The ADAPT cycle is an iterative process designed for continuous improvement of projects or topics through five key phases.

Align

This is where the ADAPT cycle begins. The core goal is to ensure everyone involved with the topic has a shared understanding of the goals, scope, constraints, and success criteria for this iteration.

• Action: Engage in in-depth discussions with key stakeholders to clearly define the problem or need.

• Output: Document the discussion details and set goals, or reach a consensus among stakeholders to ensure subsequent actions closely align with the core objective.

Design

Based on the goals established in the Align phase, you'll start conceiving and designing specific solutions or features, and refining existing ones.

• Action: Continuously discuss the goals, clarify activity flows, and detail each component. Identify and resolve potential issues during brainstorming to lay a strong foundation for upcoming actions.

• Output: Organize your ideas and discussion outcomes into an activity plan or outline, submit it for review and modification, and finalize the plan.

Act

Translate the Design phase's outcomes into concrete actions that target audiences can engage with and evaluate. "Act" here doesn't mean final completion, but rather making ideas actionable and tangible.

• Action: Officially execute the plan, which may include running activities, distributing surveys, conducting interviews, or posting social media updates.

• Output: Document the process thoroughly to ensure the practice is recorded accurately and completely. This documentation will serve as material for future reviews and the next iteration.

Probe

Actively gather feedback from participants, listen to suggestions from diverse groups, and deeply understand their genuine experiences.

• Action: Collect suggestions related to the activity by randomly interviewing participants. If using surveys or interviews, analyze the collected data or expert responses. Honestly record all feedback and express gratitude for each participant's input.

• Output: Diligently process the data or analyze participant suggestions and feedback, keeping detailed records of the analysis results.

Tweak

Based on the feedback gathered during the Probe phase, make specific adjustments, optimizations, and corrections to the design or topic.

• Action: Optimize and adjust the topic and solutions according to the collected feedback. Deeply consider how to effectively implement the feedback to guide further development.

• Output: Produce a refined solution or correct the direction and goals of the topic.

After completing the Tweak phase, the team returns to the starting point (Align) of the ADAPT cycle with the revised outcomes. They re-evaluate if the goals have been met or define new goals for the next mini-iteration based on fresh feedback, thus initiating a new cycle. This process repeats until satisfactory results are achieved or the final release.

• Strengths:
  • Burning is currently the fastest, easiest, and cheapest way to deal with straw.
  • Low technical barrier: No special equipment or skills needed. It quickly clears fields for the next planting.
  • Burning helps kill pests and weed seeds.
  • The resulting ash provides nutrients like potassium, boosting soil fertility in the short term.
• Weaknesses:
  • Causes severe air pollution, harming health, and can even lead to traffic accidents.
  • Fire risk.
  • Breaking burning bans can lead to fines or detention.
  • Ecologically, it kills soil microbes, damages organic matter and soil structure, and reduces long-term fertility.
• Opportunities:
  • Can receive subsidies for returning straw to the field, removing it, or buying machinery.
  • Can earn extra income by selling baled straw to power plants, feed mills, fertilizer producers, or compost facilities. This makes them part of the biomass energy or organic agriculture supply chain.
  • Can get guidance and services from the government or companies for mechanized straw management.
• Threats:
  • Increasing enforcement of burning bans makes breaking the rules more costly.
  • Alternative methods are expensive and complex: Returning straw requires special machinery; removing it needs extra labor and transport costs. Comprehensive utilization channels may be unstable or low-profit.
  • Time pressure: Alternatives can take longer during busy planting and harvesting seasons.
  • Market risks: The straw collection market is volatile, with unstable sales or low prices.
  • Natural conditions: Bad weather (like continuous rain) can disrupt straw removal or field return operations.

