Phase 1
Our art exhibition was planned through virtual meetings In collaboration with the iGEM Art Committee. Their invaluable insights aid in the effective organization and execution of our endeavor. Our exhibition approach involves categorizing the artworks into distinct sections, each highlighting different facets of our project. This method intends to educate visitors about our project's stages and its underlying rationale through a series of artistic representations

Phase 2
In our proactive approach to bringing together artists who contribute, we intentionally invited people from different fields, not just science, to create a diverse and varied group. This strategy aligns with our main goal of making sure everyone can easily understand our project. A crucial part of how we work involves regularly educating these artists. We do this by having 3 meetings where we provide them with a deep understanding of our project's many aspects. Through these ongoing and meaningful discussions, we effectively explain the intricate details of synthetic biology. We use visual aids, presentations, and extra materials to help them grasp the concepts better.

Phase 3
We collaborated with artists to create an immersive exhibition. Each visitor experienced stimuli tailored to their senses. They heard live music that matched specific works, evoking the intended emotions. Touch allowed them to feel textures, conveying the artist's message. For example at the heart of all the subcategories stood a plaster sculpture uniting the two microorganisms of our project, P. Putida and E. Coli. Together, they produced a bioplastic that you could touch. Also, visitors can smell our project-based materials like OMW, immersing them in the contaminated place's consequences. Sub-modules transported them to various locations, providing visual stimuli. This crafted a distinct educational experience about our project's facets

Phase 4
Our art exhibition was complemented by 2 extensive workshops conducted at the same venue. In the initial workshop, our objective was to establish a communication channel with the community. To achieve this, we created the "Hyperbacterium" painting. This segment depicted a futuristic bacterium, and what set it apart was the participation of community members in its creation. Participants could contribute their plasmid drawings to the panel, granting the bacterium the ability to solve common local problems. This approach not only educated the community about our innovative bacterium engineering but also shed light on local community issues.

Phase 5
During the second workshop, we focused on the aspect of bioplastic production within our project. To achieve this, we conducted live demonstrations at the exhibition area, crafting bioplastic souvenirs for all attendees. Simultaneously, we provided information about this material. Our aim was twofold: firstly, to familiarize participants with bioplastics, and secondly, to facilitate discussions about their advantages and disadvantages.

Phase 6
Amidst the art exhibition, over 30 local community members actively engaged, seeking insights into our team's endeavors. To gather their feedback efficiently, we seamlessly integrated a Kahoot game at the culmination of each tour. This interactive session comprised inquiries about exhibition content and invited input for potential enhancements. By strategically combining questions related to the exhibits and project specifics, we effectively gauged the depth of their understanding of the project's intricacies. Notably, over 70% of participants accurately responded to all questions, reflecting a robust comprehension of the presentation's themes.

Phase 7
Ultimately, the entirety of the painting exhibition area, accompanied by detailed descriptions of each artwork, transformed an immersive virtual environment. This virtual realm offers accessibility for all, enabling individuals to engage not only in visually experiencing facets of our project through art but also actively participating via the Kahoot game. This innovative approach enhances the potential for a broader audience to be educated about our cause through our project.

Phase 1
Firstly, we presented a concise overview of our project through a detailed poster prominently displayed in our designated area. The poster provided a clear grasp of the concept, and we included brief explanations for each section to enhance comprehension. To engage the audience further, we offered experiments and crafts related to each step, creating the project storytelling beginning from waste and ending with bioplastic production.

Phase 2
In this phase, we aimed to educate the public about the nature of Olive Mill Wastewater (OMW), the waste we detoxify in our project, and its adverse environmental effects by showing polluted ecosystem images with it. To aid visualization, we utilized a bottle filled with water and soil, replicating the color and texture of the waste. This visual demonstration effectively enhanced the audience's understanding and provided a tangible depiction of OMW's natural appearance.

