Our Human Practices work is structured into four key phases, each designed to foster effective feedback loops between stakeholders and our project:

Phase 1: Stakeholder Mapping

We begin by identifying and mapping the diverse stakeholders connected to our project. This mapping process helps us visualize relationships, understand who holds the most influence, identify those who benefit most, and recognize where critical resources are located.

Phase 2: Consultation

Next, we consult stakeholders to ensure we are focusing on the values that matter most within the context of our project. Through public surveys and interviews across different sectors, we gather valuable insights that reflect a broad range of perspectives.

Phase 3: Feedback

We then seek input to evaluate whether our approach is both practical and responsive to real user or community needs. This step allows us to refine our ideas and ensure their relevance and applicability.

Phase 4: Iteration

Finally, we “close the loop” between our design and real-world needs. The feedback we collect is systematically integrated into our wet lab experiments and hardware design. This process ensures that stakeholder perspectives directly shape our project, making it more adaptive and responsive.

By following these phases, we establish a dynamic and continuous feedback loop that not only enhances collaboration but also drives our project forward in a socially responsible and impactful way.

Why is the bacterial wilt a problem to solve？

Bacterial wilt is a devastating plant disease that occurs widely in warm and humid regions around the world. It affects a variety of economically important crops, including potato, pepper, banana, tomato, eggplant, and peanut. In the early stages, the disease is difficult to detect because plants appear wilted at midday but recover in the morning and evening. Within a few days, however, infected plants rapidly collapse and die, while stems and leaves often remain green, making early recognition even more challenging. The economic impact is severe: bacterial wilt can reduce tomato yields by 16–41%, potato yields by 64–65%, and eggplant yields by 60–90%. In Guangdong Province, the combination of heavy rainfall during the flood season and typhoon events, followed by sudden hot weather, creates ideal conditions for outbreaks. These extreme fluctuations not only threaten crop health but also restrict safe and stable agricultural production.

Figure：Crop with bacterial wilt

Farmers’ Needs Remain Unmet

Currently, farmers lack effective tools for the early diagnosis of bacterial wilt. Most infections are only detected when plants are already severely wilted, by which time it is too late to prevent economic loss. This gap leaves farmers vulnerable, as they have no reliable way to protect their crops and recover their investment.

What can we do？

To address this challenge, our team GEC-Guangzhou has designed an early detection device for bacterial wilt. This device integrates three core systems: a sensing system, a reporter system, and a treatment system. Together, these systems detect the specific signals released by the bacterial wilt pathogen, convert them into visible markers, and activate the plant’s own immune response to resist infection. By providing farmers with a rapid and intuitive tool, we aim to enable timely intervention, reduce crop losses, and protect agricultural sustainability.

Figure：Three systems of our program

Could our project be misused? Is it safe?

Safety is one of the core values of iGEM, and it has been a key consideration throughout our project design. A straightforward idea might be to release genetically modified E. coli directly into the soil to treat bacterial wilt in situ. However, this approach carries significant biosafety risks, as it could lead to the unintended release of engineered organisms into the environment. To avoid this, we chose a safer strategy: our engineered bacteria are kept inside a sealed device, where they interact only with soil samples collected from the field. This design allows us to detect bacterial wilt effectively while preventing any possibility of genetically modified organisms being released into nature. For more details, please refer to our hardware documentation.

Our stakeholder map is divided into four major categories: Public, Science, Industry, and Regulation. During our brainstorming session, the GEC-Guangzhou team discussed and identified specific groups within each category that are closely connected to bacterial wilt and our project.

Public

• Farmers who grow Solanaceae crops such as tomato, pepper, tobacco, eggplant, and potato, who suffer directly from bacterial wilt.
• Agricultural cooperatives and large farming organizations that represent collective farmer interests.

Science

• Researchers and professors from local universities, who focus on plant pathology or have published related work.

Industry

• Agricultural chemical product companies and land testing enterprises involved in the detection and treatment of bacterial wilt.

