Skip to main content
. 2017 May 25;8:15459. doi: 10.1038/ncomms15459

Table 1. Synthetic circuit size comparison.

Publication No. of gates/parts No. of connections No. of inputs Circuit complexity (gates2+connections2)1/2 Functionally complete parts? Medium
Cascade circuit 7 6 1 9.22 Yes S. cerevisiae
Nielsen et al.22 7 6 3 9.22 Yes E. coli
Qian et al.70 6 5 4 7.81 Yes In vitro
XOR circuit 5 4 2 6.40 Yes S. cerevisiae
Xie et al.11 5 4 6 6.40 No Mammalian
Auslander et al.71 5 4 2 6.40 No Mammalian
Regot et al.72 5 3 2 5.83 Yes Multicellular S. cerevisiae
Nissim et al.33 5 3 1 5.83 No Mammalian
Stanton et al.19 4 3 2 5 Yes E. coli
Nielsen et al.18 3 2 2 3.61 Yes E. coli
Kiani et al.20 2 2 1 2.83 No Mammalian

The best method for quantifying the size of synthetic biological circuits is an open question. Here we took the largest synthetic circuits constructed in recent publications and compared them with the two largest circuits from this paper. We separated the inputs to the circuits from internal components. We also counted the number of connections between the internal components. By our definition, a ‘part' is a molecular species that carries information necessary for the internal function of the circuit (as opposed to a helper protein such as cas9). A ‘connection' is a molecular interaction between parts that propagates information within the circuit.