Contents
Building Equitable Partnerships in Synthetic Biology
This year the Edinburgh-UHAS_Ghana team has taken a rather unconventional approach to human practices (HP) in the iGEM competition. Often, HP revolves around continuous stakeholder engagement and developing relationships with institutions that take interest in a given team’s iGEM project. Integrated HP is essential to give context to the problem that synthetic biology is aiming to solve. This year, however, we decided to look at HP from a different angle, considering that in order to have sustainable stakeholder interaction, you need to first form a network of relationships. The interaction between the University of Edinburgh and the University of Health and Allied Sciences led to improved access to stakeholders in both Scotland and Ghana, as well as both institutions giving each other insight into ways on tackling water pollution. This team dynamic was a valuable demonstration of the need to invest time and energy in developing equity in biology and research. We believe this is very important to iGEM’s ethos of maximising the breadth of synthetic biology.
This HP section of our wiki outlines how we established this joint team dynamic, why it was important for our project, the impact it had on our integrated HP work, and how this then relates to the bigger picture of iGEM; how can iGEM benefit from building equitable partnerships.
How did the collaboration come to be?
Professor Kwabena Duedu from the University of Health and Allied Sciences was a PhD student at Professor Chris French’s lab at the University of Edinburgh (UoE) coming from Ghana on a Darwin Studentship. His project involved looking into biomass processing and optimisation. Professor French and Professor Duedu then applied several times for funding for joint projects but weren’t successful. Professor Duedu wanted to form UHAS iGEM team for some time but had trouble raising the necessary resources, so entering the iGEM competition as a joint team seemed like a good option.
Why was this joint team important?
Establishing a sturdy connection between the University of Edinburgh and the University of Health and Allied Sciences (UHAS) in Ghana, was initially a way to share and spread the iGEM experience to new institutions. It was an advantageous opportunity to pursue a collaboration in the form of a combined iGEM team, maximizing the incorporation of knowledge from diverse backgrounds and expertise. But more importantly, it increased the breadth of local problems that could be feasibly targeted, improved access to stakeholders, provided us with new perspectives, and was definitely a reality check for the inequity that currently exists in biological research.
Identifying a problem and improving access to stakeholders
Engaging with stakeholders is essential because it provides context to the iGEM project. From the lens of a joint team, we gained insightful perspectives on the stakeholders of the same issue in both countries, which strengthened our project design. It also allowed us to discover issues in Scotlad for example, that we didn’t know were an issue!
Heavy Metals
Illegal mining activities in Ghana driving river water pollution was undoubtedly one of our target areas when it came to the human practices of PETALUTION. This was established early in the project (June). At UHAS we expressed the urgency of targeting heavy metal pollution. Having spoken to one of the local communities along the Birim River, we were told that illegal mining activities involve using excess water to wash the gold after it is extracted. After these washes, heavy metals such as lead, mercury, arsenic and cadmium from the chemicals used for mining leach into the water.
Firstly, we wanted to know exact statistics on heavy metal poisoning in local communities but the hospitals we contacted didn’t have data on cases of heavy metal poisoning as heavy metal detection in patient samples isn’t something they carry out. Given the difficulty (confidentiality, ethics etc.) of working with human samples e.g., blood, we decided that it would be best to tailor a heavy metal biosensor for the contaminated river as opposed to for hospital use. At UHAS we organised a trip to the Birim River where we spoke to local communities in the area and collected contaminated water samples for sequencing and metagenomic analysis.
Currently, Ghana Standard Authority and the Ghana Water company are the main institutions that perform large-scale water treatment. Unfortunately, these companies are limited to urban areas, so their services are only of use if local communities take water to urban areas for decontamination. This would carry a large financial burden. Communities resort to simply using this contaminated water. As with plastic pollution, there is no active way to remediate the heavy metals from the water without introducing large-scale water treatment infrastructures. Also, most existing bioremediation methods contain genetically modified organisms and given the GMO restrictions in Ghana, GMO-based bioremediation is not a viable solution.
PET plastic
Through our discussions with experts and industrial workers, we learned that PET plastics are not recycled or degraded but rather are exported to different countries. This is due to lack of equipment or methods to degrade the plastics in Ghana.
