalances and other health complications [4].
EDCs in water can harm marine life and disrupt aquatic ecosystems and freshwater ecosystems [3].
When looking for existing biosensors for EDCs we discovered a paper about the ROSALIND system [5] for rapid water pollution detection. Therefore, we looked into expanding this system for the detection of more water pollutants. We looked into existing allosteric transcription factors (aTFs), but finally a great idea came up. Using human hormone receptors as a base of a biosensor for detection of a wide range of pollutants. The idea came from reading about Yeast Estrogen and Androgen screen assays [6]. With this system we will screen for EDCs in general instead of searching for individual compounds. The complete idea for the project is outlined on our Project Description.
Identification of stakeholders
To better understand the impact of our project we identified our stakeholders. A graph of these is shown below.
We need to interact with the general public as their opinion directly influences both politicians and entrepreneurs. At the end of the day the goal for water supply companies is to satisfy the customers. To understand more about the implications of the chemicals we are studying we will also interact with doctors. Additionally, the government and politicians set guidelines and requirements for water testing and treatment and are important stakeholders to understand the implementation of the biosensor. In the same manner, the local authorities are likely the perfect stakeholders to help with how to implement and test our sensor, as they approve budgets for waterwork companies. For actual implementation and testing, we will need to talk to the waterwork companies, as they are the ones providing the water and they have an agenda to keep it clean. Finally, to understand whether our design is applicable or can be improved upon, we will discuss with researchers from various fields.
Initially, we wanted to get answers about whether the public and the politicians even think this biosensor is useful. Additionally, we want to discuss the application of our biosensor with the relevant people. Our initial idea is to make a testing kit to be sold to the general public. Some of the initial questions we wanted to answer with our stakeholders were:
- Are EDCs a problem in Danish waters? And do people even drink tap water?
- Are the general public aware of the pollutants in our groundwater?
- Are EDCs an important political area?
- Is it a good idea with a broad biosensor for EDCs to be made available to the public?
To answer these questions, we first went to Folkemødet 2024.
Engaging and Connecting at Folkemødet 2024
On 15 - 17th June we had the incredible opportunity to participate in Folkemødet 2024, an annual political discussion and festival held on the Danish island of Bornholm. This event brings together politicians, business leaders, NGOs, media representatives, and the public, creating an ideal platform for discussing our project. We were fortunate to join the Tech Tent, hosted by the Technical University of Denmark (DTU), where we introduced our project to a broad range of people and discussed the power of synthetic biology.
This event provided us with a unique opportunity to get feedback on our project by conducting interviews and distributing a survey. This engagement allowed us to understand the needs and concerns of the public. Additionally, it allowed us to connect with experts to better understand the issue of water pollution and the requirements for a potential new test kit. The insights from this event were invaluable in ensuring our work aligns with the needs of society.
Public engagement through a survey at Folkemødet
At Folkemødet we conducted a survey addressing several key questions we had about drinking water and about public awareness of water pollution. We asked participants about their age, place of residence, source of drinking water, awareness of water pollution, and whether this issue concerns them. Additionally, we went a step further to see how they would feel about purchasing an affordable test to examine their own water for EDCs. We got a total of 102 respondents.
The results of our survey showed that participants of all age groups and all geographical locations took part in the study, though North Zealand / Copenhagen were overrepresented. Furthermore they all responded that they use tap water as their primary source of drinking water.
Approximately 82% of the respondents were familiar with the issue of EDCs in the Danish groundwater, and around 15% had a deeper understanding of it. Nearly 90% of the participants expressed concern about the problem after being faced with it, but almost 40% had not previously considered it an issue.
Furthermore, we asked the participants' opinions on how the situation is handled by the authorities in Denmark at the moment. Some participants were not satisfied and used terms like "not good", "unsatisfying", or "badly". Other participants displayed trust in the authorities and used terms like "I trust they’re on it" in their answers. Interestingly, many participants were unaware of the government's actions. This shows a lack of communication and education from the authorities about this issue.
The idea of a low-cost test to detect hormone-disrupting compounds in drinking water was well-received by most participants. About 82% expressed interest in using such a test. However, 43% of them would only consider purchasing the test if it was inexpensive.
When we asked the 15% of participants who were not interested in using a test about their reasons, they offered different perspectives. Some were highly confident in government regulations and found that personal testing was unnecessary and could create panic. Others had practical concerns such as cost or complexity.
With the public opinion in mind, we decided to take the next step and explore how authorities and experts will respond to the project.
Connecting with experts and politicians at Folkemødet
We held interviews and engaged in discussions with a diverse group of experts, including people from healthcare, waterworks, governmental agencies, NGOs, and even the Danish minister of the environment. Click on each field to see the interviews and what we learned from them! English subtitles are available for all the interviews.
Niels Bjerre
Product Manager working with pesticidesNiels Bjerre - Product Manager working with pesticides
Niels Bjerre has 37 years of experience with the German company Bayer working with pesticides. Additionally, he serves as the chairman of a local waterworks, responsible for clean water to around 1,200 households. In the interview, Bjerre discusses his concerns about the public's perception of water quality, water testing and communication of this data.
What we learned
- Niels considers the water quality to be better than the public perceives it to be.
- While he generally likes the idea of a biosensor that could detect EDCs, he warns against making it available to the general public, as it could cause unnecessary panic and harm.
- He highlights that while some statistics about water pollution sound scary, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the water has gotten worse or is harmful - rather that we test for more compounds and have lower detection limits.
Reflection
This conversation puts a strong emphasis on clear outlined detection limits and explanation of the results. Additionally, from this conversation, we realized that making a biosensor available to the public could cause unnecessary harm and panic - especially if the detection limits and results are not clearly understood and described.
Susan Münster
Association of Danish WaterworksSusan Münster - Association of Danish Waterworks
Susan Münster is the Director of the Association of Danish Waterworks, and through this she works with EDCs in Danish water resources. In the interview, we discussed the benefits of developing sensors to detect these compounds and how it should be implemented.
What we learned
- Susan expresses concerns about the current situation of Denmark’s water resources, especially regarding the presence of EDCs.
- She is concerned about the far-reaching effects EDCs might have on ecosystems and groundwater reservoirs.
- Again, we were advised not to make this biosensor available to the general public, as it may cause unnecessary panic and harm.
- If implemented in water supplies, she finds it very interesting with a sensor that can be used to screen water before conducting more specific tests
Reflection
This conversation lined up perfectly with the reflections from the interview with Niels Bjerre. Our end-users should be professionals in water supply or wastewater management. These are the people who can really take action and solve the problems. Making it available for the general public, will only lead to panic and misunderstandings.
Magnus Löfstedt
European Environment Agency (EEA)Magnus Löfstedt - European Environment Agency (EEA)
Magnus Löfstedt works as an expert in chemicals at the European Environment Agency (EEA), covering both the effects on humans as well as ecosystems. We discussed the general water quality in Europe and we talked about our project.
What we learned
- The general water quality in Europe is quite poor - only a third of surface water samples received by EEA are of good chemical status
- A wide range effect-based biosensor could be a useful first step in identifying the cause of pollution.
- Again, we were advised not to make this biosensor available to the general public, as it may cause unnecessary panic and harm.
Reflection
Again, we are cautioned about the distribution of the kit to the general public. However, in contrast to what Niels Bjerre said about the quality of our drinking water, Magnus highlights the poor quality of freshwater in Europe.
Christian Ege
Green Transition Denmark
Christian Ege - Green Transition Denmark
Christian Ege is a senior consultant at Green Transition Denmark and the former head of the same organization. He has also previously been a part of the Danish Environment Agency. Christian has extensive experience working with environmental and climate problems - especially the legislative issues
What we learned
- Christian highlights the problem of only legislating and testing for individual compounds. This allows for problems with slightly modified pollutants, and it means that a lot of unknown EDCs are lost in the testing procedure.
- By focusing on pollutant groups and not on individual compounds, prevention of pollution could be more effective.
- The Danish government has pioneered the Quantitative Structural-Activity Relationship (QSAR) approach for grouping and classifying pollutants. This approach allows prediction of the harmful effects of compounds and therefore a prediction of classifications.
- Christian highlights that some limit values for chemicals should be reconsidered - detection of small amounts of compounds makes great headlines, but the effect of the detected concentration should be analyzed
Reflection
Christian highlighted that testing for single compounds can lead to undetected pollution. Our wide-range biosensor would help solve this issue. However, it is also very important to also consider the limits values for different pollutants - small amounts detected can have no adverse effect other than causing panic. We have to take this into account in our biosensor by determining what the sensitivity of our sensor is.
Interviews from Folkemødet
Svend Lindeberg
Fertility doctor and expert in IVFSvend Lindeberg - Fertility doctor and expert in IVF
Svend Lindeberg is the director of the Copenhagen Fertility Center. He is a fertility doctor and was responsible for the first IVF in Denmark in 1983. He has 40 years of experience in IVF treatments. He is also a professor at the University of Copenhagen.
What we learned
- Sperm quality in men has decreased in developed countries over the years, and EDCs have been shown to be a partial cause of this.
- Doctors as practitioners are not directly dealing with EDC pollution as there is still little understanding of their role in fertility problems.
- Svend thinks that a wide-range biosensor for EDCs could be useful in many places as it could quickly detect pollutants.
Reflection
Svend spoke positively about the idea of a biosensor for EDCs. Fertility is a problem - both in Denmark and other developed countries. Particularly, low quality of sperm is an issue that is widespread and well researched, as sperm samples are easily measurable and done so often.
Franciska Rosenkilde
Political leaderFranciska Rosenkilde - Political leader
Franciska Rosenkilde, the political leader of The Alternative party, discusses her party’s policy on pesticides, groundwater quality, and their relevance to emerging technologies like biosensors.
What we learned
- The Alternative Party aims to eliminate pesticide and toxic chemical pollution through organic farming.
- Water pollution is not only an issue that we are affected by but also an issue for future generations. By not dealing with it now we run the risk of making it very problematic to get clean drinking water in the future
Reflection
While the pollution of EDCs is a problem already now, we have to consider what could happen in the future. This could broaden the impact of our biosensor, as what we detect now could help combat issues of future generations. On the other hand, if we fail to detect harmful chemicals now, we run the risk of much more serious water pollution problems in the future.Magnus Heunicke
Danish Minister of the EnvironmentMagnus Heunicke - Danish Minister of the Environment
Magnus Heunicke has had an extensive career in politics in Denmark. He is the current Danish Minister of the Environment. In our interview, we discuss the state of Danish groundwater and recent government actions to address contamination, particularly from PFAS compounds. We thought that interviewing him would be interesting, as a lot of the statistics from our project description are found in reports for him as the Danish Minister of the Environment.
What we learned
- Danish groundwater is an important asset for both industry and drinking water, however, it is threatened by pollution, especially by PFAS.
- The Danish government has recently made a national action plan for prevention of PFAS pollution.
- Part of the action plans involves developing new technologies as it is a problem we have only recently noticed.
- The pollution issue is of high priority for the ministry.
Reflection
The Danish government considers groundwater pollution very important and has already implemented action plans to fight it. This shows that our project problem of water pollution could be valuable for Denmark locally.
Ellen Trane Nørby
Danish Water and Wastewater AssociationEllen Trane Nørby - Danish Water and Wastewater Association
Ellen Trane Nørby is the chairwoman of the Danish Water and Wastewater Association (DANVA). In the interview we talk about how to avoid, future-proof and remove water pollution.
What we learned
- More than 50% of the water wells in Denmark contain residue of contaminants. It is however below the legal limit values in many cases.
- The situation for the water wells controlled by DANVA is overall good, however, they have had to move and close water wells because of pollution.
- Water pollution is mainly dealt with by diluting polluted wells with clean water from other wells so that the concentration is below the limit. For some wells, especially around the capital region, chemical clean up methods are considered.
- They have future-proofed some water wells by afforestation on top.
Reflection
From this conversation, we reflected on what are the next steps after detecting the pollution. The practice of diluting polluted water wells with clean water supplies works for now, but as pollution becomes more widespread it may not be a solution in the future. How to future proof the water wells for the future?
Our conclusions and reflections from Folkemødet.
We got a lot of answers from the general public and experts at Folkemødet. This is how we reflected upon and integrated our new knowledge.First, all of the people we interviewed/surveyed drink tap water. Moreover, most people from the general public are concerned about the state of water pollution in Denmark and would be very interested in a sensor that would offer fast detection of EDCs in drinking water.
