In a Minnesota laboratory, scientists have assembled a cell from lifeless chemicals that eats, grows, and reproduces — not to create life, but to interrogate what life fundamentally requires. Named SpudCell, it is the first bottom-up synthetic cell to complete a full life cycle, marking a threshold in humanity's long effort to understand the boundary between the animate and the merely mechanical. Its limitations are as instructive as its achievements: dependent on externally provided proteins, lasting only five to ten generations, it illuminates precisely how much complexity natural life has q
Scientists create SpudCell, a synthetic cell that eats, grows and reproduces
It feeds, grows, replicates, divides—yet it is far simpler than any natural cell.
Mark
Why does it matter that SpudCell completes a full life cycle? Couldn't scientists have just made something that eats and grows?
Mimi
Because reproduction is the thing that separates life from chemistry. A cell that divides and passes its genetic material to offspring—even if imperfectly—is doing something that dead matter cannot do on its own. It's the difference between a machine and a system that perpetuates itself.
Mark
But you said it's not alive. So what are we actually looking at?
Mimi
We're looking at the minimum requirements for life-like behavior. SpudCell does everything we use to define life, but it's so stripped down that it shows us what's truly necessary and what's just extra complexity that evolved over billions of years.
Mark
The fact that it only lasts five to ten generations—doesn't that seem like a failure?
Mimi
It's a limitation, but it's also revealing. It shows us that ribosomes are the bottleneck. Once scientists figure out how to let SpudCell build its own, the next version could theoretically keep dividing indefinitely.
Mark
What would happen if they solved that problem? Would SpudCell become alive?
Mimi
That's the question nobody can answer because we don't have a definition of alive that everyone agrees on. But it would certainly become something much harder to distinguish from life as we know it.
Mark
Are people worried about this getting out of control?
Mimi
Not yet. SpudCell is too dependent on human care to survive on its own. It's more like a houseplant than a virus. But the field is moving fast, and biosecurity experts are paying attention.
El Pulso
- For the first time, a cell assembled entirely from laboratory chemicals — not simplified from existing life — has eaten, grown, divided, and passed genetic material to offspring.
- SpudCell cannot build its own ribosomes, forcing scientists to feed it proteins from outside, and its fragmented genome causes errors that cap its lineage at just five to ten generations.
- Its 90,000-base-pair genome, scattered across seven DNA molecules, is a radical simplification that exposes the gap between mimicking life's behaviors and achieving life's resilience.
- Biosecurity experts see no immediate danger, describing SpudCell as too fragile and dependent to be anything other than a scientific instrument — but they acknowledge it will require watching as the technology matures.
- Researchers are already designing the next version: one that manufactures its own ribosomes, transfers genetic information more faithfully, and moves closer to the self-sufficiency that defines natural life.
In a Minnesota laboratory, scientists have assembled a cell from lifeless chemicals that eats, grows, and reproduces — not to create life, but to interrogate what life fundamentally requires. Named SpudCell, it is the first bottom-up synthetic cell to complete a full life cycle, marking a threshold in humanity's long effort to understand the boundary between the animate and the merely mechanical. Its limitations are as instructive as its achievements: dependent on externally provided proteins, lasting only five to ten generations, it illuminates precisely how much complexity natural life has quietly mastered over billions of years.
In a University of Minnesota laboratory, scientists have built something that eats, grows, and divides — yet was never alive to begin with. They call it SpudCell, and it represents the first synthetic cell constructed entirely from scratch, from lifeless chemicals, to complete a full life cycle from creation to reproduction.
SpudCell is not the first artificial cell ever made. Early prototypes date to 1957, and in 2010 researchers at the J. Craig Venter Institute created minimal cells with synthetic genomes — but those were built by stripping down existing cells. SpudCell is different: assembled piece by piece, from the ground up, using only the bare minimum of genetic and structural components needed to mimic life's basic functions.
Its creators do not claim it is alive, and the question itself reveals how slippery that concept has become. SpudCell consumes nutrients, grows, replicates its genetic material, divides, and undergoes selection — yet it remains far simpler than any natural cell. Its most significant constraint is that it cannot build its own ribosomes, the machinery that manufactures proteins. Scientists must supply these from outside, limiting each lineage to five to ten generations before it exhausts itself. Its genome, just 90,000 base pairs scattered across seven separate DNA molecules, introduces errors that would be fatal in a natural organism.