Phase 3
In this phase, we focused on the "Modification of Microorganisms". Through an interactive approach, we aimed to provide a general understanding of the theoretical creation of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Using a cardboard model depicting Pseudomonas putida, we showcased the concept of gene modification to achieve our project's objective: PHA production. The audience actively participated by selecting the appropriate combination of cardboard plasmids representing genetic modifications. This activity fostered comprehension of synthetic biology principles and empowered the audience to grasp the process of tailoring microorganisms for specific project goals.

Phase 4
In the 4th step, the “Detoxification Phase”, we used a visual demonstration to showcase the power of synthetic biology. Using two "bacteria colonies" represented by carbon and sand in half-cut bottle parts like homemade “filters”, we highlighted their inability to individually detoxify homemade OMW. However, when combined into a bioreactor made of a plastic bottle, the colonies effectively converted the waste into clear water. This exemplified the collaborative nature of synthetic biology and its potential to solve environmental challenges.

Phase 5
Moving on, we showcased a “Live, homemade bioplastic cup” made from gelatin, agar, and glycerol to represent bioplastic material visually. Engaging in a dialogue with the audience, we discussed the advantages and disadvantages of bioplastics. This interactive session aimed to deepen the audience's understanding of bioplastics and their potential benefits for sustainability, while also addressing their limitations and potential challenges.

Phase 6
The last step of our event revolved around the concept of “Local people, solving local problems”. To facilitate mutual education, we created a styrofoam poster divided into 17 sections representing the SDGs. Participants suggested over 30 synthetic biology solutions, which were posted in the corresponding sections. These ideas serve as valuable resources for future iGEM projects and promote local problem-solving by incorporating community perspectives. The styrofoam poster serves as a powerful representation of the immense potential held by synthetic biology in propelling sustainable development and nurturing community-led solutions. Furthermore, the conceptualization of these pioneering SynBio projects can inspire and guide other iGEM teams in their endeavors, as the challenges we face transcend local boundaries and encompass global issues.

Phase 1
To effectively inform olive mill owners, we collaborated with experts from various fields impacted by OMW, including biodiversity, soil health, aquatic environments, and human well-being. Through a thoughtfully planned strategy, each expert delivered a concise ten-minute presentation, shedding light on how waste negatively affects their specific domains. This approach ensured a thorough exploration of the issue and contributed to public awareness and education.

Phase 2
The first speaker was Dr. Orphanoudakis, chosen for his credentials as a Ph.D. holder in soil science and forestry, his focus on addressing the negative impacts of OMW, and his research involvement. In his talk, he highlighted the problems caused by mishandled OMW on soil and biodiversity. He also mentioned a past but unsustainable solution of using OMW as fertilizer.
The next presenter, Dr. Stagos, a Ph.D. professor expert in Animal Physiology and Toxicology, was selected due to his specialization in studying the impact of waste by-products on human health and biodiversity, with a specific focus on OMW. During his presentation, he emphasized the potential adverse effects of OMW, especially when it infiltrates drinking groundwater or comes into contact with humans, even considering its odor. Interestingly, most olive mill owners didn't know most of the facts stated in the presentation, which sparked their keen interest in the discussion and led to an influx of questions on the topic.
The featured speaker at our seminar was Dr. Kormas, a Ph.D. expert in Aquatic Microbial Ecology, chosen due to his research on analogous problems like those surrounding OMW. What set this presentation apart was its unique interview format, since water pollution by OMW is the main issue in our country and we wanted to cut through all the potential questions. The interview questions were derived from extensive conversations with olive mill owners, reflecting their pressing needs and inquiries. The key topics explored revolved around the significance of aquatic ecosystems, touching on the consequences of OMW runoff into lakes and seas, notably leading to issues like eutrophication.

Phase 3
During the third phase of our conference, our team took the spotlight to introduce our proposed solution to the OMW challenge, OPHAelia. Our approach involved an interactive presentation that unfolded as a dialogue among our team members, educators, and the olive mill operators themselves. To enhance clarity and comprehension, we complemented our presentation with collaborative infographics that visually depicted our comprehensive concept. This initiative sparked genuine interest among both professors and mill operators, fostering discussions that centered around the merits of our idea and how it could effectively address the issues highlighted by the expert speakers.