However, when talking with experts, some emphasize that the facts about water pollution can be very misleading. Although it is true that each year there is more pollution detected in drinking water, this doesn’t necessarily mean much on its own. As Niels Bjerre mentioned - we are testing more and with more precision, so the increase in the detected pollution doesn’t definitively mean that the water is more polluted than last year.
But even taking this into account, the pollution of water with EDCs is a problem. As Svend Lindeberg mentioned, sperm quality of men is decreasing and there is research suggesting that EDCs are part of the problem. The Danish Minister of Environment Magnus Heunicke informed us that the Danish government has already started an action plan to combat one EDC - PFAS.
Moreover, although our testing is improving, it is still a problem that mainly individual compounds are tested for, which as Christian Ege mentioned can lead to neglecting potentially harmful compounds. The experts liked the idea of a biosensor that could detect a wide range of EDCs, but almost all of them mentioned that they don’t think it should be made for the general public as it could cause unnecessary fear.
For detecting pollution, very important aspects are the sensitivity and limit values. A minuscule amount of pollutants doesn’t mean that the water is undrinkable or unsafe. Limit values are concentrations below which the pollutant is thought to not affect human health. If our biosensor could detect EDCs way below their limit values, this could cause unnecessary fear for perfectly good drinking water.
These takeaways were integrated into our project as follows:
- We’re on the right track. The issue is of water pollution by EDCs is of high priority to both the public, experts and politicians.
- Instead of making the biosensor available to the general public, we should distribute it to water supply companies. This way we don’t cause unnecessary panic among the public.
- Our biosensor must have defined limit values. This way we can determine if the detected pollutant concentrations can affect human health and the water should be considered contaminated.
- We decided to put a lot of focus on the human androgen receptor as the effect of EDCs on the male reproductive system are well-measurable and have been extensively studied by sperm quality analysis.
Investigating the local water supply in Lyngby
Following our discussion with experts from across Denmark at Folkemødet, we were certain that the users of this biosensor should be the experts at the waterworks - not the public. Therefore, we turned our attention to our local community in Lyngby. Here, we interacted with those responsible for ensuring a high quality of the water in our taps. We aimed to figure out the following:
- Can a broad biosensor screening for EDCs assist in the current testing procedure?
- How should a biosensor like this be implemented?
- Who can help us with the implementation?
To initiate this process, we reached out to the local municipalities and got the opportunity to meet the mayor.
Discussing the regulation of water tests with the mayor of Lyngby-Taarbæk
Discussing the regulation of water tests with the mayor of Lyngby-Taarbæk
We got the opportunity to meet with Sofia Osmani, the mayor of Lyngby-Taarbæk. In addition, we also met with Thomas Hansen, Department Manager in the Climate and Utilities Department of the municipality with a background in geology. Our discussion involved the aspects of water pollution and how the municipality addresses these issues. Additionally, they gave us feedback on the implementation of our biosensor in the current testing systems. We were advised to visit the local waterworks facility to hear more about this.
What we learned
- Water quality concerns the public and is therefore a priority issue for the local authorities. However, efforts mainly focus on practical, immediate solutions.
- The local municipalities enforce European and national regulations on EDCs, through approved laboratories. They don't conduct their own tests.
- The consumers completely fund the waterworks, whether public or private, through water bills. The waterworks therefore are non-profit organizations.
- The state monitors the expenses of waterworks. The municipality is reluctant to approve new expenses, as it would raise the cost of water for the citizens. Smaller changes that can result in later savings are welcome.
Visiting the local waterworks facility
Visiting the local waterworks facility
As recommended by the mayor, we visited the local waterworks of the municipality. We got a tour and discussed testing procedures and whether they were interested in introducing new experimental testing procedures. In addition to the tour, we arranged an online meeting with Charlotte Fog Krohn, project manager and specialist at Lyngby-Taarbæk waterworks to ask some more questions specifically regarding EDCs. She later recommended that we contact InSa-Drikkevand, a non-profit organization for water supply companies.