We worked to understand the way PET is processed in Ghana. Zoomlion Ghana Limited (ZGL) has recorded a total daily door-to-door waste collection of 1194 Tonnes and a total municipal waste of 3575 Tonnes of which plastic waste is in the range of 477 Tonnes to 715 Tonnes of the total waste. Trucks collect this household waste from various collection points and it is sorted by the Integrated Recycling Compost Plant. A wind and magnetic separator then separate the various types of plastics (e.g. PP, HDPE, PET and LDPE). ZGL processes PE, LDPE and PE into pellets which are sent to Universal Plastic Products Recycle. This company adds virgin materials to the pellets to then produce other plastic-based products. ZGL mentioned they are unable to process PET plastics and so export them to Burkina Faso, Togo, Sierra Leone, Malaysia, and/or the United States. ZGL noted that plastic pollution is one of the reasons contributing to flooding in Ghana as it accumulates in the drainage systems. The current education in place at schools on minimizing plastic use and disposal hasn’t been yielding positive feedback.
Even though most of the HP work was carried out in Ghana, with the aim of seeking and sharing international perspectives, we decided to contact the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA). Seeing as PET plastic pollution is a global issue, we felt it was important not to limit our stakeholders to only Ghana. SEPA was very interested in wide scale methods for PET plastic degradation. They were excited by PETALUTION but were curious about the time scale viability of a biodegradation system. As we are still only at the proof-of-concept stage, we don’t know how this would work at a larger scale.
Our interactions with ZGL highlighted the importance of having a low-cost and easy to use solution, whereas SEPA emphasised time consumption. This is to show how incorporating stakeholder input from Ghana and Scotland provided insightful feedback into PETALUTION.
Figure 2: a) Interview with Zoomlion Ghana Limited, left to right Darlington (UHAS – University of Health and Allied Sciences), Charity Serwaa (UHAS). b) Interview with Ghana Water Company Limited, by Charity Serwaa and Gloria (UHAS).
Stakeholder engagement gave us new perspectives:
When we met with the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency in August, our initial pitch was the PET plastic biodegradation system. Once they heard about our heavy metal biosensors, however, they emphasised the importance of safe and cost-effective detection methods. We had assumed that the heavy metal side of the project wouldn’t be as relevant to Scotland, as Scotland is known for its high quality of water. However, we learned that there are in fact sites of heavy metal contamination in Scotland (Table 1), and there are likely more sites than we think, as there is a lack of data available on contamination of water bodies. A user-friendly biosensor would be a fantastic way to not only collect more data on levels of heavy metal contamination around the country, but also involve community-level data collection. SEPA expressed the importance of involving local communities and people in collaborative data collection. Our cell-free transcription-based biosensor would be an attractive solution to support this.
If it hadn’t been for the stakeholder engagement in Ghana driving the development of biosensors, we would never have known the need for biosensors for heavy metal detection in Scotland. It’s these unexpected outcomes that are valuable and unique to having a joint team dynamic. Unfortunately, it wasn’t possible to carry out metagenomic work at the Birim River, but if we had found any novel binding proteins, this is an example of how collaborative work can be catalytic for technological advancement. It shows us that projects usually seen as fostering ‘international development’ can work both ways: innovations can be useful for problems in both the Global North and South. There is this false idea that we should take.
Working in a diverse and large team gave us the chance to experience different opinions. In an increasingly globalised world, science needs to become more collaborative, and international joint efforts are ever more valuable. Even though we were all a group of students studying biochemistry, medical chemistry, molecular biology, genetics, and biotechnology, we all come from different places around the world with different educational. At UHAS, teaching is more focused on a health context, as it is a Health-oriented University. This is very different to UoE, as biotechnology, molecular biology are generalised and focus more on the techniques within these areas.
