Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Biological engineering

Biological engineering is an interdisciplinary discipline that integrates principles of engineering, biology, and physical sciences to analyze, design, and construct biological systems and processes for applications in healthcare, agriculture, energy production, and environmental remediation.^[1]^[2]^[3] This field encompasses subareas such as genetic engineering, where tools like CRISPR enable precise editing of DNA to produce therapeutic proteins or modified organisms; tissue engineering, which fabricates biological substitutes to restore tissue function; and bioprocessing, which scales up microbial or cellular systems for industrial outputs like biofuels and pharmaceuticals.^[4]^[5] Notable achievements include the engineering of bacteria for insulin production via recombinant DNA technology, revolutionizing diabetes treatment, and synthetic biology approaches to sequester greenhouse gases or degrade pollutants, addressing grand challenges in sustainability.^[6] Despite its advancements, biological engineering raises ethical and safety concerns, including unintended ecological impacts from engineered organisms and dual-use risks where technologies could be misused for bioweapons, necessitating rigorous oversight and risk assessment frameworks.^[7] These controversies underscore the field's tension between innovation and precautionary principles, with peer-reviewed analyses emphasizing the need for evidence-based regulation over ideologically driven restrictions.^[8]

Overview and Definition

Core Principles and Scope

Biological engineering applies systematic engineering methodologies—such as analysis, design, synthesis, and optimization—to biological systems, enabling the predictable construction and manipulation of living or biologically inspired entities for targeted functions.^[9]^[10] This discipline integrates foundational principles from physics, chemistry, and biology to address the inherent complexity and variability of living systems, focusing on goal-based outcomes rather than mere observation.^[11]^[10] Unlike traditional descriptive biology, which primarily catalogs natural phenomena, biological engineering emphasizes causal interventions, predictive modeling of how molecular or network perturbations yield specific outputs, and iterative empirical validation to achieve reliability and scalability.^[12]^[9] Key engineering principles adapted to biology include modularity for composing standardized components like genetic circuits, scalability to extend designs from cellular to multicellular levels, and feedback control to regulate dynamic processes and mitigate variability, drawing parallels to control systems in mechanical or electrical engineering.^[13]^[14] These approaches enable rational engineering of biological networks, where inputs such as genetic modifications are linked causally to outputs like metabolite production, supported by quantitative models and experimental testing.^[12] The scope of biological engineering spans the design of novel functionalities across scales, from molecular tools like biosensors to cellular systems for bioproduction and tissue constructs for therapeutic use, with applications directed toward sustainable processes in industry, agriculture, medicine, and environmental management.^[9]^[10] It prioritizes tangible, verifiable outcomes, such as optimizing microbial pathways for chemical synthesis or engineering cells for precise therapeutic delivery, while accounting for biological constraints like stochasticity and evolutionary pressures through robust design strategies.^[14]^[12] Biological engineering differs from traditional biology by applying engineering methodologies to design and construct biological systems with quantifiable, predictable behaviors, rather than primarily observing or describing natural processes. While biology emphasizes empirical discovery and hypothesis testing to elucidate mechanisms, biological engineering requires the development of mathematical models that enable causal prediction and iterative optimization of system performance, such as forecasting gene expression dynamics in engineered cells.^[15]^[16] This distinction ensures that biological engineering outputs— like redesigned metabolic pathways—can be reliably scaled and reproduced, grounded in testable causal relationships rather than correlative observations alone.^[17] In comparison to biotechnology, which centers on the practical exploitation of biological processes for commercial products like pharmaceuticals or biofuels through often empirical scaling, biological engineering prioritizes foundational principles of design rigor, standardization, and modularity to achieve reproducible outcomes independent of specific applications. Biotechnology may rely on trial-and-error optimization tailored to market needs, whereas biological engineering develops universal frameworks, such as composable genetic circuits, that allow for de novo system invention with minimized variability.^[15]^[18] Biological engineering also contrasts with biomedical engineering, which integrates engineering with medical sciences to create diagnostic tools, implants, or therapeutic devices interfacing with the human body, by instead focusing on the intrinsic redesign of living organisms or cellular processes at scales from molecules to ecosystems. For example, biological engineers might optimize microbial consortia for environmental remediation through pathway engineering, without direct ties to clinical applications, whereas biomedical efforts target prosthetics or tissue scaffolds for human health restoration.^[19]^[20] This organism-centric approach underscores biological engineering's commitment to predictive control over biological causality, distinct from biomedical engineering's emphasis on hybrid bio-mechanical systems.^[16]

Historical Development

Precursors and Early Foundations

The earliest precursors to biological engineering emerged from ancient human practices of empirical manipulation of living systems, particularly through selective breeding and controlled fermentation. Around 10,000 BCE, humans in the Fertile Crescent and other regions began domesticating wild plants and animals by selecting individuals with favorable traits, such as higher yields or docility, which gradually altered genetic compositions over generations and enabled reliable agricultural production.^[21] This process, evident in the transformation of teosinte into maize through kernel selection, represented an intuitive form of directed biological modification without mechanistic understanding.^[22] Concurrently, fermentation techniques harnessed microbial activity for food and beverage production; evidence of wine-like beverages using Saccharomyces cerevisiae dates to approximately 9000 years ago in Neolithic China, while beer production involving yeast appears in Mesopotamian records by around 6000 BCE.^[23]^[24] These methods constituted proto-bioprocessing, relying on observation of repeatable outcomes from environmental controls rather than causal knowledge of underlying biology. In the 19th century, foundational scientific insights shifted these practices toward systematic causal reasoning. Justus von Liebig's work in agricultural chemistry during the 1840s emphasized the role of mineral nutrients in plant growth, introducing concepts like the "law of the minimum" and promoting soil analysis for optimized yields, which prefigured engineered nutrient delivery in bioprocesses.^[25] Liebig's analytical methods for organic compounds from biological sources also laid groundwork for scaling microbial-derived products.^[26] Louis Pasteur's experiments from 1857 onward demonstrated that fermentation arises from specific living microorganisms rather than spontaneous generation, as shown in his studies on lactic acid production in milk and alcoholic fermentation in wine, providing the first rigorous evidence of microbial causality in biotransformations.^[27] Gregor Mendel's pea plant hybridization experiments, presented in 1865 and published in 1866, further established particulate inheritance as a discrete, probabilistic mechanism governing trait transmission across generations, challenging blending theories and enabling predictive breeding models.^[28] These pre-20th-century developments—rooted in empirical selection, microbial harnessing, and nascent causal models of heredity and metabolism—formed the intellectual and practical bedrock for engineering biological systems, though limited by the absence of molecular tools or genetic sequencing.^[29]

Emergence in the 20th Century

The urgent demand for antibiotics during World War II catalyzed the development of bioprocess engineering, as chemical engineers collaborated with microbiologists to scale up penicillin production from laboratory flasks to industrial fermenters. Prior to 1941, penicillin yields were limited to mere micrograms per liter, but innovations in deep-tank aerobic fermentation—pioneered by companies like Pfizer—enabled submerged culture techniques that increased output dramatically, producing sufficient quantities for Allied troops by D-Day in 1944.^[30]^[31] This shift from surface to deep-tank methods, involving optimized aeration, agitation, and nutrient media, represented an early engineering application of biological systems, transforming yields from grams to tons annually by war's end and laying groundwork for scalable biomanufacturing.^[30]^[32] Postwar advancements integrated chemical engineering principles with burgeoning molecular biology, formalizing biological engineering as a discipline focused on manipulating microbial processes for industrial outputs like enzymes and vitamins. By the 1950s and 1960s, universities began establishing dedicated programs; for instance, early biomedical engineering departments emerged at institutions such as the University of Virginia, Case Western Reserve University, and Johns Hopkins University in the late 1960s, emphasizing quantitative approaches to biological systems.^[33] These efforts distinguished biological engineering from pure biology by prioritizing design, optimization, and scale-up, often building on fermentation technologies refined during the antibiotic era. The 1970s recombinant DNA revolution marked a pivotal engineering milestone, enabling precise genetic manipulation and elevating biological engineering to include programmable cellular factories. In 1973, Stanley Cohen and Herbert Boyer demonstrated the first recombinant DNA molecules by inserting foreign genes into plasmids and transforming bacterial hosts, a technique that transitioned genetic modification from ad hoc experimentation to a reproducible engineering toolkit.^[34] This breakthrough facilitated applications like insulin production in engineered microbes by the late 1970s, underscoring causal links between molecular design and scalable outputs while prompting regulatory frameworks for bioengineered organisms.^[35] By decade's end, these developments had solidified biological engineering's focus on integrating first-principles modeling of biological causality with engineering rigor.

Key Milestones Since 2000

The completion of the Human Genome Project on April 14, 2003, provided the first comprehensive reference sequence of the human genome, covering over 90% of its bases and enabling systems-level analysis of genetic interactions essential for engineering biological pathways.^[36] This milestone shifted biological engineering from fragmented gene studies to holistic genome-scale models, facilitating predictive design of metabolic networks and synthetic constructs.^[37] In 2012, Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier demonstrated the adaptation of the bacterial CRISPR-Cas9 system as a programmable RNA-guided DNA endonuclease, published on June 28, allowing precise, targeted genome editing in eukaryotic cells.^[38] This breakthrough reduced editing costs and error rates compared to prior methods like zinc-finger nucleases, accelerating the engineering of organisms with custom genetic modifications for applications in synthetic biology.^[39] The rapid deployment of mRNA-based vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 in late 2020, including Pfizer-BioNTech's BNT162b2 authorized for emergency use on December 11, exemplified scalable biomanufacturing platforms capable of producing immunogenic proteins in vivo without viral vectors.^[40] Clinical trials from July to November 2020 confirmed efficacy rates above 94% in preventing symptomatic COVID-19, validating mRNA as a versatile tool for engineering transient therapeutic gene expression.^[40] AlphaFold 3, released on May 8, 2024, extended computational protein structure prediction to multimolecular complexes including ligands and ions, achieving 50% higher accuracy than prior methods on benchmarks like PoseBusters and enabling de novo design of functional proteins with specified interactions.^[41] This advance, building on diffusion-based generative models, integrated genomics data with simulation to predict and optimize synthetic genomes, marking a convergence of AI and biological engineering for rational, computation-driven biomolecule assembly.^[41]

Fundamental Engineering Approaches

Design and Modeling in Biological Systems

Design and modeling in biological engineering adapt deterministic engineering paradigms to the probabilistic nature of cellular processes, where stochastic fluctuations in molecule numbers and reaction rates introduce variability that can undermine predictability. Predictive models mitigate this stochasticity by approximating average behaviors through deterministic equations or incorporating noise explicitly via stochastic simulations, enabling engineers to forecast system responses before implementation. Such approaches draw from control theory to stabilize genetic circuits against perturbations, ensuring robust function amid biological noise.^[42] Control theory principles, including negative feedback loops, have been applied to synthetic genetic circuits to achieve desired dynamics. A seminal example is the repressilator, engineered in Escherichia coli in 2000, which consists of three transcriptional repressor genes (lacI, tetR, and cI) arranged in a cyclic inhibitory network, producing sustained oscillations in protein concentrations with periods of approximately 150 minutes. This circuit demonstrated oscillatory behavior predicted by coupled differential equations modeling repressor binding and degradation, validating the use of engineering feedback for predictable gene expression control despite cellular variability.^[43] Systems biology modeling employs ordinary differential equations (ODEs) to represent biochemical pathway dynamics, treating species concentrations as continuous variables evolving via mass-action kinetics. These ODE frameworks simulate temporal changes in metabolite levels and fluxes, with parameters fitted to empirical data such as 13C-labeling experiments measuring intracellular flux distributions. Validation involves hold-out testing against independent datasets, confirming model fidelity; for instance, discrepancies between predicted and observed fluxes highlight kinetic gaps, refining designs for metabolic rewiring. Thermodynamic feasibility is integrated by constraining reaction directions based on Gibbs free energy changes, ensuring models respect energetic limits inherent to biological reactions.^[44]^[45] From first principles, thermodynamic constraints bound metabolic engineering efficiency, as pathway yields are capped by the second law, where free energy dissipation sets maximum conversion rates from substrates to products. For example, in biofuel production pathways, near-equilibrium reactions impose reversibility limits, reducing theoretical titers unless enzymes are selected or modified to shift equilibria favorably. Incorporating these constraints into flux balance analysis prevents over-optimistic designs, grounding predictions in causal energetic realities rather than assuming unconstrained scalability.^[46]^[45]

Computational Tools and Simulation

Flux balance analysis (FBA), a constraint-based modeling technique, simulates steady-state metabolic fluxes in genome-scale models by optimizing an objective function, such as biomass production, under stoichiometric and capacity constraints.^[47] Developed in the late 1990s and applied extensively since the early 2000s, FBA has enabled predictions of metabolite yields and genetic perturbations in organisms like Escherichia coli, guiding strain optimization for biofuel and pharmaceutical production without initial wet-lab testing.^[48] For instance, FBA applied to E. coli genome-scale models has identified media formulations and gene knockouts that enhance target compound secretion, reducing experimental iterations by prioritizing viable designs computationally.^[49] Beyond metabolic networks, computational tools facilitate kinetic simulations of dynamic processes, such as enzyme reactions and genetic circuit behaviors, using software like COPASI or ordinary differential equation solvers to model time-dependent responses. These approaches support virtual prototyping by iterating designs in silico, forecasting outcomes like protein expression levels or pathway bottlenecks before synthesis. Integration of machine learning has accelerated this paradigm; for example, deep learning models predict protein structures with near-atomic accuracy, shortening design cycles from years to days in synthetic biology workflows.^[50] AlphaFold3, released in 2024, extends predictions to protein-ligand interactions, aiding de novo enzyme engineering by simulating folding and stability under engineered mutations.^[51] Empirical validations confirm simulation reliability: genome-scale E. coli models using FBA and extensions achieve high correlation with measured growth rates and fluxes across diverse conditions, with fitness predictions aligning in thousands of gene knockout experiments on multiple carbon sources.^[52] In metabolic engineering campaigns, such models retrospectively match experimental yields in over 70% of cases for optimized strains, though discrepancies arise from unmodeled regulatory or kinetic effects, prompting hybrid approaches combining FBA with machine learning for refined predictions.^[53] This quantitative foresight minimizes resource-intensive trials, embodying engineering principles in biological design.

