Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35197606›Full record

ReviewNature protocols2022

Genetic circuit design automation with Cello 2.0.

Timothy S Jones, Samuel M D Oliveira, Chris J Myers, Christopher A Voigt, Douglas Densmore

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature protocols, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing 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

54 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Computational design of sequence-specific DNA-binding proteins.Nature structural & molecular biology · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. The design and engineering of synthetic genomes.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2025
    Review
  19. Hashing the message with cells.Nature chemical biology · 2025
    Article
  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

5 authors.

Timothy S JonesBiological Design Center, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Samuel M D OliveiraBiological Design Center, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Chris J MyersElectrical, Computer & Energy Engineering, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8762-8444
Christopher A VoigtSynthetic Biology Center, Department of Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0844-4776
Douglas DensmoreBiological Design Center, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA. dougd@bu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7666-6808

Funding

National Science Foundation (NSF) 1522074United States Department of Defense | Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) FA8750-17-C-0229United States Department of Defense | Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) HR011-12-C-0067
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cells interact with their environment, communicate among themselves, track time and make decisions through functions controlled by natural regulatory genetic circuits consisting of interacting biological components. Synthetic programmable circuits used in therapeutics and other applications can be automatically designed by computer-aided tools. The Cello software designs the DNA sequences for programmable circuits based on a high-level software description and a library of characterized DNA parts representing Boolean logic gates. This process allows for design specification reuse, modular DNA part library curation and formalized circuit transformations based on experimental data. This protocol describes Cello 2.0, a freely available cross-platform software written in Java. Cello 2.0 enables flexible descriptions of the logic gates' structure and their mathematical models representing dynamic behavior, new formal rules for describing the placement of gates in a genome, a new graphical user interface, support for Verilog 2005 syntax and a connection to the SynBioHub parts repository software environment. Collectively, these features expand Cello's capabilities beyond Escherichia coli plasmids to new organisms and broader genetic contexts, including the genome. Designing circuits with Cello 2.0 produces an abstract Boolean network from a Verilog file, assigns biological parts to each node in the Boolean network, constructs a DNA sequence and generates highly structured and annotated sequence representations suitable for downstream processing and fabrication, respectively. The result is a sequence implementing the specified Boolean function in the organism and predictions of circuit performance. Depending on the size of the design space and users' expertise, jobs may take minutes or hours to complete.

Indexed as

Gene Regulatory NetworksSoftwareAutomationDNAEscherichia coliSynthetic BiologyDNA

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.