• Strengths:
  • Directly responsible for promoting, mobilizing, patrolling, and enforcing burning bans.
  • Can allocate resources and mobilize local communities.
  • Has key information on local straw volume, farmer needs, and business demands.
• Weaknesses:
  • High management costs and difficulty in policy implementation.
  • Faces significant financial pressure.
  • The comprehensive utilization industry is relatively weak.
• Opportunities:
  • Promote green industry development and improve regional environmental quality.
  • Build a positive government image.
• Threats:
  • Financial sustainability issues.
  • May be affected by pollution from neighboring regions.
  • Unstable results from alternatives: Improper straw return can cause pests or affect planting. straw removal chains can break, leading to stockpiles.

• Strengths:
  • Inexpensive and eco-friendly raw material.
  • Innovative technical approach, combining electrochemistry and biological methods.
  • Broad market potential for products, aligning with green and sustainable development.
• Weaknesses:
  • Connecting the two key technologies (electrochemical and biological) is difficult, with poor compatibility.
  • The process is complex and costly, making large-scale industrial production challenging.
  • Purifying products to pharmaceutical grade is very difficult.
• Opportunities:
  • Current policies strongly support green biomanufacturing, making it easier to get funding.
  • Pharmaceutical companies need green supply chains, creating strong market demand.
  • The technology platform is scalable and can be used for other product developments.
• Threats:
  • Traditional petrochemical methods are very cheap, leading to fierce market competition.
  • High risk in scaling up technology for industrial use.
  • Approval cycles for new drug manufacturing processes are long and strict.

• Strengths:
  • Can provide technology and products, have relatively established business models, and can profit from it.
  • Are major beneficiaries of policy support.
• Weaknesses:
  • Raw material collection costs are high, and technology maturity and economic viability still need improvement.
  • High market risk, requiring significant funding or technical assistance.
• Opportunities:
  • Huge market demand, with continuous policy benefits and ample room for innovative development.
• Threats:
  • Policy fluctuation risks.
  • Unstable raw material supply.
  • Increasing market competition.
  • Risk of technological replacement.
  • Differences in public perception and acceptance.

• Strengths:
  • Strong demand for health and environmental improvement.
  • Public opinion power: Can express demands through media, online platforms, and complaints, creating pressure.
  • Consumer choice: Support green products (like straw board, biomass power generation), driving market demand.
• Weaknesses:
  • Information asymmetry: May not fully understand the complexity of the straw issue.
  • Scattered actions: Individual efforts are limited, making it hard to influence policy or burning behavior effectively.
  • May lack understanding: May not fully grasp the difficulties farmers face in implementing burning bans, leading to conflict.
• Opportunities:
  • Significant improvements in health and environment: Effective straw burning bans will greatly improve air quality and reduce respiratory diseases.
  • Participate in environmental governance: Can act as citizens by reporting burning incidents, joining environmental groups, and monitoring government and businesses.
  • Support green consumption: Choosing products made from comprehensive straw utilization effectively drives market demand.
  • Raise environmental awareness: This issue is a key opportunity to spread environmental knowledge and boost public ecological consciousness.
• Threats:
  • Continued exposure to pollution: In areas with ineffective burning bans, residents will still suffer health impacts.
  • Fluctuating results: Ban effectiveness may vary due to relaxed enforcement, special weather conditions, etc.
  • NIMBY effect (Not In My Backyard): While the public opposes straw burning, they might also oppose local facilities like biomass power plants.
  • Bearing some governance costs: Government costs may eventually be passed on to the public through taxes or public spending.

• Purpose: This survey aimed to explore public acceptance of our product and its potential application prospects.
• Highlights: The survey results indicate that while public awareness of microbial synthesis technology is low, overall acceptance is high, and people show a strong willingness to try a cold medicine with an improved flavor from this technology.
• Significant Market Potential: Over 86% of respondents were supportive or accepting of microbial synthesis technology, and 58.46% explicitly stated a willingness to try a cold medicine with bio-synthesized vanillin. This highlights a broad potential user base for improving drug flavor with synthetic biology, providing a crucial market basis for our product development.
• Addresses a User Pain Point: We found that the bad taste of medicine is a significant pain point, with 74.62% of respondents having been bothered by it. At the same time, despite limited knowledge of "natural flavor ingredients," over 50% of respondents said they like vanilla flavor.
• Demonstrates Dual Value: This has led us to realize that converting lignin from straw into acetaminophen via a microbial method is not only technically feasible but also meets a market need, embodying both environmental and practical value.

