Category Archives: BioEngineering

CEO of Fluence Bioengineering Inc. has cautioned cannabis growers against adopting just any technology for their business.

According to David Cohen, who was speaking at this years Benzinga Cannabis Capital Conference in Chicago, growers should first identify what they want to do and achieve before settling on the right technology for their business.

Theres all kinds of data acquisition and analytics now available for a grower. You have to analyze millions of data points and make decisions, he urged.

Fluence, which operates as a business unit within Signifys Digital Solutions division, creates powerful and energy-efficient LED lighting solutions for commercial crop production and research applications.

The company is a leading LED lighting supplier in the global cannabis market and is committed to enabling more efficient crop production with the worlds top vertical farms, and greenhouse produce growers.

When Fluence first started, it was really convincing people that LED technology was a way to go. There were a lot of HPS grow lights out in the world, and it was just starting to come to be affordable but also showing growers that by using a different type of technology to grow the plants, they could actually get more out of what they were getting, Cohen said.

Interested in learning more about the Benzinga Cannabis Capital Conference? Get more information here.

This post contains sponsored advertising content. This content is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be investing advice.

See the rest here:
Know What You Want To Achieve Fluence CEO Cautions Companies Against Adopting Just Any Technology For T - Benzinga

PhD Program in Bioengineering

Study for the PhD in Bioengineering combines rigorous coursework with novel research mentored by Stanford faculty, enabling students to develop as independent intellectual leaders working at the interfaces between biology, medicine, engineering, and the physical sciences. Our mission is to train students at the intersection of biomedicine and engineering in both academia and the burgeoning biomedical and biotechnology industries. Applicants should have a commitment to learning and a passion for research.

On average, the program is completed in five to six years, depending on the students research and progress.First-year students have the opportunity to rotate in three different labs before selecting their dissertation advisor (PI). Many students choose to join labs in the Bioengineering department, but we also have several students who join labs within the Schools of Engineering, Medicine, and Humanities & Sciences.

The Bioengineering Department also believes that teaching is an important part of graduate-level education in Bioengineering. Consequently, serving as a teaching assistant for two courses is a requirement for the PhD in Bioengineering. Current BioE and Stanford graduate students can learn more about our TAopportunitiesvia our BioE intranet.

Along the way to the PhD degree, students have clear anddefined milestones that help guide them to the successful completion of their dissertation andoral defense. More information regarding our PhD degree requirements and milestones can be found in the Stanford Bulletin.

BioE PhD students come from a wide variety of personal, educational, and professional backgrounds. We welcome applicants with undergraduate degrees in diverse STEM disciplines including Bioengineering, Biophysics, Chemical Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Biochemistry, Physics, and Chemistry. There are no specific course requirements for applicants, but a competitive candidate will have strong quantitative training in mathematics and the physical sciences, along with a background in biology acquired through coursework or prior research. All admitted graduate students should be prepared to take the core coursesin the first year.

We welcome students entering directly from undergraduate programs, as well as applicants with MS degrees and/or substantial work experience in areas ranging from biotechnology to robotics. Our admissions committee will look for evidence that an applicant has demonstrated qualities of successful PhD students such as creativity, self-initiative, dedication, and perseverance. We also aim to admit bioengineering students who can thrive at Stanford because their specific interests and aspirations are well-matched with the research of our faculty and the educational environment of our department

The Bioengineering community is home to over 165 PhD students who come from a variety of diverse backgrounds and experiences. Below is a snapshot of our BioE PhD cohort that started in Fall 2020.

Originally posted here:
PhD Program | Bioengineering

Deloittes Ornaith OReilly shares her experience of the companys graduate programme, including the importance of a buddy and a coach.

Ornaith OReilly is a recent bioengineering graduate who now works as an analyst in the robotics and intelligent automation department of Deloitte.

While she wasnt completely sure what she wanted to do when she came out of college, she was keen to gain exposure to different technologies.

Talking to graduates from Deloitte and other companies ultimately helped me to decide on the role. The emphasis that Deloitte puts on training and development appealed to me as someone coming from a bioengineering background, who expected a steep learning curve starting out, she told SiliconRepublic.com.

Coming from a healthcare background, Ive always wanted to work in an industry that is having a positive impact on the world. Since joining Deloitte, Ive had the opportunity to work on projects with a strong social impact, she said.

From working on public health projects to more recently joining a team contributing to Irelands response to the invasion of Ukraine, I feel a great sense of fulfilment in my work.

While shes still making up her mind about the type of job she wants to do for the rest of her life, she said Deloitte has plenty of avenues to explore. Luckily, I can say that Ive spent my first year on the graduate programme in an environment where Im constantly learning and growing.

Your opinion is valued no matter what level you are ORNAITH OREILLY

I currently work across two projects which gives me a lot of variety in my day.

Firstly, I work as a solution developer on an internal project using robotic process automation software a low-code software package to build, deploy and manage software robots that simulate human actions. Typically, I spend half my day working behind the scenes building and managing automation solutions.

Secondly, I work with a public client in a project management role. This is very client-facing and allows me to build my communication skills. A typical day could include creating and delivering presentations to senior team members or clients and reporting project progress and issues to stakeholders.

While the two projects appear very different, I really like the variety they give me and how they allow me to grow both technical and soft skills.

Absolutely. I work with senior members of staff across different departments in Deloitte and very senior clients daily (almost hourly). There really is a flat structure in the firm, where your opinion is valued no matter what level you are.

In the last year, my responsibilities have increased hugely. From taking initiative in client meetings to having more ownership over project deliverables, I feel constantly challenged. While this can sometimes feel daunting, there is so much support available at Deloitte that Ive never felt overwhelmed.

Since (almost) day one Ive worked on client projects, so in lots of ways I feel like I was thrown into working life! Im a strong believer in immersion being the best way to learn and this has certainly been the case at Deloitte.

However, the graduate programme comes with support at all levels. Firstly, I was assigned a buddy someone junior in the company to help me settle in.

Secondly, I was assigned a coach someone senior in the company, outside of my immediate team, to help guide me in my career at Deloitte. Combining this with the formal training I have received since joining Deloitte, I think that the graduate programme is setting me up for professional success.

Id recommend the graduate programme at Deloitte to anyone. Coming from an engineering background, I was initially hesitant that I would feel out of depth in a consulting role or that I wouldnt find a role that suited me.

After joining the graduate programme, the variety of backgrounds were clear from history to medical degrees, our graduate intake was definitely interesting! Which made sense to me as soon as I started and saw that no two roles in Deloitte are the same.

This is great for somebody like me who still isnt sure what they want to do. Thankfully, Deloitte are keen to let you explore and upskill according to your interests.

In terms of social life, coming out of lockdown and starting in Deloittes graduate programme was a complete shock to the system. From karaoke to escape rooms and many Thursday night outs, Ive definitely made friends for life.

I feel so lucky to have had the opportunity to meet so many lovely people and for all the memories weve made over the last year.

10 things you need to know direct to your inbox every weekday. Sign up for theDaily Brief, Silicon Republics digest of essential sci-tech news.

See more here:
Meet the bioengineering graduate now working as a tech consultant - SiliconRepublic.com

Have you ever considered starting your own agricultural business? Do you have land and want to finally do something with it to start making money? Do you need a well-thought-out business plan to help you make that dream a reality?

If you answered yes to any of these questions, North Carolina Cooperative Extension, Robeson County Center, has something for you called NC Farm School (NCFS).

Agricultural business is a complex industry requiring many skills in order to become successful. According to learn.org, As farmers learn to compete and remain viable in a global marketplace, they draw upon business principles and a complex network of agriculture and business professionals. This includes taking advantage of new advances in farming, such as bioengineering, mechanization, and new breeding practices, deciding how to sell crops, whether locally or on a commodities exchange, and managing and insuring land in the most profitable manner.

N.C. Cooperative Extension, Robeson County Center, is pleased to offer a structured training opportunity to help individuals create a road map for success for new and beginning farmers by delivering an introductory-level program that will provide basic business principles used in any agricultural enterprise, whether it be crops, livestock, or some other specialty.

