Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30497870›Full record

ReviewTrends in biotechnology2019

Synthetic Biology Tools to Engineer Microbial Communities for Biotechnology.

Nicholas S McCarty, Rodrigo Ledesma-Amaro

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in biotechnology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 211 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
211citing 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

211 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. MGM as a Large-Scale Pretrained Foundation Model for Microbiome Analyses in Diverse Contexts.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Dynamic Robust Control of Microbial Communities Using Cybergenetics.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Article

151 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Nicholas S McCartyImperial College Centre for Synthetic Biology, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/@NikoMcCarty.
Rodrigo Ledesma-AmaroImperial College Centre for Synthetic Biology, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK; Department of Bioengineering, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, UK. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/@LedesmaAmaro.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/R01602X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microbial consortia have been used in biotechnology processes, including fermentation, waste treatment, and agriculture, for millennia. Today, synthetic biologists are increasingly engineering microbial consortia for diverse applications, including the bioproduction of medicines, biofuels, and biomaterials from inexpensive carbon sources. An improved understanding of natural microbial ecosystems, and the development of new tools to construct synthetic consortia and program their behaviors, will vastly expand the functions that can be performed by communities of interacting microorganisms. Here, we review recent advancements in synthetic biology tools and approaches to engineer synthetic microbial consortia, discuss ongoing and emerging efforts to apply consortia for various biotechnological applications, and suggest future applications.

Indexed as

MetabolismMicrobial ConsortiaBiotechnologyGene Expression RegulationMetabolic Networks and PathwaysSynthetic Biologybiomaterialsbioproductionmicrobial consortiasynthetic biologysynthetic consortiasynthetic microbial communities

Identifiers

PMID30497870
PMCPMC6340809

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.