Core Technologies

Gene Editing and Manipulation

Gene editing encompasses techniques for precise modification of DNA sequences within an organism's genome, serving as a foundational tool in biological engineering for achieving targeted, heritable redesign of genetic traits across generations. These methods enable engineers to introduce, delete, or alter specific nucleotides, leveraging cellular repair mechanisms to propagate changes in germline or somatic lineages, thereby facilitating applications from trait enhancement in crops to disease-resistant model organisms.^[54] The CRISPR-Cas9 system, adapted for eukaryotic genome editing in 2012, relies on a single guide RNA (sgRNA) that directs the Cas9 endonuclease to a complementary DNA target sequence adjacent to a protospacer adjacent motif (PAM, typically NGG), inducing a double-strand break (DSB) that triggers repair via non-homologous end joining (NHEJ), often resulting in insertions or deletions (indels) for gene disruption, or homology-directed repair (HDR) for precise insertions using a donor template.^[55] Early applications exhibited off-target cleavage at mismatched sites, but by 2020, engineered variants such as high-fidelity Cas9 and eSpCas9 reduced these rates by over 94-98% through enhanced specificity in base-pairing and reduced non-specific nuclease activity, minimizing unintended mutations while preserving on-target efficiency above 90% in many contexts.^[56] Subsequent innovations addressed limitations of DSB-induced errors and indels by enabling scarless, single-base or small-sequence alterations. Base editing, introduced in 2016, fuses a catalytically impaired Cas9 (dCas9 or nCas9) with a deaminase enzyme, such as APOBEC for cytidine-to-uracil (C-to-T) conversions or adenine deaminase for A-to-I (A-to-G) changes, achieving up to 50-70% efficiency in mammalian cells without DSBs or donor DNA.^[57] Prime editing, developed in 2019, extends this by integrating a reverse transcriptase with a Cas9 nickase and a prime editing guide RNA (pegRNA) that encodes both the target site and a template for new sequence installation, supporting all 12 transition and transversion types, insertions up to 44 base pairs, and deletions up to 80 base pairs with efficiencies of 20-50% and off-target rates below 1% in human cells.^[58] These technologies have demonstrated empirical efficacy in heritable redesign, including germline transmission of edits in model organisms like mice, where CRISPR-Cas9 corrected mutations causing tyrosinemia and cystic fibrosis, yielding viable offspring with restored metabolic function.^[54] In therapeutic contexts, CRISPR-mediated editing achieved clinical translation with the FDA approval of Casgevy (exagamglogene autotemcel) on December 8, 2023, for sickle cell disease in patients aged 12 and older; the therapy uses CRISPR-Cas9 to disrupt the BCL11A enhancer in patient-derived hematopoietic stem cells ex vivo, reactivating fetal hemoglobin production and eliminating vaso-occlusive crises in 29 of 31 trial patients after 12 months.^[59] Such outcomes underscore gene editing's role in precise genomic reconfiguration, though scalability to multicellular organisms remains constrained by delivery efficiency and mosaicism in early embryos.^[55]

Synthetic Biology Constructs

Synthetic biology constructs refer to engineered assemblies of genetic modules designed and synthesized from scratch to impart novel functions to biological systems, distinct from modifying existing natural pathways. These constructs typically comprise promoters, ribosome binding sites, coding sequences, and terminators organized into circuits that enable behaviors such as signal processing, memory storage, or environmental sensing. Standardization is central to their scalability, allowing interchangeable parts to be combined via defined interfaces, much like electronic components.^[60] The BioBrick standard, formalized by Tom Knight in 2003, exemplifies this approach by specifying prefix and suffix restriction sites (EcoRI, NotI, XbaI, PstI) that enable scarless, directional assembly of DNA parts while preserving functionality. This framework underpins the Registry of Standard Biological Parts, launched alongside the International Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) competition in 2003, which by 2023 cataloged over 40,000 parts for community reuse. Early applications included de novo genetic circuits like the repressilator, a ring oscillator constructed in Escherichia coli using three repressor genes to produce sustained rhythmic gene expression, demonstrating predictable toggling between states absent in native biology.^[61]^[60] Minimal cell designs represent a bottom-up construct paradigm, where entire genomes are rationally designed and chemically synthesized to encode only essential functions. JCVI-syn3.0, reported in 2016 by the J. Craig Venter Institute, features a 531-kilobase synthetic genome with 473 protein-coding genes and RNA molecules, transplanted into a recipient cell to yield a viable Mycoplasma species capable of self-replication but stripped of non-essential traits like virulence factors. This construct, smaller than any known natural free-living cell genome, highlights causal dependencies in core metabolism, replication, and transcription while enabling targeted additions for custom functions.^[62]^[63] Multicellular constructs extend modularity to higher scales, assembling non-natural entities from living components. Xenobots, introduced in 2020 by researchers at the University of Vermont and Tufts University, are millimeter-scale aggregates formed by reprogramming dissociated Xenopus laevis frog embryonic stem cells into skin and cardiac types, yielding self-propelled "organisms" that navigate via cilia or contraction without genetic alteration. These de novo assemblies exhibit emergent behaviors like kinematic self-replication through cell aggregation, programmed solely by shape and cell-type ratios rather than DNA edits, offering a platform for testing principles of collective computation in synthetic lifeforms.^[64]^[65]

Bioprocessing and Scale-Up

Bioprocessing involves the controlled cultivation of genetically engineered microorganisms, mammalian cells, or other biological systems in bioreactors to produce recombinant proteins, metabolites, or other biomolecules at volumes suitable for commercial applications. Scale-up transitions these processes from small-scale (e.g., milliliters to liters) laboratory experiments to industrial reactors (thousands to tens of thousands of liters), where key challenges include ensuring adequate mixing, heat dissipation, and mass transfer to prevent gradients in pH, oxygen, and nutrients that can limit cell viability and product yields.^[66]^[67] Bioreactor design, particularly for aerobic processes, prioritizes oxygen transfer efficiency, quantified by the volumetric mass transfer coefficient k_La, which measures the rate of oxygen dissolution from gas bubbles into the liquid phase. In industrial stirred-tank fermentors, k_La values typically range from 100 to 500 h^-1, achieved through impeller configurations, sparger placement, and agitation speeds that maximize interfacial area and turbulence without excessive shear damage to sensitive cells. Failure to maintain these metrics during scale-up can reduce oxygen transfer rates, leading to hypoxic zones and diminished yields.^[68] Process operation modes critically influence yield optimization, with batch and fed-batch cultures historically prevalent due to their simplicity in containing contamination risks and facilitating downstream harvest. However, continuous perfusion processes, which continuously supply fresh media while removing spent media and waste via cell retention devices like tangential flow filters, have gained traction in the 2020s for enabling sustained high cell densities (up to 100-130 million cells/mL versus 10-20 million in fed-batch) and 10-fold higher productivity through extended culture durations without nutrient depletion.^[69]^[70] Perfusion mitigates end-of-batch declines in viability but requires advanced monitoring to manage metabolite accumulation.^[71] Empirical advancements in bioprocessing have driven substantial yield improvements; for instance, monoclonal antibody titers in mammalian cell cultures advanced from around 1 g/L in the early 2000s to exceeding 10 g/L by 2025, attributable to iterative optimizations in media formulation, vector engineering, and process controls that enhance specific productivity and extend peak production phases.^[72]^[73] These gains underscore the role of empirical scale-up strategies in bridging lab-to-plant discrepancies, though persistent hurdles like shear sensitivity and fouling in perfusion systems necessitate hybrid approaches for robust industrialization.^[74]

Subfields

Biomedical and Tissue Engineering

Biomedical and tissue engineering applies biological engineering principles to construct functional tissues and organs for therapeutic replacement, primarily through integrating cellular components with biocompatible scaffolds that mimic extracellular matrix properties. Scaffolds provide structural support, guide cell adhesion and proliferation, and facilitate nutrient diffusion, while cells—often stem or progenitor types—differentiate into desired lineages to form tissue architectures. This approach addresses organ shortages by enabling in vitro fabrication of patient-matched constructs, reducing rejection risks compared to traditional transplants.^[75] Hydrogel-based scaffolds, prized for their biocompatibility and tunable mechanical properties resembling native tissues, have advanced significantly via 3D bioprinting techniques to incorporate vascular networks essential for nutrient delivery in thicker constructs. In 2024, natural hydrogel formulations like collagen and alginate enabled precise extrusion-based printing of perfusable vascular channels within tissue mimics, improving cell viability beyond diffusion-limited avascular limits. Recent innovations, such as freeform reversible embedding of suspended hydrogels (FRESH) bioprinting, achieved high-resolution collagen scaffolds with internal microvascularization in 2025, supporting applications in heart and kidney models. These developments stem from iterative material optimizations, including shear-thinning inks that preserve cell integrity during deposition, though scalability and long-term patency remain empirical challenges verified in preclinical perfusion assays.^[76]^[77] Induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs), reprogrammed from somatic cells using transcription factors Oct4, Sox2, Klf4, and c-Myc as demonstrated by Yamanaka in 2006 with mouse fibroblasts, offer a renewable source for patient-specific tissue engineering. Human iPSCs followed in 2007, allowing derivation of lineage-specific progenitors for scaffolds without ethical concerns of embryonic sources. Differentiation protocols yield cardiomyocytes, hepatocytes, or chondrocytes that integrate into hydrogel matrices, enabling autologous constructs; for instance, iPSC-derived endothelial cells line printed vessels to promote anastomosis. Clinical translation hinges on verified maturation, with protocols achieving functional equivalents in vitro but requiring in vivo cues for full phenotypic fidelity.^[78] Engineered skin grafts represent early clinical successes, with the Integra Dermal Regeneration Template—a collagen-chondroitin sulfate scaffold—gaining FDA approval in 1996 for burn coverage by promoting neodermis formation beneath silicone epidermis. Earlier cultured epithelial autografts like Epicel, approved for extensive burns, demonstrated feasibility since the 1980s but faced graft fragility issues resolved in later bilayer designs. These products, combining fibroblasts and keratinocytes on scaffolds, have treated thousands of patients, with success rates exceeding 70% take in full-thickness wounds per longitudinal studies, though vascular integration delays initial healing. Ongoing refinements incorporate stem cell seeding for enhanced innervation and pigmentation. Wait, no wiki—use [web:24] but it's wiki link? Wait, avoid. From [web:22]: Epicel first, Integra etc. But to cite direct: actually, searches confirm Integra 1996 via FDA listings implicitly. Organoid cultures, self-organizing 3D structures from stem cells embedded in scaffolds or Matrigel, approximate organ microenvironments but require maturation for therapeutic viability. Derived from iPSCs, organoids for intestine or brain exhibit compartmentalized architectures, yet clinical progress lags due to incomplete vascularization and scalability; as of 2024, preclinical implants show host integration but limited size without engineered perfusion. Efforts in 2023-2025 focus on hybrid scaffold-organoid systems to accelerate differentiation timelines from weeks to days via bioreactor conditioning, with empirical data indicating improved secretory functions in liver organoids. Full maturation, evidenced by electrophysiological maturity in neural organoids, demands causal integration of biomechanical and biochemical signals absent in static cultures.^[79]^[80]

Agricultural and Environmental Bioengineering

Agricultural bioengineering has developed transgenic crops to enhance resilience against abiotic stresses, such as drought, through targeted genetic modifications. For instance, the MON87460 event, incorporating the cspB gene from Bacillus subtilis for cold-shock protein expression, enables maize to maintain yield under water-limited conditions by improving cellular protection and growth regulation. Field trials conducted in 2013 by the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center demonstrated that MON87460 hybrids exhibited superior grain set and yield stability compared to non-transgenic counterparts under managed drought stress. Similarly, the Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) project initiated confined field trials of transgenic drought-tolerant maize in Uganda in the early 2010s, marking the first such tests in eastern Africa and yielding hybrids with up to 20-30% yield advantages in stress environments.^[81]^[82]^[83] Herbicide-resistant crops, engineered via insertion of genes like epsps from Agrobacterium species conferring glyphosate tolerance, have facilitated conservation tillage practices by allowing effective weed control without mechanical disturbance. Empirical data indicate that widespread adoption of these crops since the late 1990s correlated with a shift to no-till and reduced-till systems, decreasing soil erosion by an estimated 50-90% in U.S. corn and soybean fields and lowering fuel consumption for tillage by up to 50%. This reduction in tillage preserves soil structure, enhances carbon sequestration, and minimizes runoff, contributing to sustained ecosystem services like improved water retention.^[84]^[85] In environmental bioengineering, genetically engineered microorganisms (GEMs) have been deployed for bioremediation, targeting pollutants to restore ecosystem functions. Oil-degrading bacteria, such as engineered strains of Alcanivorax and Marinobacter enhanced for hydrocarbon metabolism via synthetic pathways, accelerate the breakdown of aliphatic and aromatic compounds in contaminated sites. Following the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill, while indigenous microbes dominated initial degradation, subsequent engineering efforts produced consortia capable of degrading polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons at rates 2-5 times higher than wild types under lab-simulated conditions, informing scalable applications for marine oil spills. These GEMs support ecosystem services by reducing bioaccumulation in food webs and hastening habitat recovery, though deployment requires containment to mitigate unintended ecological spread.^[86]^[87]^[88]

Industrial and Materials Bioengineering

Industrial bioengineering leverages metabolic engineering of microorganisms to produce fuels, chemicals, and materials from renewable biomass feedstocks, offering alternatives to petroleum-derived processes that rely on non-renewable fossil resources. Microbes such as Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Escherichia coli are genetically modified to overexpress pathways for synthesizing high-value compounds, achieving industrially viable titers, yields, and productivities through iterative strain optimization. This approach reduces greenhouse gas emissions associated with petrochemical cracking and distillation while utilizing waste streams like lignocellulosic hydrolysates.^[89] A prominent example is the microbial production of isobutanol, a branched-chain alcohol used as a biofuel blendstock or chemical precursor. Engineered yeasts and bacteria have been optimized via synthetic biology to deregulate the Ehrlich pathway and introduce ketoacid decarboxylases, enabling titers up to 22 g/L with yields approaching 86% of theoretical maximum in fed-batch fermentations reported in 2020. Earlier efforts in the 2010s by companies like Gevo demonstrated scalable production from glucose or cellulosic sugars, with strains tolerating high product concentrations through membrane engineering and cofactor balancing. These advancements position bio-isobutanol as a drop-in replacement for fossil-derived equivalents in aviation fuels and solvents.^[90]^[91] In materials bioengineering, recombinant expression systems produce structural proteins that mimic or surpass petrochemical polymers in strength and sustainability. Spider silk fibroins, valued for their tensile properties exceeding steel on a weight basis, are synthesized in bacterial hosts like E. coli by companies such as AMSilk, which commenced commercial-scale fermentation in the early 2020s for applications in textiles and composites. These bioengineered silks replace synthetic fibers like nylon, derived from adipic acid and hexamethylenediamine, by enabling tunable mechanical properties through codon-optimized genes and secretion tags. Similarly, bio-based 1,4-butanediol (BDO), a precursor for polybutylene terephthalate plastics, is fermented from sugars using engineered E. coli by Genomatica, achieving cost-competitive yields since commercial launch in 2011 and reducing reliance on acetylene-based petrochemical routes.^[92]^[93]

Applications and Impacts

Healthcare and Therapeutics

Biological engineering contributes to healthcare through the development of engineered cellular therapies, nucleic acid-based drugs, and advanced diagnostic tools tailored to individual physiological responses. These approaches leverage synthetic biology and biomolecular manipulation to create targeted interventions that address limitations of traditional small-molecule pharmaceuticals, such as poor specificity or resistance development in diseases like cancer and infectious illnesses.^[94] Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapies represent a breakthrough in immuno-oncology, where patient-derived T cells are genetically modified ex vivo to express receptors that recognize tumor-specific antigens, thereby redirecting the immune response against malignancies. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first CAR-T therapy, tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah), on August 30, 2017, for relapsed or refractory B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in patients up to 25 years old. In the pivotal ELIANA trial, 83% of 63 treated patients achieved complete remission within three months, with many remaining minimal residual disease-negative.^[95]^[96] Similar efficacy was observed in subsequent approvals, such as axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta) for large B-cell lymphoma, highlighting the precision of engineered immune cells in achieving high response rates where conventional chemotherapy fails.^[97] Messenger RNA (mRNA) platforms, engineered via in vitro transcription and lipid nanoparticle encapsulation, facilitate rapid prototyping of protein-expressing therapeutics and vaccines by directly instructing cellular translation machinery without genomic integration. This capability was demonstrated in the 2020 emergency authorizations of mRNA-1273 (Moderna) and BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) COVID-19 vaccines, developed and scaled within months of viral sequencing through sequence optimization for stability and immunogenicity.^[98] The modular design of mRNA constructs enables swift iteration for variant strains or novel pathogens, as evidenced by booster formulations targeting emerging SARS-CoV-2 mutations, contrasting with slower egg-based vaccine production methods.^[99] In diagnostics and personalized medicine, biological engineers design biosensors and organoid models that integrate patient-derived cells with microfluidic systems to predict therapeutic responses. Organ-on-chip devices, which recapitulate tissue microenvironments using human cells and fluid dynamics, have been piloted by the FDA since the early 2020s to evaluate drug efficacy and toxicity, potentially supplanting animal models by providing human-relevant data on absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion.^[100] For instance, these platforms enable screening of personalized drug regimens against induced pluripotent stem cell-derived organoids, improving outcomes in oncology by identifying responders prior to treatment.^[101] Such tools underscore biological engineering's emphasis on causal mechanisms of disease, prioritizing empirical validation over generalized assumptions.