Regulation

• Government institutions such as plant protection stations or local rural affairs bureaus that oversee agricultural safety.
• Legal professionals and law firms specializing in land safety and agricultural consultation.

By mapping these stakeholders, we clarified who is most directly affected, who provides expertise or resources, and who influences policy and regulation. This map laid a strong foundation for the next phase of consultation.

Figure：Our stakeholder map involves four different part：Public、Science、Industry、Regulation

After mapping our stakeholders, we GEC-Guangzhou conducted consultations to better understand their needs and expectations. We reached out to farmers, researchers, government representatives, and industry partners through surveys and interviews. These conversations allowed us to verify whether our project was addressing the most valuable concerns, and to gather diverse perspectives that could guide us toward a more practical and impactful solution.

A farmer who has suffered from bacterial wilt

Consultation

In our stakeholder map, farmers are identified as the most direct victims of bacterial wilt and also the core application group. They not only bear the economic risks caused by reduced crop yields but also face practical challenges such as the rapid spread of the disease and limited control measures. Therefore, at the early stage of the project, we recognized that growers of solanaceous crops (e.g., tomatoes) are the direct affected group of bacterial wilt, and their needs and pain points best reflect the real-world significance of the project.

We interviewed a farmer who had personally experienced bacterial wilt, who is also a family member of one of our team members. During the conversation, he described in detail the severe economic losses his family suffered. He emphasized that farmers often lack the ability to identify the disease at an early stage, and once they miss the critical control window, they can only watch helplessly as their crops die.

Feedback

Through our conversations with farmers, we realized their core needs:

• Early detection – Farmers urgently need a tool that can detect the pathogen before the plants show visible symptoms.
• Intuitive results – Since farmers lack professional equipment and laboratory conditions, the detection outcome must be simple and clear, ideally visible to the naked eye.
• Affordability – Most farmers cannot afford expensive diagnostic equipment or reagents, so a cost-effective solution is essential for practical adoption.

Iteration

In the next stage, we plan to transform these needs into concrete technical improvements:

• Developing tools for pathogen detection;
• Simplifying the operational process in device design;
• Considering low-cost, large-scale production during the manufacturing stage.

Agricultural Cooperative

After completing our initial communication with individual farmers, we realized that a single experience might not be sufficient to represent the broader agricultural community. Therefore, we visited a nearby agricultural cooperative in Guangzhou and engaged with its representatives through a combination of online and offline discussions.

Consultation

During the conversation, they pointed out that bacterial wilt is particularly severe in warm and humid regions such as Guangdong, Guangxi, and Hainan, as these climates create favorable conditions for pathogen reproduction and spread. In contrast, the incidence of bacterial wilt is relatively lower in the drier northern regions.

Feedback

The cooperative representatives once again emphasized the necessity of a detection tool and highlighted that large-scale adoption requires:

1. Convenience – Tools must be easy to use in the field and should not rely on complex instruments;
2. Affordability – Only low-cost detection and control products can be widely applied among agricultural cooperatives and farming communities.

Iteration

Their feedback not only validated the needs we had identified from individual farmers, but also made it clearer that a practical and affordable tool must be designed specifically for high-incidence regions in southern China.

Visit to Nansha Smart Farm

Smart farming is an emerging agricultural model that integrates modern management with advanced technology. Staff and technicians in such farms often have a more systematic understanding of the regional epidemiology of plant diseases. Their insights help us grasp the conditions and challenges of bacterial wilt from a macro perspective.

Consultation

We visited the Smart Farm in Zhujiang Subdistrict, Nansha District, Guangzhou (coastal Guangdong) and engaged in discussions with on-site staff and agricultural technicians. They pointed out that outbreaks of bacterial wilt are closely linked to environmental factors: after typhoons and periods of continuous rainfall, the subsequent high-temperature and high-humidity conditions greatly accelerate pathogen spread. Under such circumstances, bacterial wilt has essentially become a “regular visitor” to farmlands in Guangdong.

Feedback

This exchange once again confirmed the core demands we had previously heard from both farmers and cooperatives:

1. Early detection – Existing diagnostic methods can only confirm the disease when plants are visibly wilting and cross-sections show water-soaked symptoms, which is often too late;
2. Portability – Molecular and immunological methods are accurate, but they require laboratory equipment and cannot be quickly deployed in the field;
3. Practicality – What is truly needed is a rapid, low-cost, easy-to-use, and on-site applicable early warning tool.

Iteration

Feedback from the Smart Farm provided us with a clearer direction:

• Our device must have early warning capability, delivering results quickly in the field;
• Portability and affordability are essential, otherwise adoption will be limited;
• The project must consider not only scientific feasibility, but also practical integration into smart agriculture scenarios.

We designed three major systems—detection, colorimetric reporting, and treatment—supported by hardware iterations and user workflows, aiming to transform “scientific feasibility” into “field applicability.”

System 1: Detection | Starting from the signal, building a perceivable sensor

Consultation

When designing the detection system, we focused on two key stakeholder groups: academic experts (such as scholars from universities and research institutes) and soil testing industry practitioners. These groups not only possess cutting-edge academic perspectives but also understand the practical limitations of field applications.

We invited Professor Hao Zhang from the Chinese Academy of Sciences, who suggested fully leveraging AHL quorum-sensing molecules, as they are highly correlated with the pathogenic process of Ralstonia solanacearum. He also recommended the QscR protein as a receptor, enabling precise detection of pathogen-specific signals.

Additionally, we spoke with Dr. Zhang from a soil testing company, who reminded us that sensitivity control is crucial: if the system is overly sensitive, false positives may occur, which could undermine farmers’ trust in the results and hinder adoption in the field.

Feedback

From this dual feedback—experts and industry—we gained two key insights:

• Academic value – Using AHL as the detection target ensures pathogen relevance and scientific feasibility;
• Application value – Sensitivity must be moderate: sufficient for early detection of risks, but not so high as to cause false positives that reduce farmers’ trust.

Iteration

Based on this feedback, in the next iteration we plan to:

• Optimize the threshold response of the QscR–AHL sensing system in experimental design, ensuring both sensitivity and reliability.

Hardware Design

Consultation

Beyond the detection and colorimetric systems, we realized that without supporting hardware, our solution might still fail to be implemented in real farmland environments. Therefore, we included agricultural innovation platforms and hardware development institutions in our stakeholder map, as they not only focus on agricultural production scenarios but are also familiar with how synthetic biology outcomes can be translated into usable products.

During our discussion with the Shenzhen Institute of Synthetic Biology Industrial Innovation Center, they emphasized: agricultural products must be grounded in real needs. If the final deliverable remains only a laboratory test kit instead of a tool that farmers can hold and use in the field, it will be difficult for them to adopt. This feedback directly inspired us—the biological solution must be integrated with a hardware carrier to create a device that is easy to operate and simple to scale up.

Feedback & Iteration

From the industry feedback, we drew two core insights:

• Scenario adaptation – Farmland environments are complex; hardware must be portable, contamination-resistant, and error-proof;
• User experience – Farmers prefer clear, intuitive results, ideally displayed through simple colors or indicators, rather than relying on additional instruments.

System 2: Indigo Colorimetric Reporting | Turning “visibility” into true usability

Consultation

When designing the detection system, we realized that relying solely on fluorescent signals would not be sufficient for field applications. Fluorescence detection requires portable devices, which are expensive and inconvenient for farmers. Therefore, we included industry partners (such as indigo production companies) and academic experts as stakeholders in this stage, focusing on how to make detection results intuitive, visible, and easy to understand.

From our earlier communication with farmers, we learned that they prefer results that are “instantly recognizable” rather than dependent on specialized instruments. Meanwhile, literature research revealed that the enzymes TnaA and FMO can synthesize indigo, a stable blue precipitate that can be clearly identified with the naked eye.

