Talking Synthetic Biology — Launch of Synthetic Biology Dialogue Report
Venter does it again — Landmark paper published by the J. Craig Venter Institute
Redesigning ribosomes — Nature paper by the Chin lab
Baojun Wang feels that this year's conference reflects the fact that synthetic biology is now being put to work
Looking at the meeting agenda, I found there is a great difference between SB4.0 and SB3.0, which I attended last year in Zurich. A lot of practical applications using synthetic biology (including in industrial biotechnologies, medicine, energy and environment, etc.) filled this year’s meeting programme, while at SB3.0 there was a more focus on proof-of-principle examples and foundational technologies in this field.
This may also inform the trend of synthetic biology in the coming years, on the pathway from principles to practical applications. The parallel sessions and topics highlight the fast growing and expansion of this emerging field, and its attraction to researchers in other fields, which is also reflected by the diverse range of attendees, from academia to industry, investment and technology companies, funding agencies and even government officials.
There were several talks on using engineered organisms to produce biofuels, cellulose, biomaterials or biodrugs like PHA (polyhydroxyalkanoates) and vitamin B12, to cure diseases such as HIV and SARS. But the new applications that interested me particularly were presented in the session on agriculture and plant genetic engineering. This session introduced how synthetic biology could help to improve agricultural productivity, for example through rice engineering (by Prof. Sai-Ming Sun from the Chinese University of Hong Kong) and plant fruit pattern shaping (by Prof. Haseloff from Cambridge). Particularly, the talk by Prof. June Medford from Colorado State University explained how to use engineered plants as chemical sentinels. They have developed a new two-component signalling pathway that enables engineered plants to detect radiation or toxic chemicals in the air and signal this through changing the colour of their leaves. This led me to think about how we might use engineered plants to help absorb pollutants in the air and solve the problem of climate change in the future. But definitely, there is enormous potential for synthetic biology to be applied to agriculture and plant engineering.
As expected, there were also talks on foundational technologies. For example, the synthetic constructions session on the first day featured the construction of the first whole synthetic genome at the Craig Venter Institute. The parallel sessions also focused on topics including gene regulation and measurement technologies like modular control devices based on RNA logic, microfluidics and biomicrosystems to facilitate precise measurement and control, and the role of mathematical modelling. There were two dedicated community-organized sessions on standardization of parts (descriptions and measurement) to discuss the state-of-the-art and possible next steps in this respect. The well-characterized Part BBa_F2620 in the Registry is the one most mentioned. Without surprise, there were also parallel community-organized sessions on the social, ethical, commercial and legal issues brought by synthetic biology.
Finally, I would like to share another talk and poster that I found interesting at this conference. Caroline Ajo-Franklin’s talk on interfacing bacteria and electrodes for nanotechnology applications introduced how to use a sophisticated electron-transfer pathway in one specific bacterium to interface between the living world and the non-living technological world. Her research could lead to a real bioelectronic sensor combining the specificity and sensitivity of living cells with the convenience and reliability of electron-flow based inorganic materials. The poster presentation by Cheemeng Tan from Duke University, who I met and spoke with a lot during this conference, introduced the impact of underlying cell physiology on synthetic gene circuits. The unexplained bistability caused by a simple non-cooperative positive-feedback circuit actually can be explained by cell growth rate modulation through the interaction between the circuit and cell physiology. This example tells us that we cannot ignore or underscore the unintended interactions between synthetic circuits and underlying cell physiology, and their impact on circuit function.
Lastly, I would like to show my great appreciation for the SynBioStandards Network for generously sponsoring me to attend this fantastic conference.
