ArticlePloS one2023
Precision engineering of biological function with large-scale measurements and machine learning.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microalgae-Driven Circular Agriculture: System Integration, Nutrient Recovery, and AI-Assisted Optimization.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- Generative design of synthetic gene circuits for functional and evolutionary properties.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2026Article
- Characterization of Synthetic Gene Circuits with Absolute Quantification in Continuous Culture.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026Article
- Accelerating Genetic Sensor Development, Scale-up, and Deployment Using Synthetic Biology.Biodesign research · 2024Article
- Applications of artificial intelligence and machine learning in dynamic pathway engineering.Biochemical Society transactions · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
As synthetic biology expands and accelerates into real-world applications, methods for quantitatively and precisely engineering biological function become increasingly relevant. This is particularly true for applications that require programmed sensing to dynamically regulate gene expression in response to stimuli. However, few methods have been described that can engineer biological sensing with any level of quantitative precision. Here, we present two complementary methods for precision engineering of genetic sensors: in silico selection and machine-learning-enabled forward engineering. Both methods use a large-scale genotype-phenotype dataset to identify DNA sequences that encode sensors with quantitatively specified dose response. First, we show that in silico selection can be used to engineer sensors with a wide range of dose-response curves. To demonstrate in silico selection for precise, multi-objective engineering, we simultaneously tune a genetic sensor's sensitivity (EC50) and saturating output to meet quantitative specifications. In addition, we engineer sensors with inverted dose-response and specified EC50. Second, we demonstrate a machine-learning-enabled approach to predictively engineer genetic sensors with mutation combinations that are not present in the large-scale dataset. We show that the interpretable machine learning results can be combined with a biophysical model to engineer sensors with improved inverted dose-response curves.
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.