Genome Editing: an Ethical Review

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Genome Editing: an Ethical Review Published by Nuffield Council on Bioethics 28 Bedford Square London WC1B 3JS Telephone: 020 7681 9619 Email: [email protected] Website: http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org September 2016 © Nuffield Council on Bioethics 2016 All rights reserved. Apart from fair dealing for the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, no part of the publication may be produced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form, or by any means, without prior permission of the copyright owners. Web reference throughout this report were accessed September 2016 Nuffield Council on Bioethics Professor Jonathan Montgomery (Chair) Revd Dr Michael Banner Professor Simon Caney Dr Tara Clancy Professor Jeanette Edwards* Professor Ann Gallagher Dr Andy Greenfield Professor Erica Haimes Professor Julian Hughes (Deputy Chair) Sir Roland Jackson Dr David Lawrence Professor Shaun Pattinson Professor Tom Shakespeare Professor Mona Siddiqui Professor Christine Watson Professor Robin A Weiss Professor Heather Widdows Adam Wishart Dr Paquita de Zulueta * co-opted member of the Council while chairing the Working Party on Cosmetic Procedures iii Secretariat Hugh Whittall (Director) Ranveig Svenning Berg Dr Peter Mills Kate Harvey Katharine Wright Carol Perkins Catherine Joynson Dr Bettina Schmietow Sarah Walker-Robson Dr Anna Wilkinson Busayo Oladapo The terms of reference of the Council are: 1. to identify and define ethical questions raised by recent advances in biological and medical research in order to respond to, and to anticipate, public concerns; 2. to make arrangements for examining and reporting on such questions with a view to promoting public understanding and discussion; this may lead, where needed, to the formulation of new guidelines by the appropriate regulatory or other body; 3. in the light of the outcome of its work, to publish reports; and to make representations, as the Council may judge appropriate. The Nuffield Council on Bioethics is funded jointly by the Medical Research Council, the Nuffield Foundation, and the Wellcome Trust iv Members of the Working Group Andy Greenfield (Chair) Council member, Programme Leader in Developmental Genetics at the Medical Research Council’s Harwell Institute, and a member of the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) Tony Perry Reader, Laboratory of Mammalian Molecular Embryology, Department of Biology and Biochemistry, University of Bath Christine Watson Council member, Professor of Cell and Cancer Biology in the Department of Pathology, University of Cambridge and Vice-Principal of Newnham College David Lawrence Council member, Chair of the UK Knowledge Transfer Network and Non-Executive Director at Syngenta AG Charis Thompson Professor of Sociology, London School of Economics and Political Science and Chancellor’s Professor of Gender & Women’s Studies, University of California, Berkeley John Dupré Professor of Philosophy of Science, Exeter University and Director of Egenis, the Centre for the Study of Life Sciences Richard Ashcroft Professor of Bioethics, School of Law, Queen Mary University of London Karen Yeung Professor of Law and Director of the Centre for Technology, Ethics & Law in Society (TELOS), King’s College London Y Terms of reference The terms of reference for the working group are: 1. To identify and define ethical questions relating to developments in genome editing research. 2. To review institutional, national and international policies and provisions relevant to genome editing, and to assess their current and likely future significance. 3. To deliberate and to draw conclusions, as appropriate, about the nature of the ethical questions raised and how they might most suitably be addressed. 4. To report on these matters and to make recommendations, as appropriate, for further initiatives by the Council or by other identified bodies, or for the development or revision of policy or legislation. Yi Table of Fontents Nuffield Council on Bioethics...................................................................................................................iii Members of the Working Group ..............................................................................................................Y Terms of reference ..................................................................................................................................Yi Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 1 Section 1 – Genome editing ..................................................................................... 4 The concept of genome editing ............................................................................................................... 4 Gene, genome and epigenome ............................................................................................................... 5 Techniques of genome editing ................................................................................................................ 7 Section 2 – Science in context .............................................................................. 12 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 12 Research and innovation....................................................................................................................... 13 Interpretation and governance............................................................................................................... 19 Section 3 – Moral perspectives ............................................................................. 24 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 24 Science as a moral enterprise ............................................................................................................... 24 Intervening in the genome ..................................................................................................................... 25 Responses to the challenge to established norms................................................................................ 