Genome editing is a transformative but still erratic technology in health and agriculture

genome editing ria
Credit: IGIB

Genome editing has a transformative potential in healthcare or to improve crops or livestock. However, the use of Cas9 or other nucleases can yield unpredictable events at the target site or off target.

To overcome these challenge, it is critical to understand and accurately predict the whole range of possible editing outcomes.

The key to success is to combine molecular assays to evaluate the sequence changes at the target site and to quantify the number of copies of segments deleted/inserted across the genome.

For all applications, thorough evaluation of these outcomes is essential to identify all collateral damage from nuclease activity and for a real appraisal of the benefits and risks associated with applying this technology.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on agricultural biotech and biomedicine? Subscribe to our newsletter.

The safety of genome-editing technologies is just as critical as their efficiency for their successful application in health or agriculture. Common to all fields of application are the risks associated with undesired genetic changes that can be triggered by genome editing.

The potential for unwanted off-target nuclease activity was recognized early in the application of the CRISPR/Cas9 system as a genome-editing tool. The frequency of such events and the attached risks were the subjects of much debate. The general consensus is that, with careful molecular design, off-target events are rare and generally can be segregated away from the allele of interest in genome edited animals.

Read the original post

Outbreak
Outbreak Daily Digest
Biotech Facts & Fallacies
Talking Biotech
Genetics Unzipped
Video: Test everyone – Slovakia goes its own way to control COVID

Video: Test everyone – Slovakia goes its own way to control COVID

As Europe sees record coronavirus cases and deaths, Slovakia is testing its entire adult population. WSJ's Drew Hinshaw explains how ...
mag insects image superjumbo v

Disaster interrupted: Which farming system better preserves insect populations: Organic or conventional?

A three-year run of fragmentary Armageddon-like studies had primed the journalism pumps and settled the media framing about the future ...
dead bee desolate city

Are we facing an ‘Insect Apocalypse’ caused by ‘intensive, industrial’ farming and agricultural chemicals? The media say yes; Science says ‘no’

The media call it the “Insect Apocalypse”. In the past three years, the phrase has become an accepted truth of ...
globalmethanebudget globalcarbonproject cropped x

Infographic: Cows cause climate change? Agriculture scientist says ‘belching bovines’ get too much blame

A recent interview by Caroline Stocks, a UK journalist who writes about food, agriculture and the environment, of air quality ...
organic hillside sweet corn x

Organic v conventional using GMOs: Which is the more sustainable farming?

Many consumers spend more for organic food to avoid genetically modified products in part because they believe that “industrial agriculture” ...
benjamin franklin x

Are most GMO safety studies funded by industry?

The assertion that biotech companies do the research and the government just signs off on it is false ...
favicon

Environmental Working Group: EWG challenges safety of GMOs, food pesticide residues

Known by some as the "Environmental Worrying Group," EWG lobbies for tighter GMO legislation and famously puts out annual "dirty dozen" list of fruits and ...
m hansen

Michael Hansen: Architect of Consumers Union ongoing anti-GMO campaign

Michael K. Hansen (born 1956) is thought by critics to be the prime mover behind the ongoing campaign against agricultural biotechnology at Consumer Reports. He is an ...
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.
Send this to a friend