The Sciences Behind CIRCLES

CIRCLES employed a two-pronged approach to support changes in food systems by assessing whether and how the microbiome could be exploited to future-proof food systems. Firstly, an evidence-based approach was implemented to utilise microbiome modulators; secondly, the project was carried out using an open science approach to ensure microbiome education for the wider society and the uptake of potential microbiome applications in the future. Scientists conducting both basic and applied research across public institutions and industrial labs worked together with science communicators to efficiently translate research results into microbiome procedures, tools, processes, and applications. Additionally, efforts were made to disseminate knowledge, educate, train, and engage people across food chains and the wider society.

The food chain research on plant and animal microbiomes within CIRCLES was conducted across five work packages (WP2–WP6). The outcomes of these WPs were used to assess the interaction between plant and animal microbiomes and the human microbiome, as well as antimicrobial resistance (WP8), and were considered for exploitation in WP9. Furthermore, CIRCLES researchers received bioinformatics support for the assessment of collected data (WP7), communication and dissemination support to enhance the recognition of microbiome applications (WP10), and general coordination and management support to ensure the smooth execution of the project (WP1).

  1. Objectives
  • The overall objective of the Coordination and Management WP was to ensure the smooth realization of the project, optimizing the organization and timing of activities and resources, in order to achieve project goals in full respect of EU rules
  • To coordinate, monitor and supervise project activities
  • To manage the generated knowledge to facilitate exploitation and dissemination
  • To ensure the overall legal, administrative and financial management of the project
  1. Methodology
  • The coordinator guided its activity following the indications set in the GA and CA
  • The coordination of project activities was conducted through the WP leaders, which were responsible for the proper implementation of their WP
  • The principles that led the project activities were the maximum sharing of information among the partners and the decision making through consensus
  • The coordinator facilitated as much as possible reporting activities through templates and uses guides
  1. Deliverables

D1.1 Report on the Knowledge and Innovation management activities: report on the complementarity of the Communication actions and the Exploitation strategies carried on in CIRCLES

  1. Quote

Difficulties mastered are opportunities won. – Winston Churchill

  1. Contact details

Partners: University of Bologna (IT), Norwegian Veterinary Institute (NO), Technical University of Denkmark (DK), European Food Information Council (BE), Gate2Growth (DK), National Institute of Agricultural Research France (FR), Eurovix (IT), University of Dundee (UK), MS Biotech (IT), Spanish National Research Council (ES), Technical Research Centre of Finland (FI), Italian National Research Council (IT), Wellmicro (IT), Hague Corporate Affairs (BE), Fciencias.ID – University of Lisbon (PT), Agricola Italiana Alimentare (IT), Bolton Alimentari (IT), The University of Stirling (UK), EmmeFood (IT), Italian National Research Council (IT), University of Luxembourg (LU), University of Genoa (IT), University of Thessaloniki (GR), SoilFood (FI), National Resources Institute Finland (FI), Centro Ricerche per la Chimica Fine (IT), Marine Institute (IE)

  1. Objectives

The objective of WP2 was to develop standard procedures (SOPs) for the activities foreseen in CIRCLES, and in particular, for those activities that needed to be harmonised among different WPs and/or performed consistently by different CIRCLES partners. For instance, WP2 developed procedures for facing Ethics Requirements for both animal and human studies, as well as for collection, storage and transport, and analysis of human, animal and environmental samples. Further, WP2 developed tools needed for activities performed in other WPs: a technological platform to perform automatized air microbiome sampling around animal farms, and auto-sampling and easy-to-use kits for collection of human and environmental samples. Finally, WP2 coordinated the evaluation of cost-impacts of CIRCLES products, as well as the assessment of the environmental impacts of food-chain products after microbiome-tailored interventions.

  1. Methodology

WP2 prepared tools, procedures, protocols, and documents that were needed to carry out many activities foreseen in other WPs. WP2 collected all the necessary information from CIRCLES partners, aiming at the valorisation of the scientific strength of each partner, in order to produce tools and procedures useful not only for CIRCLES but also for future developments.

