Dr. Craig Venter Creates First Cell Controlled Entirely by Synthetic DNA

    By James DeGiulio --

After a 15-year effort, the team of Daniel Gibson (at right), Hamilton Smith, and Craig Venter (below left) have created the first cell controlled by a purely synthetic genome.  In a press release and accompanying press conference, Dr. Venter described the converted cell as "the first self-replicating species we've had on the planet whose parent is a computer."

As reported in the May 20 issue of Science, in an article entitled "Creation of a Bacterial Cell Controlled by a Chemically Synthesized Genome," the research team at the J. Craig Venter Institute in Rockville, Maryland designed 1,078 specific cassettes of DNA that were 1,080 base pairs long and ordered them from DNA synthesis company Blue Heron Biotechnology.  To ensure that the assembled genome would be recognizable as synthetic, four of the ordered DNA sequences contained strings of bases that, in code, spell out an e-mail address, the names of the people involved in the project, and a few famous quotations from James Joyce and other authors.  The team then assembled the shorter lengths into a complete Mycoplasma mycoides genome.  The researchers transferred the synthetic genome into a recipient cell from a different bacterial species, replacing the endogenous DNA, and the cell became entirely controlled by the new synthetic genome.  The cell was essentially converted into a different species, for the finished product was capable of replication and had all the expected properties of a Mycoplasma mycoides bacterium.

The cost of the project was $40 million, most of it paid for by Synthetic Genomics, a company Dr. Venter founded.  Not surprisingly, Venter has applied for several patents covering the work, assigning them to his company.  Synthetic Genomics has a contract from Exxon to generate biofuels from algae.  However, the bacterium used by the Venter group is unsuitable for biofuel production, and Dr. Venter said the team would move on to more suitable organisms.  Dr. Venter and his colleagues hope to design new bacteria that will perform useful functions, such as production of new fuel molecules, new food oils, and new biologically derived sources of plastic and chemicals.  Dr. Venter predicted that the first application the world may see could be as soon as next year.

Dr. Venter's "synthetic cell" has the potential to rejuvenate nagging questions of ethics, law, and public safety about artificial life that bio-ethicists have been debating for more than a decade.  However, some scientists downplayed the development, finding it as merely a technical accomplishment, since the new cell can be viewed as an organism with a synthetic genome, not as a synthetic organism.

President Obama has asked the White House bioethics commission to report back to him on the significance of this development, and Nature has published a series of opinions on Dr. Venter's article from synthetic biology experts.  Patent Docs will address the commentary and additional reactions to Dr. Venter's discovery in future posts.

For additional information regarding this and other related topics, please see:

• "Playing the Bioterror Card in the Synthetic Biology Debate," December 19, 2007
• "The Synthetic Biology Sky Is Not Falling," December 16, 2007
• "Patenting Life (Really)," June 11, 2007

James DeGiulio has a doctorate in molecular biology and genetics from Northwestern University and is a third-year law student at the Northwestern University School of Law.  Dr. DeGiulio was a member of MBHB's 2009 class of summer associates, and he can be contacted at [email protected].

Comments

[David Koepsell]

As I understand it, Venter's team altered the genome not merely by addition, but also by deletion, eliminating 14 genes from the full genome, making it quite new and different from the original species, and thus a good candidate as a new species, as you say. It still produces proteins found in M. mycoides but not all of them.

This is an engineered life form, and I have no dispute with patenting it as a whole, by the way, if it had a use other than as a proof of concept, that is.

best,
David

[Edward]

What will be the main function of the cells?

[Saleem Awan]

This is really a breakthrough for the future development of synthetic biology. This development can be useful in developing health products. Now we have entered into the era of developing new species. We might call ourselves masters of the earth and life now, but power comes with responsibility. We need to learn how to use powers. That's what we lack today.

[pankaj singh]

can cell completetly syenthetic. how error can be effectevily removed in dna

[6]

HAS NOBODY HERE SEEN ANY SCI FI IN THE LAST 30 YEARS? STOP THIS MAD SCIENTIST BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!

lol

[Woodypecker]

Dear. Doctor Venter,

I've always having a vision toward biotechnology, that some day some thing big would be discovered. It is exciting to know about your genome project” synthetic DNA" and your creation of hybrid living cell from an artificial DNA that your team and you have created. I can't wait to see your new invention that you planned to create next. I hope your next work would event be exciting as the first one.

Best regards,
Woodypecker!

[Gena777]

I find this development fascinating -- in part because in the future, biotech companies could potentially find a way around the "naturally occurring" limitations on patenting organisms by creating synthetic versions of the organisms, instead. This could have far-reaching effects on patent law in general, the Myriad case in particular, and many other biotech issues ... not to mention bioethics, the future of humankind, etc.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/25/patent-reform-misses-the-mark/