Table 1: List of water bodies contaminated with heavy metals in Scotland, comprising heavy metals relevant to PETALUTION (obtained from SEPA)
| Water Body | Catchment | Reporting parameter | Classification year | Notes on cause |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 Union canal (Greenbank to Kirk Bridge) | Forth Estuary (South) Coastal | Mercury | 2020 | Historic manufacturing which contaminated canal sediments |
| 6504 R Fillan | River Tay | Cadmium | 2020 | Historic Lead mining at Tyndrum |
| 10116 Glengonnar Water | River Clyde | Lead, Cadmium | 2020 | Historic Lead mining in the Leadhills area |
| 101610 River Nith (Dumfries - Sanquhar) | River Nith | Cadmium | 2020 | Historic Lead mining in the Leadhills area |
| 10618 Crawick Water/Spango Water | River Nith | Cadmium | 2020 | Historic Lead mining in the Leadhills area |
| 10619 Wanlock Water | River Nith | Lead, Cadmium | 2020 | Historic Lead mining in the Leadhills area |
Integrated Human Practices Overview
See the end of this page for a more detailed description of the integrated human practices
Reality checks
As much as we were initially hoping to get more lab work done at UHAS, this was not possible, and in hindsight, we should have accepted this from the beginning. Firstly, there were significant academic calendar differences which made it difficult for us at UHAS to carry out lab work. UHAS have their examinations in August-September, so leading up to this they had to prioritise University. UoE had their summer vacation period during this time, starting the semester at the end of September. Secondly, as iGEM was newly introduced to UHAS, there were large disparities in University-related assistance. For instance, at UHAS the financial support was minimal as compared to at UoE. At UHAS we ended up getting our consumables from Tractilis biolab, which is not University-based.
A lot of iGEM teams around the world take resources and lab consumables for granted, and if we want to increase collaboration within iGEM and in the field of synthetic biology, these differences need to be addressed. Dr. Jenny Molloy from the University of Cambridge has been focusing on working towards an equitable bioeconomy, implementing the idea of increasing access to reagents in areas of the world where it is difficult to access. Beneficial Bio Ltd was co-founded by Dr. Jenny Molloy, looking to bridge the gap in the bioeconomy and providing a sustainable way to access research. We recommend that future teams looking for ways to make lab work more accessible, communicate with Dr. Molloy.
In terms of making the iGEM competition accessible to more countries around the world, we believe that the iGEM Headquarters should take into account the vast differences in academic calendars of universities around the world. It is true that there are schools that really prioritise iGEM and give it academic credits, however, at UHAS and UoE this is not the case. IGEM should consider the calendar variations when suggesting the Jamboree dates.
How can iGEM teams build equitable partnerships?
Transdisciplinarity is one of the biggest parts of iGEM’s ethos, it is defined as the collaboration of different disciplines and non-scientific stakeholders to target a real-world social problem. In this case, the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) act as framework to identify different problems and priorities [1]. Transdisciplinary research combines knowledge from these various disciplines in order to produce a set of sustainable and socially relevant solutions.
Taking a transdisciplinary approach to research and global change is important and appealing in theory, but in practice it can lead to more challenges. Co-creation is often associated with transdisciplinary projects, but this usually ends up with the ‘Global North’ making research choice-related decisions over the ‘Global South’ [2]. Due to the way that resources have been distributed globally, it is usually the UK, the US, Europe, and Australia that end up leading research projects, deciding what gets researched and where. We recognise that transdisciplinary and co-creative work is essential to effectively target the SDGs, as they are after all, goals for globally relevant issues. But in order to do that, we need to establish equitable North-South partnerships.
When it comes to paving the way for equitable North-South partnerships, it is important that we take active steps to [3]:
- Trust that research in the region can contribute to the project
- Identify the inequities that exist
- Design, build, and maintain relationships with the long-term perspective in mind
This year, only 5 iGEM teams were represented from Africa (out of 54 countries in Africa), that is AFCM-Egypt, CU_Egypt, Makeree_Uganda, AshesiGhana, Edinburgh-UHAS_Ghana. African Universities are highly underrepresented in the iGEM competition. A possible reason for this is the difficulty is in receiving orders and consumables by post. It is unfortunate that participation in iGEM is limited to parts of the world where research facilities are readily available.
We propose that iGEM allows for joint teams to be created, connecting Universities/Institutions from various parts of the world as this allows for reputable organizational bodies to come together. As per Sibai et al. these joint teams would allow for effectively identifying the inequities that exist in their respective countries [3]. Carrying out the iGEM project in a joint way paves the way for sustainable relationships that after months of collaboration on iGEM as a relatively short-term project, can naturally create long-lasting connections. Over the following years of the iGEM competition, these joint collaborations can potentially build an impressive research network, with the aim of reducing the inequitable nature of North-South partnerships.
Throughout our project, our joint team dynamic encountered obstacles, and these were very much in line with what has been discussed in the UK Collaborative on Development Science, looking at ways to build partnerships of equals [4].
