细胞首次从零开始构建并实现生长与分裂
For first time, a cell built from scratch grows and divides

原始链接: https://www.quantamagazine.org/for-the-first-time-a-cell-built-from-scratch-grows-and-divides-20260701/

合成生物学家凯特·亚当拉(Kate Adamala)在这一领域取得了重要里程碑,她创造出了一种能够生长和分裂的合成“土豆细胞”(spudcell)。虽然此前的研究已实现了合成系统中的DNA复制和摄食,但细胞分裂一直是一个重大障碍。通过采用一种利用膜结合蛋白来物理变形并分裂细胞的机制,亚当拉成功绕过了对复杂的天然细胞骨架的需求。 尽管这些细胞尚不能自我维持——它们无法合成自身的核糖体,也无法进行自然进化——但它们代表了一个“分水岭事件”。通过整合DNA复制、供给脂质体和诱导分裂的蛋白质,亚当拉的团队证明了弥合非生命化学与生物功能之间鸿沟的可能性。 亚当拉将她的发明比作早期的“莱特飞行者”号,这是迈向更复杂合成生命的基础性一步。为了促进进一步创新,她的团队成立了一家名为Biotic的非营利组织,旨在全球范围内分享他们的方法。虽然这些细胞目前还很原始,但它们为研究生命起源提供了一个重要的平台,并有望在绿色制造和医学领域实现未来的应用。正如专家所指出的,真正理解生命的唯一途径,就是从零开始构建它。

研究人员在合成生物学领域取得了一项重要里程碑:开发出了“SpudCells”。这是首个能够生长和分裂的人造类细胞结构。与自然细胞不同,这些结构完全由非生物成分从零构建,尽管目前仍需依赖外部核糖体和营养物质来维持功能。 这一成果在 Hacker News 上引发了关于现代学术界现状及同行评审制度的热烈讨论。据报道,首席研究员凯特·阿达马拉(Kate Adamala)在审稿人以“合成生物学并非真正的生物学”为由拒绝其论文后,避开了传统的期刊投稿流程,直接向记者公开了手稿。这引发了一场辩论:这种“非同寻常”的做法究竟是应对一个破碎、不透明且常显任性的把关系统的必要权宜之计,还是逃避科学审查的不专业行为? 评论者们还讨论了创造人造生命的更广泛影响。尽管一些人对制造业和医学领域的突破持乐观态度,但另一些人则对生物安全、潜在的双重用途滥用以及人类工程化生物学可能带来的意外后果表示深切担忧。尽管存在争议,但人们普遍认为,这项工作标志着人类在理解生命起源的基本问题上迈出了重要(尽管仍处于早期阶段)的一步。
相关文章

原文

This was where the field had been stuck for some time. Researchers before Adamala had figured out different ways to feed and grow synthetic cells and to replicate their DNA. But cell division is a different beast. A typical cell reorganizes its cytoskeleton — a network of protein fibers that provide structural support — to halve its DNA and split. Synthetic biologists could not figure out how to get their cells to undergo this complex process.

So Adamala decided to ditch the cytoskeleton. One day, while tearing through the literature, she came across an interesting mechanism in a paper. By attaching protein tags to a cell membrane, the synthetic biologist Reinhard Lipowsky at the Max Planck Institute of Colloids and Interfaces attracted other proteins to crowd around and physically bend the membrane, forcing the cell to divide. Following this approach, Adamala tweaked a cell-membrane protein and tested it in her protocells. After several tries, it worked.

“I wasn’t allowing myself to believe it for a while,” she said. “It was like, ‘Holy shit, did I actually make a dividing cell?’ … At some point, you’ve been checking enough that [you think], ‘OK, now it’s real.’”

This paper “beautifully demonstrates this division mechanism,” said Job Boekhoven, a systems chemist at the Technical University of Munich who was not involved in the study. “That has been a huge achievement.”

By putting together systems inspired by different labs — DNA replication; feeder liposomes; and swarming, division-inducing proteins — and then optimizing them to work together, Adamala’s team showed that it is possible to induce the chemical world to form a biological one in the lab.

“Combining all of these things is a staggering technical accomplishment,” Glass said. “I think it will prove to be a watershed event for the synthetic-cell field and biology in general.”

Michael Lynch, an evolutionary biologist at Arizona State University who was also not involved in the study, agreed. It is “a synthetic biology tour de force,” he said. However, he also cautioned against over-hyping the cell since it’s not yet self-sustaining.

Once the synthetic cells were created, her students and others started calling them Adamala cells — a moniker she hated. She insisted that they name the cells after anything else, jokingly suggesting potatoes. So her students started calling them spudcells. “I’m Polish, I’m mostly made of potatoes, so that’s fine with me,” Adamala said.

Each cell is tiny. Its genome is way smaller than bacterial genomes, and it doesn’t look like anything special. It’s “beautiful to me because I’m super excited about it,” Adamala said. “But if you look at it under the microscope, it’s like, ‘OK, it’s a blob.’”

Evolution and Beyond

The cell could grow and divide. But could it take the next step toward life by evolving?

The researchers started fiddling with the synthetic cell’s DNA to see if they could get some cells to grow larger or divide faster — in effect, creating genetic variation in the cell population. They found that the cells that grew bigger also had more daughter cells and started to become more populous. In other words, those traits started being selected for within the population, the first step toward evolution.

What Adamala’s team demonstrated was not quite natural selection, the primary mechanism that drives evolutionary change, in which organisms that are better adapted to their environment are more likely to survive. Even if she got their cell to produce more daughter cells, she doesn’t think it would lead to evolution. That’s because Adamala’s team had to create genetic variation synthetically, instead of allowing for random mutations in DNA. The enzyme that builds new DNA strands works too well, she said; it doesn’t introduce meaningful mutations into the sequence. They will need to find an enzyme that is more error-prone — but not so error-prone that the genome’s integrity and the cell’s function is lost.

“Biology needs to change fast enough, but not too fast,” Adamala said. She said that she needs to find the sweet spot between order and chaos, referencing the biochemist and complexity theorist Stuart Kauffman, a professor emeritus at the University of Pennsylvania, who argues that biology works best at the “edge of chaos.”

A clear demonstration of an evolutionary process is “clearly something that’s missing,” Boekhoven said. “I’m sure that that’s the next big step.” Other researchers have shown adaptive evolution in other types of synthetic cells. But those cells were bacteria stripped of all but the bare minimum of genes — they weren’t built from the ground up.

The cells are also limited by the fact that they need to be fed many of their raw materials. That the cells can’t make their own ribosomes, the way natural cells do, “limits [their] potential for growth and sustained reproduction,” said Szostak, who was Adamala’s doctoral adviser. “If their system was able to generate its own ribosomes and other proteins and RNAs, it would be much closer to existing biological cells such as bacteria.”

Adamala also thinks they will need to figure out a way to add a cytoskeleton to improve their replication system. Currently, the cells waste a lot of energy and time attracting molecules to crowd around and help them divide.

All told, scientists are far from building anything remotely close to a modern living cell — but this new one is still the most lifelike yet. “The modern cell is like a Dreamliner,” Adamala said, referring to the Boeing 787 airplane. “We built a Wright flyer… the first bike frame with wings that flies 100 feet.”

Alongside sharing the new results, Adamala and other synthetic biologists announced the formation of a nonprofit called Biotic, which they will use to make their synthetic biology tools available to researchers around the world. The team is releasing their data and methods so that synthetic biologists can start building and improving on their cell. The hope is that the work can be used, decades from now, to create plastics without fossil fuels, for example, or fertilizers or drugs.

These synthetic cells could also pave the way to the past, to the origins of biology itself. Life on Earth would have started from much simpler molecules than the ones that spudcells use. Still, Adamala’s creation of a synthetic cell system from non-living materials brings researchers a step closer to exploring, in the lab, deeper questions about life’s origins and requirements, a dream she shares with others.

“If you want to understand what life is,” Boekhoven said, “you need to first build life.”

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com