Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
The Special Case of Biology
Conclusion
References
All Topics
Biology
Biotechnology

Perspectives for self-driving labs in synthetic biology

Profile image of Kristofer BouchardKristofer Bouchard

2022, arXiv (Cornell University)

https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2210.09085
visibility

…

description

17 pages

link

1 file

Abstract

Self-driving labs (SDLs) combine fully automated experiments with artificial intelligence (AI) that decides the next set of experiments. Taken to their ultimate expression, SDLs could usher a new paradigm of scientific research, where the world is probed, interpreted, and explained by machines for human benefit. While there are functioning SDLs in the fields of chemistry and materials science, we contend that synthetic biology provides a unique opportunity since the genome provides a single target for affecting the incredibly wide repertoire of biological cell behavior. However, the level of investment required for the creation of biological SDLs is only warranted if directed towards solving difficult and enabling biological questions. Here, we discuss challenges and opportunities in creating SDLs for synthetic biology.

Related papers

Design automation in synthetic biology : a dual evolutionary strategy
Sungshic Park

2019

Synthetic biology o ers a new horizon in designing complex systems. However, unprecedented complexity hinders the development of biological systems to its full potential. Mitigating complexity via adopting design principles from engineering and computer science elds has resulted in some success. For example, modularisation to foster reuse of design elements, and using computer assisted design tools have helped contain complexity to an extent. Nevertheless, these design practices are still limited, due to their heavy dependence on rational decision making by human designers. The issue with rational design approaches here arises from the challenging nature of dealing with highly complex biological systems of which we currently do not have complete understanding. Systematic processes that can algorithmically nd design solutions would be better able to cope with uncertainties posed by high levels of design complexity. A new framework for enabling design automation in synthetic biology w...

View PDFchevron_right
Workshop What can Synthetic Biology offer to Artificial Intelligence? SB-AI 2014 at the conference ALIFE14 Chair/Organizing Committee: Dr. L. Damiano, Dr. Y. Kuruma, Prof. P. Stano 30/07- 02/08/2014, Javits Center, New York, USA
Luisa Damiano, Yutetsu Kuruma
View PDFchevron_right
Build to Understand: Synthetic Approaches to Biology
Kevin Flores

Integr. Biol., 2015

In this review we discuss how synthetic biology facilitates the task of investigating genetic circuits that are observed in naturally occurring biological systems.

View PDFchevron_right
Preparing synthetic biology for the world
Gerd Moe-Behrens

Synthetic Biology promises low-cost, exponentially scalable products and global health solutions in the form of self-replicating organisms, or "living devices." As these promises are realized, proof-of-concept systems will gradually migrate from tightly regulated laboratory or industrial environments into private spaces as, for instance, probiotic health products, food, and even do-it-yourself bioengineered systems. What additional steps, if any, should be taken before releasing engineered self-replicating organisms into a broader user space? In this review, we explain how studies of genetically modified organisms lay groundwork for the future landscape of biosafety. Early in the design process, biological engineers are anticipating potential hazards and developing innovative tools to mitigate risk. Here, we survey lessons learned, ongoing efforts to engineer intrinsic biocontainment, and how different stakeholders in synthetic biology can act to accomplish best practices for biosafety.

View PDFchevron_right
BioSystems (Elsevier) Special Issue "What can Synthetic Biology offer to Artificial Intelligence?"- Editors: L. Damiano, Y. Kuruma, P. Stano
Luisa Damiano
View PDFchevron_right
Perspectives on the Automatic Design of Regulatory Systems for Synthetic Biology
Thomas LANDRAIN

Automatic design is based on computational modeling and optimization methods to provide proto- type designs to targeted problems in an unsupervised manner. For biological circuits, we need to produce quantitative predictions of cell behavior for a given genotype as consequence of the differ- ent molecular interactions. Automatic design techniques aim at solving the inverse problem of find- ing the sequences of nucleotides that better fit a targeted behavior. In the post-genomic era, our molecular knowledge and modeling capabilities have allowed to start using such methodologies with success. Herein, we describe how the emergence of this new type of tools could enable novel synthetic biology applications. We highlight the essential elements to develop automatic design pro- cedures for synthetic biology pointing out their advantages and bottlenecks. We discuss in detail the experimental difficulties to overcome in the in vivo implementation of designed networks. The use of automatic design to engineer biological networks is starting to emerge as a new technique to per- form synthetic biology, which should not be neglected in the future.