What we learned
- The waterworks include testing procedures not mandated by the state, including real-time monitoring for compounds like ammonia and water conductivity. They do this to ensure a high-quality product.
- The legislations are viewed as a minimum standard. The waterworks perform more tests to get more data than they are required to do.
- There is a strong interest in our sensor technology, with implementation being straightforward - especially if the cost aligns with our estimations. They are interested in implementing our biosensor to test the potential.
- There is no general EDC-specific test, as EDCs belong to different groups of compounds or dangerous chemicals that are being tested for independently. And they don’t test for medical residuals or unknown compounds.
- There are waterworks that do non-target screening, especially when there is a good relationship with the municipality.
Meeting the InSa-Drikkevand collaboration
Meeting the InSa-Drikkevand collaboration
As recommended by Lyngby waterworks, we set up a meeting with InSa-Drikkevand, a collaboration between 10 of the biggest water supply companies and DTU sustain. In total they provide water to a third of Denmark. InSa-Drikkevand is a space for facilitating innovation, always interested in new technologies in the field of testing, surveying and potential water purification solutions. We spoke with Ida Holm Olesen, Chief Consultant at Novafos, a big waterworks company and one of the specialists involved in InSa-Drikkevand.
What we learned
- The waterworks work with risk analysis, and endocrine-disrupting compounds (EDCs) are a significant concern.
- Trust from the customer is important. People in Denmark trust their tap water and frequent stories of new pollutants in the water supply can harm this trust.
- There is a financial risk to consider, as major investments in infrastructure could be ruined by the discovery of new pollutants. This promotes investing extensively in testing facilities.
- Waterworks aim to invest in being ahead of emerging technologies and legislation to keep high service standards and negate future risks.
- While exact numerical data from sensors is preferred by some stakeholders, the waterworks expressed interest in our sensor technology and its potential for future implementation.
Conclusions and reflections from talking with local waterwork experts
- While we expected to hear that the local waterworks would do the minimum required by the state, we found the opposite - local waterworks are testing way beyond the government requirements.
- Local waterworks are interested in wide-range testing. They are interested in being ahead of the curve because uncaught pollution could result in a costly shutdown when a new pollutant is recognised as dangerous.
- While initially we were worried about the cost of our biosensor, the waterworks are much more lenient than we thought because of the aforementioned risk of a shutdown. They are willing to invest now to not pay later. Thus, we can be more focused on providing the best quality sensor instead of a low-cost one.
- The waterworks are interested in our proposed biosensor. They are intrigued about the idea of being able to screen for EDCs before choosing which tests to perform. It will not be an incremental improvement, but a major new capability in the hands of the experts.
- They can help us test the biosensor on-site and implement it if it makes sense.
What do researchers think of our biosensor?
Until now we have focused on how our biosensor could be used by water supply companies, the government or the general public. We got some very nice responses and were told that our biosensor could be implemented but the sensitivity and affinity need to be thoroughly described. Moreover, we were interested in whether researchers would be interested in using such a sensor in their research. To achieve this, we wanted to answer the following questions:
- Is our design of the biosensor viable? How can it be tweaked?
- How can we model our biosensor?
- Are researchers interested in a biosensor like this and our idea for a software tool SENTINEL?
Dr. Terje Svingen, DTU National Food Institute, Denmark
Dr. Terje Svingen, DTU National Food Institute, Denmark
We set up a meeting with Dr. Terje Svingen, He is the Head of the Research Group for Molecular and Reproductive Toxicology at the DTU National Food Institute. He researches the effects of mixtures of endocrine-disrupting compounds on human development and health.
What we learned
- Residue from microplastics, pesticides, and hormonal medicine greatly impact the quality of drinking water.
- Currently, analysis of a water sample for EDCs requires knowledge about the EDC, a lot of equipment, human power and time.
- There is a demand for a biosensor to screen for EDCs in a cheap and fast way.
- Groups of EDCs based on their relations with receptors have different mechanisms of action. That brings a challenge in multi-receptor biosensor design, as if being mixed, the output signal could be suppressed by different EDC-receptor complexes. They should be kept separate.