Table 2: Benefits and challenges of North-South research partnerships. Taken and adapted from the UK Collaborative on Development Science, written by Dr. Jennie Dodson. An overview what has been observed in studies on North-South collaboration [4].
| Benefits | Challenges |
|---|---|
| Improved access to scientific resources (laboratories, equipment, expertise) and talent, expertise and ideas, but also better access to more complex/large-scale instruments | More complex management and decision-making processes |
| Mutual learning and knowledge exchange between partners that may lead to broadened perspectives and new solutions to key challenges | Additional workload required to maintain the partnership over and above existing responsibilities |
| Greater access to financial resources | Higher financial costs and difficulty in overhead recovery |
| Enhanced research impact | Power imbalance and research agenda dominated by the Northern institution |
| Capacity building for individuals, institutions, and national research systems | Side-lining of local and long-term research agendas |
| Improved quality, cost efficiency, and productivity of research programmes | Diversion of staff and resources away from parts of the Southern institution not involved in the partnership |
| Improved institutional and individual profile and esteem | Logistical challenges (visas, international travel, difficulty transporting samples between countries). |
| Long-term relationship and continuity that is sustainable because it lasts without the individuals that started the partnership | Tensions due to cultural differences and the wider political and social context |
Main challenges we faced?
Undoubtedly, amidst the successes there were challenges we encountered, and it is possible that future joint iGEM teams could encounter similar challenges, so we have provided potential solutions to these challenges (Figure 4).
1. Poor WiFi connectivity
Maintaining connection during weekly meetings was difficult as at UHAS we often struggled to use Teams with the available bandwidth. It was usually difficult to hear properly on both sides. We could have held the meetings through WhatsApp calls, having the entire team on each side meet up in person and then joining on either side of the call. The drawback is that we cannot share/view screens, but a way around this is to email the slides in advance. It isn’t ideal to not be able to share screens but having members actively participation would be the priority.
2. Starting with different levels of iGEM understanding
We never really acknowledged the fact that at UHAS and UoE, there are bound to be differences in the curriculum with respect to synthetic biology and a general understanding of iGEM. For future teams, it would be good to organise a series of short introductory tutorials in the first few weeks of iGEM (ideally in March/April) to level out the understanding of iGEM (e.g., an introduction to basic parts, JUMP assembly, how to design primers, case studies analysing previous iGEM teams). These would ideally be facilitated by the supervisors and team leaders.
3. Differences in financial support
Due to the differences in curricula at each institution, it is natural that the level of priority given to iGEM will vary. At UHAS, we struggled to have support from the University as iGEM was only just introduced, so there wasn’t as much support as we would have expected. There is no easy way around this than to simply get the University familiarized with iGEM, but this takes time. Crowdfunding only started in July which was too late. For future teams, fundraising should begin almost immediately, as soon as a problem has been identified.
4. Access to resources
It wasn’t easy to organise lab work at UHAS because lab work coincided with the examinations period and some consumables were not available. Luckily, we were sponsored with consumables and reagents from Tractilis Biolabs. And once the semester ended, lab work began. Nonetheless, at the beginning of the project, these limitations should have been clearly defined (see March/April in Figure 5). The limitations e.g., Human Practices limitations in Edinburgh, consumables and reagents availability in Ho should be clearly outlined, and the project should be planned out around this.
5. Academic year differences
This made it very difficult to find a time that best suited both sides of the team, as UHAS we were completing our semester and final exams during the period of the iGEM competition whiles UoE was on vacation (Table 3). The main way around this is to ensure better planning starting in March, and in hindsight, we underestimated the time commitment to iGEM, so it’s important that any future teams really consider the differences in availabilities due to the academic year structures around the world.
Table 3: Key dates of second semester of 2021/2022 academic year at the University of Health and Allied Sciences (UHAS)
6. Setting up meetings
It is essential to compromise, particularly because of the differences in the academic calendar. It would be good to have asynchronous forms of updating either side of the team. One way would be to send each other regular weekly meetings with the main bullet points (e.g. goals from each sub-section for that week, and what was accomplished from the previous week).
7. Lack of communication
At times, communication was difficult between UHAS and UoE due to academic differences, variations in the knowledge on synthetic biology and iGEM. With such a large team, it was challenging to get to know everyone. A way to improve the communication could be to focus on team building at the beginning of the project.
A guide for future joint teams
What is a joint team?
Seeing as the Edinburgh-UHAS_Ghana Team is one of the few, if not, only team to have such a unique international dynamic, we are defining a joint team as one that combines an institution located in the global North, with an institution in the global South.
