1
|
Rothschild LJ, Averesch NJH, Strychalski EA, Moser F, Glass JI, Cruz Perez R, Yekinni IO, Rothschild-Mancinelli B, Roberts Kingman GA, Wu F, Waeterschoot J, Ioannou IA, Jewett MC, Liu AP, Noireaux V, Sorenson C, Adamala KP. Building Synthetic Cells─From the Technology Infrastructure to Cellular Entities. ACS Synth Biol 2024; 13:974-997. [PMID: 38530077 PMCID: PMC11037263 DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.3c00724] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/01/2023] [Revised: 02/01/2024] [Accepted: 02/06/2024] [Indexed: 03/27/2024]
Abstract
The de novo construction of a living organism is a compelling vision. Despite the astonishing technologies developed to modify living cells, building a functioning cell "from scratch" has yet to be accomplished. The pursuit of this goal alone has─and will─yield scientific insights affecting fields as diverse as cell biology, biotechnology, medicine, and astrobiology. Multiple approaches have aimed to create biochemical systems manifesting common characteristics of life, such as compartmentalization, metabolism, and replication and the derived features, evolution, responsiveness to stimuli, and directed movement. Significant achievements in synthesizing each of these criteria have been made, individually and in limited combinations. Here, we review these efforts, distinguish different approaches, and highlight bottlenecks in the current research. We look ahead at what work remains to be accomplished and propose a "roadmap" with key milestones to achieve the vision of building cells from molecular parts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lynn J. Rothschild
- Space Science
& Astrobiology Division, NASA Ames Research
Center, Moffett
Field, California 94035-1000, United States
- Department
of Molecular Biology, Cell Biology and Biochemistry, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island 02912, United States
| | - Nils J. H. Averesch
- Department
of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United States
| | | | - Felix Moser
- Synlife, One Kendall Square, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139-1661, United States
| | - John I. Glass
- J.
Craig
Venter Institute, La Jolla, California 92037, United States
| | - Rolando Cruz Perez
- Department
of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United States
- Blue
Marble
Space Institute of Science at NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California 94035-1000, United
States
| | - Ibrahim O. Yekinni
- Department
of Biomedical Engineering, University of
Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, United States
| | - Brooke Rothschild-Mancinelli
- School
of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Georgia Institute
of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0150, United States
| | | | - Feilun Wu
- J. Craig
Venter Institute, Rockville, Maryland 20850, United States
| | - Jorik Waeterschoot
- Mechatronics,
Biostatistics and Sensors (MeBioS), KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven Belgium
| | - Ion A. Ioannou
- Department
of Chemistry, MSRH, Imperial College London, London W12 0BZ, U.K.
| | - Michael C. Jewett
- Department
of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United States
| | - Allen P. Liu
- Mechanical
Engineering & Biomedical Engineering, Cellular and Molecular Biology,
Biophysics, Applied Physics, University
of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United States
| | - Vincent Noireaux
- Physics
and Nanotechnology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, United States
| | - Carlise Sorenson
- Department
of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, United States
| | - Katarzyna P. Adamala
- Department
of Genetics, Cell Biology, and Development, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, United States
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Fernau S, Braun M, Dabrock P. What is (synthetic) life? basic concepts of life in synthetic biology. PLoS One 2020; 15:e0235808. [PMID: 32722674 PMCID: PMC7386558 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0235808] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/05/2019] [Accepted: 06/22/2020] [Indexed: 11/18/2022] Open
Abstract
One of the central aims of synthetic biology (SB) is to better understand the mechanisms of life by trying to develop and synthesize new forms and perhaps modes of life. While the question of what is life has occupied mankind for centuries, there is a lack of empirical research examining the basic concepts of life scientists within SB themselves refer to and build on. In order to gain insights into these fundamental concepts, we conducted a qualitative interview study with scientists working in the field of SB. The aim was to gain a better understanding of the underlying understandings, principles, and characteristics of (synthetic) life on the one hand, and the entangled consequences for the conducted experiments and studies as well as the pursued scientific approaches. We identified four primarily underlying basic concepts of life which serve as a fundamental framework for current and further scientific research within SB and have implications for research questions, approaches and aims as well as for the evaluation of scientific results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra Fernau
