ReviewNature communications2025
Abstraction hierarchy to define biofoundry workflows and operations for interoperable synthetic biology research and applications.
Review in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Accelerating natural product discovery, characterization and engineering by biofoundries.Natural product reports · 2026Review
- Beyond petrochemicals: challenges and opportunities in industrial-scale biomanufacturing.Nature communications · 2026Review
- Review
- Block-building with yeast to elucidate an artificial pathway for de novo biosynthesis of glabridin.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Green bioconversion of insoluble chitin: chitinase development pathways via multi-strategy synergy.Bioresources and bioprocessing · 2026Review
- High-throughput yeast engineering in biofoundries: towards autonomous and scalable synthetic biology.FEMS yeast research · 2026Review
- Biological parts in yeast synthetic biology: from regulatory elements to predictive design platforms.FEMS yeast research · 2026Review
- Design biology and mind-body health.Journal, genetic engineering & biotechnology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Lack of standardization in biofoundries limits the scalability and efficiency of synthetic biology research. Here, we propose an abstraction hierarchy that organizes biofoundry activities into four interoperable levels: Project, Service/Capability, Workflow, and Unit Operation, effectively streamlining the Design‑Build‑Test‑Learn (DBTL) cycle. This framework enables more modular, flexible, and automated experimental workflows. It improves communication between researchers and systems, supports reproducibility, and facilitates better integration of software tools and artificial intelligence. Our approach lays the foundation for a globally interoperable biofoundry network, advancing collaborative synthetic biology and accelerating innovation in response to scientific and societal challenges.
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.