4.6 Article

A Formalized Design Process for Bacterial Consortia That Perform Logic Computing

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 8, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0057482

关键词

-

资金

  1. Teaching Center for Experimental Biology
  2. National Undergraduate Innovational Experimentation Program
  3. National Science Foundation of China [11074009, 10721463]
  4. National Found for Fostering of Basic Science of China [J1030623, J1103505, J1030310, J1103205]
  5. National Basic Research Program of China ('973' Program) [2009CB918500]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The concept of microbial consortia is of great attractiveness in synthetic biology. Despite of all its benefits, however, there are still problems remaining for large-scaled multicellular gene circuits, for example, how to reliably design and distribute the circuits in microbial consortia with limited number of well-behaved genetic modules and wiring quorum-sensing molecules. To manage such problem, here we propose a formalized design process: (i) determine the basic logic units (AND, OR and NOT gates) based on mathematical and biological considerations; (ii) establish rules to search and distribute simplest logic design; (iii) assemble assigned basic logic units in each logic operating cell; and (iv) fine-tune the circuiting interface between logic operators. We in silico analyzed gene circuits with inputs ranging from two to four, comparing our method with the pre-existing ones. Results showed that this formalized design process is more feasible concerning numbers of cells required. Furthermore, as a proof of principle, an Escherichia coli consortium that performs XOR function, a typical complex computing operation, was designed. The construction and characterization of logic operators is independent of wiring and provides predictive information for fine-tuning. This formalized design process provides guidance for the design of microbial consortia that perform distributed biological computation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据