Although we often regard our own bodies and those of the other multicellular organisms around us as a singular entity, each cell that makes up our body is its own, nano-robot. One long-existing question was whether these cells can be used for other tasks — like biological robots — after they have specialized into a specific tissue type, with a recent study by [Gizem Gumuskaya] and colleagues in Advanced Science (with Nature news coverage) indicating a potential intriguing use of adult human epithelial cells recovered from the trachea.
After extraction, these adult cells were kept in an extracellular matrix (ECM, Matrigel) in conditions promoting cell division, followed by ECM dissolution after 14 days and subsequent culturing of the spherical clumps of cells that had thus formed in a water-based, low-viscosity environment. This environment, along with the addition of retinoic acid promoted the development of outward-facing cilia, rather than the typical inward type with a gel-based ECM.
These spheroids (anthrobots, referencing their human origin) generally showed the ability to move using these cilia, with the direction largely determined by the symmetry of the sphere. Multiple of these motile spheroids were then placed on a layer of human neural tissue, in which a scratch had damaged a number of the neurons to form a gap. The anthrobots grouped together over the course of days to form a bridge across the gap, with the neural tissue observed to regrow underneath this bridge, a behavior that could not be repeated by using a dummy support consisting out of agarose on another neural sample, indicating that it is this living bridge that enabled neural regeneration.
Although the researchers rightfully indicate that they are uncertain which factors actually induce this restorative effect in the neurons, it offers exciting glimpses into a potential feature where neural damage is easily repaired, and biological robots made from our own cells can be assembled to perform a variety of tasks.
Epithelial cells are the best for cloning (hint: long ladder).
Or perhaps, the pluripotent stem cells present in umbilical cords may be more beneficial as they may be persuaded some day to replace ailing cells with new cells.
“The anthrobots grouped together over the course of days to form a bridge across the gap, with the neural tissue observed to regrow underneath this bridge”
Fixing spinal cord damage once one got rid of the scar tissue.
I think this is highly fascinating and I think the ambitions behind it are noble, too.
However, in reality, did any of these concepts or studies ever come to fruition?
I mean, historical, which of those epic future dreams have ever materialized?
By 2000s, it was expected that we have flying cars and proper space travel.
But in practice, we can’t even make teeth grown again so far, yet alone cure hearing loss. Or can we?
I get your frustration. An avid reader of articles about the cutting edge could get easily jaded from all the promising things that don’t pan out and/or take a lot longer than expected to do so.
But if you really think nothing ever does come to fruition look around you. We are surrounded by functioning technology. Are you surviving off hunting and gathering? How are we communicating? What’s this Hack a Day thing, a bulletin board painted on a cave wall?
Relax a bit and if you still think it’s all so bad maybe pick a field and contribute some effort of your own to it.
Thanks for your reply, I appreciate it.
I’m relaxed, also. If I’d be any more relaxed, I’d fall asleep. Ha. 🙂
To be honest, though, I don’t see much progress in real life anymore.
I saw it in the 90s, still, though.
But maybe that’s because I don’t care much about consumer’s electronics.
A PS5, a 5 TB SSD or an 8k monitor are no breakthroughs, just logical continuity of existing concepts.
Here, something new would be a monitor based on laser technology (say, using back-projection).
Or, electric light bulbs based on electro-luminescence..
Or cars using hydrogen cells.
Or cars driving automatically on a grid that’s built into the highway.
Or floating trains like our abandoned Transrapid.
You know, one of these futuristic concepts from the 1960s/1970s..
Anyway, maybe it’s just me. I maybe simply have certain standards and expectations that aren’t being shared by the majority of the population. 🤷♂️
But to my defense, I simply don’t want to grow old just to see one of them come to be real.
It’s like with Apollo program. The technology was there, but people didn’t bother to develop things further.
It’s been over 50 years already -almost a human lifetime- that humans visited the moon.
And even now, the “know how” isn’t as good as it used to be.
No one of the original team can be asked anymore to provide assistance on the current mission.
If Artemis just had happened 25 years earlier, things might be different..
Anyway, that’s just my 2 cents. 🙂
We don’t get all of the progress dreamt up when a new discovery is made, but we’re cutting more types of cancer than ever before, we’ve cured for some genetic diseases that were killers 20 years ago, we’ve got communicators in the palm of our hands that are more capable than many sci-fi devices, etc
That might be true, but on the other hand.. The development of/research on new types of antibiotics had been halted in.. the 1980s? Because it was no longer being “profitable” enough? 😔
I forgot. Speaking of smartphones, the Nokia Communicator of 1996 shouldn’t be forgotten.
It was comparable to a smartphone, just with an extra keyboard.
So I terms of ergonomics and usability, it was superior to what we have now, maybe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nokia_Communicator
Oh kid. I don’t know were to start. About the smartphones.. *sigh* They’re lame and overrated. IMHO.
But due to our collective addiction, we find it to be awesome, of course. 🤷♂️
For comparison, I had a pager in the early-mid 90s already, followed by a Palm handheld.
A smartphone is just a PDA w/ a cell phone module.
I still remember the T-Mobile MDA from mid 2000s, the Palm Treo, some other models.
The Japanese had such things 1996 already or so (they’re always 10 years ahead). They also had i-mode, a type of mobile internet (some sort of WAP).
That’s roughly when I owned a GSM cell phone with SMS support, too.
Oh, well, I could go on here, but that would merely make me look like someone who loves complaining.. 😒