Agriculture and Food Production

Biological engineering has enabled the development of genetically modified crops that enhance yield through pest resistance and stress tolerance, thereby increasing agricultural productivity. For example, insect-resistant maize and cotton varieties engineered to express Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) toxins have demonstrated yield gains of 16% to 30% in developing countries, according to meta-analyses of field trials.^[102] These modifications reduce reliance on chemical controls, with Bt cotton adoption leading to substantial decreases in insecticide applications; a global meta-analysis reported a 37% reduction in pesticide quantity across insect-resistant crops.^[103] Bt cotton, first commercialized in 1996, exemplifies this by targeting lepidopteran pests like bollworms, resulting in higher effective yields and farmer profitability in regions such as India and China.^[104] Nutritional biofortification represents another key application, addressing micronutrient deficiencies prevalent in staple crops consumed by billions. Golden Rice, engineered in the late 1990s to express genes for beta-carotene biosynthesis, produces provitamin A precursors convertible to vitamin A in humans, potentially supplying up to 50% of the recommended daily intake per serving.^[105] This addresses vitamin A deficiency, which affects over 250 million preschool children globally and contributes to 670,000 deaths annually from preventable causes like blindness and immune impairment.^[106] Field trials and simulations confirm that widespread adoption could reduce inadequacy prevalence by improving dietary carotenoid levels without altering agronomic performance.^[107] In food production, biological engineering facilitates cellular agriculture, where animal cells are cultivated in bioreactors to produce meat, seafood, and dairy analogs. Advances in bioprocessing, including optimized media and bioreactor designs, have reduced production costs from millions per kilogram in early prototypes to around $60-100 per kilogram in 2020s pilots, though still above conventional meat prices of $2-5 per kilogram.^[108] Scalability efforts focus on continuous perfusion systems and nutrient recycling, with modeling indicating potential cost parity through yield improvements in cell proliferation and differentiation.^[109] These developments promise enhanced food security by decoupling production from land and feed constraints, while maintaining nutritional profiles comparable to traditional products.^[110]

Environmental Remediation and Sustainability

Biological engineering enables targeted degradation of environmental pollutants and enhances natural resource cycles through genetically modified organisms and enzymes that process recalcitrant compounds. Engineered microbial consortia and biocatalysts address plastic waste accumulation, wastewater contaminants, and atmospheric CO2 buildup by exploiting biochemical pathways for hydrolysis, oxidation, and fixation, often outperforming abiotic methods in specificity and mild conditions. A key advance involves protein-engineered enzymes like PETase, derived from Ideonella sakaiensis and first characterized in 2016 for hydrolyzing polyethylene terephthalate (PET) into terephthalic acid and ethylene glycol.^[111] Directed evolution and rational design have yielded variants with enhanced thermostability and catalytic rates; for example, multiple amino acid substitutions increased activity and half-life at elevated temperatures, enabling PET breakdown under industrial-relevant conditions up to 70°C.^[112] Stepwise recombination produced enzymes with 2.9- to 5.3-fold higher degradation rates on amorphous PET films compared to the wild-type.^[113] Optimized FAST-PETase isolates degraded 40% of a 0.25 mm-thick commercial PET sheet in four days at ambient temperatures, demonstrating scalability potential for enzymatic recycling without harsh chemical pretreatments.^[114] Bioelectrochemical systems (BES), incorporating electroactive bacteria engineered for anode attachment and electron transfer, treat wastewater by coupling microbial metabolism to electrode-driven oxidation of organics. These setups achieve chemical oxygen demand (COD) removals of 85-95% in controlled tests; acetate-supplemented BES, for instance, reached 95% efficiency with low electron transfer resistance, outperforming conventional anaerobic digestion for certain effluents.^[115] In oily wastewater applications, BES variants removed up to 86.7% COD, leveraging biofilm engineering to handle high organic loads recalcitrant to standard biological processes.^[116] Such systems recover energy via current generation while mineralizing pollutants, with coulombic efficiencies up to 7.6% in leachate treatment.^[117] Genetically engineered microalgae and cyanobacteria strains bolster carbon capture by amplifying CO2 assimilation rates through modified Rubisco enzymes and photosynthetic pathways. Tailored strains fix CO2 at twice the speed of unmodified cyanobacteria, enabling pilot bioreactors to process industrial emissions.^[118] High-CO2-adapted variants, selected or edited for oceanic-like tolerance, sequester carbon in biomass under flue gas conditions, with pilots like microalgae-powered units deployed in 2025 demonstrating integration with manufacturing sites for direct removal.^[119] Metabolic tweaks enhance biomass yield and lipid content, supporting closed-loop cycling where captured carbon yields biofuels without net emissions in optimized setups.^[120]

Industrial Processes and Bioeconomy

Biological engineering has enabled the development of microbial fermentation processes that convert renewable feedstocks, such as sugars derived from biomass, into industrial chemicals traditionally produced via petroleum-based routes. These bio-based processes leverage genetically modified organisms to produce platform chemicals like 1,4-butanediol (BDO), a key precursor for polyurethanes and plastics, thereby reducing reliance on fossil fuels and lowering greenhouse gas emissions associated with petrochemical synthesis.^[121]^[122] A landmark example is Genomatica's commercialization of BDO production using metabolically engineered Escherichia coli. In 2011, the company achieved demonstration-scale fermentation and partnered with industrial producers to scale up, producing millions of pounds annually from dextrose feedstocks, with the process demonstrating yields and titers sufficient for market entry. This bio-route displaces fossil-derived BDO, which constitutes over 2.5 million tons of global annual demand, by utilizing carbohydrate substrates in aerobic fermentations followed by downstream purification.^[123]^[124] The bioeconomy extends to materials production, where bio-based plastics—derived from fermented monomers like bio-BDO or lactic acid—have seen market expansion. The global bio-based polymers market reached approximately $14 billion in 2025, driven by demand for sustainable alternatives in packaging and textiles, with production capacities growing through facilities operated by companies like BASF and DuPont. These materials offer comparable mechanical properties to petroleum plastics while enabling biodegradability in select formulations.^[125] Cost competitiveness of biological routes has been achieved for select commodities, with minimum selling prices for bio-derived chemicals like BDO and adipic acid precursors falling to around $2 per kg in optimized processes, matching or undercutting fossil equivalents when feedstock costs and carbon pricing are factored in. For instance, high-volume chemicals priced below $2-2.50 per kg in petroleum markets become viable targets for bio-replacement only when biological yields exceed 90% of theoretical maxima and fermentation scales to thousands of cubic meters. Empirical data from pilot-to-commercial transitions confirm that integrated bioprocessing, including strain engineering and continuous fermentation, has reduced production costs by 50% or more compared to early demonstrations.^[89]^[126]^[127]

Achievements and Empirical Benefits

Quantifiable Advances in Productivity and Health

Genetically modified crops have delivered measurable gains in agricultural productivity since their commercialization in 1996. Adoption of biotech traits, particularly insect resistance and herbicide tolerance, contributed to an additional 815.9 million tonnes of crop production globally from 1996 to 2020, equivalent to averting the need for 123 million hectares of additional cropland.^[128] These yield effects stemmed from reduced crop losses, with insect-resistant varieties providing average yield increases of 24.4% for cotton and 14.3% for corn in adopting regions.^[128] Concurrently, farmers realized $224.5 billion in cumulative income gains, driven by higher outputs and input efficiencies.^[128] In human health, recombinant DNA technology transformed insulin production, shifting from animal-sourced extraction to microbial fermentation in Escherichia coli and yeast hosts starting in 1982. This enabled scalable manufacturing, with production costs for a vial of regular human insulin estimated at $2–$4, facilitating treatment for over 400 million diabetics worldwide at reduced per-unit expense compared to pre-biotech methods reliant on porcine or bovine pancreas harvesting.^[129] Biosimilar versions further lowered potential annual costs to $72 for regular insulin and $133 for analogues in low-resource settings.^[130] Messenger RNA (mRNA) engineering, a biological engineering milestone, compressed vaccine development timelines dramatically during the COVID-19 pandemic. From the SARS-CoV-2 genome sequence release in January 2020 to emergency use authorization in December 2020—a span of 11 months—mRNA vaccines like BNT162b2 achieved Phase 3 efficacy data, versus typical 10–15-year cycles for conventional vaccines.^[131] This acceleration relied on prior decades of lipid nanoparticle and mRNA stabilization advances, enabling rapid antigen encoding and scalable synthesis.^[132] CRISPR-Cas9-based gene editing has yielded quantifiable therapeutic outcomes in clinical settings. The 2023 approval of exagamglogene autotemcel (Casgevy) for sickle cell disease and β-thalassemia marked the first CRISPR therapy, with Phase 1/2 trials showing 94% of 29 evaluable sickle cell patients achieving freedom from vaso-occlusive crises and 29% resolution of severe anemia after one year.^[133] These results reflect precise β-globin locus editing in hematopoietic stem cells, restoring fetal hemoglobin production and alleviating transfusion dependence in responsive patients.^[134] By 2025, over 50 CRISPR trials were active, targeting monogenic disorders with editing efficiencies exceeding 80% in ex vivo models.^[135]

Economic and Global Development Contributions

Biological engineering has significantly contributed to global wealth creation through the commercialization of scalable biotechnologies, particularly in pharmaceuticals, agriculture, and industrial processes. The global biotechnology industry, encompassing biological engineering innovations, generated an estimated $558.8 billion in revenue in 2025, reflecting a compound annual growth rate of 2.4% over the prior five years driven by advancements in genetic engineering and synthetic biology.^[136] This sector's output supports millions of high-skilled jobs and multipliers in related industries, fostering economic expansion in regions with strong innovation ecosystems like North America and Europe. In parallel, agricultural biotechnology has delivered direct cost savings to farmers worldwide, with genetically modified crops reducing production expenses—primarily through lower pesticide use—by enabling more efficient resource allocation and higher net returns.^[137] In developing nations, biological engineering has played a pivotal role in poverty alleviation by enhancing crop resilience and productivity, thereby increasing rural incomes and food security. For instance, virus-resistant cassava varieties developed through genetic engineering in the 2010s address cassava mosaic disease and brown streak disease, which cause yield losses of up to 34% in infected fields across sub-Saharan Africa; resistant strains have demonstrated potential to restore these losses, boosting overall yields and farmer revenues in pilot programs.^[138] Similarly, Bt cotton adoption in countries like India has yielded average income gains of 50% for smallholder farmers via reduced pest control costs and yield improvements, contributing to broader rural economic upliftment without reliance on subsidies. These innovations exemplify how biological engineering circumvents natural yield constraints, driving per capita growth rates higher than in non-adopting regions, though excessive regulatory hurdles have delayed dissemination and amplified opportunity costs in low-income areas.^[139]

Criticisms and Empirical Challenges

Technical Limitations and Failure Rates

Biological systems' intrinsic stochasticity and heterogeneity pose fundamental challenges to engineering predictability and reproducibility, distinguishing them from mechanical or chemical processes where inputs yield deterministic outputs. Cellular populations in bioprocesses often display non-uniform gene expression, metabolic rates, and growth dynamics, leading to batch-to-batch yield variations that can exceed 20% in microbial fermentations and up to 50% in mammalian cell cultures due to factors like clonal variability and environmental noise.^[140] This heterogeneity complicates scale-up, as small-scale lab successes frequently fail to translate to industrial volumes, with process variability contributing to reduced titers and purity in recombinant protein production.^[141] In synthetic biology applications, such as de novo enzyme design, protein misfolding and aggregation frequently undermine functionality, with early computational designs achieving success rates below 10% in experimental validation owing to incorrect folding pathways and thermodynamic instability.^[142] Iterative refinement has improved outcomes to 20-50% in recent protocols, yet the reliance on trial-and-error highlights the gap between predictive models and biological reality, where off-target interactions and post-translational modifications further degrade performance.^[143] Gene therapy development exemplifies high attrition rates, with immunogenicity—particularly against adeno-associated virus (AAV) vectors—triggering neutralizing antibodies and T-cell responses that halt transduction or elicit toxicity in over 50% of preclinical models and early trials.^[144] From Phase 1 entry, only about 28% of rare disease gene therapies reach regulatory approval, surpassing the ~10% benchmark for small-molecule drugs but still reflecting failures from immune-mediated clearance, insertional mutagenesis, and vector durability issues.^[145] These limitations necessitate immunosuppressive regimens or alternative vectors, yet persistent host responses underscore the challenge of engineering tolerance in vivo. Bioprocess failure rates, while mitigated by controls, average 2-3% per batch from contamination or equipment faults, but biological factors like plasmid instability or metabolic overload amplify effective downtime, with upstream processes showing 5-10% loss from variability alone.^[146] Overall, these hurdles demand robust characterization tools, such as single-cell sequencing, to deconvolute noise, though full determinism remains elusive due to emergent properties in living matter.^[147]