Phase 1
During the current project, a crucial aspect of our Wet Lab's design involved the creation and advancement of genetically modified microorganisms (GMOs). However, as we embarked on this endeavor, we encountered apprehensions concerning the bioethical implications associated with the practical application of this method. This concern arises due to our system's reliance on enhanced yield in the final product, facilitated by the utilization of genetically modified organisms.
To address these concerns diligently, we took the initiative to host an interdisciplinary webinar entitled "To Modify or Not to Modify: GMOs Under the Scrutiny of Bioethics". The primary objective of this webinar was to foster a comprehensive understanding of the subject matter by engaging in constructive discussions with esteemed professors and benefiting from their enlightening lectures. The intention behind this initiative was to expand and deepen our knowledge while ensuring ethical considerations remained at the forefront of our scientific endeavors.

Phase 2
The webinar was held on May 29th and was open to all iGEM teams and the university community audience. The main speakers were 3 university professors and researchers who framed the topic holistically with toxicological, legislative, and philosophical views through short lectures.
&emspThe first speaker was Dr. Dimitris Kouretas, chosen for his credentials as a Ph.D. holder in the fields of toxicology and animal physiology, as well as his extensive research background which culminated in the authorship of a book centered on the golden ratio of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). During his 15’ presentation, Dr. Kouretas delved into the various applications of GMOs and their ramifications on biodiversity. Moreover, he expressed his perspective on the global community's response to this novel technological advancement.
&emspOur second guest was Mr. Nikos Kolisis. He was selected because he is a Ph.D. law candidate specializing in bioethical issues and expertly analyzed the legal dimensions of GMOs. He astutely emphasized the essential differentiations that must be made within the approach of the law system when incorporating genetically modified organisms into our daily lives. Throughout his presentation, Mr. Kolisis skillfully delineated the regulatory framework, ethical considerations, labeling and transparency, intellectual property rights, coexistence, liability, international collaboration, and the significance of grounding the legal approach on robust scientific evidence.
&emspOur third guest was Dr. Konstantina Mylona-Gianakakou, who was meticulously chosen based on her distinguished academic credentials, holding a Ph.D. in ethical philosophy, and her profound specialization in bioethical issues, including the complex realm of GMOs. Dr. Mylonas-Yanacakou made a significant and noteworthy contribution to the debate, attempting a thorough examination of the bioethical aspects inherent to GMOs. She artfully juxtaposed the philosophical theories of ancient Greeks with contemporary approaches, thus enriching our understanding of the subject matter.
After a short introductory discussion among the panelists, a two-way conversation turned on, and questions were posed to the lecturers. Focal points were the legislative context of GMOs in our country, politico-economic justifications behind the scenes, and their future potential-life implementation.

Phase 3
The final segment of our webinar was designed for live Q&A sessions where participants had the opportunity to provide feedback and engage in interactive discussions on the bioethics topic. Rather than a traditional workshop, the audience was invited to answer a thought-provoking questionnaire. The professors and attendees then collaboratively analyzed the quantitative results, delving into the underlying thought processes behind each response. It was an enriching and dynamic exchange that fostered a deeper understanding of the subject matter.
In addition to the iGEM teams, we were delighted to have students from various university societies participate in the discussion, bringing forth a wide range of questions and diverse interests. The webinar had a total of 60 participants.

In the present year, a significant focal point of the OPHAelia project revolves around the generation of raw materials destined for the bioplastics sector. In the course of our engagement with the local community, a noticeable divergence of viewpoints regarding this matter came to the forefront. As a response, we organized a Debate pitting the advocates of conventional plastics against proponents of bioplastics. This discourse centered on key beliefs distinguishing the two, encompassing environmental impact, waste management strategies, material performance, functionality, and production costs. The overarching intent encompassed providing the public with a succinct overview of the advantages and disadvantages championed by each team, ultimately fostering enhanced awareness and understanding.The two teams, Plastics and Bioplastics, consist of members of our team. Each group undertook implementation endeavors, drawing upon comprehensive research papers to substantiate their perspectives with accurate information. The outcomes were deliberately impartial, and aimed at spotlighting the favorable and unfavorable facets inherent to both paradigms. The ensuing debate, captured on video, was uploaded on YouTube, thereby ensuring a broader reach and engagement with a diverse audience.

