National Academies Press: OpenBook

Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology (2018)

Chapter: 2 Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology

« Previous: 1 Introduction
Suggested Citation:"2 Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24890.
×
Page 19
Suggested Citation:"2 Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24890.
×
Page 20
Suggested Citation:"2 Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24890.
×
Page 21
Suggested Citation:"2 Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24890.
×
Page 22
Suggested Citation:"2 Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24890.
×
Page 23
Suggested Citation:"2 Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24890.
×
Page 24
Suggested Citation:"2 Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24890.
×
Page 25
Suggested Citation:"2 Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24890.
×
Page 26
Suggested Citation:"2 Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24890.
×
Page 27
Suggested Citation:"2 Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24890.
×
Page 28

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

2 Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology To frame and guide the study, the relationship of synthetic biology to other areas of biotechnology was explored along with the context in which synthetic biology tools and applications are being pursued. This chapter describes, in the context of this study, what it means to be in “the age of synthetic biology” and introduces key concepts, approaches, and tools that were considered. WHAT IS SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY? Biotechnology is a broad term encompassing the application of biological components or processes to advance human purposes. Although the term itself is thought to have been in use for only about a century, humans have used various forms of biotechnology for millennia. Synthetic biology refers to a set of concepts, approaches, and tools within biotechnology that enable the modification or creation of biological organisms. While there remains no universally agreed- upon definition of synthetic biology (with some defining it more narrowly and others more broadly; see, for example, Benner and Sismour, 2005; Endy, 2005; Dhar and Weiss, 2007), one distillation is that synthetic biology “aims to improve the process of genetic engineering” (Voigt, 2012). By way of backdrop for this statement, it is useful to note that some of the concepts and approaches now associated with synthetic biology have roots going back to the early days of genetic engineering in the 1970s and the improvements and achievements that were envisaged then. In 1974, for example, the molecular biologist Walter Szybalski set the stage for some key synthetic biology concepts and presaged activities that have now been demonstrated.1 An inflection point for the field occurred around the year 2000, after which synthetic biology gained significant attention and momentum. Two publications often identified with the field’s acceleration are by Elowitz and Leibler (2000) and Gardner et al. (2000). While genetic engineering was occurring—and improving—prior to 2000, and the principles espoused by synthetic biologists were already noted and in use to varying extents (see for example Toman et al., 1985; and Ptashne, 1986), that year marked a shift toward the adoption of approaches more typical of engineering disciplines, but which had previously been given only modest attention in the biological sciences. 1 “Up to now we are working on the descriptive phase of molecular biology. . . . But the real challenge will start when we enter the synthetic biology phase of research in our field. We will then devise new control elements and add these new modules to the existing genomes or build up wholly new genomes. This would be a field with the unlimited expansion potential and hardly any limitations to building ‘new better control circuits’ and . . . finally other ‘synthetic’ organisms, like a ‘new better mouse’. . . . I am not concerned that we will run out [of] exciting and novel ideas . . . in the synthetic biology, in general.” (Szybalski, 1974) 19 PREPUBLICATION COPY: UNCORRECTED PROOFS

Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology 20 In improving the process of genetic engineering, synthetic biology places special emphasis on the Design-Build-Test (DBT) cycle2 (see Figures 2-1 and 2-2), the iterative process of designing a prototype, building a physical instantiation, testing the functionality of the design, learning from its flaws, and feeding that information back into the creation of a new, improved design. Developments such as enhanced computing power, laboratory automation, cost-effective DNA synthesis and sequencing technologies, and other powerful techniques to manipulate DNA have made it possible for biological engineers to rapidly repeat the DBT cycle to refine designs and products for a desired purpose. Key developments exemplifying these approaches include the establishment of standardized genetic parts registries, intensive use of models and other quantitative tools to simulate biological designs before building them, the availability of open- source DNA assembly methods, and the ability to create rationally designed genetic “circuits”— systems of DNA-encoded biological components designed to perform specific functions (Elowitz and Leibler, 2000; Gardner et al., 2000; Knight, 2003; part.igem.org, 2017). FIGURE 2-1 Design-Build-Test (DBT) cycle. This study approached synthetic biology concepts, approaches, and tools from the standpoint of their role in the DBT cycle, which is fundamental to synthetic biology. NOTE: LC/MS = liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry. SOURCE: Modified from Petzold et al., 2015. 2 Sometimes referred to as a Specify-Design-Build-Test-Learn cycle or other variations. PREPUBLICATION COPY: UNCORRECTED PROOFS

