Scholarly Literature
This is a database of scholarly literature that concentrates currently on natural and engineered selfish genetic elements (gene drives). The latest are shown here.
Disclaimer>
Wolbachia: Biological Control Strategy Against Arboviral Diseases
19967I. Mohanty, A. Rath and R. K. Hazra, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 11:27:44.
Arboviral diseases like dengue, chikungunya, and Zika are among the major causes of mortality and morbidity in human population. The limited control methods together with lack of antiviral therapies and effective vaccines have paved way for new approaches. One such approach to reduce the ever alarming conflagration of vector-borne diseases is based on biological strategy that reduces or blocks pathogen transmission in the vector. In this context, Wolbachia, an endosymbiont in mosquitoes, is explored as a novel and ecofriendly control strategy. Wolbachia seems to confer resistance to diverse RNA viruses protecting lives from virus-induced mortality. This review envisages the deployment of Wolbachia technology in controlling several arboviral diseases.
Wolbachia Endosymbiont and Mosquito Vectors, with Emphasis on Lymphatic Filariasis Elimination
19965I. P. Sunish, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 11:24:11.
Wolbachia are maternally inherited intracellular bacteria, known to alter early development and mitotic processes in their hosts. They are frequently observed as a reproductive parasite, capable of inducing feminization, parthenogenesis, male killing, or cytoplasmic incompatibility. A total of 18 clades of Wolbachia have been reported, almost exclusively in arthropods. Wolbachia-based strategies have been proposed for the control of disease vectors. Wolbachia-based population suppression and transmission blocking can work in species not commonly infected with Wolbachia in the wild. However, efficient maintenance and spread of Wolbachia infection into field populations is crucial to the success of this strategy. Property of cytoplasmic incompatibility (CI) can be used to reduce the density of mosquito field populations through inundative releases of incompatible males in order to sterilize females. In semi-field condition at La Reunion, the LR[wPip(Is)] males of Culex quinquefasciatus successfully competed with field males in mating with field females. Depletion of Wolbachia endobacteria by antibiotic therapy prevents larval moulting and kills adult filarial worms. This strategy could act as an adjunct to vector control and is being exploited for the elimination of lymphatic filariasis.
Laboratory Biosafety in Handling Genetically Modified Mosquitoes
19963J. Charles, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 11:19:52.
One of the novel approaches in controlling vector-borne diseases is to release genetically modified mosquitoes in nature. Trial studies are done in different phases by the researches, both in the laboratory and in the fields. Before a GM mosquito is validated to be ready for field release, the same has to rigorously go through several phase studies, and Phase I being the laboratory is the most significant to set the future of the GM mosquito for future investigations. Though the risk of handling GM mosquitoes in laboratory is low, nevertheless there is a prescribed list of DOs and DON’Ts, and the laboratory workers are needed to strictly follow the SOPs or basic principles of biosafety like handling administrative controls, using biosafety equipment, wearing personal protective equipment, etc. The laboratory also should have a proper design as per the risk assessment. Accordingly, the biosafety laboratories (BSL) are classified into four types: type 1, 2, 3 and 4. The risks are assessed as per the factors in the host, vector and donor sequences and the environmental factors and their activities in such environments. As GMMs are of low risk, BSL 1 and 2 are enough for their manipulation, but occasionally BSL 3 may be needed. There may be chances of spillage on the working surfaces during manipulation of the genes which can be remedied by the spill management protocols. Biological wastes may be generated in all areas of manipulation. These can be properly treated by either chemical disinfection or autoclaving and disposed of by incineration. These wastes should be segregated in colour-coded bags before disposal. There may be some risks while transporting GMMs to distant places. They should be packed securely in triple-layer pack and sent for disposal following IATA and other road rules. For each process of the manipulation of gene, a separate standard operating procedure (SOP) should be maintained which has to be updated whenever any change in the procedure is made.
Safety Assessment of Novel Genetic Technologies for Vector Control: National and International Perspectives
19961V. Ahuja, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 11:15:26.