To validate this direction, we visited Daosheng Biotechnology Co., Ltd. and toured their indigo production workshop. Their R&D staff confirmed that indigo already has a mature industrial synthesis pathway, which is stable and reliable, and could be directly adapted as our detection signal.

Feedback

From this feedback, we drew three key insights:

1. Fluorescence is impractical – reliance on instruments is the greatest barrier to adoption in the field;
2. Indigo is feasible – its mature industrial production pathway demonstrates clear potential for industrial translation;
3. Farmer-friendly – the blue precipitate signal is intuitive and easy to read, without the need for additional devices.

Iteration

In the experimental phase, we have already synthesized and constructed the TnaA and FMO genes, successfully achieving indigo production and detection. This result validates the feasibility of transitioning from fluorescent reporters to a colorimetric pathway.

System 3: Treatment | Enhancing Resistance with the Plant’s Own “Language”

After developing detection and colorimetric systems, we asked ourselves: how can we not only “identify risks” but also help crops “withstand risks”? To answer this, we engaged stakeholders including scientific experts from the Institute of Plant Protection, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS), our laboratory mentors, and farmers—building a bridge between disease mechanism research and agricultural practice.

Consultation

In discussions with CAAS experts, we confirmed that exogenous salicylic acid (SA) can significantly enhance crop disease resistance. However, its dosage must be carefully controlled, as excessive SA may lead to abnormal plant growth. This feedback provided a critical constraint for our design.

Subsequently, with guidance from our mentors, we explored the biosynthetic pathway of SA and decided to express the key enzymes ICS and IPL in E. coli BL21, thereby constructing an efficient synthetic route.

Feedback

From expert and mentor feedback, we clarified two key points:

1. Scientific feasibility – SA is indeed a key hormone in Systemic Acquired Resistance (SAR), and exogenous supplementation can enhance plant immunity;
2. Application challenges – A controllable, stable biosynthesis system must be established to avoid risks from improper dosage.

Iteration

In our experimental work, we successfully constructed the BL21-ICS-IPL engineered strain. This demonstrates that we have preliminarily established a biological module for controllable SA biosynthesis. Looking forward, this module could be further developed into a field-deployable bioproduct, enabling:

• Early detection – timely risk warning;
• Rapid colorimetric reporting – instantly recognizable by farmers;
• Intervention capability – enhanced crop resistance.

Together, the detection, colorimetric, and treatment systems form a complete “detect–recognize–respond” closed-loop solution.

Compliance Considerations

When constructing our detection–colorimetric–treatment closed loop, we initially envisioned a more direct approach: spraying engineered bacteria into the soil for in situ detection and treatment. However, this idea immediately raised concerns regarding environmental release and legal compliance. Therefore, we included legal advisors and professional law firms in our stakeholder map to ensure that our project is not only scientifically feasible but also legally compliant and biosafe.

Consultation

In our consultation with Dai Peng Law Firm, the lawyers made it clear: genetically modified bacteria cannot be directly released into the natural environment, as this would pose both biosafety risks and legal liabilities.

Feedback

Feasibility Assessment

1. In situ release is infeasible – although it has scientific potential, the biosafety and compliance risks are too high;
2. Closed systems are preferable – all detection and treatment steps must be conducted within a controlled environment to ensure that engineered bacteria never come into contact with the external ecosystem.

Iteration

Based on legal and safety feedback, we decisively abandoned the in situ treatment concept and instead adopted a fully enclosed design:

• Engineered bacterial lyophilized powder is strictly sealed within single-use sampling tubes;
• Both detection and treatment are performed in a closed environment;
• After use, all materials undergo uniform high-temperature inactivation, eliminating any risk of environmental release.