View PDFchevron_right
Tuning the dials of Synthetic Biology
Guy-Bart Stan

Microbiology, 2013

Synthetic Biology is the 'Engineering of Biology' -it aims to use a forward-engineering design cycle based on specifications, modelling, analysis, experimental implementation, testing and validation to modify natural or design new, synthetic biology systems so that they behave in a predictable fashion. Motivated by the need for truly plug-and-play synthetic biological components, we present a comprehensive review of ways in which the various parts of a biological system can be modified systematically. In particular, we review the list of 'dials' that are available to the designer and discuss how they can be modelled, tuned and implemented. The dials are categorized according to whether they operate at the global, transcriptional, translational or post-translational level and the resolution that they operate at. We end this review with a discussion on the relative advantages and disadvantages of some dials over others.

View PDFchevron_right
Towards the automated engineering of a synthetic genome
Aldemar Jaramillo

2009

The development of the technology to synthesize new genomes and to introduce them into hosts with inactivated wild-type chromosome opens the door to new horizons in synthetic biology. Here it is of outmost importance to harness the ability of using computational design to predict and optimize a synthetic genome before attempting its synthesis. The methodology to computationally design a genome is based on an optimization that computationally mimics genome evolution. The biggest bottleneck lies on the use of an appropriate fitness function. This fitness function, usually cell growth, relies on the ability to quantitatively model the biochemical networks of the cell at the genome scale using parameters inferred from high-throughput data. Computational methods integrating such models in a common multilayer design platform can be used to automatically engineer synthetic genomes under physiological specifications. We describe the current state-of-the-art on automated methods for engineering or re-engineering synthetic genomes. We restrict ourselves to global models of metabolism, transcription and DNA structure. Although we are still far from the de novo computational genome design, it is important to collect all relevant work towards this goal. Finally, we discuss future perspectives about the practicability of an automated methodology for such computational design of synthetic genomes.

View PDFchevron_right
Genetic design automation: engineering fantasy or scientific renewal?
Brian Bramlett

Trends in Biotechnology, 2012

Synthetic biology aims to make genetic systems more amenable to engineering, which has naturally led to the development of Computer-Aided Design (CAD) tools. Experimentalists still primarily rely on project-specific ad-hoc workflows instead of domain-specific tools, suggesting that CAD tools are lagging behind the front line of the field. Here, we discuss the scientific hurdles that have limited the productivity gains anticipated from existing tools. We argue that the real value of efforts to develop CAD tools is the formalization of genetic design rules that determine the complex relationships between genotype and phenotype. Computer-Aided Design tools for synthetic biology Several groups have been developing Computer-Aided Design (CAD) solutions for synthetic biology [1-10] yet the transcriptional complexity of published artificial gene networks has been leveling off since 2005 [11]. After ten years of high-expectations and hype in synthetic biology, engineering biological systems has proved more challenging than anticipated [12]. The lack of sufficient tools in synthetic biology has spurred intense efforts to develop CAD software. Unfortunately, experimental synthetic biologists still rely largely on project-specific, ad-hoc development processes that combine construct assembly, data collection, data analysis, and mathematical modeling. Five recent reviews have comprehensively covered the current state of computational tools for synthetic biology [13-17]. Thus, here we limit our description of these efforts to a brief, general overview. We also constrain the review to software specific to synthetic biology by excluding the many commercial software packages that are useful synthetic biologists, but intended for a broader user base. CAD tools for synthetic biology facilitate the design of larger systems from smaller genetic parts by providing users with visual, textual, or programming-language-like interfaces, or automatically generate designs from intended function. These tools assume that data such as sequence and description are attached to each part by the user or in some database. The aggregated parts sequences can then be leveraged to produce the corresponding physical DNA. Many tools include some level of functional modeling capabilities, which rely on the user providing the necessary equations and/or

View PDFchevron_right
Complex Adaptive Systems Drive Innovations in Synthetic Biology
Jaime Seguel

Procedia Computer Science, 2013

The resultant outcome of synthetic biology research offers the promise of changing the way that we create energy, produce food, optimize industrial processing, and detect, prevent, and cure diseases. Researchers can now realize the significant benefits of the cloud computing model to reduce IT cost and complexity, enhance R&D collaboration, and improve bioinformatics to allow lifesciences organizations to focus on answering some of lifes most challenging questions.

