Researchers build anthrobots from human airway cells that self-assemble, move, self-heal, and reverse aging markers, offering insights into synthetic life systems.
(Nanowerk Spotlight) What kinds of forms and behaviors can human cells adopt when removed from their usual biological context? Outside the body, without signals from organs or developmental programs shaped by evolution, can cells reorganize into new functional systems or even lifelike structures? These questions are central to a growing body of research at the intersection of developmental biology, bioengineering, and synthetic morphology.
Understanding how cells behave when removed from their native tissue environment is not only a theoretical question—it has practical implications for regenerative medicine, tissue engineering, and the development of programmable biological systems. Scientists are increasingly investigating how cellular assemblies can be guided to form new structures, repair damage, respond to their environment, or carry out controlled tasks such as movement or cargo delivery. These efforts aim to build systems that are not merely static tissue replacements, but dynamic, responsive, and functionally autonomous.
The ability to form such living systems from a patient’s own cells, without relying on genetic modification or synthetic scaffolds, could open new directions in personalized medicine and therapeutic design, while also advancing fundamental knowledge about the rules that govern multicellular organization and behavior.
A new study published in Advanced Science (“The Morphological, Behavioral, and Transcriptomic Life Cycle of Anthrobots”) reports that adult human airway epithelial cells, under specific culture conditions, can self-assemble into entirely new three-dimensional structures that are capable of movement, injury response, and developmental gene expression.
These constructs, called Anthrobots, form without genetic modification or artificial scaffolding. They arise spontaneously from human cells and behave as coherent, motile units with a distinct life cycle, including phases of growth, maturation, structural degradation, and molecular changes associated with aging and repair.
An Anthrobot deforms in response to mechanical injury (needle tip visible) and gradually regains its original shape within minutes, demonstrating self-repair capacity in lab conditions. (Image: Adapted from DOI:10.1002/advs.202409330, CC BY)
The study builds on prior work in biobotics, including synthetic constructs made from frog embryo cells (Xenobots) and engineered tissue hybrids. But the Anthrobots are different in key respects. They are fully cellular, derived entirely from adult human tissue, and form in the absence of any engineered genetic circuit or inorganic material. This raises important questions about the inherent plasticity of somatic cells and the role of physical structure in guiding collective cellular behavior.
By documenting the morphology, behavior, gene expression, and lifespan of these constructs, the researchers offer a detailed account of what happens when adult human cells are placed in an unfamiliar environment and allowed to self-organize. The findings have implications for regenerative medicine, developmental biology, and synthetic bioengineering. These are fields that increasingly rely on understanding how structure, context, and behavior interact in living systems.
Anthrobots originate from airway organoids, which are three-dimensional tissue models that replicate structural features of the human respiratory epithelium. These organoids contain cell types found in the airway, including ciliated and goblet cells, and are typically used to model respiratory function and disease. When these organoids are transitioned from a semisolid to a liquid environment, the epithelial cells reorganize into compact spheroids with outward-facing cilia. These cilia generate motion, allowing the structures to move autonomously.
In the study, the researchers observed that Anthrobots develop along three distinct paths. Some cells remain isolated and inactive. Others grow into multicellular spheroids through proliferation from a single progenitor cell. A third group forms through the merging of multiple clusters. These developmental trajectories produce different morphologies and suggest that even under identical conditions, human cells can take on divergent roles during assembly.
Anthrobots also undergo a morphological inversion. This eversion process flips their apical-basal polarity, bringing the cilia to the outer surface. The team analyzed 27 Anthrobots during this transition and found two behavior patterns. One group remained largely stationary while undergoing eversion. The other group exhibited movement during the process, even before full ciliary exposure. This unexpected behavior may result from uneven cilia distribution at intermediate stages and suggests that even partially formed constructs can interact mechanically with their environment.