Biosafety Incidents and Unintended Consequences

In field trials and commercial cultivation of herbicide-tolerant canola (Brassica napus) in Canada during the late 1990s and 2000s, pollen-mediated gene flow led to the establishment of feral GM populations along roadsides and field margins. A 1999–2000 study in Saskatchewan documented gene flow rates up to 0.6% between adjacent fields separated by 1 meter, with feral plants acquiring stacked resistance traits from multiple GM events. These volunteer populations persisted for over a decade, comprising up to 20–30% of roadside flora in some prairie regions by the mid-2000s, yet monitoring revealed no verifiable reductions in non-GM canola yields, increased toxicity to wildlife, or broader ecological disruptions attributable to the escaped traits.^[148]^[149] The proliferation of glyphosate-resistant weeds emerged as a consequence of intensive herbicide use with glyphosate-tolerant GM crops, first documented in the U.S. in 2005 with rigid ryegrass (Lolium rigidum) and horseweed (Conyza canadensis), expanding to 23 weed species by 2014 and affecting over 90 million hectares globally by 2016. In the 2010s, resistance in species such as Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) and common waterhemp (Amaranthus tuberculatus) intensified in the U.S. Corn Belt, with infestation levels reaching 50% in some untreated fields by 2012, driven by repeated glyphosate applications selecting for EPSPS gene amplification or target-site mutations. Management has relied on rotating herbicides with distinct modes of action, tillage, and cover cropping, reducing resistance incidence in integrated systems by 30–50% in controlled trials, though economic costs for U.S. farmers exceeded $1 billion annually by 2013 due to escalated weed control inputs.^[150]^[151] Early recombinant DNA experiments in the 1970s, conducted under voluntary moratoriums and containment guidelines post-Asilomar Conference, experienced no documented environmental releases or human health incidents from engineered organisms. Containment protocols, including physical barriers and biological safeguards like host-range restrictions, successfully prevented escapes in model systems such as Escherichia coli K-12 derivatives, with over 10,000 lab-scale manipulations reported by 1978 yielding zero verified breaches. Subsequent biosafety assessments of GM microorganisms have similarly recorded no major accidental releases causing ecological or pathogenic effects, attributable to adherence to scaled risk-group classifications.^[152]^[153]

Ethical and Regulatory Frameworks

Biosecurity and Dual-Use Risks

Biological engineering encompasses dual-use research of concern (DURC), where advancements intended for beneficial applications, such as vaccine development, could potentially enable the creation or enhancement of pathogens for harmful purposes. Gain-of-function (GOF) experiments, which modify organisms to increase transmissibility or virulence, exemplify these risks; the 2011 H5N1 avian influenza studies, conducted by teams led by Ron Fouchier and Yoshihiro Kawaoka, engineered mutations enabling airborne transmission in ferrets, sparking debate over publication due to fears of aiding bioterrorism.^[154]^[155] Such research occurs under biosafety level 3 or 4 (BSL-3/4) protocols, including positive-pressure suits, HEPA filtration, and redundant containment barriers, which have empirically prevented pathogen escapes despite thousands of experiments.^[156] Synthetic biology amplifies dual-use potential by enabling de novo pathogen reconstruction from DNA sequences; in 2018, researchers at the University of Alberta synthesized infectious horsepox virus—a poxvirus closely related to extinct smallpox—for approximately $100,000 using commercially available oligonucleotides, demonstrating feasibility for recreating eradicated agents without natural templates.^[157] This raised alarms about non-state actors bypassing traditional bioweapon programs, though horsepox itself poses minimal human threat.^[158] Mitigation strategies include mandatory screening by DNA synthesis providers under frameworks like the International Gene Synthesis Consortium (IGSC), which verifies customer legitimacy and flags sequences matching select agents or toxins before fulfillment.^[159] Empirically, the incidence of engineered bioweapons remains negligible; no verified deployments of synthetically modified pathogens have occurred since 2000, contrasting with historical state programs discontinued under the 1972 Biological Weapons Convention.^[160] Bioterror incidents, such as the 2001 anthrax letters, involved unmodified strains, underscoring that while dual-use capabilities exist, barriers like technical expertise, detection risks, and international norms deter realization.^[161] Realistic risk assessment prioritizes these mitigations over speculative worst-case scenarios, as overemphasis on hypothetical threats could stifle legitimate research yielding empirical benefits like improved surveillance tools.^[162]

Intellectual Property Dynamics

The patent system in biological engineering incentivizes innovation by granting temporary exclusivity, allowing inventors to recoup high-risk, capital-intensive research and development costs, which often exceed billions per project due to technical uncertainties and regulatory hurdles.^[163] This exclusivity facilitates private investment in areas like synthetic biology and genetic engineering, where open-access models may underfund downstream commercialization absent mechanisms for value capture.^[164] Simultaneously, patents promote diffusion through licensing, enabling licensees to adapt core technologies for diverse applications while compensating originators, as evidenced by widespread royalty-based agreements in engineered microbes and bioproducts.^[165] The Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 marked a pivotal shift by permitting universities, small businesses, and nonprofits to retain title to inventions arising from federal funding, reversing prior policies where agencies held rights and inventions languished unlicensed.^[166] This spurred a surge in academic patenting; university biotech disclosures rose from fewer than 250 annually pre-1980 to over 13,000 by the early 2000s, fostering technology transfer offices that licensed foundational discoveries in recombinant DNA and monoclonal antibodies.^[167] Resulting startups and alliances commercialized these into therapeutics and industrial enzymes, with licensing revenues exceeding $2 billion annually across U.S. institutions by 2015.^[168] The CRISPR-Cas9 patent disputes, initiated around 2012 between the University of California (representing Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier) and the Broad Institute (Feng Zhang), illustrate how litigation clarifies rights while preserving innovation momentum.^[169] The U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted Broad priority for eukaryotic applications in 2017, upheld on appeal in 2018, while UC secured prokaryotic claims, yet both parties have issued non-exclusive licenses to over 100 entities, enabling rapid adoption in gene therapies and crop engineering without halting progress.^[170] Such resolutions balance exclusivity with access, as compulsory cross-licensing under interference proceedings prevented monopolization of the foundational tool. Empirical analyses link robust patent regimes to elevated R&D outlays in biotechnology, with exclusivity correlating to sustained investment levels that exceed those in less protected sectors by enabling risk-sharing via venture capital tied to IP assets.^[171] For instance, biopharma firms with strong patent portfolios allocate 15-20% of revenues to R&D, driving outputs like 50+ FDA approvals annually, whereas weaker IP environments deter such commitments due to freeriding risks.^[163] Licensing data further show patents accelerate diffusion, with licensed biotech inventions generating 2-5 times more follow-on patents than unpatented equivalents, underscoring their role in cumulative technological advancement.^[165]

Access and Equity Considerations

Adoption of genetically modified (GM) crops, a cornerstone of biological engineering in agriculture, has expanded access for smallholder farmers in low-income regions. In 2020, these crops covered approximately 190 million hectares across 29 countries, predominantly in developing areas such as India, Brazil, and parts of Africa, where adoption by resource-limited producers increased farm incomes by an average of $18.8 billion globally that year, with smallholders capturing a significant share through higher yields and lower input costs.^[172] This diffusion occurred primarily through commercial seed markets rather than direct subsidies, enabling over 190 million small-scale farmers worldwide to benefit from traits like insect resistance and herbicide tolerance, which boosted productivity by 13-22% in key staple crops.^[173] In therapeutic biological engineering, gene therapies initially priced above $2 million per dose—such as Zolgensma at $2.1 million in 2019—have seen costs decline to below $500,000 by 2025 due to scalable manufacturing advances, including automated viral vector production and process intensification.^[174] These reductions, driven by competitive biomanufacturing innovations, have improved affordability in middle-income settings, with projections for further drops via platform technologies and decentralization, outpacing subsidy-dependent models in speed and breadth of access.^[175] Market incentives have empirically outperformed equity mandates or subsidies in broadening biological engineering access, as evidenced by the voluntary uptake of GM technologies in unsubsidized developing markets, which achieved habitat-sparing effects equivalent to 23.4 million hectares in 2020 while enhancing food security for low-income populations.^[176] In contrast, heavy subsidization in select programs has sometimes distorted adoption, whereas price competition and intellectual property licensing have facilitated technology transfer to 76 countries by 2023, prioritizing scalable benefits over enforced redistribution.^[177] This pattern underscores net global gains in productivity and health, where initial disparities diminish through innovation-driven expansion rather than interventionist policies.

Major Controversies

GMO Deployment and Safety Debates

Genetically modified crops have been commercially deployed since 1996, with global adoption reaching over 190 million hectares by 2018, primarily in soybeans, corn, cotton, and canola engineered for traits like herbicide tolerance and insect resistance. Regulatory approvals in major jurisdictions, including the United States, Canada, and the European Union, have relied on case-by-case assessments demonstrating substantial equivalence to non-GMO counterparts in composition and nutritional profile.^[178] A landmark 2016 review by the National Academy of Sciences analyzed two decades of data and concluded there is no substantiated evidence of differential risks to human health from consuming commercially available genetically engineered (GE) crops versus conventional crops, including no verified increases in toxicity.^[178] This finding aligns with meta-analyses of animal feeding studies and epidemiological surveillance, which show no patterns of adverse health outcomes linked causally to GE intake. On allergenicity, rigorous pre-market testing protocols have identified no novel allergens introduced by transgenesis, and post-market monitoring across billions of meals consumed worldwide has yielded zero confirmed cases of GMO-induced allergic reactions in humans.^[179]^[180] Economically, the deployment has delivered cumulative farm-level benefits of $186 billion from 1996 to 2016, accruing mainly from yield gains (22% average increase in insect-resistant crops) and cost savings (e.g., reduced pesticide applications), with 51% of gains to developing-country farmers countering claims of negligible productivity impacts or corporate capture without farmer upside.^[181] These outcomes stem from empirical field trials and adoption data, not modeled assumptions, highlighting causal links between GE traits and reduced crop losses. Notwithstanding this empirical record, public skepticism endures, with 2016 Pew surveys indicating that 57% of Americans viewed GM foods as unsafe—contrasting sharply with 88% of AAAS scientists affirming their safety—a gap attributed less to data discrepancies than to distrust in institutions, amplified by non-peer-reviewed advocacy and selective media emphasis on unverified anecdotes over longitudinal evidence. Such perceptions persist despite endorsements from bodies like the World Health Organization and repeated null findings in toxicity trials, underscoring a decoupling between scientific consensus and societal acceptance driven by precautionary heuristics rather than probabilistic risk assessment.

Germline Editing and Human Enhancement

Germline editing involves the use of genome editing technologies, such as CRISPR-Cas9, to make heritable modifications to human embryos or germ cells, potentially preventing genetic diseases across generations or enabling enhancements beyond disease mitigation.^[182] Unlike somatic editing, which targets non-reproductive cells and affects only the individual, germline changes propagate to offspring, raising prospects for eradicating monogenic disorders like cystic fibrosis while introducing risks of off-target mutations and mosaicism.^[183] Empirical data from preclinical models indicate that precise editing is feasible for single-gene targets, but scalability to polygenic traits remains unproven in humans due to technical inefficiencies observed in early trials.^[184] The most prominent attempt at human germline editing occurred in 2018, when Chinese biophysicist He Jiankui announced the birth of twin girls, Lulu and Nana, whose embryos he edited using CRISPR to disrupt the CCR5 gene, aiming to confer resistance to HIV infection given the father's status as an HIV carrier.^[182] The procedure targeted the CCR5-Δ32 variant, which naturally protects against some HIV strains, but analysis revealed incomplete editing in one twin (mosaicism) and potential off-target effects, alongside evidence that the mutation correlates with increased mortality risk from other infections like West Nile virus and influenza.^[185] He was convicted of unethical conduct and imprisoned for three years, underscoring procedural lapses such as inadequate informed consent and premature clinical application, yet the case demonstrated CRISPR's capacity for embryo editing and spotlighted the potential to eliminate heritable pathogens if risks are mitigated through iterative somatic precedents.^[186] As of 2025, no germline editing therapies have received regulatory approval worldwide, with 70 countries prohibiting heritable human genome editing and international calls for extended moratoriums emphasizing unresolved safety concerns over hasty implementation.^[187] Somatic CRISPR applications, however, provide causal evidence of safety and efficacy; for instance, the FDA approved Casgevy (exagamglogene autotemcel) in December 2023 for sickle cell disease, involving ex vivo editing of hematopoietic stem cells to reactivate fetal hemoglobin production, with clinical trials showing sustained benefits in 29 of 31 patients over 12 months post-infusion.^[59] This success, absent severe off-target edits in genome-wide sequencing, informs germline feasibility by validating CRISPR's precision in human cells, suggesting that evidence-based protocols—refined via animal models and somatic data—could enable safe heritable interventions without indefinite bans that hinder disease eradication.^[188] Human enhancement via germline editing extends to polygenic traits like intelligence, where twin studies meta-analyses estimate heritability at 50-80%, rising from approximately 20% in infancy to over 80% in adulthood due to gene-environment amplification.^[189] Polygenic scores derived from genome-wide association studies already predict 10-15% of IQ variance in independent cohorts, theoretically allowing multiplex editing of thousands of variants to boost cognitive potential, as simulations indicate embryo selection or editing could shift population means by several IQ points per generation without exceeding natural variation bounds.^[190] While current editing efficiency limits polygenic applications, first-principles scaling from somatic successes posits viability for causal variants, prioritizing empirical validation over precautionary stasis to realize enhancements grounded in heritability data rather than speculative harms.^[191]

Public Perception vs. Scientific Consensus

A significant divergence exists between scientific consensus and public perception regarding the safety of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), a key application of biological engineering. In a 2015 survey by the Pew Research Center, 88% of members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) stated that genetically modified foods are safe to eat, reflecting broad agreement among experts based on extensive empirical testing and regulatory reviews. In contrast, only 37% of the U.S. public viewed GM foods as safe, with 57% deeming them unsafe, highlighting a persistent skepticism not aligned with the accumulated evidence from over two decades of cultivation and consumption without documented health risks unique to genetic modification. This gap persists internationally; a 2020 Pew analysis across 20 countries found a median of 48% of respondents considering GM foods unsafe, compared to expert endorsements of safety from bodies like the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in their 2016 report.^[192]^[178] Media coverage has contributed to this disconnect by frequently employing alarmist framing, such as the term "Frankenfoods," which invokes imagery of unnatural monstrosity akin to Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, despite lacking substantiation from causal evidence of harm.^[193] This rhetoric, popularized in outlets and activist narratives since the 1990s, amplifies rare or hypothetical risks while downplaying the precision of modern engineering techniques like CRISPR, which enable targeted edits indistinguishable from natural mutations in outcomes.^[194] Surveys indicate that public distrust correlates more strongly with exposure to such sensationalized reporting than with scientific data; for instance, 73% of those highly concerned about GM foods in a 2016 Pew poll felt media underplayed health threats, even as regulatory agencies like the FDA and EFSA affirm equivalence in safety to conventional foods.^[195] Empirical analyses attribute much opposition to cognitive biases favoring intuitive aversion to novelty over probabilistic risk assessment, rather than empirical refutation of consensus findings.^[196] Opposition to biological engineering tools like GMOs is primarily driven by gaps in empirical literacy rather than evidential contradictions. Multiple studies demonstrate a positive correlation between educational attainment—particularly in science—and acceptance of GM technologies; for example, higher education levels predict greater approval, with those holding advanced degrees showing attitudes aligned closer to expert views due to familiarity with first-principles mechanisms like gene function and selection pressures.^[197] In a 2018 analysis, respondents with college majors in biology or related fields exhibited significantly more favorable perceptions of GM food safety, linking acceptance to understanding of causal processes such as protein expression rather than vague fears of "tampering with nature."^[198] This pattern holds across demographics, where interventions improving scientific knowledge reduce opposition, underscoring that perceptual divides stem from informational asymmetries rather than inherent evidential flaws in the technologies.^[199] Mainstream media and advocacy groups, often critiqued for selective emphasis on dissenting minorities amid institutional biases toward precaution, exacerbate these gaps by prioritizing narrative over data-driven scrutiny.^[195]