  1. Deliverables

D2.1: Procedures for submission of study protocols to Governance and Ethics Committees (M3)

D2.2: SOPs for sampling, storage and transport of human, environmental and animal samples, and for microbiome analysis (M6)

D2.3: Report on platforms for air microbiome sampling and environmental parameter measuring (M12)

D2.4: Reports on cost impacts and environmental impacts of CIRCLES products (M58)

D2.5: Auto-sampling kits for collection of human and household samples, and draft of a microbiome analysis report for workers (M12)

D2.6: Auto-sampling kit and validated protocols for detection of SMFS biomarkers (M56)

  1. Quote

More information coming soon.

  1. Contact details

Marco Candela (CIRCLES coordinator, marco.candela@unibo.it), University of Bologna, Italy

Elena Biagi (elena.biagi@unibo.it), University of Bologna, Italy

Partners: Norwegian Veterinary Institute (NO), Institute of Marine Sciences – National Research Council (IT), Technical University of Denmark (DK), Gate2Growth (DK), Hague Corporate Affairs (BE), Technical Research Centre of Finland (FI), Wellmicro (IT), Natural Resources Institute Finland (FI)

  1. Objectives

The overarching objective of this working package was to elucidate the impact of the microbial communities naturally associated with plants, collectively referred to as the plant microbiome, on sustainable agriculture. Similar to the microbiome inhabiting the digestive tract of humans, the plant microbiome can improve the growth, development, and health of crops.

WP3 addressed the following specific questions:

  • Can we use microbiome information to design plant probiotics and prebiotics that can support the health and productivity of tomato and spinach?
  • How do these plant probiotics and prebiotics work in the field?
  1. Methodology

Similar to the other pillars of CIRCLES this working package followed a two-pronged methodological approach. An initial ‘observation phase’ involved researchers of the team interacting with crop growers to define the ‘lab-in-the-filed’ sites. The project capitalised on state-of-the-art DNA sequencing technologies to perform a ‘census’ of the microbiome associated to either healthy producing plants and less productive ones. Scientists referred to this approach ‘comparative metagenomics’. This was followed by an ‘Intervention phase’ whereby researchers mined the comparative metagenomics results with state-of-the-art bioinformatics tools to identify what was missing (or what is imbalanced) in the microbiome of a less productive plants. The project team then attempted to restore a healthy microbiome with a targeted application on farm of natural microbes and/or products capable of stimulating microbial activities, which are defined as Smart Microbiome Modulators (SMMs). The efficacy of SMMs was assessed by measuring crop performance, as well as the impact of these applications on the environment and people participating in the crop production process.

  1. Deliverables

D3.1: Report on microbiomes dynamics, circulations and association with performances across plant food chains, observation phase (M39)

D3.2: Report on microbiomes-tailored circular interventions on plant food chains and impact on performances (M58)

D3.3: Report on SMFPs from plant food chains (M58)

D3.4: Guidelines for validated interventions to optimize microbiome structure and circulation across plant food chains to improve productivity, quality, safety & sustainability (M58)

  1. Quote

One of the most pressing questions for this research area is how to rationally predict the outcome of plant-microbiome interactions under real conditions. If we don’t know how to achieve that, we won’t be able to exploit the microbiome for agricultural purposes. The consortium we developed has the expertise and resource to address this question and I look forward to validating, under real conditions, discoveries we made in the lab in the last few years. – Davide Bulgarelli, WP leader

  1. Contact

Dr Davide Bulgarelli (d.bulgarelli@dundee.ac.uk), University of Dundee at the James Hutton Institute, United Kingdom

Partners: Gate2Growth (DK), National Institute of Agricultural Research France (FR), Eurovix (IT), University of Dundee (UK), MS Biotech (IT), National Resources Institute Finland (FI), SoilFood (FI), Orogel (IT), EmmeFood (IT), Centro Ricerche per la Chimica Fine (IT)

  1. Objectives

The aim of WP4 was to improve productivity, quality, safety and sustainability of the poultry and swine food chains by modulating the microbial communities naturally associated to those ecosystems.

