ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read
Building Synthetic Cells─From the Technology Infrastructure to Cellular Entities
My Activity
  • Open Access
Perspective

Building Synthetic Cells─From the Technology Infrastructure to Cellular Entities
Click to copy article linkArticle link copied!

Open PDF

ACS Synthetic Biology

Cite this: ACS Synth. Biol. 2024, 13, 4, 974–997
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.3c00724
Published March 26, 2024

Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under

CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 .

Abstract

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

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.

This publication is licensed under

CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 .
  • cc licence
  • by licence
  • nc licence
  • nd licence
Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society

Introduction: What Is a Cell and Why Build One?

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

What Is a Cell?

Cells are discrete, compartmentalized units of living systems that are distinct from their surrounding environment and other cells. As individuals, they can interact with each other, the environment, and act as distinct units of selection in evolution. While most living cells comprise lipid-bounded compartments, other biological entities, such as complex viruses, rely on protein capsules. Growing evidence suggests that compartmentalization via liquid–liquid phase separation (i.e., coacervate formation) may also be sufficient for compartmentalization. (1)
The flexibility of this definition of a cell begs the question, “What is life?” While this has been debated for decades, if not centuries, even a modern, more complete understanding of biological systems at the molecular level has not yielded a consensus definition. (2) This is for good reason. Earth’s organisms (the only ones known so far) demonstrate breathtaking diversity in their ecology, phenotypes, and biochemistry. Definitions of life have tended to search for commonality in life, and thus are repeatedly rewritten, following discoveries that disprove previously established rules. (3,4) Perhaps a generalized universal definition of life is even impossible: a “natural kind” in philosophy is a category that reflects the actual world and not just human interests or properties of a group. (5) For example, water is a natural kind, whereas chairs are not. Life is possibly not a natural kind, and thus there may never be a natural definition. (6)
To anchor our discussion, we use Gánti’s Chemoton model of life, (7) which uses three criteria: replication, metabolism, and compartmentalization. From these criteria emerge additional features, such as evolution, responsiveness to stimuli, and directed movement, which are strongly indicative but not strictly required for life. (8) Although the latter three emerge from the three main criteria, they are not strictly limited to “fully living” systems. For example, a replicating moving system need not necessarily show compartmentalization. The primary criteria are interdependent. For example, replication cannot occur without the compartmentalization of “self” genetic material from “non-self” genetic material. The merits of these three essential criteria have been discussed at length elsewhere. (9−11,6) Gray areas are immediately apparent. What about “replication” through mechanical processes? Metabolism for how long? Evolution is a derived characteristic of populations, not individuals, and not all cells have the ability for directed movement and responsiveness to stimuli. Ultimately, the key question is if we were to engineer a living system de novo, what are the desired final parameters by which we declare success? This process itself may force another re-examination of what it means to be “alive”.
For simplicity, we propose that any engineered synthetic system that meets the three criteria, and subsequently demonstrates evolution and possibly other emergent behaviors, should qualify as “alive”, as depicted in Figure 1. The word “system” is key, as life is a population-level phenomenon. For example, not every member must replicate, and certainly no individual undergoes evolution. This definition also works well with other working definitions of life. The so-called NASA definition of life, “a self-sustaining chemical system capable of Darwinian evolution” (9,12) includes the critical phrase “self-sustaining”, which we include in our discussion. Note that in this context “self-sustaining” does not mean completely autotrophic, as all organisms require the intake of water and elements, such as carbon, nitrogen, and other nutrients. Thus, this includes everything from diazotrophic cyanobacteria to parasites. In reality, “self-sustaining” refers to being able to live without outside intervention. Probably a better way to put it is that, while alive, an organism sustains itself in the face of entropy. We expect that as more discoveries are made, especially if life is discovered beyond Earth, the three criteria may continue to evolve, potentially allowing us to formulate a natural definition of life.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Our working definition of living systems, based on Tibor Gánti’s Chemoton model of life. Compartmentalization, replication, and metabolism together make up minimal criteria for a living system. From these other features emerge, including evolution, responsiveness to stimuli, and directed movement.

Here, we discuss the varying strategies and approaches to build synthetic cells. We then describe the motivations for and impact of building synthetic cells by highlighting the features of life that make biology attractive as a technology. Finally, we identify the progress and most critical current and future challenges in the field. This leads us to propose a roadmap toward the design and synthesis of a wholly engineered living system that embodies the criteria of life as put forward here. We envision this endeavor to be accomplished within a decade.

Why Build a Cell?

What is to be gained from building a cell? While the breadth of life on Earth is awe-inspiring in its diversity, the exercise of building a cell de novo offers lessons and perspectives that are unique from the scientific interrogation of extant living systems: it could enable entirely new science and may empower the engineering of living systems that are orthogonal and contextually superior to those that have emerged naturally. Examples of scientific gains from this pursuit include insights into how life on Earth may have begun, as well as what may permit life’s emergence elsewhere in the universe. Practical applications could include the creation of better platforms for industrial biotechnology and biomedicine.
The tools for building cells and dissecting the function of biological mechanisms into modules will entail bioengineering advances that affect multiple areas of the life sciences, (13) if the development of tools for the experimental modification of living systems is a guide. Such experiments interrogate cellular systems by endowing them with novel functions and expanded capabilities. While similar to metabolic engineering efforts, such gain-of-function experiments are distinct in that they primarily aim to answer questions about the system and seek to replicate characteristics of life from nonliving components to shed light on fundamental questions about life’s origins, components, and workings. (14,15)
Building a cell would likely have profound scientific ramifications: a fundamental understanding of all cellular components and their organization required to build a living cell would significantly advance our ability to comprehend how the highly complex, dynamic, interacting system called “life” operates. Equally important, the ability to build cells would expand the range of cell-types beyond the one shared by all life on Earth, thus giving scientists the ability to study not just life as it is, but as it could be. Currently, we have one example of a successful cellular system: that from which all life on Earth descends. Surely, there must be other feasible compositions of functional cellular systems. Others may well have existed on Earth, but we have yet to recognize any traces they left─alternatives may also exist in places beyond Earth, but also those have yet to be discovered.
The first synthetic cells will likely be very basic and thus extremely sensitive to environmental changes. They would be “minimal” as compared to the functions of common model microbes, such as Escherichia coli, Bacillus subtilis, and Saccharomyces cerevisiae, which have evolved naturally and are thus robust in respect to a wide range of environmental conditions. It will likely require the infrastructure of generations of professionals with the enabling technologies to build, tune, and enhance or optimize features of many different synthetic cells for particular applications. For instance, a synthetic cell optimized for industrial biotechnology, such as the production of chemicals, is unlikely to also be optimized for therapeutic uses, such as killing cancer cells. Thus, the greatest values of cells created de novo will not be represented in the functions of the first iterations of a synthetic cell, but in the opportunities it opens up.

Advantages of Synthetic Cells over Cell-Free or Liposome Systems

Why are existing technologies with widespread commercial availability, such as cell-free transcription/translation (Tx/Tl) systems, not sufficient? What are the limitations of encapsulated cell-free systems in studying life? To answer this, we have distinguished four principal systems as shown diagrammatically in Figure 2, while their advantages and disadvantages are summarized in Table 1.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Four different molecular platforms for studying life. Outgoing from externally provided template DNA (1), a cell-free transcription/translation (Tx/Tl) system uses complex substrates and a chemical energy-donor (2) to synthesize RNA, proteins and potentially other biocatalytically (enzymatically) formed products (3). An encapsulated cell-free system is often a liposome enclosing a cell-free Tx/Tl system. A synthetic cell would function more like a natural cell in that it could be a self-sustaining system that is capable of replication.

Table 1. Advantages and Disadvantages of Using Different Molecular Platforms for Studying Life
 cell-freeencapsulated cell-freesynthetic cellnaturally evolved cell
Defining life/Origin-of-lifeHelps understand certain processesHelps understand a broader range of processesIdeal to understand the transition from nonliving to livingNoncontroversial example of life
Alternative cellular systemsMost easily modified for noncanonical componentsNoncanonical components functioning in a unitNo constraints of prior evolution, genetics and developmentChanges are constrained by evolution, genetics and development
Studying genes of unknown functionTesting of genes against a defined backgroundTesting of genes against a defined backgroundTesting of genes against a defined backgroundToo many to study; throughput of traditional means too low and slow; reached limit of previous approaches, better to use synthetic biology tools
Prototyping metabolic pathwaysIdeal for simple pathways; no concern about lethality to a cellEnables compartmentalization for more sophisticated pathwaysMost orthogonal while sufficiently capable for more complex pathwaysLeast orthogonal but most capable for complex pathways
Molecular biosynthesis developmentTesting of metabolite transformationTesting expansion of metabolite transformationIntegrated multigene pathway testing in controlled/known environmentAnalysis of alternative/competing molecular pathways
Production of toxic compoundsIdeal/unrestrictedBiocontained delivery of biotechIdeal if not toxic to synthetic cell; potential to study mechanism of toxicityProhibited by definition
Preservation of biodiversityUnderstand key metabolic pathways with ecological importance, (e.g., plant–microbe interactions)Study and engineer key evolutionary and ecological processes (e.g., symbiogenesis)Study and engineer symbiogenesis, preserve extant and extinct life (e.g., boot-up endangered or extinct genomes), generate new biodiversityPreserve organism with intrinsic value and natural producer of valuable compound
Designing environmental stress responsesProtein stability testingBasic functional tests (e.g., protection of DNA from radiation), subcellular localization and compartmentalization, transport phenomenaResponse testing in controlled/known environmentInteraction of stress response with other cellular mechanisms
Therapeutics production/delivery/testingDistributed production, logic-gated controlCompartmentalization and targeted delivery, logic-gated controlAllow testing against a known genetic background; could provide orthogonal system for drug deliveryMay have superior compatibility with life
Studying cellular functionDependent on system used for Tx/Tl“Toy” system amenable to modeling; reintroducing confinement/organelles/scaffolding in controlled wayProvides modular, defined systemIntact systems for realistic studies
Evolution studiesComponent evolution (e.g., genes)Component evolution (e.g., transport proteins)Studies with well-defined cellular systemsNatural evolutionary processes
Workflows for engineered biological “parts” (modules)Testing parts in a simplified system toward use in living cellsTesting parts in a simplified system toward use in living cells, with more realistic spatial confinement/biophysics than bulk cell-freeTesting of parts against a defined backgroundDifficult/impossible/unmet challenge to predict a priori how engineered part will function in vivo
The key difference between a cell-free system and a cell is compartmentalization. This allows for the emergence of individuality in metabolism, heredity, and evolution. Thus, a synthetic cell could be the superior tailored platform for basic science and bioengineering. Like naturally evolved life, a synthetic cell may survive in a suspended state for longer periods of time than typical cell-free systems, which is critical when preservation of cellular components is key. Additionally, a synthetic cell could provide a unit of selection for the evolution of desired processes, whereas a cell-free system is not capable of that by a homogenized whole.

Is There an Ideal Synthetic Cell?

What are the ideal properties of a synthetic cell? Biologists and engineers dream of an organism in which every chemical interaction is defined and understood so that the phenotype can be predicted from the genotype. The resulting genetic transparency is somewhat congruent with the idea of a “minimal cell”. Such an organism would serve as a genetic “base operating system” onto which any desired function can be “installed”. In further analogy to computer science, difficulties in the engineering of natural cells arise from their “closed-source” programming and the difficulty to reverse-engineer them and accurately back-translate their compiled “machine-code”. In contrast, synthetic cells would be “open access” making the “source-code” available and thereby allowing the more precise “programming” of functions before compilation.
Transitioning from the theoretical attributes of a synthetic cell to a chemical understanding and implementation may be difficult. Because life is an emergent property of chemistry, it is by definition stochastic and unpredictable. (16) On another level that accounts more for context, engineers tend to have specific, application-dependent needs, relating to growth-rate and biomass-yield, source of energy, carbon, and other nutrients, as well as robustness within an environment (e.g., temperature and pH) and ecology. These are determined by the intended purpose of the organism (foundational studies, metabolic engineering, biomedicine, etc.). In short, there is no single “ideal” synthetic cell, as the design depends on the need and intended application/use case. Thus, not all synthetic cells will necessarily be the most minimal.

Strategies for Building a Cell

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

The ultimate goal of building a cell is to create a biochemical system recognizable as alive from its nonliving component parts de novo. Different design strategies for building a cell offer relevant approaches to provide platforms for the development of foundational technologies and advancing understanding of cellular structures and functions toward the de novo creation of a cell. These alternative approaches can be organized into “bottom-up”, “top-down”, and “middle-out”. Each approach is characterized by unique advantages, drawbacks, and challenges. A schematic overview of all three strategies is represented in Figure 3.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Major approaches to building a synthetic cell: bottom-up (a), top-down (b), and middle-out (c) are distinguished as the basic concepts of currently ongoing research. Top-down approaches generally seek to find a “minimal genome” of an existing organism, while the bottom-up approach aspires to de novo create a cell “from scratch” or based on macromolecules. Middle-out approaches utilize modules of known function (e.g., organelles, extracts) to assemble a new cell or major elements/mechanisms thereof.

To help illustrate these different approaches, consider the analogy of building a car that can drive. The bottom-up approach is like building a drivable car from the most basic components, such as metal sheeting and screws. The top-down approach is akin to stripping a drivable car piece-by-piece, discarding “non-essential” parts, modules, and subsystems (e.g., the radio) while retaining the ability to drive. Sometimes, which modules are “non-essential” is unclear until the car stops driving. The middle-out approach is akin to putting a car together from subsystems and modules (e.g., the engine) whose intricacies the assembling engineer does not need to fully comprehend. However, unlike a car, a living cell displays emergent properties that are extremely difficult to predict and are profound in their implications.
In the following section, we briefly introduce the different approaches and outline the efforts to-date that have been undertaken on each. We also compare the merits of the different approaches and discuss the scientific and technical challenges.

Bottom-up Engineering

The bottom-up approach comprises the step-by-step chemical synthesis of a living system de novo, from isolated or synthesized (macro)molecules that can comprise membranes, genetic material, and proteins to carry out the functions of a cell. This gives the researcher complete control of the components, whether to try to create an orthogonal system with nonbiological components, such as D-amino acids and L-sugars, or to try to replicate the origin-of-life here or elsewhere. This approach operates on the hypothesis that the right configuration of molecules will display life-like behaviors, or ultimately create a system we recognize as “life”. It arguably best exemplifies the ultimate goal of the field, but may require the greatest depth of knowledge and technical skill to be accomplished.
There has been much work toward bottom-up engineering to understand the origin-of-life, creating liposomes that encapsulate various portions of the genetic machinery. (17−19) Polymersomes, artificial vesicles that self-assemble from amphiphilic copolymers and enclose an aqueous cavity, (20) and synthosomes, polymersomes that contain channels to allow for selective transport of chemicals, are more recent advances that stray further from mimicking natural organisms. Polymersomes can be engineered as protocells to mimic cell functions and build cell-like structures. (21) However, there is still a substantial gap between the abiotic production of macromolecules, or even macromolecular assemblages, such as, vesicles loaded with biochemicals, and living systems. Also, as origin-of-life research specifically seeks to recreate life as it likely occurred on a young Earth, the field often does not explore radically different alternatives that might interest an astrobiologist, synthetic biologist, or biomolecular engineer.

Top-down Engineering

Systematic top-down approaches commonly aim to remove extraneous genetic modules from extant genomes to generate a “minimal genome” that contains a subset of its initial functions. (22,23) The objectives of these range from enabling a simplified platform for bioengineering to creating a cell with only the essential functions required to sustain cellular life for foundational studies. (24−26) The approach has been applied to various species and genetic systems to varying extents. For example, the genome of E. coli was reduced by up to 30%. (27,28) The most minimal genome was created from the bacterium Mycoplasma mycoides, whose genome is already one of the smallest known with only 915 genes. From this species, the synthetic genome JCVI-syn1.0 was created by developing a series of enabling synthetic biology technologies. (24,25,29−32) There, a synthetic bacterial genome containing an antibiotic resistance marker was installed in an existing living bacterial cell to produce a new cell with the genotype of the installed genome. Consequently, a near-minimal organism was created with a synthetic genome that comprised only 531 kbp and 473 genes, a genome smaller than that of any autonomously replicating cell found in nature. While several species exist that have fewer genes than Mycoplasma genitalium, none of them are free-living. Notably, the progenitor, JCVI-syn3.0, can only be cultivated in a laboratory environment under strictly controlled conditions. (26)

Middle-out Engineering

The middle-out or “semi-synthetic” approach extracts and repurposes extant modules of living cells to reconstruct a living system. (33) Much of the research now designated as a middle-out approach was previously considered bottom-up. The classic example is the use of complex fractions of cell extracts, such as organelles and other modularly functional fractions of living material that enable functional biochemistry, to reconstitute features of living systems, such as gene expression, replication, and sense/response behavior. (34) Examples include the encapsulation of cell-extracts in liposomes to achieve cellular functions, (35,36) decorating nanoparticles with cell membranes, (37) and re-engineering and transferring complex molecular systems, such as the glycosylation machinery, to synthetic systems, such as a microsome. (38) Synthetic biologists have recreated fairly complex systems of replication and transcription-coupled translation in vitro. (39,40) Encapsulating such systems into membranes and coupling their function to cytokinesis and metabolism is still a profound challenge. (34)
The middle-out approach is distinct from the top-down approach in that it does not rely on the minimization of naturally evolved cells. It is distinct from the bottom-up approach in that it does not rely on purified or synthesized, well-characterized molecules with defined functions but instead utilizes only partially understood multimolecular assemblies to perform such functions. Such middle-out systems can be treated as modular black boxes with defined inputs and outputs. Despite being incompletely understood and some lack of reproducibility, these systems can still be leveraged to achieve life-like behavior and are nonetheless useful in piecing together the essential features of living systems, either in conjunction with other complex mixtures or purified molecules. In fact, the reconstitution of a living cell from its components following extraction has yet to be accomplished and would provide a worthy milestone as a technical achievement for the insight it could give into what differentiates living entities from nonliving systems.

Applications of Synthetic Cells

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Synthetic cells are anticipated to have a range of applications, from fundamental research to applied science. For bioprocess engineers, synthetic cells are of interest as an infinitely scalable manufacturing platform for chemicals or for environmental applications. Synthetic cells could also offer an alternative platform for biomanufacturing that is not readily performed by existing cellular chassis. For example, synthetic cells could allow the unbiased implementation of nonevolved elements like nonstandard (proteogenic) amino acids (NSAAs), (41) alternate chiralities, and xenonucleic acids (XNAs) (42) that are inaccessible or hardly accessible with extant biology. Cell biologists would be able to use synthetic cells to understand the fundamental workings of living cellular systems. Evolutionary biologists and astrobiologists could use them to answer the “what if?” questions of the origin, evolution and diversity of life. For example, could life originate in multiple ways? What does that say about the potential for life elsewhere? The following examples are meant to illustrate the impact synthetic cells could have and thus the importance of the endeavor to build a cell.

Understanding the Origin, Evolution, and Diversity of Life

The physicist Richard Feynman famously wrote, “What I cannot create, I do not understand.” Building a cell may thus be the only way to truly provide a mechanism for the ultimate validation of our foundational understanding of life’s components and functions. Our inability to create a synthetic cell from molecular components─even from components derived from previously alive cells─illuminates gaps in our understanding.
Most likely, all extant life on Earth descended from a universal common ancestor. (43) The exercise of building a cell could allow us to postulate what life might have looked like elsewhere in our solar system and beyond, perhaps permitting us to answer one of our most profound scientific questions: are we alone? Further, synthetic cells could offer a platform for understanding how life might operate on specific extraterrestrial bodies, such as the subsurface oceans of Europa and Enceladus. In addition to “how”, we are left with many of the “why” questions of evolution. Why does life on Earth only use left-handed amino acids in ribosomally synthesized proteins? Why D-sugars? Did evolution sample other approaches and simply discard them out of pure chance? Or were they outcompeted? Or did alternatives never arise because none were functional? Building synthetic cells would allow us to distinguish among these alternatives for a basic scientific understanding of life. It can further provide insight into the biochemical and structural intricacies of cellular functions to guide application-focused bioengineers. Evidence that the molecules involved in the central dogma on Earth are not the only “way of life” is provided in the form of DNA with unnatural base pairs (UBPs), consisting of, e.g., six bases instead of four. (44) This DNA also seems to be energetically superior, as the two non-natural bases are less prone to oxidation and epimerization. The creation of an E. coli strain that actually uses unnatural base pairs shows the feasibility of such hypotheses. (45)

Characterization of Cellular Parts and Elucidation of their Functions

Synthetic cells could allow the testing of biological parts outside of their native context. Such “parts” may range in size and complexity from lipid composition to the genetic code to whole organelles. If a module is necessary and sufficient for a particular desired function, a synthetic cell with minimal complexity could provide an excellent chassis to evaluate how that module affects or is affected by basic cellular functions. This is because the synthetic cell chassis is by concept a defined background free from the constraints, complexity, and legacy of evolution with the confounding variables and added complexity found in natural cells─in brief, synthetic cells could be entirely orthogonal. Dissecting the cellular machinery of a natural cell through deletion is not always possible or preferable to adding components to a synthetic cell. Currently, there are considerable efforts and hypotheses to understand adaptation and regulatory processes involving domestication and biodiversity of natural organisms. (46) Synthetic cells may also be useful as foundations for the synthetic domestication of biodiversity traits─an approach that constitutes a sustainable and viable option for conservation and development of value-added processes and products from biodiversity. (47)

Development of Engineering and Design Tools

Just as cell-free Tx/Tl systems are used for the rapid prototyping of genetic circuits, synthetic cells will prove similarly useful for prototyping at higher levels of organization and cellular interactions, for example, between components or membrane-less compartments. Synthetic cells may offer a broad array of traits found in natural cells that can ultimately be combined in an “à la carte” format to engineer uniquely tailored cell systems. Consider how five Spiroplasma genes were added to a nonmotile organism, yielding a mutant of the minimized bacterium JCVI-syn3B capable of movement. (48) This is not dissimilar to how evolution has operated with bacteria, which have an extraordinary ability to exchange DNA through horizontal gene transfer, or for eukaryotes who have formed temporary symbioses or even incorporated symbionts that ultimately became heritable, such as mitochondria. (49) Progress toward engineering synthetic cells also involves developing orthogonal biochemistries. Examples include NSAAs, XNAs, (50) and an expanded genetic code with UBPs, (51) as well as de novo designed proteins, potentially enabling the formation of proteins with new structures and novel functions. (52)

Metabolic Engineering and Biomanufacturing

The ability to predict, design, and construct reliable and robust biochemical pathways is key to efficient metabolic engineering. Systems Biology, quantitative synthetic biology and integrated multiomics techniques (i.e., genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics) grant insights that can significantly accelerate the development of microbial cell factories. (53−55) At present, improving synthetic cells for biomanufacturing is not achieved by strain engineering (because synthetic cells don't have engineerable strains yet) but instead by better understanding how cells work and how to build them de novo. The concept, known as systems metabolic engineering, reduces the Design-Build-Test-Learn (DBTL) cycles required to reach a strain that performs as desired and enables the rational creation of microbial cell factories. Nevertheless, it is still not (yet) possible to exactly predict outcomes of genetic interventions in even the best-studied model organisms. Already, cell-free systems have been shown to accelerate design cycles. (56,57) A fully defined synthetic cell may go beyond such approaches to provide a predictive platform, allowing bioengineers to further streamline systems metabolic engineering strategies. This may not only improve control over the process parameters (e.g., rate, titer, yield), (58) but also improve the precision and efficiency of biomanufacturing. (59) Minimization of crosstalk between peripheral and intersecting heterologous metabolic functions may allow formerly inaccessible biosynthetic pathways, for example, of complex natural products, to be (re)constructed. (60−62) The semisynthetic near minimal JCVI-syn3A (and derivative strains) is already being used as a chassis to evaluate the effects of adding new metabolic pathways on basic cellular biology. Its extreme metabolic simplicity makes it useful for such purposes; however, synthetic or semisynthetic cells that are similar to common model organisms could be much more useful than current minimal cells.
A fully defined biomanufacturing system tailored to its purpose may also allow for better process control through enhanced biosafety, as compared to natural cell systems: requirements for containment may be relaxed due to a lower chance of survival, in case of unintentional release. Intrinsic biological controls could be considered, such as “kill switches” after a certain number of generations or in response to a particular environmental change. (63,64) Alternatively, or additionally, a synthetic cell could be designed to be incompatible with natural life, therefore unable to interact with or contaminate it (for example, by using D- rather than L-amino acids, L-sugars instead of D-sugars, or UBPs with XNAs and/or NSAAs). Vice versa, synthetic systems that are different enough from nature may not be susceptible to “intruders”, such as bacterial- or phage-contamination. Such microbial chassis are already in development and could provide a firewall to prevent any exchange between the recoded organism and natural ecosystems. A recent example is an E. coli strain with an alternative codon usage where artificial tRNAs recognize different amino acids. (65)

Food Production and Bioremediation

Microbial biotechnology will play a crucial role in advancing food-production systems (e.g., agriculture, livestock) toward greater efficiency and sustainability. (66) Because existing genetically modified organisms cannot persist indefinitely and are often outcompeted by natural systems in a short period of time, synthetic cells could become a viable tool to, for example, replace chemical fertilizers (67) or tailor microbiomes of plants (68) and animals. (69,70) Similarly as for biomanufacturing/metabolic engineering applications, orthogonality and intrinsic safeguards of the synthetic cells could ensure the biosafety of the synthetic system.
Natural cells have been used successfully in environmental remediation efforts, such as treating and recovering concentrated nutrients, sequestering heavy metals, and decomposing plastics. (71−74) Synthetic cells may provide opportunities to improve and expand these efforts, when engineered to survive environments that preclude naturally evolved life. For example, synthetic cells could be created to be impervious to compounds that are toxic to life. Natural cells excel at processing natural compounds, but synthetic cells may fill an important niche in bioremediation by being tailored to function with and act on synthetic compounds.
Synthetic cells could also become field-deployable detectors for environmental monitoring to detect contaminants, such as pathogens or heavy metals. (75) These “biosensors” through their portable sizes and scalability could provide a warning system in hazardous situations where there is a risk of exposure to harmful levels of toxic chemicals or pathogens.

Diagnostics and Therapeutics

Our understanding of the molecular biology of cells, though incomplete, underpins much of modern medicine, shaping our comprehension of disease and pathogenicity mechanisms and influencing the development of diagnostics and therapeutics. Several diagnostic procedures rely on identifying cellular components or products, while many therapeutics act by influencing cells, cell products, or altogether replacing cells and tissues. It is clear how diseases and their treatments often lead back to the cell. In the words of the physician-scientist Rudolf Virchow, “no matter how we twist and turn, we shall eventually come back to the cell. Every pathological disturbance, every therapeutic effect, finds its ultimate explanation only when it is possible to designate the specific living cellular elements involved.” (76,77) Similar to the way molecular biology contributed to modern medicine, one can expect insights from synthetic cell endeavors to further advance medical practice, improving our understanding of disease pathologies, and informing novel diagnostics and therapeutic strategies.
Synthetic cell research may enable the development of novel biological functions that do not currently exist in nature but may be relevant for the treatment of different disease conditions. Today, natural cells form the basis of cellular therapies, spanning multiple therapeutic areas including regenerative medicine, immunotherapy, and cancer. There are 29 FDA-approved cell- and gene therapies with others at various stages of clinical development. (78) However, there have been major limitations with the manufacturing of natural cell-based therapeutics with variability in product specifications as well as other sourcing, supply chain, and storage challenges. (79) For instance, CAR T-cell therapy, while promising, is restricted by these limitations, leading to extensive duration and high costs. (80,81) Synthetic cells that are able to mimic the functions of these natural cells could significantly improve access to these therapies, allowing better supply, storage, and manufacturing at scale. (82) Toward that objective, droplet-based microfluidics techniques for producing synthetic cells are very promising, as they can combine complex designs (e.g., compartmentalization) with high consistency and large-scale production. (83)
Extracellular vesicles have also become an active area of research toward therapeutic applications. Limitations of these vesicles are the difficulty sourcing them and their variability, which limits the ability to control their quality. Current synthetic cell research is already tackling these challenges with the bottom-up assembly of synthetic vesicles for wound healing, or regenerative therapies. (84) Further synthetic cell research may lead to the development of synthetic vesicles for other disease conditions for which natural extracellular vesicles have demonstrated effect in preclinical studies.
The potential of synthetic transcription and translation systems to provide a greater shelf life and stability, by being freeze-dried and later rehydrated, has already been recognized: such medicines and vaccines could mitigate regional healthcare disparities, overcome geographical and environmental barriers, and improve global healthcare access. (85,86) Better yet would be the ability to create a synthetic cell system that is amenable to long-term desiccation, to address the problem of maintaining stem cells or other cellular-based manufacturing systems in an active or even semiactive form.
Another promising potential application of synthetic cells are specialized medicines and therapies. The rapid advancement of synthetic biotechnologies and research techniques has increased the accessibility, reliability, and prevalence of personalized medicine, resulting in treatments tailored to a patient’s unique needs, physiology, and genetics. (87) A personalized medicine regime may be vital for the successful treatment of disease effectively, while maintaining quality of life.
With tissues and organs being multicellular organizations of cells, another potential area of impact for synthetic cell research is organ and tissue transplantation. Terminal irreversible damage of the kidneys, lungs, heart, liver, etc. are treated with organ transplantation. However, there are limitations in the supply of these organs to patients. New synthetic tissue approaches based on synthetic cell research may one day provide alternative organ sources for transplantation.

