"
Notification
The systems our team designed do not contain parts that produce toxins. Therefore, no additional biosafety indications will be given next to the other part information at the Registry of Standard Biological Parts (RSBP).
When there is (uncertainty about) relevant biosafety information, it would be good to indicate this in the Design Notes of the Part Design page of the RSBP. Furthermore it should become clear from the introduction on the Main Page whether the BioBrick part produces a biohazardous product or the system might be harmful in total and if a subpart falls out of the superpart. Because effects of release out of the containment can be unpredictable, biosafety information wouldn’t be at the right place on the page Hard Information. A team might have designed a part without producing and validating it. If this part is then used in a new system and turns out to be hazardous during the construction this should also be noticed under User Reviews at the Experience page. For this purpose, the team that used the BioBrick design should be able to edit this page.
The indications of biosafety could even be more generalized when at the BioBrick part entry page of the RSBP there would be requested to enter these indications. This, by filling in two extra text entry box(es) headed with, the notions on safety indicated by iGEM:
- Foreseen BioBrick Part or System/Device risk(s) and
- ‘Chassis enhancement’
or by marking a ‘No relevant biosafety issue’ checkbox (2011; Jump to References). They could also come out better if the Main Page of the BioBrick part had a Biosafety category, that would add relevant biosafety information from the entry page automatically.