Summary

The results of this survey show that the public has a high level of acceptance and anticipation for our project. This has solidified our commitment to completing our project, and we will continue to dedicate our efforts to its success.

• Purpose: To strengthen horizontal exchange among iGEM teams, identify blind spots in our design, and refine our experimental approach to improve project quality. At the same time, we aimed to learn from the experiences of excellent teams to improve our own team building.

• Highlights: During the exchange, we systematically presented our complete solution, from straw burning pollution to drug synthesis, which helped us clarify our thinking. Furthermore, through interactions with other teams, we realized our team management could be improved, leading us to make adjustments to better leverage the strengths of each team member.

• Summary: Through this exchange, our team received professional feedback from a multidisciplinary perspective, and this feedback has been directly applied to our project's optimization. The success of this conference embodies the collaborative and open spirit of the iGEM competition and provided us with important directions for future improvements to our research.

  

Purpose:Initiated by the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area iGEM team, this initiative centers on collaboration between academic institutions and enterprises to build a bridge between biological theory and practice, actively promoting cooperative development within the Greater Bay Area's biological industry cluster.

Highlights:The event unfolded across three venues with diverse activities. At the University of Hong Kong, a simulated jamboree facilitated topic exchange and collaborative communication among teams. During the workshop, instructors vividly explained the significance and innovative aspects of human practice. At the Industrial Innovation Center, participants toured the facilities and explored the prospects of synthetic biology innovation competitions and industrialization. At Southern University of Science and Technology, interactions during the simulated jamboree and the closing ceremony's project-based drawing activities further strengthened team communication and cooperation.

Summary: This forum provided an opportunity for intellectual exchange and collaboration among our team and other participants, fostering mutual learning and growth among members. It has laid a more solid foundation for the future development of the NEFU-China team and has also advanced communication and cooperation within the field of synthetic biology.

• Purpose: The livestream aimed to strengthen science communication for non-specialists while also promoting exchange among different iGEM teams.

• Highlights:
  • Hainan University provided an accessible introduction to synthetic biology, using analogies like "cells are like computers" and mentioning the topic of "artificially synthesized starch."
  • Jiangnan University introduced their project, which involves engineering yeast to produce the human antimicrobial peptide LL-37 as an alternative to traditional antibiotics. This technology could have future applications in medicine and the food industry.
  • Hainan University discussed their innovative epilepsy defense system. They are using engineered bacteria to dynamically regulate BHB synthesis, offering an alternative to traditional ketogenic diet therapy. They also use smart hydrogel encapsulation technology to enhance safety and colonization efficiency.

Summary

This livestream allowed us to not only popularize biological knowledge to a wider audience but also to present and analyze our project from a professional perspective, deepening our own understanding of synthetic biology.

• Purpose: Our participation had three main goals: to validate our project's innovative value on a professional platform outside of iGEM; to obtain expert feedback on our technical route; and to learn from the advanced experience of other teams in the application of synthetic biology.

• Highlights:
  • We showcased our innovative "chemical-biological co-utilization" strategy to the competition. We emphasized our project's complete value chain and highlighted its dual goals of environmental and economic benefits. Through the competition, we received significant recognition from the judges for this innovative approach.

• Summary: Through this innovation challenge, our team not only received targeted guidance from professional judges but also recognized the project's shortcomings in process scale-up and economic analysis. This feedback was directly used to optimize our iGEM project, particularly by strengthening our techno-economic analysis and life-cycle assessment, which significantly improved our project's completeness and feasibility.