See the full debate between team bioplastic and team plastic!

Phase 1
This year, our team took the initiative to enhance the public's familiarity with bioplastics. We achieved this by producing a video that demonstrates the synthesis of bioplastics using everyday materials. The primary objective was to raise awareness about bioplastics as a material and empower individuals to craft it at home. Despite the prevailing prominence of conventional plastics in our local community, we aimed to bridge the knowledge gap surrounding bioplastics.
Furthermore, our video served an educational purpose. We not only showcased the process of bioplastic production but also underscored the drawbacks of conventional plastics through well-researched data and statistics. By presenting the advantages of bioplastics in contrast, we aimed to inform and enlighten our audience about the potential of adopting more sustainable materials
Bioplastic Recipe:

See the full video of bioplastic creacton!

See the citation!

Phase 1
To implement the content of the event specifically for the students of 5th grade. We engaged in lengthy conversations with school teachers and gained valuable insights into the student's educational background. By understanding their current knowledge regarding biology-related topics as well as their learning abilities, we could carefully tailor our project presentation to match their needs. We accomplished this by prioritizing the critical aspects of the action plan that required the most attention, particularly those related to the science behind our project, which is why we provided specialized explanatory materials for the next phases.

Phase 2
At the inception of our presentation, we commenced by introducing ourselves and providing an overview of the iGEM competition to the students. However, our intent reached beyond mere introduction; we endeavored to captivate the students' attention and sustain their engagement throughout our session. To achieve this, we strategically showcased the remarkable capabilities of synthetic biology and science at large. Drawing from the accomplishments of other groups, we illuminated the tangible impact that scientific endeavors can have on the world, such as the project of iGEM Thessaly 2022. Through these concrete examples, we aimed to underline the profound difference that scientific exploration and innovation can bring about, fostering a sense of wonder and inspiration among the students.

Phase 3
To heighten learning interactivity, we chose an inventive route - introducing less-covered terms like "ecosystem" and "microorganisms" through a game, diverging from their usual curriculum. With cards depicting thriving and polluted ecosystems, students pinpointed pollution sources. Guided by us, they then explored their chosen problem, followed by a brief presentation on achievable solutions.
Post-game, our focus transitioned. We aimed to expose them to fresh problem-solving methods, specifically through synthetic biology. Hence, we seamlessly proceeded with the presentation of a solution, namely, our project.

Phase 4
Subsequently, we introduced our project to the students as a means to combat another pollutant factor resulting from OMW. Utilizing a collaborative effort with the teachers, we crafted an imaginative poster to familiarize the children with a waste variant distinct from their existing knowledge. The poster effectively illustrated the entire progression of our project, spanning from waste collection to the production of PHA in its final phase. This strategic step was specifically designed to facilitate comprehension of the waste itself, laying the groundwork for subsequent presentations detailing the individual stages of the process.

Phase 5
In Phase 5, our focus shifted to the synthetic biology aspect of our project. We elucidated the concept of microbial synergy and highlighted how the realm of synthetic biology plays a pivotal role in the entire process. To ensure comprehension of a synthetic consortium, we employed visually compelling models represented by distinct colored bottles: P. putida (Blue bottle), E. coli (Green bottle), and a hybrid of both, underscoring the augmented biological system with plastic elements symbolizing PHA granules inside of it. Through interactive components and clear explanations in the presentation, our goal was to enhance understanding, stimulate active engagement, and pique curiosity among students about synthetic biology's potential.

Phase 6
Lastly, to make them feel like actual synthetic biologists we gave them our lab coats and offered them a peek through our toy microscope (made of paperboard) to understand how our project microbes and PHA granules look. By employing this approach, we can gain a deeper understanding of the appearance of PHA when it is synthesized by the microorganism itself.