Initial Hardware Design

Consultation

As our project progressed, we realized that “how to collect soil samples” is a critical challenge in hardware design. Traditional methods rely on Luoyang shovels combined with laboratory testing, but this approach can damage crop roots, is labor-intensive, and ultimately requires samples to be sent back to the lab—making it unsuitable for rapid field detection. Therefore, we included our lab instructors and students participating in science outreach courses as stakeholders, seeking diverse perspectives.

During a campus science outreach discussion, students proposed an alternative solution: using an electric pump to extract soil water, combined with a soil liquid sampler to collect samples. At first, this idea appeared more convenient than the Luoyang shovel and avoided damaging crop roots.

However, field testing revealed several significant problems with the electric pump approach:

1. Lack of portability – required a power source and was relatively heavy, unsuitable for large-scale field inspection;
2. Low efficiency – could only collect one sample at a time, limiting throughput in the field;
3. Sample management risks – when handling many samples, confusion was likely, reducing the reliability of on-site judgments.

Building on this, student Liu proposed an improved solution: using a manual syringe with wooden support, eliminating the need for electricity while remaining lightweight, portable, and better suited to real field scenarios.

Feedback & Iteration

Based on these insights, we decided that the next generation of hardware would:

• Adopt a manual syringe sampling method, balancing portability and cost control;
• Incorporate fixed supports (e.g., wooden blocks or 3D-printed components) to improve stability;
• Explore modular sampling kits to avoid confusion when managing multiple samples.

Second-Generation Hardware Design

In our early design, we tested a syringe combined with a liquid soil sampler. While this method could successfully collect samples, farmer feedback highlighted several shortcomings:

• Confusion when handling multiple samples;
• Cumbersome transfer operations;
• Insufficient user-friendliness for farmers.

Consultation

During visits and exchanges at several innovation parks and universities in Shenzhen, we observed that laboratory staff commonly use disposable blood collection tubes. These tubes have clear pre-printed labels on the walls, which make sample management and tracking much easier.

Feedback

This observation provided new inspiration:

1. Label-based management – numbered tubes can significantly reduce confusion when handling multiple samples;
2. Convenience – disposable tubes are compact and easy for farmers to use;
3. Safety – their closed structure prevents contamination during sample transfer.

Iteration

Based on this feedback, we plan to incorporate disposable blood collection tubes into our next-generation hardware design, with pre-loaded lyophilized engineered bacteria inside the tubes, creating an “all-in-one sampling-and-detection system”:

• Simplified workflow – eliminating sample transfer, detection occurs directly inside the tube;
• Reduced risk – preventing cross-contamination and improving sample reliability.

Third-Generation Hardware Design

Building on the experience of the first two designs, we proposed a third-generation sampling system: disposable blood collection needle + liquid soil sampler. This solution almost perfectly addressed all previous issues:

• Lightweight and easy to operate, without harming crops;
• Numbered samples, eliminating management confusion;
• Simplified transfer process, making it easy for farmers to use directly.

Consultation

During our visit to the Major Synthetic Biology Research Infrastructure in Shenzhen, we were inspired by the idea that hardware should not only solve the problem of sampling, but also be integrated with digital agriculture.

Feedback

This feedback led us to several new realizations:

• Field-friendliness – with the third-generation system, usability requirements for farmers are essentially met;
• Smart agriculture potential – we can further explore digitalization of sampling data, so that results go beyond test tubes and inform management decisions;
• Future direction – combining detection with field management to enhance application value.

Iteration

In future iterations, we envision building a smart, phone-monitored management system:

• Sample numbering – each sample corresponds to a unique identifier;
• Colorimetric readout – color changes can be recorded by eye or image recognition;
• Mobile logging – farmers can quickly upload and store results via their smartphones;
• Field risk mapping – the backend generates a risk distribution map, helping farmers make precise decisions.

Summary

Through three iterations, our sampling hardware evolved from the initial “laboratory-oriented tool” (Luoyang shovel + lab testing), to a “farmer-friendly tool” (disposable blood collection tube + liquid soil sampler), and further toward a “smart agriculture tool” (digitalized and intelligent management).

