Limits of bacterial synthesis

[Snoach]

Hi all. This is my first post here, so:

 

1. I've read the sticky and think this belongs here and not in Speculation.

2. I am a scientist of no sort, so my question may be face-palmingly stupid.

 

 

That said, what are the limits of bacterial synthesis? I understand that bacteria have been bred that synthesise biofuels and pharmaceuticals, but if the methods available were flawless, could they be engineered to create things like foods, explosives and varieties of plastic?

 

If so, what would they need to feed on? I doubt they can make everything from agar and glucose.

[CharonY]

There is a limit to what biological synthesis pathways can do. But keep in mind that they have, by definition, be products that can be gained from biochemical reactions. Artificial polymers as plastics for instance, can therefore generally not be produced by them.

They can degrade many of them though and thus changing their properties.

[Snoach]

Thanks for the reply,CharonY. Is the chemistry of plastic so different to biochem that it's impossible? I assume there must be some biological structures that are vaguely analogous to plastic (chitin?), so substituting may be possible in the future?

 

For the record, I'm writing a SF story and I'm trying to get an idea of bacterial technology that's at least theoretically possible, so that scientifically-aware people won't tear the pages up in disgust.

[ewmon]

Offhand, I don't see why bacteria can't make foods, explosives and polymers. The food possibility is very obvious. We've already developed algae to produce ethanol fuel, so explosives should be easy enough. For polymers, we'd just get a bit more sophisticated: some bacteria make the repeat units and other bacteria make the enzyme that polymerizes them. In that way, the polymers are produced outside the cells instead of inside, where it would be disastrous.

[Genecks]

Well, explosives is a tricky word. Sure, if it's producing a fuel, that could immediately be used as an explosive. But if it's making some kind of time-delayed explosive that will only be set off by some kind of condition, such as a large temperature drop? I'm not sure how that would be pulled off. I think such a microorganism would be useful.

 

I think if there were a limit to bacterial synthesis, then it would be related to size or complexity of the molecule being made. Synthesis is primarily dependent on those things, I think.

 

But then again, I've often questioned the limit, and I would have to say whether or not it's worth it to develop a bacterium to do something. Let's say we could actually build bacteria that can build a car (insane, I know). Somehow we've mastered that ability. But it would only be worth to have something like that if it would be cost-efficient. In the example of a car? I don't think people would want to put forth the time and money to do something like that.

 

Furthermore, I think people would be more interested in nanotech (or some tiny robots) for something like that. And then there is rapid-prototyping using machinery.

 

So, for making molecules, maybe we'd use microorganisms. For building machines? Probably something mechanic to build something mechanic.

 

What would the microbes feed on? That would depend on the metabolic and synthesis activities of the microbe. If you can find a way to get it to use ATP, great. I guess energy source would depend on the kind of molecule you're synthesizing and how you developed it.

 

Some people have electric cars, and some people have cars that run on gasoline.

Edited June 1, 2010 by Genecks

[Snoach]

Thanks for the info. Very helpful.