Imagine for a moment that you have come across a trove of marvelous devices left by an ancient civilization. These mysterious instruments vary widely in size and complexity, but they all share a few wondrous capabilities.
If you want to understand how they work, it makes sense to start with the simplest and smallest device, then systematically carve off pieces until it stops working. Eventually, everything that is inessential would be gone and you would be left with only the components necessary for it to perform its basic functions. Then, once you figure out what each of those pieces does, you would have your answer.
This is roughly the journey of discovery that the US biotechnologist J. Craig Venter and his colleagues have been taking for the past two decades — only their marvelous devices are not archeological remains, but living organisms. The pieces they are trying to understand are the genes that we share with all other forms of autonomous, reproductive life.
In a recent paper in the journal Science, Venter and his colleagues announced that they had created the smallest living and reproducing organism. Their creation — called JCVI-syn 3.0 — is a simple cell, with only the genes that are essential for life; it has a smaller genome than any autonomously replicating organism found in nature, larger only than those found in viruses and other entities that rely on hosts for essential functions.
Venter and his team created their organism through a process of trial and error. They began by using their knowledge of biology to deduce the minimum set of genes that would be required for life. That approach failed.
So, instead, they took an existing organism and began to whittle it down.
They started with the genome of Mycoplasma mycoides, a parasitic bacterium that infects cattle and goats, and also a close relative of Mycoplasma genitalium, which has the fewest genes — just 525 — known among free-living bacteria.
The team broke the Mycoplasma mycoides genome into eight fragments and began deleting genes one by one. If the reconstructed organism failed to thrive, the gene was left in. If it did not appear to matter, it stayed out. In the end, 473 genes were required for the organism to thrive. Humans, by comparison, have about 20,000 genes.
The most important result of the Venter team’s work was to reveal how little we know about the basic biology of life. Most of the 473 genes take care of housekeeping: They make proteins, keep DNA in good repair and are responsible for the cell’s membrane and cytoplasm.
However, there are 149 genes whose function is unknown. In other words, the purpose of nearly one-third of the genes needed to keep the organism alive, well and reproducing remains a mystery.
Of the 149 genes with unknown functions, 70 have a structure that at least hints at their role in the cell. However, nothing is know about the other 79, except that in these organisms, in this environment, life is impossible without them. Moreover, as Venter and his colleagues acknowledge, if the team began with a different microbe, or grew it in a different environment, the set of necessary genes would be different. So their genome is a minimal genome, not the minimal genome.
All of this implies many exciting discoveries ahead. Yet, when it comes to practical, commercial objectives, the news is considerably more sobering.
One of the primary goals of synthetic biology has been to create a platform, or chassis, to use as a foundation for building organisms designed for specific tasks. Just as Volkswagen uses its A5 platform to build 19 different vehicles, from luxury Audi A3s to small sport utility vehicles and budget models, a biological chassis would be a minimal microbial platform onto which could be bolted genetic instructions to make drugs, biofuels, cosmetics or whatever one desires.
With the publication of the Science paper, two challenges become evident. The first is that biology is complicated. As Venter’s work shows, we do not yet have a sufficient grasp of the essentials of basic biology to design and build a cell. Genes do not function like fenders or brakes; they cannot be mounted on a chassis to perform a function independently of other components. Genes interact — amplifying, dampening, or even silencing one another. Those effects, in turn, influence other genes.
Genomes function less like machines than like ecosystems with multitudinous relationships and complex feedback loops. Adding genomic parts to a synthetic organism in order to achieve a predictable result might be far more difficult than proponents of the chassis model have assumed.
The second challenge regards the competition. When Venter and his team began their effort, genetic engineers had tools that were powerful, but, by modern standards, crude. In recent years, scientists have found ways to edit genes with far greater precision. The most prominent, known as CRISPR Cas9, cuts DNA with remarkable — though not perfect — accuracy. As a result, gene editing has emerged as an alternative strategy to the chassis model for tailoring microbes to make useful products.
It is impossible to know whether synthetic organisms like Venter’s JCVI-syn 3.0 or gene-editing techniques would prove to be commercially dominant in biotechnology — or indeed whether some other method would supplant both. However, it is likely that people’s knowledge of basic biology will deepen, and that their growing ability to manipulate living organisms will confront them with increasingly serious ethical considerations.
Thomas Murray, president emeritus at the Hastings Center, is a visiting professor at the National University of Singapore’s Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) trip to China provides a pertinent reminder of why Taiwanese protested so vociferously against attempts to force through the cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014 and why, since Ma’s presidential election win in 2012, they have not voted in another Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) candidate. While the nation narrowly avoided tragedy — the treaty would have put Taiwan on the path toward the demobilization of its democracy, which Courtney Donovan Smith wrote about in the Taipei Times in “With the Sunflower movement Taiwan dodged a bullet” — Ma’s political swansong in China, which included fawning dithyrambs