Synthetic Biology is one of the most exciting frontiers of applied science. It aspires to put the “engineering” in the field of genetic engineering. Rather than manipulating DNA in a haphazard manner, synthetic biologists seek to introduce the rigor of engineering to this process. The result, it is hoped, will be the ability to more quickly and more robustly create novel types of biological organisms that can be useful to society.
Want to clean up toxic waste? Why not design a new kind of bacteria that eats the waste and produces fuel? Want to manufacture furniture more simply? Why not design a new kind of tree that grows into the shape of a table? Want to create a more efficient solar panel? Why not redesign plant cells to scale up the process of photosynthesis? The possibilities literally are as boundless as human imagination.
The field is exciting enough that I need to split my thoughts into two posts. This post will provide some background on the field. My next post will detail some of my hands-on experiences.
Pioneers
Two of the pioneers of synthetic biology are Drew Endy and Tom Knight. While Drew Endy’s story has been well-covered in the press, I’ve never met him. But I do know Tom Knight, who is one of the most respected research scientists in MIT’s computer science department. (Incidentally, Tom is the father of James Knight, one of my buddies from undergrad at MIT and every bit as brilliant as his father.)
At about the time I was in my final years of undergrad at MIT (i.e., the turn of the millennium), Tom was in the midst of changing his research focus. He sat in on many of the introductory biology classes and started building a wet lab within the engineering department. As such, he brought an engineer’s perspective to the field of genetics.
Principles
Tom and his collaborators were struck by how inefficient genetic engineering was back in those days. Almost in a one-off manner, researchers would try to assemble from scratch the DNA for new organisms. Tom realized that if he could introduce a few simple engineering principles to this process, he could help the field move much more quickly and robustly.
The most important of those principles was the concept of “interchangeability”. When engineers are designing new devices, they seldom start from scratch. Instead, they use a standard set of interchangeable parts that they can order from catalogs. If you are building a chair, you use standard screws. You don’t design your own screws from scratch. By having a set of standard parts that can be used in conjunction with each other, it is possible build devices faster and more reliably.
Breakthrough Bricks
So that is what Tom Knight and Drew Endy set out to build: a standard set of interchangeable biological parts. Each biological “part” is a DNA sequence that performs one specific useful function, like inverting or measuring signals. To build a biological machine, all you’d need to do is chain together the right parts, just like building Lego creations from those little bricks. They embraced this Lego analogy and called their DNA sequences “BioBricks“.
They could have stopped there, but these guys think big. Rather than designing all of the BioBricks themselves, they wanted to spur massive innovation. So they made their catalog “open source” and allowed anybody to contribute. The result is the Registry of Standard Biological Parts, which at last count contains hundreds, if not thousands, of parts.
What this means is that anybody in the world– even high school students with limited expertise– can apply their creativity in building biological machines. All they need to do is chain together the appropriate BioBricks. If they need a new brick along the way, they can invent one and contribute it to the catalog for all to share. An annual competition, called the International Genetically Engineering Machine competition (iGEM), challenges teams to do exactly that. It has been a smashing success and is growing by leaps and bounds.
Policy Perils
Given the relative ease for amateurs to use the tools of synthetic biology, it is not surprising that the field is raising a few eyebrows in policy circles. People worry that not all of the molecular machines that synthetic biologists design would be so benign. What if a lunatic wanted to engineer a superbug that is capable of inflicting immense harm? Theoretically, the same tools that give rise to helpful synthetic organisms could also give rise to harmful ones.
These concerns are not unwarranted. I expect that in the not too distant future, we will see regulations that aim to curtail the risk of nefarious synthetic biology. Some researchers may be worried that government regulation is likely to have a chilling effect on beneficial innovations in the field. While that is definitely possible, the regulations are likely to be much more favorable so long as researchers start discussing policy solutions immediately. For regulators to make smart decisions, they need to be as educated as possible. And that education must start immediately. The worst thing the field can do is to hide from potential regulation, hoping that it never materializes. Because it is inevitable.
Opportunities
Whenever there is a useful branch of science where the barriers to innovate are collapsing, startups are sure to thrive. If it is not obvious, there are countless billion dollar opportunities for startups in this space. After all, simple bacteria, thanks to their resilience and their propensity to reproduce, are the most efficient factories in the known universe. By reformulating their DNA, you can theoretically “program” them to produce almost any organic substance you want. Synthetic Biology has the promise to revolutionize countless industries, from manufacturing, to agriculture, to energy, to medicine.
The ecosystem for startups to succeed in this burgeoning field couldn’t be more ripe. There is a steady flow of talent streaming out of bioengineering departments. There is more than a critical mass of venture capital firms, like Musea Ventures, targeting this space. And there are hordes of pharmaceuticals, materials, and energy companies impatiently waiting to buy out startups that can demonstrate useful innovations.
My friends, this is the PC industry in the 1970′s! The technology exists in research labs. It is simple and cheap enough that amateur clubs are active. And the markets are well-known. I can’t wait to see what emerges.
Advertisement
1 Response to “The Promise of Synthetic Biology”