View PDFchevron_right

References (62)

  1. Granda et al): A great example of the potential of SDLs, showing how a robot is able to systematically explore chemical space and successfully predict reactivity.
  2. Burger et al): An inspiring use of a mobile robotic arm to automate the researcher rather than the instruments, opening the transition to SDLs for any traditional lab.
  3. Cai et al): An informative review on how to embed prior knowledge in AI, in this case for fluid dynamics in the form of PINNs ( Physics-Informed Neural Networks). Similar approaches would be needed for biology.
  4. Guimera et al): A stimulating demonstration of the power of "machine scientists", able to extract closed mathematical models automatically out of data.
  5. Rienzo et al): This paper demonstrates the use of microfluidics and automated cell manipulation through light for synthetic biology, providing a promising platform for SDLs.
  6. Fuller et al): A very interesting report on the possibilities created by embedding single molecules in electronic chips. Special interest:
  7. King et al): Adam is the first published example of a closed-loop system that designs and executes experiments to test inferred hypotheses. A classic well before SDLs became of widespread interest.
  8. Williams et al): Eve constitutes an outstanding example of the use of SDLs to alleviate the large cost of drug discovery.
  9. Karr et al): One of the first examples of a whole-cell model, accounting for all annotated gene functions in Mycoplasma genitalium, and validated against a broad range of data.
  10. Jian et al): Good introduction to digital twins, and how they are becoming an industry staple.
  11. Gach et al): A nice demonstration of what microfluidics can achieve in terms of automating synthetic biology protocols.
  12. Lawson et al): Interesting review on the current and possible applications of AI in metabolic engineering and synthetic biology. Bibliography
  13. Häse F, Roch LM, Aspuru-Guzik A. Next-Generation Experimentation with Self-Driving Laboratories. Trends in Chemistry. 2019;1: 282-291. doi:10.1016/j.trechm.2019.02.007
  14. Soldatov MA, Butova VV, Pashkov D, Butakova MA, Medvedev PV, Chernov AV, et al. Self-Driving Laboratories for Development of New Functional Materials and Optimizing Known Reactions. Nanomaterials (Basel). 2021;11. doi:10.3390/nano11030619
  15. Bennett JA, Abolhasani M. Autonomous chemical science and engineering enabled by self-driving laboratories. Curr Opin Chem Eng. 2022;36: 100831. doi:10.1016/j.coche.2022.100831
  16. Beal J, Rogers M. Levels of autonomy in synthetic biology engineering. Mol Syst Biol. 2020;16: e10019. doi:10.15252/msb.202010019
  17. Vrana J, de Lange O, Yang Y, Newman G, Saleem A, Miller A, et al. Aquarium: open-source laboratory software for design, execution and data management. Synth Biol (Oxf). 2021;6: ysab006. doi:10.1093/synbio/ysab006
  18. King RD, Whelan KE, Jones FM, Reiser PGK, Bryant CH, Muggleton SH, et al. Functional genomic hypothesis generation and experimentation by a robot scientist. Nature. 2004;427: 247-252. doi:10.1038/nature02236
  19. Williams K, Bilsland E, Sparkes A, Aubrey W, Young M, Soldatova LN, et al. Cheaper faster drug development validated by the repositioning of drugs against neglected tropical diseases. J R Soc Interface. 2015;12: 20141289. doi:10.1098/rsif.2014.1289
  20. Granda JM, Donina L, Dragone V, Long D-L, Cronin L. Controlling an organic synthesis robot with machine learning to search for new reactivity. Nature. 2018;559: 377-381. doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0307-8
  21. Christensen M, Yunker LPE, Adedeji F, Häse F, Roch LM, Gensch T, et al. Data-science driven autonomous process optimization. Commun Chem. 2021;4: 112. doi:10.1038/s42004-021-00550-x
  22. Wang L, Karadaghi LR, Brutchey RL, Malmstadt N. Self-optimizing parallel millifluidic reactor for scaling nanoparticle synthesis. Chem Commun. 2020;56: 3745-3748. doi:10.1039/d0cc00064g