Dr. Brigit van Brenk, Utrecht University, Netherlands
Dr. Brigit van Brenk, Utrecht University, Netherlands
To gather other opinions about our project, we contacted Dr. Brigit van Brenk from Utrecht University. She works with the removal of toxic micropollutants (EDCs) from wastewater with fungi enzymes. Her experience with EDCs was valuable knowledge for us. Moreover, she is very familiar with water content in northern Europe and methods for its detection.
What we learned
- Due to the lack of human awareness regarding the types of EDCs present in water and the mechanisms of their transformation, modern ways of analysis are too demanding for time, knowledge and budget.
- There isn’t a wide-range method for the detection of the presence of EDCs in water that doesn’t require time, money and expertise.
- Water is rich with many molecules that can interfere with our method based on human receptors and we have to keep it in mind when making a cell-free system.
- They were very excited for our software tool SENTINEL. It solves some very common problems that they are dealing with daily.
Dr. Gerd Seibold, Technical University of Denmark
Dr. Gerd Seibold, Technical University of Denmark
We also reached out to Professor Seibold to discuss various aspects of our iGEM project, focusing on the development of a cell-free biosensor. He provided valuable insights on the advantages and challenges of our proposed system, suggesting specific improvements and experimental techniques to enhance the functionality and reliability of our biosensor.
Overall, the meeting with Professor Seibold provided crucial guidance for our iGEM project, emphasizing the potential of a cell-free biosensor and offering specific strategies to improve its design and functionality. His recommendations on conducting RNA gel electrophoresis, and employing RT-PCR for fluorescence measurement will be instrumental in refining our experimental approach. Moving forward, we will try to incorporate these suggestions to gather robust data and enhance the reliability of our biosensor.
What we learned
- While a cell-free biosensor has many advantages, an in-cell biosensor has other advantages. He noted that ALE techniques or mutagenesis are very useful for in-cell systems. Additionally, cell growth can be linked to production, which increases practicality.
- Using a negative signal for the biosensor as in our design, could complicate interpretation of the results. He still believes that it has potential though.
- We should have a yeast-based system which could be used to test the receptor functionality. Additionally, he proposed that we also incorporate the T7 polymerase in yeast, even though he was uncertain whether it would work.
- We can use RNA gel electrophoresis to monitor RNA production over time.
- Professor Seibold stressed the importance of gathering comprehensive data including fluorescence measurements and RNA measurements. He recommended using an RT-PCR machine and making measurements every 30 seconds to analyze the fluorescence over time.
Dr. Mogens Kilstrup, Technical University of Denmark
Dr. Mogens Kilstrup, Technical University of Denmark
We reached out to Dr. Mogens Kilstrup. He works with many aspects of synthetic biology. We specifically reached out to discuss modeling of our sensor system, as he currently works on tools for stochastic modeling of such systems. This is further described in our Modeling page.
What we learned
- He gave us valuable insights into the various modeling methods that can be utilized to model a system like ours.
- We were provided specific tools, designed by J. Cassias and M. Kilstrup, to model our system. This has not been published and therefore is not referenced.
- We were introduced to old lectures about modeling and systems biology valuable for later learning more.
- We need to be able to locate kinetic parameters from literature
- There can be problems with trying to predict the fluorescence values based on theoretical kinetic parameters as there are many unknown parameters.
Conclusions and reflections from talking with researchers about our biosensor
After interviews with researchers from different backgrounds, we shaped main conclusions that pushed our projects further. Human knowledge about EDCs is broadening every day and there is a lack of understanding of the transformation mechanism of EDCs. Current methods of detection are very specific and resource-demanding. That brings a burden on research projects in many ways: money, time, and expertise are required.
The scientific community shows interest in our idea of a wide-range easy-to-use biosensor that is supposed to be cheaper than current available methods. We have to consider different mechanisms of interactions between EDCs and human receptors we use in the project. Moreover, the presence of other molecules has to be taken into account.
Our main takeaways that we directly integrated into our project are outlined below:
- Researchers also find this biosensor interesting as a tool to help their research.
- Working with the hormonal receptors cell-free is risky. There are many compounds that can affect our receptors and skew the results. This leads us to conclude that we should test the receptors in an in-cell system first.
- Many recommendations by Professor Seibold were implemented. To take an example, we utilized RNA gel electrophoresis to analyze the production of RNA from the T7 polymerase over time.
