"
Team:Heidelberg/HumanPractice/Experts
From 2013.igem.org
Project
Notebook
Human Practice
Experts. Valuable new Perspectives.
Already in a very early phase of the project, we talked to Prof. Dr. Rainer Zawatzky, group leader and safety representative at the German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) as well as deputy chairman of the regional office of the BUND (a German NGO for preservation of the environment). Our discussion focused on three topics: The impact of synthetic biology in general and our project in particular on the environment, synthetic biology as a risk-technology and finally sustainability, since we intend to provide an energy-efficient alternative to conventional gold-recycling.
We received valuable input concerning communicating our project and software to the general public. Prof. Zawatzky pointed out that possible concerns of society regarding our project should be negligible for the planning of our project. In his long experience as researcher, he often experienced anxiety of non-scientists towards his research as well as doubts regarding the effectiveness of advances in Human Practice. He emphasized that interactions with critical people may not lead to the anticipated outcome. However, we believe that it is in fact possible to address and to banish fears by engaging society in your work and by encouraging communication between science and the society.
We visited Peptide Specialties Laboratories GmbH (PLS), a leader in customized peptide synthesis established in Heidelberg. Managing director Dr. Hans-Richard Rackwitz gave us fascinating insight in chemical peptide synthesis in his company (a German video tour is availible on youtube), which is based on the merryfield synthesis using Fmoc chemistry.
One of the PLS “specialties” is the incorporation of many non-proteinogenic amino acids including D-conformations, phosphorylated monomers, DTPA- and DOTA-coupled amino acids as well as e.g. chloride and amid substitutions. Equipped with a range of synthesizers, they are able to produce 5 to 100 mg of peptides with a length of up to 75 amino acids within 2 to 3 weeks. In order to guarantee substantially 100 % purity of the final product, Peptide Specialty Laboratories performs extensive HPLC purification and MALDI-TOF analysis to provide the customer with sufficient informations about the product.
Dr. Rackwitz pointed out that most of the produced peptides are used for immunological studies; therefore, a minimal length of 8 amino acids should be achieved by NRPS synthesis to be commercially relevant. Furthermore, he told us that upscaling of chemical peptide synthesis up to tons as needed for clinical research is comparably easy. The challenge herein lies in fulfilling good manufacturing practices requirements, which also involve separate production lines to avoid cross-contamination. Since our NRPS peptides are currently expressed in vivo, this implies complex purification strategies. Alternatively, one could think of in vitro production using immobilized NRPS assembly lines, especially for the production of peptides with complex monomers that would be more expensive if synthesized chemically.
We wish to thank Dr. Rackwitz for an inspiring and insightful morning!
Seeing safety concerns as one of the major issues in a Human Practice Advance, we wanted to gain a deeper knowledge of professional biosafety, in this case, defense against biological weapons. We arranged to take part in an open day at the ABC-defense regiment (i.e. atomic, biological and chemical weapon defense) organized by the Federal German Armed Forces. Especially the part about biological weapons was of interest for us, as many people we talked to pointed out safety concerns as one of their major fears regarding synthetic biology. Hence, we wanted to know, how experts in biosafety approach these issues. Read about our experiences here!
With Mrs. Van Aaken, who not only is a pedagogue for environmental education, but also member of the BUND, we talked about the impact of synthetic biology on environment and on our lives in general. We cannot foresee all consequences and the impact our actions will have for the future – which accounts for both, the interactions of our “creations” with different ecosystems as well as the impact of synthetic food or medicine on our bodies. The evaluation of possible risks arising from them has to be done according to the specific use of the synthetic product. Furthermore, we should return to our essential needs instead of the urge to pile up cheap goods and wealth at the expense of nature and the poor.
Besides this general issue, we also considered the question whether synthetic biology is an artificial process or rather something natural. When interacting with the non-scientific public in general (see below), a common association to synthetic biology was “artificial”. However, we can ask whether synthetic biology actually is human-made artificial or accelerated natural evolution. Addressing these questions in the discussion with Mrs. Van Aaken lead us further in the very theory behind science in general, hence, what natural sciences really are, what nature is and whether our quest for knowledge and technological advance is part of human nature. These considerations opened up an entirely new point of view on what we as scientists-in-training were doing and hence, we thank Mrs. Van Aaken for broadening our horizon during this enlightening afternoon.