21 Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology FIGURE 2-2 General workflow showing steps typical of the DBT cycle. This study focused on the core elements, Design-Build-Test, while recognizing that steps such as Specify and Learn can be considered separately or rolled into these core steps. The age of synthetic biology is marked by the broad adoption and consolidation of these concepts, approaches, and tools within the DBT cycle to accelerate the engineering of living organisms. The concepts, approaches, and tools developed to advance synthetic biology will continue to be integrated more broadly into the life sciences toolkit and applied toward many biological research and biotechnology activities. As a result, this report does not draw a precise distinction between synthetic biology and other aspects of advancing biological sciences, but considers synthetic biology a crucial contributor to the spectrum of activities within biology and biotechnology more broadly. The age of synthetic biology is ushering in not only novel technologies, but the application of engineering paradigms to biological contexts. The general intent to manipulate biological systems and to apply engineering paradigms from other disciplines is not new; from the PREPUBLICATION COPY: UNCORRECTED PROOFS

Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology 22 introduction of recombinant DNA technologies in the 1970s to the present, there has been a concerted effort to manipulate genetic material and biological organisms. What has changed is the increased power of particular technologies that enable engineering paradigms to be applied to biological materials. Assessing new technologies and platforms that may enable the creative or destructive manipulation of biological materials, systems, and organisms will be important for identifying potential security opportunities and vulnerabilities. IMPLICATIONS OF THE AGE OF SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY Synthetic biology is enabled by tools and techniques from a variety of scientific disciplines, from electrical engineering to computation to biology to chemistry. For example, the exponential improvements in DNA sequencing capabilities, initially developed to further our understanding of the human genome but soon applied to characterize many other organisms, have provided crucial raw material for synthetic biology and fueled innovation over the past decade. More recently, genome editing tools such as CRISPR/Cas9 (“Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats”) (Jinek et al., 2012; Cong et al., 2013) have been adopted for synthetic biology techniques such as the regulation of gene circuits and the development of gene drives (genetic elements for which inheritance is favorably biased; see National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2016). Scientific progress in domains relevant to synthetic biology has been remarkably rapid; CRISPR/Cas9, for example, was extended from mammalian cell culture (in the United States) to primates (in China) in a single year (Cong et al., 2013; Jinek et al., 2013; Mali et al., 2013; Niu et al., 2014). Two somewhat dichotomous phenomena are increasing the pace and progress of engineering of biological systems. The first is that bioengineering can be more theoretical, due to increased predictability of biological systems and evolving standards for biological performance. Biological engineering approaches make it possible to separate the design of a biological material or organism from its manufacture, and standards are evolving to facilitate a theoretical approach to biological design. Biological knowledge may thus be captured and applied in the design stage. The second phenomenon is the ability to try many different designs, often in parallel, and to potentially use directed evolution (see Appendix A) in living systems to perfect the design (see Box 2-1). The inexpensive technologies involved in designing and creating new DNA constructs to test make it easier to proceed without a hypothesis of how the design will work; in other words, it is “cheaper to make than to think.”3 However, the level of underlying biological knowledge still affects the degree to which these biological engineering techniques can be successfully applied; for example, adjusting well-understood pathways to increase ethanol production is fundamentally easier than increasing the virulence of Francisella tularensis, whose virulence mechanisms remain largely unknown. These advances have real-world consequences for the development of new biotechnologies as well as their accessibility to actors of all types. On the positive side, it is expected that these 3 For example, researchers recently synthesized and tested more than 7,000 genes to identify diverse homologs capable of complementing the deletion of two essential Escherichia coli genes. While the function of those 7,000 genes could be inferred by sequence similarity, it was more tractable to prove their function via synthesis and testing rather than developing a model of their function from first principles. In practice, these large-scale efforts are synergistic with modeling techniques, as they provide systematic data that can strengthen models for predicting biological functions (Plesa, 2018). PREPUBLICATION COPY: UNCORRECTED PROOFS