Extension will be working with a larger cluster of southeastern counties to offer an NC Farm School program beginning in February and ending in May of 2023. Classroom sessions will be held from 6 to 9 p.m. on Feb. 6, Feb. 20, March 6, March 20, April 3, April 17, May 1, and May 15 at Cooperative Extension, Bladen County Center, 450 Smith Circle, Elizabethtown, NC 28337.

Snacks, drinks, course material, and online resources will be provided.

Four field days will be offered on March 15, April 12, May 10, and May 31, which will run from 8:30 a.m. to 3 p.m. Field day attendance is not required as a part of the graduation requirement, but attendance will be in person only.

Registration is now live for both in-person and online (virtual) opportunities. The cost is $399 per person or $599 per pair.

Our program is subsidized thanks to sponsors and state funding made available to help start and support farms in NC.

Students who apply must declare their method of attendance as a part of their application. We encourage in-person attendance to get the most from NCFS, but we respect preferences and schedule requirements for all students. Applications are reviewed and accepted monthly from September-January or until all program spots are full. The maximum class size is 30 participants to ensure we have the capacity to serve each student well. We expect students to attend 6 of the 8 sessions and complete a minimum business plan required to receive a graduation certificate.

We will use internet technology and we have a student-based website as well as an online/interactive business planning tool. This program also includes an on-farm consultation visit of each participants farm with NCFS staff to help make your dreams become a reality. More information about this exciting opportunity can be found at https://ncfarmschool.ces.ncsu.edu/2023-nc-farm-school/.

Mac Malloy is the County Extension director and Field Crop agent with North Carolina Cooperative Extension, Robeson County Center. Contact him calling 910-671-3276, by email at [emailprotected], or by visiting the Robeson County Center website at http://robeson.ces.ncsu.edu/.

More here:
NC Farm School: Is it for You? - The Robesonian

The NationalBioengineeredFood Disclosure Standard(NBFDS) which narrowlydefines bioengineered foods as those that contain detectable genetic material that has been modified through certain lab techniques and cannot be created through conventional breeding or found in nature kind of shot in the middle and missed every constituency,"observes Nate Ensrud, VP, US technical services, certification, and food safety solutionsatFoodChain ID, which helps firms to comply with the standard.

For some stakeholders in the natural foods industry, he says,it missed the mark,both in scope (the definition fails to capture thousands of products that have been produced with genetic engineering) and application (many objected to bioengineered vs GMO as the chosen terminology and the option to use digital disclosures on food labels).

For other stakeholders who believeslapping a blanket statement about bioengineering (which has thousands of different applications) on a jar of pasta sauce is about as useful as saying 'science was used to make this product," the NBFDS in its current form is just acostlybureaucratic headachewithout any obvious consumer benefit.

A major sticking point is the definitionof bioengineered, which excludes meat and dairy from animals fed GM feed, incidental additives, and highly refined oils and sweeteners made from GM crops such as soybean oil and high fructose corn syrup if they contain no detectable modified DNA.

Gene-edited foods, in turn, occupy something of a grey area. They may not contain detectable genetic material that has been modified through traditional rDNA techniques, but how easy is it for a third party to determine if gene-edited material meets the definition ofcannot be created through conventional breeding or found in nature?

Back in the day, says Ensrud, We were mostly talking about a series of crops that very obviously had genes inserted to express different traits.

"But since then, theres been a substantial proliferation of gene-edited products, products made using synthetic biology and so on, and while the [alternative meat, egg, and dairy]movement used to be pretty aligned, this is not the case anymore [as anyone following the social media debate about whether 'biotech' companies should be allowed to exhibit at Natural Products Expo West can see].

For example, under the NBFDS, firms deployingsynthetic biologyto re-tool the DNA of microbes to produce everything from flavors, sweeteners, and colors to animal-free collagen, egg, or dairy proteins are not required to label their ingredients as 'bioengineered' if there is no detectable level of the genetically modified host micro-organism in the final product.

This means that milk, ice cream, or cream cheese containing Perfect Days animal-free whey protein, which is expressed by a genetically engineered strain of fungi in a fermentation tank; or beverages containing Cargills EverSweet Reb M sweetener, made by GM bakers yeast, will not trigger a bioengineered label, if no GM material is detectable in the final ingredient.

