RESUMEN

Standard molecular biology laboratories are usually made with complex, sophisticated, and expensive equipment. Unfortunately, most of these labs are not affordable for everyone. In this paper, we show how we built a portable bio lab BioBlocksLab, made of four modules: a centrifuge, a thermocycler, electrophoresis, and an incubator. We also propose a new version of a blockly programming language to describe experimental lab protocols, called BioBlocks 2.0, which is based on the Microsoft MakeCode platform from the open-source project Microsoft Programming Experience Toolkit (PXT). We run BioBlocks programs of real lab protocols to control different hardware modules with biological reagents and get positive results. We offer an easy, affordable, and open-source way for everyone to do experiments with Do-It-Yourself (DIY) portable bio-labs.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Recent years have seen a proliferation of do-it-yourself biology (DIYbio) initiatives, consisting of people undertaking a range of bioscience activities outside traditional research environments. DIYbio initiatives, while diverse, exist at the fringes of institutionalised science, which enables them to advance different promissory visions about what science, especially bioscience, could or should become in the future, including how it should be governed. These visions reconfigure conventional delineations of science in politically and normatively loaded ways that can simultaneously reaffirm, contest, and shift the traditional epistemic foundations of science. They put forth alternative science futures in ways that highlight the performative force of promissory visions in shaping not only mainstream but also fringe science activity. DIYbio offers a fruitful lens for understanding how science is currently being reconfigured by unconventional actors to encompass new meanings and domains. It offers a different angle on the wider sociology of expectations engagement with the future as an analytical object, by showing how the future of science is constructed and managed from the fringe. Yet, DIYbio initiatives' promissory visions are also embedded within neoliberal ideals of productive and entrepreneurial citizens, highlighting how the wider socio-economic context constrains the alternative futures manufactured by these initiatives.

RESUMEN

Drawing on the case study of Real Vegan Cheese (RVC), a synthetic biology project housed in a community lab or "biohackerspace," I argue that biohacking performs an "artistic critique" of the bioeconomy. Following Boltanski and Chiapello's use of the term, the "artistic critique" pits values of autonomy and creativity against a view of capitalist production as standardized and alienating, represented (in the case of biotechnology) by Monsanto's monoculture GMOs. In this way, biohacking is depicted as liberating biotechnology from the constraints of corporate and academic institutions. Through the use of design fiction and a playful aesthetic, projects such as RVC demonstrate a more legitimate--with respect to the values of the artistic critique--mode of production for a new generation of biotechnology products, one that is portrayed as driven primarily by ethical and aesthetic values rather than the profit motive. This analysis highlights the role that aesthetic and affective strategies play in advancing particular sociotechnical visions, and the way that biohacking projects operate in symbiosis with incumbent institutions even as they define themselves in opposition to them. Finally, it suggests that biohacking has certain limitations when considered as a form of public engagement with science.

RESUMEN

Aim. The nascent field of bio-geoengineering stands to benefit from synthetic biologists' efforts to standardise, and in so doing democratise, biomolecular research methods. Roseobacter clade bacteria comprise 15-20% of oceanic bacterio-plankton communities, making them a prime candidate for establishment of synthetic biology chassis for bio-geoengineering activities such as bioremediation of oceanic waste plastic. Developments such as the increasing affordability of DNA synthesis and laboratory automation continue to foster the establishment of a global 'do-it-yourself' research community alongside the more traditional arenas of academe and industry. As a collaborative group of citizen, student and professional scientists we sought to test the following hypotheses: (i) that an incubator capable of cultivating bacterial cells can be constructed entirely from non-laboratory items, (ii) that marine bacteria from the Roseobacter clade can be established as a genetically tractable synthetic biology chassis using plasmids conforming to the BioBrick(TM) standard and finally, (iii) that identifying and subcloning genes from a Roseobacter clade species can readily by achieved by citizen scientists using open source cloning and bioinformatic tools. Method. We cultivated three Roseobacter species, Roseobacter denitrificans, Oceanobulbus indolifexand Dinoroseobacter shibae. For each species we measured chloramphenicol sensitivity, viability over 11 weeks of glycerol-based cryopreservation and tested the effectiveness of a series of electroporation and heat shock protocols for transformation using a variety of plasmid types. We also attempted construction of an incubator-shaker device using only publicly available components. Finally, a subgroup comprising citizen scientists designed and attempted a procedure for isolating the cold resistance anf1 gene from Oceanobulbus indolifexcells and subcloning it into a BioBrick(TM) formatted plasmid. Results. All species were stable over 11 weeks of glycerol cryopreservation, sensitive to 17 µg/mL chloramphenicol and resistant to transformation using the conditions and plasmids tested. An incubator-shaker device, 'UCLHack-12' was assembled and used to cultivate sufficient quantity of Oceanobulbus indolifexcells to enable isolation of the anf1 gene and its subcloning into a plasmid to generate the BioBrick(TM) BBa_K729016. Conclusion.The process of 'de-skilling' biomolecular techniques, particularly for relatively under-investigated organisms, is still on-going. However, our successful cell growth and DNA manipulation experiments serve to indicate the types of capabilities that are now available to citizen scientists. Science democratised in this way can make a positive contribution to the debate around the use of bio-geoengineering to address oceanic pollution or climate change.

RESUMEN

The encounter of amateur science with synthetic biology has led to the formation of several amateur/do-it-yourself biology (DIYBio) groups worldwide. Although media outlets covered DIYBio events, most seemed only to highlight the hope, hype, and horror of what DIYBio would do in the future. Here, we analyze the European amateur biology movement to find out who they are, what they aim for and how they differ from US groups. We found that all groups are driven by a core leadership of (semi-)professional people who struggle with finding lab space and equipment. Regulations on genetic modification limit what groups can do. Differences between Europe and the US are found in the distinct regulatory environments and the European emphasis on bio-art. We conclude that DIYBio Europe has so far been a responsible and transparent citizen science movement with a solid user base that will continue to grow irrespective of media attention.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

The do-it-yourself biology (DIYbio) community is emerging as a movement that fosters open access to resources permitting modern molecular biology, and synthetic biology among others. It promises in particular to be a source of cheaper and simpler solutions for environmental monitoring, personal diagnostic and the use of biomaterials. The successful growth of a global community of DIYbio practitioners will depend largely on enabling safe access to state-of-the-art molecular biology tools and resources. In this paper we analyze the rise of DIYbio, its community, its material resources and its applications. We look at the current projects developed for the international genetically engineered machine competition in order to get a sense of what amateur biologists can potentially create in their community laboratories over the coming years. We also show why and how the DIYbio community, in the context of a global governance development, is putting in place a safety/ethical framework for guarantying the pursuit of its activity. And finally we argue that the global spread of DIY biology potentially reconfigures and opens up access to biological information and laboratory equipment and that, therefore, it can foster new practices and transversal collaborations between professional scientists and amateurs.