How to form a joint team?
The enthusiasm for forming a joint team should be two-way, in that each side of the potential team has actively chosen to take part.
We suggest that iGEM creates a twinning program for joint teams, which would start by sending out following survey to create a list of teams that are open to this kind of setup. The survey would be sent out in January, long in advance before the Grand Jamboree in October. Please also refer to our infographic for an overview on how we propose that you set up a joint team (Figure 5).
- Institution Name
- Country of Institution
- Time zome
- Continent
- Team Leader(s)
- Main point of contact information
- Number of team members
- Tracks you are interested in (pick as many as you are considering)
- Diagnostics
- Therapeutsics
- Climate crisis
- Environment
- Conservation
- Food and nutrition
- Biomanufacturing
- Industry scale up
- Energy
- Foundational advance
- Software and AI
- High school
- Potential ideas (optional)
- Do you have easy access to lab spaces at your institution?
Detailed overview of Integrated Human Practices
April
- iGEM team established
- Brainstorming begins (pollution, waste management, agriculture – potential areas we could look into)
- Large, diverse team, different educational backgrounds
- We are thinking of splitting lab work evenly and hopefully we could order necessary consumables/reagents and send them to UHAS via FedEx or DHL as it is very difficult to order in the mail from Science product companies (customs, takes longer, more expensive, etc.)
May
Meeting with Joana Mendes (UHAS virtual, UoE in person)
- Name & Background: Joana Mendes is a PhD student from Ghana at UoE, currently working in Professor Andrew Free’s lab.
- Interaction: Discussion of the various problems occurring in Ghana. Joana suggested water pollution as a targetable issue. Waste management, particularly plastic pollution and accumulation in water bodies is also a big issue as this can cause flooding and waterborne diseases.
- Project direction & Impact: At UHAS we also agreed that because of illegal mining being a pressing issue in Ghana, water pollution is of serious concern. Scotland is known for its impeccable water quality, so we thought that the Human Practices would be veered more so towards Ghana.
Large general iGEM meeting with PIs – Professor Chris French and Professor Kwabena Duedu
- Name & Background: Professor Chris French (Professor at UoE) and Professor Kwabena Duedu (Professor at UHAS)
- Interaction: An elaborate brainstorming session of all possible ideas from targeting the cocoa swollen shoot virus to targeting PET plastic pollution, we were at the drawing board. We also looked back at previous UoE iGEM teams to see how we could build on what has already been made. The issue of PET plastic as public health hazard was also raised, as PET plastic accumulates in water ways and has caused flooding and outbreaks of waterborne diseases e.g. cholera. Particularly in areas of stagnant river water.
- Project direction & Impact: Water pollution would be a good way to build on the arsenic biosensor from the UoE 2020 Team (Finding Nemo). We wanted to find out statistics on heavy metal poisoning rates in patients living near these contaminated sites. As for the PET plastic idea, the UoE 2021 iGEM Team, Super Grinder, also looked at PET plastic biodegradation, so we realised we could also build upon this idea.
June
Calling hospitals in Ghana which are located near heavy metal-contaminated rivers
- Name & Background: GCD Hospital Akwatia, St. Dominic’s Hospital
- Interaction: Phone calls asking for any data on number of cases/patients admitted with heavy metal poisoning. Hospitals said there is no data on this as there are no devices for testing heavy metal poisoning in patient samples. Ampomah, Executive director the Ghana News Agency at a workshop in Ho in 2017 said that 60% of Ghana’s water bodies are polluted to a critical level.
- Project direction & Impact: Very briefly we questioned whether it would be worth designing a diagnostic device for heavy metal poisoning, but this would only identify the problems of heavy metal poisoning when it’s a bit too late, as opposed to attempting to prevent poisoning from occurring. The ethics and safety concerns of dealing with blood/urine samples would also be very complicated, hampering the progress of our project. We decided that a heavy metal biosensor for contaminated river water would be ideal and would allow us to build upon Finding Nemo (UoE 2020 iGEM team). A biosensor would also be more of a preventative measure, the use of which would ideally allow individuals at the household level to test whether their water is safe to use.
Meeting with Dr. Stephen Wallace
- Name & Background: Dr. Wallace is a senior lecturer in Biotechnology at the University of Edinburgh. He has an MChem in medicinal and biological chemistry.