Purpose

• To introduce children to DNA characteristics, the central dogma, and fundamental concepts of synthetic biology, interpreting the "code of life" through vivid explanations;

• To foster an intuitive appreciation for the fascination of life sciences through experiments and interactive games, sparking curiosity about the field;

• To convey the applied value of synthetic biology, helping children establish a foundational cognitive framework linking "life blueprints—building blocks of life—biological traits."

Highlights

• Innovative Participation Model: Employing a "team-guided + child-interactive" approach, where iGEM team members serve as presenters and teaching assistants. Tailored to children's cognitive characteristics, this model delivers specialized knowledge in an engaging manner.

• Diverse and Rich Formats: Integrating knowledge lectures, hands-on experiments, and interactive games. Participants receive theoretical input while gaining practical experience and exercising creativity, comprehensively stimulating enthusiasm.

• Mutually Empowering Outcomes: Children master core scientific terminology and principles while igniting their curiosity for exploration; the team enhances cross-group communication skills, deepens social value awareness, and refines collaboration processes through outreach practice—all of which feed back into project development and dissemination.

Conclusion

This outreach program not only opened a window to life sciences for the children, sparking their interest in synthetic biology, but also provided the NEFU-China 2025 iGEM team with invaluable experience in cross-group communication, social value recognition, and team collaboration. These insights will empower the team to better balance scientific rigor with communicative effectiveness in project development, strengthen the presentation of social value, and enhance experimental efficiency—injecting new momentum into future project advancement and outcome translation. We look forward to continuing such outreach activities, enabling more people to appreciate the appeal of synthetic biology and promoting the dissemination of green biotechnology concepts.

Opening Statement
Thank you, Chair, Judges, and opposing debaters.
To begin with, let us establish our definitions. First, we must clarify the basis of our discussion:
Synthetic biology specifically refers to biological experiments involving human modification and manipulation of the internal structures of plants and animals, particularly at the genetic level. Environmental modifications fall outside the scope of today's debate.
The scientific community refers to individuals possessing relevant expertise, understanding the current state of synthetic biology, and capable of clearly articulating experimental logic. This includes systematically educated undergraduates and practitioners in related fields.
Today's debate will determine who can more scientifically, reasonably, and accurately address these ethical controversies, and who can more objectively clarify the essence of the matter. That party should hold the primary voice in this discourse.
Our position is clear: the scientific community should lead the discourse on synthetic biology ethics. Two reasons support this:

First, professional barriers determine interpretive authority.

The technical threshold is insurmountable. The core of synthetic biology—gene editing and artificial genome construction—operates in a highly specialized domain. Creating the first "artificial cell" required 15 years, $40 million, and the precise assembly of 473 genes. The U.S. Bioethics Committee explicitly states that its interdisciplinary knowledge system is currently accessible only to specialized researchers.
Second, dispelling misconceptions relies on expert clarification. Public concerns often stem from blind spots in technological understanding. For instance, a Wilson Center survey revealed that fears of biological weapon misuse or ecological runaway stem largely from unfamiliarity with risk control mechanisms. Through channels like congressional hearings, the scientific community can systematically clarify technological boundaries and regulatory frameworks, distinguishing facts from conjecture. When controversies are rooted in scientific fundamentals, the authority to articulate what technology can and cannot achieve must reside with those who can explain it clearly.

Second, stakeholder interests drive responsible discourse.
First, dual pressures converge on the scientific community, with ethical controversies impacting both ends: scientists face risks of career setbacks and research stagnation, while the public grapples with widespread anxieties like food safety concerns. Yet the scientific community sits at the eye of the storm—its research environment, social reputation, and the trajectory of controversies are directly intertwined.

2. Responsibility compels rational discourse
This core stake compels the scientific community to comprehensively assess the essence of the controversy and seek sustainable solutions. Compared to the public's fragmented understanding, scientific discourse prioritizes long-term risk management and rejects emotional venting. The convergence of vested interests and professional responsibility lends its statements greater constructiveness and credibility.