- Chair of Systematic Theology II (Ethics), Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Matthias Braun
- Chair of Systematic Theology II (Ethics), Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Peter Dabrock
- Chair of Systematic Theology II (Ethics), Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Braun M, Fernau S, Dabrock P. (Re-)Designing Nature? An Overview and Outlook on the Ethical and Societal Challenges in Synthetic Biology. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2020; 3:e1800326. [PMID: 32648715 DOI: 10.1002/adbi.201800326] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/10/2018] [Revised: 03/12/2019] [Indexed: 12/21/2022]
Abstract
This structured literature analysis aims to map the current, emerging, and predicted future of synthetic biology (SB) by putting the focus on the implied conceptual, societal, and ethical challenges. The central objective of the analysis is to provide an initial systematization of the ethical and socio-scientific debate on SB by structuring and categorizing widely discussed issues within the debate in recent years. Starting with the quest for possible definitions, issues of biosafety and biosecurity are emphasized. Furthermore, the focus is on the more conceptual challenges of SB, including the relationship between natural and synthetic, or concepts of life and living. From the very beginning, one specific characteristic of SB has been a strong entanglement with different forms of public participation. In some respects SB has already taken a leading position in claiming and orchestrating itself as an integrative and participatory discipline. After addressing SB as an emerging biotechnology at the interface between science and society, a venture is initiated to focus on the possible regulatory and governmental challenges which are entangled in SB.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Matthias Braun
- Chair of Systematic Theology II (Ethics), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Kochstraße 6, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Sandra Fernau
- Chair of Systematic Theology II (Ethics), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Kochstraße 6, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Peter Dabrock
- Chair of Systematic Theology II (Ethics), Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Kochstraße 6, 91054, Erlangen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Abstract
Compartmentalisation is recognised to be a primary step for the assembly of non-living matter towards the construction of life-like microensembles. To date, a host of hollow microcompartments with various functionalities have been widely developed. Within this respect, given that dynamic behaviour is one of the fundamental features to distinguish living ensembles from those that are non-living, the design and construction of microcompartments with various dynamic behaviours are attracting considerable interest from a wide range of research communities. Significantly, the created dynamic microcompartments could also be widely used as chassis for further bottom-up design towards building protocell models by integrating and booting up necessary biological information. Herein, strategies to install the various motility behaviours into microcompartments, including haptotaxis, chemotaxis and gravitaxis, are summarized in the anticipation of inspiring more designs towards creating various advanced active microcompartments, and contributing new techniques to the ultimate goal of constructing a basic living unit entirely from non-living components.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Youping Lin
- MIIT Key Laboratory of Critical Materials Technology, for New Energy Conversion and Storage, School of Chemistry & Chemical Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology (HIT), Harbin, 150001, P.R. China
| | - Lei Wang
- MIIT Key Laboratory of Critical Materials Technology, for New Energy Conversion and Storage, School of Chemistry & Chemical Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology (HIT), Harbin, 150001, P.R. China
| | - Xin Huang
- MIIT Key Laboratory of Critical Materials Technology, for New Energy Conversion and Storage, School of Chemistry & Chemical Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology (HIT), Harbin, 150001, P.R. China