Bioprinting

Bioprinting is the use of 3D-printing technology with materials that incorporate viable living cells as a component of bioinks to create structures–in essence, biological additive manufacturing. To date, the focus has primarily been on tissue and organ regeneration, (88) but other uses such as printing of plant or algal cells have been explored. (89) Challenges exist that potentially could be remedied by the use of synthetic cells as components of bioinks. (88) For example, they could be engineered to withstand conditions such as temperature or chemical composition of the carrier compound that would be difficult or impossible for naturally evolved cells to survive. There could be situations where cell division is not desired. A synthetic cell could be engineered to be more biocompatible with others or be made immune to infection from viruses and bacteria and remain undetected by a host immune system.

Space Exploration

Space exploration is limited by mass and volume constraints during launch, as much of the launch-mass is fuel. In the absence of resupply, storage and reliability issues are key. As life is self-replicating and synthetic biology can transfer the ability to convert available resources into a more tractable form (say, a single cell that could produce wood or rubber), biotechnology has the potential to be the key to human survival off-planet. (90,83) Cells, especially microbes, are exquisitely good at nanotechnology and comparatively low-maintenance. (91) The attainable savings in up-mass can be huge. (92) Creating synthetic cells that are better suited to off-planet environments than naturally evolved life could be the key to life-support and in situ resource utilization for manufacturing of items with regular demand on long-duration space missions, such as food, drugs, and materials. (93,94)

Research Advancements toward Fulfilling the Criteria of Life

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

To refine a framework for bioengineers to understand current challenges in creating synthetic biological life, we review progress and begin to frame target specifications. For that, we adhere to the foregone criteria of life “compartmentalization, metabolism, and replication”, as well as the emergent features “evolution, responsiveness, and movement”. While we discuss each of these separately, in many cases research has also demonstrated their combination. For example, various synthetic compartmentalized systems already exhibit some form of metabolism and replication. (95−98)

Compartmentalization

Compartmentalization of cells into discrete units is required to distinguish life from the physical environment, from each other, such as oxidative and other cells-types (especially in multicellular organisms). From a biological point of view, physical separation allows distinct individuals to experience differential selection. From a physical point of view, compartmentalization allows a separation and concentration of cellular components and compounds in a manner that facilitates metabolism. Compartmentalization also allows for different metabolic activities to occur within the same cell that would otherwise interfere with each other, such as, e.g., oxidative phosphorylation and nitrogen fixation, (99) or β-oxidation. (100)
Internal compartmentalization exists in all domains of life. In prokaryotes, there are two major classes of organelles: those formed by a protein shell or lipid monolayer (e.g., lipid bodies, polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) granules, carboxysomes, magnetosomes, and gas vacuoles) or lipid bilayer. (101) Eukaryotic compartments in the form of membrane-bound organelles (e.g., nucleus, mitochondrion, chloroplast) are well-known. Additional compartmentalization occurs through biomolecular condensates formed by liquid–liquid phase separation. (102,103) Examples from eukaryotes include membrane-less organelles in the nucleus, such as the nucleolus, Cajal bodies, nuclear speckles, and paraspeckles, and in the cytoplasm, such as P-bodies, stress granules, and germ granules. (104) Some eukaryotic organelles, such as mitochondria and chloroplasts, arose via the assimilation of bacteria into eukaryotic cells through endosymbiosis. (105) Synthetic biology approaches have even enabled the establishment of a bacterial endosymbiosis in yeast that functioned as an endosymbiotic organelle and was stable for more than 40 generations. (106) Formation of these cellular compartmentalizations can be achieved in synthetic systems, such as polymer-based aqueous two-phase systems and hydrogels. (107−110)
Synthetic compartmentalization has been achieved through different techniques─e.g., encapsulation in amphiphilic lipids, peptides, or polymers, protein capsids, and liquid–liquid phase separation─and is technically relatively facile. Applied methods include, for example, thin-film hydration, biphasic centrifugation, extrusion, and sonication. (111) Generating liposomes containing genetic material is as simple as adding a solution of plasmid to a dried thin film of phospholipid. The challenge with compartmentalization has been the relatively low efficiency of encapsulating molecules at consistent quantities within compartments. Stochasticity often generates wide variation in the composition of individual liposomes encapsulating cell extract. (112) The size of the artificial compartments themselves can vary considerably depending on the method used, as can the relative spatial connectivity. These technical hurdles stymie the production of cell-like compartments with sufficient reproducibility to study their behavior. While microfluidic tools and methods are available, improved methods are needed to create compartments of consistent size, composition, and connectivity to enable more systematic and quantitative studies.
In many cases, it will be desirable to build compartments within other compartments and then manipulate those, for example, through fusion or fission. Forming multiple compartments within a larger liposome is possible by microfluidic double emulsion liposome construction using different reagents for the dewetting process. (113) Some researchers have encased live cells within liposomal cells to allow for compartments with different internal properties. (114) Genetic cascade reactions can be compartmentalized for controlled modular reactions. Incompatible reactions can be allocated to separate liposomes and then fused together to allow for concurrent reactions. (35)
A variety of other techniques, beyond the use of lipid membranes, have been demonstrated for compartmentalization. The most common alternative to membranes are water–oil emulsions created with microfluidics. Those systems enable the compartmentalization functionalities of liposomes, using membrane proteins. As these emulsions tend to be unstable outside of carefully controlled environments, their utility for applications, such as drug delivery, is currently limited. (115) Peptide-based compartments have also been used to contain biochemical reactions and reaction networks. (116−118) Single-stranded DNA has also been used to form complex flexible coacervates, and double-stranded DNA can favor coacervate formation in the presence of cationic polymers. (119,120) Additionally, low-complexity RNA molecules can reversibly compartmentalize peptides and oligonucleotides by modifying the temperature. (121) Zeolites, microporous crystalline aluminosilicates, can compartmentalize molecules of choice. (122) Understanding how membrane-less compartments are created within cells through self-organization will also suggest engineering strategies to build a cell. (123)

Metabolism

Metabolism is the chemical means by which life harnesses energy to organize and maintain itself in a nonequilibrium state at the cost of increasing the entropy of the external environment. This set of chemical reactions sustains life through the assimilation of substrate and harvesting of energy for conversion into compounds that allow the biosynthesis of cellular components.
Individual biochemical reactions can be straightforward to replicate. However, recreating a carefully balanced, self-sustaining network of biochemistry that mobilizes energy and matter and commits it to growth and replication is arguably one of the most difficult aspects of building a living cell. First, the construction and dynamic balancing of a complex system of catabolic and anabolic chemistries is by itself a formidable hurdle. For replication, a net-excess of matter (i.e., fixed carbon, nitrogen, and other elements) must be produced. Second, the metabolic system must be encoded genetically to propagate continuously, which creates the additional challenge of engineering the timing and amount of each component to be formed throughout the life-cycle of an organism. In known extant cells, metabolism must be coupled in some way to replication. Hence, metabolism depends on itself in what could be conceived as an arbitrarily complex differential equation. Despite this, primordial cells could have evolved with only a tenuous link between metabolism and replication. Metabolism may have resulted in passive cell division, mediated by forces exerted by membrane curvature.
To date, minimal synthetic metabolism has been demonstrated in various forms. Basic redox reactions and energy metabolism are key for cells to generate new chemical products, as well as their own energy for sustaining life. In most whole cells, adenosine triphosphate (ATP), the main energy-carrier of biology as we know it, is primarily regenerated by a trans-membrane ion-gradient that drives an ATP synthase. The presence of a membrane is therefore crucial in the function of these enzymes. However, production of synthetic membranes and correspondingly membrane-bound proteins, remains a challenge. Promisingly, cell-free expression can quickly generate membrane-bound proteins. (124) Alternatively, energy in the form of photons can be used to phosphorylate ADP. One method for achieving this is through the encapsulation of rhodopsin, a light-gated ion-pump, and ATP synthase. Encased in vesicles together, they convert light energy into a proton-gradient that generates ATP via phosphorylation. (125) Other, cell-free systems have been developed that use pyruvate, (126) maltose, (127) 3-phosphoglyceric acid, (128) and phosphoenolpyruvate, (129) to provide energy to maintain biochemical reactions. This area has been extensively developed and is reviewed elsewhere. (130)

Replication

Replication requires the existence of genetic material that stores information and can be inherited by any progeny. This information minimally comprises instructions for replication, such as the genetic code of a virus. Achieving replication of a synthetic cell requires engineering of both a system for replicating the genetic material and a mechanism for subdividing a complete copy of the genetic material into a new compartment. Also needed is sufficient (bio)chemical activity to generate or scavenge resources for the synthesis of both the genetic material and the components of its containing compartment. Integration and coordination of each facet of replication is ultimately required to ensure its maintenance over generations.
Replication of internal biochemistry and cellular membranes is essential for cell perpetuation. Methods of accomplishing this include extrusion through primordial clay and cell-free expression of a minimal divisome. (131,132) Liposomes can be fused and fissured through a freeze–thaw method to generate larger liposomes, which can then be used for encapsulation of larger compounds. (133)
Nucleic acid polymers are currently the only known genetic material. DNA, the predominant form of genetic material on Earth, is highly stable (half-life of millennia) and dense in information. (134) RNA, which is prone to autocatalytic degradation and alkaline hydrolysis, has a shorter half-life in vivo (only minutes) than DNA but becomes more stable when bound to ribosomes. (135,136) Self-replicating RNAs have been demonstrated in multiple experiments. (137,138) DNA, however, requires extensive protein machinery to replicate, and deoxyribonucleotides are converted to ribonucleotides by ribonucleotide reductase. This has been a powerful argument for the existence of an “RNA world” prior to the evolution of DNA as the most widely used genetic material on Earth.
RNAs have been shown to retain catalytic activity when encapsulated in lipid vesicles. (17,139) Because of this, and because no autonomous self-replicating DNA is known to exist, RNA may be the more promising genetic material for a truly bottom-up synthetic cell in the near future. However, DNA-based replication should remain an engineering goal, because of its much greater stability. In addition, proofreading and repair is more common for double stranded DNA than for RNA: in vivo replication of DNA replication has an error rate of less than one per 100 million base pairs. Viral RNA replication and transcription of DNA produces an error every thousand bases. Furthermore, DNA molecules can be up to 250 million base pairs large, for example, in the human genome, whereas most RNAs are not more than a few thousand base pairs, with the current record length belonging to a nidovirus, which has an RNA genome of 41 thousand bases (single strand). (140) A DNA-based synthetic cell would require a number of additional factors, greatly increasing its complexity. For example, E. coli replication requires at minimum helicase, primase, DNA polymerase, and ligase, all of which would need to be encoded and expressed. This, in turn, requires machinery and raw material for transcription and translation to produce each enzyme. In addition, the progeny material must be produced faster than the parent material is degraded. (141) Still, a synthetic cell with a DNA genome that recapitulates features of Earth’s first cells might be much less complicated. Were helicase, primase, DNA polymerase, and ligase enzymes present in the first cell with a DNA genome, or was a simpler mechanism present in the progenitor?
Living cells have elaborate pathways that orchestrate the physical partitioning of copied genomes into new compartments. While careful partitioning of the old and copied genomes has evolved in most organisms, this is not strictly required. Multiple copies of genomes can persist in a single compartment and then be randomly segregated during division. This is the case for the majority of bacterial multicopy plasmids. (142) Without partitioning mechanisms, this would result in a high fraction of progeny having either none or multiple copies of genomes. As long as some fidelity (and diversity) is maintained across generations of synthetic cells, the population can persist. The spontaneous division of lipid vesicles has been demonstrated in multiple systems, however, none have been coupled to the replication of genetic material.
Box 1

Assembly of Artificial Genomes Based on Natural or Synthetic DNA

Assuming the first synthetic cell will rely on DNA as the genetic material, then this coding sequence must be either chemically synthesized or derived from an extant organism. The middle-out approach of using existing DNA from a living organism is appealing, because it does not require detailed design knowledge of the genetic code itself. De novo design of every base pair in even a simple genome is a daunting prospect, requiring holistic understanding of not only the function but also interaction of all genetic elements and gene regulatory networks. (143−147)
Hence, the coding of the first synthetic cell genome is likely to be naturally derived, while the physical DNA itself will almost certainly be chemically synthesized. This is due to the rapid progress that has been made in recent decades both in the reduction of the cost of synthetic DNA and technical leaps that have enabled stitching relatively small oligonucleotides into massive assemblies of genes, chromosomes, and even whole genomes. The size of the DNA for the first synthetic cell could vary wildly from a few thousand to a few million base pairs. A quarter of a century ago, the first synthetic genome, an 8 kbp DNA copy of a hepatitis C virus subgenomic replicon, took months to assemble from synthetic oligonucleotides. (148) Less than a decade later, scientists had developed DNA synthesis technologies that allowed completion of the 583 kbp Mycoplasma genitalium genome. (30) This became possible with the invention of homology-based assembly strategies relying on chemically synthesized subgenomic DNA fragments of 1 to 5 kbp. (149) The fragments we recombined into shuttle-vectors and then transformed into Escherichia coli to obtain assemblies of 10 to 30 kbp. In a second assembly step, these fragments were transformed into yeast where homologous recombination allowed formation of artificial chromosomes of 20 to 140 kbp. Outgoing from these, fragments can be isolated and used to create a living or nonliving synthetic cell. (150)
The booting-up process of synthetic genomes is not trivial, and genome transplantation has only been accomplished for the species Mycoplasma. (29,31,32) The only other organism for which a completely synthetic genome has been loaded is E. coli. (65,151) Additionally, Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains with multiple synthetic chromosomes have been made where native genomes are replaced with corresponding ∼50 kbp synthetic segments that are iteratively transformed into cells where the swap takes place. (65,151)
While the cost for the construction of large DNA fragments have decreased substantially with the emergence of DNA foundries, transplantation of nonmycoplasma genomes via a similar or equivalent universally applicable technique is still limited to nonliving cells with coding sequences that are much less complex than those of natural cells. (150,152)

Emergent Features of Life

Evolution

Evolution is a process that emerges when a population of individuals shows differential survival based on a heritable phenotype; an individual cell does not evolve. For synthetic cell engineers, this means that evolution cannot be observed to occur unless a population of synthetic cells with a heritable phenotype has been created. Evolution also requires that the organism’s phenotype is the result of its genotype. The evolution of individuality, referred to as the “Darwinian threshold”, (153,154) was key to the origin of predominantly vertical rather than horizontal transmission of genetic material.
For example, in the case of the JCVI minimal bacterial cell, it was hypothesized that a bacterium whose genome only encoded genes essential for cell-viability might be unable to evolve, mainly because of the absence of DNA-repair mechanisms that would lead to the rapid accumulation of fatal mutations. This idea was disproved recently in adaptive laboratory evolution experiments, demonstrating increased fitness of JCVIsyn3A and JCVI-syn3B after thousands of generations in laboratory culture. (155,156)
Evolution should inevitably emerge from a population of individual cells where there is some relation of phenotype to heredity, whether by natural selection, drift, or another mechanism. If the environment changes or more than one organism competes for a resource, taxa must evolve to even “stand still”, according to van Valen’s “Red Queen Hypothesis”. (157,158) Evolution requires individuals, so it can occur at subcellular levels as well, where mitochondria and chloroplasts can count as individuals, all the way down to the genes. For example, the usage of NSAAs may arise that result in new and diverse chemical properties of proteins. This may expand the functional ability of proteins, resulting in a potential evolutionary advantage to the host cell. (159)

Responsiveness

Sensing stimuli and responding by altering system behavior is an emergent trait of life. This enables organisms to adjust their behavior to a changing environment. The unique ability of cells to sense and respond to stimuli has provided inspiration for engineers, for example, in the creation of biomimetic materials.
Communication among populations is vital for population-level adaptation from unicellular organisms to entire mixed ecologies. Understanding intercell communication systems has enabled applications in synthetic biology. (160) Mechanisms for cellular sensing and responding are essential for the coordination of spatially separated functional modules. Advancements in programmable cell communication are expected to enable advanced control over synthetic cells. For example, cells with a porous membrane may utilize nucleus-like DNA hydrogel to express signaling molecules to communicate with neighboring cells. Utilizing this technology enables the creation of mutualisms. (161) Programmable mechanosensitivity in synthetic cells has been accomplished using osmotic pressure through mechanosensitive channels. (162) Further, advancements have been made in the areas of signaling molecules, signal range, active and passive signaling, (163) and information transfer, (164) as discussed previously. (165)
It can also be argued that responsiveness to environmental change is not a necessary property of living cells, at least in captivity. In nature, the bacteria with the smallest genomes tend to be obligate parasites. Bacteria like mycoplasmas, which are human urogenital pathogens, are examples of this. (166) They evolved from bacteria like Bacillus subtilis through a process of massive gene loss. (167) This was likely possible due to a very stable and nutritionally-rich habitat. Human urogenital epithelial cells, which these bacteria parasitize, provide such an environment. One can imagine that over years of completely constant laboratory culture, these mycoplasma species would be able to also discard all the approximately 60 genes they have retained for growth in their natural environment to deal with changes in urine osmolarity or the presence of other parasitic bacteria. A synthetic cell incapable of responding to its physical, chemical, or biological environment could be highly desirable: if it were to be released into the environment, it would presumably not be able to survive, therefore providing intrinsic biocontainment.

Movement

While directed movement, whether on a micro- or macroscale, is not required for life, many organisms demonstrate some form of mobility. (168) For most, movement is necessary to locate and obtain resources, to avoid living in a buildup of waste-products, to find a mate, or avoid predation. In microorganisms, flagella, microvilli, membrane blebbing, and gliding activity enable and facilitate movement. (169) Some organisms are small enough that ambient fluid flow or Brownian motion is sufficient to support their molecular processes. As such, even growth and division can be classified as movement─by that definition all living cells experience microscopic movement.
While directed movement can be thought of as a form of responsiveness, because the movement is often in response to some stimuli, the molecular machinery that enables movement can be distinct from the responsive elements. A greater understanding of the relationship between morphology and motility allows for increased ingenuity in creating artificial movement. The specific strategies for creating cellular protrusions, substrate adhesion, and myosin-dependent actin network contractility in synthetic cells are discussed elsewhere. (170)
Each of the above properties of living organisms have been engineered into synthetic systems to varying degrees, sometimes even in (albeit limited) combinations. In theory, once the criteria of compartmentalization, replication, and metabolism are established simultaneously, a new lifeform should emerge. Table 2 summarizes the state of efforts to date in that regard.
Table 2. Efforts Undertaken toward Building Synthetic Cells to Datea
titleDOIyearlabapproachgenetic replicationdivisioncompartmentalizationmetabolismmovementsense and respondevolution
Oparin’s Reactions Revisited: Enzymatic Synthesis of Poly(adenylic acid) in Micelles and Self-Reproducing Vesicles10.1021/ja00096a0101994LuisiBottom-upYesYesYesNoNoNoNo
Man-made cell-like compartments for molecule evolution10.1038/nbt0798-6521998GriffithMiddle-outNoNoYesNoNoNoNo
A vesicle bioreactor as a step toward an artificial cell assembly10.1073/pnas.0408236102004LibchaberBottom-upNoNoYesYesNoNoNo
Design of artificial cell–cell communication using gene and metabolic networks10.1073/pnas.03064841012004LiaoTop-downNoNoYesYesNoYesNo
Self-maintained Movements of Droplets with Convection Flow10.1007/978-3-540-76931-6_162007IkegamiBottom-upNoNoNoNoYesYesNo
Multilevel Selection in Models of Prebiotic Evolution II: A Direct Comparison of Compartmentalization and Spatial Self-Organization10.1371/journal.pcbi.10005422009HogewegTop-downYesNoYesNoNoNoYes
Creation of a bacterial cell controlled by a chemically synthesized genome10.1126/science.11907192010GibsonTop-downYesYesNoYesNoYesYes
Self-reproduction of supramolecular giant vesicles combined with the amplification of encapsulated DNA10.1038/nchem.11272011SugawaraBottom-upNoYesYesYes*NoNoNo
An Open Question on the Origin of Life: The First Forms of Metabolism10.1002/cbdv.2012002812012LuisiBottom-upNoNoYesYesNoNoNo
Spontaneous network formation among cooperative RNA replicators10.1038/nature115492012LehmanTop-downNoNoNoNoNoYesYes
Liposome division by a simple bacterial division machinery10.1073/pnas.12222541102013EricksonBottom-upNoYesYesNoNoNoNo
Darwinian evolution in a translation-coupled RNA replication system within a cell-like compartment10.1038/ncomms34942013YomoBottom-upYesNoYesNoNoNoYes
Protein synthesis in artificial cells: using compartmentalization for spatial organization in vesicle bioreactors10.1039/C4CP05933F2015CesBottom-upNoNoYesYesNoNoNo
Self Guided Supramolecular Cargo Loaded Nanomotors with Chemotactic Behavior toward Cells10.1002/anie.2015041862015van Hest and WilsonBottom-upNoNoYesNoYesNoNo
Design and synthesis of a minimal bacterial genome10.1126/science.aad62532016HutchisonTop-downYesYesNoYesYesYesYes
Growth and division of active droplets provides a model for protocells10.1038/nphys39842016JülicherBottom-upYesYesYesNoNoNoYes
Engineering genetic circuit interactions within and between synthetic minimal cells10.1038/nchem.26442017AdamalaMiddle-outNoNoYesNoNoYesNo
The origin of heredity in protocells10.1098/rstb.2016.04192017LaneBottom-upNoYesYesNoNoNoYes
Light-Guided Motility of a Minimal Synthetic Cell10.1021/acs.nanolett.8b034692018WegnerBottom-upNoNoYesNoYesYes*No
Enzyme-powered motility in buoyant organoclay/DNA protocells10.1038/s41557-018-0119-32018MannMiddle-outNoNoYesNoYesYesNo
Sustainable replication and coevolution of cooperative RNAs in an artificial cell-like system10.1038/s41559-018-0650-z2018Mizuuchi and IchihashiTop-downYesYesYesNoNoNoYes
Freeze–thaw cycles induce content exchange between cell-sized lipid vesicles10.1088/1367-2630/aabb962018SchwilleBottom-upNoNoYesNoNoNoNo
Self-replication of DNA by its encoded proteins in liposome-based synthetic cells10.1073/pnas.19146561172018DanelonBottom-upYesNoYesNoNoNoNo
Artificial photosynthetic cell producing energy for protein synthesis10.1038/s41467-019-09147-42019Ueda, KurumaBottom-upNoNoYesYesNoYesNo
Bottom-up Creation of an Artificial Cell Covered with the Adhesive Bacterionanofiber Protein AtaA10.1021/jacs.9b093402019Matsuura, HoriBottom-upNoNoYesNoNoNoNo
An Adaptive Synthetic Cell Based on Mechanosensing, Biosensing, and Inducible Gene Circuits10.1021/acssynbio.9b002042019NoireauxMiddle-outNoNoYesNoNoYesNo
Motility of Enzyme-Powered Vesicles10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b018302019SenBottom-upNoNoYesNoYesNoNo
Mimicking Chemotactic Cell Migration with DNA Programmable Synthetic Vesicles10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b044282019ChoiMiddle-out?NoNoYesNoYesYesNo
Chemical Signal Communication between Two Protoorganelles in a Lipid-Based Artificial Cell10.1021/acs.analchem.9b011282019HanMiddle-out?NoNoYesNoNoYesNo
Bottom-Up Construction of a Minimal System for Cellular Respiration and Energy Regeneration10.1021/acssynbio.0c001102020Biner and HirstBottom-upNoNoYesYesNoNoNo
Self-division of giant vesicles driven by an internal enzymatic reaction10.1039/C9SC05195C2020Lagzi, RossiBottom-upNoYesYesNoNoYesNo
Self Propelled PLGA Micromotor with Chemotactic Response to Inflammation10.1002/adhm.2019017102020WilsonBottom-upNoNoYesNoYesNoNo
A Step toward Molecular Evolution of RNA: Ribose Binds to Prebiotic Fatty Acid Membranes, and Nucleosides Bind Better than Individual Bases Do10.1002/cbic.2020002602020KellerBottom-upNoNoYesNoNoNoNo
Hydrodynamic accumulation of small molecules and ions into cell-sized liposomes against a concentration gradient10.1038/s42004-020-0277-22020ToyotaBottom-upNoNoYesNoNoNoNo
Dissipative self-assembly, competition and inhibition in a self-reproducing protocell model10.1039/D0SC02768E2020FletcherBottom-upYesNoYesNoNoNoNo
Catalytic processing in ruthenium-based polyoxometalate coacervate protocells10.1038/s41467-019-13759-12020MannMiddle-out?NoNoYesNoNoYesNo
Membrane molecular crowding enhances MreB polymerization to shape synthetic cells from spheres to rods10.1073/pnas.19146561172020NoireauxBottom-upNoNoYesYesNoNoNo
Signaling and differentiation in emulsion-based multi-compartmentalized in vitro gene circuits10.1038/s41557-018-0174-92020SimmelBottom-upNoNoYesNoNoYesNo
Engineering motile aqueous phase-separated droplets via liposome stabilization10.1038/s41467-021-21832-x2021CesBottom-upNoNoYesNoYesNoNod
Light-Powered Reactivation of Flagella and Contraction of Microtubule Networks: Toward Building an Artificial Cell10.1021/acssynbio.1c000712021GholamiMiddle-outNoNoYesYesYesYesNo
Reconstitution of contractile actomyosin rings in vesicles10.1038/s41467-021-22422-72021SchwilleBottom-upNoYesYesNoNoNoNo
Programmable Aggregation of Artificial Cells with DNA Signals10.1021/acssynbio.0c005502021ChoiBottom-upNoNoYesNoNoYesNo
Phase Separation and Protein Partitioning in Compartmentalized Cell-Free Expression Reactions10.1021/acs.biomac.1c005462021MaedaMiddle-outNoNoYesNoNoNoNo
Light-Triggered Cargo Loading and Division of DNA-Containing Giant Unilamellar Lipid Vesicles10.1021/acs.nanolett.1c008222021GöpfrichBottom-upNoYesYesNoNoNoNo
Chromatophores efficiently promote light-driven ATP synthesis and DNA transcription inside hybrid multicompartment artificial cells10.1073/pnas.20121701182021MavelliMiddle-outNoNoYesYesNoYesNo
Programmable Fusion and Differentiation of Synthetic Minimal Cells10.1021/acssynbio.1c005192022AdamalaBottom-upNoNoYesYesNoNoYes
Signal-processing and adaptive prototissue formation in metabolic DNA protocells10.1038/s41467-022-31632-62022WaltherBottom-upNoNoYesNoNoYesNo
Living material assembly of bacteriogenic protocells10.1038/s41586-022-05223-w2022MannMiddle-outNoNoYesYesNoYesNo
In vitro assembly, positioning and contraction of a division ring in minimal cells10.1038/s41467-022-33679-x2022SchwilleBottom-upNoYesYesNoNoNoNo
Gene silencing and transfection in synthetic cells10.1002/bit.284222023AdamalaBottom-upNoNoYesYesNoNoYes
Synthesizing a minimal cell with artificial metabolic pathways10.1038/s42004-023-00856-y2023ImaiMiddle-outNoNoYesYesNoNoNo
Clonal Amplification-Enhanced Gene Expression in Synthetic Vesicles10.1021/acssynbio.2c006682023DanelonBottom-upYesNoYesYesNoNoNo
Engineering cellular communication between light-activated synthetic cells and bacteria10.1038/s41589-023-01374-72023BoothMiddle-outNoNoYesNoNoYesNo
Signal transduction across synthetic cell membranes, with nucleic acid and peptide signals10.1016/j.cels.2023.12.0082024AdamalaBottom-upNoNoYesYesNoYesYes
a

Classification of approach may be ambiguous in certain cases.