In summary:

The scientific community, armed with irreplaceable expertise, can penetrate the fog of controversy to reveal the essence of technology. As the central bearer of these disputes, its discourse combines depth with a profound sense of responsibility. Granting the voice to those who understand the technology best and possess the strongest motivation to solve problems is the rational choice for promoting the healthy development of technological ethics!

Thank you!

Objective: To help more people understand synthetic biology and its research directions through accessible means, sparking interest; gather public suggestions to refine project topics while addressing key ethical issues facing synthetic biology.
Highlights:

• We broke away from traditional one-way science communication by transforming synthetic biology from a "lab concept" into a tangible "tool for solving real-world problems" through offline painting and online interactions, igniting broader interest in biology. During our offline events, multiple non-biology students participated in conceptualizing and painting, experiencing the power and ingenuity of synthetic biology firsthand.

• Offline activities targeted university students, while online outreach covered all Douyin users. We discovered complementary feedback from these two groups: students focused more on technical details, while the general public prioritized "the practical impact of technology on daily life." This not only provided professional insights for our research but also added a public perspective.

• We recognize that the event is not the endpoint, but rather the starting point for optimizing scientific research. The collected suggestions were translated into concrete actions. The team integrated the concept of "resource circulation" into creative practice, allowing the public to intuitively experience how "public feedback can tangibly advance scientific progress." This reinforced the understanding that "disciplinary development requires collective societal participation."

Summary: In summary, the Maker Project advanced our research focus from "single-product synthesis" to "resource circulation systems" through creative feedback, interdisciplinary collaboration, and problem-solving discussions. It reinforced ecological safety design, achieving deep integration between science outreach and research practice. Moreover, through the "Creator Project," the team not only disseminated synthetic biology knowledge but also transformed the project's core concepts of "resource recycling" and "green biosynthesis" into tangible creative practices. This enabled more students to understand that synthetic biology's "creation" fundamentally involves rationally designing solutions to real-world challenges like environmental and health issues—which aligns precisely with the NEFU-China team's original mission in undertaking this project.

Objectives

• Popularize synthetic biology knowledge: Using microorganisms as an entry point, leverage everyday scenarios like bread fermentation and flower-shaped steamed bun making to educate young adults about the "dual nature" of microbes, lowering the barrier to scientific understanding;

• Build an interactive platform: Foster emotional connections among young people with special needs, parents, and volunteers through activities like "Pass the Flower" and "Puzzle Painting," enabling participants to express themselves in a relaxed atmosphere;

• Spark potential and career aspirations: Guide young people to envision the practical value of microorganisms through hands-on activities like "Drawing by Lot" and "Flower Bun Experiments," planting seeds of curiosity about future career paths;

• Convey scientific warmth: Guided by the principle that "every life deserves gentle care through science," we blend science and art to express respect and inclusivity toward special populations.

Highlights

• Innovative integration: Pioneering a "science + art" outreach model, we embed microbial knowledge into artistic forms like painting, puzzles, and flower-shaped steamed bun making—depicting microbes with brushes and experiencing fermentation through buns to make abstract science tangible;

• Rich Interactive Layers: Multiple segments like drum-passing games, puzzle-painting, lottery-draw painting, and flower-bread experiments foster emotional connection while delivering knowledge and unlocking potential.

• Multi-dimensional Value Transmission: Beyond science education, it promotes social values like "inclusion" and "respect" through parent sharing, youth presentations, and slogan resonance, infusing science with human warmth.

Conclusion
This event enabled young adults with special needs to grasp the wonders of microbes through art, boosting their confidence and employment prospects. Parents gained emotional support, while volunteers experienced the warmth of science outreach. For the NEFU-China team, it validated the effectiveness of the "science + art" outreach model, built expertise in engaging special populations, and deepened the commitment to "synthetic biology serving society." Moving forward, the team will continue pursuing the integration of science and goodwill, driving the mutual advancement of science communication and social inclusion.