Single step purification of plasmid DNA using peptide ligand affinity chromatography

Single step affinity chromatography was employed for the purification of plasmid DNA (pDNA), thus eliminating several steps compared with current commercial purification methods for pDNA. Significant reduction in pDNA production time and cost was obtained. This chromatographic operation employed a peptide-monolith construct to isolate pDNA from Escherichia coli (E. coli) impurities present in a clarified lysate feedstock. Mild conditions were applied to avoid any degradation of pDNA. The effect of some important parameters on pDNA yield was also evaluated with the aim of optimising the affinity purification of pDNA. The results demonstrate that 81% of pDNA was recovered and contaminating gDNA, RNA and protein were removed below detectable levels. © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Strength properties of composite clay balls containing additives from industry wastes as new filter media in water treatment

Pebble matrix filtration (PMF) is a water treatment technology that can remove suspended solids in highly turbid surface water during heavy storms. PMF typically uses sand and natural pebbles as filter media. Hand-made clay pebbles (balls) can be used as alternatives to natural pebbles in PMF treatment plants, where natural pebbles are not readily available. Since the high turbidity is a seasonal problem that occurs during heavy rains, the use of newly developed composite clay balls instead of pure clay balls have the advantage of removing other pollutants such as natural organic matter (NOM) during other times. Only the strength properties of composite clay balls are described here as the pollutant removal is beyond the scope of this paper. These new composite clay balls must be able to withstand dead and live loads under dry and saturated conditions in a filter assembly. Absence of a standard ball preparation process and expected strength properties of composite clay balls were the main reasons behind the present study. Five different raw materials from industry wastes: Red Mud (RM), Water Treatment Alum Sludge (S), Shredded Paper (SP), Saw Dust (SD), and Sugar Mulch (SM) were added to common clay brick mix (BM) in different proportions. In an effort to minimize costs, in this study clay balls were fired to 1100 0C at a local brick factory together with their bricks. A comprehensive experimental program was performed to evaluate crushing strength of composite hand-made clay balls, using uniaxial compression test to establish the best material combination on the basis of strength properties for designing sustainable filter media for water treatment plants. Performance at both construction and operating stages were considered by analyzing both strength properties under fully dry conditions and strength degradation after saturation in a water bath. The BM-75% as the main component produced optimum combination in terms of workability and strength. With the material combination of BM-75% and additives-25%, the use of Red Mud and water treatment sludge as additives produced the highest and lowest strength of composite clay balls, with a failure load of 5.4 kN and 1.4 kN respectively. However, this lower value of 1.4 kN is much higher than the effective load on each clay ball of 0.04 kN in a typical filter assembly (safety factor of 35), therefore, can still be used as a suitable filter material for enhanced pollutant removal.

Inventing life: Intellectual property and the new biology

In 2009, the National Research Council of the National Academies released a report on A New Biology for the 21st Century. The council preferred the term ‘New Biology’ to capture the convergence and integration of the various disciplines of biology. The National Research Council stressed: ‘The essence of the New Biology, as defined by the committee, is integration—re-integration of the many sub-disciplines of biology, and the integration into biology of physicists, chemists, computer scientists, engineers, and mathematicians to create a research community with the capacity to tackle a broad range of scientific and societal problems.’ They define the ‘New Biology’ as ‘integrating life science research with physical science, engineering, computational science, and mathematics’. The National Research Council reflected: 'Biology is at a point of inflection. Years of research have generated detailed information about the components of the complex systems that characterize life––genes, cells, organisms, ecosystems––and this knowledge has begun to fuse into greater understanding of how all those components work together as systems. Powerful tools are allowing biologists to probe complex systems in ever greater detail, from molecular events in individual cells to global biogeochemical cycles. Integration within biology and increasingly fruitful collaboration with physical, earth, and computational scientists, mathematicians, and engineers are making it possible to predict and control the activities of biological systems in ever greater detail.' The National Research Council contended that the New Biology could address a number of pressing challenges. First, it stressed that the New Biology could ‘generate food plants to adapt and grow sustainably in changing environments’. Second, the New Biology could ‘understand and sustain ecosystem function and biodiversity in the face of rapid change’. Third, the New Biology could ‘expand sustainable alternatives to fossil fuels’. Moreover, it was hoped that the New Biology could lead to a better understanding of individual health: ‘The New Biology can accelerate fundamental understanding of the systems that underlie health and the development of the tools and technologies that will in turn lead to more efficient approaches to developing therapeutics and enabling individualized, predictive medicine.’ Biological research has certainly been changing direction in response to changing societal problems. Over the last decade, increasing awareness of the impacts of climate change and dwindling supplies of fossil fuels can be seen to have generated investment in fields such as biofuels, climate-ready crops and storage of agricultural genetic resources. In considering biotechnology’s role in the twenty-first century, biological future-predictor Carlson’s firm Biodesic states: ‘The problems the world faces today – ecosystem responses to global warming, geriatric care in the developed world or infectious diseases in the developing world, the efficient production of more goods using less energy and fewer raw materials – all depend on understanding and then applying biology as a technology.’ This collection considers the roles of intellectual property law in regulating emerging technologies in the biological sciences. Stephen Hilgartner comments that patent law plays a significant part in social negotiations about the shape of emerging technological systems or artefacts: 'Emerging technology – especially in such hotbeds of change as the life sciences, information technology, biomedicine, and nanotechnology – became a site of contention where competing groups pursued incompatible normative visions. Indeed, as people recognized that questions about the shape of technological systems were nothing less than questions about the future shape of societies, science and technology achieved central significance in contemporary democracies. In this context, states face ongoing difficulties trying to mediate these tensions and establish mechanisms for addressing problems of representation and participation in the sociopolitical process that shapes emerging technology.' The introduction to the collection will provide a thumbnail, comparative overview of recent developments in intellectual property and biotechnology – as a foundation to the collection. Section I of this introduction considers recent developments in United States patent law, policy and practice with respect to biotechnology – in particular, highlighting the Myriad Genetics dispute and the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Bilski v. Kappos. Section II considers the cross-currents in Canadian jurisprudence in intellectual property and biotechnology. Section III surveys developments in the European Union – and the interpretation of the European Biotechnology Directive. Section IV focuses upon Australia and New Zealand, and considers the policy responses to the controversy of Genetic Technologies Limited’s patents in respect of non-coding DNA and genomic mapping. Section V outlines the parts of the collection and the contents of the chapters.