ReviewQuantitative biology (Beijing, China)2023
From qualitative to quantitative: the state of the art and challenges for plant synthetic biology.
Review in Quantitative biology (Beijing, China), 2023. 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.
- Ribozyme-Enabled Tissue Specificity (RETS): A System for Precise Gene Expression without Specialized Promoters.ACS synthetic biology · 2026Article
- Elucidating design principles for Ribozyme-Enabled Tissue Specificity (RETS) to allow precise expression without specialized promoters.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Systematic representation and optimization enable the inverse design of cross-species regulatory sequences in bacteria.Nature communications · 2025Article
- From qualitative to quantitative: the state of the art and challenges for plant synthetic biology.Quantitative biology (Beijing, China) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The flourishing plant science promotes the exploding number of data and the expansion of toolkits. Plant synthetic biology is still in its early stages and requires more quantitative and predictable study. Despite the challenges, some pioneering examples have been successfully demonstrated in model plants. Backgrounds: As an increasing number of synthetic switches and circuits have been created for plant systems and of synthetic products produced in plant chassis, plant synthetic biology is taking a strong foothold in agriculture and medicine. The ever-exploding data has also promoted the expansion of toolkits in this field. Genetic parts libraries and quantitative characterization approaches have been developed. However, plant synthetic biology is still in its infancy. The considerations for selecting biological parts to design and construct genetic circuits with predictable functions remain desired. Results: In this article, we review the current biotechnological progresses in field of plant synthetic biology. Assembly standardization and quantitative approaches of genetic parts and genetic circuits are discussed. We also highlight the main challenges in the iterative cycles of design-build-test-learn for introducing novel traits into plants. Conclusion: Plant synthetic biology promises to provide important solutions to many issues in agricultural production, human health care, and environmental sustainability. However, tremendous challenges exist in this field. For example, the quantitative characterization of genetic parts is limited; the orthogonality and the transfer functions of circuits are unpredictable; and also, the mathematical modeling-assisted circuits design still needs to improve predictability and reliability. These challenges are expected to be resolved in the near future as interests in this field are intensifying.
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.