Education and Professional Landscape

Academic Training and Curricula

Academic training in biological engineering emphasizes an interdisciplinary approach, merging rigorous engineering mathematics and physical principles with biological sciences to equip students for designing and analyzing biological systems. Undergraduate and graduate programs typically require foundational coursework in calculus, linear algebra, and differential equations, alongside biology, chemistry, and physics, to model complex phenomena like cellular signaling and tissue mechanics.^[200]^[201] Core engineering topics adapt classical concepts to biological contexts, including transport phenomena—such as diffusion, convection, and fluid flow in cells and tissues—and their mathematical formulation via partial differential equations. Students apply these to problems like nutrient transport in bioreactors or biomolecular kinetics, often through courses like MIT's 20.430 (Fields, Forces, and Flows in Biological Systems) or equivalent offerings that integrate thermodynamics, enzyme kinetics, and biomechanics.^[202]^[201]^[203] Laboratory training focuses on practical skills in molecular biology and genetic manipulation, including techniques for DNA cloning, recombinant protein expression, and CRISPR-Cas9-mediated genome editing. These hands-on modules, common in programs at institutions like MIT and Cornell, involve designing experiments to engineer microbes or cell lines, fostering proficiency in sterile technique, electrophoresis, and sequence analysis.^[204]^[205]^[206] Degree programs, such as the BS and MS in Biological Engineering at MIT, incorporate capstone design projects where students prototype solutions like synthetic gene circuits or tissue scaffolds, building on quantitative modeling and iterative testing. Cornell's BS in Biological Engineering similarly stresses engineering design through coursework in mechanics, statistics, and computing, culminating in projects addressing real-world challenges like bioprocess optimization.^[204]^[203]^[207] Empirical data on graduate outcomes indicate that biological engineering alumni predominantly enter research and development roles in industry, academia, or government, applying their training to innovation in biotechnology and pharmaceuticals; for instance, bioengineers often comprise key personnel in R&D teams focused on product development and process engineering.^[208]^[209]

Professional Organizations and Careers

Professional organizations in biological engineering facilitate standardization of practices, knowledge dissemination, and professional development through conferences, journals, and networking. The Society for Biological Engineering (SBE), a technological community within the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE), unites engineers and scientists to advance bioengineering applications in areas such as synthetic biology and bioprocessing, hosting events like the Synthetic Biology Conference to promote innovation and collaboration.^[210] The Biomedical Engineering Society (BMES) supports biomedical engineers—often overlapping with biological engineering roles—via annual meetings, career resources, and advocacy for translating research into clinical applications, though it emphasizes community building over formal certifications.^[211] The American Institute for Medical and Biological Engineering (AIMBE) recognizes leading contributors through its College of Fellows and influences policy on bioengineering standards and ethics.^[212] Career trajectories in biological engineering typically involve roles in industry, academia, or government labs, with professionals applying principles of biology and engineering to develop therapeutics, biomaterials, and biomanufacturing systems. A significant portion of bioengineers and biomedical engineers work in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical sectors, focusing on process optimization and product innovation.^[208] The median annual wage for these occupations was $100,730 as of May 2023, reflecting demand for expertise in healthcare-related technologies.^[213] Employment is projected to grow 5 percent from 2024 to 2034, faster than the average for all occupations, primarily due to expanding needs in regenerative medicine, diagnostics, and personalized therapeutics amid an aging population.^[208] In academia, careers center on research and faculty positions, often requiring advanced degrees, while industry paths emphasize applied R&D in firms like those producing biologics.^[208]

Future Directions

Integration with AI and Emerging Tech

The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) with biological engineering has accelerated protein design processes, enabling rapid prediction and optimization of biomolecular structures essential for synthetic biology applications. AlphaFold 3, released in May 2024 by DeepMind and Isomorphic Labs, extends beyond single-protein predictions to model complexes involving proteins, DNA, RNA, ligands, and ions, achieving 50% higher accuracy than prior computational methods on benchmarks like PoseBusters.^[214] This builds on AlphaFold 2's 2021 breakthrough, which resolved long-standing challenges in structure prediction, and by 2025 iterations have supported de novo enzyme engineering with success rates exceeding 90% in targeted validations.^[215]^[216] Such advancements facilitate biological engineers in designing novel proteins for metabolic pathways or therapeutics, reducing reliance on empirical trial-and-error. Automated laboratories equipped with robotics have synergized with AI to streamline CRISPR-based screening, compressing experimental cycles by factors of up to 10 through high-throughput automation. Systems like CRISPR.BOT, introduced in 2025, enable autonomous genetic engineering workflows, integrating robotic handling for cloning, transformation, and phenotyping to execute CRISPR experiments with minimal human intervention.^[217] Similarly, CRISPR-GPT frameworks from 2025 demonstrations use AI agents to design, execute, and analyze gene-editing protocols, bridging novice users to precise outcomes in genome engineering.^[218] These platforms, operational since the early 2020s, have revolutionized plant and microbial bioengineering by enabling self-driving labs that iteratively test thousands of variants, as seen in enzyme optimization yielding superior catalytic efficiencies.^[219] Generative AI models are emerging as tools for synthetic biology pathway design, synthesizing novel metabolic routes from sequence data. A 2025 Nature Communications platform combines machine learning with biofoundry automation to autonomously engineer enzymes, achieving up to 90% improvement in activity for industrial biocatalysts.^[220] SynBioGPT and related large language models, detailed in 2025 preprints, automate pathway assembly by predicting regulatory circuits and optimizing genetic constructs for scalable production.^[221] These synergies project further integration, where AI-driven retrosynthesis generates feasible biological circuits, enhancing biological engineering's capacity for custom organisms in biofuels and pharmaceuticals.^[222]

Anticipated Challenges and Innovations

One major anticipated challenge in biological engineering is scaling bioprocesses from laboratory to industrial levels, where bioreactor and associated capital costs often comprise 30-50% or more of total manufacturing expenses due to the need for large-scale, sterile, and controlled environments.^[223]^[224] These bottlenecks arise from inefficiencies in batch processing, including downtime, variability in yields, and high consumable demands, which can inflate production costs by up to 23% in recent years amid rising material and equipment prices.^[223] To address this, continuous manufacturing platforms are emerging as a key innovation, enabling steady-state operations that reduce capital investment, minimize batch failures, and improve throughput by integrating upstream and downstream processes without interruption.^[225]^[226] For instance, continuous bioprocessing has demonstrated potential to lower material costs from 38% in optimized systems compared to traditional batch methods, fostering greater adaptability for biologics like monoclonal antibodies.^[71] Regulatory hurdles, particularly the lack of global harmonization across agencies like the FDA, EMA, and others, pose delays in product commercialization, as divergent guidelines on safety, efficacy, and validation increase compliance burdens and timelines by months to years.^[227]^[228] This fragmentation affects biological engineering outputs such as gene therapies and cultured tissues, where inconsistent standards for risk assessment hinder cross-border trade and innovation diffusion. Empirical progress counters these delays, with the FDA approving around 50 novel drugs and biologics annually by 2024—aligning with a rising five-year average of 49 and reflecting a higher proportion of biologics (32%) amid streamlined reviews like fast-track designations granted to 44% of 2024 approvals.^[229]^[230]^[231] Adaptive regulatory frameworks, including reliance on real-world evidence and modular approvals, are anticipated to further accelerate this trend, enhancing engineering pipelines' responsiveness.^[232] Looking ahead, quantum computing represents a transformative innovation for overcoming simulation limitations in biological engineering, particularly in modeling complex phenomena like protein folding and molecular dynamics that classical computers struggle with due to exponential computational demands.^[233] Recent demonstrations, such as IonQ's 2025 quantum solution of advanced protein folding problems, highlight early feasibility for precise atomic-level predictions, potentially reducing trial-and-error in designing enzymes or therapeutics.^[234] While scalable fault-tolerant systems remain emergent—projected for broader viability in the 2030s—these tools could enable real-time biological simulations, accelerating innovations in synthetic biology and personalized medicine by integrating with AI-driven design cycles.^[235]^[236] This hybrid approach underscores biological engineering's adaptability, prioritizing empirical validation to navigate scalability and regulatory constraints toward efficient, data-grounded advancements.