The purpose of SpudCell is not to create life but to understand what life requires. By building a cell from scratch, researchers can identify which components are truly essential. John Glass of the J. Craig Venter Institute called it a major advance — the closest thing to being alive that the bottom-up synthetic cell field has ever produced. The knowledge it generates could reshape medical research, inform space exploration strategies, and deepen understanding of how life first emerged.
Researchers are already planning the next iteration: a version that manufactures its own ribosomes, transfers genetic information more completely, and reduces dependence on externally provided enzymes. Biosecurity experts, meanwhile, consider the current SpudCell an exciting proof-of-principle but note it remains too fragile and dependent to pose any meaningful risk — a tool for understanding life, not a substitute for it.
In a laboratory at the University of Minnesota, scientists have assembled something that eats, grows, and divides into new cells—yet it was never alive to begin with. They call it SpudCell, and it represents a threshold moment in synthetic biology: the first cell built entirely from scratch, from lifeless chemicals, that completes a full life cycle from creation to reproduction.
SpudCell is not the first artificial cell ever made. That distinction belongs to work from 1957, when a Canadian physicist named Thomas Ming Swi Chang created an early prototype that, while crude, opened the door to medical applications like transporting biological materials through the body to treat organ failure and poisoning. Since then, the field has advanced in fits and starts. In 2010, researchers at the J. Craig Venter Institute in California created minimal cells—stripped-down versions of natural cells with synthetic genomes that could divide on their own. But those were built by simplifying existing cells. SpudCell is different. It was constructed piece by piece, from the ground up, using only laboratory chemicals and the bare minimum of genetic and structural components needed to mimic life's basic functions.
Yet SpudCell is not alive, or at least the scientists who created it do not claim it is. The question itself reveals how slippery the concept of life has become. There is no single agreed definition, the researchers note. What SpudCell does is perform the behaviors we typically use to distinguish the living from the merely mechanical: it consumes nutrients, it grows, it replicates its genetic material, it divides, and it undergoes selection. But it does all this while remaining far simpler than any natural cell, and with significant limitations that expose how much we still depend on living systems.
The most obvious constraint is that SpudCell cannot build its own ribosomes—the cellular machinery responsible for manufacturing proteins. Scientists must feed it these crucial proteins and enzymes from outside. This dependency means each generation of SpudCell cells can only divide five to ten times before the lineage exhausts itself. Its genome, too, is radically simplified: just 90,000 base pairs compared to the three billion in human DNA, and those base pairs are scattered across seven separate DNA molecules rather than consolidated into one. This fragmentation means genetic information does not always transfer completely to offspring, introducing errors and instability that would be fatal in a natural organism.
The point of SpudCell is not to create life, but to understand what life requires. For decades, researchers have pursued what they call minimal cells—the theoretical bare bones of cellular function. By building SpudCell from scratch, scientists can identify which genetic and structural components are truly essential and which are redundant. This knowledge has ripple effects. Understanding the mechanisms that underlie life's basic functions could reshape medical research, inform strategies for space exploration, and deepen our grasp of how life itself emerged. John Glass, who leads synthetic cell research at the J. Craig Venter Institute, called SpudCell a major advance, noting that Kate Adamala's team had created something far closer to being alive than anything produced by the bottom-up synthetic cell field before.
The researchers are already planning the next iteration. They want to engineer genetic instructions that would allow future versions of SpudCell to manufacture their own ribosomes, eliminating the need for external feeding and removing the five-to-ten-generation ceiling. They also hope to improve how completely genetic information passes to the next generation and to reduce the cell's dependence on the enzyme-rich food scientists currently provide. Each improvement would move SpudCell closer to the self-sufficiency that defines natural life.
Biosecurity experts have weighed in on whether SpudCell poses any immediate threat. The consensus is that it does not. Becky Mackelprang, director of security programs at the Engineering Biology Research Consortium, called the current SpudCell an exciting proof-of-principle but noted that before it could be used for good or ill, it would require significantly more development. The cell remains too dependent, too fragile, too limited to be anything other than what it is: a tool for understanding life, not a replacement for it.
Citas Notables
SpudCell performs the behaviors often used to tell the living from the inert—it feeds, grows, replicates its genome, divides and undergoes selection—yet it is far simpler than any natural cell and was assembled, part by part, by hand.— SpudCell project researchers
The current SpudCell is an exciting proof-of-principle, but before it can be used for good or for bad, it will require significantly more work.— Becky Mackelprang, Engineering Biology Research Consortium
Quieres la nota completa?
Lee el original en The Straits Times ↗
Education