WP4 addressed the following specific questions:

  • What is the microbiome composition in commercial poultry and swine farms that differ in productivity, quality, safety and sustainability?
  • Can we design nutritional strategies and bio-promotors that enhance poultry and swine farms in such a way that they conform to qualities associated with future-proof food systems?
  • Can we optimise nutritional strategies and bio-promotors so that they can be exploited as new Smart Microbiome Food Products (SMFPs) with innovative Microbiome Transparent Labels (MTLs) for the poultry and swine food chains?
  1. Methodology

The methodology followed in WP4 reflected the WP structure, divided in an observational and an intervention phase. In the observational phase, current and well-categorised commercial animal production situations, selected based on different productivity, quality, safety and sustainability performance criteria, were intensively investigated using targeted and shotgun metagenomic sequencing. In particular, the composition, dynamic and circulation of their microbial communities were compared and modelled to understand which one supports good performances. Then, in the intervention phase, specific nutritional strategies, feed prebiotic and probiotic, production strategies, as well as litter microbial treatments, were assessed for their ability to:

(1) Enhance the specific combinations of beneficial microbes associated to high performance scores, identified in the observational phase;

(2) Support a circular beneficial action among the farmer, animal, farm, slaughterhouse and meat product microbial communities to reach that microbial setting promoting productivity, quality, safety and sustainability of the poultry and swine food chains.

The best strategies to improve beneficial microbes and their circulation were validated as Smart Microbiome Modulators (SMMs) and implemented into integrated and concrete microbiome applications, which were then exploited at commercial level to improve the poultry and swine food chain productivity, quality, safety and sustainability. The fit for purpose Smart Microbiome Modulators then  provided new Smart Microbiome Food Products (SMFPs) with innovative Microbiome Transparent Labels (MTLs) for the poultry and swine food chains.

  1. Deliverables

D4.1: Report on microbiomes dynamics, circulations and association with performances across the poultry & swine food chains, observational phase (M30)

D4.2: Report on microbiomes-tailored circular interventions on the poultry & swine food chains and impact on performances (M56)

D4.3: Report on SMFPs from the poultry & swine food chains (M56)

D4.4: Guidelines for validated interventions to optimize microbiome structure and circulation across poultry & swine food chains to improve productivity, quality, safety & sustainability (M56)

  1. Quote

For centuries scientists tried to improve animal productivity and food quality as well as safety through something from outside those ecosystems. CIRCLES would try to change course supporting the productivity, quality, safety and sustainability of poultry and swine food chains modulating anything good they already have, which are the beneficial microbes and their positive interactions. – Alessandra De Cesare, WP leader

  1. Contact details

Alessandra De Cesare (alessandra.decesare@unibo.it), University of Bologna, Italy

Partners: University of Bologna (IT), Gate2Growth (DK), French National Institute for Agriculture (FR), Eurovix (IT), DSM Nutritional Products Ltd (CH), Agricola Italiana Alimentare (IT), Centro Ricerche per la Chimica Fine Srl (IT), EmmeFOOD (IT)

  1. Objectives

WP5 aims was to understand and exploit microbiomes (communities of microorganisms) to improve quality, productivity, safety, socio-economic and environmental sustainability in aquaculture, with particular emphasis on Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and Gilt-head (sea) bream (Sparus aurata). These two species represent two biologically, environmentally, geographically and technically highly diverse model aquaculture food chains.

