Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22483202›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in biotechnology2012

Cell-free biology: exploiting the interface between synthetic biology and synthetic chemistry.

D Calvin Harris, Michael C Jewett

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in biotechnology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Advancing synthetic biology through cell-free protein synthesis.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2023
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Cell-free synthetic biology forBiochemical Society transactions · 2017
    Review
  13. Article
  14. High-yield hydrogen production from biomass by in vitro metabolic engineering: Mixed sugars coutilization and kinetic modeling.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2015
    Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Production of Fatty Acid-derived valuable chemicals in synthetic microbes.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2014
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

D Calvin HarrisDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Northwestern University, 2145 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208, USA.
Michael C Jewett

Funding

Toward construction of a synthetic self-replicating entityR00GM081450 · NIGMS · NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY · PI JEWETT, MICHAEL C · 2009 to 2011
$740k
NIGMS NIH HHS R00 GM081450NIGMS NIH HHS R00GM081450
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Just as synthetic organic chemistry once revolutionized the ability of chemists to build molecules (including those that did not exist in nature) following a basic set of design rules, cell-free synthetic biology is beginning to provide an improved toolbox and faster process for not only harnessing but also expanding the chemistry of life. At the interface between chemistry and biology, research in cell-free synthetic systems is proceeding in two different directions: using synthetic biology for synthetic chemistry and using synthetic chemistry to reprogram or mimic biology. In the coming years, the impact of advances inspired by these approaches will make possible the synthesis of nonbiological polymers having new backbone compositions, new chemical properties, new structures, and new functions.

Indexed as

Cell-Free SystemChemistry Techniques, SyntheticPolymersProtein BiosynthesisSynthetic BiologyPolymers

Identifiers

PMID22483202
PMCPMC4038125

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.