  23. MacLeod BP, Parlane FGL, Morrissey TD, Häse F, Roch LM, Dettelbach KE, et al. Self-driving laboratory for accelerated discovery of thin-film materials. Sci Adv. 2020;6: eaaz8867. doi:10.1126/sciadv.aaz8867
  24. MacLeod BP, Parlane FGL, Rupnow CC, Dettelbach KE, Elliott MS, Morrissey TD, et al. A self-driving laboratory advances the Pareto front for material properties. Nat Commun. 2022;13: 995. doi:10.1038/s41467-022-28580-6
  25. Shimizu R, Kobayashi S, Watanabe Y, Ando Y, Hitosugi T. Autonomous materials synthesis by machine learning and robotics. APL Mater. 2020;8: 111110. doi:10.1063/5.0020370
  26. Gongora AE, Xu B, Perry W, Okoye C, Riley P, Reyes KG, et al. A Bayesian experimental autonomous researcher for mechanical design. Sci Adv. 2020;6: eaaz1708. doi:10.1126/sciadv.aaz1708
  27. Rooney MB, MacLeod BP, Oldford R, Thompson ZJ, White KL, Tungjunyatham J, et al. A self-driving laboratory designed to accelerate the discovery of adhesive materials. Digital Discovery. 2022. doi:10.1039/D2DD00029F
  28. Deneault JR, Chang J, Myung J, Hooper D, Armstrong A, Pitt M, et al. Toward autonomous additive manufacturing: Bayesian optimization on a 3D printer. MRS Bull. 2021;46: 566-575. doi:10.1557/s43577-021-00051-1
  29. Dave A, Mitchell J, Kandasamy K, Wang H, Burke S, Paria B, et al. Autonomous Discovery of Battery Electrolytes with Robotic Experimentation and Machine Learning. Cell Reports Physical Science. 2020;1: 100264. doi:10.1016/j.xcrp.2020.100264
  30. Burger B, Maffettone PM, Gusev VV, Aitchison CM, Bai Y, Wang X, et al. A mobile robotic chemist. Nature. 2020;583: 237-241. doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2442-2
  31. Si T, Chao R, Min Y, Wu Y, Ren W, Zhao H. Automated multiplex genome-scale engineering in yeast. Nat Commun. 2017;8: 15187. doi:10.1038/ncomms15187
  32. HamediRad M, Chao R, Weisberg S, Lian J, Sinha S, Zhao H. Towards a fully automated algorithm driven platform for biosystems design. Nat Commun. 2019;10: 5150. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-13189-z
  33. Kanda GN, Tsuzuki T, Terada M, Sakai N, Motozawa N, Masuda T, et al. Robotic search for optimal cell culture in regenerative medicine. eLife. 2022;11. doi:10.7554/eLife.77007
  34. Knott GJ, Doudna JA. CRISPR-Cas guides the future of genetic engineering. Science. 2018;361: 866-869. doi:10.1126/science.aat5011
  35. Jumper J, Evans R, Pritzel A, Green T, Figurnov M, Ronneberger O, et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature. 2021;596: 583-589. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2
  36. Yan Q, Pfleger BF. Revisiting metabolic engineering strategies for microbial synthesis of oleochemicals. Metab Eng. 2020;58: 35-46. doi:10.1016/j.ymben.2019.04.009
  37. Herrgård MJ, Covert MW, Palsson BØ. Reconstruction of microbial transcriptional regulatory networks. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2004;15: 70-77. doi:10.1016/j.copbio.2003.11.002
  38. Karr JR, Sanghvi JC, Macklin DN, Gutschow MV, Jacobs JM, Bolival B, et al. A whole-cell computational model predicts phenotype from genotype. Cell. 2012;150: 389-401. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2012.05.044
  39. Macklin DN, Ahn-Horst TA, Choi H, Ruggero NA, Carrera J, Mason JC, et al. Simultaneous cross-evaluation of heterogeneous E. coli datasets via mechanistic simulation. Science. 2020;369. doi:10.1126/science.aav3751
  40. Lawson CE, Harcombe WR, Hatzenpichler R, Lindemann SR, Löffler FE, O'Malley MA, et al. Common principles and best practices for engineering microbiomes. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2019;17: 725-741. doi:10.1038/s41579-019-0255-9
  41. Lauren, Yang J, Scott R, Qutub A, Martin H, Berrios D, et al. Beyond Low Earth Orbit: Biological Research, Artificial Intelligence, and Self-Driving Labs.
  42. Jiang Y, Yin S, Li K, Luo H, Kaynak O. Industrial applications of digital twins. Philos Transact A Math Phys Eng Sci. 2021;379: 20200360. doi:10.1098/rsta.2020.0360
  43. Neves M, Leser U. Question answering for biology. Methods. 2015;74: 36-46. doi:10.1016/j.ymeth.2014.10.023
