Difference between revisions of "SynBERC:COG"

From OpenWetWare
Jump to: navigation, search
(Define problem)
Line 8: Line 8:
 
#Produce a [[SynBERC:COG/Report|report]] with evaluation of current assembly approaches and recommendations for going forward.
 
#Produce a [[SynBERC:COG/Report|report]] with evaluation of current assembly approaches and recommendations for going forward.
  
=COG:Meeting 1=
+
=Meetings=
Agenda:
+
*[[SynBERC:COG/October 2007 Meeting]]
  
==What are the goals for COG?==
 
Proposed based on SynBERC meeting / conversations since:
 
#Stay up to date with current automated cloning research projects taking place in SynBERC labs
 
#Get the ball rolling for solving the automated cloning problem in the short term
 
 
===Research Updates===
 
*1/2 the meeting?
 
*Brief updates from each of the groups? one longer presentation each month about one project?
 
**Something else?
 
 
===Getting the ball rolling for solving automated cloning===
 
#Define the problem we want solved
 
#Specify the possible solutions
 
#Evaluate / Act on solutions
 
 
====Define problem(s)====
 
*Combinatorial libraries of assembled parts (Wendall, UCSF iGEM team project)
 
*Automation of standard BioBrick Assembly (Registry)
 
*Automation of assembly independent of BBs (Synth companies?)
 
 
====Specify Possible Solutions====
 
#Decentralized approach
 
#*We make cloning easier by using some automation combined with "normal" individual cloning approaches.  For example, each lab buys a Qiacube to partially automate minipreps and restriction digests.  Then ligations and transformations are done by hand at the bench.
 
#Centralized academic facility
 
#*We find the resources to start an assembly facility similar to how sequencing facilities are set up on campus
 
#Outsource to DNA synthesis company
 
#*We work with a DNA synthesis company so that they can offer commercial automated cloning services.  How do we ensure that such a partnership wouldn't fall apart as soon as a big synthesis order comes along?  Automated cloning may be too small a market and/or too large a problem for DNA synthesis companies to tackle right now?
 
 
====Evaluate / Act on Solutions====
 
*Registry hires more staff to do process engineering
 
*Trial QIAcube / other "cheap" robots for distributed approach
 
*Figure out how big an assembly order iGEM + labs using parts could put together for a Synth company (George suggestion)
 
*Go talk to Synth companies see if they'll do this.
 
*Plot the cost of synth vs. assembly over time for particular length scales (drew's suggestion)
 
 
==Meeting Frequency==
 
*Monthly?
 
*Any weekday's particularly bad for certain groups? (Weds at MIT)
 
 
==Next steps==
 
  
 
=Communication=
 
=Communication=

Revision as of 04:55, 29 October 2007

Service lab.png Welcome to the Construction Optimization Group (COG)!

At the last SynBERC retreat SynBERCers decided that solving the challenge of automated DNA assembly/cloning would be a priority for the center. COG will be tasked with drafting a report for the upcoming NSF visit in March(?) that evaluates current assembly approaches and proposes a path forward. This page is just getting started, please add/edit!

Goals

  1. Maintain communication across labs on status of automated assembly projects.
  2. Produce a report with evaluation of current assembly approaches and recommendations for going forward.

Meetings


Communication

Members