Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31362616›Full record

ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2019

Constructing living buildings: a review of relevant technologies for a novel application of biohybrid robotics.

Mary Katherine Heinrich, Sebastian von Mammen, Daniel Nicolas Hofstadler, Mostafa Wahby, Payam Zahadat, Tomasz Skrzypczak, Mohammad Divband Soorati, Rafał Krela, Wojciech Kwiatkowski, Thomas Schmickl and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Organismal Design and Biomimetics: A Problem of Scale.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Social Integrating Robots Suggest Mitigation Strategies for Ecosystem Decay.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021
    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

13 authors.

Mary Katherine HeinrichInstitute of Computer Engineering, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Sebastian von MammenHuman-Computer Interaction, Julius Maximilian University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Daniel Nicolas HofstadlerInstitute of Biology, Artificial Life Lab, University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Mostafa WahbyInstitute of Computer Engineering, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Payam ZahadatInstitute of Biology, Artificial Life Lab, University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Tomasz SkrzypczakDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland.
Mohammad Divband SooratiInstitute of Computer Engineering, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.
Rafał KrelaDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland.
Wojciech KwiatkowskiDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznan, Poland.
Thomas SchmicklInstitute of Biology, Artificial Life Lab, University of Graz, Graz, Austria.
Phil AyresSchool of Architecture, Centre for IT and Architecture, Royal Danish Academy, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Kasper StoyDepartment of Computer Science, IT University of Copenhagen, Kobenhavn, Denmark.
Heiko HamannInstitute of Computer Engineering, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biohybrid robotics takes an engineering approach to the expansion and exploitation of biological behaviours for application to automated tasks. Here, we identify the construction of living buildings and infrastructure as a high-potential application domain for biohybrid robotics, and review technological advances relevant to its future development. Construction, civil infrastructure maintenance and building occupancy in the last decades have comprised a major portion of economic production, energy consumption and carbon emissions. Integrating biological organisms into automated construction tasks and permanent building components therefore has high potential for impact. Live materials can provide several advantages over standard synthetic construction materials, including self-repair of damage, increase rather than degradation of structural performance over time, resilience to corrosive environments, support of biodiversity, and mitigation of urban heat islands. Here, we review relevant technologies, which are currently disparate. They span robotics, self-organizing systems, artificial life, construction automation, structural engineering, architecture, bioengineering, biomaterials, and molecular and cellular biology. In these disciplines, developments relevant to biohybrid construction and living buildings are in the early stages, and typically are not exchanged between disciplines. We, therefore, consider this review useful to the future development of biohybrid engineering for this highly interdisciplinary application.

Indexed as

Construction MaterialsRoboticsUrban RenewalCitiesbiobotbiohybridconstructionhybridroboticsself-organization

Identifiers

PMID31362616
PMCPMC6685033

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.