ReviewCurrent genetics2018
Synthetic genome recoding: new genetic codes for new features.
Review in Current genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Importance of the 5' regulatory region to bacterial synthetic biology applications.Microbial biotechnology · 2021Review
- ReScribe: An Unrestrained Tool Combining Multiplex Recombineering and Minimal-PAM ScCas9 for Genome RecodingACS synthetic biology · 2021Article
- Context matters: On the road to responsible biosafety technologies in synthetic biology.EMBO reports · 2021Article
- Review
- AddictingACS chemical biology · 2020Article
- Building genomes to understand biology.Nature communications · 2020Review
- Controlling the Implementation of Transgenic Microbes: Are We Ready for What Synthetic Biology Has to Offer?Molecular cell · 2020Review
- Plant Biosystems Design Research Roadmap 1.0.Biodesign research · 2020Review
- Changing the biological Rosetta stone: the (commercial) potential of recoded microbes.Microbial biotechnology · 2020Article
- Review
- How Synthetic Biology and Metabolic Engineering Can Boost the Generation of Artificial Blood Using Microbial Production Hosts.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Full genome recoding, or rewriting codon meaning, through chemical synthesis of entire bacterial chromosomes has become feasible in the past several years. Recoding an organism can impart new properties including non-natural amino acid incorporation, virus resistance, and biocontainment. The estimated cost of construction that includes DNA synthesis, assembly by recombination, and troubleshooting, is now comparable to costs of early stage development of drugs or other high-tech products. Here, we discuss several recently published assembly methods and provide some thoughts on the future, including how synthetic efforts might benefit from the analysis of natural recoding processes and organisms that use alternative genetic codes.
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.