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Gómez-Tatay L, Hernández-Andreu JM, Aznar J. The Conception of Synthetic Entities from a Personalist Perspective. SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING ETHICS 2019; 25:97-111. [PMID: 29076055 DOI: 10.1007/s11948-017-9994-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/12/2017] [Accepted: 10/19/2017] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
Synthetic biology opens up the possibility of producing new entities not found in nature, whose classification as organisms or machines has been debated. In this paper we are focusing on the delimitation of the moral value of synthetic products, in order to establish the ethically right way to behave towards them. In order to do so, we use personalism as our ethical framework. First, we examine how we can distinguish between organisms and machines. Next, we discuss whether the products of synthetic biology can be considered organisms at all and assess what their moral value is and how should we behave towards them. Finally, we discuss the hypothetical case of synthetic humans.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lucía Gómez-Tatay
- Institute of Life Sciences, Universidad Católica de Valencia San Vicente Mártir, 46001, Valencia, Spain
- Grupo de Medicina Molecular y Mitocondrial, Departamento de Ciencias Médicas Básicas, Facultad de Medicina y Odontología, Universidad Católica de Valencia San Vicente Mártir, 46001, Valencia, Spain
- Escuela de Doctorado, Universidad Católica de Valencia San Vicente Mártir, 46001, Valencia, Spain
| | - José Miguel Hernández-Andreu
- Institute of Life Sciences, Universidad Católica de Valencia San Vicente Mártir, 46001, Valencia, Spain
- Grupo de Medicina Molecular y Mitocondrial, Departamento de Ciencias Médicas Básicas, Facultad de Medicina y Odontología, Universidad Católica de Valencia San Vicente Mártir, 46001, Valencia, Spain
| | - Justo Aznar
- Institute of Life Sciences, Universidad Católica de Valencia San Vicente Mártir, 46001, Valencia, Spain.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
The living organism: Strengthening the basis. Biosystems 2017; 158:10-16. [DOI: 10.1016/j.biosystems.2017.04.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/25/2017] [Revised: 04/25/2017] [Accepted: 04/27/2017] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
|
7
|
Societal impact of synthetic biology: responsible research and innovation (RRI). Essays Biochem 2017; 60:371-379. [PMID: 27903824 DOI: 10.1042/ebc20160039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2016] [Revised: 10/05/2016] [Accepted: 10/19/2016] [Indexed: 01/18/2023]
Abstract
Synthetic biology is an emerging field at the interface between biology and engineering, which has generated many expectations for beneficial biomedical and biotechnological applications. At the same time, however, it has also raised concerns about risks or the aim of producing new forms of living organisms. Researchers from different disciplines as well as policymakers and the general public have expressed the need for a form of technology assessment that not only deals with technical aspects, but also includes societal and ethical issues. A recent and very influential model of technology assessment that tries to implement these aims is known as RRI (Responsible Research and Innovation). In this paper, we introduce this model and its historical precursor strategies. Based on the societal and ethical issues which are presented in the current literature, we discuss challenges and opportunities of applying the RRI model for the assessment of synthetic biology.
Collapse
|
8
|
Ancillotti M, Holmberg N, Lindfelt M, Eriksson S. Uncritical and unbalanced coverage of synthetic biology in the Nordic press. PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF SCIENCE (BRISTOL, ENGLAND) 2017; 26:235-250. [PMID: 26481730 DOI: 10.1177/0963662515609834] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
Abstract
Synthetic biology will probably have a high impact on a variety of fields, such as healthcare, environment, biofuels, agriculture, and so on. A driving theme in European research policy is the importance of maintaining public legitimacy and support. Media can influence public attitudes and are therefore an important object of study. Through qualitative content analysis, this study investigates the press coverage of synthetic biology in the major Nordic countries between 2009 and 2014. The press coverage was found to be event-driven and there were striking similarities between countries when it comes to framing, language use, and treated themes. Reporters showed a marked dependence on their sources, mainly scientists and stakeholders, who thus drives the media agenda. The media portrayal was very positive, with an optimistic look at future benefits and very little discussion of possible risks.
