ArticlemSphere2022
Reconfiguring the Challenge of Biological Complexity as a Resource for Biodesign.
Article in mSphere, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Data-Driven Engineering of Antimicrobial Nanomaterials for Food Safety and Biomedical Systems.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Achieving bottom-up ethical, legal, and societal implications and responsible research and innovation in the synthetic biology research community from the Japanese context.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Article
- Comprehensive characterization of AP-1 adaptor complex genes in lung cancer reveals AP1AR as a novel prognostic and therapeutic biomarker.Journal of Cancer · 2026Article
- State-of-the-art in engineering small molecule biosensors and their applications in metabolic engineering.SLAS technology · 2024Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
Biological complexity is widely seen as the central, intractable challenge of engineering biology. Yet this challenge has been constructed through the field's dominant metaphors. Alternative ways of thinking-latent in progressive experimental approaches, but rarely articulated as such-could instead position complexity as engineering biology's greatest resource. We outline how assumptions about engineered microorganisms have been built into the field, carried by entrenched metaphors, even as contemporary methods move beyond them. We suggest that alternative metaphors would better align engineering biology's conceptual infrastructure with the field's move away from conventionally engineering-inspired methods toward biology-centric ones. Innovating new conceptual frameworks would also enable better aligning scientific work with higher-level conversations about that work. Such innovation-thinking about how engineering microbes might be more like user-centered design than like programming a computer or building a car-could highlight complexity as a resource to leverage, not a problem to erase or negate.
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.