ReviewSynthetic biology (Oxford, England)2024
An engineering biology approach to automated workflow and biodesign.
Review in Synthetic biology (Oxford, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- High-throughput yeast engineering in biofoundries: towards autonomous and scalable synthetic biology.FEMS yeast research · 2026Review
- Phylogenetic and Functional Diversity of Soluble Di-Iron Monooxygenases.Environmental microbiology · 2025Review
- Closing the loop: establishing an autonomous test-learn cycle to optimize induction of bacterial systems using a robotic platform.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The paper addresses the application of engineering biology strategies and techniques to the automation of laboratory workflow-primarily in the context of biofoundries and biodesign applications based on the Design, Build, Test and Learn paradigm. The trend toward greater automation comes with its own set of challenges. On the one hand, automation is associated with higher throughput and higher replicability. On the other hand, the implementation of an automated workflow requires an instruction set that is far more extensive than that required for a manual workflow. Automated tasks must also be conducted in the order specified in the workflow, with the right logic, utilizing suitable biofoundry resources, and at scale-while simultaneously collecting measurements and associated data. The paper describes an approach to an automated workflow that is being trialed at the London Biofoundry at SynbiCITE. The solution represents workflows with directed graphs, uses orchestrators for their execution, and relies on existing standards. The approach is highly flexible and applies to not only workflow automation in single locations but also distributed workflows (e.g. for biomanufacturing). The final section presents an overview of the implementation-using the simple example of an assay based on a dilution, measurement, and data analysis workflow.
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.