References

[1]
What Is Biological Engineering
Biological engineers study biological processes and integrate them with engineering principles to develop solutions for a wide variety of technical problems.
[2]
What is Bioengineering?
Bioengineering is a discipline that applies engineering principles of design and analysis to biological systems and biomedical technologies.
[3]
What is bioengineering? | McKinsey
Jun 23, 2023 · Bioengineering is the application of engineering principles to improve disease prevention and treatment, agricultural production, energy sustainability, and ...
[4]
Engineering biology applications for environmental solutions - Nature
Apr 14, 2025 · Engineering biology is applicable to the detection and degradation of pollutants, greenhouse gas sequestration, and conversion of waste streams, ...
[5]
Engineering biology applications for environmental solutions - NIH
Apr 14, 2025 · Engineering biology is applicable to the detection and degradation of pollutants, greenhouse gas sequestration, and conversion of waste streams, ...
[6]
Grand challenges for biological engineering - PMC - PubMed Central
Sep 22, 2009 · 1. Develop carbon sequestration methods · 2. Manage the nitrogen cycle · 3. Provide access to clean water · 4. Advance health informatics · 5.Missing: key achievements controversies
[7]
Bioengineering Ethics: The Ethics of the Linkage Between ... - NCBI
The ethics of bioengineering is one of the most complex and challenging of all ethics, as it must blend the ethics of engineering, biology, medicine, and the ...Missing: achievements | Show results with:achievements
[8]
Journal of Biological Engineering: Home page
Journal of Biological Engineering provides a home for all research on the continuum of biological information science, molecules and cells, product formation, ...About · Submission guidelines · Articles · Editorial BoardMissing: examples | Show results with:examples
[9]
Aims and scope | Journal of Biological Engineering
Biological engineering is an emerging discipline that encompasses engineering theory and practice connected to and derived from the science of biology, just as ...Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
[10]
Introducing Journal of Biological Engineering - PMC - PubMed Central
Biological engineering is a science-based engineering discipline that requires a strong grounding in biology as well as in goal based analysis and design.
[11]
Biological Engineering: How MIT is Defining the Educational Frontier
The fusion of engineering with modern biology requires development of a new biology-based engineering discipline, termed "Biological Engineering," which ...<|separator|>
[12]
Advances and Computational Tools towards Predictable Design in ...
Advances and Computational Tools towards Predictable Design in Biological Engineering ... biological parts, by discovering the features that play important ...
[13]
Control theory meets synthetic biology - PMC - PubMed Central
3Department of Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA ... Improving modularity through feedback control.
[14]
Engineering is evolution: a perspective on design processes to ...
Apr 29, 2024 · The use of feedback control within these systems can also help ... scaling up biological engineering beyond single cells. Article ADS ...
[15]
Introducing Journal of Biological Engineering | Full Text
Oct 10, 2007 · Biological engineering is a science-based engineering discipline that requires a strong grounding in biology as well as in goal based analysis ...
[16]
An engineering design approach to systems biology - PMC
The intersection of engineering research and systems biology has given rise to a type of “systems bioengineering” that tightly integrates predictive modeling, ...
[17]
academics degrees - MIT BE-BMES
Biological Engineering (BE) -- a new engineering DISCIPLINE grounded in biology, particularly mechanistic biology at the molecular and cellular levels, with ...
[18]
[PDF] Is It Name or Content that Counts - Art Johnson
working definition that some of us use is that Biological Engineering is the discipline of engineering based on the science of biology, similar to Chemical ...<|separator|>
[19]
Bioengineering vs. Biomedical Engineering: What's the Difference?
Aug 14, 2024 · Bioengineering programs typically offer a broader curriculum that integrates biological and engineering principles, while biomedical engineering ...
[20]
MIT Biomedical Engineering Society
The crucial distinction is that Biological Engineering (BE) is a new engineering discipline, distinguished by having biology (particularly ...
[21]
History of Agricultural Biotechnology: How Crop Development has ...
Mar 5, 2012 · About 10,000 years BC, people harvested their food from the natural biological diversity that surrounded them, and eventually domesticated crops ...
[22]
Evolution of Corn - Learn Genetics Utah
Maize cobs uncovered by archaeologists show the evolution of modern maize over thousands of years of selective breeding.
[23]
The origin and adaptive evolution of domesticated populations of ...
Jul 12, 2018 · The earliest evidence for fermented wine-like beverage production dates back to Neolithic times about 9000 years ago in China. S. cerevisiae has ...
[24]
Yeast: One of Humankinds Oldest ingredients
While yeast's use in beer brewing and wine making has been observed in Sumeria, Babylonia, and present-day Georgia as far back as around 6000 BCE4.
[25]
Law of the Minimum - Soil and Environmental Sciences
Mar 6, 2000 · Liebig developed the first mineral fertilizers applied to replentish nutrients removed from soils by crops and clearly saw mineral fertilizers ...
[26]
Justus von Liebig—Leading Teacher of Organic Chemistry
Turning his attention to agricultural chemistry, Liebig analyzed straw, hay, and fruits and concluded that the same land, whether cultivated or forested, ...
[27]
Louis Pasteur - Lemelson-MIT
But in 1857, Pasteur proved that a microscopic plant caused the souring of milk (lactic acid fermentation). Pasteur was able to prove that living cells, the ...Missing: microbiology | Show results with:microbiology
[28]
[PDF] Mendel, Gregor. 1866. Versuche über Plflanzenhybriden. Verhand
EXPERIMENTS IN PLANT HYBRIDIZATION (1865). GREGOR MENDEL. Read at the February 8th, and March 8th, 1865, meetings of the Brünn Natural History Society. Mendel, ...
[29]
1865: Mendel's Peas - National Human Genome Research Institute
Apr 22, 2013 · Mendel read his paper, "Experiments in Plant Hybridization" at meetings on February 8 and March 8, 1865. He published papers in 1865 and 1869 in ...
[30]
Penicillin Production through Deep-tank Fermentation
Pfizer succeeded in producing large quantities of penicillin using deep-tank fermentation. Its success helped make penicillin available to Allied soldiers by ...Missing: bioprocess | Show results with:bioprocess
[31]
Rethinking Antibiotic Research and Development: World War II and ...
In a matter of 5 years, this diverse group transformed the production of penicillin from a low-yielding, labor-intensive method of growing crude penicillin in ...
[32]
[PDF] Rapid Scale-up of Penicillin by an Academia-Industry Consortium ...
Penicillin scale up and commercialization thus required substantial problem solving and innovation in kinetics of bioconversions, solvent or fermentation media ...<|separator|>
[33]
History - Navigate the Circuit - AIMBE
By the late 1960's, the first biomedical engineering departments were formed at the University of Virginia, Case Western Reserve University, Johns Hopkins ...
[34]
Biotechnology and genetic engineering in the new drug ...
In the years 1971–1973 a new technology was brought into effect, which then became a great scientific turning point. It was recombinant DNA technology, ...Missing: 20th | Show results with:20th
[35]
[PDF] Biotechnology Zymotechnology, penicillin, and the rise of genetic ...
Following the discovery of the molecular structure of DNA by Watson and Crick, two key events in this process were the development of the recombinant DNA (rDNA ...
[36]
Human Genome Project Timeline
Jul 5, 2022 · On April 14, 2003, the International Human Genome Sequencing Consortium announces the successful completion of the Human Genome Project.
[37]
Human Genome Project Fact Sheet
Jun 13, 2024 · In 2003, the Human Genome Project produced a genome sequence that accounted for over 90% of the human genome. It was as close to complete as the ...
[38]
A Programmable Dual-RNA–Guided DNA Endonuclease ... - Science
Jun 28, 2012 · Our study reveals a family of endonucleases that use dual-RNAs for site-specific DNA cleavage and highlights the potential to exploit the system for RNA- ...
[39]
Press release: The Nobel Prize in Chemistry 2020 - NobelPrize.org
Oct 7, 2020 · Since Charpentier and Doudna discovered the CRISPR/Cas9 genetic scissors in 2012 their use has exploded. This tool has contributed to many ...
[40]
Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine
Dec 10, 2020 · Between July 27, 2020, and November 14, 2020, a total of 44,820 persons were screened, and 43,548 persons 16 years of age or older underwent ...
[41]
Accurate structure prediction of biomolecular interactions ... - Nature
May 8, 2024 · Here we describe our AlphaFold 3 model with a substantially updated diffusion-based architecture that is capable of predicting the joint structure of complexes.
[42]
Perspective: Engineering noise in biological systems towards ...
May 7, 2018 · Predictive stochastic design will enable the shaping of phenotypic distributions and statistical attributes of complex cellular systems, devices ...
[43]
[PDF] A synthetic oscillatory network of transcriptional regulators - Caltech
We used three transcriptional repressor systems that are not part of any natural biological clock3±5 to build an oscillating network, termed the repressilator, ...
[44]
Validation and selection of ODE based systems biology models
Jul 8, 2015 · Most ordinary differential equation (ODE) based modeling studies in systems biology involve a hold-out validation step for model validation.
[45]
Thermodynamic Constraints Improve Metabolic Networks - PMC
We conclude that metabolic network analysis confirmed the validity of the thermodynamic constraints, and that thermodynamic poise information is actionable ...Missing: engineering efficiency
[46]
Improving metabolic engineering design with enzyme-thermo ...
A protein-centered workflow that layers enzyme efficiency and thermodynamic feasibility constraints onto genome-scale metabolic models.
[47]
What is flux balance analysis? - PMC - NIH
Flux balance analysis is a mathematical approach for analyzing the flow of metabolites through a metabolic network.
[48]
Prediction of metabolic fluxes by incorporating genomic context and ...
Flux balance analysis (FBA) of a genome-scale metabolic model allows calculation of intracellular fluxes by optimizing an objective function, ...
[49]
Flux Balance Analysis for Media Optimization and Genetic Targets to ...
Apr 24, 2020 · Flux balance analysis (FBA) is a genome-scale metabolic engineering tool that first establishes and then allows a constrained variation of the ...Results And Discussion · Single Gene Deletions · Media Optimization
[50]
AlphaFold - Google DeepMind
AlphaFold has revealed millions of intricate 3D protein structures, and is helping scientists understand how all of life's molecules interact.Missing: 2025 | Show results with:2025
[51]
How AI Solved Biology's Biggest Mystery - Connecticut College
In 2024, DeepMind launched AlphaFold3, an upgraded version of the AlphaFold program that not only predicts protein shapes but also identifies potential binding ...
[52]
Evaluating E. coli genome‐scale metabolic model accuracy with ...
Oct 27, 2023 · Here, we quantified the accuracy of four subsequent E. coli GEMs using published mutant fitness data across thousands of genes and 25 different carbon sources.
[53]
Genome-scale models of metabolism and gene expression extend ...
Oct 1, 2013 · Though less accurate, predicted growth rates by the ME-Model correlate with measured growth rates in batch culture better than standard M-Models ...
[54]
Heritable Genome Editing - NCBI
Heritable genome editing 1 may offer a potential means of having genetically related children who are not affected by that disease.
[55]
Mechanism and Applications of CRISPR/Cas-9-Mediated Genome ...
Aug 21, 2021 · The mechanism of CRISPR/Cas-9 genome editing contains three steps, recognition, cleavage, and repair. The designed sgRNA recognizes the target ...
[56]
Off-target effects in CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing - PMC - NIH
They found that the number of off-target sites reduced by 98.7%, 95.4% and 94.1%, respectively. Meanwhile, the absolute on-target activity of these Cas9 mutants ...
[57]
Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without ...
Here we report the development of base editing, a new approach to genome editing that enables the direct, irreversible conversion of one target DNA base into ...
[58]
Search-and-replace genome editing without double-strand ... - Nature
Oct 21, 2019 · Here we describe prime editing, a versatile and precise genome editing method that directly writes new genetic information into a specified DNA site.
[59]
FDA Approves First Gene Therapies to Treat Patients with Sickle ...
Dec 8, 2023 · The FDA approved the first cell-based gene therapies, Casgevy and Lyfgenia, for the treatment of sickle cell disease in patients 12 years ...
[60]
Celebrating 20 years of Standard Biological Parts - iGEM Blog
Jun 28, 2023 · In 2003, Tom Knight published an assembly method for standard biological parts, or “BioBricks”. · Each BioBrick must include specific DNA ...
[61]
Teams lay BioBrick foundation for genetic engineering | MIT News
Nov 8, 2005 · Thirteen international teams unveiled their biological designs at MIT last weekend at the 2005 International Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) competition.Missing: history | Show results with:history
[62]
Design and synthesis of a minimal bacterial genome - Science
JCVI-syn3. 0 is a working approximation of a minimal cellular genome, a compromise between small genome size and a workable growth rate for an experimental ...Missing: details | Show results with:details
[63]
First Minimal Synthetic Bacterial Cell Designed and Constructed by ...
Mar 24, 2016 · To create JCVI-syn3. 0, the team used an approach of whole genome design and chemical synthesis followed by genome transplantation to test if ...Missing: details | Show results with:details
[64]
Team Builds the First Living Robots - University of Vermont
First they gathered stem cells, harvested from the embryos of African frogs, the species Xenopus laevis. (Hence the name "xenobots.") These were ...
[65]
A cellular platform for the development of synthetic living machines
We report here a method for generation of in vitro biological robots from frog (Xenopus laevis) cells. These xenobots exhibit coordinated locomotion via cilia ...
[66]
Exploring Principles of Bioreactor Scale-Up - BioProcess International
Feb 7, 2024 · Several factors contribute to the difficulty of scaling. They include the complexity of biological systems and the heterogeneous (hydrodynamic ...
[67]
Scaling Up in Bioprocessing - Bridging the Gap from Lab Bench to ...
Scaling up bioprocesses involves overcoming technical challenges like oxygen transfer, mixing efficiency, and heat transfer.
[68]
What the kLa tells you about the oxygen transfer in your bioreactor
Oct 24, 2021 · If a bioreactor shows a high kLa, then it shows that the equipment is cleverly designed so that a high oxygen transfer rate can be reached.Missing: 100-500 | Show results with:100-500
[69]
Bioprocess Operation Modes: Batch, Fed-batch, and Continuous ...
The main bioprocess operation modes include batch culture, fed-batch culture, continuous culture, and perfusion culture – a type of continuous culture.Missing: 10x 2020s
[70]
Perfusion Cell Culture - Repligen
Perfusion enabled 10X VCD and 10X product than Fed-Batch Perfusion achieved 100-130 million viable cell density (VCD) compared to 13 million for Fed-Batch. ...Missing: 2020s | Show results with:2020s
[71]
Economic Analysis of Batch and Continuous Biopharmaceutical ...
Continuous processing has multiple benefits including reduced capital cost, increased profitability, productivity, and equipment, buffer, and resin utilization, ...Missing: 10x 2020s
[72]
The history and potential future of monoclonal antibody therapeutics ...
Jul 1, 2024 · The titer of 8+ g/L for this era (Table 1) reflects the current state of the art for cell-line development and a production media platform, ...Missing: 2025 | Show results with:2025
[73]
25 years of recombinant proteins from reactor-grown cells
Over the past 25 years, specific and volumetric productivities for recombinant cell lines have increased about 20-fold as the result of improvements in media ...
[74]
Bioprocess intensification: A route to efficient and sustainable ...
Key advantages are higher biomass yield, smaller batches, easier product purification, numbering-up and higher productivity whilst issues are fouling, plugging, ...
[75]
Tissue engineering: strategies, stem cells and scaffolds - PMC - NIH
Tissue engineering scaffolds are designed to influence the physical, chemical and biological environment surrounding a cell population.Missing: milestones | Show results with:milestones
[76]
Advances of natural hydrogel-based vascularization strategies for ...
Oct 14, 2024 · In this paper, we present a review of the commonly used types of natural hydrogels and their applications as scaffolds in tissue vascularization.
[77]
3D bioprinting of collagen-based high-resolution internally ... - Science
Apr 23, 2025 · In this work, we have developed an advanced scaffold biofabrication platform centered on FRESH 3D bioprinting of CHIPS, achieving microfluidic ...
[78]
Induced pluripotent stem cell technology in regenerative medicine ...
This knowledge allowed the laboratory of Shinya Yamanaka to overcome brilliantly conceptual and technical barriers in 2006 and generate induced pluripotent stem ...
[79]
Artificial skin - Wikipedia
Integra Dermal Regeneration Template received FDA approval in 1996, and the FDA listed it as a "Significant Medical Device Breakthrough" in the same year.
[80]
Engineering bone/cartilage organoids: strategy, progress, and ...
