After all, the resulting life forms now being discussed will still rely on a biological “chassis,”  the “hollowed out” cell. As the Harvard researcher points out, “That shell is not such an empty husk — if that’s all it was, it wouldn’t work. If the empty husk is like a computer and has the basics of microprocessor and so forth … the unique thing about biology is that not only does it read the program, it also modifies the program, turning genes on and off.”

“Life” as most of us understand it, is the combination of the software and hardware — the genome and the not-really-empty cell. A working synthetic genome, while a significant breakthrough with potentially enormous practical applications, would still be a far cry from something we could honestly call “life from scratch.”

It’s also worth pointing out that the whole “life from scratch” idea is one that holds a lot more fascination for laypeople (and journalists) than for many of the scientists actually practicing synthetic biology.

The Synthetic Kingdom is part of our new nature.

Image Credits daisyginsberg.com

Image Credits daisyginsberg.com

Trying to engineer living things is like working with a computer that does what is is told half the time and half the time runs the programs it wants to run

“If whales and trees can be built from seeds, why can’t submarines and cell phone towers be built that way?”

For one thing, amplifying from a tiny seed to a larger structure is not so simple. And there's also the matter of cells sucking.

Synthetic biology is different, it’s about building slippery wetware entities that might live in the real world.

The synthetic biology approach is onto something big—a new version of nanotechnology, which is the craft of manufacturing things at the molecular scale. Synthetic biology’s plan is to capitalize on the fact that biology is already doing molecular fabrication all the time. What might happen if we repurpose biology to our own ends?

One big worry is what nanotechnologists call the “gray-goo problem.” What’s to stop a particularly virulent synthetic organism from eating everything on earth? My guess is that this could never happen. Every existing plant, animal, fungus and protozoan already aspires to world domination. There’s nothing more ruthless than viruses and bacteria—and they’ve been practicing for a very long time.

The fact that the synthetic organisms are likely to have simplified Tinkertoy DNA doesn’t necessarily mean they’re going to be faster and better. It’s more likely that they’ll be dumber and less adaptable. I have a mental image of germ-size MIT nerds putting on gangsta clothes and venturing into alleys to try some rough stuff. And then they meet up with the homies who’ve been keeping it real for a billion years or so.

The students in Freiburg set their sights on building a new set of chemical shears, called restriction endonucleases. The project combines parts of enzymes to create one that, with the help of an adapter, recognizes parts of DNA and is capable of separating it in an easier and more precise manner than existing methods that exist in nature and the field of genetic engineering.

 

If the shears work, they'll likely end up in every genetic engineer's tool box. The Freiburg researchers know they are setting a high goal for themselves.

 

"Scientists have tried to do it in the past and failed," molecular biology student Kristian Mueller said. "But new methods have been discovered that have convinced us now is the right time for this experiment."

The Synthetic Kingdom: A Natural History of the Synthetic Future, 2009 by Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg exhibited at the WHAT IF... Exhibition in the Science Gallery, Trinity College, Dublin in 2009.

How will we classify what's natural or unnatural when life is built from scratch? Synthetic Biology is turning to the living kingdoms for its materials library. No more petrochemicals: instead, pick a feature from an existing organism, locate its DNA and insert it into a biological chassis. Engineered life will compute, produce energy, clean up pollution, kill pathogens and even do the housework. Meanwhile, we'll have to add an extra branch to the Tree of Life. The Synthetic Kingdom is part of our new nature.

Biotech promises us control over the natural world, but living machines need controlling. Biology doesn't respect boundaries or patents. In simplifying life to its molecular interactions, might we accidentally degrade our sense of self? Are promises of sustainability and good health seductive enough to accept
such compromise?

Native Commodities, 2009 by Will Carey exhibited at the WHAT IF... Exhibition in the Science Gallery, Trinity College, Dublin in 2009.

As genome technologies promote the open sourcing of the human body, could such data participation one day be extended into other forms of biological manufacture? Synthetic biology and nanotechnologies have made it possible to reprogramme cells, but would we be prepared to consider using our bodies to do this? This project is a preliminary study into the tolerable limits of sharing, manufacturing and interacting with biological data from our bodies. The aesthetics of three spittoons for capturing bodily fluid have been explored.

Growth Assembly, 2009 by Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg and Sascha Pohflepp exhibited at the WHAT IF... Exhibition in the Science Gallery, Trinity College, Dublin in 2009.
Synthetic biology enables us to harness our natural environment for the production of things. Coded into the DNA of a plant, product parts grow within the supporting system of the plant's structure. When fully developed, they are stripped like a walnut from its shell or corn from its husk, ready for assembly.
Using biology for the production of consumer goods has reversed the idea of industrial standards, introducing diversity and softness into a realm that once was dominated by heavy manufacturing. The product on show in Science Gallery is the Herbicide Sprayer, an essential commodity to protect these delicate engineered horticultural machines from older nature.