Technical Challenges

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Clearly, building synthetic cells faces significant technical challenges and is still a long way from achieving its declared objective. Box 2 provides a high-level overview of the remaining hurdles and outlines a sensible approach to overcome these. The remainder of this paper further defines the specific technical challenges, organized by the criteria of life as defined above.
Box 2

Steps toward Rational Bottom-up Design and Construction of Living Cells

To achieve the building of a cell, a series of milestones will have to be reached. While there are likely numerous routes to success, we anticipate the most rational approach to comprise the following six stages, to be accomplished in somewhat chronological order:
1.

Accomplish DNA replication in an encapsulated cell-free system

2.

Develop synthetic translation modules (synthetic ribosome; i.e., ribosomes making ribosomes, and the rest of the translation apparatus)

3.

Implement cycling/self-replicating Tx/Tl systems

4.

Achieve autonomous division of

a.

synthetic cellular compartment(s) without DNA

b.

machineries that segregate DNA

5.

Show adaptation/sense response response (adaptive homeostasis) of synthetic biochemical systems

6.

Revisit the definition of biological life to include synthetic biochemistry

Finally, an appropriate biosafety and -security framework will have to be instituted in parallel to and in correspondence with the progression of steps one to six that is applicable and pertinent to the new lifeform.
Since parallel development and cross-information on the six steps outlined above is highly likely, we have composed an overview of the interdependences in the path toward building of a cell in Figure 4.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Milestones toward the de novo design and construction of a synthetic cell. Many of these steps can be performed in parallel with a mixing and matching approach to integration.

Compartmentalization

To achieve the formation of compartments, reliable methods for vesicular synthesis are required. Traditional means, such as thin-film hydration to encapsulate cell-free systems in liposomes, results in a large range in the size and shape of liposomes. (35,171) This leads to variable protein expression among liposomes. (112,172) Another source of variability, especially in small (<10 μm) liposomes, is the random encapsulation of reactants. (173) This randomness means that some liposomes contain sufficient reactants to produce protein as opposed to nominal content of others. Even with microfluidic encapsulation, which ensures more uniform size and content, macromolecular crowding can lead to large local variability within the same liposome. (174)

Metabolism

Functional metabolism requires the development of robust catabolic and anabolic processes for the mobilization of substrate and energy. This will allow for the biosynthesis of essential cellular compounds, such as carbohydrates, fatty acids, and amino acids, that are the building blocks to minimize the reliance on externally supplied nutrients.
Given the large amount of transcription and translation that must occur simultaneously in synthetic cells, temporal control over gene-expression is critical. Whole cells have evolved complex methods to regulate genes in order to allocate limited resources toward the necessary metabolic functions required to maintain life. This control is often maintained via a series of genetic circuits that interact with each other, such as feedback and -forward loops, as well as oscillators. Advancements have been made in developing orthogonal gene regulators, which allow for the control of multiple genes simultaneously. However, emulating the complex gene regulation of whole cells in a cell-free environment remains a challenge. Furthermore, as we progress into developing synthetic cells with extended capabilities, for example, to produce chemicals, allocation of resources becomes an even larger challenge, as there must be a balance between maintenance of cellular functions and formation of the product of interest. (175,176)

Transcription and Translation Systems

Cell-free transcription and translation systems have advanced capabilities of in vitro protein expression by creating controllable, tunable systems independent of cell viability. The ‘Protein synthesis Using Recombinant Elements’ (PURE) system comprises the minimum number of enzymes required for Tx/Tl under specific conditions of almost any given gene. The PURE components are expressed in vivo, purified individually, and then combined. (40) This artificially reconstituted cell-free translation system allows controlled and high-throughput protein synthesis in vitro. (177) As with many novel technologies, the cost of supplies is a significant barrier. Nevertheless, promising advances in generating low-cost methods to produce the PURE cell-free system have been made. (178) “PURE to make PURE” is an example of this. Further, while completely tunable, the system consumes many resources and therefore has a lower protein output than crude cell extracts. (179) Crude cell extracts are derived from lysed whole cells where insoluble constituents have been removed via centrifugation, yielding an extract that contains a concentrated mix of cytosolic proteins. (180,181) Further processing by methods, such as dialysis, can improve the performance of such systems. Maintaining transcription and translation over extended periods in either of these cell-free systems remains a challenge, as with no regeneration most transcription and translation processes terminate after a few hours due to depletion of resources. In order to overcome this, long-lasting transcription and translation systems have been developed that continually replenish resources, such as tRNAs, amino acids, and salts, via a feeding solution or exhibit partial endogenous metabolism (e.g., oxidative phosphorylation). (182,180)
Advanced cell-free protein synthesis systems can produce up to 0.5 mg/mL protein in 2 to 4 h. (183) Nevertheless, these systems pale in comparison to the capabilities of naturally evolved cells as intracellular protein concentrations can be orders of magnitude higher. (184) The protein concentration of the cytoplasm in E. coli, for example, can reach 320 mg/mL, depending on the osmotic concentration of the medium. (185,186) If assuming a doubling time of ∼20 min, a protein production rate of 960 mg/mL cytoplasm per hour is theoretically feasible.
The ribosome is the “molecular machine” at the core of the translation system. Understanding of the ribosome has been transformed by the determination of three-dimensional structures, single molecule studies, and the construction of ribosomes from in vitro synthesized parts. (187,188) Despite this understanding, bottom-up synthesis of the ribosome in vitro remains a challenge. To achieve this objective, which is critical to building a true synthetic cell from the bottom-up, several key-achievements are needed, including the synthesis and assembly of rRNA and rProteins. Recent strides have been made in the construction of semisynthetic ribosomes using iSAT (integrated rRNA (rRNA) synthesis, ribosome assembly, and translation technology) in ribosome-free, crude cell lysates. (189) iSAT ribosomes are capable of constructing ribosomes. (190) In contrast to previous methods, this approach mimics the in vivo environment, including the cotranscription of rRNA and ribosome assembly, followed by protein synthesis in the same compartment. Similar methods imitate a natural cell’s cytoplasmic environment to allow for the de novo synthesis of ribosomes. (191)
The translation system is composed of many parts (ribosomes, tRNAs, aaRS, etc.), and synthesizing all of these is an energy-intensive process. Biosynthesis of the E. coli ribosome alone requires 7,434 peptide bonds to make a complete set of rProteins. (189) A successfully self-replicating translation system would need to be able to not only replicate components of the translation system but also any essential auxiliary proteins. (192) Any such system would come close to achieving a living synthetic cell.

Replication

No cell is immortal, thus replication is key to the persistence of life, as well as to evolution and the creation of a sufficiently dense population that ensures survival. PCR has been used to replicate genetic material in liposomes since 1995. (193) Although the replication and division of genetic material in liposomes is still not spontaneous, this technology has built a strong foundation for coupling with other technologies that work toward the goal of a synthetic cell. In vivo studies of natural cells have helped to elucidate the mechanisms of cell division. The minimal division machinery relies on gene circuits, metabolism, and macromolecular modules that have evolved to function in the environment of a living cell, and thus are not easily transferable to synthetic cells. Nevertheless, major strides have been made to control and observe genome management and separation. Future reconstitution attempts using cellular components may need to create environments that mimic natural crowding and associated electrostatic and excluded volume effects, such as was observed for DNA acting as an exclusion zone for actin fibers encapsulated in beads. (194) Synthetic systems that enable segregation of genomes to complement cell division still need to be established. Minimal-systems, as well as the proto-ring components, must be encapsulated in vesicles or other deformable compartments. (195) Analysis of cell division in JCVI-syn3.0 showed that it does not divide like most normal cells. Because it lacks a set of seven nonessential genes that include the cell-division proteins FtsZ and SepF, the cell appears to divide based on forces of membrane curvature rather than by forming a protein–lipid membrane between daughter cells. A similar process may have existed before the evolution of more sophisticated cell-division mechanisms. (196) Thus, construction of synthetic cells with replication systems simpler than those in the vast majority of lifeforms on Earth may be possible.

Emergent Features

Evolution

Evolution relies on the differential selection of variants whose phenotype is hereditary. In other words, evolution should emerge as long as there is heredity coupled to a phenotype and some variability (heterogeneity) in the population. To unleash the potential of evolution in a synthetic cell, genetic material must be passed on through generations. This can be accomplished by designing a synthetic genome, which may utilize either RNA or DNA and could rely on isothermal replication thereof, analogous to existing cells.
The concept of an “RNA world”, which suggests that RNA performed as both the genetic information and replication machinery, serves as a common theory for the emergence of life on Earth. Efforts to develop this into a synthetic cellular system could validate the possibility of an RNA origin-of-life and provide a way to bottom-up construct a synthetic cell. However, a fully self-synthesizing ribozyme has yet to be discovered or engineered.

Responsiveness

Designing synthetic cells that can respond to specific stimuli without relying on simply altering gene-expression remains a significant challenge. There are a wide range of chemical reaction systems that are responsive to different stimuli. In biological systems, sometimes similarly responsive reactions take place that employ no genetic elements. Stimuli-responsive compartments could enable dynamic changes in the behavior and functionality of synthetic cells in response to external cues. Achieving this requires the development of responsive cellular components and mechanisms that can detect and transduce signals. (164)

Movement

Many current techniques for the creation of directional movement are focused on single enzyme mediated movement along a limited diversity of concentration gradients. More physics-based techniques using interfacial tension differences could also be incorporated into synthetic cell-like systems. Based on the Marangoni effect, liposome-stabilized cell-sized droplets have demonstrated negative chemotaxis, resulting in movement away from the stimulus. (197) Self-propelled Janus particles have also been tuned to deliver cargo in response to specific obstacle geometries. (198) However, linking these to complex information-processing pathways inside an artificial system has not yet been shown. While likely challenging, these would nonetheless be a promising route to providing a limited form of directional movement.
Alternatively, complex parts of living cells could be isolated and reconstituted in artificial cell-based systems, for example, cilia and flagella, following a middle-out approach. Methods will need to be developed for their incorporation in a synthetic cell and their linkage to the information processing system for providing more than mere random motion. Knowledge gained by the development of these techniques can result in a better understanding of the motion-creating machinery that is essential for cell movement, potentially providing information for their bottom-up reconstitution.
A third technique driving directional movement could be the encapsulation of a set of cytoskeletal elements with associated proteins, for example, by reconstituting actin network assembly. (199,200) Described as “gliding”, some species of mycoplasmas exhibit this feature, which provides shape transformations, but directional movement is limited.

Concurrent Challenges

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Integration with Natural Cells

Successful interfacing of artificial and natural cells requires the presence of robust communication pathways. In recent years, synthetic cell-driven quorum-sensing was used not only to achieve signaling responses in bacteria, but also to expand their sensory range via artificial cells acting as chemical translators. (201,202) In another approach, artificial cells encapsulating gene-networks were able to detect, interact, and kill bacteria in chemically diverse extracellular-like environments. (203) Lastly, interfacing with eukaryotic cells has been successfully demonstrated by cuboplex-mediated gene-silencing in Chinese Hamster Ovary (CHO) cells, promoting the differentiation of neural stem cells from an artificially synthesized and released neurotrophic factor. (204)

Integration and Scalability

Overall, challenges of scalability of synthetic cells exist at three levels: scalability of individual components (e.g., scaling the number of genes that can be expressed in a cell-free system), scalability of number of components that can be integrated (e.g., adding a mobility module to membrane protein modules), and the scaling of the replication cycles and culture volume. A standardized workflow can help to establish both vertically- and horizontally integrated technology stacks for robust, reliable construction of synthetic cells. Such a workflow may also be helpful to define the components of a synthetic cell at varying levels of complexity and create modular abstraction for prediction and design. One such abstraction, of containers and content, has been proposed and others may emerge. (205−207) Scalability of synthetic cells for applications will depend on the success of these efforts at abstraction, coordination, and integration.

Cross-Lab and Larger-Scale Coordination

To be successful in building a cell, the free and open-access flow of data, protocols, and probably also people will be required. Effective communication and coordination between individual researchers and groups is crucial for establishing and maintaining functioning collaborations. This is especially important as cells require multiple interacting components, which exceeds the capacity of individual laboratories. Several such groups exist, including the NSF-funded Research Coordination Network (RCN) “Build-a-Cell”. (208) Build-a-Cell is an open, international collaboration supporting the science and engineering of synthetic cells. Members of the Build-a-Cell research community bring expertise from a variety of fields and backgrounds to foster open channels of collaboration, coordinate fundraising efforts, address biosafety and biosecurity concerns, encourage open technology transfer, and organize outreach efforts to increase understanding among researchers, policymakers, and the public. Other groups, such as the German-led MaxSynBio, (209) the Dutch-led BasyC, (210) and efforts from related fields, exist. (211−213)
To realize the full potential of synthetic cells for biomanufacturing, advanced tools and infrastructure for scale-up will be required. U.S. legislation, such as the “Inflation Reduction Act of 2022” (214) and the White House Executive Order 14081 on “Advancing Biotechnology and Biomanufacturing Innovation for a Sustainable, Safe, and Secure American Bioeconomy”, (215) as well as U.S. government efforts, such as BioMADE, (216) could support infrastructure for manufacturing synthetic cells.

Modular Roadmapping for Individual Components

Developing a modular roadmap for the integration of existing technologies, such as DNA synthesis, nanopore technology, microelectromechanical systems, microfluidics, compact hyperspectral imaging and ML, generative AI, and quantum computing, will help to motivate the community toward greater action, focus resources, and accelerate progress. This roadmap must be versatile enough to incorporate new technologies as they emerge. Academic efforts to produce devices for constructing cells are as of yet mostly uncoordinated.

Biosafety and Regulatory Guidelines

The field of synthetic cell research faces not only technical but also social, ethical, and philosophical challenges to define what is life, along with key obstacles requiring prudence for advancing both synthetic cell research specifically and biotechnology as a whole. Future applications, social and political frameworks, and governance for synthetic cell technologies demand thoughtful consideration, to ensure benefits while avoiding risks and preventing hazards. Equitable governance and regulatory participation are crucial for biosafety and threat mitigation as synthetic cell technologies become more accessible, reducing the risk of (intentionally or unintentionally) harmful biology. Existing methodologies for risk assessment, especially related to synthetic biology, must be revised or established anew, considering potential hazards through red teaming events and promoting biocontainment strategies.
Ensuring safe market-integration of synthetic cell technologies necessitates efficient regulatory pipelines, boosting private investments and career interests. Standardized definitions are prerequisites for policy protocols, aiding clear communication of standard operating procedures (SOPs) and safety protocols. FDA approval, a lengthy process for drugs, lacks suitable components for assessing synthetic cell safety due to their developmental stage. Classification of synthetic cell laboratories under BioSafety Levels (BSL) provides a standardized foundation for safety measures. BSL ratings, ranging from 1 to 4, determine containment needs based on pathogen type, a model that is likely also suitable for synthetic cells. Incorporating synthetic cells into existing pathogen definitions would simplify the process, assessing them similarly to naturally evolved pathogens based on infection capabilities or reproductive rates.

Technology Transfer

To optimize the development of impactful synthetic biology tools for synthetic cells, it is crucial to emphasize knowledge and technology transfer, given the significant expert hours required. Sharing procedures and protocols fosters effective collaboration, reducing redundancy and unnecessary competition among researchers. A coordinated effort to integrate the technology necessary for modeling, making, and measuring synthetic cells will not only enhance collaboration but also facilitate continuous iteration and improvement of underlying technologies. This collaborative approach should include complete reporting of attempted approaches, especially those that do not yield satisfactory results, to prevent researchers from inadvertently duplicating previous failures. Establishing a framework for sharing these unpublished results could significantly increase research efficiency.
Research could, for example, follow the lead of software development and create an open-source model for modular “à la carte” biological parts to develop a comprehensive synthetic cell chassis. This not only allows for a shared and collaborative understanding of basic biology functions but also avoids limiting the definition of “life” and thus limiting the scope of the field.

Outreach and Education

Synthetic cells offer significant potential for biotechnology, but engaging the public in research and technology development is crucial. Emphasizing education with both policymakers and the public will not only support effective policy frameworks but also enhance the acceptance and impact of new technologies. Fostering a better grasp of and involvement in synthetic cell technologies will aid in cultivating a market. Enhancing science literacy in the realm of synthetic biology will ensure a qualified workforce for this rapidly advancing field.
Comprehensive outreach and knowledge dissemination are essential across all levels to develop research tools, establish clear communication with policymakers, and create a market and workforce conducive to applying new technologies. Notably, BioBits kits have already captured student interest, fostering greater understanding. (217−221) Elevating science literacy through do-it-yourself (DIY) communities not only facilitates ethical discussions but also enhances public awareness and comprehension of ongoing research and eventual technologies.
Leveraging community-based laboratories alongside newly established foundations for global synthetic biology education can effectively drive public engagement and education in synthetic cell technology. (222) These endeavors to broaden STEM education can be interconnected with synthetic cell research.

Accessibility and Equity

Both living and nonliving synthetic cells will become a larger and larger part of biotechnology worldwide. The economic impact of this technology could be huge. A sustainable bioeconomy has the potential to enable communities around the world to be self-sufficient, self-determined, and resilient. As a highly impactful biotech field still in its nascency, synthetic cell research is well positioned to address historical barriers to access and address equity and inclusion in science more deliberately and democratically. This includes efforts in expanding the reach of education, developing technologies for use across geographic and socioeconomic boundaries, and engaging across disciplines to make decisions about the future of synthetic cell technology. (210)

Conclusions and Steps Ahead

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Due to the opportunity to tailor cellular systems for a specific purpose, synthetic cells could have a wide range of potential applications in various fields, such as cell biology, astrobiology and origin-of-life, bioengineering and biomedicine, biomanufacturing, and bioprocess engineering. However, achieving a self-sustaining biochemical reaction remains a significant challenge: the development of a fully functional synthetic cell is a complex and ongoing scientific endeavor that requires the integration of multiple disciplines and technologies.
Accomplishing the de novo construction of cells will be an enormous achievement, especially if the devised system is capable of reproduction, which will be a key first─but not ultimate─achievement. Any first iteration of a synthetic cell will likely be very basic, lacking substantial versatility in its metabolism and environmental robustness, and hence difficult to keep alive. In summary, the development of synthetic cells is a complex and multifaceted endeavor that will require interdisciplinary collaborations and significant investment in both resources and infrastructure.

When and How to Declare Success

Finally, at what point do we declare success? How do we know if we have created a synthetic cell that is alive rather than a vesicle that just exhibits life-like functions? Following Gánti’s Chemoton model of life, at a minimum, the characteristics of compartmentalization, metabolism, and replication must be present.
Is translation, transcription, or cell division required? Mature mammalian red blood cells, for example, do not have a nucleus or ribosomes and thus are not capable of transcription, translation or cell division. How about derived characteristics such as evolution? Clearly, these cells evolved from other kinds of cells, and the evolution of the nucleated cells that give rise to red blood cells will change the red blood cells. The list of exceptions goes on. If we turn to naturally evolved cells, we can easily find counterexamples for each of the current criteria of life, because life is a population-level phenomenon. As it is impossible to account for all possible variations and no “natural definition” of life exists, it may be a matter of creating a cell that is “generally recognized as alive” or GRAA. This allows the field to progress independently of philosophical agreement on a definition of life. Thus, the definition of success is likely context dependent and will have to be adapted as science progresses.

Author Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

  • Corresponding Author
  • Authors
    • Nils J. H. Averesch - Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United StatesOrcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-6389-2646
    • Elizabeth A. Strychalski - National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899, 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 StatesOrcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-3784-5301
    • Rolando Cruz Perez - Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United StatesBlue 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 StatesOrcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-0727-180X
    • Brooke Rothschild-Mancinelli - School of Chemistry and Biochemistry, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0150, United States
    • Garrett A. Roberts Kingman - NASA Postdoctoral Program, Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California 94035-1000, United States
    • Feilun Wu - J. Craig Venter Institute, Rockville, Maryland 20850, United States
    • Jorik Waeterschoot - Mechatronics, Biostatistics and Sensors (MeBioS), KU Leuven, 3000 Leuven BelgiumOrcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-3875-329X
    • Ion A. Ioannou - Department of Chemistry, MSRH, Imperial College London, London W12 0BZ, U.K.Orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-8749-1049
    • Michael C. Jewett - Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305, United StatesOrcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-2948-6211
    • Allen P. Liu - Mechanical Engineering & Biomedical Engineering, Cellular and Molecular Biology, Biophysics, Applied Physics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109, United StatesOrcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-0309-7018
    • Vincent Noireaux - Physics and Nanotechnology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455, United StatesOrcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-5213-273X
    • 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 StatesOrcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1066-7207
  • Author Contributions

    LJR, NJHA, FM, and KPA formulated the concept and structure of the article. LJR, NJHA, EAS, FM, JIG, RCP, IOY, BRM, GARK, FW, JW, IAI, MCJ, APL, VN, CS, and KPA wrote portions of the manuscript. LJR, EAS, FW, and JW created the figures. All authors edited the manuscript.

  • Notes
    Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in this document to describe an experimental procedure or concept adequately. Such identification is not intended to imply recommendation or endorsement by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor is it intended to imply that the entities, materials, or equipment are necessarily the best available for the purpose.
    The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Acknowledgments

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

We are grateful to every current or previous member of the “Build-a-Cell Roadmap Working Group” who drafted or edited this paper but chose not to be coauthors. NSF Research Coordination Network (RCN) funding (award number 1901145) supported this endeavor. In addition, LJR was supported by NASA’s Planetary Science Division Research Program, through the ISFM work package “Evolutionary Processes that Drove the Emergence and Early Distribution of Life” at NASA Ames Research Center. MCJ acknowledges funding from NSF Division of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport Systems (award number 1936789.). APL acknowledges funding from NSF Division of Emerging Frontiers (award number 1935265).

Abbreviations

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

BSL

BioSafety Levels

DBTL

Design-Build-Test-Learn

DIY

do-it-yourself

GRAA

generally recognized as alive

iSAT

integrated synthesis, assembly, and translation

NSAA

nonstandard amino acid

PCR

polymerase chain reaction

PURE

protein synthesis using recombinant elements

RCN

Research Coordination Network

SOP

standard operating procedure

STEM

science, technology, engineering and mathematics

Tx/Tl

transcription/translation

UBP

unnatural base pair

XNA

xenonucleic acid.

References

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

This article references 222 other publications.