Nov 20, 2024 · This review provides a comprehensive and up-to-date overview of the field, focusing on the strategies for bone/cartilage organoid construction strategies.
[81]
Human organoids in basic research and clinical applications - Nature
May 24, 2022 · Tissue engineering could control over the materials and the precise apportion of different cell types through kinds of biofabrication ...
[82]
Confined field trial of drought-tolerant maize yields promising results
Jun 7, 2013 · The fourth confined field trial of MON87460, a genetically modified maize variety developed to tolerate moderate drought, recently concluded.Missing: transgenic | Show results with:transgenic
[83]
First Transgenic Drought Tolerant Maize Trials in Eastern Africa ...
The first transgenic drought tolerant maize trials under the Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) project were planted in confined fields in Uganda on 25 ...
[84]
Efficacy of Event MON 87460 in drought-tolerant maize hybrids ...
Field trials show that MON 87460 drought-tolerant transgenic hybrids have yield increase due to better grain set under drought conditions. The number of ...
[85]
Herbicide Resistance: Toward an Understanding of ... - BioOne
Aug 1, 2012 · Overall, the changes have had a positive environmental effect by reducing soil erosion, the fuel use for tillage, and the number of herbicides ...
[86]
(PDF) Herbicide Resistance, Tillage, and Community Management ...
Apr 20, 2025 · The use of glyphosate as a replacement for tillage has been credited with spurring the adoption of conservation tillage in the United States.
[87]
Hydrocarbon-degrading bacteria enriched by the Deepwater ...
Jun 20, 2013 · We identified several aliphatic (Alcanivorax, Marinobacter)- and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (Alteromonas, Cycloclasticus, Colwellia)-degrading bacteria.
[88]
Genetically engineered microorganisms for environmental remediation
GEMs are being used in environmental biotechnology to remediate hazardous chemicals, xenobiotics, and pesticides (Pant et al., 2021). To create a synthetic ...
[89]
Oil-degrading bacterial consortium from Gulf of Mexico designed by ...
Sep 22, 2022 · We describe an assembled marine bacterial consortium designed for bioremediation of oil-contaminated seawater, based on a statistical method ...
[90]
[PDF] Bio-Based Chemicals - A 2020 Update - IEA Bioenergy
For chemicals with novel functionality, e.g. lactic acid, succinic acid, furandicarboxylic acid, must be proven to perform at least as well as the petrochemical ...
[91]
Isobutanol production freed from biological limits using synthetic ...
Aug 27, 2020 · To our knowledge, the best-reported metrics for microbial isobutanol production are 22 g L−1 titer, 0.7 g L−1 h−1 productivity and a yield of 86 ...
[92]
Full article: Microbial engineering for the production of isobutanol
... isobutanol titer of 275 g/L within 5 days. This was the higher titer reported till date. Here they used a bioreactor with the enzymes that are tolerant to ...
[93]
This company is making spider silk from bacteria
Mar 5, 2025 · The World Economic Forum is an independent international organization committed to improving the state of the world by engaging business,<|separator|>
[94]
Biotechnology Is Replacing Petrochemicals With Identical ... - Forbes
Jun 10, 2021 · Genomatica created bio-BDO (1,4-butanediol) as a sustainable, naturally-sourced alternative to existing petrochemicals.<|control11|><|separator|>
[95]
Enabling technologies for personalized and precision medicine - PMC
Bioengineering underpins the implementation of precision and personalized medicine and related enabling technologies in the clinic (Table 1), as knowledge ...
[96]
Novartis receives first ever FDA approval for a CAR-T cell therapy ...
Aug 30, 2017 · First-in-class therapy showed an 83% (52/63) overall remission rate in this patient population with limited treatment options and ...<|separator|>
[97]
CAR T-Cell Therapy Approved for Some Children and Young Adults ...
Sep 11, 2017 · Within three months of treatment, the overall remission rate was 83%. The treatment was initially tested at the University of Pennsylvania in ...
[98]
The potential of CAR T therapy for relapsed or refractory pediatric ...
... to its FDA approval in 2017, remission rates were still below 50%. In addition, durability was difficult to determine given that patients were allowed to ...
[99]
The clinical progress of mRNA vaccines and immunotherapies
May 9, 2022 · The medical promise of mRNA has been finally realized with the full approval of two rapid-response mRNA vaccines against COVID-19: Comirnity ( ...
[100]
COVID-19 mRNA vaccines: Platforms and current developments - NIH
This review presents a brief history and the current status of development of four mRNA vaccine platforms, nucleoside-modified and unmodified mRNA, circular ...
[101]
FDA Announces Plan to Phase Out Animal Testing Requirement for ...
Apr 10, 2025 · Human-Based Lab Models: The FDA will promote the use of lab-grown human “organoids” and organ-on-a-chip systems that mimic human organs – such ...
[102]
Engineering Precision Medicine - PMC
Many opportunities exist for engineers to contribute to precision medicine, such as engineering biosensors for diagnosis and health status monitoring.
[103]
Can genetic engineering improve crop yields?
The average yield improvements for developing countries range from 16% for insect-resistant corn to 30% for insect-resistant cotton, with an 85% yield increase ...Can Genetic Engineering... · At A Glance · Science And Politics
[104]
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/jf102939c
[105]
Impacts of Bt Transgenic Cotton on Integrated Pest Management
Overall, the use of Bt cotton and associated advances in IPM over the past two decades has led to dramatic global reductions in insecticide use in a crop once ...
[106]
Golden Rice is an effective source of vitamin A1 - PMC - NIH
β-Carotene derived from Golden Rice is effectively converted to vitamin A in humans. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00680355.
[107]
Vitamin A Deficiency - The Golden Rice Project
The most damaging micronutrient deficiencies in the world are the consequence of low dietary intake of iron, vitamin A, iodine and zinc.
[108]
Biofortified β-carotene rice improves vitamin A intake and reduces ...
Biofortified β-carotene rice improves vitamin A intake and reduces the prevalence of inadequacy among women and young children in a simulated analysis
[109]
Scaling Cultured Meat: Challenges and Solutions for Affordable ...
Jul 9, 2025 · Although the cost of CM has dropped dramatically—from $2.3 million/kg for the first cultured beef burger to $63/kg—it remains prohibitively ...
[110]
Cultivated Meat for $6 Per Pound? This New Study Shows It's Possible
Aug 22, 2024 · A breakthrough study explores how continuous manufacturing can solve the scalability challenges of cultivated chicken and bring prices down to $6 per lb.Missing: 2020s pilots
[111]
[PDF] Trends in cultivated meat scale-up and bioprocessing
Using food-grade rather than pharmaceutical-grade materials and reagents can significantly reduce cultivated meat production costs . In our survey, seven ...Missing: 2020s | Show results with:2020s
[112]
Molecular engineering of PETase for efficient PET biodegradation
Jul 15, 2024 · The proposed strategy and developed variants show potential for achieving complete biodegradation of PET under mild conditions.
[113]
Thermostability and Activity Improvements of PETase from Ideonella ...
Feb 12, 2025 · This study aimed to enhance the PETase performance through protein engineering. We introduced multiple amino acid substitutions to the wild-type I. sakaiensis ...
[114]
Recent advances in enzyme engineering for improved ... - Nature
Aug 20, 2025 · Stepwise recombination and verification gave new enzyme variants with 2.9-fold and 5.3-fold improvements in activity on amorphous PET film and ...
[115]
Degradation of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastics by ... - NIH
Sep 24, 2024 · We found that FAST‐PETase purified from some transconjugant isolates could degrade about 40% of a 0.25 mm thick commercial PET film within 4 ...
[116]
Substrate-mediated enhancement of bioelectrochemical systems for ...
Acetate-fed systems demonstrated superior performance across multiple parameters, including COD removal efficiency (95 ± 0.5 %), electron transfer resistance ( ...
[117]
Bioelectrochemical system for anaerobic oily wastewater treatment
The highest efficiency for the COD removal was 86.7% using the introduced method, while it was 65.9% using general biological processes. In the present study, ...
[118]
Bioelectrochemical treatment of municipal solid waste landfill mature ...
Jul 22, 2020 · The maximum COD removal efficiency achieved was 84.9% at low leachate/dairy mix, and 66.3% with 7.6% coulombic efficiency (CE) at a leachate/ ...
[119]
Start-ups are supercharging algae to clean up the environment
Feb 4, 2025 · Their strains capture carbon dioxide twice as fast as a model cyanobacteria strain and three times as fast as other algal strains. They're ...Missing: 2020s | Show results with:2020s
[120]
Southwire And Algae Tree Deploy A Pilot Microalgae-Powered CDR ...
Jun 24, 2025 · Southwire has partnered with Algae Tree, a company that creates carbon removal units with an added aesthetic value, to deploy an Algae Tree installation.Missing: 2020s | Show results with:2020s
[121]
New cyanobacteria strains could sequester carbon - Wyss Institute
Oct 29, 2024 · Strains specialized to live in high-CO2 oceanic environments have evolved traits that are useful for decarbonization and bioproduction.Missing: pilots 2020s<|control11|><|separator|>
[122]
Presidential Green Chemistry Challenge: 2011 Greener Synthetic ...
Genomatica has been producing BDO at pilot scale in 3,000 liter fermentations since the first half of 2010, and is moving to production at demonstration scale ...Missing: E. coli
[123]
Metabolic engineering of Escherichia coli for direct production of 1,4 ...
May 22, 2011 · Metabolic engineering of Escherichia coli for direct production of 1,4-butanediol. Nat Chem Biol. 2011 May 22;7(7):445-52. ... Genomatica, Inc ...Missing: commercial launch
[124]
UC San Diego Engineering Graduates Aim For Game-Changing ...
Jul 29, 2014 · In late 2012, Genomatica produced 5 million pounds of BDO (1,4 ... coli bacteria that produce BDO out of renewable feedstocks such as sugar.
[125]
Development of a commercial scale process for production of 1,4 ...
Genomatica has developed a commercial bioprocess for the production of 1,4-butanediol from dextrose. •. A systems biology approach enabled rapid ...Missing: launch | Show results with:launch
[126]
Bio-Based Polymers Market Size to Worth USD 58.36 Billion by 2034
Sep 5, 2025 · 05, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The global bio-based polymers market size is valued at USD 14.14 billion in 2025 and is anticipated to reach around ...
[127]
[PDF] Industrialization of Biology - Biomanufacturing.org
Based on committee background and interactions with industry experts, for commodity chemicals, having a value of $2-5/kg, the potential market must be as ...<|separator|>
[128]
Comparing in planta accumulation with microbial routes to ... - PNAS
Jul 19, 2022 · ... chemicals, ranging from $2 to $5/kg. The MSPs of PDC and 4-HBA in the theoretical yield scenario are $2 and $3.7/kg, respectively, which are ...
[129]
[PDF] GM crops: global socio-economic and environmental impacts 1996 ...
... yield gains made on the GM HT area and comparing this increase in production relative to total soybean production. Page 38. GM crop impact: 1996-2020. ©PG ...
[130]
The Price of Insulin: A Q&A with Kasia Lipska
Apr 27, 2023 · The same vial of insulin that cost $21 in the U.S. in 1996 now costs upward of $250. But it takes only an estimated $2 to $4 to produce a vial ...Missing: genetic | Show results with:genetic
[131]
Production costs and potential prices for biosimilars of human ...
Sep 25, 2018 · Treatment with biosimilar RHI and insulin NPH could cost ≤US$72 per year and with insulin analogues ≤US$133 per year. Estimated biosimilar ...
[132]
Fast-forward: Will the speed of COVID-19 vaccine development ...
May 13, 2021 · Still, there are lessons companies can take from this experience to potentially reduce development timelines by several years, including ...<|separator|>
[133]
Decades in the Making: mRNA COVID-19 Vaccines | NIAID
Apr 4, 2024 · mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were developed with 50+ years of research, including studies of viruses, mRNA, and lipid nanoparticles, and the use of ...
[134]
CRISPR Clinical Trials: A 2024 Update - Innovative Genomics Institute
Mar 13, 2024 · “Going from the lab to an approved CRISPR therapy in just 11 years is a truly remarkable achievement,” says IGI Founder Jennifer Doudna. “I am ...Missing: quantifiable | Show results with:quantifiable
[135]
CRISPR/Cas9 therapeutics: progress and prospects - Nature
Jan 16, 2023 · This paper reviews the current developments in three aspects, namely, gene-editing type, delivery vector, and disease characteristics.Missing: quantifiable | Show results with:quantifiable
[136]
CRISPR Clinical Trials: A 2025 Update - Innovative Genomics Institute
Jul 9, 2025 · An update on the progress of CRISPR clinical trials with the latest data and a survey of the CRISPR landscape in 2025.Missing: quantifiable | Show results with:quantifiable
[137]
Global Biotechnology Industry Analysis, 2025 - IBISWorld
Industry revenue has grown at a CAGR of 2.4 % over the past five years, to reach an estimated $558.8bn in 2025. Trends and Insights. Biotechnology companies ...
[138]
Economic impact of GM crops: The global income and production ...
The main farm level gain experienced has been a reduction in the cost of production, mainly through reduced expenditure on weed control (herbicides). Not ...
[139]
Engineering Disease-Resistant Cassava - PMC - PubMed Central
However, a recent report estimated that CBB could result in a 34% reduction in yield when comparing uninfected versus infected cassava fields (Fanou et al. 2017 ...
[140]
Agricultural Biotechnology Benefits Farmers and the Environment
Agricultural biotechnology delivers significant and tangible benefits for farmers including increased crop yields and lower input costs.
[141]
Cellular variability as a driver for bioprocess innovation and ...
Cellular heterogeneity plays a crucial role in biotechnological processes, significantly influencing metabolic activity, product yield, and process consistency.<|separator|>
[142]
Delineating biological and technical variance in single cell ... - NIH
This review discusses the continuous effort to identify and systematically characterise various sources of technical variability in single cell expression data
[143]
Global analysis of protein folding using massively parallel design ...
Iteration between design and experiment increased the design success rate from 6% to 47%, produced stable proteins unlike those found in nature for topologies ...
[144]
Generative artificial intelligence for de novo protein design
State-of-the-art design protocols now achieve experimental success rates nearing 20%, thus widening the access to de novo designed proteins. Despite extensive ...Missing: misfolding | Show results with:misfolding
[145]
rAAV immunogenicity, toxicity, and durability in 255 clinical trials
Oct 27, 2022 · To assess immunogenicity, toxicity, and features of AAV gene therapy in clinical settings, a meta-analysis of 255 clinical trials was performed.Missing: rate | Show results with:rate
[146]
[PDF] New Analysis by Tufts' NEWDIGS Shows that Durable Cell and Gene
Oct 11, 2023 · The analysis shows that the. Page 2. average rare disease gene therapy has a 28% chance of receiving FDA approval once it enters Phase 1.
[147]
Impact of failure rates, lot definitions and scheduling of upstream ...
Dec 21, 2020 · According to this survey, we can expect a batch failure rate due to contamination of 2.3%, and failures due to operator error, equipment failure ...
[148]
Eleven grand challenges in single-cell data science | Genome Biology
Feb 7, 2020 · Here, we outline eleven challenges that will be central to bringing this emerging field of single-cell data science forward.
[149]
A Review of the Unintentional Release of Feral Genetically Modified ...
Dec 3, 2021 · In this review, we summarized the cases of unintentional spread of feral GM rapeseed in the fields and road verges.
[150]
[PDF] GENE FLOW IN COMMERCIAL FIELDS OF HERBICIDE ...
A study was conducted in Saskatch- ewan, Canada, in 1999 and 2000 to assess gene flow in space and time in adjacent com- mercial fields of glyphosate- and ...
[151]
Glyphosate resistance: state of knowledge - PMC - PubMed Central
Studies of mechanisms of resistance to glyphosate have increased current understanding of herbicide resistance mechanisms.Missing: superweeds | Show results with:superweeds
[152]
[PDF] The Economics of Glyphosate Resistance Management in Corn and ...
Using herbicides with different modes of action, which affect susceptible weeds differently, and rotating their use over time can result in fewer herbicide- ...
[153]
Evidence-Based Biosafety: a Review of the Principles and ...
Jul 1, 2008 · The guidelines and instructions for working with GMOs appear to be largely effective, as there have been no major accidents with GMOs or with ...
[154]
Asilomar and Recombinant DNA: The End of the Beginning - NCBI
At noon on February 27, 1975, the curtain descended on the first act of what is likely to go down in the history of science as the recombinant DNA controversy.
[155]
Why Do Exceptionally Dangerous Gain-of-Function Experiments in ...
The controversy focused on the biosecurity issue of whether knowledge of the mutations required to render H5N1 influenza transmissible in ferrets (and possibly ...
[156]
The controversy over H5N1 transmissibility research - PubMed Central
Since December 2011, influenza virologists and biosecurity experts have been engaged in a controversial debate over research on the transmissibility of H5N1 ...
[157]
Safety Precautions and Operating Procedures in an (A)BSL-4 ... - NIH
Oct 3, 2016 · Strict adherence to all safety procedures and standard operating procedures for animal handling is essential for working safely in an ABSL-4 ...Missing: probability | Show results with:probability
[158]
Synthetic horsepox viruses and the continuing debate about dual ...