  44. Cai S, Mao Z, Wang Z, Yin M, Karniadakis GE. Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) for fluid mechanics: a review. Acta Mech Sin. 2021;37: 1727-1738. doi:10.1007/s10409-021-01148-1
  45. Liu Z, Tegmark M. Machine Learning Conservation Laws from Trajectories. Phys Rev Lett. 2021;126: 180604. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.180604
  46. Guimerà R, Reichardt I, Aguilar-Mogas A, Massucci FA, Miranda M, Pallarès J, et al. A Bayesian machine scientist to aid in the solution of challenging scientific problems. Sci Adv. 2020;6: eaav6971. doi:10.1126/sciadv.aav6971
  47. Garcez A d'Avila, Lamb LC. Neurosymbolic AI: The 3rd Wave. arXiv. 2020. doi:10.48550/arxiv.2012.05876
  48. Arnold C. Cloud labs: where robots do the research. Nature. 2022;606: 612-613. doi:10.1038/d41586-022-01618-x
  49. Lee C-C, Snyder TM, Quake SR. A microfluidic oligonucleotide synthesizer. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010;38: 2514-2521. doi:10.1093/nar/gkq092
  50. Gach PC, Shih SCC, Sustarich J, Keasling JD, Hillson NJ, Adams PD, et al. A droplet microfluidic platform for automating genetic engineering. ACS Synth Biol. 2016;5: 426-433. doi:10.1021/acssynbio.6b00011
  51. Iwai K, Wehrs M, Garber M, Sustarich J, Washburn L, Costello Z, et al. Scalable and automated CRISPR-based strain engineering using droplet microfluidics. Microsyst Nanoeng. 2022;8: 31. doi:10.1038/s41378-022-00357-3
  52. Hori Y, Kantak C, Murray RM, Abate AR. Cell-free extract based optimization of biomolecular circuits with droplet microfluidics. Lab Chip. 2017;17: 3037-3042. doi:10.1039/c7lc00552k
  53. Iwai K, Ando D, Kim PW, Gach PC, Raje M, Duncomb TA, et al. Automated flow-based/digital microfluidic platform integrated with onsite electroporation process for multiplex genetic engineering applications. 2018 IEEE Micro Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS). IEEE; 2018. pp. 1229-1232. doi:10.1109/MEMSYS.2018.8346785
  54. Heinemann J, Deng K, Shih SCC, Gao J, Adams PD, Singh AK, et al. On-chip integration of droplet microfluidics and nanostructure-initiator mass spectrometry for enzyme screening. Lab Chip. 2017;17: 323-331. doi:10.1039/c6lc01182a
  55. Fuller CW, Padayatti PS, Abderrahim H, Adamiak L, Alagar N, Ananthapadmanabhan N, et al. Molecular electronics sensors on a scalable semiconductor chip: A platform for single-molecule measurement of binding kinetics and enzyme activity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2022;119. doi:10.1073/pnas.2112812119
  56. Cortese AJ, Smart CL, Wang T, Reynolds MF, Norris SL, Ji Y, et al. Microscopic sensors using optical wireless integrated circuits. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2020;117: 9173-9179. doi:10.1073/pnas.1919677117
  57. Nie L, Nusantara AC, Damle VG, Sharmin R, Evans EPP, Hemelaar SR, et al. Quantum monitoring of cellular metabolic activities in single mitochondria. Sci Adv. 2021;7. doi:10.1126/sciadv.abf0573
  58. Wegner SA, Barocio-Galindo RM, Avalos JL. The bright frontiers of microbial metabolic optogenetics. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2022;71: 102207. doi:10.1016/j.cbpa.2022.102207
  59. Rienzo M, Lin K-C, Mobilia KC, Sackmann EK, Kurz V, Navidi AH, et al. High-throughput optofluidic screening for improved microbial cell factories via real-time micron-scale productivity monitoring. Lab Chip. 2021;21: 2901-2912. doi:10.1039/d1lc00389e
  60. Lawson CE, Martí JM, Radivojevic T, Jonnalagadda SVR, Gentz R, Hillson NJ, et al. Machine learning for metabolic engineering: A review. Metab Eng. 2021;63: 34-60. doi:10.1016/j.ymben.2020.10.005
  61. On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models. 2021 [cited 15 Aug 2022]. Available: https://fsi.stanford.edu/publication/opportunities-and-risks-foundation-models
  62. Eslami M, Adler A, Caceres RS, Dunn JG, Kelley-Loughnane N, Varaljay VA, et al. Artificial intelligence for synthetic biology. Commun ACM. 2022;65: 88-97. doi:10.1145/3500922

