Bioelectronics: Bridging the Gap between Biology and Electronics

Kinjal Patel and Jaymin Ray*

Department of Physics, Uka Tarsadia University, Bardoli, Dist. Surat, Gujarat, India.

Corresponding Author E-mail: jayminray@gmail.com

Copy the following to cite this article: Patel K, Ray J. Bioelectronics: Bridging the Gap between Biology and Electronics. Mat. Sci. Res. India;21(3).

Copy the following to cite this URL: Patel K, Ray J. Bioelectronics: Bridging the Gap between Biology and Electronics. Mat. Sci. Res. India;21(3). Available from: https://bit.ly/4eTf6Rg

The field of bioelectronics lies at the intersection of biology and electronics, focusing on creating systems that can interface the two domains. The applications of bioelectronics devices are diverse, encompassing tools for understanding biological processes, diagnosing diseases, and delivering therapies. These devices operate by facilitating communication between biological systems and electronic components in either direction.

Bioelectronics, in its broadest sense, is the field that interfaces electronics with biology, allowing for communication between the two domains. For example, a bioelectronics device can be used to probe a biological reaction. In such cases, the biological process induces changes in the device, translating them into readable outputs. This principle underpins glucose biosensors, which measure blood glucose levels¹. Conversely, bioelectronics devices can stimulate biological processes, as seen in pacemakers that regulate heartbeat².

Communication between electronics and biology can occur at various levels and complexities, ranging from molecular components (e.g., proteins, nucleotides) to whole organisms³. Electronics can include materials, passive components (e.g., electrodes), and active elements like transistors⁴. These technologies aim to bridge the gap between well-understood electronic systems and the complex, often unpredictable biological processes⁵.

The development of bioelectronics is driven by scientific curiosity and practical needs, including diagnostics and therapeutics that improve patient quality of life and extend human lifespan⁶. The challenge lies in reconciling the differences between these two worlds. Electronic devices are typically rigid and rely on electronic currents, while biological systems are soft, aqueous, and communicate via ionic currents or chemical signals⁷.

One of the most critical examples of electrical signaling in biology is the neuronal action potential, the basis of neural communication⁸. Neurons are specialized cells in the brain that carry fundamental units of information. Unlike traditional electronic currents, action potentials rely on ionic currents driven by membrane potential, which is created by ionic concentration differences between the inside and outside of the cell.

The ionic current is facilitated by specialized proteins called ion channels, which enable the exchange of ions such as sodium and potassium⁹. These action potentials propagate along axons without losing amplitude, as the signal is regenerated by adjacent ion channel activation. At the axon’s terminus, neurotransmitter release enables chemical communication with neighboring neurons through synapses, bridging electrical and chemical signaling.

The action potential operates on an all-or-nothing basis, activating only when the transmembrane potential reaches a threshold. This ensures precision and reliability in neural signal transmission. Communication across synapses, whether chemical or electrical, is essential for coordinated neural activity and is a cornerstone of bioelectronics applications like brain-machine interfaces¹⁰.

In summary, bioelectronics seeks to harmonize the electronic and biological worlds to advance diagnostics, therapies, and our understanding of life processes. Central to its success is addressing the inherent differences in how these systems operate and enabling seamless communication at their interface.

References

1. Wang, J. Electrochemical Glucose Biosensors, Chemical Reviews, 2008; 108(2): 814–825.
   CrossRef
2. Rosen, A., Solomon, J., Elman, M. The pacemaker: Electrical engineering meets  cardiology, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, 2002; 49(6): 541–548.
3. Ventura, B. D., Wasserman, S. M., & Avci, M. Interfaces in Bioelectronics: From Materials to Mechanisms, Nature Reviews Materials, 2021; 6(8): 679–693.
4. Narang, R., Narayanan, V., Huang, L. Electronic Materials for Biointerfaces, ACS Nano, 2020; 14(2): 2261–2271.
5. Macchia, E., Torricelli, F., Torsi, L. Organic Bioelectronics: Materials and Devices for Healthcare Applications, Advanced Materials, 2020; 32(1): 1905315.
6. Bao, Z., Chen, X., Dai, L. Materials for Electronics in Bioelectronic Applications, Science Advances, 2018; 4(1): eaau9490.
7. Rivnay, J., Wang, H., Malliaras, G. G. Organic Electronics for Biological Communication, Nature Reviews Materials, 2018; 3(2): 17086.
   CrossRef
8. Hille, B. Ion Channels of Excitable Membranes (3rd ed.). Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates; 2001.
9. Hodgkin, A. L., Huxley, A. F. A Quantitative Description of Membrane Current and its            Application to Conduction and Excitation in Nerve, Journal of Physiology, 1952; 117(4): 500–544.
   CrossRef
10. Nicolelis, M. A., Lebedev, M. A. Principles of Neural Ensemble Physiology Underlying the Operation of Brain–Machine Interfaces, Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 2009; 10(7): 530–540.
    CrossRef

---

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.