  1. Methodology

Intervention-free aquaculture systems served as reference points for characterization of the composition, mobility, succession and functional impact of microbiomes in aquaculture food chains. Biological samples of developmental stages of fish, from egg to final foods, were collected, including both internal (e.g. intestinal) and external (e.g. skin) tissues. DNA from tissue associated microbial communities were isolated from the samples and successively sequenced. Taxonomic composition (genus, family, order) were characterized using amplicon metagenomics, e.g. 16S rRNA gene sequence analysis. Functional composition (e.g. ability to degrade or synthesize specific metabolites, presence of virulence factors or resistance to antibiotics) were characterized using (shotgun) whole metagenome sequencing. Correlations, e.g. between particular microbiome elements and fish health or food quality parameters were assessed. Sequencing, data analyses, design and optimization of microbiome modulators will be done by WPs 7, 8 and 9. Microbiome modulators were applied to diets and living environment of the fishes, and the actual effects assessed statistically.

  1. Deliverables

D4.1: Report describing key aspects of the composition, mobility, succession and functional impact of microbiomes in salmon and sea bream aquaculture production systems (M30)

D4.2: Report describing the impact of implemented microbiome modulations on sustainability, food safety, quality and quantity (M54)

D4.3: Specific ‘smart microbiome food products’ with associated labels and information (M54)

D4.4: Spin-off results with potential applications for aquaculture, e.g. new tools to assess disease risk (M58)

  1. Contact details

Arne Holst-Jensen (arne.holst-jensen@vetinst.no), Norwegian Veterinary Institute, Norway

Partners: Gate2Growth (DK), Eurovix (IT), Spanish National Research Council (ES), Veronesi (IT), Bolton Alimentary SpA (IT), Italian National Research Council (IT), University of Thessaloniki (GR), Centro Ricerche per la Chimica Fine Srl (IT), EmmeFOOD (IT), Marine Institute (IE), University of Stirling (UK), Previwo AS (N), NordLaks Smolt AS (NO).

  1. Objectives

WP6 was focused on the evaluation of the microbiome structures in wild fishes and the marine environment in proximity of aquaculture sites. The main objective of WP6 was to evaluate the microbiome structure in wild fishes, and the health and safety of the marine ecosystem in proximity to aquaculture cages, also with the purpose to implement innovative blue-technology approaches to improve the environmental quality and sustainability of open-fish cage aquaculture practices. Specific objectives of this WP was to deal with i) the assessment of the microbiomes of wild fish models (Atlantic salmon and seabream); ii) the assessment of the interactions, in terms of microbiome exchanges, between fish production and marine microbiomes in natural environments, also in relation to WP5 integrated interventions; iii) the modulation of the marine microbiome and the implementation of SMMs to improve the environmental quality.

  1. Methodology

WP6 was structured in an observational and an intervention phase. During the first phase, microbiomes of wild fish models (Atlantic salmon and sea bream) were investigated and used as a reference basis to interpret microbiome data and assist in developing microbiomes-tailored circular actions in WP5. The health and safety of the marine ecosystem in proximity to aquaculture cages were evaluated through the assessment of mutual interactions and exchanges between fish farms and marine microbiomes, also in terms of pathobiomes, in both the observational and intervention phase of WP5. Further, in the WP6 intervention phase, innovative blue-technology approaches were implemented and validated with the specific aim to modulate the marine microbiome and improve the environmental quality and sustainability of open-fish cage aquaculture practices.

  1. Deliverables

D6.1: Report on microbiomes of wild fish models (seabream & Atlantic salmon) (M48)

D6.2: Report on marine environmental safety (pathobiome) and marine environmental health

(bio-indicators) in proximity of aquaculture cages (M32)

D6.3: Report on application and effects of microbiome modulation activities on marine

environment (M58)

D6.4: Report on new marine bacterial isolates to be used for bio-remediation activities (M58)

  1. Quote

Aquaculture in open-sea fish cages plays a key role for the future growth of aquaculture; still, central to the development of the industry is environmental sustainability. In CIRCLES we will focus on wild specimens of two of the most relevant species in world aquaculture, and used for the development of microbiomes-tailored “circular” actions. We will model the link between fish production in open-sea cages and marine environmental quality, and explore blue-technology approaches to mitigate the environmental impact while improving sustainability.

