Can CRISPR gene editing revive promise of GMOs to provide hardier, more nutritious, better tasting crops?

Screen Shot at PM

Using CRISPR to add—or remove—a plant trait is faster, more precise, easier, and in most cases cheaper than either traditional breeding techniques or older genetic engineering methods.

Although scientists can use CRISPR to add genes from other species to a plant, many labs are working to exploit the vast diversity of genes that exists within a plant species. In fact, enhancing many of the most valued traits in agriculture doesn’t require adding DNA from other species.

Gene-edited crops have the potential to revive some of the early promise that genetic engineering has not fulfilled, such as making plants that are higher yielding, drought tolerant, disease resistant, more nutritious, or just better tasting. In addition, CRISPR can efficiently improve not just row crops such as corn but also fruits and vegetables, ornamentals, and staple crops such as cassava.

Proponents hope consumers will embrace gene-edited crops in a way that they did not accept genetically engineered ones, especially because they needn’t involve the introduction of genes from other species—a process that gave rise to the specter of Frankenfood.

But it’s not clear how consumers will react or if gene editing will result in traits that consumers value. And the potential commercial uses of CRISPR may narrow if agriculture agencies in the U.S. and Europe decide to regulate gene-edited crops in the same way they do genetically engineered crops.

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion, and analysis. Read full, original post: CRISPR: A new toolbox for better crops

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

ChatGPT-Image-Apr-20-2026-11_17_18-AM-2
10,000 scientists gone: Trump’s cuts create an unprecedented brain drain
Screenshot-2026-04-22-at-4.10.32-PM
Viewpoint — ‘Completely unethical’: RFK, Jr.’s medical ignorance deprives melanoma cancer-sufferers of a life-saving therapy
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-22-2026-04_31_20-PM
‘Irresponsible decision’? On mandatory military flu shots, Hegseth chooses ‘freedom’ over health
Screenshot-2026-04-15-at-1.22.58-PM
Anti-biotechnology activists smear hybrid wheat breakthrough that could surge yields in poorer countries
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-20-2026-12_28_36-PM
Vaccine skepticism is a growing global problem
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-17-2026-03_30_52-PM
Food labels, decoded: What they really mean
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-11-2026-11_58_46-AM
The Trump administration has run out more than 4,000 National Institutes of Health employees. Here are the consequences
images
The never-ending GMO debate: Pros and cons
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-2-2026-03_22_54-PM
Why ‘support supplements’ for GLP-1 users are mostly a waste of money
ChatGPT-Image-Apr-21-2026-11_30_48-AM
Stupid study of the month: Eating fresh fruits and vegetables can lead to cancer
Screenshot-2026-04-20-at-3.34.46-PM
Viewpoint: How do you sell evidence-based health and science in a world where facts don’t matter?
Screenshot-2026-04-12-135256
Bixonimania: The fake disease scam that AI swallowed whole
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.