- Interaction: He took us through the whole PET degradation aspect of the project design, mentioning that he thinks our project plan is feasible. We discussed methods for enzyme immobilisation, and the idea of including the bioconversion of terephthalic acid (TPA) to vanillin.
- Project direction & Impact: We thought a bit more about the immobilisation of our optimised enzymes, and we needed to take care of the phase of enzyme-bead complex. If the enzyme-bead is solid, it won’t have any activity upon the solid substrate. We decided we have to carry out a test called “three phase test” and use it to prove that the enzymes are working in the solution phase (i.e. by supporting it into the solid phase, reacting it with a solid substrate and observing no reaction, we can imply that it was in the solution phase to begin with). Initially, we wanted to work on Bioconversion of TPA to vanillin after degrading the plastics but Dr. Wallace suggested not to replicate the work done by Dr. Sadler (lecturer at UoE) who has worked on the bioconversion of TPA to vanillin. He told us if we want to do the Bioconversion aspect, then after getting up-stream source of TPA from Biodegradation, we can just do the Bioconversion with TPADO. That would make everything simpler but still effective to prove the down-stream application of TPA. He suggested we carry out metagenomic work on PET plastic waste as that is how the PETase from Ideonella sakaiensis was first identified in 2016.
Meeting with Ghana Water Company – Identified as a stakeholder
- Name & Background:Mr. Nathaniel Thompson from Ghana Water Company (Ho branch) Ghana Water Company an organization which is the main provider of urban water supply in Ghana. Mr. Thompson is the Quality Assurance Manager and so oversees the quality of water going into the houses of people residing in areas such as; Sokode, Trafalgar, Kpeve. Their main source of water is the Volta Lake. Hence, he sees to it that, all physicochemical properties such as heavy metal pollution is checked and are within specification before it is allowed to be distributed to various homes. His background is in Chemistry.
- Interaction: Mr. Thompson confirmed that indeed mining activities and improper disposal of industrial waste contribute to heavy metal pollution in our water bodies in Ghana. Mr. Thompson was interested in the biosensor, but we discussed that if you are giving people a method to detect heavy metals, then what are they supposed to do when they find out they can’t use their water? We also discussed the issues of genetically modified organism not being very socially acceptable.
- Project direction & Impact: The interview was great for verifying the direction of our project, targeting heavy metal water pollution, and helped us narrow our focus on Lead, Mercury, Cadmium and Arsenic as the main heavy metals contaminating river bodies. As for how to problem solve once someone find outs their water is contaminated, a bioremediation device would be perfect to accompany the biosensor. Any device or solution we propose must be cell-free for biosafety reasons but more importantly, for socio-political reasons, as genetically engineered organisms are not widely accepted in Ghana. Metallothioneins are naturally occurring metal-chelating proteins that have potential for bioremediation of heavy metals.
Meeting with Professor Lynne Regan
- Name & Background: Professor Regan is a lecturer at UoE. She is Chair of Interdisciplinary Science in the Centre for Synthetic and Systems Biology, Institute for Quantitative Biology, Biochemistry and Biotechnology.
- Interaction: We discussed the feasibility and technicalities of SpyTag-SpyCatcher hydrogels as a means of immobilising metallothioneins for a cell-free bioremediation device. She suggested that we could potentially embed the metallothioneins in these hydrogels, however we needed to be aware that it would be a lengthy and complicated process of protein purification of metallothioneins, and that we needed to ensure that the SpyTag-SpyCatcher proteins wouldn’t interfere with the metallothioneins, and we weren’t certain of this.
- Project direction & Impact: We decided that we needed to also start thinking of a back up hydrogel material, as the SpyTag-SpyCatcher system might not be the best option. She gave us some references we could follow up on to evaluate whether the SpyTag-SpyCatcher metallothionein-embedded hydrogel was worth making. Overall though, hydrogels are a good medium for immobilising metallothioneins to then create a cell-free bioremediation device.
July
General iGEM meeting
- Interaction: We were discussing the difficulties of splitting up the lab work and re-evaluating our plans of sending reagents from UoE to UHAS in the mail. We were struggling mainly because at UHAS we couldn’t have access to lab space at this time of the year, as the final year students require it to carry out their final year projects.
- Project direction & Impact: Seeing as of course academic requirements took priority, we needed to re-allocate the workload in the team and decided that an alternative would be for us at UHAS to organise a trip to the Birim River and collect samples of water and also to collect plastic waste samples to then carry out metagenomics. At UHAS we could get access to a Nanopore sequencer, and metagenomic analysis to identify any new metal-binding proteins or PETases would be very valuable. We planned for the trip to occur in July, but this also was not possible, as we struggled to get support from the University to fund and facilitate this trip. This is understandable, though, as iGEM was only just introduced at UHAS, and we had never taken part in it before.
Meeting with Miss Emma from Zoomlion Ghana Limited (ZGL).
- Name & Background: Miss Emma Adwoa Appiaa Osei-Duah is the Communication Director of ZGL in Accra Head Office. Zoomlion is an organisation which is a wholly Ghanaian-owned company that focuses on delivering total waste management solutions. The company provides integrated waste management solutions from waste collection, through haulage, transfer, and sorting to recycling and disposal. It is a member of the Environmental Services Providers Association (ESPA) of Ghana and a silver member of the International Solid Waste Management Association (ISWMA, USA)
- Interaction: She gave us an overview of plastic pollution in Ghana and how waste management is carried out in the country. On a daily basis, ZGL collects about 1193 tonnes door to door, and a total municipal waste of about 3575 tonnes of which plastic waste is in the range of 10% (477 tonnes) to 15% (715 tonnes). We also learnt that all these wastes are collected by trucks and are emptied into the compost plant or directed by the environmental waste officers. these wastes were sorted by the Integrated Recycling Compost Plant. They have the wind separator and the magnetic separator which separate the various types of plastics. Examples, PP, HDPE, PET and LDPE. We learnt not all the plastics are recycled. The ones which are recycle include; HDPE, LDPE and PE. They process the plastics that are recycled and send the pellets to companies such as Universal Plastic Products Recycle. This company adds virgin materials to the pellets then produce whatever plastic produce they would like to produce.
- Project direction & Impact: The main takeaway was that ZGL has no efficient way to deal with PET plastic, so they export it to countries that can. Miss Emmanuelle emphasised the urgency of dealing with PET plastic at the household level as its accumulation is indeed dangerous and can cause flooding, which in the past has led to casualties. She also highlighted the need for easy to use and low-cost methods, so this emphasised that we needed to stick to room temperature systems, and ideally immobilise the enzymes on the silica beads in such a way that they could be collected and reused. Particularly in Ghana where it can be difficult to order reagents and enzymes, reusability is essential.
One of the meetings with Professor Chris French
- Interaction: Given our challenges with DNA assemblies failing and various lab errors that would set us back in our timeline, we were discussing alternatives to the SpyCatcher-SpyTag hydrogels. Although it would be a good base for a hydrogel that would ensure protein stability, the chances of it working were not high, especially because we didn’t know if it would interfere with the metallothionein.
- Project direction & Impact: We decided it wasn’t worth the risk to pursue a SpyCatcher-SpyTag at all, as this would also be a more expensive route, and given the need for having a low-cost and easy to use device, it made more sense to use carboxy methyl cellulose hydrogels (suggested by Professor French) and immobilise the metallothioneins by inserting the Cellulose Binding Domain from the cellulase of Cellulomonas fimi into the E. coli assembled metallothioneins, which would then be purified. This isn't as expensive as our initial plan for using SpyTag-SpyCatcher, and we believed would have less of a risk.
August
Contacted Scottish Water
- Name & Background: Mr. Kenny Stewart is the Leader of the Water Treatment Team at Scottish Water
- Interaction: We proposed our project to them, addressing the biosensor/bioremediation and the plastic pollution aspects, but they unfortunately had no interest in following up, saying that this wouldn’t be something they had time to discuss.
- Project direction & Impact: We got the impression that Scottish Water doesn’t really have issues with heavy metal decontamination, thus discouraging us for targeting water pollution-related stakeholders in Scotland.
Meeting with Dr. Nadanai Laohakunakorn
- Name & Background: Dr. Nadanai Laohakunakorn is a lecturer at University of Edinburgh and an expert in cell-free protein synthesis.
- Interaction: The meeting was regarding the feasibility of the bioremediation aspect of the project, already underway. We discussed the feasibility of protein purification of the metallothioneins, an whether this would be worth it to then immobilise in the hydrogels.
