↓ Skip to main content

What Symbionts Teach us about Modularity

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
What Symbionts Teach us about Modularity
Published in
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fbioe.2013.00014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Manuel Porcar, Amparo Latorre, Andrés Moya

Abstract

The main goal of Synthetic Biology (SB) is to apply engineering principles to biotechnology in order to make life easier to engineer. These engineering principles include modularity: decoupling of complex systems into smaller, orthogonal sub-systems that can be used in a range of different applications. The successful use of modules in engineering is expected to be reproduced in synthetic biological systems. But the difficulties experienced up to date with SB approaches question the short-term feasibility of designing life. Considering the "engineerable" nature of life, here we discuss the existence of modularity in natural living systems, particularly in symbiotic interactions, and compare the behavior of such systems, with those of engineered modules. We conclude that not only is modularity present but it is also common among living structures, and that symbioses are a new example of module-like sub-systems having high similarity with modularly designed ones. However, we also detect and stress fundamental differences between man-made and biological modules. Both similarities and differences should be taken into account in order to adapt SB design to biological laws.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Mexico 1 2%
United States 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 40 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 23%
Researcher 9 20%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Professor 4 9%
Student > Master 3 7%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 3 7%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 45%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 16%
Chemical Engineering 2 5%
Engineering 2 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 5%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 7 16%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 November 2013.
All research outputs
#20,209,145
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#4,561
of 6,505 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,798
of 280,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
#10
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,505 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 280,769 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.