Novel genetic technologies provide an alternative approach for control of vectors particularly those carrying deadly pathogens. Genetic control technologies aim to either suppress target populations or modify the vector by introducing a heritable factor that reduces or blocks their ability to transmit the diseases. These technologies are thus referred to as population suppression or population modification approaches. Both these approaches offer significant advantages for vector control; however, there are associated biosafety concerns related to possible ecosystem interactions. Therefore, extensive testing on a case-by-case basis is required before these can be used as a public health intervention. This paper provides details of the international initiatives towards development of guidelines and status of regulations in India.
Measuring Public Attitudes to Releases of Transgenic Mosquitoes for Disease Control, with Special Reference to Dengue and Malaria
19958L. A. De Las Llagas and M. S. T. Gunigundo, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 11:10:05.
Since the advent of DDT in public health and agriculture, science leaped forward with revolutionary technology such as gene drive or editing, thus making it possible to develop alternative approaches to address vector-borne diseases. However, their utilization and sustenance in public life are dependent on public attitude, i.e., societal awareness and social acceptance. In the face of strong skepticism against genetically modified organisms in both developed and developing countries, public acceptance is therefore a requirement (Boete and Beisel 2013, and Bohannon 2002, as cited in De Souza et al. Understanding the requirements and factors necessary for the acceptance of genetically modified mosquitoes as a potential malaria control tool in Ghana: a questionnaire survey, AsPac J Biol Biotechnol 21(3):76–88, 2013).
Experiences and Outcomes from a Worldwide Training Programme on Genetically Modified Vectors (GMVs) Related Biosafety for Human Health and the Environment
19956B. K. Tyagi, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 11:04:33.
Partial to virtual lack of any impact on control of vectors of human diseases, especially mosquitoes, warranted urgent search for new alternate technologies which will be safe, economical and environment-friendly, on one hand, and integrate with other tools and methodologies of the integrated vector management (IVM), on the other. Past few decades have witnessed surge of many effective and sustainable genetically and biotechnologically developed de novo technologies which tend to control mosquito vectors by working either to suppress (transgenesis) or replace (paratransgenesis), besides an array of other physiological interventions, on the vector populations. Several technologies such as, for example, Release of insect carrying Dominant Lethal (RIDL) gene system, Wolbachia (an endocellular symbiotic bacterium naturally present in many arthropods) induced cytoplasmic incompatibility (CI) resulting in unviable egg production and transforming dengue vectors (Aedes spp.) and malaria vectors (e.g., Anopheles stephensi) into resistant to respective pathogens, i.e., viruses and Plasmodium, have offered promise in controlling vector-borne diseases. Notwithstanding unchallengeable significance, these technologies have also raised many questions from both societies and governments of many countries. To alleviate their scepticism and other queries, many international organizations conducted meetings to generate consensus for guidelines, but even this helped marginally to pacify global interrogations. It was, therefore, considered opportune by the Tropical Disease Research (TDR)/WHO to set up a series of multi-regional training workshops in Africa (Bamako, Mali), Asia (Madurai, India) and Latin America (Medellin, Colombia) between 2008 and 2011 (WHO 2015). About 150 trainees were drawn from as diverse disciplines/walks of life as science, health departments, academics, social, legal, non-governmental organization. The outcome, inculcated from the experiences expressed by the trainees themselves post-workshops, has been very encouraging as they all found the training courses highly beneficial to comprehend genetically modified vectors/mosquitoes (GMV/GMM) related biosafety to the human and the environment and thus become a potential ambassador in their areas or countries to strongly communicate and advocate about the lasting benefits of the various genetically evolved technologies in the control of mosquitoes responsible for transmission of dengue and malaria, in particular.
Advances in Aedes Mosquito Vector Control Strategies Using CRISPR/Cas9
19929P. D. S. U. Wickramasinghe, G. N. Silva, Y. I. N. Silva Gunawardene and R. S. Dassanayake, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 09:39:52.
Advancements in genetic engineering have resulted in the development of mosquitoes with impaired vector competence, thereby limiting acquisition and transmission of pathogens. The main dengue (DENV) vector, Aedes aegypti, is an invasive species that have spread unwittingly across the world as a result of human trade and travel. The Ae. aegypti mosquito species has spread across tropical and subtropical regions, with higher presence in urban regions where rapid breeding patterns have shown in artificial containers. Identification of and treating an adequate number of mosquito breeding sites as a control measure have been done for the past couple of years, and yet improvement is far from the expectations, even with well-funded and well-organized initiatives. In order to stop the pathogen transmission, genetically modified mosquitoes (GMM) needs to be created and released. Despite many Aedes-related achievements, GMM creation has been challenging. The spread of particular genetic elements that impair vector competence, trigger deleterious recessive mutations, or skew a population's sex ratio can be used to prevent the spread of vector disease, or eradicate invasive organisms in a species-specific and eco-friendly manner. In recent years, genome editing strategies have evolved to make use of a variety of nucleases, ranging from sequence-specific zinc finger nucleases to modular TALENs (transcription activator-like effector nucleases) and most recently, RNA-guided nucleases adapted from bacterial adaptive immune systems, dubbed CRISPR/Cas (clustered regularly interspaced palindromic repeats/CRISPR associated systems). By combining these methods, a new era in gene editing had emerged. Generally, both of these gene editing technologies utilize sequence-specific nucleases to generate double-stranded DNA breaks (or nicks) in the target sequence, resulting in desired DNA modifications using endogenous DNA repair mechanisms. Since cells with DNA lesions are unable to divide further, the nuclease-generated strand breaks must be rapidly repaired by the cell to maintain the viability. CRISPR/Cas has been widely accepted for use in a variety of organisms, including insect species, with only minor optimization steps needed thus far. CRISPR/Cas9 technology transformed the process of engineering nucleases capable of cleaving complex genomic sequences. A complementary guide RNA (gRNA) directs the Cas9 endonuclease's operation to the specific DNA target site, enabling the editing of virtually any DNA sequence without complex protein engineering and selection procedures. Apart from genome editing, the specificity and flexibility of the CRISPR/Cas9 method enables unprecedented rapid development of genetically modified organisms with mutation systems for disease vector insect control. The stability and expression of the gene construct generated by CRISPR/Cas9 or any other method must be addressed before GMM are released, in order to make sure that pathogen transmission and formulation are interrupted robustly and completely. Spreading foreign antipathogen genes through gene drive strategies among wild mosquito populations strengthens the case for a more streamlined approach. Major fields that must be adequately assessed include risk evaluation and management, conducting studies to ensure human and environmental protection, developing effective control strategies built on comprehensive gene-driving systems, and adequately addressing the ethical, legal, and social consequences of GMM release. Although GMM is theoretically feasible as a disease control method, field releases should be made only when strong scientific evidence of human and environmental protection and effectiveness are presented, and public acceptance is addressed appropriately. This chapter discusses the diverse technological advances in generating Ae. aegypti mosquitoes which are resistant to dengue virus (DENV) and other diseases, as well as the biosafety and risk assessment of these procedures. Additionally, the chapter outlines a convincing path forward for developing successful genetic-based DENV control strategies based on CRISPR/Cas9, which could be expanded to control other arboviruses while maintaining biosafety.
Genetic Improvements to the Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) for the Control of Mosquito Population
19927P. V. D. Dilani, Y. I. N. S. Gunawardene and R. S. Dassanayake, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 09:33:58.
Mosquito-borne diseases are becoming a major health problem worldwide. At present, the principal method of controlling these diseases entirely depends on the mosquito vector control strategies. However, traditional control methods which are focussed on reducing mosquito populations through environmental management and the application of insecticides are largely ineffective. Hence, various control methods, including the release of sterile insect technique (SIT), have been proposed for the reduction of the mosquito population. As a species-specific control strategy, SIT offers considerable environmental benefits and a chemical-free option for insect control. However, the application of the SIT to mosquito control consistently suffered from lack of efficient sexing system, high fitness cost and operational difficulty in ionizing radiation, density-dependent nature of the target mosquito population and various other technical issues. The intervention of genetic engineering has led to several improvements in the operation or security of SIT programmes. The advent of mosquito transgenesis has paved the way for novel approaches in mosquito control. One possibility is a release of insects carrying dominant lethal (RIDL) strategy by engineering self-limiting gene, which offers solutions for many drawbacks of traditional SIT by providing genetic sterilization, genetic sexing, genetic containment and provision of genetic markers while maintaining its environmentally benign and species-specific utility. The success of this strategy often depends on how genetic modification affects the fitness of the mosquitoes. With several improvements and modifications allowing minimum fitness load, RIDL is now available for a wide range of mosquitoes such as Aedes aegypti, Aedes albopictus and Anopheles stephensi with field-testing possibilities. However, with solid epidemiological evidence and community support, widespread implementation of these strategies might reverse the current alarming global mosquito vector-borne diseases.
Field Trials of Gene Drive Mosquitoes: Lessons from Releases of Genetically Sterile Males and Wolbachia-infected Mosquitoes
19925J. M. Marshall and V. N. Vásquez, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 09:27:08.
The discovery of CRISPR-based gene editing and its application to homing-based gene drive has been greeted with excitement, for its potential to control mosquito-borne diseases on a wide scale, and concern, for the invasiveness and potential irreversibility of a release. At the same time, CRISPR-based gene editing has enabled a range of self-limiting gene drive systems to be engineered with much greater ease, including (1) threshold-dependent systems, which tend to spread only when introduced above a certain threshold population frequency, and (2) temporally self-limiting systems, which display transient drive activity before being eliminated by virtue of a fitness cost. As these CRISPR-based gene drive systems are yet to be field-tested, plenty of open questions remain to be addressed, and insights can be gained from precedents set by field trials of other novel genetics-based and biological control systems, such as trials of Wolbachia-transfected mosquitoes, intended for either population replacement or suppression, and trials of genetically sterile male mosquitoes, either using the RIDL system (release of insects carrying a dominant lethal gene) or irradiation. We discuss lessons learned from these field trials and implications for a phased exploration of gene drive technology, including homing-based gene drive, chromosomal translocations, and split gene drive as a system potentially suitable for an intermediate release.
Arthropods of Medical Importance: Need for Genetic and Other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, with Emphasis on Eco-biosocial and Environmental Considerations.
19923B. K. Tyagi, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 09:22:08.
Among the world’s known vector groups, viz. arthropods, snails and rodents, the most important vectors originate from arthropods, the jointed legs. Arthropods are doubtlessly regarded as the most dominant creatures on the Earth due largely to their remarkable structural and behavioural diversity, besides humongous species preponderance. Of course, some of these arthropods are serious pests and/or vectors of human and animal diseases—deadly, debilitating and economy destructing. According to an estimate, arthropod species make approximately 80% of the global biological diversity. Born some 350–400 million years ago, they have of course achieved, to the utter envy of all other animal forms, a formidable genetic diversity and robustness so much so that they have virtually captivated pivotal human attention for centuries. They serve as a spectacular model of bioprospecting or laboratory experiments mostly because they are found in abundance, breed prodigiously and are exceptionally easier to culture or cultivate. For the aforesaid reasons, arthropods are also the easy target for genetic manipulations such as the transgenesis (using the release of insect carrying dominant lethal (RIDL) gene system or gene drive-based genome editing, e.g. CRISPR/Cas9, to suppress or replace the vector population) or paratransgenesis (e.g. deploying endosymbiont Wolbachia-induced cytoplasmic incompatibility for replacing natural vector population). In particular, the advent of CRISPR technology has excited the potential to engineer new game-changing technologies and innovative systems that can be used to control wild populations of mosquitoes. Two developments of particular interest are a self-limiting system termed precision-guided sterile insect technique (pgSIT) and a homing-based gene drive (HGD). The unique features of these systems can make them valuable tools to control vector mosquitoes in the future. All these biotechnological advancements in vector control are designed to fit well in the multi-methodical integrated vector management (IVM) strategy.
The Effects of Boric Acid Sugar Bait on Wolbachia Trans-Infected Male Aedes albopictus (ZAP Males®) in Laboratory Conditions
19917V. S. Aryaprema, W. A. Qualls, K. L. Dobson, S. L. Dobson and R.-D. Xue, Insects, 13. 2021-12-21 09:06:57.
The field release of Wolbachia trans-infected male mosquitoes, as well as the use of toxic sugar baits, is a novel and promising candidate technique for integrated mosquito management programs. However, the methods of action of the two techniques may not be complementary, because the Wolbachia method releases mosquitoes into the environment expecting a wild population reduction in subsequent generations while the toxic baits are intended to reduce the wild population by killing mosquitoes. This laboratory study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of boric acid toxic sugar baits on Wolbachia trans-infected male Aedes albopictus, relative to wild-type Ae. albopictus males. Wolbachia trans-infected (ZAP male®) and the wild-type Ae. albopictus males were exposed separately to 1% boric acid in a 10% sucrose solution in BugDorms. In the control test, the two groups were exposed to 10% sucrose solution without boric acid. Percent mortalities were counted for 24 h, 48 h and 72 h post exposure periods. The results show that 1% boric acid toxic sugar bait can effectively kill ZAP males under laboratory conditions, and the effectiveness was significantly higher after 24 h and 48 h, compared to wild-type male Ae. albopictus. This finding will help in planning and coordinating integrated mosquito management programs, including both Wolbachia trans-infected mosquito releases and the use of toxic sugar baits against Ae. albopictus.
Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies
19912B. K. Tyagi, SpringerLink, 2021-12-21 08:48:19.
This book comprehensively covers the latest development in developing and deploying the genetically modified vectors, particularly Anopheles and Aedes mosquitoes responsible for transmitting malaria parasites and dengue viruses, the most deadly and/or debilitating among all the vector-borne diseases. It is considered timely and commensurate to bring about a book dealing with the various ecological, biological and social as well as regulatory aspects for the deployment of genetically modified vectors in special context with the biosafety of humans, his associates, and the environment. Written by an array of specialists and experts in various subjects of genetically modified organisms, this book centrally addresses the (i) basic principles of the genetic manipulation of vectors and they are potential impact on human and the environment, (ii) ecological, biological, ethical, legal and social implications of the use of genetically modified vectors, (iii) identification of potential hazards; assessment and management of risks for human and environment; risk/benefit analysis, (iv) principles and practices for the assessment and management of biosecurity and biosafety in laboratories (and in the field), (v) guiding principles for creation and management of institutional or national biosafety review boards and ethics review committees, and (vi) development and application of a biosafety regulatory framework and its related legal principles at national levels for securing the development and use of vector control methods based on genetic modification strategies.
Safe Application of Genetically Modified Mosquito (GMM) to Combat Dengue and Chikungunya Depends on Socioeconomic Status and Social Acceptance in the Developing Countries: A Comprehensive Analysis
19898M. N. Islam, Genetically Modified and other Innovative Vector Control Technologies, 2021-12-21 08:16:32.
The emerging and re-emerging vector-borne diseases are a serious public health problem throughout the world. It has been observed that more than 100 countries and approximately half of the world’s population are at risk on vector-borne diseases (VBDs). The global burden of the vector-borne diseases is unacceptably high. It alludes toward their functional inappropriateness, untimeliness, and irrelevance in controlling vectors and vector-borne diseases. Modern technologies, coupled with other appropriate ones within the precincts of integrated vector management (IVM), can tide over this situation posed by conventional, mostly insecticide-based, methodologies. A lot of challenges, obstacles, and interruptive factors have warranted urgent deployment of new approaches for the control of VBDs keeping in mind the inbuilt ethical, social, and regulatory issues. Genetically modified mosquito (GMM) technology is a complex and highly sophisticated biotechnological intervention for suppression of vector populations. Wolbachia-associated sterile insect technique (SIT) has been proved highly significant and effective for replacement of mosquito populations. Adopting a highly sophisticated GMM technology to suppress or replace the mosquito populations’ density is a big question in developing countries because their priority is directed to foremost fulfill the basic human rights to sustain. Yet, notwithstanding foreseeable bottlenecks, of paramount importance is the need to deploy GMM technology with due consideration to socioeconomic factors and availability of advanced biotechnological facilities during the application of GMM in the developing countries.
Malaria vector control tools in emergency settings: What do experts think? Results from a DELPHI survey
19785C. Boete, S. Burza, E. Lasry, S. Moriana and W. Robertson, Conflict and Health, 15:11. 2021-12-20 14:16:22.