Collapse
|
9
|
Porcar M, Peretó J. Nature versus design: synthetic biology or how to build a biological non-machine. Integr Biol (Camb) 2016; 8:451-5. [DOI: 10.1039/c5ib00239g] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/01/2023]
Abstract
We suggest that progress in synthetic biology will be achieved by abandoning the bio-machine paradigm and by using an alliance between engineering and evolution as a guiding tool.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M. Porcar
- Cavanilles Institute for Biodiversity and Evolutionary Biology
- University of Valencia
- Spain
- Institute for Integrative Systems Biology (I2SysBio)
- University of Valencia-CSIC
| | - J. Peretó
- Cavanilles Institute for Biodiversity and Evolutionary Biology
- University of Valencia
- Spain
- Institute for Integrative Systems Biology (I2SysBio)
- University of Valencia-CSIC
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Kerbe W. What is Life-in Everyday Understanding? A Focus Group Study on Lay Perspectives on the Term Life. ARTIFICIAL LIFE 2015; 22:119-133. [PMID: 26649809 DOI: 10.1162/artl_a_00181] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
Abstract
The philosophical and scientific debate about definitions of life-as-we-know-it and its value is very diverse. How do non-biologists characterize these issues? We held focus groups to shed light on the role of the term life in laypeople's understanding. Results show that features of early childhood cognition dominate the understanding of the term life even in adulthood. Textbook knowledge and definitions derived from specific knowledge systems and beliefs are of minor importance. For an ethical differentiation between life forms the ability to feel and to suffer is seen as the crucial criterion. We conclude that lay perspectives on the concept of life can shape a normative discourse on existing as well as on new life forms in a crucial way. In addition, these perspectives may also strongly influence the expectations towards the life-as-it-could-be that is brought forward by the artificial life community. While some concepts like metabolism exist both in scientific and in everyday reasoning as criteria for life, the normative discussion on life is dominated by such ideas as a hierarchical order of living kinds, which emphasize "easy to think" concepts of a moral differentiation. These can also form a basis for the moral standing of artificial life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wolfgang Kerbe
- Johannes Kepler University, Linz and Biofaction KG, Vienna
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Kueffer C, Larson BMH. Responsible Use of Language in Scientific Writing and Science Communication. Bioscience 2014. [DOI: 10.1093/biosci/biu084] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
|
12
|
Boudry M, Pigliucci M. The mismeasure of machine: Synthetic biology and the trouble with engineering metaphors. STUDIES IN HISTORY AND PHILOSOPHY OF BIOLOGICAL AND BIOMEDICAL SCIENCES 2013; 44:660-668. [PMID: 23790452 DOI: 10.1016/j.shpsc.2013.05.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/02/2023]
Abstract
The scientific study of living organisms is permeated by machine and design metaphors. Genes are thought of as the "blueprint" of an organism, organisms are "reverse engineered" to discover their functionality, and living cells are compared to biochemical factories, complete with assembly lines, transport systems, messenger circuits, etc. Although the notion of design is indispensable to think about adaptations, and engineering analogies have considerable heuristic value (e.g., optimality assumptions), we argue they are limited in several important respects. In particular, the analogy with human-made machines falters when we move down to the level of molecular biology and genetics. Living organisms are far more messy and less transparent than human-made machines. Notoriously, evolution is an opportunistic tinkerer, blindly stumbling on "designs" that no sensible engineer would come up with. Despite impressive technological innovation, the prospect of artificially designing new life forms from scratch has proven more difficult than the superficial analogy with "programming" the right "software" would suggest. The idea of applying straightforward engineering approaches to living systems and their genomes-isolating functional components, designing new parts from scratch, recombining and assembling them into novel life forms-pushes the analogy with human artifacts beyond its limits. In the absence of a one-to-one correspondence between genotype and phenotype, there is no straightforward way to implement novel biological functions and design new life forms. Both the developmental complexity of gene expression and the multifarious interactions of genes and environments are serious obstacles for "engineering" a particular phenotype. The problem of reverse-engineering a desired phenotype to its genetic "instructions" is probably intractable for any but the most simple phenotypes. Recent developments in the field of bio-engineering and synthetic biology reflect these limitations. Instead of genetically engineering a desired trait from scratch, as the machine/engineering metaphor promises, researchers are making greater strides by co-opting natural selection to "search" for a suitable genotype, or by borrowing and recombining genetic material from extant life forms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maarten Boudry
- Ghent University, Department of Philosophy and Moral Sciences, Belgium.
| | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Deplazes-Zemp A, Biller-Andorno N. Explaining life. Synthetic biology and non-scientific understandings of life. EMBO Rep 2012; 13:959-63. [PMID: 23059979 DOI: 10.1038/embor.2012.150] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Anna Deplazes-Zemp
- University of Zurich, Institute of Biomedical Ethics in Zurich, Switzerland.
| | | |
Collapse
|