26 Governance and democracy ................................................................................................................. 30 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 31 Section 4 – Human health ...................................................................................... 34 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 34 Improving understanding of health and disease.................................................................................... 35 Treating disease .................................................................................................................................... 40 Avoiding genetic disease....................................................................................................................... 45 Enhancing biological function and performance.................................................................................... 50 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 52 Section 5 – Food ..................................................................................................... 56 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 56 Plants..................................................................................................................................................... 57 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................. 72 Section 6 – The natural environment .................................................................... 76 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 76 Use of genome technologies in the wild................................................................................................ 77 Gene drive ............................................................................................................................................. 79 Converging technologies: CRISPR-enabled gene drive ....................................................................... 81 Yii Law and regulation ................................................................................................................................ 84 Moral and societal questions identified ................................................................................................. 86 Conclusion............................................................................................................................................. 92 6HFWLRQ 7 – Other applications .............................................................................. 96 Introduction...........................................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • Salmon with a Side of Genetic Modification: the FDA's Approval of Aquadvantage Salmon and Why the Precautionary Principle Is E
    Salmon with a Side of Genetic Modification: The FDA’s Approval of AquAdvantage Salmon and Why the Precautionary Principle is Essential for Biotechnology Regulation Kara M. Van Slyck* INTRODUCTION Over the last thirty years, once abundant wild salmon populations in the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans have declined to a mere fraction of their historic levels. As of 2016, salmon populations in Washington State’s Columbia River region are either failing to make any progress towards recovery or showing very little signs of improvement; Puget Sound salmon are only getting worse.1 In the Gulf of Maine, salmon populations dropped from five-hundred spawning adults in 1995 to less than fifty adults in 1999.2 Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar, were first designated as “endangered”3 in November 2000—the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) expanded the listing nine years later to include critical habitat along the coast of Maine as a result of little improvement to the population’s numbers.4 In the Pacific Ocean, FWS classified four significant salmon species as endangered for protection under the Endangered Species Act * Juris Doctor Candidate, Seattle University School of Law 2018. I would like to extend thanks to Professor Carmen G. Gonzalez for her valuable insight of the precautionary principle, her extensive knowledge on environmental regulations in the United States, and her unwavering support of this Note. 1. Governor’s Salmon Recovery Office, State of Salmon in Watersheds 2016, WASH. ST. RECREATION & CONSERVATION OFF., http://stateofsalmon.wa.gov/governors-report-2016/ [https:// perma.cc/6F3J-FKWE]. 2. Endangered and Threatened Species; Final Endangered Status for a Distinct Population Segment of Anadromous Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) in the Gulf of Maine, 50 C.F.R.
    [Show full text]
  • Efficient Genome Editing of an Extreme Thermophile, Thermus
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN Efcient genome editing of an extreme thermophile, Thermus thermophilus, using a thermostable Cas9 variant Bjorn Thor Adalsteinsson1*, Thordis Kristjansdottir1,2, William Merre3, Alexandra Helleux4, Julia Dusaucy5, Mathilde Tourigny4, Olafur Fridjonsson1 & Gudmundur Oli Hreggvidsson1,2 Thermophilic organisms are extensively studied in industrial biotechnology, for exploration of the limits of life, and in other contexts. Their optimal growth at high temperatures presents a challenge for the development of genetic tools for their genome editing, since genetic markers and selection substrates are often thermolabile. We sought to develop a thermostable CRISPR-Cas9 based system for genome editing of thermophiles. We identifed CaldoCas9 and designed an associated guide RNA and showed that the pair have targetable nuclease activity in vitro at temperatures up to 65 °C. We performed a detailed characterization of the protospacer adjacent motif specifcity of CaldoCas9, which revealed a preference for 5′-NNNNGNMA. We constructed a plasmid vector for the delivery and use of the CaldoCas9 based genome editing system in the extreme thermophile Thermus thermophilus at 65 °C. Using the vector, we generated gene knock-out mutants of T. thermophilus, targeting genes on the bacterial chromosome and megaplasmid. Mutants were obtained at a frequency of about 90%. We demonstrated that the vector can be cured from mutants for a subsequent round of genome editing. CRISPR-Cas9 based genome editing has not been reported previously in the extreme thermophile T. thermophilus. These results may facilitate development of genome editing tools for other extreme thermophiles and to that end, the vector has been made available via the plasmid repository Addgene.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Molecular Farming: a Viable Platform for Recombinant Biopharmaceutical Production
