Header
WORK IN PROGRESS (SOPHIE)
Leabernier (Talk | contribs) |
Sophierivara (Talk | contribs) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Template:EPFL2013Header}} | {{Template:EPFL2013Header}} | ||
+ | WORK IN PROGRESS (SOPHIE) | ||
- | + | <!-- | |
The nanoparticles were decided to be composed of gelatin, and a two step desolvation protocol was successfully used to make them. We were able to prove their presence by DLS method, giving an average size of nanoparticles of 200 nm. | The nanoparticles were decided to be composed of gelatin, and a two step desolvation protocol was successfully used to make them. We were able to prove their presence by DLS method, giving an average size of nanoparticles of 200 nm. | ||
Line 45: | Line 46: | ||
In conclusion, we can say that except minor problems, cloning succedeed well. The Gibson assemblies globally worked out and we had no trouble growing the resulting transformed bacteria. The most delicate part was the characterization of our parts with functionnal assays. However, a lot of parts showed encouraging results but would maybe need to be studied in more detail. The naoparticles is the part that worked out well, nanoparticles could be synthetized and loaded. This project was ambitious and was almost achieved, and we are really proud of sharing our results with the iGEM community! | In conclusion, we can say that except minor problems, cloning succedeed well. The Gibson assemblies globally worked out and we had no trouble growing the resulting transformed bacteria. The most delicate part was the characterization of our parts with functionnal assays. However, a lot of parts showed encouraging results but would maybe need to be studied in more detail. The naoparticles is the part that worked out well, nanoparticles could be synthetized and loaded. This project was ambitious and was almost achieved, and we are really proud of sharing our results with the iGEM community! | ||
- | + | --> | |
{{Template:EPFL2013Footer}} | {{Template:EPFL2013Footer}} |