23 Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology technologies will enable a wider range of therapeutics, a wider range of biological detection and diagnostic methods, and opportunities to detect biological anomalies. However, these developments also potentially increase the power of even less-resourced malicious actors to produce a harmful biological agent. In this context, it is useful to consider the technologies that enable synthetic biology and how these developments may drive paradigm shifts in the practice of bioengineering. BOX 2-1 Designing Biology Design in biology has traditionally differed from design in other engineering disciplines. In particular, biological design in the past has typically involved building and testing many designs to identify those that have the desired effect. The need for this trial-and-error process stemmed in part from the tools that were available; sequencing, synthesis, and gene editing tools have historically been too inexact and labor-intensive to permit systematic exploration of biological design spaces. The complexity of biological systems makes it likely that biological design will continue to rely on trial-and-error, at least in part, for the foreseeable future. The balance between trial- and-error and explicit design is determined by our ability to predict phenotypic results from genotypic editing. Despite the continued need for trial-and-error, as the “craft” elements of genetic modification have been replaced with standards and practices, the discipline of design has come to play an increasingly key role in identifying strategies for specifying and building libraries that out-perform previous approaches. In some cases, natural evolution can be co- opted to optimize designs by passaging samples through multiple generations of animal models or other living systems, where a selective pressure will identify the best constructs. In addition, aspects of biological systems can be discretely modeled with increasing accuracy. Examples of such advances include models of ribosome binding site strength (Salis Lab, 2017) and protein folding (Baker Lab, 2017), systems biology models (Palsson Lab, 2017), and statistical design tools (CIDAR Lab, 2016). None of these tools eliminate the need to build or test biological systems, but they reduce the size of the effective design space that must be explored to make progress toward a design goal. As tools supporting the building and testing of biological products improve in precision and throughput, larger design spaces can be explored. The future of design in biology is expected to continue to separate the intent of the designer from the specification of genetic changes to make. Similar to the way that modern programming languages do not require software developers to understand how software routines are executed at the transistor level, biological design tools are becoming less dependent on base-pair level descriptions of genetic constructs. In other words, a synthetic biologist may not need to know the exact sequence of nucleic acids required in order to design a regulatory circuit for gene expression—simply specifying a particular goal, e.g., the desire to integrate two pre-determined biological signals, may be sufficient to return a blueprint for the Build stage. Importantly, design tools are not restricted to base-pair level descriptions of genetic constructs as output; they may instead output instructions for libraries of designs to PREPUBLICATION COPY: UNCORRECTED PROOFS

Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology 24 build and test (e.g., suggesting a range of sequences to vary expression level of a regulatory protein) or conditions for mutagenesis, evolution, and selection (e.g., to augment rational design with directed evolution)—thus allowing the designer to more efficiently identify improved biological systems. Enabling Technologies for Synthetic Biology Synthetic biology is enabled by numerous technologies that enhance success rates and facilitate experimentation, particularly in the DBT cycle. The development of these technologies to some extent defines the transition to the current age of synthetic biology. These include technologies specifically created for synthetic biology, as well as technologies developed for general molecular biology and biotechnology that are being exploited by synthetic biologists. These enabling technologies serve as the tools that facilitate the specification of biological designs and constructions. Key enabling technology areas, examples of which are described in more detail in Appendix A and below (see Specific Synthetic Biology Technologies and Applications), include the following: • DNA synthesis and assembly. The heart of synthetic biology is the ability to make DNA constructs quickly and efficiently. Improvements in synthesis technology have followed a “Moore’s Law-like” curve for both reductions in costs and increases in the length of constructs that are attainable. These trends are likely to continue. • Genome engineering. While in the past it has proven possible to engineer organismal or viral genomes via painstaking mutational methods, the ability to synthesize DNA quickly, coupled with improvements in transformation technologies and “booting” (the steps needed to go from DNA to a viable organism), has led to an acceleration in the ability to make mutations, including multiple mutations in parallel (e.g., Wang et al. 2009). In particular, the ongoing CRISPR revolution (Doudna and Charpentier, 2014) has led to the ability to introduce site-specific changes into a wide variety of organisms that may have previously been refractory to such techniques. • Improved computational modeling. With new approaches to modeling biological systems and improved computing power, more complex biomolecular designs and system behaviors can be explored. This allows for larger areas of the theoretical “design space” in biology to be explored and tested in parallel, leading to better working systems in less time. Modeling advances are abetted by new computational advances in machine learning and big data that have allowed the results of past experiments (both successes and failures) to inform the next round of design and experimentation. In the future, the creation of “rules” from the machine learning process should greatly improve the specification of future successful designs. • Genetic logic. A key development in the field that meshes with improvements in modeling is the development of genetic logic circuits (Moon et al., 2012; Kotula et al., 2014) that allow living systems to make basic “decisions” based on both current inputs to the system (combinational logic) and the history of inputs (memory or sequential logic). The inherently programmable nature of genetic logic circuits is expected to mesh with advanced modeling approaches to improve the DBT cycle. An example of the use of genetic logic is plants that have been modified to act as radiation sensors capable of PREPUBLICATION COPY: UNCORRECTED PROOFS

25 Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology indicating when large amounts of gamma radiation have been detected (Peng et al., 2014). • Directed evolution. While directed evolution methods are not new, their application has been accelerated by recent advances in DNA synthesis and genome engineering and are thus addressed in this report under the umbrella of biotechnology in the age of synthetic biology. Directed evolution methods stand both as an alternative to design-based models and as a supplement to them, in that they can return enormous amounts of data on fitness landscapes that can further improve computational modeling approaches. Additionally, the combination of design and selection moves constructs well beyond the bounds of what nature would attempt while still allowing the facile repair of unintended unnatural or less-fit deficiencies and interactions. A somewhat notorious example of the use of directed evolution was the introduction of an engineered version of a more virulent strain of influenza virus into ferrets, where it rapidly evolved to become airborne-transmissible (Fouchier, 2015). While this research was done for reasons some argue were appropriate, it also provided a blueprint for potential misuse. Engineering Paradigms for Synthetic Biology Enabling technologies have allowed synthetic biologists to make genetic changes in organisms with greater ease, precision, and scale. As a maturing engineering discipline, synthetic biology is also being advanced by engineering paradigms that allow these tools to be used with greater predictability of result. Engineering paradigms are methods of adapting enabling technologies to abstraction, standards, computing, workflow optimization, and other engineering principles. If enabling technologies provide options for what tools will be used in synthetic biology, engineering paradigms describe how these technologies will be used. In other words, these paradigms encompass the processes and decisions followed in designing, building, and testing biological constructs. The following engineering concepts and paradigms are particularly relevant to the context of this study: • Specify-Design-Build-Test-Learn cycle. The Specify-Design-Build-Test-Learn cycle refers to an iterative process that requires a formal description of the desired biological behavior or function (specify), the planned modification of an organism in silico or via rational design principles to realize that behavior (design), the physical assembly of the biological material representing those designs (build), the testing of the material to determine if it functions as specified (test), and formally capturing and storing information about the entire process to inform the next revision or subsequent design (learn). The boundaries between the cycle stages are fluid, and for the purposes of this report, the cycle is simplified to Design-Build-Test, with other stages implicitly included in these core elements. For example, Specify is incorporated into Design and Learn is incorporated in the analytical steps of Test. Additional elements that are pertinent to biodefense considerations, such as Scale and Delivery, are also included. • Combinatorial approaches. While not an engineering paradigm per se, it is a fundamental shift that in many cases, it is now often “cheaper to make than to think.” It is becoming increasingly common to use combinatorial approaches—approaches in which a large number of genetic variants are created and then tested. Variants can be created by using a PREPUBLICATION COPY: UNCORRECTED PROOFS

Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology 26 technique in which a large number of DNA variants are incorporated systematically to synthesize multiple variants (i.e., combinatorial assembly). The concept is that one can generate a large number of variants with limited knowledge of sequence-function relationships. These approaches enable many design options to be explored, even in the absence of predictive tools to model the performance of those designs. Directed evolution is a related concept, discussed in Appendix A. • High-throughput data acquisition. The speed of the DBT cycle has been greatly increased by the raft of enabling technologies such as combinatorial assembly (Smanski et al., 2014; Carbonell et al., 2016), CRISPR/Cas based editing methods (Black et al., 2017; Schmidt and Platt, 2017; Mendoza and Trinh, 2018), and directed evolution (Cobb et al., 2013; Tizei et al., 2016). By synergizing with advances in analytical chemistry and biology, such as microfluidics and high-throughput sequencing, these technologies may allow the functional assessment of millions of constructs in parallel, hence providing particularly robust feedback for the next iteration of design. • Separation of design and manufacturing. Specifying and designing a system can now be done in one location (e.g., an academic environment) while the manufacturing process (the Build step in the DBT cycle) is done in another location (e.g., a remotely operated facility or “cloud laboratory”). The increasing physical and virtual separation of design and manufacturing not only further increases the accessibility of synthetic biology but also creates potential security concerns where designs cannot necessarily be explicitly connected to manufacturing locations and vice versa. • Standards. Standards have emerged that make DNA assembly easier and parts more “sharable” (e.g., Gibson and modular cloning assembly methods). Data standards such as Synthetic Biology Open Language (Sbolstandard.org, 2017) have made the sharing, analysis, and software ecosystem of synthetic biology increasingly sophisticated. Such standards may ultimately allow engineers to focus on raising the level of abstraction in designs since lower level mechanisms have been well defined and vetted. SPECIFIC SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY TECHNOLOGIES AND APPLICATIONS The technologies and engineering paradigms described above have led to a number of applications that drive synthetic biology development because they provide unique ways to take advantage of what synthetic biology offers. They are not all unique to synthetic biology, nor are they all routinely used to explore synthetic biology designs. For example, all synthetic biologists use software to store and analyze DNA sequences and use some form of computation in specifying designs (e.g., using biophysical models or algorithms to design ribosome binding sites, to check folding energies of DNA primers used for amplification and assembly, or to refactor the DNA sequence encoding a protein to increase protein production, a technique known as “codon optimization”). However, far fewer have the requisite library of DNA parts and accompanying software tools to achieve a level of abstraction that would allow the researcher to query, for example, a logic gate that accepts glucose concentration as input and activates transcription of a tethered reporter when a specific concentration is achieved. In other words, there are approaches and tools that are continuing to develop and gain traction within synthetic biology but which have not necessarily reached their full technical potential or user adoption. While the technologies used in each of the component phases of the DBT cycle may evolve over time or be replaced by new technologies, the fundamental concepts of the DBT cycle will PREPUBLICATION COPY: UNCORRECTED PROOFS