To understand the molecular changes involved, the researchers compared gene expression profiles between the Anthrobots and their source cells using RNA sequencing. Nearly 9,000 genes showed significant changes, indicating a major shift in transcriptional activity. Several genes typically associated with embryonic development were upregulated, including those involved in defining body axes and forming germ layers. This suggests that even though Anthrobots originate from adult cells, their assembly activates developmental programs that resemble early stages of human embryogenesis.
Further analysis examined the evolutionary origin of the expressed genes using a method called phylostratigraphy. The Anthrobots expressed a higher number of genes conserved across ancient lineages, including genes common to all eukaryotes and even to the earliest cellular life. This pattern, combined with the embryonic-like gene expression, points to a shift toward more fundamental biological states at both the developmental and evolutionary levels.
Over time, the Anthrobots continued to change. Between day 0 and day 10 of development, gene expression shifted again. Markers for early mesoderm development declined, while genes linked to ectoderm and neural lineage were upregulated. Notably, the expression of SHH, a gene that helps establish left–right asymmetry during embryogenesis, increased during this phase. This progression suggests that the constructs follow a trajectory resembling early embryonic development, despite being built from mature human airway cells.
Functionally, the Anthrobots demonstrated resilience. When punctured with a needle, most retracted and partially restored their original form within minutes. Although they did not fuse back together after full separation, a significant number recovered their shape after localized damage. These observations suggest a level of morphogenetic stability not dependent on programmed regeneration, but likely an emergent property of epithelial tissue dynamics.
The team also investigated how these constructs age. Using epigenetic clocks based on DNA methylation patterns, they found that Anthrobots exhibited a measurable reduction in biological age compared to the cells they came from. Constructs made from a 21-year-old donor showed a mean epigenetic age of 18.7 days after formation. By day 25, their measured age was still below that of the original donor cells. This age reversal occurred without genetic reprogramming and was not observed in traditional 2D airway cultures made from the same donor. The result suggests that the process of three-dimensional self-assembly can affect molecular aging markers.
The Anthrobots eventually degrade. The researchers tracked 36 constructs over 35 days and observed that all followed a consistent rate of structural decline. Larger Anthrobots lived longer, not because they aged more slowly, but because their greater mass delayed the point at which degradation made them unviable. Despite visible signs of breakdown, their movement continued until structural disintegration occurred. There was no evidence of a slow transition to inactivity. The constructs remained motile until they ceased functioning.
The work suggests that human cells retain a surprising degree of plasticity when placed in unfamiliar conditions. Without any genetic editing, and using cells from adult donors, the researchers observed the emergence of constructs that move, respond to damage, exhibit developmental gene expression, and display reduced biological age. These results do not imply sentience or cognition. However, they raise fundamental questions about how cellular identity and behavior are shaped by environmental context and physical organization.
The authors propose that Anthrobots could serve as a model for investigating aging, regeneration, and the effects of physical structure on gene expression. Their ability to be made from donor-specific cells also opens possibilities for personalized studies. Importantly, because they are made entirely from human cells without embryos, animal material, or artificial substrates, they avoid several ethical concerns that affect other systems in synthetic biology.
By showing that adult human cells can reconfigure into motile, self-repairing systems under the right conditions, this study expands the known capacities of biological matter. Anthrobots do not mimic natural tissues or organs, and they are not imitating anything that exists in human development. Instead, they reveal what is possible when living cells are allowed to form entirely new structures. This research frames a broader question about how life can be guided, reassembled, or repurposed—not by altering genes, but by changing the environment in which those genes operate.
For authors and communications departmentsclick to open
Lay summary
Prefilled posts
Nanowerk Newsletter
Get our Nanotechnology Spotlight updates to your inbox!
Thank you!
You have successfully joined our subscriber list.
Become a Spotlight guest author! Join our large and growing group of guest contributors. Have you just published a scientific paper or have other exciting developments to share with the nanotechnology community? Here is how to publish on nanowerk.com.