  1. 1
    van Stevendaal, M. H. M. E.; Vasiukas, L.; Yewdall, N. A.; Mason, A. F.; van Hest, J. C. M. Engineering of Biocompatible Coacervate-Based Synthetic Cells. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2021, 13 (7), 78797889,  DOI: 10.1021/acsami.0c19052
  2. 2
    Tsokolov, S. A. Why Is the Definition of Life so Elusive? Epistemological Considerations. Astrobiology 2009, 9 (4), 401412,  DOI: 10.1089/ast.2007.0201
  3. 3
    Deplazes-Zemp, A. The Conception of Life in Synthetic Biology. Sci. Eng. Ethics 2012, 18 (4), 757774,  DOI: 10.1007/s11948-011-9269-z
  4. 4
    Machery, E. Why I Stopped Worrying about the Definition of Life··· and Why You Should as Well. Synthese 2012, 185 (1), 145164,  DOI: 10.1007/s11229-011-9880-1
  5. 5
    Bird, A.; Tobin, E. Natural Kinds. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy; Zalta, E. N., Nodelman, U., Eds.; Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, 2023.
  6. 6
    Cleland, C. E.; Chyba, C. F. Defining “Life.. Orig. Life Evol. Biosph. 2002, 32 (4), 387393,  DOI: 10.1023/A:1020503324273
  7. 7
    Ganti, T. The Principles of Life; OUP Oxford, 2003.
  8. 8
    Vibhute, M. A.; Mutschler, H. A Primer on Building Life like Systems. ChemSystemsChem 2023,  DOI: 10.1002/syst.202200033
  9. 9
    Benner, S. A. Defining Life. Astrobiology 2010, 10 (10), 10211030,  DOI: 10.1089/ast.2010.0524
  10. 10
    Cleland, C. E. The Quest for a Universal Theory of Life: Searching for Life As We Don’t Know It; Cambridge University Press, 2019.
  11. 11
    Otto, S. An Approach to the De Novo Synthesis of Life. Acc. Chem. Res. 2022, 55 (2), 145155,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.accounts.1c00534
  12. 12
    Joyce, G. F. In Vitro Evolution of Nucleic Acids. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 1994, 4, 331336,  DOI: 10.1016/S0959-440X(94)90100-7
  13. 13
    Agapakis, C. M. Designing Synthetic Biology. ACS Synth. Biol. 2014, 3 (3), 121128,  DOI: 10.1021/sb4001068
  14. 14
    Malaterre, C. Can Synthetic Biology Shed Light on the Origins of Life?. Biol. Theory 2009, 4 (4), 357367,  DOI: 10.1162/BIOT_a_00002
  15. 15
    Mukherji, S.; van Oudenaarden, A. Synthetic Biology: Understanding Biological Design from Synthetic Circuits. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2009, 10 (12), 859871,  DOI: 10.1038/nrg2697
  16. 16
    Rothschild, L. J. The Role of Emergence in Biology; Oxford University Press, 2008.
  17. 17
    Adamala, K.; Szostak, J. W. Nonenzymatic Template-Directed RNA Synthesis inside Model Protocells. Science 2013, 342 (6162), 10981100,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1241888
  18. 18
    Deamer, D.; Dworkin, J. P.; Sandford, S. A.; Bernstein, M. P.; Allamandola, L. J. The First Cell Membranes. Astrobiology 2002, 2 (4), 371381,  DOI: 10.1089/153110702762470482
  19. 19
    Deamer, D. The Role of Lipid Membranes in Life’s Origin. Life 2017, 7 (1), 5,  DOI: 10.3390/life7010005
  20. 20
    Discher, B. M.; Bermudez, H.; Hammer, D. A.; Discher, D. E.; Won, Y.-Y.; Bates, F. S. Cross-Linked Polymersome Membranes: Vesicles with Broadly Adjustable Properties. J. Phys. Chem. B 2002, 106 (11), 28482854,  DOI: 10.1021/jp011958z
  21. 21
    Kamat, N. P.; Katz, J. S.; Hammer, D. A. Engineering Polymersome Protocells. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2011, 2 (13), 16121623,  DOI: 10.1021/jz200640x
  22. 22
    Vickers, C. E. The Minimal Genome Comes of Age. Nat. Biotechnol. 2016, 34 (6), 623624,  DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3593
  23. 23
    Xu, X.; Meier, F.; Blount, B. A.; Pretorius, I. S.; Ellis, T.; Paulsen, I. T.; Williams, T. C. Trimming the Genomic Fat: Minimising and Re-Functionalising Genomes Using Synthetic Biology. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14 (1), 1984,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-37748-7
  24. 24
    Hutchison, C. A.; Peterson, S. N.; Gill, S. R.; Cline, R. T.; White, O.; Fraser, C. M.; Smith, H. O.; Venter, J. C. Global Transposon Mutagenesis and a Minimal Mycoplasma Genome. Science 1999, 286 (5447), 21652169,  DOI: 10.1126/science.286.5447.2165
  25. 25
    Glass, J. I.; Assad-Garcia, N.; Alperovich, N.; Yooseph, S.; Lewis, M. R.; Maruf, M.; Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Smith, H. O.; Venter, J. C. Essential Genes of a Minimal Bacterium. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2006, 103 (2), 425430,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0510013103
  26. 26
    Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Chuang, R.-Y.; Noskov, V. N.; Assad-Garcia, N.; Deerinck, T. J.; Ellisman, M. H.; Gill, J.; Kannan, K.; Karas, B. J.; Ma, L.; Pelletier, J. F.; Qi, Z.-Q.; Richter, R. A.; Strychalski, E. A.; Sun, L.; Suzuki, Y.; Tsvetanova, B.; Wise, K. S.; Smith, H. O.; Glass, J. I.; Merryman, C.; Gibson, D. G.; Venter, J. C. Design and Synthesis of a Minimal Bacterial Genome. Science 2016, 351 (6280), aad6253,  DOI: 10.1126/science.aad6253
  27. 27
    Hashimoto, M.; Ichimura, T.; Mizoguchi, H.; Tanaka, K.; Fujimitsu, K.; Keyamura, K.; Ote, T.; Yamakawa, T.; Yamazaki, Y.; Mori, H.; Katayama, T.; Kato, J.-I. Cell Size and Nucleoid Organization of Engineered Escherichia Coli Cells with a Reduced Genome. Mol. Microbiol. 2005, 55 (1), 137149,  DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2004.04386.x
  28. 28
    Pósfai, G.; Plunkett, G., 3rd; Fehér, T.; Frisch, D.; Keil, G. M.; Umenhoffer, K.; Kolisnychenko, V.; Stahl, B.; Sharma, S. S.; de Arruda, M.; Burland, V.; Harcum, S. W.; Blattner, F. R. Emergent Properties of Reduced-Genome Escherichia Coli. Science 2006, 312 (5776), 10441046,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1126439
  29. 29
    Lartigue, C.; Glass, J. I.; Alperovich, N.; Pieper, R.; Parmar, P. P.; Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Smith, H. O.; Venter, J. C. Genome Transplantation in Bacteria: Changing One Species to Another. Science 2007, 317 (5838), 632638,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1144622
  30. 30
    Gibson, D. G.; Benders, G. A.; Andrews-Pfannkoch, C.; Denisova, E. A.; Baden-Tillson, H.; Zaveri, J.; Stockwell, T. B.; Brownley, A.; Thomas, D. W.; Algire, M. A.; Merryman, C.; Young, L.; Noskov, V. N.; Glass, J. I.; Venter, J. C.; Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Smith, H. O. Complete Chemical Synthesis, Assembly, and Cloning of a Mycoplasma Genitalium Genome. Science 2008, 319 (5867), 12151220,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1151721
  31. 31
    Lartigue, C.; Vashee, S.; Algire, M. A.; Chuang, R.-Y.; Benders, G. A.; Ma, L.; Noskov, V. N.; Denisova, E. A.; Gibson, D. G.; Assad-Garcia, N.; Alperovich, N.; Thomas, D. W.; Merryman, C.; Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Smith, H. O.; Venter, J. C.; Glass, J. I. Creating Bacterial Strains from Genomes That Have Been Cloned and Engineered in Yeast. Science 2009, 325 (5948), 16931696,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1173759
  32. 32
    Gibson, D. G.; Glass, J. I.; Lartigue, C.; Noskov, V. N.; Chuang, R.-Y.; Algire, M. A.; Benders, G. A.; Montague, M. G.; Ma, L.; Moodie, M. M.; Merryman, C.; Vashee, S.; Krishnakumar, R.; Assad-Garcia, N.; Andrews-Pfannkoch, C.; Denisova, E. A.; Young, L.; Qi, Z.-Q.; Segall-Shapiro, T. H.; Calvey, C. H.; Parmar, P. P.; Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Smith, H. O.; Venter, J. C. Creation of a Bacterial Cell Controlled by a Chemically Synthesized Genome. Science 2010, 329 (5987), 5256,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1190719
  33. 33
    Stano, P.; Luisi, P. L. Semi-Synthetic Minimal Cells: Origin and Recent Developments. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2013, 24 (4), 633638,  DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2013.01.002
  34. 34
    Olivi, L.; Berger, M.; Creyghton, R. N. P.; De Franceschi, N.; Dekker, C.; Mulder, B. M.; Claassens, N. J.; Ten Wolde, P. R.; van der Oost, J. Towards a Synthetic Cell Cycle. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12 (1), 4531,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-24772-8
  35. 35
    Adamala, K. P.; Martin-Alarcon, D. A.; Guthrie-Honea, K. R.; Boyden, E. S. Engineering Genetic Circuit Interactions within and between Synthetic Minimal Cells. Nat. Chem. 2017, 9 (5), 431439,  DOI: 10.1038/nchem.2644
  36. 36
    Fenz, S. F.; Sachse, R.; Schmidt, T.; Kubick, S. Cell-Free Synthesis of Membrane Proteins: Tailored Cell Models out of Microsomes. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2014, 1838 (5), 13821388,  DOI: 10.1016/j.bbamem.2013.12.009
  37. 37
    Kroll, A. V.; Fang, R. H.; Zhang, L. Biointerfacing and Applications of Cell Membrane-Coated Nanoparticles. Bioconjugate Chem. 2017, 28 (1), 2332,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.6b00569
  38. 38
    Gurramkonda, C.; Rao, A.; Borhani, S.; Pilli, M.; Deldari, S.; Ge, X.; Pezeshk, N.; Han, T.-C.; Tolosa, M.; Kostov, Y.; Tolosa, L.; Wood, D. W.; Vattem, K.; Frey, D. D.; Rao, G. Improving the Recombinant Human Erythropoietin Glycosylation Using Microsome Supplementation in CHO Cell-Free System. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2018, 115 (5), 12531264,  DOI: 10.1002/bit.26554
  39. 39
    Su’etsugu, M.; Takada, H.; Katayama, T.; Tsujimoto, H. Exponential Propagation of Large Circular DNA by Reconstitution of a Chromosome-Replication Cycle. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017, 45 (20), 1152511534,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkx822
  40. 40
    Shimizu, Y.; Inoue, A.; Tomari, Y.; Suzuki, T.; Yokogawa, T.; Nishikawa, K.; Ueda, T. Cell-Free Translation Reconstituted with Purified Components. Nat. Biotechnol. 2001, 19 (8), 751755,  DOI: 10.1038/90802
  41. 41
    Drienovská, I.; Roelfes, G. Expanding the Enzyme Universe with Genetically Encoded Unnatural Amino Acids. Nature Catalysis 2020, 3 (3), 193202,  DOI: 10.1038/s41929-019-0410-8
  42. 42
    Medina, E.; Yik, E. J.; Herdewijn, P.; Chaput, J. C. Functional Comparison of Laboratory-Evolved XNA Polymerases for Synthetic Biology. ACS Synth. Biol. 2021, 10 (6), 14291437,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.1c00048
  43. 43
    Theobald, D. L. A Formal Test of the Theory of Universal Common Ancestry. Nature 2010, 465 (7295), 219222,  DOI: 10.1038/nature09014
  44. 44
    Yang, Z.; Chen, F.; Alvarado, J. B.; Benner, S. A. Amplification, Mutation, and Sequencing of a Six-Letter Synthetic Genetic System. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133 (38), 1510515112,  DOI: 10.1021/ja204910n
  45. 45
    Malyshev, D. A.; Dhami, K.; Lavergne, T.; Chen, T.; Dai, N.; Foster, J. M.; Corrêa, I. R., Jr; Romesberg, F. E. A Semi-Synthetic Organism with an Expanded Genetic Alphabet. Nature 2014, 509 (7500), 385388,  DOI: 10.1038/nature13314
  46. 46
    Rech, E. L.; Arber, W. Biodiversity as a Source for Synthetic Domestication of Useful Specific Traits. Ann. Appl. Biol. 2013, 162 (2), 141144,  DOI: 10.1111/aab.12013
  47. 47
    Rech, E. Genomics and Synthetic Biology as a Viable Option to Intensify Sustainable Use of Biodiversity. Nat. Precedings 2011, 11,  DOI: 10.1038/npre.2011.5759.1
  48. 48
    Kiyama, H.; Kakizawa, S.; Sasajima, Y.; Tahara, Y. O.; Miyata, M. Reconstitution of a Minimal Motility System Based on Spiroplasma Swimming by Two Bacterial Actins in a Synthetic Minimal Bacterium. Sci. Adv. 2022, 8 (48), eabo7490,  DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abo7490
  49. 49
    Geiger, O.; Sanchez-Flores, A.; Padilla-Gomez, J.; Degli Esposti, M. Multiple Approaches of Cellular Metabolism Define the Bacterial Ancestry of Mitochondria. Sci. Adv. 2023, 9 (32), eadh0066,  DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.adh0066
  50. 50
    Pinheiro, V. B.; Taylor, A. I.; Cozens, C.; Abramov, M.; Renders, M.; Zhang, S.; Chaput, J. C.; Wengel, J.; Peak-Chew, S.-Y.; McLaughlin, S. H.; Herdewijn, P.; Holliger, P. Synthetic Genetic Polymers Capable of Heredity and Evolution. Science 2012, 336 (6079), 341344,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1217622
  51. 51
    Hoshika, S.; Leal, N. A.; Kim, M.-J.; Kim, M.-S.; Karalkar, N. B.; Kim, H.-J.; Bates, A. M.; Watkins, N. E., Jr; SantaLucia, H. A.; Meyer, A. J.; DasGupta, S.; Piccirilli, J. A.; Ellington, A. D.; SantaLucia, J., Jr; Georgiadis, M. M.; Benner, S. A. Hachimoji DNA and RNA: A Genetic System with Eight Building Blocks. Science 2019, 363 (6429), 884887,  DOI: 10.1126/science.aat0971
  52. 52
    Jumper, J.; Evans, R.; Pritzel, A.; Green, T.; Figurnov, M.; Ronneberger, O.; Tunyasuvunakool, K.; Bates, R.; Žídek, A.; Potapenko, A.; Bridgland, A.; Meyer, C.; Kohl, S. A. A.; Ballard, A. J.; Cowie, A.; Romera-Paredes, B.; Nikolov, S.; Jain, R.; Adler, J.; Back, T.; Petersen, S.; Reiman, D.; Clancy, E.; Zielinski, M.; Steinegger, M.; Pacholska, M.; Berghammer, T.; Bodenstein, S.; Silver, D.; Vinyals, O.; Senior, A. W.; Kavukcuoglu, K.; Kohli, P.; Hassabis, D. Highly Accurate Protein Structure Prediction with AlphaFold. Nature 2021, 596 (7873), 583589,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2
  53. 53
    Lee, J. W.; Na, D.; Park, J. M.; Lee, J.; Choi, S.; Lee, S. Y. Systems Metabolic Engineering of Microorganisms for Natural and Non-Natural Chemicals. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2012, 8 (6), 536546,  DOI: 10.1038/nchembio.970
  54. 54
    Nielsen, J. Systems Biology of Metabolism. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2017, 86, 245275,  DOI: 10.1146/annurev-biochem-061516-044757
  55. 55
    Choi, K. R.; Jang, W. D.; Yang, D.; Cho, J. S.; Park, D.; Lee, S. Y. Systems Metabolic Engineering Strategies: Integrating Systems and Synthetic Biology with Metabolic Engineering. Trends Biotechnol. 2019, 37 (8), 817837,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2019.01.003
  56. 56
    Karim, A. S.; Dudley, Q. M.; Juminaga, A.; Yuan, Y.; Crowe, S. A.; Heggestad, J. T.; Garg, S.; Abdalla, T.; Grubbe, W. S.; Rasor, B. J.; Coar, D. N.; Torculas, M.; Krein, M.; Liew, F. E.; Quattlebaum, A.; Jensen, R. O.; Stuart, J. A.; Simpson, S. D.; Köpke, M.; Jewett, M. C. In Vitro Prototyping and Rapid Optimization of Biosynthetic Enzymes for Cell Design. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2020, 16 (8), 912919,  DOI: 10.1038/s41589-020-0559-0
  57. 57
    Dudley, Q. M.; Karim, A. S.; Nash, C. J.; Jewett, M. C. In Vitro Prototyping of Limonene Biosynthesis Using Cell-Free Protein Synthesis. Metab. Eng. 2020, 61, 251260,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ymben.2020.05.006
  58. 58
    Averesch, N. J. H.; Krömer, J. O. Metabolic Engineering of the Shikimate Pathway for Production of Aromatics and Derived Compounds-Present and Future Strain Construction Strategies. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2018, 6, 32,  DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2018.00032
  59. 59
    Jang, W. D.; Kim, G. B.; Lee, S. Y. An Interactive Metabolic Map of Bio-Based Chemicals. Trends Biotechnol. 2023, 41 (1), 1014,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2022.07.013
  60. 60
    Lai, H.-E.; Obled, A. M. C.; Chee, S. M.; Morgan, R. M.; Lynch, R.; Sharma, S. V.; Moore, S. J.; Polizzi, K. M.; Goss, R. J. M.; Freemont, P. S. GenoChemetic Strategy for Derivatization of the Violacein Natural Product Scaffold. ACS Chem. Biol. 2021, 16 (11), 21162123,  DOI: 10.1021/acschembio.1c00483
  61. 61
    Galanie, S.; Thodey, K.; Trenchard, I. J.; Filsinger Interrante, M.; Smolke, C. D. Complete Biosynthesis of Opioids in Yeast. Science 2015, 349 (6252), 10951100,  DOI: 10.1126/science.aac9373
  62. 62
    Trenchard, I. J.; Siddiqui, M. S.; Thodey, K.; Smolke, C. D. De Novo Production of the Key Branch Point Benzylisoquinoline Alkaloid Reticuline in Yeast. Metab. Eng. 2015, 31, 7483,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ymben.2015.06.010
  63. 63
    Chan, C. T. Y.; Lee, J. W.; Cameron, D. E.; Bashor, C. J.; Collins, J. J. Deadman” and “Passcode” Microbial Kill Switches for Bacterial Containment. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2016, 12 (2), 8286,  DOI: 10.1038/nchembio.1979
  64. 64
    Caliando, B. J.; Voigt, C. A. Targeted DNA Degradation Using a CRISPR Device Stably Carried in the Host Genome. Nat. Commun. 2015, 6, 6989,  DOI: 10.1038/ncomms7989
  65. 65
    Nyerges, A.; Vinke, S.; Flynn, R.; Owen, S. V.; Rand, E. A.; Budnik, B.; Keen, E.; Narasimhan, K.; Marchand, J. A.; Baas-Thomas, M.; Liu, M.; Chen, K.; Chiappino-Pepe, A.; Hu, F.; Baym, M.; Church, G. M. A Swapped Genetic Code Prevents Viral Infections and Gene Transfer. Nature 2023, 615 (7953), 720727,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-05824-z
  66. 66
    Scrinis, G.; Lyons, K. The Emerging Nano-Corporate Paradigm: Nanotechnology and the Transformation of Nature, Food and Agri-Food Systems. Int. J. Sociol. Agric. Food 2007, 15 (2), 2244
  67. 67
    Nitrogen fixing bacteria - microbial fertilizer. https://www.pivotbio.com/ (accessed on April 30, 2023).
  68. 68
    Kaul, S.; Choudhary, M.; Gupta, S.; Dhar, M. K. Engineering Host Microbiome for Crop Improvement and Sustainable Agriculture. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 635917,  DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.635917
  69. 69
    Mueller, U. G.; Sachs, J. L. Engineering Microbiomes to Improve Plant and Animal Health. Trends Microbiol. 2015, 23 (10), 606617,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tim.2015.07.009
  70. 70
    Jin Song, S.; Woodhams, D. C.; Martino, C.; Allaband, C.; Mu, A.; Javorschi-Miller-Montgomery, S.; Suchodolski, J. S.; Knight, R. Engineering the Microbiome for Animal Health and Conservation. Exp. Biol. Med. 2019, 244 (6), 494504,  DOI: 10.1177/1535370219830075
  71. 71
    Aziz, C. E.; Borden, R. C.; Coates, J. D.; Cox, E. E.; Downey, D. C.; Evans, P. J.; Hatzinger, P. B.; Henry, B. M.; Andrew Jackson, W.; Krug, T. A.; Tony Lieberman, M.; Loehr, R. C.; Norris, R. D.; Nzengung, V. A.; Perlmutter, M. W.; Schaefer, C. E.; Stroo, H. F.; Herb Ward, C.; Winstead, C. J.; Wolfe, C. In Situ Bioremediation of Perchlorate in Groundwater; Springer: New York.
  72. 72
    Hou, D.; O’Connor, D.; Igalavithana, A. D.; Alessi, D. S.; Luo, J.; Tsang, D. C. W.; Sparks, D. L.; Yamauchi, Y.; Rinklebe, J.; Ok, Y. S. Metal Contamination and Bioremediation of Agricultural Soils for Food Safety and Sustainability. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment 2020, 1 (7), 366381,  DOI: 10.1038/s43017-020-0061-y
  73. 73
    Maity, W.; Maity, S.; Bera, S.; Roy, A. Emerging Roles of PETase and MHETase in the Biodegradation of Plastic Wastes. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2021, 193 (8), 26992716,  DOI: 10.1007/s12010-021-03562-4
  74. 74
    de Lorenzo, V.; Prather, K. L.; Chen, G.-Q.; O’Day, E.; von Kameke, C.; Oyarzún, D. A.; Hosta-Rigau, L.; Alsafar, H.; Cao, C.; Ji, W.; Okano, H.; Roberts, R. J.; Ronaghi, M.; Yeung, K.; Zhang, F.; Lee, S. Y. The Power of Synthetic Biology for Bioproduction, Remediation and Pollution Control: The UN’s Sustainable Development Goals Will Inevitably Require the Application of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology on a Global Scale. EMBO Rep 2018,  DOI: 10.15252/embr.201745658
  75. 75
    Thavarajah, W.; Verosloff, M. S.; Jung, J. K.; Alam, K. K.; Miller, J. D.; Jewett, M. C.; Young, S. L.; Lucks, J. B. A Primer on Emerging Field-Deployable Synthetic Biology Tools for Global Water Quality Monitoring. NPJ. Clean Water 2020,  DOI: 10.1038/s41545-020-0064-8
  76. 76
    Gupta, R. M.; Schnitzler, G. R.; Fang, S.; Lee-Kim, V. S.; Barry, A. Multiomic Analysis and CRISPR Perturbation Screens Identify Endothelial Cell Programs and Novel Therapeutic Targets for Coronary Artery Disease. Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol. 2023, 43 (5), 600608,  DOI: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.123.318328
  77. 77
    Virchow, R. L. K. Disease, Life and Man: Selected Essays; Rather, L. J., Translator; Stanford University Press, 1958.
  78. 78
    Center for Biologics Evaluation; Research. Approved Cellular and Gene Therapy Products. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/cellular-gene-therapy-products/approved-cellular-and-gene-therapy-products (accessed on August 21, 2023).
  79. 79
    Bashor, C. J.; Hilton, I. B.; Bandukwala, H.; Smith, D. M.; Veiseh, O. Engineering the next Generation of Cell-Based Therapeutics. Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 2022, 21 (9), 655675,  DOI: 10.1038/s41573-022-00476-6
  80. 80
    Rosenbaum, L. Tragedy, Perseverance, and Chance - The Story of CAR-T Therapy. N. Engl. J. Med. 2017, 377 (14), 13131315,  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1711886
  81. 81
    Hay, A. E.; Cheung, M. C. CAR T-Cells: Costs, Comparisons, and Commentary. J. Med. Econ. 2019, 22 (7), 613615,  DOI: 10.1080/13696998.2019.1582059
  82. 82
    Sampson, K.; Sorenson, C.; Adamala, K. FDA needs to get ready to evaluate synthetic cells, the next generation of therapeutics. STAT. https://www.statnews.com/2022/07/26/fda-develop-framework-evaluate-synthetic-cells/ (accessed on January 6, 2024).
  83. 83
    Lussier, F.; Staufer, O.; Platzman, I.; Spatz, J. P. Can Bottom-Up Synthetic Biology Generate Advanced Drug-Delivery Systems?. Trends Biotechnol. 2021, 39 (5), 445459,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2020.08.002
  84. 84
    Staufer, O.; Dietrich, F.; Rimal, R.; Schröter, M.; Fabritz, S.; Boehm, H.; Singh, S.; Möller, M.; Platzman, I.; Spatz, J. P. Bottom-up Assembly of Biomedical Relevant Fully Synthetic Extracellular Vesicles. Sci. Adv. 2021, 7 (36), eabg6666,  DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abg6666
  85. 85
    Ghaemmaghamian, Z.; Zarghami, R.; Walker, G.; O’Reilly, E.; Ziaee, A. Stabilizing Vaccines via Drying: Quality by Design Considerations. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2022, 187, 114313,  DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2022.114313
  86. 86
    Adiga, R.; Al-Adhami, M.; Andar, A.; Borhani, S.; Brown, S.; Burgenson, D.; Cooper, M. A.; Deldari, S.; Frey, D. D.; Ge, X.; Guo, H.; Gurramkonda, C.; Jensen, P.; Kostov, Y.; LaCourse, W.; Liu, Y.; Moreira, A.; Mupparapu, K.; Peñalber-Johnstone, C.; Pilli, M.; Punshon-Smith, B.; Rao, A.; Rao, G.; Rauniyar, P.; Snovida, S.; Taurani, K.; Tilahun, D.; Tolosa, L.; Tolosa, M.; Tran, K.; Vattem, K.; Veeraraghavan, S.; Wagner, B.; Wilhide, J.; Wood, D. W.; Zuber, A. Point-of-Care Production of Therapeutic Proteins of Good-Manufacturing-Practice Quality. Nat. Biomed Eng. 2018, 2 (9), 675686,  DOI: 10.1038/s41551-018-0259-1
  87. 87
    Ginsburg, G. S.; Phillips, K. A. Precision Medicine: From Science To Value. Health Aff. 2018, 37 (5), 694701,  DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2017.1624
  88. 88
    Agarwal, S.; Saha, S.; Balla, V. K.; Pal, A.; Barui, A.; Bodhak, S. Current Developments in 3D Bioprinting for Tissue and Organ Regeneration-A Review. Front. Mech. Eng. Chin 2020,  DOI: 10.3389/fmech.2020.589171
  89. 89
    Ghosh, S.; Yi, H.-G. A Review on Bioinks and Their Application in Plant Bioprinting. Int. J. Bioprint 2022, 8 (4), 612,  DOI: 10.18063/ijb.v8i4.612
  90. 90
    Santomartino, R.; Averesch, N. J. H.; Bhuiyan, M.; Cockell, C. S.; Colangelo, J.; Gumulya, Y.; Lehner, B.; Lopez-Ayala, I.; McMahon, S.; Mohanty, A.; Santa Maria, S. R.; Urbaniak, C.; Volger, R.; Yang, J.; Zea, L. Toward Sustainable Space Exploration: A Roadmap for Harnessing the Power of Microorganisms. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14 (1), 1391,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-37070-2
  91. 91
    Rothschild, L. J. Synthetic Biology Meets Bioprinting: Enabling Technologies for Humans on Mars (and Earth). Biochem. Soc. Trans. 2016, 44 (4), 11581164,  DOI: 10.1042/BST20160067
  92. 92
    Averesch, N. J. H.; Berliner, A. J.; Nangle, S. N.; Zezulka, S.; Vengerova, G. L.; Ho, D.; Casale, C. A.; Lehner, B. A. E.; Snyder, J. E.; Clark, K. B.; Dartnell, L. R.; Criddle, C. S.; Arkin, A. P. Microbial Biomanufacturing for Space-Exploration-What to Take and When to Make. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14 (1), 2311,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-37910-1
  93. 93
    Averesch, N. J. H. Choice of Microbial System for in-Situ Resource Utilization on Mars. Front. Astron. Space Sci. 2021,  DOI: 10.3389/fspas.2021.700370
  94. 94
    Cockell, C. S. Bridging the Gap between Microbial Limits and Extremes in Space: Space Microbial Biotechnology in the next 15 Years. Microb. Biotechnol. 2022, 15 (1), 2941,  DOI: 10.1111/1751-7915.13927
  95. 95
    Buddingh’, B. C.; van Hest, J. C. M. Artificial Cells: Synthetic Compartments with Life-like Functionality and Adaptivity. Acc. Chem. Res. 2017, 50 (4), 769777,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.accounts.6b00512
  96. 96
    Ichihashi, N. What Can We Learn from the Construction of in Vitro Replication Systems?. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 2019, 1447 (1), 144156,  DOI: 10.1111/nyas.14042
  97. 97
    Groaz, A.; Moghimianavval, H.; Tavella, F.; Giessen, T. W.; Vecchiarelli, A. G.; Yang, Q.; Liu, A. P. Engineering Spatiotemporal Organization and Dynamics in Synthetic Cells. WIREs Nanomed. Nanobiotechnol. 2021, 13 (3), e1685,  DOI: 10.1002/wnan.1685
  98. 98
    Gaut, N. J.; Adamala, K. P. Reconstituting Natural Cell Elements in Synthetic Cells. Adv. Biol. 2021, 5 (3), e2000188,  DOI: 10.1002/adbi.202000188
  99. 99
    Stal, L. J. Nitrogen Fixation in Cyanobacteria. In eLS; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd: Chichester, UK, 2015; pp 19.  DOI: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0021159.pub2 .
  100. 100
    Poirier, Y.; Antonenkov, V. D.; Glumoff, T.; Hiltunen, J. K. Peroxisomal β-oxidation─A Metabolic Pathway with Multiple Functions. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular Cell Research 2006, 1763 (12), 14131426,  DOI: 10.1016/j.bbamcr.2006.08.034
  101. 101
    Murat, D.; Byrne, M.; Komeili, A. Cell Biology of Prokaryotic Organelles. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 2010, 2 (10), a000422,  DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a000422
  102. 102
    Nott, T. J.; Craggs, T. D.; Baldwin, A. J. Membraneless Organelles Can Melt Nucleic Acid Duplexes and Act as Biomolecular Filters. Nat. Chem. 2016, 8 (6), 569575,  DOI: 10.1038/nchem.2519
  103. 103
    Lyon, A. S.; Peeples, W. B.; Rosen, M. K. A Framework for Understanding the Functions of Biomolecular Condensates across Scales. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2021, 22 (3), 215235,  DOI: 10.1038/s41580-020-00303-z
  104. 104
    Protter, D. S. W.; Parker, R. Principles and Properties of Stress Granules. Trends Cell Biol. 2016, 26 (9), 668679,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tcb.2016.05.004
  105. 105
    Roger, A. J.; Muñoz-Gómez, S. A.; Kamikawa, R. The Origin and Diversification of Mitochondria. Curr. Biol. 2017, 27 (21), R1177R1192,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.09.015
  106. 106
    Mehta, A. P.; Supekova, L.; Chen, J.-H.; Pestonjamasp, K.; Webster, P.; Ko, Y.; Henderson, S. C.; McDermott, G.; Supek, F.; Schultz, P. G. Engineering Yeast Endosymbionts as a Step toward the Evolution of Mitochondria. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2018, 115 (46), 1179611801,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1813143115
  107. 107
    Headen, D. M.; Aubry, G.; Lu, H.; García, A. J. Microfluidic-Based Generation of Size-Controlled, Biofunctionalized Synthetic Polymer Microgels for Cell Encapsulation. Adv. Mater. 2014, 26 (19), 30033008,  DOI: 10.1002/adma.201304880
  108. 108
    Torre, P.; Keating, C. D.; Mansy, S. S. Multiphase Water-in-Oil Emulsion Droplets for Cell-Free Transcription-Translation. Langmuir 2014, 30 (20), 56955699,  DOI: 10.1021/la404146g
  109. 109
    Zhang, Y.; Kojima, T.; Kim, G.-A.; McNerney, M. P.; Takayama, S.; Styczynski, M. P. Protocell Arrays for Simultaneous Detection of Diverse Analytes. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12 (1), 5724,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-25989-3
  110. 110
    Allen, M. E.; Hindley, J. W.; Baxani, D. K.; Ces, O.; Elani, Y. Hydrogels as Functional Components in Artificial Cell Systems. Nat. Rev. Chem. 2022, 6 (8), 562578,  DOI: 10.1038/s41570-022-00404-7
  111. 111
    Has, C.; Sunthar, P. A Comprehensive Review on Recent Preparation Techniques of Liposomes. J. Liposome Res. 2020, 30 (4), 336365,  DOI: 10.1080/08982104.2019.1668010
  112. 112
    Luisi, P. L.; Allegretti, M.; Pereira de Souza, T.; Steiniger, F.; Fahr, A.; Stano, P. Spontaneous Protein Crowding in Liposomes: A New Vista for the Origin of Cellular Metabolism. Chembiochem 2010, 11 (14), 19891992,  DOI: 10.1002/cbic.201000381
  113. 113
    Michelon, M.; Huang, Y.; de la Torre, L. G.; Weitz, D. A.; Cunha, R. L. Single-Step Microfluidic Production of W/O/W Double Emulsions as Templates for β-Carotene-Loaded Giant Liposomes Formation. Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 366, 2732,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2019.02.021
  114. 114
