This article explores the integration of biological and non-biological technologies, suggesting implications for innovation and collaboration.
<?A3B2 tlsb=-.03w?>In recent years, the convergence of biological and non-biological technologies has been reshaping the global landscape of scientific and technological development with unprecedented breadth and depth, emerging as a core driving force for fostering disruptive innovation, cultivating new quality productive forces, and advancing sustainable transformation. This integration transcends the simplistic combination of isolated technological functions typical of earlier stages, gradually evolving into a systemic, multi-scale collaborative innovation paradigm. It provides robust support for cross-level systematic research from molecules to individuals, ranging from precise regulation at molecular interfaces, intelligent construction of cellular microenvironments, and in vitro simulation of organ functions to digital mapping of life systems at the organismal level, thereby driving a shift in life science research from traditional “passive observation” toward “active design” and even “dynamic optimization”. This article focuses on this cutting-edge trend. First, it delves into the underlying logic of the convergence between biological and non-biological technologies, highlighting that the core lies in establishing system-level coupling mechanisms that bridge living systems and artificial systems across physical, informational, and functional dimensions. Such coupling is not merely about interface connections; rather, it involves the efficient integration of signal transduction, energy exchange, and functional synergy at the bio-nonbio interface through multidisciplinary tools such as biomimetic design, synthetic biology, micro/nano-fabrication, and artificial intelligence. Second, the article examines several key nodes and representative application areas, systematically reviewing advances in frontier fields such as programmable biomaterials, biosensors, 3D/4D bioprinting, organoids, brain-computer interfaces, biohybrid robots, and digital life. For instance, programmable biomaterials enable fine-tuned control over material structure and performance in response to external stimuli; biosensors facilitate real-time, highly sensitive monitoring of cellular metabolism or neural activity; 3D/4D bioprinting significantly enhances the biomimetic fidelity and controllability of organoids at the tissue level and in terms of cellular heterogeneity; biohybrid robots demonstrate potential in precise manipulation, environmental detection, micro-scale operation, and life-like system modeling; and digital life technologies propel life sciences from ″observing life″ toward ″computing life″, laying a revolutionary technological foundation for future precision medicine, drug design, public health, and biomanufacturing. These directions synergistically advance the precision design of molecular structures, dynamic regulation of cellular behavior, and systematic reconstruction of tissue functions, ultimately enabling dynamic replication, precise intervention, and continuous optimization of physiological functions at the organ or even organismal level. Finally, the article emphasizes that, despite rapid technological convergence, challenges such as underdeveloped regulatory framework, ambiguous ethical boundaries, and poorly defined safety risks remain. Accordingly, it proposes the construction of a dynamic and adaptive regulatory system for convergent technologies, the establishment of new interdisciplinary ″translation″ and collaboration mechanisms, and the integration of ethics and safety considerations into the very source of technological innovation. Looking ahead, with continued breakthroughs in AI, digital twins, advanced materials, and automated platforms, the convergence of biological and non-biological technologies is expected to advance higher levels of intelligent collaboration, driving a new wave of scientific and industrial revolution. <alternatives id="alt3"> </alternatives>
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
ZHANG et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: