ReviewF1000Research2016
Recent advances in synthetic biosafety.
Review in F1000Research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Engineering Cyborg Bacteria Through Intracellular Hydrogelation.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2023Article
- A genetic toolkit and gene switches to limit Mycoplasma growth for biosafety applications.Nature communications · 2022Article
- AddictingACS chemical biology · 2020Article
- Bacterium-Mediated RNA Interference: Potential Application in Plant Protection.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
- Selection, Addiction and Catalysis: Emerging Trends for the Incorporation of Noncanonical Amino Acids into Peptides and Proteins in Vivo.Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology · 2019Review
- Surrogate strains of human pathogens for field release.Bioengineered · 2018Review
- Auxotrophy to Xeno-DNA: an exploration of combinatorial mechanisms for a high-fidelity biosafety system for synthetic biology applications.Journal of biological engineering · 2018Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Synthetically engineered organisms hold promise for a broad range of medical, environmental, and industrial applications. Organisms can potentially be designed, for example, for the inexpensive and environmentally benign synthesis of pharmaceuticals and industrial chemicals, for the cleanup of environmental pollutants, and potentially even for biomedical applications such as the targeting of specific diseases or tissues. However, the use of synthetically engineered organisms comes with several reasonable safety concerns, one of which is that the organisms or their genes could escape their intended habitats and cause environmental disruption. Here we review key recent developments in this emerging field of synthetic biocontainment and discuss further developments that might be necessary for the widespread use of synthetic organisms. Specifically, we discuss the history and modern development of three strategies for the containment of synthetic microbes: addiction to an exogenously supplied ligand; self-killing outside of a designated environment; and self-destroying encoded DNA circuitry outside of a designated environment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.