Phase 7
To further test their understanding, we asked them to use their imagination and, according to what they learned, draw a litter or waste, a modified microorganism, and a new product that their microorganism could produce. The majority of the children demonstrated their comprehension of the concept of a consortium by depicting two microorganisms, each with a distinct color, in their drawings.
Moreover, to gauge the impact of the activity, we distributed questionnaires assessing the student's comprehension of the introduced terms during the presentation. The outcomes were remarkably impressive.

We visited a primary school to introduce synthetic biology to students aged 12-19. A statistical analysis from Cambridge revealed that biology was the least preferred subject among this age group, with only 11.1% showing interest. Our goal was to make synthetic biology more accessible and highlight its wonders. After our interaction with the students, over 70% expressed their desire to work in synthetic biology through a questionnaire.

By recording the students' ability to explain what synthetic biology is before and after our activity, the following results emerged.

The key takeaway for young students is the significance of sharing their experiences with those close to them. This question unveiled the genuine inherent value of the activity.

Phase 1
To ensure the effective implementation of our customized plan, we conducted discussions with the teachers to gain insights into the students' understanding of synthetic biology and general biology. The results revealed that due to the limited time allocated to the biology course in the school's weekly schedule, there are noticeable knowledge gaps, with synthetic biology being absent from the curriculum. Furthermore, we incorporated various reference materials, including texts like "Biology Didactics,(Dr. Kampourakis K., 2022)" to augment the student's comprehension of their foundational knowledge. Armed with this information, we have made the necessary preparations to address these shortcomings and provide fitting educational content during our action.

Phase 2
We began by surveying students' knowledge and opinions about biology and synthetic biology using pre-activity questionnaires. The results were striking: only 1 out of 20 students knew about "synthetic biology", and just one student could give an example of it. This reinforced our hypothesis and emphasized the need to educate students about this field. Based on their cognitive level, we organized sessions to present synthetic biology and the iGEM competition. Our approach included practical examples to make concepts relatable and discussions about the motivations behind scientific progress in this area. We also highlighted the competition's role in advancing synthetic biology and addressing local challenges. See our team's presentation here:

Phase 3
In the concluding phase of our action, we conducted an interactive workshop for the students. During the initial phase of the workshop, the brainstorming session, students engaged in discussions to identify key local issues that would serve as the foundation for their iGEM projects. The emphasis was on solving local problems so that students understand the impact they can have through synthetic biology on their way of life and, on a larger scale, the whole world, in line with the competition's values. Students were then grouped into smaller teams, each member focusing on a specific department such as Human Practices, Wet Lab, and Dry Lab. Our group acted as advisors for these teams. The projects drew inspiration from the presentation and our discussions, directing their scientific problem-solving efforts. The workshop highlighted strategies for team outreach through human practice techniques, including stakeholder engagement, such as organizing targeted events for each stakeholder. Each team subsequently presented a poster and received crucial feedback from their peers, contributing significantly to their overall team development.

Phase 4
Following the presentation and discussions, we administered post-activity questionnaires to gauge the student's understanding and opinions. The findings were promising, as there was a significant 60% increase in their comprehension of synthetic biology, and half of them could provide examples. Furthermore, more than 60% of the students expressed a keen interest in participating in the iGEM competition in the future, indicating that our efforts effectively promoted awareness and inspired engagement with the fascinating world of synthetic biology.

Through our pre- and post-action questionnaires, we asked for a definition of what synthetic biology is. Here is a comparison of the two results.

The following statistic shows the answers to the question "would like to participate in a similar research group?"

Phase 1
To ensure the effective implementation of our custom plan, we discussed with the teachers to gauge the students' understanding of synthetic biology and general biology. The results revealed notable knowledge gaps, attributed to limited time allocated to the biology course in the school's weekly schedule and the absence of synthetic biology in the curriculum. Armed with this insight, we have prepared to address these deficiencies and provide meaningful educational content during our initiative.

Phase 2
The initial step of our attempt involved assessing the student's level of knowledge by distributing pre-activity questionnaires. The results of these questionnaires confirmed the teachers' initial prediction, revealing that only 7.7% of the students had prior exposure to the term "synthetic biology", with a mere 3% being able to provide a written example. These findings shed light on the inadequate emphasis placed on the emerging facets of synthetic biology within the school curriculum, a situation that our action seeks to address and rectify.

