ReviewACS synthetic biology2024
Synthetic Ecosystems: From the Test Tube to the Biosphere.
Review in ACS synthetic biology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Synthetic Mirror Bacteria as a Frontier for Chiral Synthetic Biology and Biocontainment.MicrobiologyOpen · 2026Review
- Phage bioaugmentation reveals the potential of lysogeny for soil bioremediation.Communications biology · 2026Review
- Emergent coexistence and the limits of reductionism in ecological communities.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Engineering Basal Cognition: Minimal Genetic Circuits for Habituation, Sensitization, and Massed-Spaced Learning.ACS synthetic biology · 2026Article
- Eco-Inspired terraform networks emerge from material self-organization.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Origins of life: the possible and the actual.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study of ecosystems, both natural and artificial, has historically been mediated by population dynamics theories. In this framework, quantifying population numbers and related variables (associated with metabolism or biological-environmental interactions) plays a central role in measuring and predicting system-level properties. As we move toward advanced technological engineering of cells and organisms, the possibility of bioengineering ecosystems (from the gut microbiome to wildlands) opens several questions that will require quantitative models to find answers. Here, we present a comprehensive survey of quantitative modeling approaches for managing three kinds of synthetic ecosystems, sharing the presence of engineered strains. These include test tube examples of ecosystems hosting a relatively low number of interacting species, mesoscale closed ecosystems (or ecospheres), and macro-scale, engineered ecosystems. The potential outcomes of synthetic ecosystem designs and their limits will be relevant to different disciplines, including biomedical engineering, astrobiology, space exploration and fighting climate change impacts on endangered ecosystems. We propose a space of possible ecosystems that captures this broad range of scenarios and a tentative roadmap for open problems and further exploration.
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.