Life: A 21st Century Technology

The term “synthetic biology” was first coined in 1974 by Polish geneticist Wacław Szybalski¹, but the field itself was born around the turn of the millenium as an offshoot of genetic engineering and molecular biology.  Broadly speaking, synthetic biology refers to the creation of novel organisms or artificial life.  While the term synthetic biology is provocative and, to some individuals, alarming in its implications, it is important to understand that this term is still quite visionary while the field itself remains limited in scope.  What is meant by a “novel organism” is typically, but not always, a unicellular microorganism which can be manipulated through recombinant DNA technology and molecular biology.  While some efforts in synthetic biology are concerned with creating living, molecular systems de novo, most current efforts in synthetic biology are concerned with altering or adding new features to already existing model organisms.  Synthetic biology promises to enhance our fundamental understanding of life, while producing important technological solutions for the 21st century. 

The question, What is life?  is one of the most fundamental questions in all of science^2,3.  Synthetic biology provides insight into this question by explaining living systems in terms of engineering principles.  In many ways, a living cell has similarities to familiar, artificial systems.  Just as a thermostat regulates the temperature in a room, a cell possesses control mechanisms that maintain its internal environment.  From an engineering perspective, one might also describe a cell as a biological computer in which calculations are performed by molecular reactions. The computational properties of biochemical systems is a subject of study in Professor Georg Seelig’s lab at UW.

Synthetic biology also considers the inverse problem, which is, How may life inspire new ideas about engineering?   A living cell differs remarkably from classically engineered systems.  For example, even the simplest of bacteria are controlled by baffingly complex networks of genes, proteins, and other molecules.  This complexity is a universal feature of life at all levels.  One area of research in synthetic biology is concerned with how complex systems are assembled from simpler parts.  For this reason, unraveling the complexity of biological systems requires the collaboration of researchers from diverse backgrounds, and the community of synthetic biology researchers at UW includes biologists, engineers, computer scientists, and physicists.

Complexity is a property of living organisms at all scales, and synthetic biology may help scientists disentangle "Darwin's bank".

One goal of synthetic biology is to harness the creative power of nature to solve important technological challenges in energy, medicine, and environment.  Over billions of years, evolution has generated innumerable lifeforms, each adapted to its own ecological niche.  Many of these lifeforms have evolved solutions to problems of great importance to human beings, such as the capture of energy from sunlight, the production of medicinal compounds, and the neutralization of toxic waste.  Many efforts in synthetic biology are focused on refactoring microorganisms to be used specifically for these purposes.  Such biologically-based solutions are potentially sustainable, renewable, and compatible with naturally occurring eco-processes.  Currently, several investigators at the University of Washington are collaborating in order to develop methods for sequestering carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and producing biofuels using re-engineered microorganisms.

These E.coli are lit up with fluorescently-labeled proteins that enable observation of intracellular dynamics

Promise & peril⁴

Creating new life forms is a tricky business.  Many of the current success stories in synthetic biology were the result of much trial-and-error experimentation.  In order to make it easier to engineer living organisms, many researchers in the community are working to define design standards for biological parts.  Standards have been essential in the success of classical engineering.  For example, the nuts and bolts at your local hardware store come in standard sizes that greatly facilitate the assembly of the many kinds of machines that are ubiquitous in modern society.  Similarly, standardized biological parts may make it easier to assemble cells from macromolecular components such as DNA, RNA, and proteins.  However, this traditional engineering approach may be limited when applied to complex life forms.  That’s why in many cases, synthetic biologists use techniques collectively described as “directed evolution” to create novel biological functions.  Faculty researchers at UW are developing standards for biological engineering, and at the same time employing ”evolution in action”.  

Synthetic biology has emerged recently as a field of interest to many investigators, both public and private.  Its recent rise is in coevolution  with other, enabling technologies.  Advances in microprocessing speed and information technology enable scientists to tackle compex biological questions.  Whole-genome sequencing, DNA synthesis-to-order and whole-genome construction are succesful commercial biotechnology ventures that will be essential for the synthesis of artificial life forms.   

What are the perils of synthetic biology?  Like many modern technologies, synthetic biology is a “dual-use” technology.  Nuclear physics may be used to either power cities or alternatively destroy them.  Chemistry may create either miracle cures or addictive drugs.  Likewise, synthetic biology has the potential to serve in the interest of human society or to be used for nefarious purposes.  Open dialog between the synthetic biology community and the public at large is necessary to ensure that the technology continues to be developed and applied in a safe and  just manner.  One of the goals of this website is to generate enthusiasm and interest among the public, especially among the younger generation for whom this emerging technology will have the most significant consequences.

There is currently an ongoing debate about the best course to proceed with the development of synthetic biology. Some groups favor a “pre-cautionary” approach while others favor a “pro-actionary” approach.  Ultimately, what lies at the heart of the these matters is often a question of personal ethics and values, especially in regard to how one perceives humankind and its relationship to nature⁶.  On December 16th, 2010 the Presidential Commission on Bioethical Issues delivered a report to President Obama that weighed the potential benefits and harms of synthetic biology⁷.  The report charts a course of “prudent vigilance” that steers midway between the pre-cautionary and pro-actionary philosophies.

[1]  Szybalski, Waclaw.  In Vivo and in Vitro Initiation of Transcription, Page 405. In: A. Kohn and A. Shatkay (Eds.), Control of Gene Expression, pp. 23-24, and Discussion pp. 404-405 (Szybalski’s concept of Synthetic Biology), 411-412, 415 – 417. New York: Plenum Press, 1974

[2] Schrodinger, Erwin.  What is Life?.  Cambridge University Press, 1944.

[3]   Regis, Ed. What is Life?:  Investigating the Nature of Life in the Age of Synthetic Biology.  Oxford University Press, 2008.

[4] Carlson, Robert H. Biology Is Technology: The Promise, Peril, and New Business of Engineering Life. Harvard University Press, 2010.

[5] Bray, Dennis.  Wetware: A Computer Inside Every Living Cell.  Yale University Press, 2009.

[6] Erik Parens, Josephine Johnston, and Jacob Moses, “Ethical Issues in Synthetic Biology: An Overview of the Debates,” Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, June 24, 2009.  http://www.synbioproject.org/library/publications/archive/synbio3/

[7] Presidential Commission for the Study of Bioethical Issues. NEW DIRECTIONS The Ethics of Synthetic Biology and Emerging Technologies. Washington, D.C., December 2010. www.bioethics.gov