Related papers

Enabling AI in Synthetic Biology through Construction File Specification
Zexuan Zhao

The Construction File (CF) specification establishes a standardized interface for molecular biology operations, laying a foundation for automation and enhanced efficiency in experiment design. It is implemented across three distinct software projects: PyDNA_CF_Simulator, a Python project featuring a ChatGPT plugin for interactive parsing and simulating experiments; ConstructionFileSimulator, a field-tested Java project that showcases ‘Experiment’ objects expressed as flat files; and C6-Tools, a JavaScript project integrated with Google Sheets via Apps Script, providing a user-friendly interface for authoring and simulation of CF. The CF specification not only standardizes and modularizes molecular biology operations but also promotes collaboration, automation, and reuse, significantly reducing potential errors. The potential integration of CF with artificial intelligence, particularly GPT-4, suggests innovative automation strategies for synthetic biology. While challenges such as to...

View PDFchevron_right
DAWN OF SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY ENGINEERING LIFE AT THE MICROSCOPIC SCALE: A REVIEW
Mostafa E A M Eissa

Brief Review, 2025

Synthetic biology, converging biology, engineering and computer science, allows the design of new biological systems, promising revolutions in healthcare, agriculture and environmental sustainability. Its core principles-modularity, abstraction hierarchies, orthogonality, predictability, and standardization-enable systematic biological engineering. Modularity breaks complex systems into manageable parts, while abstraction hierarchies organize these parts by complexity. Orthogonality ensures independent function of synthetic components and predictability is achieved through modeling and computation. Standardization promotes reproducibility and collaboration. Mechanistically, synthetic biology manipulates DNA, designs genetic circuits and metabolic pathways and applies physical and computational principles. Techniques like PCR and DNA sequencing construct recombinant DNA. Genetic circuits control gene expression and metabolic engineering optimizes pathways. Integrating Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML) accelerates innovation by analyzing data, predicting protein structures and automating experiments, improving drug and therapy development.Synthetic biology can address global challenges like infectious diseases, climate change and food security, in addition to the potential applications in the medical and pharmaceutical sectors. By understanding its principles and using advanced technologies, researchers can realize the field's potential for a better future.

View PDFchevron_right
Wet Lab Accelerator: A Web-Based Application Democratizing Laboratory Automation for Synthetic Biology
Paul R Jaschke, Aaron Berliner

Wet Lab Accelerator (WLA) is a cloud-based tool that allows a scientist to conduct biology via robotic control without the need for any programming knowledge. A drag and drop interface provides a convenient and user-friendly method of generating biological protocols. Graphically developed protocols are turned into programmatic instruction lists required to conduct experiments at the cloud laboratory Transcriptic. Prior to the development of WLA, biologists were required to write in a programming language called " Autoprotocol " in order to work with Transcriptic. WLA relies on a new abstraction layer we call " Omniprotocol " to convert the graphical experimental description into lower level Autoprotocol language, which then directs robots at Transcriptic. While WLA has only been tested at Transcriptic, the conversion of graphically laid out experimental steps into Autoprotocol is generic, allowing extension of WLA into other cloud laboratories in the future. WLA hopes to democratize biology by bringing automation to general biologists.

View PDFchevron_right
Interdisciplinary Interconnections in Synthetic Biology
Ulrich Krohs

Biological Theory, 2013

View PDFchevron_right
Synthetic biology routes to bio-artificial intelligence
Darren Nesbeth

Essays In Biochemistry, 2016

The design of synthetic gene networks (SGNs) has advanced to the extent that novel genetic circuits are now being tested for their ability to recapitulate archetypal learning behaviours first defined in the fields of machine and animal learning. Here, we discuss the biological implementation of a perceptron algorithm for linear classification of input data. An expansion of this biological design that encompasses cellular ‘teachers’ and ‘students’ is also examined. We also discuss implementation of Pavlovian associative learning using SGNs and present an example of such a scheme and in silico simulation of its performance. In addition to designed SGNs, we also consider the option to establish conditions in which a population of SGNs can evolve diversity in order to better contend with complex input data. Finally, we compare recent ethical concerns in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) and the future challenges raised by bio-artificial intelligence (BI).

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Synthetic Biology
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved