Bio-syncretic robots consisting of artificial structures and living muscle cells have attracted much attention owing to their potential advantages, such as high drive efficiency, miniaturization, and compatibility. Motion controllability, as an important factor related to the main performance of bio-syncretic robots, has been explored in numerous studies. However, most of the existing bio-syncretic robots still face challenges related to the further development of steerable kinematic dexterity. In this study, a bionic optimized biped fully soft bio-syncretic robot actuated by two muscle tissues and steered with a direction-controllable electric field generated by external circularly distributed multiple electrodes has been developed. The developed bio-syncretic robot could realize wirelessly steerable motion and effective transportation of microparticle cargo on artificial polystyrene and biological pork tripe surfaces. This study may provide an effective strategy for the development of bio-syncretic robots and other related studies, such as nonliving soft robot design and muscle tissue engineering.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
YangGZ, BellinghamJ, DupontPE, et al.The grand challenges of science robotics. Sci Robot, 2018; 3(14):eaar7650; doi: 10.1126/scirobotics.aar7650.
2.
WangW, DuanW, AhmedS, et al.Small power: Autonomous nano- and micromotors propelled by self-generated gradients. Nano Today, 2013; 8(5):531–554; doi: 10.1016/j.nantod.2013.08.009.
3.
DasM, WilsonK, MolnarP, et al.Differentiation of skeletal muscle and integration of myotubes with silicon microstructures using serum-free medium and a synthetic silane substrate. Nat Protoc, 2007; 2(7):1795–1801; doi: 10.1038/nprot.2007.229.
4.
AlfordPW, FeinbergAW, SheehySP, et al.Biohybrid thin films for measuring contractility in engineered cardiovascular muscle. Biomaterials, 2010; 31(13):3613–3621; doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2010.01.079.
5.
RicottiL, TrimmerB, FeinbergAW, et al.Biohybrid actuators for robotics: A review of devices actuated by living cells. Sci Robot, 2017; 2(12):eaaq0495; doi: 10.1126/scirobotics.aaq0495.
6.
SunL, YuY, ChenZ, et al.Biohybrid robotics with living cell actuation. Chem Soc Rev, 2020; 49(12):4043–4069; doi: 10.1039/d0cs00120a.
7.
ZhangC, WangW, XiN, et al.Development and future challenges of bio-syncretic robots. Engineering, 2018; 4(4):452–463; doi: 10.1016/j.eng.2018.07.005.
8.
PagaduanJV, BhattaA, RomerLH, et al.3D hybrid small scale devices. Small, 2018; 14(27):e1702497; doi: 10.1002/smll.201702497.
9.
Webster-WoodVA, AkkusO, GurkanUA, et al.Organismal engineering: Toward a robotic taxonomic key for devices using organic materials. Sci Robot, 2017; 2(12):eaap9281; doi: 10.1126/scirobotics.aap9281.
10.
ChanV, AsadaHH, BashirR. Utilization and control of bioactuators across multiple length scales. Lab Chip, 2014; 14(4):653–670; doi: 10.1039/c3lc50989c.
FeinbergAW, FeigelA, ShevkoplyasSS, et al.Muscular thin films for building actuators and powering devices. Science, 2007; 317(5843):1366–1370; doi: 10.1126/science.1146885.
19.
SunL, ChenZ, BianF, et al.Bioinspired soft robotic caterpillar with cardiomyocyte drivers. Adv Funct Mater, 2020; 30(6):1907820; doi: 10.1002/adfm.201907820.
20.
LeeKY, ParkSJ, MatthewsDG, et al.An autonomously swimming biohybrid fish designed with human cardiac biophysics. Science, 2022; 375(6581):639–647; doi: 10.1126/science.abh0474.
21.
AydinO, ZhangX, NuethongS, et al.Neuromuscular actuation of biohybrid motile bots. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2019; 116(40):19841–19847; doi: 10.1073/pnas.1907051116.
22.
MorimotoY, OnoeH, TakeuchiS. Biohybrid robot powered by an antagonistic pair of skeletal muscle tissues. Sci Robot, 2018; 3(18):eaat4440; doi: 10.1126/scirobotics.aat4440.
23.
RamanR, GrantL, SeoY, et al.Damage, healing, and remodeling in optogenetic skeletal muscle bioactuators. Adv Healthc Mater, 2017; 6(12):1700030; doi: 10.1002/adhm.201700030.
24.
RamanR, CvetkovicC, UzelSG, et al.Optogenetic skeletal muscle-powered adaptive biological machines. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2016; 113(13):3497–3502; doi: 10.1073/pnas.1516139113.
25.
CvetkovicC, RamanR, ChanV, et al.Three-dimensionally printed biological machines powered by skeletal muscle. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2014; 111(28):10125–10130; doi: 10.1073/pnas.1401577111.
26.
KaufmanCD, LiuSC, CvetkovicC, et al.Emergence of functional neuromuscular junctions in an engineered, multicellular spinal cord-muscle bioactuator. APL Bioeng, 2020; 4(2):026104; doi: 10.1063/1.5121440.
27.
MorimotoY, OnoeH, TakeuchiS. Biohybrid robot with skeletal muscle tissue covered with a collagen structure for moving in air. APL Bioeng, 2020; 4(2):026101; doi: 10.1063/1.5127204.
28.
NomuraT, TakeuchiM, KimE, et al.Development of cultured muscles with tendon structures for modular bio-actuators. Micromachines, 2021; 12(4):379; doi: 10.3390/mi12040379.
UesugiK, ShimizuK, AkiyamaY, et al.Contractile performance and controllability of insect muscle-powered bioactuator with different stimulation strategies for soft robotics. Soft Robot, 2016; 3(1):13–22; doi: 10.1089/soro.2015.0014.
31.
AkiyamaY, SakumaT, FunakoshiK, et al.Atmospheric-operable bioactuator powered by insect muscle packaged with medium. Lab Chip, 2013; 13(24):4870–4880; doi: 10.1039/c3lc50490e.
32.
AkiyamaY, OdairaK, SakiyamaK, et al.Rapidly-moving insect muscle-powered microrobot and its chemical acceleration. Biomed Microdevices, 2012; 14(6):979–986; doi: 10.1007/s10544-012-9700-5.
33.
WeibelDB, GarsteckiP, RyanD, et al.Microoxen: Microorganisms to move microscale loads. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2005; 102(34):11963–11967; doi: 10.1073/pnas.0505481102.
34.
ZhangC, XieS, WangW, et al.Bio-syncretic tweezers actuated by microorganisms: Modeling and analysis. Soft Matter, 2016; 12(36):7485–7494; doi: 10.1039/C6SM01055E.
35.
SokolovA, ApodacaMM, GrzybowskiBA, et al.Swimming bacteria power microscopic gears. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2010; 107(3):969–974; doi: 10.1073/pnas.0913015107.
36.
StantonMM, ParkBW, Miguel-LopezA, et al.Biohybrid microtube swimmers driven by single captured bacteria. Small, 2017; 13(19):1603679; doi: 10.1002/smll.201603679.
37.
LeamanEJ, GeutherBQ, BehkamB. Hybrid centralized/decentralized control of a network of bacteria-based bio-hybrid microrobots. J Micro-Bio Robot, 2019; 15:1–12; doi: 10.1007/s12213-019-00116-0.
38.
Bastos-ArrietaJ, Revilla-GuarinosA, UspalWE, et al.Bacterial biohybrid microswimmers. Front Robot AI, 2018; 5:97; doi: 10.3389/frobt.2018.00097.
39.
LiJ, DekanovskyL, KhezriB, et al.Biohybrid micro-and nanorobots for intelligent drug delivery. Cyborg Bionic Systems, 2022; 2022:9824057; doi: 10.34133/2022/9824057.
40.
GaoL, WuW, TongS, et al.A muscle-machine hybrid crawler: Omnidirectional maneuverability and high load capacity. Sensors Actuators B Chem, 2023; 393:134333; doi: 10.1016/j.snb.2023.134333.
41.
GuixM, MestreR, PatioT, et al.Bio-hybrid soft robots with self-stimulating skeletons. Sci Robot, 2020; 6(53):eabe7577; doi: 10.1126/scirobotics.abe7577.
42.
KabumotoK, HoshinoT, AkiyamaY, et al.Voluntary movement controlled by the surface EMG signal for tissue-engineered skeletal muscle on a gripping tool. Tissue Eng Pt A, 2013; 19(15–16):1695–1703; doi: 10.1089/ten.tea.2012.0421.
43.
FujitaH, DauVT, ShimizuK, et al.Designing of a Si-MEMS device with an integrated skeletal muscle cell-based bio-actuator. Biomed Microdev, 2011; 13(1):123–129; doi: 10.1007/s10544-010-9477-3.
44.
WangJ, ZhangX, ParkJ, et al.Computationally assisted design and selection of maneuverable biological walking machines. Adv Intell Syst, 2021; 3(5):2000237; doi: 10.1002/aisy.202000237.
45.
DongX, KheiriS, LuY, et al.Toward a living soft microrobot through optogenetic locomotion control of Caenorhabditis elegans. Sci Robot, 2021; 6(55):eabe3950; doi: 10.1126/scirobotics.abe3950.
KimY, YangY, ZhangX, et al.Remote control of muscle-driven miniature robots with battery-free wireless optoelectronics. Sci Robot, 2023; 8(74):eadd1053; doi: 10.1126/scirobotics.add1053.
48.
TetsukaH, PirramiL, WangT, et al.Wirelessly powered 3D printed hierarchical biohybrid robots with multiscale mechanical properties. Adv Funct Mater, 2022; 32(31):2202674; doi: 10.1002/adfm.202202674.
49.
LiuL, ZhangC, WangW, et al.Regulation of C2C12 differentiation and control of the beating dynamics of contractile cells for a muscle-driven biosyncretic crawler by electrical stimulation. Soft Robot, 2018; 5(6):748–760; doi: 10.1089/soro.2018.0017.
50.
ZhangC, ZhangY, WangW, et al.A manta ray-inspired biosyncretic robot with stable controllability by dynamic electric stimulation. Cyborg Bionic Systems, 2022; 2022:9891380; doi: 10.34133/2022/9891380.
51.
VandenburghH, ShanskyJ, Benesch-LeeF, et al.Drug-screening platform based on the contractility of tissue-engineered muscle. Muscle Nerve, 2010; 37(4):438–447; doi: 10.1002/mus.20931.
52.
ZhangC, ShiJ, WangW, et al.Fabrication and characterization of muscle rings using circular mould and rotary electrical stimulation for bio-syncretic robots. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, Montreal, QC, Canada. 2019; pp. 4825–4830; doi: 10.1109/ICRA.2019.8793903.
53.
BenamKH, DauthS, HassellB, et al.Engineered in vitro disease models. Annu Rev Pathol Mech, 2015; 10:195–262; doi: 10.1146/annurev-pathol-012414-040418.
54.
ZhangC, WangJ, WangW, et al.Modeling and analysis of bio-syncretic micro-swimmers for cardiomyocyte-based actuation. Bioinspir Biomim, 2016; 11(5):056006; doi: 10.1088/1748-3190/11/5/056006.
55.
TaubmanMB, SmithCW, IzumoS, et al.The expression of sarcomeric muscle-specific contractile protein genes in BC3H1 cells: BC3H1 cells resemble skeletal myoblasts that are defective for commitment to terminal differentiation. J Cell Biol, 1989; 108(5):1799–1806; doi: 10.1083/jcb.108.5.1799.
56.
KhodabukusA, BaarK. Defined electrical stimulation emphasizing excitability for the development and testing of engineered skeletal muscle. Tissue Eng Part C Me, 2012; 18(5):349–357; doi: 10.1089/ten.tec.2011.0364.
57.
ElwoodH, GeorgeS, CarpenterDO. Excitability and inhibitability of motoneurons of different sizes. J Neurophysiol, 1965; 28(3):599–620; doi: 10.1152/jn.1965.28.3.599.
58.
AkiyamaY, NakayamaA, NakanoS, et al.An electrical stimulation culture system for daily maintenance-free muscle tissue production. Cyborg Bionic Systems, 2021; 2021:9820505; doi: 10.34133/2021/9820505.
59.
ZhangC, YangJ, WangW, et al.Bio-syncretic robots composed of biological and electromechanical systems. Natl Sci Rev, 2023; 10(5):nwac274; doi: 10.1093/nsr/nwac274.
60.
ChenZ, LiangQ, WeiZ, et al.An overview of in vitro biological neural networks for robot intelligence. Cyborg Bionic Systems, 2023; 2023:0001; doi: 10.34133/cbsystems.0001.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
