"
Team:Greensboro-Austin/Standard Proposal
From 2013.igem.org
(Difference between revisions)
(→Open Sequence Initiative) |
(→Open Sequence Initiative) |
||
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
== <div style="text-align: center;"> <span style="font-size:120%">Open Sequence Initiative == | == <div style="text-align: center;"> <span style="font-size:120%">Open Sequence Initiative == | ||
| - | [[File:1233319 10102849539077660 493272188 n.jpg]] | + | [[File:1233319 10102849539077660 493272188 n.jpg|center|300px]] |
==Introduction== | ==Introduction== | ||
Revision as of 06:57, 3 September 2013
Contents |
Open Sequence Initiative
Introduction
Previous Standards:
As the fields of Synthetic Biology and genetic engineering emerged, arguments for the standardizing the assembly methods involved in constructing plasmids also emerged...
Why standards are awesome...
Drawbacks...
[updated probability chart with GC content-inserted here]
[because of this] We speculated that other teams might be having the same issues with regards to part submission and illegal restriction sites. To find out we made a survey asking other teams if they ever come across the same sorts of problems as we do- an analysis of their responses has been shown here:
RFC_95 9.2.13
Survey Results
Introduction
Previous Standards: As the fields of Synthetic Biology and genetic engineering emerged, arguments for the standardizing the assembly methods involved in constructing plasmids also emerged...
Why standards are awesome...
Drawbacks...
[updated probability chart with GC content-inserted here]
[because of this] We speculated that other teams might be having the same issues with regards to part submission and illegal restriction sites. To find out we made a survey asking other teams if they ever come across the same sorts of problems as we do- an analysis of their responses has been shown here:
RFC_95 9.2.13
Survey Results