    plants Review Plant Molecular Farming: A Viable Platform for Recombinant Biopharmaceutical Production Balamurugan Shanmugaraj 1,2, Christine Joy I. Bulaon 2 and Waranyoo Phoolcharoen 1,2,* 1 Research Unit for Plant-Produced Pharmaceuticals, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand; [email protected] 2 Department of Pharmacognosy and Pharmaceutical Botany, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok 10330, Thailand; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +66-2-218-8359; Fax: +66-2-218-8357 Received: 1 May 2020; Accepted: 30 June 2020; Published: 4 July 2020 Abstract: The demand for recombinant proteins in terms of quality, quantity, and diversity is increasing steadily, which is attracting global attention for the development of new recombinant protein production technologies and the engineering of conventional established expression systems based on bacteria or mammalian cell cultures. Since the advancements of plant genetic engineering in the 1980s, plants have been used for the production of economically valuable, biologically active non-native proteins or biopharmaceuticals, the concept termed as plant molecular farming (PMF). PMF is considered as a cost-effective technology that has grown and advanced tremendously over the past two decades. The development and improvement of the transient expression system has significantly reduced the protein production timeline and greatly improved the protein yield in plants. The major factors that drive the plant-based platform towards potential competitors for the conventional expression system are cost-effectiveness, scalability, flexibility, versatility, and robustness of the system. Many biopharmaceuticals including recombinant vaccine antigens, monoclonal antibodies, and other commercially viable proteins are produced in plants, some of which are in the pre-clinical and clinical pipeline.
    [Show full text]
  • US EPA, Pesticide Product Label, WIDESTRIKE 3 INSECT
    UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 OFFICE OF CHEMICAL SAFETY AND POLLUTION PREVENTION October 18, 2016 Stephanie L. Burton US Regulatory Manager Dow AgroSciences LLC 9330 Zionsville Road Indianapolis, IN 46268-1054 Subject: PRIA (Pesticide Registration Improvement Act) Amendment – to update the terms of registration related to gene flow and revise the product label. Product Name: WideStrike® 3 Insect Resistant Cotton EPA Registration Number: 68467-19 Application Date: June 23, 2016 OPP Decision Number: 518794 Dear Ms. Burton: The amendment referred to above, submitted in connection with registration under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended, are acceptable provided you comply with the revised terms of registration as set forth below: 1. Submit/cite all data required for registration of your product under FIFRA § 3(c)(5) when the Agency requires all registrants of similar products to submit such data. 2. Gene Flow The following information regarding commercial production must be included in the grower guide for WideStrike® 3 Insect Resistant Cotton: a) No planting of WideStrike® 3 Insect Resistant Cotton is permitted south of Route 60 (near Tampa) in Florida. b) Commercial culture of WideStrike® 3 Insect Resistant Cotton is prohibited in Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands. The following information regarding test plots and seed production must appear in contracts or on bags of WideStrike® 3 Insect Resistant Cotton intended for the following purposes: Page 2 of 10 EPA Reg. No. 68467-19 OPP Decision No. 518794 a) Test plots or breeding nurseries, regardless of the plot size, established in Hawaii must not be planted within 3 miles of Gossypium tomentosum.
    [Show full text]
  • Improvement of Late Blight Resistance on Potato by Transgenesis and Cisgenesis
    Improvement of late blight resistance on potato by transgenesis and cisgenesis Name: Tiantian Liu Registration number: 860927523040 Examiners: Prof. Evert Jacobsen & Dr. Jack Vossen Supervision: MSc Suxian Zhu & Dr. Jack Vossen Course code: PBR-80436 Thesis Plant Breeding Study specialisation: Plant Breeding and Genetic Resources Abstract This project aimed at the improvement of late blight resistance in potato by means of transgenesis and cisgenesis. In transgenesis, Rpi-mcq1 was successfully cloned into vector pBINPLUS. After single R gene transformation or by transformation of multiple different R genes, positive transformants were detected by PCR and functional assays in cisgenesis. Different transformation approaches were followed in this project in order to find out an efficient method for generating marker free plants. The results indicated that co-transformation of selection marker containing and marker free constructs is much more efficient in generating R gene positive plants than transformation of marker free constructs alone. However, several cisgenic plants were also selected from marker free transformation. Moreover, in vitro disease assay could be efficiently used as a pre-selection for positive R-gene containing regenerants. Keywords: potato; marker free; (co-)transformation; R-gene; functionality i Thesis Outline To improve the late blight resistance in potato by cisgenesis, three experiments were carried out. 1. To build up a Desiree transformants differential set, Rpi-mcq1 gene was cloned from vector pCLD04541 with the amplification primers which were designed by removing some nucleotides to reduce the length of gene from the patent (Jones et al., 2010). It was transferred into the vector pBINPLUS. 2. In order to get sufficient numbers of cisgenic plants, marker free transformation with two R genes, Rpi-sto1 and Rpi-blb3 , was carried out in previous experiments.
    [Show full text]
  • Where to Find 6 Million Minds
    Research Fortnight, 11 February 2015 view 23 roger highfield Where to find 6 million minds Over the decades, a disturbing image has often entered 2012-13. The sexes were nearly equally represented. my mind as I have whiled away the hours in meetings Slightly more than half of the museum’s visitors come about PUS and PES, aka the public understanding of, or from family groups, 36 per cent come from adult groups engagement with, science. This reverie involves a group and 13 per cent come from educational groups. In 2013- of beggars briefly materialising around a campfire to 14, more than half of the schools in London visited the squabble about how to spend a million pounds. museum; our aim is to make that two-thirds by 2018. Of course, the question is: how are they going to make Public engagement is enshrined in the research coun- all that money in the first place? By the same token, why cils’ royal charters—as it should be, because science, are researchers assuming that they have oodles of ‘sci- through technology, is the greatest force shaping cul- ence capital’ to spend, rather than wondering how they ture today. Paul Nurse’s review of the councils will no are going to engage with the big audiences that yield doubt consider how well they are fulfilling this aspect of such capital in the first place? their mission and whether they can do even more to use Around the PES campfire, many issues burn bright- museums to showcase their work. ly. The idea of a single public has given way to a The good news is that research councils are starting to heterogeneous mishmash of audiences.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cultural Ecology of Elisabeth Mann Borgese
    NARRATIVES OF NATURE AND CULTURE: THE CULTURAL ECOLOGY OF ELISABETH MANN BORGESE by Julia Poertner Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at Dalhousie University Halifax, Nova Scotia March 2020 © Copyright by Julia Poertner, 2020 TO MY PARENTS. MEINEN ELTERN. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ………………………………………………………………………………... v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS USED ………………………………………………………….. vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………………………………………………………………….. vii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………………… 1 1.1 Thesis ………………………………………………………………... 1 1.2 Methodology and Outline ………………………………………….. 27 1.3 State of Research ……....…………………………………………... 32 1.4 Background ……………………………………………………….... 36 CHAPTER 2: NARRATIVES OF NATURE AND CULTURE …………………………………... 54 2.1 Between a Mythological Past and a Scientific Future ……………………. 54 2.1.1 Biographical Background ………………………………………... 54 2.1.2 “Culture is Part of Nature in Any Case”: Cultural Evolution ……. 63 2.1.3 Ascent of Woman ………………………………….……………… 81 2.1.4 The Language Barrier: Beasts and Men …….…………………… 97 2.2 Dark Fiction: Futuristic Pessimism …………………………………….. 111 2.2.1 “To Whom It May Concern” ………………….………………… 121 2.2.2 “The Immortal Fish” ………………………………………….…. 123 2.2.3 “Delphi Revisited” ……………………………………….……… 127 2.2.4 “Birdpeople” …………………………………………….………. 130 CHAPTER 3: UTOPIAN OPTIMISM: THE OCEAN AS A LABORATORY FOR A NEW WORLD ORDER ……………………………………………….…………….……… 135 3.1 Historical Background …………………………………………………. 135 3.1.1 Competing Narratives: The Common Heritage of Mankind and Sustainable Development ……………………………………….. 135 3.1.2 Ocean Frontiers and Chairworm & Supershark ………………... 175 3.1.3 Arvid Pardo’s Tale of the Deep Sea …………………………….. 184 3.2 Elisabeth Mann Borgese’s Cultural Ecology ………………………….. 207 iii 3.2.1 Law: From the Deep Seabed via Ocean Space towards World Communities ……………………………………………………. 207 3.2.2 Economics ………………………………………………………. 244 3.2.3 Science and Education: The Need for Interdisciplinarity ……….
    [Show full text]
  • SUMMARY Sign Offv7
    Syngenta Event GA21 Page 1 of 29 PART II: SUMMARY Application for import and use of genetically modified herbicide tolerant maize Event GA21 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 PART II: SUMMARY Syngenta Event GA21 Page 2 of 29 PART II: SUMMARY A . GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Details of application a) Member State of application UK b) Application number Not available at the time of submission c) Name of the product (commercial and other names) Maize Event GA21 In the USA, GA21 is marketed under the product name Agrisure GT Advantage (http://www.nk-us.com/infosilo/seedguide/agrisure.asp) d) Date of acknowledgement of valid application Not available at the time of submission Syngenta Event GA21 Page 3 of 29 PART II: SUMMARY 2. Applicant a) Name of applicant Syngenta Seeds S.A.S on behalf of Syngenta Crop Protection AG, Basel b) Address of applicant Syngenta Seeds S.A.S. 12, chemin de l'Hobit BP 27 F-31790 Saint-Sauveur On behalf of Syngenta Crop Protection AG, Basel Switzerland and all affiliated companies Schwarzwaldallee 215 CH 4058 Basle Switzerland c) Name and address of the person established in the Community who is responsible for the placing in the market, whether it be the manufacturer, the importer or the distributor, if different from the applicant (Commission Decision 2004/204/EC Art 3(a)(ii)) Event GA21 maize will be imported and used as any other maize in the EU by operators currently involved in these processes. 3. Scope of the application x GM plants for food use x Food containing or consisting of GM plants xFood produced from GM plants or containing ingredients produced from GM plants xGM plants for feed use x Feed containing or consisting of GM plants x Feed produced from GM plants x Import and processing (Part C of Directive 2001/18/EC) o Seeds and plant propagating material for cultivation in Europe (Part C of Directive 2001/18/EC) Syngenta Event GA21 Page 4 of 29 PART II: SUMMARY 4.
    [Show full text]
  • The Era of Corporate Consolidation and the End of Competition Bayer-Monsanto, Dow-Dupont, and Chemchina-Syngenta
    Research Brief October 2018 The Era of Corporate Consolidation and the End of Competition Bayer-Monsanto, Dow-DuPont, and ChemChina-Syngenta DISRUPT ECOSYSTEM ACCLERATE MONOPOLY THE EFFECTS OF CORPORATE CONSOLIDATION UNDERMINE FOOD SECURITY HARM SMALL PRODUCERS HAASINSTITUTE.BERKELEY.EDU This publication is published by the Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society at UC Berkeley This research brief is part of the Haas Institute's Shahidi Project from the Global Justice Program. The Shahidi Project (Shahidi is a Swahili word meaning “witness”) intends to demystify the power structures and capacities of transnational food and agricultural corporations within our food system. To that end, researchers have developed a robust database focusing on ten of the largest food and agricultural corporations in the world. See more at haasinstitute.berkeley.edu/shahidi. About the Authors Copyeditor Support Elsadig Elsheikh is the director Marc Abizeid Special thanks to the Food of the Global Justice program and Farm Communications at the Haas Institute for a Infographics Fund, which provided the seed Fair and Inclusive Society at Samir Gambhir funding for the Shahidi project. the University of California- Berkeley, where he oversees Report Citation Contact the program’s projects and Elsadig Elsheikh and Hossein 460 Stephens Hall research on corporate power, Ayazi. “The Era of Corporate Berkeley, CA 94720-2330 food system, forced migration, Consolidation and The End of Tel 510-642-3326 human rights, Islamophobia, Competition: Bayer-Monsanto, haasinstitute.berkeley.edu structural marginality and Dow-DuPont, and ChemChina- inclusion, and trade and Syngenta.” Haas Institute for development. a Fair and Inclusive Society at the University of California, Hossein Ayazi, PhD, is a Berkeley, CA.