  1. Contact details

Gian Marco Luna (gianmarco.luna@cnr.it) and Grazia Marina Quero (grazia.quero@szn.it), Italian National Research Centre, Italy

Partners: Italian National Research Council (IT), University of Bologna (IT), University of Thessaloniki (GR), University of Genoa (IT), Norwegian Veterinary Institute (NO), Gate2Growth (DK), Eurovix (IT), Spanish National Research Council (ES), Marine Insitute (IE), The University of Stirling (UK)

  1. Objectives

WP7 aimed at designing and validating microbial communities – or microbiome-tailored actions to reduce antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and enhance safety and recycling potential of plants, poultry, pigs, aquaculture and marine fish productions.

WP7 addressed the following specific questions:

  • How does AMR spread and evolve across all actors of the CIRCLES food chains?
  • What characterizes the microbiomes of workers and environments such as wastewaters, sediments, soil and air linked to the CIRCLES food chains?
  • To what extent we can reduce and control AMR across food chains by microbiome-tailored integrated circular actions?
  • What is the effect of the CIRCLES microbiome-tailored circular actions on the microbial communities of food chain workers, their cohabitants and household surfaces?
  • Can the CIRCLES microbiome-tailored actions modulate environmental microbial communities in wastewaters and sediments to enhance safety and recycling potential across all food chains?
  1. Methodology

WP7 was a horizontal work package. It combined microbiome and metagenomics approaches to monitor AMR and pathogens occurrence, transmission, and evolution across each reservoir of CIRCLES food chains, including feed, animals, plants, soil, air, wastewater, food, and workers.

Food chain environmental metagenomes such as wastewaters, sediments and soil also were explored with the specific aim to improve recycling and safety measured as diminished release of environmental pollutants (e.g. heavy metals and greenhouse gases) and increase of azote and phosphor recycling among other key indicators.

In addition, metagenomes from food chain workers, cohabitants and household surfaces were explored with particular attention to metagenome markers of safety and health such as diminished AMR occurrence and increased disease resistance, among others.

WP7 generated microbiome and metagenomics data by combining next-generation sequencing (NGS) and culturomics approaches and using state-of-the-art bioinformatics tools. WP7 data analysis drew on the WP leaders’ and partners’ experience in developing and maintaining bioinformatics pipelines (www.genomicepidemiology.org) that were widely used globally.

  1. Deliverables

D7.1: Report on resistome dynamics and evolution across actors of CIRCLES food chains, observation phase (M39)

D7.2: Report on environmental metagenomes across CIRCLES food chains, observation phase (M39)

D7.3: Report on workers metagenome in CIRCLES food chains, observation phase (M39)

D7.4: Report on workers metagenome in CIRCLES food chains, intervention phase (M58)

D7.5: Report on impact of circular microbiomes-tailored interventions on resistome dynamics and evolution actors of CIRCLES food chains (M58)

D7.6: Guidelines for circular microbiomes-tailored interventions for AMR reduction (M58)

D7.7: Report on impact of circular microbiomes-tailored interventions in term of food chains environmental metagenomes amelioration (M58)

D7.8: Report on guidelines for circular microbiomes-tailored interventions to modulate environmental metagenomes for improved recycling & safety (M58)

  1. Quote

Discovering the microbiomes that foster food system sustainability in the animal, human and environmental systems to meet the aims of the One Health vision.  – Frank Møller Aarestrup, WP leader

  1. Contact details

Frank Møller Aarestrup (fmaa@food.dtu.dk), Technical University of Denmark, Denmark

Valeria Bortolaia (vabo@food.dtu.dk), Technical University of Denmark, Denmark

Partners: University of Bologna (IT), Norwegian Veterinary Institute (NO), Eurovix (IT), University of Dundee (UK), MS Biotech (IT), University of Thessaloniki (GR), Luxembourg Centre for Systems Biomedicine (LU), Wellmicro (IT)

  1. Objectives

CIRCLES partners produced massive amount of data: in each food chain, many microbiomes were sequenced and several parameters relevant for productivity, quality, safety and sustainability will be measured. Such a large volume of data required accurate and scalable analyses to become knowledge suited to be translated into actionable interventions.

