4.8 Article

A machine learning Automated Recommendation Tool for synthetic biology

Journal

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-18008-4

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Bioenergy Technologies Office [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  2. Basque Government through the BERC 2014-2017 program
  3. Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness MINECO: BCAM Severo Ochoa excellence accreditation [SEV-2013-0323]
  4. U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science [DE-AC02-05CH11231]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Synthetic biology allows us to bioengineer cells to synthesize novel valuable molecules such as renewable biofuels or anticancer drugs. However, traditional synthetic biology approaches involve ad-hoc engineering practices, which lead to long development times. Here, we present the Automated Recommendation Tool (ART), a tool that leverages machine learning and probabilistic modeling techniques to guide synthetic biology in a systematic fashion, without the need for a full mechanistic understanding of the biological system. Using sampling-based optimization, ART provides a set of recommended strains to be built in the next engineering cycle, alongside probabilistic predictions of their production levels. We demonstrate the capabilities of ART on simulated data sets, as well as experimental data from real metabolic engineering projects producing renewable biofuels, hoppy flavored beer without hops, fatty acids, and tryptophan. Finally, we discuss the limitations of this approach, and the practical consequences of the underlying assumptions failing. Synthetic Biology often lacks the predictive power needed for efficient bioengineering. Here the authors present ART, a machine learning and probabilistic predictive tool to guide synthetic biology design in a systematic fashion.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available