- Project direction & Impact: Given we encountered challenges on DNA assembly of metallothioneins in our E. coli, this set us back by a lot of time, and we decided in the best interest of our proof of concept, we would be dropping the SpyTag-SpyCatcher hydrogels, and just stick to Carboxy methylcellulose hydrogels for metallothionein immobilisation. We also decided that we would no longer be carrying out protein purification because it would require 3 weeks minimum, and Dr. Nadanai suggested we avoid protein purification in general, as this is a time-consuming, challenging, and costly. Instead, we will be using cell lysate. It might not be as pure, but it could still get us results.
Trip to the Birim River (UHAS)
- Interaction: We travelled to Kyebi, Apapam and Bunso in the Eastern Region. The Birim River that flows in these three communities is one of the rivers that has been contaminated as a result of illegal mining. We spoke to some of the local people around each community – some of them use this river for their domestic purpose. They would really love to have a solution to the polluted river. The community uses a water plant to purify the water but sometimes because of the excessive pollution, the water plant is shut down for maintenance. When that happens access to clean water becomes difficult. We were told currently the state of the river is better as compared to some years ago. Illegal mining activities are reducing at these communities as the government has introduced more restrictions.
- Project direction & Impact: They were concerned if the solution we are proposing would harm them, but we explained to their understanding that it won’t. Communicating to their understanding was a challenge as some of them haven’t gone to school, so have close to no knowledge on biology. This is indeed a challenge for implementing synthetic biology-based solutions. he fact that there is already a water treatment plant there was good to know
September
Meeting with the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency – Identified as another stakeholder
- Name & Background: Miss Janine Ballander works in the Policy making & implementation sector at the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA).
- Interaction: Ms. Ballander was fascinated by PETALUTION in all aspects. She was pleasantly surprised that such an idea was even slightly possible. We were told there was an extensive list of heavy metal contaminated water bodies in Scotland (Table 1). She also highlighted that there is a lack of data on the heavy metal contamination sites around Scotland, and that we need to involve more of the community when it comes to data collection, as collaborative community-based science should be encouraged. The bioremediation aspect was discussed as being important, however, Ms. Ballander emphasised the need for data collection, so the biosensor was of particular interest to her.
- Project direction & Impact: It was very surprising to find out that Scotland does indeed have sites of heavy metal contamination, which was quite the contrary impression we got from the response from Scottish Water. Not only did this highlight the importance of not always using a single stakeholder as a definitive source when it comes to making conclusions (e.g. if we had simply believed Scottish Water, we would never have known that SEPA had a list of all these contaminated sites). This meeting made us realise the importance of having a biosensor not only for the Human Practices element of attempting to solve problems at the individual household level, but to also contribute to better methods for data collection at an Agency level (SEPA).
Meeting with Mr. Lin from Ghana Restart Company
- Name & background: Mr. Lin is the CEO of Ghana Restart Company (established in 2008). Although his company doesn’t produce PET products, the CEO knows the people operating the company that makes PET products.
- Interaction: We discussed that PET is mainly used to produce plastic bottles in Ghana. Ghana’s local market primarily consumes the product produced by the company in Ghana. PET plastic usage in Ghana increases yearly. This is a consequence of Chinese companies in Ghana make polyester silks from plastic bottles, and also because people in Ghana used to store drinking water in plastics bags, but now they use more plastics bottles. We also discovered that, every year, the consumption of PET raw materials increases by 10,000 tons. PP, PE and PET plastics are the largest plastics in the local market.
- Project direction & Impact: This interaction confirmed the need to focus on PET plastics rather than any other plastic for our project, as they are the most used in industries in Ghana. PET plastic biodegradation is essential to be targeted in order to achieve a holistic approach towards targeting water pollution. From this interview, we also got to know the importance of finding a solution to PET plastics as they can’t be always exported to different countries to be broken down or processed.
References
- Schmidt L, Pröpper M. Transdisciplinarity as a real-world challenge: A case study on a north–south collaboration. Sustainability Science. 2017;12(3):365–79.
- Iglesias JL. Global North-south tensions in international co-creation projects. Co-Creation in Theory and Practice. 2020;:55–70.
- Sibai AM, Rizk A, Coutts AP, Monzer G, Daoud A, Sullivan R, et al. North–south inequities in research collaboration in humanitarian and conflict contexts. The Lancet. 2019;394(10209):1597–600.
- Dodson J. Building Partnerships of Equals: The role of funders in equitable and effective international development collaborations. UK Collaborative on Development Science; p. 3–4.