The first objective of WP8 was to provide all partners with a user-friendly and efficient computational infrastructure for storing experimental information into consistent and secured databases, for sharing information among partners and with the scientific and social community and for performing analyses.

The second main objective was to devise and implement modelling procedures to mine from (big) data significant relationships among the microbial distribution across food chains and the indicators of productivity, quality, safety and sustainability.

The challenge was to derive from data the optimal microbiome composition in each food chain and to design innovative microbiome-based interventions to improve food systems.

  1. Methodology

Collected data are big and complex from different perspectives: the big number of samples, the high-dimensionality of variables collected for each sample and the complexity of the relationships among the different actors in each food chain. Careful design of databases was the first step to organize data in a fruitful way for enabling further analyses: the key point was to devise clear and unambiguous definitions of experimental variables and descriptions of links among them.

Efficient analysis pipelines were also crucial.

  • The volume of data requires fast computation: CIRCLES exploited the Computerome facility available at the Technical University of Denmark
  • Data complexity requires accurate computation: CIRCLES implemented the state-of-the-art procedures to characterize the composition of microbiomes at both qualitative and quantitative levels
  • The volume and complexity of data require innovative analysis paradigms: dimensionality reduction procedures were adopted to extract a limited number of microbiome species or communities that significantly correlate with the indicators of productivity, quality, safety and sustainability

Cutting-edge algorithms based on machine-learning approaches will be adopted to model the complex relationship between microbiomes and food chain parameters.

  1. Deliverables

D8.1: First version of Data Management Plan (M6)

D8.2: Computational pipelines for metagenomic data analysis and visualization (M12)

D8.3: Computational models of microbiome dynamics and optimal configuration across food chains in relation to relevant covariates (M40)

D8.4: List of species and genera candidate as relevant phylogenetic biomarkers (M40)

D8.5: Computational models of CIRCLES microbiome-tailored circular interventions (M58)

  1. Quote

Our challenge is to go from data to actionable knowledge through modelling.

  1. Contact details

Pier Luigi Martelli, (pierluigi.martelli@unibo.it), University of Bologna, Italy

Partners: University of Bologna (IT), Norwegian Veterinary Institute (NO), Technical University of Denmark (DK), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (FR), Fciencias.ID – University of Lisboa (PT)

  1. Objectives

WP9 focussed on the exploitation of project results for microbiome applications to be near market ready at the end of the project.

WP9 addressed the following specific questions:

  • Can we design and formulate Smart Microbiomes Modulators (SMMs) to be implemented into concrete microbiome applications to improve food chain performances in terms of productivity, quality, safety and sustainability?
  • How can we best exploit the project results?
  1. Methodology

The methodology followed in WP9 was to design and formulate SMMs that will be implemented into microbiomes-tailored circular actions (WPs 3-7). SMMs will hit different microbiomes across all food chain actors, from the plant/animal microbiome to the food microbiome, as well as food chain environmental microbiomes controlling soil, wastewaters and sediments.

Existing modulators for plants/soil, animal gut, wastewaters and sediments were implemented, based on the data collected during the observational phase (WPs 3-7), by studying the most suitable formulation and integration, along with application methods.

For each new microbiomes-tailored integrated circular action implemented by WPs 3-7, a dedicated exploitation strategy were carefully designed in complete synergy with the corresponding dissemination plan (WP10). WP 9 explored viable and sustainable business models, build a robust replication strategy to ensure high market uptake and maximize environmental and economic impact of CIRCLES project results.