27 Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology stand. Thus, it is useful to consider current technologies and anticipated future developments in terms of the ways in which they enable the DBT cycle. However, it is important to recognize that the component phases of the DBT cycle are not strictly separate. It is possible, even probable, that some technologies or approaches will have impacts across multiple phases of the DBT cycle; one such example may be directed evolution, where repeated passage in a model host or in cell cultures under stress permits nature to Design, Build, and Test new phenotypes. There are also likely areas in which advances in synthetic biology capabilities relevant to biodefense would arise from synergies or convergence among technologies relevant to different phases. For example, it is important to consider potential synergies between Design technologies and Build technologies, because a malicious actor would need both Design and Build capabilities to carry out an attack. Similarly, synergies may arise if large-scale Test technologies are developed to match the enormous output of certain Build technologies, thus helping those Build technologies reach their full potential. Appendix A describes a core set of current synthetic biology concepts, approaches, and tools that enable each step of the DBT cycle, focusing particularly on areas in which advances in biotechnology may raise the potential for malicious acts that were less feasible before the age of synthetic biology. Although the examples presented are intentionally quite broad and somewhat arbitrary—and do not represent an exhaustive list of all technologies or all possible applications of synthetic biology—they provide useful context for understanding how specific tools or approaches might enable the potential capabilities analyzed in chapters 4–6 and can be adapted to assess new areas of concern as the biotechnology landscape continues to evolve. In addition, while Appendix A captures the main known technologies at the time of writing, this list will need to be updated and modified to stay relevant as the science advances. Figure 2-3 summarizes how the concepts, approaches, and tools described in Appendix A map to the phases of the DBT cycle. Going forward, it will be useful to consider how each phase of the DBT cycle may be further enabled by future developments in technology and knowledge, particularly in areas where a current bottleneck may be overcome. Appendix A also indicates the relative degree of maturity of specific techniques discussed (see Figure A-1). Key Synthetic Biology Concepts, Design Build Test Approaches, and Tools Automated Biological Design Metabolic Engineering Phenotype Engineering Horizontal Transfer and Transmissibility Xenobiology Human Modulation PREPUBLICATION COPY: UNCORRECTED PROOFS

Biotechnology in the Age of Synthetic Biology 28 DNA Construction Editing of Genes or Genomes Library Construction Booting of Engineered Constructs High-Throughput Screening Directed Evolution FIGURE 2-3 Synthetic biology concepts, approaches, and tools that enable the DBT cycle. NOTE: Shading indicates which phase of the DBT cycle each example aligns with most closely. See Appendix A for full descriptions. PREPUBLICATION COPY: UNCORRECTED PROOFS

Next: 3 Framework for Assessing Concern about Synthetic Biology Capabilities »
Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology Get This Book
×
Buy Prepub | $79.00 Buy Paperback | $70.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Scientific advances over the past several decades have accelerated the ability to engineer existing organisms and to potentially create novel ones not found in nature. Synthetic biology, which collectively refers to concepts, approaches, and tools that enable the modification or creation of biological organisms, is being pursued overwhelmingly for beneficial purposes ranging from reducing the burden of disease to improving agricultural yields to remediating pollution. Although the contributions synthetic biology can make in these and other areas hold great promise, it is also possible to imagine malicious uses that could threaten U.S. citizens and military personnel. Making informed decisions about how to address such concerns requires a realistic assessment of the capabilities that could be misused.

Biodefense in the Age of Synthetic Biology explores and envisions potential misuses of synthetic biology. This report develops a framework to guide an assessment of the security concerns related to advances in synthetic biology, assesses the levels of concern warranted for such advances, and identifies options that could help mitigate those concerns.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!