Step by step, we solved key challenges:

• Crop damage → Non-invasive sampling;
• Labor-intensive and inefficient → Lightweight and portable tools;
• Sample confusion → Numbered tube labeling;
• Field usability issues → Smartphone-based intelligent management.

Patent Considerations

As our project moves closer to application, we realized that intellectual property and compliance are also crucial stakeholder concerns. Relevant stakeholders include patent lawyers, intellectual property training institutions, and potential industry partners, all of whom play key roles in patent protection, market entry, and future commercialization.

Consultation

Our team participated in the online seminar “Intellectual Property Lecture Series”, where we systematically learned about the procedures and considerations of patent applications. The lecture covered topics such as how to protect core technologies, how to avoid conflicts with existing patents, and the importance of patent planning before product implementation.

Feedback

From this seminar, we drew three key insights:

1. Necessity – Filing patents before product rollout helps protect innovative成果;
2. Compliance – Understanding the patent process helps the team avoid legal risks and potential infringement;
3. Foresight – Intellectual property planning is not only about protecting research成果, but also the foundation for future commercialization.

Iteration

In our upcoming work, we will:

• Explore patent applications for our core technical modules (AHL detection, indigo colorimetric reporting, salicylic acid biosynthesis);
• Continue consulting intellectual property lawyers to assess the feasibility and scope of patent protection.

User Education

Consultation

During our interactions with farmers and the general public, we found that their level of awareness has a direct impact on disease management. Through surveys, we discovered that both the public and some farmers lack sufficient knowledge of the basics and risks of bacterial wilt. Many are unfamiliar with its early symptoms, transmission pathways, and control challenges. This reality highlights that scientific innovation alone is not enough—there is also a need to strengthen knowledge dissemination.

Feedback

Key findings include:

1. Awareness gap – Farmers often mistake early symptoms for drought stress, causing them to miss the optimal intervention window;
2. Information gap – The general public has almost no concept of bacterial wilt or its threat to food security;
3. Education opportunity – The public and students showed strong curiosity about the intersection of synthetic biology and agriculture, providing a valuable entry point for science communication.

Iteration

Based on these findings, we launched a series of education and outreach activities (see Education section for details).

Team Collaboration with WLSA iGEM

In the spirit of collaboration, we actively engaged with the WLSA iGEM team to exchange ideas and share experiences. During our discussions, both teams introduced our respective projects and identified overlapping interests in biosensor design and hardware development. Through this exchange, we gained valuable insights into how WLSA approached stakeholder engagement and system optimization, while we shared our experiences in farmer-centered Human Practices and hardware iteration. The dialogue not only broadened our perspectives but also inspired us to refine our own strategies, especially in the areas of user-friendly design and field applicability. This collaboration highlighted the importance of cross-team learning within iGEM: by combining different expertise and perspectives, we were able to strengthen the scientific foundation and real-world relevance of our projects.

We have completed a full cycle of Human Practices integration. Through continuous interactions with diverse stakeholders—including farmers, agricultural cooperatives, smart farming technicians, plant pathology experts, soil testing enterprises, legal advisors, and industry partners—we have progressively optimized the scientific soundness and feasibility of our project. Despite concerns raised over detection sensitivity, implementation costs, and biosafety, we valued all perspectives to ensure our solution balances farmer needs, ecological safety, technological innovation, and practical application prospects. This collaborative model ultimately led to the formation of our integrated early detection and prevention product for bacterial wilt—a solution that is not only scientifically feasible, but also truly field-deployable.

Looking ahead, we will continue to:

• Advance optimization toward miniaturization and portability, making the tool more suitable for farmers’ daily operations;
• Explore smart and digital management, building disease risk maps through mobile applications and data visualization;
• Actively promote collaboration with enterprises and regulatory agencies, ensuring steady progress along the paths of industrialization and compliance.

We believe this solution will open up a new pathway for safeguarding food security, advancing smart agriculture, and promoting green disease control.