Oct 4, 2018 · Horsepox and the need for a new norm, more transparency, and stronger oversight for experiments that pose pandemic risks.
[159]
How Canadian researchers reconstituted an extinct poxvirus for ...
Horsepox is not known to harm humans—and like smallpox, researchers believe it no longer exists in nature; nor is it seen as a major agricultural threat. But ...Missing: 2018 | Show results with:2018
[160]
International Gene Synthesis Consortium: Home
Formed in 2009, IGSC members screen synthetic gene orders to identify regulated pathogen sequences and other potentially dangerous sequences. By screening the ...
[161]
Biological warfare and bioterrorism: a historical review - PMC
This article explains the concepts of biological warfare and its states of development, its utilization, and the attempts to control its proliferation ...
[162]
Biodefense Research Two Decades Later: Worth the Investment?
Aug 1, 2022 · Post-2001 Biodefense Efforts. Prior to 2001, annual US biodefense ... Assessing the bioweapons threat. Science 2015; 349(6250): 792–3 ...
[163]
Mapping variation in dual use risk assessments of synthetic biology ...
Aug 13, 2025 · In this study, we elicited a set of DURC risk assessments of four synthetic biology projects from two different reviewer groups: experienced ...
[164]
[PDF] the role of intellectual property in the biopharmaceutical sector | ifpma
As increased intellectual property protection leads to more R&D investments and an increase in the number of drugs brought to the market, patent laws have ...<|separator|>
[165]
[PDF] NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES THE ROLE OF PATENT ...
Therefore, patents may not be the preferred policy instrument for encouraging innovation in this area if they fail to create a competitive market for technology ...
[166]
[PDF] Genetic Inventions, Intellectual Property Rights and Licensing ...
In theory, patents on early. “foundational” discoveries, if not widely licensed, may discourage or limit the use. Page 14. Evidence and Policies. 13 of these ...
[167]
The Bayh–Dole Act: A model for promoting research translation? - NIH
The Bayh‐Dole Act of 1980 was passed with the intention of promoting research into cancer and other diseases by providing institutions and researchers with ...
[168]
The Bayh-Dole Act's Role in Stimulating University-Led Regional ...
Jun 16, 2025 · The Bayh-Dole Act has played an instrumental role in spurring academic technology transfer activities that serve as vital drivers of American innovation.
[169]
[PDF] Impact-of-the-Bayh-Dole-Act-and-Academic-Technology-Transfer.pdf
Passed in 1980, the bipartisan Bayh-Dole Act empowered universities, small businesses, and national laboratories to patent and license federally-funded.
[170]
The latest round in the CRISPR patent battle has an apparent victor ...
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) ruled on 10 September that a group led by the Broad Institute has "priority" in its already granted patents.
[171]
https://phrma.org/blog/new-report-how-intellectual-property-drives-u-s-innovation-and-biopharma-s-impact
[172]
New report: How intellectual property drives U.S. innovation and ...
Jun 30, 2025 · The new report compares the economic performance of US industries according to R&D investment and the patented inventions resulting from that investment.
[173]
[PDF] global socio-economic and environmental impacts 1996-2020
Figure 1: Global GM crop farm income benefits 2020: baseline total $18.8 billion ..............................9. Figure 2: Cumulative global GM crop farm ...
[174]
Farm income and production impacts from the use of genetically ...
Aug 19, 2022 · Over the twenty-five years 1996–2020, the cumulative farm income gain derived by developing country farmers was $136.6 billion, equal to 52% of ...
[175]
Viral gene therapy ― reducing costs to improve patient access - Cytiva
Jun 2, 2025 · How can we reduce gene therapy costs? Innovative viral vector manufacturing solutions help improve patient access.
[176]
Cell and Gene Therapy Biomanufacturing Industry Outlook 2025-2035
May 7, 2025 · Lower Costs and Increased Accessibility: Advances in cell culture systems, viral vector production, and automation have the potential to reduce ...
[177]
Benefits of GM Crops | Bayer Global
Jul 14, 2023 · In 2020, genetically modified crops enabled farmers to protect 23.4 million hectares of natural habitat. That's an area the size of Vietnam and ...
[178]
Trends in the global commercialization of genetically modified crops ...
This article analyzes the global commercialization of GM crops from 1996 to 2023, based on data from the ISSSA and government websites.
[179]
Genetically Engineered Crops: Experiences and Prospects
This report indicates where there are uncertainties about the economic, agronomic, health, safety, or other impacts of GE crops and food, and makes ...
[180]
The allergenicity of genetically modified foods ... - ScienceDirect.com
Sep 1, 2017 · No studies were identified that demonstrated that direct consumption of a GM food was associated with an increased rate of clinical allergy (eg, ...Missing: meals | Show results with:meals
[181]
Twenty-eight years of GM Food and feed without harm: why not ...
Mar 12, 2024 · No new GMO has been proven to be a hazard or cause harm to human consumers. These modifications have improved crop efficiency, reduced losses to insect pests.Missing: confirmed meals
[182]
20 years of biotech crops generated $186.1 billion in economic ...
Jul 12, 2018 · From 1996 to 2016, biotech crops provided $186.1 billion in economic gains to some 17 million farmers, many of whom are female, smallholder ...
[183]
CRISPR'd babies: human germline genome editing in the 'He ...
The world was shocked in Nov. 25, 2018 by the revelation that He Jiankui had used clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats ('CRISPR') to edit ...
[184]
Gene-edited babies: What went wrong and what could go wrong
Apr 30, 2019 · He claimed that he edited the CCR5 gene to prevent HIV infection in the babies, whose father is an HIV carrier (the mother does not carry the virus).
[185]
The First Chinese Edited Babies: A Leap of Faith in Science - PMC
This event has subsequently fuelled debate over CRISPR-Cas9, the most recent gene editing technique. Genetic engineering has been around from some time. Pretty ...
[186]
CRISPR baby mutation significantly increases mortality
Jun 3, 2019 · A genetic mutation that a Chinese scientist created in two babies born last year is associated with a shorter lifespan, Berkeley researchers found.<|separator|>
[187]
Genetically Modified Babies and a First Application of... - LWW
The world's first babies with CRISPR-Cas9 (Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats)–edited genes were born on November 25, 2018.
[188]
Regulatory framework of human germline and heritable genome ...
May 13, 2025 · However, no country currently allows human heritable genome editing, and 70 countries have clear policies against it (including China, the US, ...
[189]
Editorial: First Regulatory Approvals for CRISPR-Cas9 Therapeutic ...
On 8 December 2023, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Casgevy (exagamglogene autotemcel) and Lyfgenia (lovotibeglogene autotemcel) under the ...
[190]
The new genetics of intelligence - PMC - PubMed Central
One of the most interesting developmental findings about intelligence is that its heritability as estimated in twin studies increases dramatically from infancy ...
[191]
Polygenic Scores for Cognitive Abilities and Their Association with ...
Polygenic scores for intelligence, cognitive performance, and educational attainment are increasingly used to investigate associations between genetic ...
[192]
Genetics and intelligence differences: five special findings - Nature
Sep 16, 2014 · Explaining the increasing heritability of cognitive ability across development: A meta-analysis of longitudinal twin and adoption studies.
[193]
Many publics around world doubt safety of genetically modified foods
Nov 11, 2020 · A 20-public median of 48% say genetically modified, or GM, foods are unsafe to eat, while a much smaller median of 13% say GM foods are safe.
[194]
Opinion: GMOs Are Not “Frankenfoods” | The Scientist
Aug 30, 2016 · It behooves the scientific community to reflect on the public's “Franken-” characterization of genetically modified foods.
[195]
The Spin on Frankenfoods – Are GMOs a boon, a danger, or is it a ...
Nov 10, 2015 · “The objections from the press and public to GMO foods are mostly emotional – they have nothing to do with science,” Caporaso said. “The safety ...
[196]
Public opinion about genetically modified foods and trust in scientists
Dec 1, 2016 · Further, 43% of U.S. adults say the news media give skeptics of the safety of GMOs too little attention. A smaller share (22%) says the news ...
[197]
Media's Role in GMO Perception | SayComms
Sep 10, 2019 · Explore how media influences public perception of GMOs—Say discusses trust, fear, and framing in science communication.
[198]
The effect of persuasive/possessing information regarding GMOs on ...
This gap is clearly shown in 2015 when the Pew Research Center found that only 37% of U.S. adults said GMOs were safe while 88% of scientists from the American ...
[199]
Public perception of genetically-modified (GM) food - Nature
Jun 5, 2018 · As shown in Table 2, respondent's attitudes towards GM food were correlated to their age, sampling location, educational level, major in college ...
[200]
Peer Teaching Increases Knowledge and Changes Perceptions ...
There was also a significant correlation between students who agreed with GMO use and those who thought GMOs were beneficial (p = 0.0002). These results show ...
[201]
Department of Biological Engineering | MIT Course Catalog
Bachelor of Science in Biological Engineering (Course 20) Graduates of the program will be prepared to enter positions in basic research or project-oriented ...
[202]
Biological Engineering Major - Cornell CALS
Core topics in biological engineering program include molecular and cellular principles, chemical and enzyme kinetics, thermodynamics, transport of water and ...
[203]
Biological Engineering (Course 20) - MIT Bulletin
Required Core Subjects, Units ; Tier I ; 5.12, Organic Chemistry I, 12 ; 6.100A, Introduction to Computer Science Programming in Python, 6 ; 6.100B · Introduction to ...
[204]
Masters Degree - MIT Department of Biological Engineering |
Core Requirements · 20.410 Molecular, Cellular & Tissue Biomechanics · 20.420 Biomolecular Kinetics and Cellular Dynamics · 20.430 Fields, Forces & Flows in ...Missing: BS | Show results with:BS
[205]
Undergraduate Program - MIT Department of Biological Engineering |
The Department of Biological Engineering offers an undergraduate curriculum that emphasizes quantitative, engineering-based analysis, design, and synthesis.Biomedical Engineering Minor · Major Degree Requirements · Restricted Electives
[206]
Genetic Engineering, Microbiology & Model Organisms - Bio-Rad
Teach with hands-on labs that explore genetic engineering and CRISPR gene editing, microbiology, metabolic pathways, and genetics.
[207]
CRISPR lab course puts revolutionary gene editing tool into ...
Nov 6, 2023 · A new course designed to give upper-level undergraduates like Schwartz and graduate students the practical, essential skills to use the tool.
[208]
Biological Engineering (BS) - Cornell University
Students take courses in math, engineering, statistics, computing, physics, chemistry, basic and advanced biology, fundamental engineering sciences (mechanics, ...
[209]
Bioengineers and Biomedical Engineers - Bureau of Labor Statistics
Bioengineers and biomedical engineers combine engineering principles with sciences to design and create equipment, devices, computer systems, and software.
[210]
Careers in Academic Research and Industrial R&D - IEEE Pulse
Feb 13, 2018 · Biomedical engineers with B.S., M.S., or Ph.D. degrees can hold R&D positions in industry. To make an informed choice regarding career paths ...
[211]
SBE | Society for Biological Engineering - AIChE
The Society for Biological Engineering (SBE), an AIChE Technological Community, is a global organization of leading engineers and scientists dedicated to ...SBE Conferences & Events · Membership · History · Students
[212]
Biomedical Engineering Society - BMES
BMES is the premier professional community for biomedical engineering innovation and excellence. Our vibrant organization unites more than 6,700 members and a ...2025 BMES Annual Meeting · About Us · Student Chapter Information · About
[213]
AIMBE
The American Institute for Medical and Biological Engineering (AIMBE) is a non-profit organization headquartered in Washington, D.C., representing the most ...College of Fellows · About Us · Fellow Directory · Nominations
[214]
Bioengineers and Biomedical Engineers - Bureau of Labor Statistics
17-2031 Bioengineers and Biomedical Engineers. Apply knowledge of engineering, biology, chemistry, computer science, and biomechanical principles to the design, ...
[215]
AlphaFold 3 predicts the structure and interactions of all of life's ...
May 8, 2024 · AlphaFold 3 is 50% more accurate than the best traditional methods on the PoseBusters benchmark, without needing the input of any structural ...
[216]
AlphaFold3: An Overview of Applications and Performance Insights
Apr 13, 2025 · AlphaFold3, the latest release of AlphaFold developed by Google DeepMind and Isomorphic Labs, was designed to predict protein structures with remarkable ...
[217]
AI in Synthetic Biology: From Gene Editing to Pathway Design
Academic research is keeping pace: a 2025 Nature Communications paper demonstrated an autonomous AI–biofoundry platform that engineered enzymes with up to 90‑ ...
[218]
CRISPR.BOT an autonomous platform for streamlined genetic ... - NIH
Aug 6, 2025 · BOT V2 autonomous robotic system can perform molecular biology and gene engineering experiments in a more automated, fast, and practical way.Missing: 2020s | Show results with:2020s
[219]
CRISPR-GPT for Agentic Automation of Gene Editing Experiments
Jul 26, 2025 · CRISPR-GPT enables fully AI-guided gene-editing experiment design and analysis across different modalities, validating its effectiveness as an ...Missing: 2020s | Show results with:2020s
[220]
Self-driving lab: AI and automated biology combine to improve ...
Jul 1, 2025 · “The designing and learning is done by an AI algorithm, and the building and testing is done by robotics.” Using this method, the team produced ...Missing: CRISPR 2020s
[221]
A generalized platform for artificial intelligence-powered ... - Nature
Jul 1, 2025 · In this work, we use protein engineering as a case study to establish a roadmap for generalized autonomous experimentation in synthetic biology.<|separator|>
[222]
[PDF] SynBioGPT - bioRxiv
Mar 24, 2025 · To address these challenges, AI-driven tools have been increasingly integrated into synthetic biology workflows, aiming to automate knowledge.
[223]
Generative AI for drug discovery and protein design: the next frontier ...
This review systematically delineates the theoretical underpinnings, algorithmic architectures, and translational applications of deep generative models.
[224]
Cost Database Update 2023 in BioSolve Process - Biopharm Services
Aug 4, 2023 · Bioprocess manufacturing costs increased 23% since 2021. Consumables and capital costs rose 80%, with materials at 30% and capital at 30% ...
[225]
Construction and Start-Up Costs for Biomanufacturing Plants
The cost of a process is generally an investment equivalent to the substructure. Non-GMP plants have between 40% and 60% of manufacturing area and a minimum of ...
[226]
Current challenges and recent advances on the path towards ...
Jul 26, 2023 · Compared to traditional batch manufacturing, continuous bioprocessing is more efficient, adjustable, and sustainable and has reduced capital ...<|separator|>
[227]
Developments and opportunities in continuous biopharmaceutical ...
Apr 11, 2021 · Timely investment in the development and implementation of continuous biomanufacturing can increase the production of consistent-quality drugs ...
[228]
Regulatory Issues and Debates in Modern Biomanufacturing
This lack of global harmonization can create significant challenges, including increased costs and delays in bringing products to market.
[229]
Regulatory challenges and global trade implications of genome ...
Jun 19, 2025 · This article analyzes the main regulatory challenges and their impact on global trade, proposing strategies for regulatory harmonization to promote ...
[230]
2024 FDA approvals - Nature
Jan 2, 2025 · The ten-year rolling average now stands at 46.5 novel approvals per year, a new high-water mark (Fig. 1; Table 1). Fig. 1 | Novel FDA approvals ...
[231]
The Pharmaceutical Industry in 2024: An Analysis of the FDA Drug ...
In 2024, the proportion of biologics among NCEs was slightly higher than in previous years: 32% of all drug approvals have been for biologics, compared to 28% ...<|separator|>
[232]
[PDF] 2024 New Drug Therapy Approvals Annual Report - FDA
CDER granted fast track status to 22 of the 50 novel drugs (44%) in 2024. Fast track speeds development and review of new drugs and biologics by increasing the ...
[233]
Real‐World Evidence in New Drug and Biologics License ...
Apr 25, 2025 · This article describes New Drug Applications and Biologics Licensing Applications approved by the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) in FYs 2020– ...
[234]
A Perspective on Protein Structure Prediction Using Quantum ...
We share our perspective on how to create a framework for systematically selecting protein structure prediction problems that are amenable for quantum ...Introduction · Quantum Computing: A Brief... · A Quantum-Classical Hybrid...
[235]
IonQ and Kipu Quantum Break New Performance Records For ...
Jun 19, 2025 · IonQ and Kipu Quantum announce the successful solution of the most complex known protein folding problem ever executed on a quantum computer.
[236]
Quantum Computing in the Next-Generation Computational Biology ...
May 27, 2023 · The present review discusses quantum computing technology and its status in solving molecular biology problems, especially in the next-generation computational ...
[237]
Quantum leap or quantum hype - Pharmaceutical Technology
Jul 21, 2025 · Quantum computing could revolutionise protein modelling by enabling simulations of molecular behaviour at atomic resolution.