    [Show full text]
  • The Deadlock in European GM Crop Authorisations As a Wicked Problem by Design
    The Deadlock in European GM Crop Authorisations as a Wicked Problem by Design A need for Repoliticisation of the Decision-making Process Ruth Mampuys The Deadlock in European GM Crop Authorisations as a Wicked Problem by Design A need for Repoliticisation of the Decision-making Process Ruth Mampuys Colofon Sociology, Theory and Methodology | Erasmus School of Law | 2020 Author: Ruth Mampuys Thesis design & layout: Bart Erkamp Cover design: Matteo Bettoni The Deadlock in European GM Crop Authorisations as a Wicked Problem by Design A need for Repoliticisation of the Decision-making Process Thesis To obtain the degree of Doctor from the Erasmus University Rotterdam By command of the rector magnificus Prof.dr. F.A. van der Duijn Schouten and in accordance with the decision of the Doctorate Board. The public defence shall be held on Thursday 28 january 2021 at 15:30 hrs by Ruth Mampuys born in Enschede, the Netherlands Doctoral Committee Promotors: Prof. dr. W. van der Burg Prof. dr. F.W.A. Brom Other members: Prof. dr. A. Arcuri Prof. dr. K. Millar Prof. dr. J.E.J. Prins Copromotor: Dr. L.M. Poort CONTENTS PREFACE 1 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 5 CHAPTER 1 Biotechnology governance: why, how and by whom? 9 1. Introduction 11 2. Varying definitions of biotechnology and GMOs 14 3. Recurring themes in discussions about biotechnology 17 3.1 Fundamental moral perspectives 18 3.2 Attitudes on risks/benefits 19 3.3 Broader issues 20 4. Regulatory framework for GMOs in Europe 21 4.1 Prerequisite: an environmental risk and food safety assessment 24 4.2 Regulatory decision-making: Comitology 25 4.3 Decision-making in practice 30 5.
    [Show full text]
  • CRISPR/Cas9-Mediated Genome Editing Efficiently Creates Specific
    www.nature.com/scientificreports Correction: Author Correction OPEN CRISPR/Cas9-mediated genome editing efciently creates specifc mutations at multiple loci using one Received: 18 April 2017 Accepted: 3 July 2017 sgRNA in Brassica napus Published: xx xx xxxx Hong Yang1, Jia-Jing Wu1, Ting Tang1, Ke-De Liu 2 & Cheng Dai1 CRISPR/Cas9 is a valuable tool for both basic and applied research that has been widely applied to diferent plant species. Nonetheless, a systematical assessment of the efciency of this method is not available for the allotetraploid Brassica napus—an important oilseed crop. In this study, we examined the mutation efciency of the CRISPR/Cas9 method for 12 genes and also determined the pattern, specifcity and heritability of these gene modifcations in B. napus. The average mutation frequency for a single-gene targeted sgRNA in the T0 generation is 65.3%. For paralogous genes located in conserved regions that were targeted by sgRNAs, we observed mutation frequencies that ranged from 27.6% to 96.6%. Homozygotes were readily found in T0 plants. A total of 48.2% of the gene mutations, including homozygotes, bi-alleles, and heterozygotes were stably inherited as classic Mendelian alleles in the next generation (T1) without any new mutations or reversions. Moreover, no mutation was found in the putative of-target sites among the examined T0 plants. Collectively, our results demonstrate that CRISPR/Cas9 is an efcient tool for creating targeted genome modifcations at multiple loci that are stable and inheritable in B. napus. These fndings open many doors for biotechnological applications in oilseed crops.
    [Show full text]
  • Environmental Assessment for Aquadvantage ® Salmon
    Environmental Assessment for AquAdvantage Salmon Environmental Assessment for AquAdvantage® Salmon An Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) bearing a single copy of the stably integrated α-form of the opAFP-GHc2 gene construct at the α-locus in the EO-1α line Aqua Bounty Technologies, Inc. Submitted to the Center for Veterinary Medicine US Food and Drug Administration For Public Display August 25, 2010 Page 1 of 84 August 25, 2010 Environmental Assessment for AquAdvantage Salmon Table of Contents (Page 1 of 4) Title Page ............................................................................................................................. 1 Table of Contents ................................................................................................................. 2 List of Tables ....................................................................................................................... 6 List of Figures ...................................................................................................................... 6 List of Acronyms & Abbreviations ..................................................................................... 7 List of Definitions ................................................................................................................ 9 Summary ............................................................................................................................. 10 1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]