Phase 3
During Phase 3, our approach involved introducing students to synthetic biology by presenting real-world examples and case studies from iGEM teams. This allowed us to illustrate the practical applications of synthetic biology and distinguish it from biotechnology. Additionally, we underscored the importance of the iGEM competition in advancing synthetic biology as a scientific discipline, reinforcing its impact on cutting-edge research and innovation in this exciting field. See our presentation here:

Phase 4
In the 4th phase, we provided students with information about universities and degree programs in synthetic biology, as well as future career opportunities. Our primary goal was to inspire and raise awareness about the exciting prospects in this field, encouraging them to consider higher education in this promising area of science. Emphasizing the significance of the iGEM competition in their universe selection, we highlighted how it offers contestants valuable insight into the field of synthetic biology, providing them with first-hand experience of its challenges and potential.

Phase 5
Despite the challenges, our efforts to engage students in the field of synthetic biology yielded a good result. With a substantial 70% increase in their understanding of the subject, as demonstrated by the post-activity composite questionnaire, we are pleased with the outcome. Notably, more than half of the students showcased their ability to propose real-life examples of synthetic biology from their everyday lives. Moreover, 15 students answered that they wanted to participate in research teams such as iGEM Competition Teams, a fact that revealed their increased curiosity after our activity. The success of our interactive presentations and discussions proved valuable in bridging the knowledge gap and igniting scientific curiosity.

Through our pre- and post-action questionnaires we asked for a definition of what synthetic biology is. Here is a comparison of the two results

The following statistic shows the answers to the question "would like to participate in an iGEM Team similar research group?"

After our recent visit and event at the high school, both students and teachers showed great interest in learning more about the upcoming contest. To support them, we've created a guide called "A Comprehensive Guide to Establishing and Managing an iGEM Team: A Resource for High School Educators and Students". This guide explains how iGEM works and its interdisciplinary nature. It also helps high school teams understand key terms like synthetic biology and outlines different team roles. The guide covers areas like Human Practices, Wet Lab, Dry Lab, and Fundraising, showing why they matter. It ends by highlighting the benefits of participating in iGEM, like personal growth and skill development. This guide is meant to help individuals successfully engage in the iGEM competition.
You can find our guide in our Contribution page.

In this year's endeavors, our team recognized the collaborative aspect stipulated by the competition guidelines. Beyond the competitive nature of the event, we placed significant emphasis on establishing connections with other participating teams. Our primary goal was to facilitate the exchange of insights, particularly in the realm of synthetic biology, allowing for the dissemination of information and knowledge. Even within the context of competition, we understood the profound value of fostering mutual understanding among teams. This shared comprehension not only enriches our internal collaboration but also enhances our capacity to effectively communicate with the external world.

This year, our team's primary objective was to increase awareness about our work within a broader community, with a particular focus on olive oil mill owners, who held a direct stake in our efforts. This goal was successfully accomplished by strategically publishing articles in both local and national newspapers and magazines that centered around the agro-industry.In these articles, we openly expressed our deep-seated concern regarding the issue of olive mill wastewater (OMW) and effectively conveyed the core concept behind the OPHAelia initiative using simple and comprehensible language.