However, burgers containing Motif FoodWorks 'meaty' animal-free heme protein myoglobin which is also made in a fermentation tank using a pichia pastoris yeast strain probably will trigger a bioengineered disclosure under the NBFDS, as trace amounts of the host microbe may be in the final product, says the company.

But even for exactly the same ingredient - myoglobin - no two companies producing this via fermentation are necessarily subject to the same labeling requirements when it comes to bioengineered food, saysBelgian startup Paleo, which has engineered a strain of pichia pastoristo express myoglobin in an extra-cellular fashion (it's secreted outside the cell).

This means its easier to separate myoglobin from the yeast cells during downstream processing and purification, such that Paleo'smyoglobin would not trigger bioengineered labeling in the US and would not be subject to EU GMO regulations, argues co-founder Hermes Sanctorum.

"Weve tested our heme proteins through PCR and there is no recombinant DNA whatsoever in our products.

The difficulty for companies trying to navigate this minefield is that the NBFDS doesn't really talk much about microbes"or much less explain how you label them with the exception of something like certain probiotics where genetically engineered bacteria might be the end product itself [rather than a production platform for something else], notes Ensrud.

To further complicate matters, he says:Then theres a really vague section of the of NBFDS that says if a company has actual knowledge its using something bioengineered, even if a food is not on the BE list, it is supposed to make a disclosure, which feels like a throwaway line, but how do you determine that?

He adds:We don't know a lot about how this will be enforced because the USDA has been clear that they're not going to be proactively enforcing this, but will be reliant on complaints. And so far, we havent seen very many well-structured complaints that can help us say, these are the areas that companies are going to challenge, and I don't know that it's going to be one of the first areas people think about because microbes are not included in the list of bioengineered foods.

(FoodNavigator-USA has asked USDA how manywritten complaints have been filed with the AMS Administrator alleging violations of the NBFDS and will update this article when we hear back.)

The detectability factor makes practical sense, argue many stakeholders: if there's noGMOactually in the food, why should you have to label it?

But for organizations such as the Non-GMO Project that take issue withgenetic engineering in the food supply chain per se, whether there's actually any 'modified genetic material' left in soybean oil or a natural flavor is hardly the point, notes Ensrud.

Their goal is to establish a GMO-free supply chain, and so the gap between their definition of what should be labeled GMO and the NBFDS is an ocean wide.

Having said that, the Non-GMO Project has arguably gained traction as a result of all this confusion, given that foods without bioengineered labels are not necessarily Non-GMO given the narrow scope of the federal law, prompting shoppers that care about avoiding genetic engineering to seek outthe butterfly logo while shopping if they want to be sure.

So what about disclosure options, which like everything else in theNBFDS, have generated a lot of controversy? The standardpermits multiple options:

Aspects of the digital disclosure options have just been successfully challenged in a lawsuitbrought by the Center for Food Safety and others, with a court sending USDA back to the drawing board to make revisions consistent with Congressional requirements around consumer access.

So what does this mean for companies currently using the QR code or text message option? According to Ensrud, We did see some companies choose to use the QR code, but not a large majority by any means. The ones that were choosing QR codes told us they liked the flexibility, as perhaps they were still trying to remove some bioengineered foods from their supply chain and would move from having to disclose to not having to disclose, which would require a change in labels, which can be costly and laborious.

The opposite is also possible. If a company has to make an emergency shift from a non-GMO source to a GMO source for an ingredient [not that unusual given current supply chain volatility], it would likely change the labeling requirements. For companies that have less settled supply chains, this change in requirements could make things more difficult.

Sam Jockel, a senior associate at law firm Alston & Bird, noted that There is still an opportunity for either USDA or the plaintiffs in this case to appeal theruling, which I am watching for.

According to George Kimbrell, legal director at the Center for Food Safety, which filed the lawsuit challenging many aspects of the NBFDS, The Court did not set a deadline, but under law agencies cannot unduly delay such action and must complete it in a reasonable time.

Should the order ultimately stand, said Jockel,it appears that USDA would have discretion in terms of timing as the court did not set any deadlines for USDA to conduct its post-remand proceedings.

