Team:Brown-Stanford/Lab/Safety

From 2011.igem.org

Introduction

Safety is a primary concern when conducting research in synthetic biology. We recognize that any type of work in the laboratory setting generates an element risk for us, as iGEM team members, and those in our community. To reduce this risk, we engaged in safety training and followed best practices as outlined by our respective academic institutions and by NASA. We also recognize that the nature of our work, to modify organisms and introduce novel functions, warrants additional consideration from a safety standpoint. The team carefully evaluated the potential dangers posed by our projects and took appropriate measures where necessary.

Biosafety regulations and practices

Our academic institutions have Environmental Health and Safety organizations which establish rules and regulations for proper lab practice. The team followed these guidelines, as well as those of the Occupational Health and Safety division of the NASA Ames Research Center, whenever we engaged at research. More information is available at the following websites for reference:

http://www.brown.edu/Administration/EHS/biological/

http://www.stanford.edu/dept/EHS/prod/researchlab/bio/

http://server-mpo.arc.nasa.gov/Services/CDMSDocs/Centers/arc/Dirs/APR/APR1700.1.html

Safety training

In compliance with safety regulation, team members underwent several rounds of training at our home institutions and at NASA Ames.

Prior to the summer, Brown and Stanford students all participated in courses on general lab safety/biosafety/waste disposal, gaining the requisite certification to engage in biological research with our universities.

Upon arrival at NASA, we went through the standard orientation and training process required of all interns. We attended a three hour general orientation of the research facility, which included information about occupational health and a broad overview of the safety resources available at NASA. Later on, we took part in a four hour safety “bootcamp” in which we were introduced to biological containment protocols, waste disposal, and handling of hazardous materials in the lab.

Practices

Hazardous materials containment

Although we worked with non-pathogenic strains of bacteria, we took care to contain potentially hazardous materials in the lab. Work with biological materials was carried out at BSL1 conditions. Other standard lab practices were followed, including secondary containment of chemicals, proper storage of volatiles and flammables, and separation of acids and bases.

Waste disposal

Waste contaminated with biologicals was stored in specially marked bags that were autoclaved prior to disposal. Sharps and broken glassware was also disposed of in accordance with institutional guidelines. Hazardous liquid waste was clearly labeled, stored in secondary containment in a specially cordoned off section of the lab for our lab manager to eliminate.

Alternative DNA staining

- Our team used GelRed, a DNA dye produced by Biotium Inc, as a non-toxic alternative to ethidium bromide (EtBr). EtBr is one of the more common hazardous materials in molecular biology, used to stain DNA in the process of gel electrophoresis. It is an intercalating agent which inserts into double stranded DNA and is suspected to be a powerful mutagen. In contrast, GelRed has passed numerous toxicity tests outlined by government waste disposal laws (http://www.biotium.com/product/product_info/Safety_Report/GR%20&%20GG%20safety.pdf) . GelRed is safe to handle with latex gloves and can be disposed as regular trash. We thus bypassed the health risks posed by a potential carcinogen and simplified our waste managementprocess.

Projects

PowerCell

The cyanobacteria used are not known to have any harmful attributes.

REGObricks

B. subtilis, S. pasteurii, and E. coli are not known to have any harmful attributes.

Biosensor

E. coli is not known to have any harmful attributes.

Safety and Ethics on Mars

States Parties to the Treaty shall pursue studies of outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, and conduct exploration of them so as to avoid their harmful contamination and also adverse changes in the environment of the Earth resulting from the introduction of extraterrestrial matter and, where necessary, shall adopt appropriate measures for this purpose.

-Article IX of the Outer Space Treaty, 1967

Because our project’s goal is to develop synthetic biology applications for Mars, we need to consider the ethical ramifications of contaminating a foreign planet with microorganisms from Earth. The Outer Space Treaty (formerly known as The Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies) put into action in 1967 and signed by 98 countries, prohibits the harmful contamination of celestial bodies. The reasons for avoiding such contamination generally involve protecting the pristine environment of space. However, Brown-Stanford iGEM believes that in order for the successful colonization of the solar system it is necessary to allow for a degree of biological contamination onto another planet such as Mars. In the interest of research, biological contamination could potentially preclude the discovery of any native life on Mars by either out-competing it, or more likely, casting into doubt any forms of life we may find. Thus, it is important to have biological tracers on the organisms that are brought into space to identify them as originating from Earth. Additionally, settlement by humans may cause large-scale environmental change on the level of ecopoeisis. Without going into the philosophical arguments of balancing human species preservation with the intrinsic value of extraterrestrial ecologies, it is the opinion of Brown-Stanford iGEM that advancing civilization beyond the boundaries of Earth is the greatest achievement a species.