- Dr. Mogens Killstrup provided us with lectures and learning tools for modeling methods. We need to locate kinetic parameters from literature.
- There is a need for a software tool like SENTINEL. Especially Dr. Brigit van Brenk who works with EDCs daily was excited for it.
- We should make multiple biosensors with different receptors. Mixing them will only bring complications.
Communicating and collaborating with other innovative people
During our project, we had the opportunity to engage with and receive feedback from other innovative minds. A few of these events are summarized in this section. At these events we mainly aimed to discuss the presentation of our project and receive feedback on this, hopefully allowing us to frame our project in a great way.
Meeting other iGEM teams at BFH European Meetup
Meeting other iGEM teams at BFH European Meetup
We had the opportunity to be part of the first BFH European Meetup from May 24th to 26th. It was a three-day event organized by iGEM teams from Bielefeld, Frankfurt, and Hamburg and held in Bielefeld. The event included several workshops, classes, pitch sessions, and poster presentations.
At this event, we had the chance to present our project to other iGEM teams and judges for the first time and hear their ideas about it. We got great feedback, made new connections, and started nice collaborations during these three days. It was also really inspiring to hear about other teams’ projects and learn more about them. We also gained great vision by seeing how other groups were presenting their work, their story and their progress.
The feedback we received helped us realize the potential of our project and how unique it is. However, it highlighted the need to communicate our ideas more clearly without causing any misunderstanding. This experience significantly influenced how we present the scientific and technical part of our project, ensuring it is understandable and engaging while avoiding any confusion.
Participation in the annual Green Challenge
Participation in the annual Green Challenge
Our team was honored to participate in the Green Challenge conference hosted by the Technical University of Denmark on the 28 June. It is an education initiative held each year to ensure that engineering projects integrate sustainable goals.
Around 40 projects had their poster at an innovation hub called SkyLab DTU and pitched their projects 3 times to 3 different panels of judges. During 120 seconds participants had to inspire judges from different backgrounds such as students, professors and industry experts.
After extensive discussion, our project was noticed as a valuable addition to currently used methods of water screening. Judges agreed that the change of target users - to distribute the biosensor through the scientific community and water utility companies - is a credible turn of the project. Despite the advantage of affordable and fast tests, experts pointed out the fact that the addition of our solution to the already existing system of detection can bring pollution problems on its own. Therefore we have to consider materials for the biosensor and strategy for the life cycle of the product as a next step.
Attending the Nordic iGEM Conference (NiC)
Attending the Nordic iGEM Conference (NiC)
Alongside other Nordic and Baltic teams, DTU Biobuilders had the honor and opportunity to participate in NiC 2024, where we competed for a Golden Pipette Award. A 3-day conference was hosted by last year’s Golden Pipette Award winners - ABOA Turku at Åbo Akademi University located in the oldest city of Finland, Turku 26-28 July.
The goal of the conference was to get more insights into each other’s projects, strengthen the collaboration between the teams and get important clues on how to present our research and results during the Grand iGEM Jamboree. We had a chance to get feedback on our pitch and poster presentations from judges and experts associated with iGEM HQ who specialized in scientific content delivery.
As an outcome, we learned an important skill of engaging the audience and connecting with the listeners that will make sure our message is fully and exhaustively delivered to and understood by the public and how to improve our storytelling skills. Throughout the event, we exchanged many thoughts and ideas with other teams and our colleagues, which fortified the iGEM spirit and set the grounds for future collaborations.
Conclusions and reflections from communicating and collaborating with other innovative people
During the opportunities we had to present our project and progress, we realized that our project has great potential. We just need to learn how to communicate it effectively, both within the scientific community and the public, and how these two can be different.
- Participating in the BFH meetup and presenting our idea helped us to improve our scientific communication and be able to pitch our idea without causing any confusion.
- Using the knowledge we gained in the BFH meetup, we decided to take every opportunity to present our ideas from different perspectives in the Green Challenge. We learned how to pitch our idea more effectively, stay one step ahead, anticipate all the challenges, and consider how we will address them.
- At the NIC conference, we learned how to engage with the public more efficiently and how to tell our story more impressively.
With all these in mind now we are ready to develop the biosensor!
