UMass Amherst engineers have built an artificial neuron powered by bacterial protein nanowires that functions like a real one, but at extremely low voltage. This allows for seamless communication with biological cells and drastically improved energy efficiency. The discovery could lead to bio-inspired computers and wearable electronics that no longer need power-hungry amplifiers.
Credentials: I published in this field, but I don’t have time to read the entire paper right now.
This is exciting work. Based on the key highlights, it sounds like their work focuses on how plausible it is to construct the bio-artificial neuron, and they have done so with great success.
What I would like to learn about is what advantages this technology has compared to just cultivating neurons on a microelectrode array. Are the artificial cells easier to maintain? Do they interface with electrodes without developing glial scarring like our brains do? Can they bio-engineer special proteins (e.g. optogenetic channels) easier in these cells than in mouse lines?
The discussion section is fairly anemic. The authors say this will “spearhead” additional development but I was disappointed the authors didn’t clarify what will be additionally developed.
Until these advantages are spelled out, it feels like we’re re-invented the biological wheel. We already have cells that can integrate and fire at low voltages. They’re called neurons. Why did we need artificial ones?
Thanks for the insight. Lemmy starts to feel like reddit in the past were some specialist or the author of the paper chimed in on the discussion.
By the time I finished graduate school, reddit was dead so I never bothered getting verified on the Science subreddits. It was a bummer!
sounds like saying “we already have a lung in our body why make an iron lung.”
Like I know obviously it’s not like plug this into your spine and cure paralysis but I could definitely be very useful.
Not quite, an iron lung replaces a dysfunctional organ. I’m saying we can already grow neurons onto circuits, and it’s difficult (not impossible) to implant neurons into a body. I don’t easily see how these bio-engineered neurons make those processes easier.
Fair, I suppose I understand the idea but like… idk I can think of MANY reasons (patent bullshit, could be useful, or prove to be cheaper, or developed further into something better) why having something similar to an already existing process is still good. Look at Sodium batteries potentially now being 10% of the cost of lithium ones, even if they’re a similar but generally worse storage technology. I don’t think it should be a requirement that a new process or discovery have an inherent reason/advantage. Shit like that is how we end up with leaded gasoline.
It’s more like saying, “we can already grow new lungs, why make an iron lung?”