  1. Deliverables

D9.1: Report on SMMs targeting plant microbiomes (M40)

D9.2: Report on SMMs targeting poultry microbiomes (M36)

D9.3: Report on SMMs targeting swine microbiomes (M36)

D9.4: Report on SMMs targeting aquaculture microbiomes (M54)

D9.5: Report on SMMs targeting wastewater, litter, sediments and marine water microbiomes (M40)

D9.6: Report on exploitation strategies of CIRCLES food chain-specific integrated intervention strategies, including SMMs and MTLs (M58)

D9.7: Report on critical sustainability questions in SMFS (M60)

  1. Quote

Exploitation of R& D or innovation results does not always require specific funding. Good and efficient dissemination of new knowledge is often a good way to secure value for society, and it can be an equally important responsibility for the innovators as the creation of new businesses. – Carmen Bianca Socaciu, WP leader

  1. Contact details

Carmen Bianca Socaciu (cs@gate2growth.com) and Rasmus Egvad (re@gate2growth.com), Gate2Growth, Denmark

Partners: University of Bologna (IT), Norwegian Veterinary Institute (NO), Gate2Growth (DK), French National Institute of Agricultural Research (FR), Eurovix (IT), University of Dundee (UK), MS Biotech (IT), DSM Nutritional Products Ltd (CH), Technical Research Centre of Finland (FI), Orogel (IT), University of Lisbon (PT), Agricola Italiana Alimentare (IT), National Research Centre Finland (FI), Bolton Alimentari (IT), SoilFood (FI), Italian National Research Council (IT), University of Thessaly (GR), University of Genoa (IT), University of Luxembourg (LU), Centro Ricerche per la Chimica Fine (IT), Hague Corporate Affairs (BE), EmmeFood (IT), Wellmicro (IT), Marine Institute (IE), The University of Stirling (UK), Previvo AS (NO), Nordlaks Smolt (NO)

  1. Objectives

The activities of WP10 were organised around three key objectives.

  • To raise awareness about the project and its activities and explain the benefits microbiomes may have for human, animal and plant health
  • Building on the first objective, we will strive to educate citizens and consumers about the importance of microbiomes for the realisation of healthier, resilient, as well as sustainable food systems
  • Beyond the laboratory doors, WP10, together with other WPs, aims to engage companies, farmers and decision-makers in microbiome science with a view to developing healthier food applications. In that perspective, CIRCLES will aim at engaging other H2020 projects focusing on microbiomes and nutrition
  1. Methodology

The methodology WP10 applied was designed so that the communication and dissemination activities underpinning it, feed off each other.

  • On the one hand, WP10 introduced the consortium partners to the communication strategy and communication tools with a view to helping partners to reaching out to their targeted audience. In that perspective, WP10 provided trainings to the partners on science communication.
  • On the other hand, WP10 communicated externally towards CIRCLES stakeholders. This was done through a wide array of channels comprising website blogs, social media, newsletters and press relations, for instance. Furthermore, in this process, WP10 strove to engage consumers and citizens in 5 European cities.

Throughout its communication activities, WP10 nurtured a constant interaction with its identified stakeholders. Based on the gather inputs (internally and externally) WP10 assessed the performance of the project’s communication activities and reviewed the strategy and the activities accordingly, in order to maximise CIRCLES’ outreach.

  1. Deliverables

D10.1: Dissemination and communication strategy (M4)

D10.2: Report on City Tours (M46)

D10.3: Report on Final Event (M58)

  1. Quote

Smaller things have sometimes an unimaginably big impact. A fascinating microscopic world lurks around and within us and awaits to be explored. Yet, our challenge is to better understand while tapping into its potential for future food applications and sustainable food systems. Beyond science, engaging consumers is a cornerstone of CIRCLES’ ambitions!

  1. Contact details

Lennart Padberg (Padberg@hague.company), Hague Corporate Affairs, Belgium

Giacomo Sini (giacomo.sini@eufic.org), EUFIC, Belgium

Partners: All