Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36846306›Full record

ArticleMaterials today. Bio2023

Light and carbon: Synthetic biology toward new cyanobacteria-based living biomaterials.

Isabella M Goodchild-Michelman, George M Church, Max G Schubert, Tzu-Chieh Tang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Materials today. Bio, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The Potential of Self-Maintainable Living Materials.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Building like a Coral-Parallelized, Multiscale Biofabrication.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Bacterial Hybrid Light-Emitting Diodes.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Isabella M Goodchild-MichelmanDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA.
George M ChurchDepartment of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Max G SchubertDepartment of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Tzu-Chieh TangDepartment of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cyanobacteria are ideal candidates to use in developing carbon neutral and carbon negative technologies; they are efficient photosynthesizers and amenable to genetic manipulation. Over the past two decades, researchers have demonstrated that cyanobacteria can make sustainable, useful biomaterials, many of which are engineered living materials. However, we are only beginning to see such technologies applied at an industrial scale. In this review, we explore the ways in which synthetic biology tools enable the development of cyanobacteria-based biomaterials. First we give an overview of the ecological and biogeochemical importance of cyanobacteria and the work that has been done using cyanobacteria to create biomaterials so far. This is followed by a discussion of commonly used cyanobacteria strains and synthetic biology tools that exist to engineer cyanobacteria. Then, three case studies-bioconcrete, biocomposites, and biophotovoltaics-are explored as potential applications of synthetic biology in cyanobacteria-based materials. Finally, challenges and future directions of cyanobacterial biomaterials are discussed.

Indexed as

BiomaterialsCarbon sequestrationCyanobacteriaEngineered living materialsSustainabilitySynthetic biology

Identifiers

PMID36846306
PMCPMC9945787

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.