For those who think this means that the QR code will go away, added Jockel, The statute passed by Congress requires an electronic/digital link disclosure as one of the options along with the text and symbol, so the QR code option is not going away.

The Consumer Brands Association said it is still reviewing the court order, but added:"We plan to stay engaged during the forthcoming rulemaking and legal process, especially considering the potential impact on the companies using QR codes or texts. Consumer Brands will also continue supporting the valuable role digital disclosures play in boosting consumer transparency through programs like SmartLabel.

Jockel also noted that the scope of the products that require mandatory disclosure is actually subject to change.

Companies will want to watch for any updates to thelist of BE Foodsas AMS is required to review and consider updates on an annual basis. As the judges order put it in reference to the agencys regular updates to the List of BE Foods, AMS did not ignore the likelihood of progress. As evidence of that, the agency is currently proposing to expand the list to include insect-resistant sugarcane.

Greg Jaffe, biotechnology project director at the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), told us that an informal surveyconducted in his local Giant grocery store earlier in the year found that almost no companies use the symbol on the package with most seeming to opt for the bioengineered food or contains a bioengineered food ingredient option, although several brands had adopted QR codes.

My informal survey also found many foods disclose even though they probably only have highly refined ingredients, so companies are clearly erring on the side of giving more information to the consumer than might be required.

So has the law helped consumers make informed choices? Or are blanket references to bioengineered foods just wallpaper to busy shoppers?

I think that the law has provided consumers who want to know this information, more information than they would receive without the law, said Jaffe, who described it as a step in the right direction in terms of transparency, in part because companies were not providing this information voluntarily anywhere for the consumer who wanted it.

He added:I dont think many consumers look for this information or make purchasing choices based on it. With that said, for many consumers, knowing that there is transparency and information is available is important (i.e. knowing that information that some people might want is not hidden or inaccessible).

Asked about the growing number of ingredients produced by genetically engineered microbes, he said:Many ingredients made with engineered organisms also will not require disclosure, but I think it is important that those companies are transparent and provide information to consumers about the origin of the ingredients in their products, whether or not it has to be disclosed as bioengineered.

Being transparent with consumers will build trust, educate consumers about the use of biotechnology in foods, and allow for consumer choice.

Further reading:

See more here:
SPECIAL REPORT: Bioengineered food labeling: 'They kind of shot in the middle and missed every constituency' - FoodNavigator-USA.com

African American, Latino/a American, and Native American scholars and artists from across the U.S. are coming to Rochester Institute of Technology this week to learn how to successfully navigate their career search process while getting a behind-the-scenes glimpse into life as an RIT faculty member. RITs Future Faculty Career Exploration Program (FFCEP) will welcome its 19th cohort from Sept. 21 to 24, inviting 14 scholars from universities varying from Stanford University to Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University.

The program focuses on recruiting prospective candidates nearing the completion of the highest academic degree in their field, as well as junior faculty and those on post-doctoral assignments. Participants get an opportunity to engage with RITs diverse administration, faculty, and students while on campus. The program offers additional opportunities to enhance interview skills, practice job-talk presentations, and explore the research, teaching, and service expectations of RIT faculty members.

To date, the program has welcomed nearly 400 participants since its inception in 2003, and RIT has hired dozens of program participants to faculty positions. Most recently, Dennis Delgado joined RIT as a visiting lecturer in the School of Photographic Arts and Sciences after participating in the virtual FFCEP event last year.

This program represents a longstanding commitment to inclusive excellence here at RIT that is dedicated to recruiting the best talent in America, said Donathan Brown, assistant provost and assistant vice president for faculty diversity and recruitment. These scholars were chosen through an exhaustive and rigorous nationwide search and represent the best minds in higher education, as represented by their research, art, expertise, and skillsets. We look forward to learning about their work and career aspirations.

Each participant will present their research to the campus and all interested RIT community members are invited to attend. The schedule is posted to the Office of Faculty Diversity and Recruitment website.

This years participants include:

To learn more about FFCEP, go to the Office of Faculty Diversity and Recruitment website.

More:
RIT program to help underrepresented prospective faculty kick-start career searches returns in-person | RIT - Rochester Institute of Technology