| Literature DB >> 36082163 |
Camillo Moschner1, Charlie Wedd1, Somenath Bakshi1.
Abstract
Synthetic biology offers many solutions in healthcare, production, sensing and agriculture. However, the ability to rationally engineer synthetic biosystems with predictable and robust functionality remains a challenge. A major reason is the complex interplay between the synthetic genetic construct, its host, and the environment. Each of these contexts contains a number of input factors which together can create unpredictable behaviours in the engineered biosystem. It has become apparent that for the accurate assessment of these contextual effects a more holistic approach to design and characterisation is required. In this perspective article, we present the context matrix, a conceptual framework to categorise and explore these contexts and their net effect on the designed synthetic biosystem. We propose the use and community-development of the context matrix as an aid for experimental design that simplifies navigation through the complex design space in synthetic biology.Entities:
Keywords: biodesign; context; design of experiments; function-centric; standardisation; synthetic biology
Year: 2022 PMID: 36082163 PMCID: PMC9445834 DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2022.954707
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Bioeng Biotechnol ISSN: 2296-4185
FIGURE 1The three contexts of an engineered biosystem’s function (A) Construct context includes factors intrinsic to the design of the synthetic genetic circuit which can affect performance, and can be broadly divided into intra and inter-transcription unit construct contexts. An example of an intra-TU context is the composition of the construct itself, which can be tuned with different parts to achieve different outputs. Relative gene orientation is an example of an inter-TU context, which can significantly affect expression (Yeung et al., 2017). (B) The host context concerns all factors where the host organism affects the performance of the biosystem, and can be divided into the contexts of genetic factors, resource competition and the state in which the cell is growing. Resource competition (top, middle panel), is the phenomenon of a synthetic circuit competing with the host genome for shared resources. For genome-integrated circuits differing transcriptional propensities (indicated by the height of the green region) specify how the location of the circuit in the chromosome will affect performance (Scholz et al., 2019). (C) The environmental context in which the biosystem operates is defined by physical, chemical and ecological factors (reducing to just physical and chemical factors for cell-free systems). A selection of cultivation processes are illustrated, the differences between which are likely to have significant effects on gene expression in individual cells and shape the growth of the population as a whole. Acroynms: TU = transcription unit. RNAP = RNA polymerase. RBS = Ribosomal binding site.
FIGURE 2The context matrix and its applications. (A) A representation of the context matrix. The three primary contexts (construct = C, host = H, environment = E), are each composed of a number of input factors (C.F1, E.F2, … ), which are described in Figure 1. The input factors are further subdivided into levels (C.F1. L1, C.F1. L2, … ). Continuous input factors (such as temperature or glucose concentration) can take any feasible finite level, whereas categorical input factors (such as species or gene orientation) are restricted to discrete values. The chosen combination of all input factors (orange or pink outlines) completely defines the context of an engineered biosystem, and can be thought of as an input landscape. Each input landscape will produce an input-output mapping to outputs such as performance and fitness. (B) Emergent properties arising from overlapping contexts. (C) Integrating the context matrix into the Design-Build-Test-Learn cycle for context-aware synthetic biology. DoE = Design of Experiments.