Our team engaged in project communication by participating in the 29th National Conference of Medical Students, which was held from the 5th to the 7th of May in Alexandroupolis.
Noticing that we have a common goal to inform the medical students and general audience present at the event about synthetic biology (SynBio) applications in medicine, our team invited iGEM Athens and iGEM Thrace to form a collaboration. The first two teams proposed one example of synthetic biology’s application in medicine, while the third mentioned a case where SynBio was utilized to provide a solution for the 2nd (Zero Hunger) and 3rd (Good Health & Well-Being) Sustainable Development Goal.
In detail, iGEM Thessaly’s 2023 example was based on the project of iGEM Thessaly 2019. That was the utilization of synbio for the invention of a self-test for the diagnosis of tuberculosis.
In addition, iGEM Athens presented an example of curing Phenylketonuria (PKU) with genetically modified E. coli bacteria.
Last but not least, iGEM Thrace talked about the implementation of a new variety of rice, named “golden rice”. That genetically modified variety contains carotin B and it was invented to tackle the issue of the deficiency of the specific protein many people have in areas such as Bangladesh, China, India, and elsewhere in Asia.
Together, we set up an information booth at the event to let the participants of the convention know about those advances in medicine and agriculture thanks to synthetic biology. Some of the materials used to convey our message were informative leaflets, which could also be found online through a QR code. They contained information about our iGEM team and our goal to promote Synbio. Moreover, we distributed questionnaires, with the primary aim of assessing the level of understanding the university students present had about the subject of synbio. The results showed that the majority of the people were not familiar with the meaning of the term “synthetic biology”. However, after we explained the term to them, not only did the majority reply that in their opinion synbio could aid the evolution of medicine, but also that they do not consider its use (for that purpose solely) unethical. At the same, we took advantage of our presence at the event to ask the public about their opinion on participating in an online webinar in which the ethical perspective of Synbio would be analyzed. As a matter of fact, 60.9% of the students who answered replied that they would find such an event very interesting and they would gladly participate. That was the feedback we needed for setting off to design our SynBio& Bioethics online webinar.

Our team participated in the 1st Hellenic Student Bioscience Conference on April 29th in Alexandroupolis, where we presented our project for the first time in the scientific community. We aimed to engage with fellow scientists and other iGEM teams to gather valuable feedback for our project's advancement.
At the conference, we engaged in meaningful conversations with educators and students from diverse academic backgrounds, all with a focus on biological sciences. They inquired about our proposed biological design, explored the potential applications of PHA, and shared ideas about the project's future implementation. Their valuable insights greatly influenced the direction of our ongoing efforts, not only offering crucial perspectives but also enhancing our project's development.

With the intention of amplifying the recognition of the advantages derived from our engagement in the iGEM competition, our team took part in a collective video effort orchestrated in collaboration with numerous iGEM teams, organized by iGEM Thrace, spanning the global landscape. In this endeavor, each team contributed an expression that commenced with the words "iGEM is."
Through this unified endeavor, teams from various corners of the world came together to underscore the constructive outcomes associated with participating in the competition. The resulting video, an amalgamation of these shared sentiments, was subsequently shared on our team's social media platforms, effectively disseminating the positive aspects of the iGEM experience to both scientific and non-scientific communities.

Check out our team's instagram account!

To mark World DNA Day, our team actively engaged in a collaborative effort to develop a questionnaire aimed at gauging public familiarity with synthetic biology. Working collectively with other iGEM teams organized by iGEM Patras, we each contributed unique questions to shape the comprehensive survey.
The combination of these diverse questions resulted in a well-rounded questionnaire that probed people's understanding of synthetic biology. This initiative was shared on our team's social media platform, garnering attention and fostering a broader awareness of the intricacies surrounding this innovative field of science.

Check out our DNA Day Questionnaire!

To commemorate National DNA Day, our team took part in a collaborative endeavor by co-creating a video alongside other iGEM teams spanning the globe. In this collective effort, each iGEM team contributed significant historical insights concerning the discovery of DNA, a pivotal contribution to the advancement of scientific knowledge.
Through this shared initiative, we collectively aimed to disseminate crucial scientific information, thereby fostering a wider understanding of the significance behind DNA discovery. The collaboration served as a testament to the global spirit of scientific inquiry and the collective commitment to promoting science communication.

Check out our team's instagram account!

In observance of World Health Day, our team engaged in a collaborative social media initiative alongside teams hailing from all over the world, organized by iGEM Patras Med. The core of this effort revolved around the creation of individual posters by each team, each bearing a distinct phrase intimately tied to the realm of health.
The collective objective of this endeavor was to ignite global inspiration regarding the importance of health maintenance. Health, a cornerstone of civilized society, is regrettably overlooked in the hustle of daily life. Through this united action, we aimed to bring attention to this critical aspect of well-being and provoke meaningful contemplation on its significance.

Check out our team's instagram account!