    Elani, Y.; Trantidou, T.; Wylie, D.; Dekker, L.; Polizzi, K.; Law, R. V.; Ces, O. Constructing Vesicle-Based Artificial Cells with Embedded Living Cells as Organelle-like Modules. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8 (1), 4564,  DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-22263-3
  115. 115
    Tayeb, H. H.; Sainsbury, F. Nanoemulsions in Drug Delivery: Formulation to Medical Application. Nanomedicine 2018, 13 (19), 25072525,  DOI: 10.2217/nnm-2018-0088
  116. 116
    Vogele, K.; Frank, T.; Gasser, L.; Goetzfried, M. A.; Hackl, M. W.; Sieber, S. A.; Simmel, F. C.; Pirzer, T. Towards Synthetic Cells Using Peptide-Based Reaction Compartments. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9 (1), 3862,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-06379-8
  117. 117
    Mushnoori, S.; Lu, C. Y.; Schmidt, K.; Zang, E.; Dutt, M. Peptide-Based Vesicles and Droplets: A Review. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 2020, 33 (5), 053002,  DOI: 10.1088/1361-648X/abb995
  118. 118
    Sharma, B.; Ma, Y.; Hiraki, H. L.; Baker, B. M.; Ferguson, A. L.; Liu, A. P. Facile Formation of Giant Elastin-like Polypeptide Vesicles as Synthetic Cells. Chem. Commun. 2021, 57 (97), 1320213205,  DOI: 10.1039/D1CC05579H
  119. 119
    Vieregg, J. R.; Lueckheide, M.; Marciel, A. B.; Leon, L.; Bologna, A. J.; Rivera, J. R.; Tirrell, M. V. Oligonucleotide-Peptide Complexes: Phase Control by Hybridization. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2018, 140 (5), 16321638,  DOI: 10.1021/jacs.7b03567
  120. 120
    Fraccia, T. P.; Jia, T. Z. Liquid Crystal Coacervates Composed of Short Double-Stranded DNA and Cationic Peptides. ACS Nano 2020, 14 (11), 1507115082,  DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.0c05083
  121. 121
    Aumiller, W. M., Jr; Pir Cakmak, F.; Davis, B. W.; Keating, C. D. RNA-Based Coacervates as a Model for Membraneless Organelles: Formation, Properties, and Interfacial Liposome Assembly. Langmuir 2016, 32 (39), 1004210053,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.langmuir.6b02499
  122. 122
    Rimoli, M. G.; Rabaioli, M. R.; Melisi, D.; Curcio, A.; Mondello, S.; Mirabelli, R.; Abignente, E. Synthetic Zeolites as a New Tool for Drug Delivery. J. Biomed. Mater. Res., Part A 2008, 87 (1), 156164,  DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.31763
  123. 123
    Hyman, A. A.; Weber, C. A.; Jülicher, F. Liquid-Liquid Phase Separation in Biology. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 2014, 30, 3958,  DOI: 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100913-013325
  124. 124
    Junge, F.; Haberstock, S.; Roos, C.; Stefer, S.; Proverbio, D.; Dötsch, V.; Bernhard, F. Advances in Cell-Free Protein Synthesis for the Functional and Structural Analysis of Membrane Proteins. N. Biotechnol. 2011, 28 (3), 262271,  DOI: 10.1016/j.nbt.2010.07.002
  125. 125
    Lee, K. Y.; Park, S.-J.; Lee, K. A.; Kim, S.-H.; Kim, H.; Meroz, Y.; Mahadevan, L.; Jung, K.-H.; Ahn, T. K.; Parker, K. K.; Shin, K. Photosynthetic Artificial Organelles Sustain and Control ATP-Dependent Reactions in a Protocellular System. Nat. Biotechnol. 2018, 36 (6), 530535,  DOI: 10.1038/nbt.4140
  126. 126
    Jewett, M. C.; Swartz, J. R. Mimicking the Escherichia Coli Cytoplasmic Environment Activates Long-Lived and Efficient Cell-Free Protein Synthesis. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2004, 86 (1), 1926,  DOI: 10.1002/bit.20026
  127. 127
    Caschera, F.; Noireaux, V. Synthesis of 2.3 Mg/mL of Protein with an All Escherichia Coli Cell-Free Transcription-Translation System. Biochimie 2014, 99, 162168,  DOI: 10.1016/j.biochi.2013.11.025
  128. 128
    Garamella, J.; Marshall, R.; Rustad, M.; Noireaux, V. The All E. Coli TX-TL Toolbox 2.0: A Platform for Cell-Free Synthetic Biology. ACS Synth. Biol. 2016, 5 (4), 344355,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.5b00296
  129. 129
    Kim, D.-M.; Swartz, J. R. Efficient Production of a Bioactive, Multiple Disulfide-Bonded Protein Using Modified Extracts of Escherichia Coli. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2004, 85 (2), 122129,  DOI: 10.1002/bit.10865
  130. 130
    Jeong, S.; Nguyen, H. T.; Kim, C. H.; Ly, M. N.; Shin, K. Toward Artificial Cells: Novel Advances in Energy Conversion and Cellular Motility. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2020, 30 (11), 1907182,  DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201907182
  131. 131
    Hanczyc, M. M.; Fujikawa, S. M.; Szostak, J. W. Experimental Models of Primitive Cellular Compartments: Encapsulation, Growth, and Division. Science 2003, 302 (5645), 618622,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1089904
  132. 132
    Kretschmer, S.; Ganzinger, K. A.; Franquelim, H. G.; Schwille, P. Synthetic Cell Division via Membrane-Transforming Molecular Assemblies. BMC Biol. 2019, 17 (1), 43,  DOI: 10.1186/s12915-019-0665-1
  133. 133
    Anzai, K.; Yoshida, M.; Kirino, Y. Change in Intravesicular Volume of Liposomes by Freeze-Thaw Treatment as Studied by the ESR Stopped-Flow Technique. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Biomembranes 1990, 1021 (1), 2126,  DOI: 10.1016/0005-2736(90)90378-2
  134. 134
    van der Valk, T.; Pečnerová, P.; Díez-Del-Molino, D.; Bergström, A.; Oppenheimer, J.; Hartmann, S.; Xenikoudakis, G.; Thomas, J. A.; Dehasque, M.; Sağlıcan, E.; Fidan, F. R.; Barnes, I.; Liu, S.; Somel, M.; Heintzman, P. D.; Nikolskiy, P.; Shapiro, B.; Skoglund, P.; Hofreiter, M.; Lister, A. M.; Götherström, A.; Dalén, L. Million-Year-Old DNA Sheds Light on the Genomic History of Mammoths. Nature 2021, 591 (7849), 265269,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-03224-9
  135. 135
    Li, Z.; Deutscher, M. P. Analyzing the Decay of Stable RNAs in E. Coli. Methods Enzymol. 2008, 447, 3145,  DOI: 10.1016/S0076-6879(08)02202-7
  136. 136
    Chan, L. Y.; Mugler, C. F.; Heinrich, S.; Vallotton, P.; Weis, K. Non-Invasive Measurement of mRNA Decay Reveals Translation Initiation as the Major Determinant of mRNA Stability. eLife 2018,  DOI: 10.7554/eLife.32536
  137. 137
    Paul, N.; Joyce, G. F. A Self-Replicating Ligase Ribozyme. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2002, 99 (20), 1273312740,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.202471099
  138. 138
    Robertson, M. P.; Joyce, G. F. Highly Efficient Self-Replicating RNA Enzymes. Chem. Biol. 2014, 21 (2), 238245,  DOI: 10.1016/j.chembiol.2013.12.004
  139. 139
    Chen, I. A.; Salehi-Ashtiani, K.; Szostak, J. W. RNA Catalysis in Model Protocell Vesicles. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127 (38), 1321313219,  DOI: 10.1021/ja051784p
  140. 140
    Gorbalenya, A. E.; Enjuanes, L.; Ziebuhr, J.; Snijder, E. J. Nidovirales: Evolving the Largest RNA Virus Genome. Virus Res. 2006, 117 (1), 1737,  DOI: 10.1016/j.virusres.2006.01.017
  141. 141
    Joyce, G. F.; Szostak, J. W. Protocells and RNA Self-Replication. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 2018, 10 (9), a034801,  DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a034801
  142. 142
    Jahn, M.; Vorpahl, C.; Hübschmann, T.; Harms, H.; Müller, S. Copy Number Variability of Expression Plasmids Determined by Cell Sorting and Droplet Digital PCR. Microb. Cell Fact. 2016, 15 (1), 211,  DOI: 10.1186/s12934-016-0610-8
  143. 143
    Nielsen, A. A. K.; Der, B. S.; Shin, J.; Vaidyanathan, P.; Paralanov, V.; Strychalski, E. A.; Ross, D.; Densmore, D.; Voigt, C. A. Genetic Circuit Design Automation. Science 2016, 352 (6281), aac7341,  DOI: 10.1126/science.aac7341
  144. 144
    Salis, H. M.; Mirsky, E. A.; Voigt, C. A. Automated Design of Synthetic Ribosome Binding Sites to Control Protein Expression. Nat. Biotechnol. 2009, 27 (10), 946950,  DOI: 10.1038/nbt.1568
  145. 145
    Ostrov, N.; Beal, J.; Ellis, T.; Gordon, D. B.; Karas, B. J.; Lee, H. H.; Lenaghan, S. C.; Schloss, J. A.; Stracquadanio, G.; Trefzer, A.; Bader, J. S.; Church, G. M.; Coelho, C. M.; Efcavitch, J. W.; Güell, M.; Mitchell, L. A.; Nielsen, A. A. K.; Peck, B.; Smith, A. C.; Stewart, C. N., Jr; Tekotte, H. Technological Challenges and Milestones for Writing Genomes. Science 2019, 366 (6463), 310312,  DOI: 10.1126/science.aay0339
  146. 146
    Farasat, I.; Kushwaha, M.; Collens, J.; Easterbrook, M.; Guido, M.; Salis, H. M. Efficient Search, Mapping, and Optimization of Multi-Protein Genetic Systems in Diverse Bacteria. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2014, 10 (6), 731,  DOI: 10.15252/msb.20134955
  147. 147
    Pretorius, I. S.; Boeke, J. D. Yeast 2.0-Connecting the Dots in the Construction of the World’s First Functional Synthetic Eukaryotic Genome. FEMS Yeast Res. 2018,  DOI: 10.1093/femsyr/foy032
  148. 148
    Blight, K. J.; Kolykhalov, A. A.; Rice, C. M. Efficient Initiation of HCV RNA Replication in Cell Culture. Science 2000, 290 (5498), 19721974,  DOI: 10.1126/science.290.5498.1972
  149. 149
    Gibson, D. G.; Young, L.; Chuang, R.-Y.; Venter, J. C.; Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Smith, H. O. Enzymatic Assembly of DNA Molecules up to Several Hundred Kilobases. Nat. Methods 2009, 6 (5), 343345,  DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.1318
  150. 150
    Venter, J. C.; Glass, J. I.; Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Vashee, S. Synthetic Chromosomes, Genomes, Viruses, and Cells. Cell 2022, 185 (15), 27082724,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2022.06.046
  151. 151
    Fredens, J.; Wang, K.; de la Torre, D.; Funke, L. F. H.; Robertson, W. E.; Christova, Y.; Chia, T.; Schmied, W. H.; Dunkelmann, D. L.; Beránek, V.; Uttamapinant, C.; Llamazares, A. G.; Elliott, T. S.; Chin, J. W. Total Synthesis of Escherichia Coli with a Recoded Genome. Nature 2019, 569 (7757), 514518,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-1192-5
  152. 152
    Zhao, Y.; Coelho, C.; Hughes, A. L.; Lazar-Stefanita, L.; Yang, S.; Brooks, A. N.; Walker, R. S. K.; Zhang, W.; Lauer, S.; Hernandez, C.; Cai, J.; Mitchell, L. A.; Agmon, N.; Shen, Y.; Sall, J.; Fanfani, V.; Jalan, A.; Rivera, J.; Liang, F.-X.; Bader, J. S.; Stracquadanio, G.; Steinmetz, L. M.; Cai, Y.; Boeke, J. D. Debugging and Consolidating Multiple Synthetic Chromosomes Reveals Combinatorial Genetic Interactions. Cell 2023, 186 (24), 52205236,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2023.09.025
  153. 153
    Woese, C. The Universal Ancestor. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1998, 95 (12), 68546859,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.95.12.6854
  154. 154
    Woese, C. R. On the Evolution of Cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2002, 99 (13), 87428747,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.132266999
  155. 155
    Sandberg, T. E.; Wise, K. S.; Dalldorf, C.; Szubin, R.; Feist, A. M.; Glass, J. I.; Palsson, B. O. Adaptive Evolution of a Minimal Organism with a Synthetic Genome. iScience 2023, 26 (9), 107500,  DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.107500
  156. 156
    Moger-Reischer, R. Z.; Glass, J. I.; Wise, K. S.; Sun, L.; Bittencourt, D. M. C.; Lehmkuhl, B. K.; Schoolmaster, D. R., Jr; Lynch, M.; Lennon, J. T. Evolution of a Minimal Cell. Nature 2023, 620 (7972), 122127,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06288-x
  157. 157
    Strotz, L. C.; Simões, M.; Girard, M. G.; Breitkreuz, L.; Kimmig, J.; Lieberman, B. S. Getting Somewhere with the Red Queen: Chasing a Biologically Modern Definition of the Hypothesis. Biol. Lett. 2018, 14 (5), 20170734,  DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2017.0734
  158. 158
    Solé, R. Revisiting Leigh Van Valen’s “A New Evolutionary Law” (1973). Biol. Theory 2022, 17 (2), 120125,  DOI: 10.1007/s13752-021-00391-w
  159. 159
    Hammerling, M. J.; Krüger, A.; Jewett, M. C. Strategies for in Vitro Engineering of the Translation Machinery. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020, 48 (3), 10681083,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkz1011
  160. 160
    Williams, T. C.; Averesch, N. J. H.; Winter, G.; Plan, M. R.; Vickers, C. E.; Nielsen, L. K.; Krömer, J. O. Quorum-Sensing Linked RNA Interference for Dynamic Metabolic Pathway Control in Saccharomyces Cerevisiae. Metab. Eng. 2015, 29, 124134,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ymben.2015.03.008
  161. 161
    Robinson, A. O.; Venero, O. M.; Adamala, K. P. Toward Synthetic Life: Biomimetic Synthetic Cell Communication. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2021, 64, 165173,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2021.08.008
  162. 162
    Garamella, J.; Majumder, S.; Liu, A. P.; Noireaux, V. An Adaptive Synthetic Cell Based on Mechanosensing, Biosensing, and Inducible Gene Circuits. ACS Synth. Biol. 2019, 8 (8), 19131920,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.9b00204
  163. 163
    Liu, H.; Yang, Q.; Peng, R.; Kuai, H.; Lyu, Y.; Pan, X.; Liu, Q.; Tan, W. Artificial Signal Feedback Network Mimicking Cellular Adaptivity. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2019, 141 (16), 64586461,  DOI: 10.1021/jacs.8b13816
  164. 164
    Gispert, I.; Hindley, J. W.; Pilkington, C. P.; Shree, H.; Barter, L. M. C.; Ces, O.; Elani, Y. Stimuli-Responsive Vesicles as Distributed Artificial Organelles for Bacterial Activation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2022, 119 (42), e2206563119,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2206563119
  165. 165
    Aufinger, L.; Simmel, F. C. Establishing Communication Between Artificial Cells. Chemistry 2019, 25 (55), 1265912670,  DOI: 10.1002/chem.201901726
  166. 166
    Pereyre, S.; Sirand-Pugnet, P.; Beven, L.; Charron, A.; Renaudin, H.; Barré, A.; Avenaud, P.; Jacob, D.; Couloux, A.; Barbe, V.; de Daruvar, A.; Blanchard, A.; Bébéar, C. Life on Arginine for Mycoplasma Hominis: Clues from Its Minimal Genome and Comparison with Other Human Urogenital Mycoplasmas. PLoS Genet. 2009, 5 (10), e1000677,  DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000677
  167. 167
    Woese, C. R.; Maniloff, J.; Zablen, L. B. Phylogenetic Analysis of the Mycoplasmas. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1980, 77 (1), 494498,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.77.1.494
  168. 168
    Li, S.; Guan, J.-L.; Chien, S. Biochemistry and Biomechanics of Cell Motility. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2005, 7, 105150,  DOI: 10.1146/annurev.bioeng.7.060804.100340
  169. 169
    Brunet, T.; Albert, M.; Roman, W.; Coyle, M. C.; Spitzer, D. C.; King, N. A Flagellate-to-Amoeboid Switch in the Closest Living Relatives of Animals. eLife 2021,  DOI: 10.7554/eLife.61037
  170. 170
    Siton-Mendelson, O.; Bernheim-Groswasser, A. Toward the Reconstitution of Synthetic Cell Motility. Cell Adh. Migr. 2016, 10 (5), 461474,  DOI: 10.1080/19336918.2016.1170260
  171. 171
    Blanken, D.; van Nies, P.; Danelon, C. Quantitative Imaging of Gene-Expressing Liposomes Reveals Rare Favorable Phenotypes. Phys. Biol. 2019, 16 (4), 045002,  DOI: 10.1088/1478-3975/ab0c62
  172. 172
    Stano, P.; D’Aguanno, E.; Bolz, J.; Fahr, A.; Luisi, P. L. A Remarkable Self-Organization Process as the Origin of Primitive Functional Cells. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 2013, 52 (50), 1339713400,  DOI: 10.1002/anie.201306613
  173. 173
    Weitz, M.; Kim, J.; Kapsner, K.; Winfree, E.; Franco, E.; Simmel, F. C. Diversity in the Dynamical Behaviour of a Compartmentalized Programmable Biochemical Oscillator. Nat. Chem. 2014, 6 (4), 295302,  DOI: 10.1038/nchem.1869
  174. 174
    Hansen, M. M. K.; Meijer, L. H. H.; Spruijt, E.; Maas, R. J. M.; Rosquelles, M. V.; Groen, J.; Heus, H. A.; Huck, W. T. S. Macromolecular Crowding Creates Heterogeneous Environments of Gene Expression in Picolitre Droplets. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2016, 11 (2), 191197,  DOI: 10.1038/nnano.2015.243
  175. 175
    Rao, C. V. Expanding the Synthetic Biology Toolbox: Engineering Orthogonal Regulators of Gene Expression. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2012, 23 (5), 689694,  DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2011.12.015
  176. 176
    Yelleswarapu, M.; van der Linden, A. J.; van Sluijs, B.; Pieters, P. A.; Dubuc, E.; de Greef, T. F. A.; Huck, W. T. S. Sigma Factor-Mediated Tuning of Bacterial Cell-Free Synthetic Genetic Oscillators. ACS Synth. Biol. 2018, 7 (12), 28792887,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.8b00300
  177. 177
    Li, J.; Zhang, C.; Huang, P.; Kuru, E.; Forster-Benson, E. T. C.; Li, T.; Church, G. M. Dissecting Limiting Factors of the Protein Synthesis Using Recombinant Elements (PURE) System. Translation (Austin) 2017, 5 (1), e1327006,  DOI: 10.1080/21690731.2017.1327006
  178. 178
    Lavickova, B.; Maerkl, S. J. A Simple, Robust, and Low-Cost Method To Produce the PURE Cell-Free System. ACS Synth. Biol. 2019, 8 (2), 455462,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.8b00427
  179. 179
    Li, J.; Gu, L.; Aach, J.; Church, G. M. Improved Cell-Free RNA and Protein Synthesis System. PLoS One 2014, 9 (9), e106232,  DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106232
  180. 180
    Jewett, M. C.; Calhoun, K. A.; Voloshin, A.; Wuu, J. J.; Swartz, J. R. An Integrated Cell-Free Metabolic Platform for Protein Production and Synthetic Biology. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2008, 4, 220,  DOI: 10.1038/msb.2008.57
  181. 181
    Silverman, A. D.; Karim, A. S.; Jewett, M. C. Cell-Free Gene Expression: An Expanded Repertoire of Applications. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2020, 21 (3), 151170,  DOI: 10.1038/s41576-019-0186-3
  182. 182
    Ouyang, X.; Zhou, X.; Lai, S. N.; Liu, Q.; Zheng, B. Immobilization of Proteins of Cell Extract to Hydrogel Networks Enhances the Longevity of Cell-Free Protein Synthesis and Supports Gene Networks. ACS Synth. Biol. 2021, 10 (4), 749755,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.0c00541
  183. 183
    New England Biolabs. NEBExpress Cell-free ecoli Protein Synthesis System. https://www.neb.com/products/e5360-nebexpress-cell-free-ecoli-protein-synthesis-system (accessed on August 21, 2023).
  184. 184
    Zimmerman, S. B.; Trach, S. O. Estimation of Macromolecule Concentrations and Excluded Volume Effects for the Cytoplasm of Escherichia Coli. J. Mol. Biol. 1991, 222 (3), 599620,  DOI: 10.1016/0022-2836(91)90499-V
  185. 185
    Record, M. T., Jr; Courtenay, E. S.; Cayley, D. S.; Guttman, H. J. Responses of E. Coli to Osmotic Stress: Large Changes in Amounts of Cytoplasmic Solutes and Water. Trends Biochem. Sci. 1998, 23 (4), 143148,  DOI: 10.1016/S0968-0004(98)01196-7
  186. 186
    Cayley, S.; Lewis, B. A.; Guttman, H. J.; Record, M. T. Jr. Characterization of the Cytoplasm of Escherichia Coli K-12 as a Function of External Osmolarity. Implications for Protein-DNA Interactions in Vivo. J. Mol. Biol. 1991, 222 (2), 281300,  DOI: 10.1016/0022-2836(91)90212-O
  187. 187
    Li, J.; Haas, W.; Jackson, K.; Kuru, E.; Jewett, M. C.; Fan, Z. H.; Gygi, S.; Church, G. M. Cogenerating Synthetic Parts toward a Self-Replicating System. ACS Synth. Biol. 2017, 6 (7), 13271336,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.6b00342
  188. 188
    Murase, Y.; Nakanishi, H.; Tsuji, G.; Sunami, T.; Ichihashi, N. In Vitro Evolution of Unmodified 16S rRNA for Simple Ribosome Reconstitution. ACS Synth. Biol. 2018, 7 (2), 576583,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.7b00333
  189. 189
    Jewett, M. C.; Fritz, B. R.; Timmerman, L. E.; Church, G. M. In Vitro Integration of Ribosomal RNA Synthesis, Ribosome Assembly, and Translation. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2013, 9, 678,  DOI: 10.1038/msb.2013.31
  190. 190
    Fritz, B. R.; Jamil, O. K.; Jewett, M. C. Implications of Macromolecular Crowding and Reducing Conditions for in Vitro Ribosome Construction. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015, 43 (9), 47744784,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkv329
  191. 191
    Hammerling, M. J.; Fritz, B. R.; Yoesep, D. J.; Kim, D. S.; Carlson, E. D.; Jewett, M. C. In Vitro Ribosome Synthesis and Evolution through Ribosome Display. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11 (1), 1108,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-14705-2
  192. 192
    Wang, T.; Lu, Y. Toward Minimal Transcription-Translation Machinery. ACS Synth. Biol. 2023, 12 (11), 33123327,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.3c00324
  193. 193
    Oberholzer, T.; Albrizio, M.; Luisi, P. L. Polymerase Chain Reaction in Liposomes. Chem. Biol. 1995, 2 (10), 677682,  DOI: 10.1016/1074-5521(95)90031-4
  194. 194
    Kawska, A.; Carvalho, K.; Manzi, J.; Boujemaa-Paterski, R.; Blanchoin, L.; Martiel, J.-L.; Sykes, C. How Actin Network Dynamics Control the Onset of Actin-Based Motility. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2012, 109 (36), 1444014445,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1117096109
  195. 195
    Hürtgen, D.; Härtel, T.; Murray, S. M.; Sourjik, V.; Schwille, P. Functional Modules of Minimal Cell Division for Synthetic Biology. Adv. Biosyst. 2019, 3 (6), e1800315,  DOI: 10.1002/adbi.201800315
  196. 196
    Pelletier, J. F.; Sun, L.; Wise, K. S.; Assad-Garcia, N.; Karas, B. J.; Deerinck, T. J.; Ellisman, M. H.; Mershin, A.; Gershenfeld, N.; Chuang, R.-Y.; Glass, J. I.; Strychalski, E. A. Genetic Requirements for Cell Division in a Genomically Minimal Cell. Cell 2021, 184 (9), 24302440,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2021.03.008
  197. 197
    Zhang, S.; Contini, C.; Hindley, J. W.; Bolognesi, G.; Elani, Y.; Ces, O. Engineering Motile Aqueous Phase-Separated Droplets via Liposome Stabilisation. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12 (1), 1673,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-21832-x
  198. 198
    Li, M.; Brinkmann, M.; Pagonabarraga, I.; Seemann, R.; Fleury, J.-B. Spatiotemporal Control of Cargo Delivery Performed by Programmable Self-Propelled Janus Droplets. Commun. Phys. 2018, 1 (1), 18,  DOI: 10.1038/s42005-018-0025-4
  199. 199
    Litschel, T.; Kelley, C. F.; Holz, D.; Adeli Koudehi, M.; Vogel, S. K.; Burbaum, L.; Mizuno, N.; Vavylonis, D.; Schwille, P. Reconstitution of Contractile Actomyosin Rings in Vesicles. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12 (1), 2254,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-22422-7
  200. 200
    Bashirzadeh, Y.; Moghimianavval, H.; Liu, A. P. Encapsulated Actomyosin Patterns Drive Cell-like Membrane Shape Changes. iScience 2022, 25 (5), 104236,  DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.104236
  201. 201
    Gardner, P. M.; Winzer, K.; Davis, B. G. Sugar Synthesis in a Protocellular Model Leads to a Cell Signalling Response in Bacteria. Nat. Chem. 2009, 1 (5), 377383,  DOI: 10.1038/nchem.296
  202. 202
    Lentini, R.; Santero, S. P.; Chizzolini, F.; Cecchi, D.; Fontana, J.; Marchioretto, M.; Del Bianco, C.; Terrell, J. L.; Spencer, A. C.; Martini, L.; Forlin, M.; Assfalg, M.; Dalla Serra, M.; Bentley, W. E.; Mansy, S. S. Integrating Artificial with Natural Cells to Translate Chemical Messages That Direct E. Coli Behaviour. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 4012,  DOI: 10.1038/ncomms5012
  203. 203
    Ding, Y.; Contreras-Llano, L. E.; Morris, E.; Mao, M.; Tan, C. Minimizing Context Dependency of Gene Networks Using Artificial Cells. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2018, 10 (36), 3013730146,  DOI: 10.1021/acsami.8b10029
  204. 204
    Toparlak, Ö. D.; Zasso, J.; Bridi, S.; Serra, M. D.; Macchi, P.; Conti, L.; Baudet, M.-L.; Mansy, S. S. Artificial Cells Drive Neural Differentiation. Sci. Adv. 2020,  DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abb4920
  205. 205
    Fanalista, F.; Birnie, A.; Maan, R.; Burla, F.; Charles, K.; Pawlik, G.; Deshpande, S.; Koenderink, G. H.; Dogterom, M.; Dekker, C. Shape and Size Control of Artificial Cells for Bottom-Up Biology. ACS Nano 2019, 13 (5), 54395450,  DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.9b00220
  206. 206
    Van de Cauter, L.; Fanalista, F.; van Buren, L.; De Franceschi, N.; Godino, E.; Bouw, S.; Danelon, C.; Dekker, C.; Koenderink, G. H.; Ganzinger, K. A. Optimized cDICE for Efficient Reconstitution of Biological Systems in Giant Unilamellar Vesicles. ACS Synth. Biol. 2021, 10 (7), 16901702,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.1c00068
  207. 207
    Ganar, K. A.; Leijten, L.; Deshpande, S. Actinosomes: Condensate-Templated Containers for Engineering Synthetic Cells. ACS Synth. Biol. 2022, 11 (8), 28692879,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.2c00290
  208. 208
    Frischmon, C.; Sorenson, C.; Winikoff, M.; Adamala, K. P. Build-a-Cell: Engineering a Synthetic Cell Community. Life 2021, 11 (11), 1176,  DOI: 10.3390/life11111176
  209. 209
    Schwille, P.; Spatz, J.; Landfester, K.; Bodenschatz, E.; Herminghaus, S.; Sourjik, V.; Erb, T. J.; Bastiaens, P.; Lipowsky, R.; Hyman, A.; Dabrock, P.; Baret, J.-C.; Vidakovic-Koch, T.; Bieling, P.; Dimova, R.; Mutschler, H.; Robinson, T.; Tang, T.-Y. D.; Wegner, S.; Sundmacher, K. MaxSynBio: Avenues Towards Creating Cells from the Bottom Up. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 2018, 57 (41), 1338213392,  DOI: 10.1002/anie.201802288
  210. 210
    Habets, M. G. J. L.; Zwart, H. A. E.; van Est, R. Why the Synthetic Cell Needs Democratic Governance. Trends Biotechnol. 2021, 39 (6), 539541,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2020.11.006
  211. 211
    Rasmussen, S. Protocells: Bridging Nonliving and Living Matter; MIT Press, 2008.
  212. 212
    Schwille, P. Bottom-up Synthetic Biology: Engineering in a Tinkerer’s World. Science 2011, 333 (6047), 12521254,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1211701
  213. 213
    Abil, Z.; Danelon, C. Roadmap to Building a Cell: An Evolutionary Approach. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2020, 8, 927,  DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00927
  214. 214
    Yarmuth; [d-Ky-3], J. A. Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 ; 2022. http://www.congress.gov/ (accessed on April 30, 2023).
  215. 215
    The White House. Executive order on advancing biotechnology and biomanufacturing innovation for a sustainable, safe, and secure American bioeconomy. The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2022/09/12/executive-order-on-advancing-biotechnology-and-biomanufacturing-innovation-for-a-sustainable-safe-and-secure-american-bioeconomy/ (accessed on April 30, 2023).
  216. 216
    BioMADE. https://www.biomade.org/ (accessed on April 30, 2023).
  217. 217
    Huang, A.; Nguyen, P. Q.; Stark, J. C.; Takahashi, M. K.; Donghia, N.; Ferrante, T.; Dy, A. J.; Hsu, K. J.; Dubner, R. S.; Pardee, K.; Jewett, M. C.; Collins, J. J. BioBitsTM Explorer: A Modular Synthetic Biology Education Kit. Sci. Adv. 2018, 4 (8), eaat5105,  DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aat5105
  218. 218
    Stark, J. C.; Huang, A.; Nguyen, P. Q.; Dubner, R. S.; Hsu, K. J.; Ferrante, T. C.; Anderson, M.; Kanapskyte, A.; Mucha, Q.; Packett, J. S.; Patel, P.; Patel, R.; Qaq, D.; Zondor, T.; Burke, J.; Martinez, T.; Miller-Berry, A.; Puppala, A.; Reichert, K.; Schmid, M.; Brand, L.; Hill, L. R.; Chellaswamy, J. F.; Faheem, N.; Fetherling, S.; Gong, E.; Gonzalzles, E. M.; Granito, T.; Koritsaris, J.; Nguyen, B.; Ottman, S.; Palffy, C.; Patel, A.; Skweres, S.; Slaton, A.; Woods, T.; Donghia, N.; Pardee, K.; Collins, J. J.; Jewett, M. C. BioBitsTM Bright: A Fluorescent Synthetic Biology Education Kit. Sci. Adv. 2018, 4 (8), eaat5107,  DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aat5107
  219. 219
    Stark, J. C.; Huang, A.; Hsu, K. J.; Dubner, R. S.; Forbrook, J.; Marshalla, S.; Rodriguez, F.; Washington, M.; Rybnicky, G. A.; Nguyen, P. Q.; Hasselbacher, B.; Jabri, R.; Kamran, R.; Koralewski, V.; Wightkin, W.; Martinez, T.; Jewett, M. C. BioBits Health: Classroom Activities Exploring Engineering, Biology, and Human Health with Fluorescent Readouts. ACS Synth. Biol. 2019, 8 (5), 10011009,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.8b00381
  220. 220
    Rybnicky, G. A.; Dixon, R. A.; Kuhn, R. M.; Karim, A. S.; Jewett, M. C. Development of a Freeze-Dried CRISPR-Cas12 Sensor for Detecting Wolbachia in the Secondary Science Classroom. ACS Synth. Biol. 2022, 11 (2), 835842,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.1c00503
  221. 221
    Jung, K. J.; Rasor, B. J.; Rybnicky, G. A.; Silverman, A. D.; Standeven, J.; Kuhn, R.; Granito, T.; Ekas, H. M.; Wang, B. M.; Karim, A. S.; Lucks, J. B.; Jewett, M. C. At-Home, Cell-Free Synthetic Biology Education Modules for Transcriptional Regulation and Environmental Water Quality Monitoring. bioRxiv , January 9, 2023.  DOI: 10.1101/2023.01.09.523248 .
  222. 222
    Perry, E.; Weber, J.; Pataranutaporn, P.; Volf, V.; Gonzalez, L. M.; Nejad, S.; Angleton, C.; Chen, J.-E.; Gabo, A.; Jammalamadaka, M. S. S.; Kuru, E.; Fortuna, P.; Rico, A.; Sulich, K.; Wawrzyniak, D.; Jacobson, J.; Church, G.; Kong, D. How to Grow (almost) Anything: A Hybrid Distance Learning Model for Global Laboratory-Based Synthetic Biology Education. Nat. Biotechnol. 2022, 40 (12), 18741879,  DOI: 10.1038/s41587-022-01601-x

Cited By

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!
Citation Statements
Explore this article's citation statements on scite.ai

This article is cited by 16 publications.

  1. Surendra Yadav, Alexander J. P. Perkins, Sahan B. W. Liyanagedera, Anthony Bougas, Nadanai Laohakunakorn. ATP Regeneration from Pyruvate in the PURE System. ACS Synthetic Biology 2025, 14 (1) , 247-256. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.4c00697
  2. Manisha Kapasiawala, Richard M. Murray. Metabolic Perturbations to an Escherichia coli-based Cell-Free System Reveal a Trade-off between Transcription and Translation. ACS Synthetic Biology 2024, 13 (12) , 3976-3990. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.4c00361
  3. Lan Hai Anh Tran, Lauren A. Lowe, Yaam Deckel, Matthew Turner, James Luong, Omar Abdullah A Khamis, Megan L. Amos, Anna Wang. Measuring Vesicle Loading with Holographic Microscopy and Bulk Light Scattering. ACS Physical Chemistry Au 2024, 4 (4) , 400-407. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsphyschemau.4c00011
  4. Yuishin Kosaka, Yumi Miyawaki, Megumi Mori, Shunsuke Aburaya, Chisato Nishizawa, Takeshi Chujo, Tatsuya Niwa, Takumi Miyazaki, Takashi Sugita, Mao Fukuyama, Hideki Taguchi, Kazuhito Tomizawa, Kenji Sugase, Mitsuyoshi Ueda, Wataru Aoki. Autonomous ribosome biogenesis in vitro. Nature Communications 2025, 16 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-55853-7
  5. Jiawei Zhu, Yaru Meng, Wenli Gao, Shuo Yang, Wenjie Zhu, Xiangyang Ji, Xuanpei Zhai, Wan-Qiu Liu, Yuan Luo, Shengjie Ling, Jian Li, Yifan Liu. AI-driven high-throughput droplet screening of cell-free gene expression. Nature Communications 2025, 16 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-58139-0
  6. Michele Costantino, Eric J. Young, Abesh Banerjee, Cheryl A. Kerfeld, Giovanna Ghirlanda. Interfacing bacterial microcompartment shell proteins with genetically encoded condensates. Protein Science 2025, 34 (3) https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.70061
  7. Neta Agmon, Liat Rahamim-Ben Navi, Yosi Shacham-Diamand, Yuval Dorfan, Ilana Kolodkin-Gal. From academia to real-life biotech: ‘It takes a village’. Trends in Biotechnology 2025, 7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2025.02.014
  8. Marcelo Freire, Katarzyna Adamala, Alexandre Nepomuceno, Paul Christou, Elibio Rech. Engineering biology and the positive regulatory pathway in Brazil. Annals of Applied Biology 2025, 186 (2) , 88-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/aab.12978
  9. Matthew E. Allen, James W. Hindley, Robert V. Law, Oscar Ces, Yuval Elani. Microfluidic Production of Spatially Structured Biomimetic Microgels as Compartmentalized Artificial Cells. Small Science 2025, 8 https://doi.org/10.1002/smsc.202400320
  10. Nuan Li, Xiaofeng Han, Xiaoli Mai, Peng Wang, Fangxu Wang, Linyuan Wu, Yuanyuan Xie, Bin Wang. Iron biomineralization by mediation of clMagR/clCry4 protein contribute to T2 contrast enhanced in MRI. Colloid and Interface Science Communications 2025, 64 , 100810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.colcom.2024.100810
  11. Zhanar Abil, Simone Giaveri, Tobias J. Erb, Lynn J. Rothschild. Integrating metabolism and evolution towards the realization of synthetic life. Nature Reviews Bioengineering 2025, 3 (1) , 9-10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44222-024-00267-1
  12. Zhen‐Hong Luo, Gong‐Yu Shi, Nan‐Nan Deng. Easy, Rapid and High‐Throughput Production of Single and Multicompartment Liposomes by Vortex Emulsification. ChemSystemsChem 2024, 333 https://doi.org/10.1002/syst.202400085
  13. Souradeep Das, Gauri M. Patki, Vanthanaa Sridhar, Sahil Sunil Mulewar, Raya Roy, Udita Bandyopadhyay, Nishant Nitinidhi Kulshreshtha, Sudha Rajamani. Compartmentalization as a ubiquitous feature of life: from origins of life to biomimetics. The European Physical Journal Special Topics 2024, 233 (21-22) , 3153-3172. https://doi.org/10.1140/epjs/s11734-024-01203-5
  14. Priyanshi Agnihotri, Divya Dheer, Anvi Sangwan, Vysakh C. Chandran, Nimisha A. Mavlankar, Gunjan Hooda, Debabrata Patra, Asish Pal. Design of multi-responsive and actuating microgels toward on-demand drug release. Nanoscale 2024, 16 (41) , 19254-19265. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4NR02728K
  15. Sebastian Barthel, Luca Brenker, Christoph Diehl, Nitin Bohra, Simone Giaveri, Nicole Paczia, Tobias J Erb. In vitro transcription-based biosensing of glycolate for prototyping of a complex enzyme cascade. Synthetic Biology 2024, 9 (1) https://doi.org/10.1093/synbio/ysae013
  16. Surendra Yadav, Alexander J. P. Perkins, Sahan B. W. Liyanagedera, Anthony Bougas, Nadanai Laohakunakorn. ATP Regeneration from Pyruvate in the PURE System. 2024https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.09.06.611674
  17. Ion A. Ioannou, Carolina Monck, Francesca Ceroni, Nicholas J. Brooks, Marina K. Kuimova, Yuval Elani. Nucleated synthetic cells with genetically driven intercompartment communication. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 2024, 121 (36) https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2404790121
  18. Jiawei Zhu, Yaru Meng, Wenli Gao, Shuo Yang, Wenjie Zhu, Xiangyang Ji, Xuanpei Zhai, Wan-Qiu Liu, Yuan Luo, Shengjie Ling, Jian Li, Yifan Liu. AI-driven high-throughput droplet screening of cell-free gene expression. 2024https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.07.04.602084
  19. Sebastian Barthel, Luca Brenker, Christoph Diehl, Nitin Bohra, Simone Giaveri, Nicole Paczia, Tobias J Erb. In vitro transcription-based biosensing of glycolate for prototyping of a complex enzyme cascade. 2024https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.04.26.591264
  20. Manisha Kapasiawala, Richard M. Murray. Metabolic perturbations to an E. coli -based cell-free system reveal a trade-off between transcription and translation. 2023https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.03.22.533877

ACS Synthetic Biology

Cite this: ACS Synth. Biol. 2024, 13, 4, 974–997
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.3c00724
Published March 26, 2024

Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under

CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 .

Article Views

4589

Altmetric

-

Citations

Learn about these metrics

Article Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.

Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.

The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated.

  • Abstract

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. Our working definition of living systems, based on Tibor Gánti’s Chemoton model of life. Compartmentalization, replication, and metabolism together make up minimal criteria for a living system. From these other features emerge, including evolution, responsiveness to stimuli, and directed movement.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. Four different molecular platforms for studying life. Outgoing from externally provided template DNA (1), a cell-free transcription/translation (Tx/Tl) system uses complex substrates and a chemical energy-donor (2) to synthesize RNA, proteins and potentially other biocatalytically (enzymatically) formed products (3). An encapsulated cell-free system is often a liposome enclosing a cell-free Tx/Tl system. A synthetic cell would function more like a natural cell in that it could be a self-sustaining system that is capable of replication.

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. Major approaches to building a synthetic cell: bottom-up (a), top-down (b), and middle-out (c) are distinguished as the basic concepts of currently ongoing research. Top-down approaches generally seek to find a “minimal genome” of an existing organism, while the bottom-up approach aspires to de novo create a cell “from scratch” or based on macromolecules. Middle-out approaches utilize modules of known function (e.g., organelles, extracts) to assemble a new cell or major elements/mechanisms thereof.

    Figure 4

    Figure 4. Milestones toward the de novo design and construction of a synthetic cell. Many of these steps can be performed in parallel with a mixing and matching approach to integration.

  • References


    This article references 222 other publications.

    1. 1
      van Stevendaal, M. H. M. E.; Vasiukas, L.; Yewdall, N. A.; Mason, A. F.; van Hest, J. C. M. Engineering of Biocompatible Coacervate-Based Synthetic Cells. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2021, 13 (7), 78797889,  DOI: 10.1021/acsami.0c19052
    2. 2
      Tsokolov, S. A. Why Is the Definition of Life so Elusive? Epistemological Considerations. Astrobiology 2009, 9 (4), 401412,  DOI: 10.1089/ast.2007.0201
    3. 3
      Deplazes-Zemp, A. The Conception of Life in Synthetic Biology. Sci. Eng. Ethics 2012, 18 (4), 757774,  DOI: 10.1007/s11948-011-9269-z
    4. 4
      Machery, E. Why I Stopped Worrying about the Definition of Life··· and Why You Should as Well. Synthese 2012, 185 (1), 145164,  DOI: 10.1007/s11229-011-9880-1
    5. 5
      Bird, A.; Tobin, E. Natural Kinds. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy; Zalta, E. N., Nodelman, U., Eds.; Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, 2023.
    6. 6
      Cleland, C. E.; Chyba, C. F. Defining “Life.. Orig. Life Evol. Biosph. 2002, 32 (4), 387393,  DOI: 10.1023/A:1020503324273
    7. 7
      Ganti, T. The Principles of Life; OUP Oxford, 2003.
    8. 8
      Vibhute, M. A.; Mutschler, H. A Primer on Building Life like Systems. ChemSystemsChem 2023,  DOI: 10.1002/syst.202200033
    9. 9
      Benner, S. A. Defining Life. Astrobiology 2010, 10 (10), 10211030,  DOI: 10.1089/ast.2010.0524
    10. 10
      Cleland, C. E. The Quest for a Universal Theory of Life: Searching for Life As We Don’t Know It; Cambridge University Press, 2019.
    11. 11
      Otto, S. An Approach to the De Novo Synthesis of Life. Acc. Chem. Res. 2022, 55 (2), 145155,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.accounts.1c00534
    12. 12
      Joyce, G. F. In Vitro Evolution of Nucleic Acids. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 1994, 4, 331336,  DOI: 10.1016/S0959-440X(94)90100-7
    13. 13
      Agapakis, C. M. Designing Synthetic Biology. ACS Synth. Biol. 2014, 3 (3), 121128,  DOI: 10.1021/sb4001068
    14. 14
      Malaterre, C. Can Synthetic Biology Shed Light on the Origins of Life?. Biol. Theory 2009, 4 (4), 357367,  DOI: 10.1162/BIOT_a_00002
    15. 15
      Mukherji, S.; van Oudenaarden, A. Synthetic Biology: Understanding Biological Design from Synthetic Circuits. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2009, 10 (12), 859871,  DOI: 10.1038/nrg2697
    16. 16
      Rothschild, L. J. The Role of Emergence in Biology; Oxford University Press, 2008.
    17. 17
      Adamala, K.; Szostak, J. W. Nonenzymatic Template-Directed RNA Synthesis inside Model Protocells. Science 2013, 342 (6162), 10981100,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1241888
    18. 18
      Deamer, D.; Dworkin, J. P.; Sandford, S. A.; Bernstein, M. P.; Allamandola, L. J. The First Cell Membranes. Astrobiology 2002, 2 (4), 371381,  DOI: 10.1089/153110702762470482
    19. 19
      Deamer, D. The Role of Lipid Membranes in Life’s Origin. Life 2017, 7 (1), 5,  DOI: 10.3390/life7010005
    20. 20
      Discher, B. M.; Bermudez, H.; Hammer, D. A.; Discher, D. E.; Won, Y.-Y.; Bates, F. S. Cross-Linked Polymersome Membranes: Vesicles with Broadly Adjustable Properties. J. Phys. Chem. B 2002, 106 (11), 28482854,  DOI: 10.1021/jp011958z
    21. 21
      Kamat, N. P.; Katz, J. S.; Hammer, D. A. Engineering Polymersome Protocells. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2011, 2 (13), 16121623,  DOI: 10.1021/jz200640x
    22. 22
      Vickers, C. E. The Minimal Genome Comes of Age. Nat. Biotechnol. 2016, 34 (6), 623624,  DOI: 10.1038/nbt.3593
    23. 23
      Xu, X.; Meier, F.; Blount, B. A.; Pretorius, I. S.; Ellis, T.; Paulsen, I. T.; Williams, T. C. Trimming the Genomic Fat: Minimising and Re-Functionalising Genomes Using Synthetic Biology. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14 (1), 1984,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-37748-7
    24. 24
      Hutchison, C. A.; Peterson, S. N.; Gill, S. R.; Cline, R. T.; White, O.; Fraser, C. M.; Smith, H. O.; Venter, J. C. Global Transposon Mutagenesis and a Minimal Mycoplasma Genome. Science 1999, 286 (5447), 21652169,  DOI: 10.1126/science.286.5447.2165
    25. 25
      Glass, J. I.; Assad-Garcia, N.; Alperovich, N.; Yooseph, S.; Lewis, M. R.; Maruf, M.; Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Smith, H. O.; Venter, J. C. Essential Genes of a Minimal Bacterium. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2006, 103 (2), 425430,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0510013103
    26. 26
      Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Chuang, R.-Y.; Noskov, V. N.; Assad-Garcia, N.; Deerinck, T. J.; Ellisman, M. H.; Gill, J.; Kannan, K.; Karas, B. J.; Ma, L.; Pelletier, J. F.; Qi, Z.-Q.; Richter, R. A.; Strychalski, E. A.; Sun, L.; Suzuki, Y.; Tsvetanova, B.; Wise, K. S.; Smith, H. O.; Glass, J. I.; Merryman, C.; Gibson, D. G.; Venter, J. C. Design and Synthesis of a Minimal Bacterial Genome. Science 2016, 351 (6280), aad6253,  DOI: 10.1126/science.aad6253
    27. 27
      Hashimoto, M.; Ichimura, T.; Mizoguchi, H.; Tanaka, K.; Fujimitsu, K.; Keyamura, K.; Ote, T.; Yamakawa, T.; Yamazaki, Y.; Mori, H.; Katayama, T.; Kato, J.-I. Cell Size and Nucleoid Organization of Engineered Escherichia Coli Cells with a Reduced Genome. Mol. Microbiol. 2005, 55 (1), 137149,  DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2958.2004.04386.x
    28. 28
      Pósfai, G.; Plunkett, G., 3rd; Fehér, T.; Frisch, D.; Keil, G. M.; Umenhoffer, K.; Kolisnychenko, V.; Stahl, B.; Sharma, S. S.; de Arruda, M.; Burland, V.; Harcum, S. W.; Blattner, F. R. Emergent Properties of Reduced-Genome Escherichia Coli. Science 2006, 312 (5776), 10441046,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1126439
    29. 29
      Lartigue, C.; Glass, J. I.; Alperovich, N.; Pieper, R.; Parmar, P. P.; Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Smith, H. O.; Venter, J. C. Genome Transplantation in Bacteria: Changing One Species to Another. Science 2007, 317 (5838), 632638,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1144622
    30. 30
      Gibson, D. G.; Benders, G. A.; Andrews-Pfannkoch, C.; Denisova, E. A.; Baden-Tillson, H.; Zaveri, J.; Stockwell, T. B.; Brownley, A.; Thomas, D. W.; Algire, M. A.; Merryman, C.; Young, L.; Noskov, V. N.; Glass, J. I.; Venter, J. C.; Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Smith, H. O. Complete Chemical Synthesis, Assembly, and Cloning of a Mycoplasma Genitalium Genome. Science 2008, 319 (5867), 12151220,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1151721
    31. 31
      Lartigue, C.; Vashee, S.; Algire, M. A.; Chuang, R.-Y.; Benders, G. A.; Ma, L.; Noskov, V. N.; Denisova, E. A.; Gibson, D. G.; Assad-Garcia, N.; Alperovich, N.; Thomas, D. W.; Merryman, C.; Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Smith, H. O.; Venter, J. C.; Glass, J. I. Creating Bacterial Strains from Genomes That Have Been Cloned and Engineered in Yeast. Science 2009, 325 (5948), 16931696,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1173759
    32. 32
      Gibson, D. G.; Glass, J. I.; Lartigue, C.; Noskov, V. N.; Chuang, R.-Y.; Algire, M. A.; Benders, G. A.; Montague, M. G.; Ma, L.; Moodie, M. M.; Merryman, C.; Vashee, S.; Krishnakumar, R.; Assad-Garcia, N.; Andrews-Pfannkoch, C.; Denisova, E. A.; Young, L.; Qi, Z.-Q.; Segall-Shapiro, T. H.; Calvey, C. H.; Parmar, P. P.; Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Smith, H. O.; Venter, J. C. Creation of a Bacterial Cell Controlled by a Chemically Synthesized Genome. Science 2010, 329 (5987), 5256,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1190719
    33. 33
      Stano, P.; Luisi, P. L. Semi-Synthetic Minimal Cells: Origin and Recent Developments. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2013, 24 (4), 633638,  DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2013.01.002
    34. 34
      Olivi, L.; Berger, M.; Creyghton, R. N. P.; De Franceschi, N.; Dekker, C.; Mulder, B. M.; Claassens, N. J.; Ten Wolde, P. R.; van der Oost, J. Towards a Synthetic Cell Cycle. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12 (1), 4531,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-24772-8
    35. 35
      Adamala, K. P.; Martin-Alarcon, D. A.; Guthrie-Honea, K. R.; Boyden, E. S. Engineering Genetic Circuit Interactions within and between Synthetic Minimal Cells. Nat. Chem. 2017, 9 (5), 431439,  DOI: 10.1038/nchem.2644
    36. 36
      Fenz, S. F.; Sachse, R.; Schmidt, T.; Kubick, S. Cell-Free Synthesis of Membrane Proteins: Tailored Cell Models out of Microsomes. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2014, 1838 (5), 13821388,  DOI: 10.1016/j.bbamem.2013.12.009
    37. 37
      Kroll, A. V.; Fang, R. H.; Zhang, L. Biointerfacing and Applications of Cell Membrane-Coated Nanoparticles. Bioconjugate Chem. 2017, 28 (1), 2332,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.6b00569
    38. 38
      Gurramkonda, C.; Rao, A.; Borhani, S.; Pilli, M.; Deldari, S.; Ge, X.; Pezeshk, N.; Han, T.-C.; Tolosa, M.; Kostov, Y.; Tolosa, L.; Wood, D. W.; Vattem, K.; Frey, D. D.; Rao, G. Improving the Recombinant Human Erythropoietin Glycosylation Using Microsome Supplementation in CHO Cell-Free System. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2018, 115 (5), 12531264,  DOI: 10.1002/bit.26554
    39. 39
      Su’etsugu, M.; Takada, H.; Katayama, T.; Tsujimoto, H. Exponential Propagation of Large Circular DNA by Reconstitution of a Chromosome-Replication Cycle. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017, 45 (20), 1152511534,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkx822
    40. 40
      Shimizu, Y.; Inoue, A.; Tomari, Y.; Suzuki, T.; Yokogawa, T.; Nishikawa, K.; Ueda, T. Cell-Free Translation Reconstituted with Purified Components. Nat. Biotechnol. 2001, 19 (8), 751755,  DOI: 10.1038/90802
    41. 41
      Drienovská, I.; Roelfes, G. Expanding the Enzyme Universe with Genetically Encoded Unnatural Amino Acids. Nature Catalysis 2020, 3 (3), 193202,  DOI: 10.1038/s41929-019-0410-8
    42. 42
      Medina, E.; Yik, E. J.; Herdewijn, P.; Chaput, J. C. Functional Comparison of Laboratory-Evolved XNA Polymerases for Synthetic Biology. ACS Synth. Biol. 2021, 10 (6), 14291437,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.1c00048
    43. 43
      Theobald, D. L. A Formal Test of the Theory of Universal Common Ancestry. Nature 2010, 465 (7295), 219222,  DOI: 10.1038/nature09014
    44. 44
      Yang, Z.; Chen, F.; Alvarado, J. B.; Benner, S. A. Amplification, Mutation, and Sequencing of a Six-Letter Synthetic Genetic System. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2011, 133 (38), 1510515112,  DOI: 10.1021/ja204910n
    45. 45
      Malyshev, D. A.; Dhami, K.; Lavergne, T.; Chen, T.; Dai, N.; Foster, J. M.; Corrêa, I. R., Jr; Romesberg, F. E. A Semi-Synthetic Organism with an Expanded Genetic Alphabet. Nature 2014, 509 (7500), 385388,  DOI: 10.1038/nature13314
    46. 46
      Rech, E. L.; Arber, W. Biodiversity as a Source for Synthetic Domestication of Useful Specific Traits. Ann. Appl. Biol. 2013, 162 (2), 141144,  DOI: 10.1111/aab.12013
    47. 47
      Rech, E. Genomics and Synthetic Biology as a Viable Option to Intensify Sustainable Use of Biodiversity. Nat. Precedings 2011, 11,  DOI: 10.1038/npre.2011.5759.1
    48. 48
      Kiyama, H.; Kakizawa, S.; Sasajima, Y.; Tahara, Y. O.; Miyata, M. Reconstitution of a Minimal Motility System Based on Spiroplasma Swimming by Two Bacterial Actins in a Synthetic Minimal Bacterium. Sci. Adv. 2022, 8 (48), eabo7490,  DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abo7490
    49. 49
      Geiger, O.; Sanchez-Flores, A.; Padilla-Gomez, J.; Degli Esposti, M. Multiple Approaches of Cellular Metabolism Define the Bacterial Ancestry of Mitochondria. Sci. Adv. 2023, 9 (32), eadh0066,  DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.adh0066
    50. 50
      Pinheiro, V. B.; Taylor, A. I.; Cozens, C.; Abramov, M.; Renders, M.; Zhang, S.; Chaput, J. C.; Wengel, J.; Peak-Chew, S.-Y.; McLaughlin, S. H.; Herdewijn, P.; Holliger, P. Synthetic Genetic Polymers Capable of Heredity and Evolution. Science 2012, 336 (6079), 341344,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1217622
    51. 51
      Hoshika, S.; Leal, N. A.; Kim, M.-J.; Kim, M.-S.; Karalkar, N. B.; Kim, H.-J.; Bates, A. M.; Watkins, N. E., Jr; SantaLucia, H. A.; Meyer, A. J.; DasGupta, S.; Piccirilli, J. A.; Ellington, A. D.; SantaLucia, J., Jr; Georgiadis, M. M.; Benner, S. A. Hachimoji DNA and RNA: A Genetic System with Eight Building Blocks. Science 2019, 363 (6429), 884887,  DOI: 10.1126/science.aat0971
    52. 52
      Jumper, J.; Evans, R.; Pritzel, A.; Green, T.; Figurnov, M.; Ronneberger, O.; Tunyasuvunakool, K.; Bates, R.; Žídek, A.; Potapenko, A.; Bridgland, A.; Meyer, C.; Kohl, S. A. A.; Ballard, A. J.; Cowie, A.; Romera-Paredes, B.; Nikolov, S.; Jain, R.; Adler, J.; Back, T.; Petersen, S.; Reiman, D.; Clancy, E.; Zielinski, M.; Steinegger, M.; Pacholska, M.; Berghammer, T.; Bodenstein, S.; Silver, D.; Vinyals, O.; Senior, A. W.; Kavukcuoglu, K.; Kohli, P.; Hassabis, D. Highly Accurate Protein Structure Prediction with AlphaFold. Nature 2021, 596 (7873), 583589,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2
    53. 53
      Lee, J. W.; Na, D.; Park, J. M.; Lee, J.; Choi, S.; Lee, S. Y. Systems Metabolic Engineering of Microorganisms for Natural and Non-Natural Chemicals. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2012, 8 (6), 536546,  DOI: 10.1038/nchembio.970
    54. 54
      Nielsen, J. Systems Biology of Metabolism. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2017, 86, 245275,  DOI: 10.1146/annurev-biochem-061516-044757
    55. 55
      Choi, K. R.; Jang, W. D.; Yang, D.; Cho, J. S.; Park, D.; Lee, S. Y. Systems Metabolic Engineering Strategies: Integrating Systems and Synthetic Biology with Metabolic Engineering. Trends Biotechnol. 2019, 37 (8), 817837,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2019.01.003
    56. 56
      Karim, A. S.; Dudley, Q. M.; Juminaga, A.; Yuan, Y.; Crowe, S. A.; Heggestad, J. T.; Garg, S.; Abdalla, T.; Grubbe, W. S.; Rasor, B. J.; Coar, D. N.; Torculas, M.; Krein, M.; Liew, F. E.; Quattlebaum, A.; Jensen, R. O.; Stuart, J. A.; Simpson, S. D.; Köpke, M.; Jewett, M. C. In Vitro Prototyping and Rapid Optimization of Biosynthetic Enzymes for Cell Design. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2020, 16 (8), 912919,  DOI: 10.1038/s41589-020-0559-0
    57. 57
      Dudley, Q. M.; Karim, A. S.; Nash, C. J.; Jewett, M. C. In Vitro Prototyping of Limonene Biosynthesis Using Cell-Free Protein Synthesis. Metab. Eng. 2020, 61, 251260,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ymben.2020.05.006
    58. 58
      Averesch, N. J. H.; Krömer, J. O. Metabolic Engineering of the Shikimate Pathway for Production of Aromatics and Derived Compounds-Present and Future Strain Construction Strategies. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2018, 6, 32,  DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2018.00032
    59. 59
      Jang, W. D.; Kim, G. B.; Lee, S. Y. An Interactive Metabolic Map of Bio-Based Chemicals. Trends Biotechnol. 2023, 41 (1), 1014,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2022.07.013
    60. 60
      Lai, H.-E.; Obled, A. M. C.; Chee, S. M.; Morgan, R. M.; Lynch, R.; Sharma, S. V.; Moore, S. J.; Polizzi, K. M.; Goss, R. J. M.; Freemont, P. S. GenoChemetic Strategy for Derivatization of the Violacein Natural Product Scaffold. ACS Chem. Biol. 2021, 16 (11), 21162123,  DOI: 10.1021/acschembio.1c00483
    61. 61
      Galanie, S.; Thodey, K.; Trenchard, I. J.; Filsinger Interrante, M.; Smolke, C. D. Complete Biosynthesis of Opioids in Yeast. Science 2015, 349 (6252), 10951100,  DOI: 10.1126/science.aac9373
    62. 62
      Trenchard, I. J.; Siddiqui, M. S.; Thodey, K.; Smolke, C. D. De Novo Production of the Key Branch Point Benzylisoquinoline Alkaloid Reticuline in Yeast. Metab. Eng. 2015, 31, 7483,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ymben.2015.06.010
    63. 63
      Chan, C. T. Y.; Lee, J. W.; Cameron, D. E.; Bashor, C. J.; Collins, J. J. Deadman” and “Passcode” Microbial Kill Switches for Bacterial Containment. Nat. Chem. Biol. 2016, 12 (2), 8286,  DOI: 10.1038/nchembio.1979
    64. 64
      Caliando, B. J.; Voigt, C. A. Targeted DNA Degradation Using a CRISPR Device Stably Carried in the Host Genome. Nat. Commun. 2015, 6, 6989,  DOI: 10.1038/ncomms7989
    65. 65
      Nyerges, A.; Vinke, S.; Flynn, R.; Owen, S. V.; Rand, E. A.; Budnik, B.; Keen, E.; Narasimhan, K.; Marchand, J. A.; Baas-Thomas, M.; Liu, M.; Chen, K.; Chiappino-Pepe, A.; Hu, F.; Baym, M.; Church, G. M. A Swapped Genetic Code Prevents Viral Infections and Gene Transfer. Nature 2023, 615 (7953), 720727,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-05824-z
    66. 66
      Scrinis, G.; Lyons, K. The Emerging Nano-Corporate Paradigm: Nanotechnology and the Transformation of Nature, Food and Agri-Food Systems. Int. J. Sociol. Agric. Food 2007, 15 (2), 2244
    67. 67
      Nitrogen fixing bacteria - microbial fertilizer. https://www.pivotbio.com/ (accessed on April 30, 2023).
    68. 68
      Kaul, S.; Choudhary, M.; Gupta, S.; Dhar, M. K. Engineering Host Microbiome for Crop Improvement and Sustainable Agriculture. Front. Microbiol. 2021, 12, 635917,  DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2021.635917
    69. 69
      Mueller, U. G.; Sachs, J. L. Engineering Microbiomes to Improve Plant and Animal Health. Trends Microbiol. 2015, 23 (10), 606617,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tim.2015.07.009
    70. 70
      Jin Song, S.; Woodhams, D. C.; Martino, C.; Allaband, C.; Mu, A.; Javorschi-Miller-Montgomery, S.; Suchodolski, J. S.; Knight, R. Engineering the Microbiome for Animal Health and Conservation. Exp. Biol. Med. 2019, 244 (6), 494504,  DOI: 10.1177/1535370219830075
    71. 71
      Aziz, C. E.; Borden, R. C.; Coates, J. D.; Cox, E. E.; Downey, D. C.; Evans, P. J.; Hatzinger, P. B.; Henry, B. M.; Andrew Jackson, W.; Krug, T. A.; Tony Lieberman, M.; Loehr, R. C.; Norris, R. D.; Nzengung, V. A.; Perlmutter, M. W.; Schaefer, C. E.; Stroo, H. F.; Herb Ward, C.; Winstead, C. J.; Wolfe, C. In Situ Bioremediation of Perchlorate in Groundwater; Springer: New York.
    72. 72
      Hou, D.; O’Connor, D.; Igalavithana, A. D.; Alessi, D. S.; Luo, J.; Tsang, D. C. W.; Sparks, D. L.; Yamauchi, Y.; Rinklebe, J.; Ok, Y. S. Metal Contamination and Bioremediation of Agricultural Soils for Food Safety and Sustainability. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment 2020, 1 (7), 366381,  DOI: 10.1038/s43017-020-0061-y
    73. 73
      Maity, W.; Maity, S.; Bera, S.; Roy, A. Emerging Roles of PETase and MHETase in the Biodegradation of Plastic Wastes. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2021, 193 (8), 26992716,  DOI: 10.1007/s12010-021-03562-4
    74. 74
      de Lorenzo, V.; Prather, K. L.; Chen, G.-Q.; O’Day, E.; von Kameke, C.; Oyarzún, D. A.; Hosta-Rigau, L.; Alsafar, H.; Cao, C.; Ji, W.; Okano, H.; Roberts, R. J.; Ronaghi, M.; Yeung, K.; Zhang, F.; Lee, S. Y. The Power of Synthetic Biology for Bioproduction, Remediation and Pollution Control: The UN’s Sustainable Development Goals Will Inevitably Require the Application of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology on a Global Scale. EMBO Rep 2018,  DOI: 10.15252/embr.201745658
    75. 75
      Thavarajah, W.; Verosloff, M. S.; Jung, J. K.; Alam, K. K.; Miller, J. D.; Jewett, M. C.; Young, S. L.; Lucks, J. B. A Primer on Emerging Field-Deployable Synthetic Biology Tools for Global Water Quality Monitoring. NPJ. Clean Water 2020,  DOI: 10.1038/s41545-020-0064-8
    76. 76
      Gupta, R. M.; Schnitzler, G. R.; Fang, S.; Lee-Kim, V. S.; Barry, A. Multiomic Analysis and CRISPR Perturbation Screens Identify Endothelial Cell Programs and Novel Therapeutic Targets for Coronary Artery Disease. Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol. 2023, 43 (5), 600608,  DOI: 10.1161/ATVBAHA.123.318328
    77. 77
      Virchow, R. L. K. Disease, Life and Man: Selected Essays; Rather, L. J., Translator; Stanford University Press, 1958.
    78. 78
      Center for Biologics Evaluation; Research. Approved Cellular and Gene Therapy Products. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/cellular-gene-therapy-products/approved-cellular-and-gene-therapy-products (accessed on August 21, 2023).
    79. 79
      Bashor, C. J.; Hilton, I. B.; Bandukwala, H.; Smith, D. M.; Veiseh, O. Engineering the next Generation of Cell-Based Therapeutics. Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 2022, 21 (9), 655675,  DOI: 10.1038/s41573-022-00476-6
    80. 80
      Rosenbaum, L. Tragedy, Perseverance, and Chance - The Story of CAR-T Therapy. N. Engl. J. Med. 2017, 377 (14), 13131315,  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMp1711886
    81. 81
      Hay, A. E.; Cheung, M. C. CAR T-Cells: Costs, Comparisons, and Commentary. J. Med. Econ. 2019, 22 (7), 613615,  DOI: 10.1080/13696998.2019.1582059
    82. 82
      Sampson, K.; Sorenson, C.; Adamala, K. FDA needs to get ready to evaluate synthetic cells, the next generation of therapeutics. STAT. https://www.statnews.com/2022/07/26/fda-develop-framework-evaluate-synthetic-cells/ (accessed on January 6, 2024).
    83. 83
      Lussier, F.; Staufer, O.; Platzman, I.; Spatz, J. P. Can Bottom-Up Synthetic Biology Generate Advanced Drug-Delivery Systems?. Trends Biotechnol. 2021, 39 (5), 445459,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2020.08.002
    84. 84
      Staufer, O.; Dietrich, F.; Rimal, R.; Schröter, M.; Fabritz, S.; Boehm, H.; Singh, S.; Möller, M.; Platzman, I.; Spatz, J. P. Bottom-up Assembly of Biomedical Relevant Fully Synthetic Extracellular Vesicles. Sci. Adv. 2021, 7 (36), eabg6666,  DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abg6666
    85. 85
      Ghaemmaghamian, Z.; Zarghami, R.; Walker, G.; O’Reilly, E.; Ziaee, A. Stabilizing Vaccines via Drying: Quality by Design Considerations. Adv. Drug Delivery Rev. 2022, 187, 114313,  DOI: 10.1016/j.addr.2022.114313
    86. 86
      Adiga, R.; Al-Adhami, M.; Andar, A.; Borhani, S.; Brown, S.; Burgenson, D.; Cooper, M. A.; Deldari, S.; Frey, D. D.; Ge, X.; Guo, H.; Gurramkonda, C.; Jensen, P.; Kostov, Y.; LaCourse, W.; Liu, Y.; Moreira, A.; Mupparapu, K.; Peñalber-Johnstone, C.; Pilli, M.; Punshon-Smith, B.; Rao, A.; Rao, G.; Rauniyar, P.; Snovida, S.; Taurani, K.; Tilahun, D.; Tolosa, L.; Tolosa, M.; Tran, K.; Vattem, K.; Veeraraghavan, S.; Wagner, B.; Wilhide, J.; Wood, D. W.; Zuber, A. Point-of-Care Production of Therapeutic Proteins of Good-Manufacturing-Practice Quality. Nat. Biomed Eng. 2018, 2 (9), 675686,  DOI: 10.1038/s41551-018-0259-1
    87. 87
      Ginsburg, G. S.; Phillips, K. A. Precision Medicine: From Science To Value. Health Aff. 2018, 37 (5), 694701,  DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2017.1624
    88. 88
      Agarwal, S.; Saha, S.; Balla, V. K.; Pal, A.; Barui, A.; Bodhak, S. Current Developments in 3D Bioprinting for Tissue and Organ Regeneration-A Review. Front. Mech. Eng. Chin 2020,  DOI: 10.3389/fmech.2020.589171
    89. 89
      Ghosh, S.; Yi, H.-G. A Review on Bioinks and Their Application in Plant Bioprinting. Int. J. Bioprint 2022, 8 (4), 612,  DOI: 10.18063/ijb.v8i4.612
    90. 90
      Santomartino, R.; Averesch, N. J. H.; Bhuiyan, M.; Cockell, C. S.; Colangelo, J.; Gumulya, Y.; Lehner, B.; Lopez-Ayala, I.; McMahon, S.; Mohanty, A.; Santa Maria, S. R.; Urbaniak, C.; Volger, R.; Yang, J.; Zea, L. Toward Sustainable Space Exploration: A Roadmap for Harnessing the Power of Microorganisms. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14 (1), 1391,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-37070-2
    91. 91
      Rothschild, L. J. Synthetic Biology Meets Bioprinting: Enabling Technologies for Humans on Mars (and Earth). Biochem. Soc. Trans. 2016, 44 (4), 11581164,  DOI: 10.1042/BST20160067
    92. 92
      Averesch, N. J. H.; Berliner, A. J.; Nangle, S. N.; Zezulka, S.; Vengerova, G. L.; Ho, D.; Casale, C. A.; Lehner, B. A. E.; Snyder, J. E.; Clark, K. B.; Dartnell, L. R.; Criddle, C. S.; Arkin, A. P. Microbial Biomanufacturing for Space-Exploration-What to Take and When to Make. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14 (1), 2311,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-37910-1
    93. 93
      Averesch, N. J. H. Choice of Microbial System for in-Situ Resource Utilization on Mars. Front. Astron. Space Sci. 2021,  DOI: 10.3389/fspas.2021.700370
    94. 94
      Cockell, C. S. Bridging the Gap between Microbial Limits and Extremes in Space: Space Microbial Biotechnology in the next 15 Years. Microb. Biotechnol. 2022, 15 (1), 2941,  DOI: 10.1111/1751-7915.13927
    95. 95
      Buddingh’, B. C.; van Hest, J. C. M. Artificial Cells: Synthetic Compartments with Life-like Functionality and Adaptivity. Acc. Chem. Res. 2017, 50 (4), 769777,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.accounts.6b00512
    96. 96
      Ichihashi, N. What Can We Learn from the Construction of in Vitro Replication Systems?. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 2019, 1447 (1), 144156,  DOI: 10.1111/nyas.14042
    97. 97
      Groaz, A.; Moghimianavval, H.; Tavella, F.; Giessen, T. W.; Vecchiarelli, A. G.; Yang, Q.; Liu, A. P. Engineering Spatiotemporal Organization and Dynamics in Synthetic Cells. WIREs Nanomed. Nanobiotechnol. 2021, 13 (3), e1685,  DOI: 10.1002/wnan.1685
    98. 98
      Gaut, N. J.; Adamala, K. P. Reconstituting Natural Cell Elements in Synthetic Cells. Adv. Biol. 2021, 5 (3), e2000188,  DOI: 10.1002/adbi.202000188
    99. 99
      Stal, L. J. Nitrogen Fixation in Cyanobacteria. In eLS; John Wiley & Sons, Ltd: Chichester, UK, 2015; pp 19.  DOI: 10.1002/9780470015902.a0021159.pub2 .
    100. 100
      Poirier, Y.; Antonenkov, V. D.; Glumoff, T.; Hiltunen, J. K. Peroxisomal β-oxidation─A Metabolic Pathway with Multiple Functions. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Molecular Cell Research 2006, 1763 (12), 14131426,  DOI: 10.1016/j.bbamcr.2006.08.034
    101. 101
      Murat, D.; Byrne, M.; Komeili, A. Cell Biology of Prokaryotic Organelles. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 2010, 2 (10), a000422,  DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a000422
    102. 102
      Nott, T. J.; Craggs, T. D.; Baldwin, A. J. Membraneless Organelles Can Melt Nucleic Acid Duplexes and Act as Biomolecular Filters. Nat. Chem. 2016, 8 (6), 569575,  DOI: 10.1038/nchem.2519
    103. 103
      Lyon, A. S.; Peeples, W. B.; Rosen, M. K. A Framework for Understanding the Functions of Biomolecular Condensates across Scales. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2021, 22 (3), 215235,  DOI: 10.1038/s41580-020-00303-z
    104. 104
      Protter, D. S. W.; Parker, R. Principles and Properties of Stress Granules. Trends Cell Biol. 2016, 26 (9), 668679,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tcb.2016.05.004
    105. 105
      Roger, A. J.; Muñoz-Gómez, S. A.; Kamikawa, R. The Origin and Diversification of Mitochondria. Curr. Biol. 2017, 27 (21), R1177R1192,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.09.015
    106. 106
      Mehta, A. P.; Supekova, L.; Chen, J.-H.; Pestonjamasp, K.; Webster, P.; Ko, Y.; Henderson, S. C.; McDermott, G.; Supek, F.; Schultz, P. G. Engineering Yeast Endosymbionts as a Step toward the Evolution of Mitochondria. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2018, 115 (46), 1179611801,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1813143115
    107. 107
      Headen, D. M.; Aubry, G.; Lu, H.; García, A. J. Microfluidic-Based Generation of Size-Controlled, Biofunctionalized Synthetic Polymer Microgels for Cell Encapsulation. Adv. Mater. 2014, 26 (19), 30033008,  DOI: 10.1002/adma.201304880
    108. 108
      Torre, P.; Keating, C. D.; Mansy, S. S. Multiphase Water-in-Oil Emulsion Droplets for Cell-Free Transcription-Translation. Langmuir 2014, 30 (20), 56955699,  DOI: 10.1021/la404146g
    109. 109
      Zhang, Y.; Kojima, T.; Kim, G.-A.; McNerney, M. P.; Takayama, S.; Styczynski, M. P. Protocell Arrays for Simultaneous Detection of Diverse Analytes. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12 (1), 5724,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-25989-3
    110. 110
      Allen, M. E.; Hindley, J. W.; Baxani, D. K.; Ces, O.; Elani, Y. Hydrogels as Functional Components in Artificial Cell Systems. Nat. Rev. Chem. 2022, 6 (8), 562578,  DOI: 10.1038/s41570-022-00404-7
    111. 111
      Has, C.; Sunthar, P. A Comprehensive Review on Recent Preparation Techniques of Liposomes. J. Liposome Res. 2020, 30 (4), 336365,  DOI: 10.1080/08982104.2019.1668010
    112. 112
      Luisi, P. L.; Allegretti, M.; Pereira de Souza, T.; Steiniger, F.; Fahr, A.; Stano, P. Spontaneous Protein Crowding in Liposomes: A New Vista for the Origin of Cellular Metabolism. Chembiochem 2010, 11 (14), 19891992,  DOI: 10.1002/cbic.201000381
    113. 113
      Michelon, M.; Huang, Y.; de la Torre, L. G.; Weitz, D. A.; Cunha, R. L. Single-Step Microfluidic Production of W/O/W Double Emulsions as Templates for β-Carotene-Loaded Giant Liposomes Formation. Chem. Eng. J. 2019, 366, 2732,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cej.2019.02.021
    114. 114
      Elani, Y.; Trantidou, T.; Wylie, D.; Dekker, L.; Polizzi, K.; Law, R. V.; Ces, O. Constructing Vesicle-Based Artificial Cells with Embedded Living Cells as Organelle-like Modules. Sci. Rep. 2018, 8 (1), 4564,  DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-22263-3
    115. 115
      Tayeb, H. H.; Sainsbury, F. Nanoemulsions in Drug Delivery: Formulation to Medical Application. Nanomedicine 2018, 13 (19), 25072525,  DOI: 10.2217/nnm-2018-0088
    116. 116
      Vogele, K.; Frank, T.; Gasser, L.; Goetzfried, M. A.; Hackl, M. W.; Sieber, S. A.; Simmel, F. C.; Pirzer, T. Towards Synthetic Cells Using Peptide-Based Reaction Compartments. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9 (1), 3862,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-018-06379-8
    117. 117
      Mushnoori, S.; Lu, C. Y.; Schmidt, K.; Zang, E.; Dutt, M. Peptide-Based Vesicles and Droplets: A Review. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 2020, 33 (5), 053002,  DOI: 10.1088/1361-648X/abb995
    118. 118
      Sharma, B.; Ma, Y.; Hiraki, H. L.; Baker, B. M.; Ferguson, A. L.; Liu, A. P. Facile Formation of Giant Elastin-like Polypeptide Vesicles as Synthetic Cells. Chem. Commun. 2021, 57 (97), 1320213205,  DOI: 10.1039/D1CC05579H
    119. 119
      Vieregg, J. R.; Lueckheide, M.; Marciel, A. B.; Leon, L.; Bologna, A. J.; Rivera, J. R.; Tirrell, M. V. Oligonucleotide-Peptide Complexes: Phase Control by Hybridization. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2018, 140 (5), 16321638,  DOI: 10.1021/jacs.7b03567
    120. 120
      Fraccia, T. P.; Jia, T. Z. Liquid Crystal Coacervates Composed of Short Double-Stranded DNA and Cationic Peptides. ACS Nano 2020, 14 (11), 1507115082,  DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.0c05083
    121. 121
      Aumiller, W. M., Jr; Pir Cakmak, F.; Davis, B. W.; Keating, C. D. RNA-Based Coacervates as a Model for Membraneless Organelles: Formation, Properties, and Interfacial Liposome Assembly. Langmuir 2016, 32 (39), 1004210053,  DOI: 10.1021/acs.langmuir.6b02499
    122. 122
      Rimoli, M. G.; Rabaioli, M. R.; Melisi, D.; Curcio, A.; Mondello, S.; Mirabelli, R.; Abignente, E. Synthetic Zeolites as a New Tool for Drug Delivery. J. Biomed. Mater. Res., Part A 2008, 87 (1), 156164,  DOI: 10.1002/jbm.a.31763
    123. 123
      Hyman, A. A.; Weber, C. A.; Jülicher, F. Liquid-Liquid Phase Separation in Biology. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 2014, 30, 3958,  DOI: 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100913-013325
    124. 124
      Junge, F.; Haberstock, S.; Roos, C.; Stefer, S.; Proverbio, D.; Dötsch, V.; Bernhard, F. Advances in Cell-Free Protein Synthesis for the Functional and Structural Analysis of Membrane Proteins. N. Biotechnol. 2011, 28 (3), 262271,  DOI: 10.1016/j.nbt.2010.07.002
    125. 125
      Lee, K. Y.; Park, S.-J.; Lee, K. A.; Kim, S.-H.; Kim, H.; Meroz, Y.; Mahadevan, L.; Jung, K.-H.; Ahn, T. K.; Parker, K. K.; Shin, K. Photosynthetic Artificial Organelles Sustain and Control ATP-Dependent Reactions in a Protocellular System. Nat. Biotechnol. 2018, 36 (6), 530535,  DOI: 10.1038/nbt.4140
    126. 126
      Jewett, M. C.; Swartz, J. R. Mimicking the Escherichia Coli Cytoplasmic Environment Activates Long-Lived and Efficient Cell-Free Protein Synthesis. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2004, 86 (1), 1926,  DOI: 10.1002/bit.20026
    127. 127
      Caschera, F.; Noireaux, V. Synthesis of 2.3 Mg/mL of Protein with an All Escherichia Coli Cell-Free Transcription-Translation System. Biochimie 2014, 99, 162168,  DOI: 10.1016/j.biochi.2013.11.025
    128. 128
      Garamella, J.; Marshall, R.; Rustad, M.; Noireaux, V. The All E. Coli TX-TL Toolbox 2.0: A Platform for Cell-Free Synthetic Biology. ACS Synth. Biol. 2016, 5 (4), 344355,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.5b00296
    129. 129
      Kim, D.-M.; Swartz, J. R. Efficient Production of a Bioactive, Multiple Disulfide-Bonded Protein Using Modified Extracts of Escherichia Coli. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2004, 85 (2), 122129,  DOI: 10.1002/bit.10865
    130. 130
      Jeong, S.; Nguyen, H. T.; Kim, C. H.; Ly, M. N.; Shin, K. Toward Artificial Cells: Novel Advances in Energy Conversion and Cellular Motility. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2020, 30 (11), 1907182,  DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201907182
    131. 131
      Hanczyc, M. M.; Fujikawa, S. M.; Szostak, J. W. Experimental Models of Primitive Cellular Compartments: Encapsulation, Growth, and Division. Science 2003, 302 (5645), 618622,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1089904
    132. 132
      Kretschmer, S.; Ganzinger, K. A.; Franquelim, H. G.; Schwille, P. Synthetic Cell Division via Membrane-Transforming Molecular Assemblies. BMC Biol. 2019, 17 (1), 43,  DOI: 10.1186/s12915-019-0665-1
    133. 133
      Anzai, K.; Yoshida, M.; Kirino, Y. Change in Intravesicular Volume of Liposomes by Freeze-Thaw Treatment as Studied by the ESR Stopped-Flow Technique. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Biomembranes 1990, 1021 (1), 2126,  DOI: 10.1016/0005-2736(90)90378-2
    134. 134
      van der Valk, T.; Pečnerová, P.; Díez-Del-Molino, D.; Bergström, A.; Oppenheimer, J.; Hartmann, S.; Xenikoudakis, G.; Thomas, J. A.; Dehasque, M.; Sağlıcan, E.; Fidan, F. R.; Barnes, I.; Liu, S.; Somel, M.; Heintzman, P. D.; Nikolskiy, P.; Shapiro, B.; Skoglund, P.; Hofreiter, M.; Lister, A. M.; Götherström, A.; Dalén, L. Million-Year-Old DNA Sheds Light on the Genomic History of Mammoths. Nature 2021, 591 (7849), 265269,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-03224-9
    135. 135
      Li, Z.; Deutscher, M. P. Analyzing the Decay of Stable RNAs in E. Coli. Methods Enzymol. 2008, 447, 3145,  DOI: 10.1016/S0076-6879(08)02202-7
    136. 136
      Chan, L. Y.; Mugler, C. F.; Heinrich, S.; Vallotton, P.; Weis, K. Non-Invasive Measurement of mRNA Decay Reveals Translation Initiation as the Major Determinant of mRNA Stability. eLife 2018,  DOI: 10.7554/eLife.32536
    137. 137
      Paul, N.; Joyce, G. F. A Self-Replicating Ligase Ribozyme. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2002, 99 (20), 1273312740,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.202471099
    138. 138
      Robertson, M. P.; Joyce, G. F. Highly Efficient Self-Replicating RNA Enzymes. Chem. Biol. 2014, 21 (2), 238245,  DOI: 10.1016/j.chembiol.2013.12.004
    139. 139
      Chen, I. A.; Salehi-Ashtiani, K.; Szostak, J. W. RNA Catalysis in Model Protocell Vesicles. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127 (38), 1321313219,  DOI: 10.1021/ja051784p
    140. 140
      Gorbalenya, A. E.; Enjuanes, L.; Ziebuhr, J.; Snijder, E. J. Nidovirales: Evolving the Largest RNA Virus Genome. Virus Res. 2006, 117 (1), 1737,  DOI: 10.1016/j.virusres.2006.01.017
    141. 141
      Joyce, G. F.; Szostak, J. W. Protocells and RNA Self-Replication. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 2018, 10 (9), a034801,  DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a034801
    142. 142
      Jahn, M.; Vorpahl, C.; Hübschmann, T.; Harms, H.; Müller, S. Copy Number Variability of Expression Plasmids Determined by Cell Sorting and Droplet Digital PCR. Microb. Cell Fact. 2016, 15 (1), 211,  DOI: 10.1186/s12934-016-0610-8
    143. 143
      Nielsen, A. A. K.; Der, B. S.; Shin, J.; Vaidyanathan, P.; Paralanov, V.; Strychalski, E. A.; Ross, D.; Densmore, D.; Voigt, C. A. Genetic Circuit Design Automation. Science 2016, 352 (6281), aac7341,  DOI: 10.1126/science.aac7341
    144. 144
      Salis, H. M.; Mirsky, E. A.; Voigt, C. A. Automated Design of Synthetic Ribosome Binding Sites to Control Protein Expression. Nat. Biotechnol. 2009, 27 (10), 946950,  DOI: 10.1038/nbt.1568
    145. 145
      Ostrov, N.; Beal, J.; Ellis, T.; Gordon, D. B.; Karas, B. J.; Lee, H. H.; Lenaghan, S. C.; Schloss, J. A.; Stracquadanio, G.; Trefzer, A.; Bader, J. S.; Church, G. M.; Coelho, C. M.; Efcavitch, J. W.; Güell, M.; Mitchell, L. A.; Nielsen, A. A. K.; Peck, B.; Smith, A. C.; Stewart, C. N., Jr; Tekotte, H. Technological Challenges and Milestones for Writing Genomes. Science 2019, 366 (6463), 310312,  DOI: 10.1126/science.aay0339
    146. 146
      Farasat, I.; Kushwaha, M.; Collens, J.; Easterbrook, M.; Guido, M.; Salis, H. M. Efficient Search, Mapping, and Optimization of Multi-Protein Genetic Systems in Diverse Bacteria. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2014, 10 (6), 731,  DOI: 10.15252/msb.20134955
    147. 147
      Pretorius, I. S.; Boeke, J. D. Yeast 2.0-Connecting the Dots in the Construction of the World’s First Functional Synthetic Eukaryotic Genome. FEMS Yeast Res. 2018,  DOI: 10.1093/femsyr/foy032
    148. 148
      Blight, K. J.; Kolykhalov, A. A.; Rice, C. M. Efficient Initiation of HCV RNA Replication in Cell Culture. Science 2000, 290 (5498), 19721974,  DOI: 10.1126/science.290.5498.1972
    149. 149
      Gibson, D. G.; Young, L.; Chuang, R.-Y.; Venter, J. C.; Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Smith, H. O. Enzymatic Assembly of DNA Molecules up to Several Hundred Kilobases. Nat. Methods 2009, 6 (5), 343345,  DOI: 10.1038/nmeth.1318
    150. 150
      Venter, J. C.; Glass, J. I.; Hutchison, C. A., 3rd; Vashee, S. Synthetic Chromosomes, Genomes, Viruses, and Cells. Cell 2022, 185 (15), 27082724,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2022.06.046
    151. 151
      Fredens, J.; Wang, K.; de la Torre, D.; Funke, L. F. H.; Robertson, W. E.; Christova, Y.; Chia, T.; Schmied, W. H.; Dunkelmann, D. L.; Beránek, V.; Uttamapinant, C.; Llamazares, A. G.; Elliott, T. S.; Chin, J. W. Total Synthesis of Escherichia Coli with a Recoded Genome. Nature 2019, 569 (7757), 514518,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-019-1192-5
    152. 152
      Zhao, Y.; Coelho, C.; Hughes, A. L.; Lazar-Stefanita, L.; Yang, S.; Brooks, A. N.; Walker, R. S. K.; Zhang, W.; Lauer, S.; Hernandez, C.; Cai, J.; Mitchell, L. A.; Agmon, N.; Shen, Y.; Sall, J.; Fanfani, V.; Jalan, A.; Rivera, J.; Liang, F.-X.; Bader, J. S.; Stracquadanio, G.; Steinmetz, L. M.; Cai, Y.; Boeke, J. D. Debugging and Consolidating Multiple Synthetic Chromosomes Reveals Combinatorial Genetic Interactions. Cell 2023, 186 (24), 52205236,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2023.09.025
    153. 153
      Woese, C. The Universal Ancestor. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1998, 95 (12), 68546859,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.95.12.6854
    154. 154
      Woese, C. R. On the Evolution of Cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2002, 99 (13), 87428747,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.132266999
    155. 155
      Sandberg, T. E.; Wise, K. S.; Dalldorf, C.; Szubin, R.; Feist, A. M.; Glass, J. I.; Palsson, B. O. Adaptive Evolution of a Minimal Organism with a Synthetic Genome. iScience 2023, 26 (9), 107500,  DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2023.107500
    156. 156
      Moger-Reischer, R. Z.; Glass, J. I.; Wise, K. S.; Sun, L.; Bittencourt, D. M. C.; Lehmkuhl, B. K.; Schoolmaster, D. R., Jr; Lynch, M.; Lennon, J. T. Evolution of a Minimal Cell. Nature 2023, 620 (7972), 122127,  DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06288-x
    157. 157
      Strotz, L. C.; Simões, M.; Girard, M. G.; Breitkreuz, L.; Kimmig, J.; Lieberman, B. S. Getting Somewhere with the Red Queen: Chasing a Biologically Modern Definition of the Hypothesis. Biol. Lett. 2018, 14 (5), 20170734,  DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2017.0734
    158. 158
      Solé, R. Revisiting Leigh Van Valen’s “A New Evolutionary Law” (1973). Biol. Theory 2022, 17 (2), 120125,  DOI: 10.1007/s13752-021-00391-w
    159. 159
      Hammerling, M. J.; Krüger, A.; Jewett, M. C. Strategies for in Vitro Engineering of the Translation Machinery. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020, 48 (3), 10681083,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkz1011
    160. 160
      Williams, T. C.; Averesch, N. J. H.; Winter, G.; Plan, M. R.; Vickers, C. E.; Nielsen, L. K.; Krömer, J. O. Quorum-Sensing Linked RNA Interference for Dynamic Metabolic Pathway Control in Saccharomyces Cerevisiae. Metab. Eng. 2015, 29, 124134,  DOI: 10.1016/j.ymben.2015.03.008
    161. 161
      Robinson, A. O.; Venero, O. M.; Adamala, K. P. Toward Synthetic Life: Biomimetic Synthetic Cell Communication. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2021, 64, 165173,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cbpa.2021.08.008
    162. 162
      Garamella, J.; Majumder, S.; Liu, A. P.; Noireaux, V. An Adaptive Synthetic Cell Based on Mechanosensing, Biosensing, and Inducible Gene Circuits. ACS Synth. Biol. 2019, 8 (8), 19131920,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.9b00204
    163. 163
      Liu, H.; Yang, Q.; Peng, R.; Kuai, H.; Lyu, Y.; Pan, X.; Liu, Q.; Tan, W. Artificial Signal Feedback Network Mimicking Cellular Adaptivity. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2019, 141 (16), 64586461,  DOI: 10.1021/jacs.8b13816
    164. 164
      Gispert, I.; Hindley, J. W.; Pilkington, C. P.; Shree, H.; Barter, L. M. C.; Ces, O.; Elani, Y. Stimuli-Responsive Vesicles as Distributed Artificial Organelles for Bacterial Activation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2022, 119 (42), e2206563119,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2206563119
    165. 165
      Aufinger, L.; Simmel, F. C. Establishing Communication Between Artificial Cells. Chemistry 2019, 25 (55), 1265912670,  DOI: 10.1002/chem.201901726
    166. 166
      Pereyre, S.; Sirand-Pugnet, P.; Beven, L.; Charron, A.; Renaudin, H.; Barré, A.; Avenaud, P.; Jacob, D.; Couloux, A.; Barbe, V.; de Daruvar, A.; Blanchard, A.; Bébéar, C. Life on Arginine for Mycoplasma Hominis: Clues from Its Minimal Genome and Comparison with Other Human Urogenital Mycoplasmas. PLoS Genet. 2009, 5 (10), e1000677,  DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgen.1000677
    167. 167
      Woese, C. R.; Maniloff, J.; Zablen, L. B. Phylogenetic Analysis of the Mycoplasmas. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1980, 77 (1), 494498,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.77.1.494
    168. 168
      Li, S.; Guan, J.-L.; Chien, S. Biochemistry and Biomechanics of Cell Motility. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2005, 7, 105150,  DOI: 10.1146/annurev.bioeng.7.060804.100340
    169. 169
      Brunet, T.; Albert, M.; Roman, W.; Coyle, M. C.; Spitzer, D. C.; King, N. A Flagellate-to-Amoeboid Switch in the Closest Living Relatives of Animals. eLife 2021,  DOI: 10.7554/eLife.61037
    170. 170
      Siton-Mendelson, O.; Bernheim-Groswasser, A. Toward the Reconstitution of Synthetic Cell Motility. Cell Adh. Migr. 2016, 10 (5), 461474,  DOI: 10.1080/19336918.2016.1170260
    171. 171
      Blanken, D.; van Nies, P.; Danelon, C. Quantitative Imaging of Gene-Expressing Liposomes Reveals Rare Favorable Phenotypes. Phys. Biol. 2019, 16 (4), 045002,  DOI: 10.1088/1478-3975/ab0c62
    172. 172
      Stano, P.; D’Aguanno, E.; Bolz, J.; Fahr, A.; Luisi, P. L. A Remarkable Self-Organization Process as the Origin of Primitive Functional Cells. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 2013, 52 (50), 1339713400,  DOI: 10.1002/anie.201306613
    173. 173
      Weitz, M.; Kim, J.; Kapsner, K.; Winfree, E.; Franco, E.; Simmel, F. C. Diversity in the Dynamical Behaviour of a Compartmentalized Programmable Biochemical Oscillator. Nat. Chem. 2014, 6 (4), 295302,  DOI: 10.1038/nchem.1869
    174. 174
      Hansen, M. M. K.; Meijer, L. H. H.; Spruijt, E.; Maas, R. J. M.; Rosquelles, M. V.; Groen, J.; Heus, H. A.; Huck, W. T. S. Macromolecular Crowding Creates Heterogeneous Environments of Gene Expression in Picolitre Droplets. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2016, 11 (2), 191197,  DOI: 10.1038/nnano.2015.243
    175. 175
      Rao, C. V. Expanding the Synthetic Biology Toolbox: Engineering Orthogonal Regulators of Gene Expression. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2012, 23 (5), 689694,  DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2011.12.015
    176. 176
      Yelleswarapu, M.; van der Linden, A. J.; van Sluijs, B.; Pieters, P. A.; Dubuc, E.; de Greef, T. F. A.; Huck, W. T. S. Sigma Factor-Mediated Tuning of Bacterial Cell-Free Synthetic Genetic Oscillators. ACS Synth. Biol. 2018, 7 (12), 28792887,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.8b00300
    177. 177
      Li, J.; Zhang, C.; Huang, P.; Kuru, E.; Forster-Benson, E. T. C.; Li, T.; Church, G. M. Dissecting Limiting Factors of the Protein Synthesis Using Recombinant Elements (PURE) System. Translation (Austin) 2017, 5 (1), e1327006,  DOI: 10.1080/21690731.2017.1327006
    178. 178
      Lavickova, B.; Maerkl, S. J. A Simple, Robust, and Low-Cost Method To Produce the PURE Cell-Free System. ACS Synth. Biol. 2019, 8 (2), 455462,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.8b00427
    179. 179
      Li, J.; Gu, L.; Aach, J.; Church, G. M. Improved Cell-Free RNA and Protein Synthesis System. PLoS One 2014, 9 (9), e106232,  DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106232
    180. 180
      Jewett, M. C.; Calhoun, K. A.; Voloshin, A.; Wuu, J. J.; Swartz, J. R. An Integrated Cell-Free Metabolic Platform for Protein Production and Synthetic Biology. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2008, 4, 220,  DOI: 10.1038/msb.2008.57
    181. 181
      Silverman, A. D.; Karim, A. S.; Jewett, M. C. Cell-Free Gene Expression: An Expanded Repertoire of Applications. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2020, 21 (3), 151170,  DOI: 10.1038/s41576-019-0186-3
    182. 182
      Ouyang, X.; Zhou, X.; Lai, S. N.; Liu, Q.; Zheng, B. Immobilization of Proteins of Cell Extract to Hydrogel Networks Enhances the Longevity of Cell-Free Protein Synthesis and Supports Gene Networks. ACS Synth. Biol. 2021, 10 (4), 749755,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.0c00541
    183. 183
      New England Biolabs. NEBExpress Cell-free ecoli Protein Synthesis System. https://www.neb.com/products/e5360-nebexpress-cell-free-ecoli-protein-synthesis-system (accessed on August 21, 2023).
    184. 184
      Zimmerman, S. B.; Trach, S. O. Estimation of Macromolecule Concentrations and Excluded Volume Effects for the Cytoplasm of Escherichia Coli. J. Mol. Biol. 1991, 222 (3), 599620,  DOI: 10.1016/0022-2836(91)90499-V
    185. 185
      Record, M. T., Jr; Courtenay, E. S.; Cayley, D. S.; Guttman, H. J. Responses of E. Coli to Osmotic Stress: Large Changes in Amounts of Cytoplasmic Solutes and Water. Trends Biochem. Sci. 1998, 23 (4), 143148,  DOI: 10.1016/S0968-0004(98)01196-7
    186. 186
      Cayley, S.; Lewis, B. A.; Guttman, H. J.; Record, M. T. Jr. Characterization of the Cytoplasm of Escherichia Coli K-12 as a Function of External Osmolarity. Implications for Protein-DNA Interactions in Vivo. J. Mol. Biol. 1991, 222 (2), 281300,  DOI: 10.1016/0022-2836(91)90212-O
    187. 187
      Li, J.; Haas, W.; Jackson, K.; Kuru, E.; Jewett, M. C.; Fan, Z. H.; Gygi, S.; Church, G. M. Cogenerating Synthetic Parts toward a Self-Replicating System. ACS Synth. Biol. 2017, 6 (7), 13271336,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.6b00342
    188. 188
      Murase, Y.; Nakanishi, H.; Tsuji, G.; Sunami, T.; Ichihashi, N. In Vitro Evolution of Unmodified 16S rRNA for Simple Ribosome Reconstitution. ACS Synth. Biol. 2018, 7 (2), 576583,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.7b00333
    189. 189
      Jewett, M. C.; Fritz, B. R.; Timmerman, L. E.; Church, G. M. In Vitro Integration of Ribosomal RNA Synthesis, Ribosome Assembly, and Translation. Mol. Syst. Biol. 2013, 9, 678,  DOI: 10.1038/msb.2013.31
    190. 190
      Fritz, B. R.; Jamil, O. K.; Jewett, M. C. Implications of Macromolecular Crowding and Reducing Conditions for in Vitro Ribosome Construction. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015, 43 (9), 47744784,  DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkv329
    191. 191
      Hammerling, M. J.; Fritz, B. R.; Yoesep, D. J.; Kim, D. S.; Carlson, E. D.; Jewett, M. C. In Vitro Ribosome Synthesis and Evolution through Ribosome Display. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11 (1), 1108,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-14705-2
    192. 192
      Wang, T.; Lu, Y. Toward Minimal Transcription-Translation Machinery. ACS Synth. Biol. 2023, 12 (11), 33123327,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.3c00324
    193. 193
      Oberholzer, T.; Albrizio, M.; Luisi, P. L. Polymerase Chain Reaction in Liposomes. Chem. Biol. 1995, 2 (10), 677682,  DOI: 10.1016/1074-5521(95)90031-4
    194. 194
      Kawska, A.; Carvalho, K.; Manzi, J.; Boujemaa-Paterski, R.; Blanchoin, L.; Martiel, J.-L.; Sykes, C. How Actin Network Dynamics Control the Onset of Actin-Based Motility. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2012, 109 (36), 1444014445,  DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1117096109
    195. 195
      Hürtgen, D.; Härtel, T.; Murray, S. M.; Sourjik, V.; Schwille, P. Functional Modules of Minimal Cell Division for Synthetic Biology. Adv. Biosyst. 2019, 3 (6), e1800315,  DOI: 10.1002/adbi.201800315
    196. 196
      Pelletier, J. F.; Sun, L.; Wise, K. S.; Assad-Garcia, N.; Karas, B. J.; Deerinck, T. J.; Ellisman, M. H.; Mershin, A.; Gershenfeld, N.; Chuang, R.-Y.; Glass, J. I.; Strychalski, E. A. Genetic Requirements for Cell Division in a Genomically Minimal Cell. Cell 2021, 184 (9), 24302440,  DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2021.03.008
    197. 197
      Zhang, S.; Contini, C.; Hindley, J. W.; Bolognesi, G.; Elani, Y.; Ces, O. Engineering Motile Aqueous Phase-Separated Droplets via Liposome Stabilisation. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12 (1), 1673,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-21832-x
    198. 198
      Li, M.; Brinkmann, M.; Pagonabarraga, I.; Seemann, R.; Fleury, J.-B. Spatiotemporal Control of Cargo Delivery Performed by Programmable Self-Propelled Janus Droplets. Commun. Phys. 2018, 1 (1), 18,  DOI: 10.1038/s42005-018-0025-4
    199. 199
      Litschel, T.; Kelley, C. F.; Holz, D.; Adeli Koudehi, M.; Vogel, S. K.; Burbaum, L.; Mizuno, N.; Vavylonis, D.; Schwille, P. Reconstitution of Contractile Actomyosin Rings in Vesicles. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12 (1), 2254,  DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-22422-7
    200. 200
      Bashirzadeh, Y.; Moghimianavval, H.; Liu, A. P. Encapsulated Actomyosin Patterns Drive Cell-like Membrane Shape Changes. iScience 2022, 25 (5), 104236,  DOI: 10.1016/j.isci.2022.104236
    201. 201
      Gardner, P. M.; Winzer, K.; Davis, B. G. Sugar Synthesis in a Protocellular Model Leads to a Cell Signalling Response in Bacteria. Nat. Chem. 2009, 1 (5), 377383,  DOI: 10.1038/nchem.296
    202. 202
      Lentini, R.; Santero, S. P.; Chizzolini, F.; Cecchi, D.; Fontana, J.; Marchioretto, M.; Del Bianco, C.; Terrell, J. L.; Spencer, A. C.; Martini, L.; Forlin, M.; Assfalg, M.; Dalla Serra, M.; Bentley, W. E.; Mansy, S. S. Integrating Artificial with Natural Cells to Translate Chemical Messages That Direct E. Coli Behaviour. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 4012,  DOI: 10.1038/ncomms5012
    203. 203
      Ding, Y.; Contreras-Llano, L. E.; Morris, E.; Mao, M.; Tan, C. Minimizing Context Dependency of Gene Networks Using Artificial Cells. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2018, 10 (36), 3013730146,  DOI: 10.1021/acsami.8b10029
    204. 204
      Toparlak, Ö. D.; Zasso, J.; Bridi, S.; Serra, M. D.; Macchi, P.; Conti, L.; Baudet, M.-L.; Mansy, S. S. Artificial Cells Drive Neural Differentiation. Sci. Adv. 2020,  DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abb4920
    205. 205
      Fanalista, F.; Birnie, A.; Maan, R.; Burla, F.; Charles, K.; Pawlik, G.; Deshpande, S.; Koenderink, G. H.; Dogterom, M.; Dekker, C. Shape and Size Control of Artificial Cells for Bottom-Up Biology. ACS Nano 2019, 13 (5), 54395450,  DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.9b00220
    206. 206
      Van de Cauter, L.; Fanalista, F.; van Buren, L.; De Franceschi, N.; Godino, E.; Bouw, S.; Danelon, C.; Dekker, C.; Koenderink, G. H.; Ganzinger, K. A. Optimized cDICE for Efficient Reconstitution of Biological Systems in Giant Unilamellar Vesicles. ACS Synth. Biol. 2021, 10 (7), 16901702,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.1c00068
    207. 207
      Ganar, K. A.; Leijten, L.; Deshpande, S. Actinosomes: Condensate-Templated Containers for Engineering Synthetic Cells. ACS Synth. Biol. 2022, 11 (8), 28692879,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.2c00290
    208. 208
      Frischmon, C.; Sorenson, C.; Winikoff, M.; Adamala, K. P. Build-a-Cell: Engineering a Synthetic Cell Community. Life 2021, 11 (11), 1176,  DOI: 10.3390/life11111176
    209. 209
      Schwille, P.; Spatz, J.; Landfester, K.; Bodenschatz, E.; Herminghaus, S.; Sourjik, V.; Erb, T. J.; Bastiaens, P.; Lipowsky, R.; Hyman, A.; Dabrock, P.; Baret, J.-C.; Vidakovic-Koch, T.; Bieling, P.; Dimova, R.; Mutschler, H.; Robinson, T.; Tang, T.-Y. D.; Wegner, S.; Sundmacher, K. MaxSynBio: Avenues Towards Creating Cells from the Bottom Up. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 2018, 57 (41), 1338213392,  DOI: 10.1002/anie.201802288
    210. 210
      Habets, M. G. J. L.; Zwart, H. A. E.; van Est, R. Why the Synthetic Cell Needs Democratic Governance. Trends Biotechnol. 2021, 39 (6), 539541,  DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2020.11.006
    211. 211
      Rasmussen, S. Protocells: Bridging Nonliving and Living Matter; MIT Press, 2008.
    212. 212
      Schwille, P. Bottom-up Synthetic Biology: Engineering in a Tinkerer’s World. Science 2011, 333 (6047), 12521254,  DOI: 10.1126/science.1211701
    213. 213
      Abil, Z.; Danelon, C. Roadmap to Building a Cell: An Evolutionary Approach. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2020, 8, 927,  DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00927
    214. 214
      Yarmuth; [d-Ky-3], J. A. Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 ; 2022. http://www.congress.gov/ (accessed on April 30, 2023).
    215. 215
      The White House. Executive order on advancing biotechnology and biomanufacturing innovation for a sustainable, safe, and secure American bioeconomy. The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2022/09/12/executive-order-on-advancing-biotechnology-and-biomanufacturing-innovation-for-a-sustainable-safe-and-secure-american-bioeconomy/ (accessed on April 30, 2023).
    216. 216
      BioMADE. https://www.biomade.org/ (accessed on April 30, 2023).
    217. 217
      Huang, A.; Nguyen, P. Q.; Stark, J. C.; Takahashi, M. K.; Donghia, N.; Ferrante, T.; Dy, A. J.; Hsu, K. J.; Dubner, R. S.; Pardee, K.; Jewett, M. C.; Collins, J. J. BioBitsTM Explorer: A Modular Synthetic Biology Education Kit. Sci. Adv. 2018, 4 (8), eaat5105,  DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aat5105
    218. 218
      Stark, J. C.; Huang, A.; Nguyen, P. Q.; Dubner, R. S.; Hsu, K. J.; Ferrante, T. C.; Anderson, M.; Kanapskyte, A.; Mucha, Q.; Packett, J. S.; Patel, P.; Patel, R.; Qaq, D.; Zondor, T.; Burke, J.; Martinez, T.; Miller-Berry, A.; Puppala, A.; Reichert, K.; Schmid, M.; Brand, L.; Hill, L. R.; Chellaswamy, J. F.; Faheem, N.; Fetherling, S.; Gong, E.; Gonzalzles, E. M.; Granito, T.; Koritsaris, J.; Nguyen, B.; Ottman, S.; Palffy, C.; Patel, A.; Skweres, S.; Slaton, A.; Woods, T.; Donghia, N.; Pardee, K.; Collins, J. J.; Jewett, M. C. BioBitsTM Bright: A Fluorescent Synthetic Biology Education Kit. Sci. Adv. 2018, 4 (8), eaat5107,  DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.aat5107
    219. 219
      Stark, J. C.; Huang, A.; Hsu, K. J.; Dubner, R. S.; Forbrook, J.; Marshalla, S.; Rodriguez, F.; Washington, M.; Rybnicky, G. A.; Nguyen, P. Q.; Hasselbacher, B.; Jabri, R.; Kamran, R.; Koralewski, V.; Wightkin, W.; Martinez, T.; Jewett, M. C. BioBits Health: Classroom Activities Exploring Engineering, Biology, and Human Health with Fluorescent Readouts. ACS Synth. Biol. 2019, 8 (5), 10011009,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.8b00381
    220. 220
      Rybnicky, G. A.; Dixon, R. A.; Kuhn, R. M.; Karim, A. S.; Jewett, M. C. Development of a Freeze-Dried CRISPR-Cas12 Sensor for Detecting Wolbachia in the Secondary Science Classroom. ACS Synth. Biol. 2022, 11 (2), 835842,  DOI: 10.1021/acssynbio.1c00503
    221. 221
      Jung, K. J.; Rasor, B. J.; Rybnicky, G. A.; Silverman, A. D.; Standeven, J.; Kuhn, R.; Granito, T.; Ekas, H. M.; Wang, B. M.; Karim, A. S.; Lucks, J. B.; Jewett, M. C. At-Home, Cell-Free Synthetic Biology Education Modules for Transcriptional Regulation and Environmental Water Quality Monitoring. bioRxiv , January 9, 2023.  DOI: 10.1101/2023.01.09.523248 .
    222. 222
      Perry, E.; Weber, J.; Pataranutaporn, P.; Volf, V.; Gonzalez, L. M.; Nejad, S.; Angleton, C.; Chen, J.-E.; Gabo, A.; Jammalamadaka, M. S. S.; Kuru, E.; Fortuna, P.; Rico, A.; Sulich, K.; Wawrzyniak, D.; Jacobson, J.; Church, G.; Kong, D. How to Grow (almost) Anything: A Hybrid Distance Learning Model for Global Laboratory-Based Synthetic Biology Education. Nat. Biotechnol. 2022, 40 (12), 18741879,  DOI: 10.1038/s41587-022-01601-x