Background The use and implementation of novel tools for malaria control such as long lasting impregnated bednets (LLINs) and Indoor Residual Spraying (IRS) over the last decade has contributed to a substantial reduction in malaria burden globally. However numerous challenges exist particularly in relation to vector control in emergency settings. This study seeks to explore expert opinion on the utility of existing tools within the emergency context setting and to better understand the attitude towards emerging and innovative tools (including Genetically Modified Mosquitoes) to augment current approaches. Methods 80 experts in the field of malaria and vector control were invited to participate in a two-round Delphi survey. They were selected through a combination of literature (academic and policy publications) review and snowball sampling reflecting a range of relevant backgrounds including vector control experts, malaria programme managers and emergency response specialists. The survey was conducted online through a questionnaire including the possibility for free text entry, and concentrated on the following topics: Utility and sustainability of current vector control tools, both in and outside emergency settings Feasibility, utility and challenges of emerging vector control tools, both in and outside emergency settings Current and unmet research priorities in malaria vector control and in malaria control in general. Results 37 experts completed the first round and 31 completed the second round of the survey. There was a stronger consensus about the increased utility of LLIN compared to IRS in all settings, while insecticide-treated covers and blankets ranked very high only in emergency settings. When considering the combination of tools, the ones deemed most interesting always involved LLINs and IRS regardless of the setting, and the acceptability and the efficacy at reducing transmission are essential characteristics. Regarding perceptions of tools currently under development, consensus was towards improvement of existing tools rather than investing in novel approaches and the majority of respondents expressed distrust for genetic approaches. Conclusion Malaria vector control experts expressed more confidence for tools whose efficacy is backed up by epidemiological evidence, hence a preference for the improvement rather than the combination of existing tools. Moreover, while several novel tools are under development, the majority of innovative approaches did not receive support, particularly in emergency settings. Stakeholders involved in the development of novel tools should involve earlier and raise awareness of the potential effectiveness amongst a wider range of experts within the malaria community to increase acceptability and improve early adoption once the evidence base is established.
Gene Editing in the Wild: Shaping Decisions through Broad Public Deliberation
19701M. K. Gusmano, G. E. Kaebnick, K. J. Maschke, C. P. Neuhaus and B. C. Wills, The Hastings Center Report, 51. 2021-12-14 19:46:28.
The essays in this special report grew out of a project funded by the National Science Foundation (with NSF award number 1827935). Gregory E. Kaebnick and Michael K. Gusmano were co-principal investigators on the project, and Karen J. Maschke and Carolyn P. Neuhaus were coinvestigators. Ben Curran Wills was project manager and research assistant. Genetic editing technologies have long been used to modify domesticated nonhuman animals and plants. Recently, attention and funding have also been directed toward projects for modifying nonhuman organisms in the shared environment—that is, in the “wild.” Interest in gene editing nonhuman organisms for wild release is motivated by a variety of goals, and such releases hold the possibility of significant, potentially transformative benefit. The technologies also pose risks and are often surrounded by a high uncertainty. Given the stakes, scientists and advisory bodies have called for public engagement in the science, ethics, and governance of gene editing research in nonhuman organisms. Most calls for public engagement lack details about how to design a broad public deliberation, including questions about participation, how to structure the conversations, how to report on the content, and how to link the deliberations to policy. We summarize the key design elements that can improve broad public deliberations about gene editing in the wild.
Genetic Control in Historical Perspective: The Legacy of India’s Genetic Control of Mosquitoes Unit
19652R. Wilbanks, Hastings Center Report, 51:S11-S18. 2021-12-14 18:54:15.
Abstract In the early 1970s, a World Health Organization-initiated and United States-funded project released lab-reared mosquitoes outside New Delhi in the first large-scale field trials of the genetic control of mosquitoes. Despite partnering with the Indian Council of Medical Research and investing significantly in outreach to local communities at the release sites, the project was embroiled in controversy and became an object of vehement debate within the Indian parliament and diplomatic contretemps between the United States and India. This early episode of genetic control research demonstrates how a scientific collaboration was entangled in geopolitics and shaped by the legacy of colonialism. This historical case study has implications for public deliberation in the present, pointing to the challenges of shared decision-making in the context of structural inequality, the way that a backdrop of military interest in a technology can impede trust, and the long-term consequences of projects that foster mistrust.
Deficits of Public Deliberation in U.S. Oversight for Gene Edited Organisms
19650J. Kuzma, Hastings Center Report, 51 Suppl 2:S25-s33. 2021-12-14 18:49:23.
Environmental releases of gene edited (GEdOs) and gene drive organisms (GDOs) will likely occur under conditions of high uncertainty and in complex socioecological systems. Therefore, public deliberation is especially important to account for diverse interpretations of safety, risks, and benefits; to draw on experiential and public wisdom in areas of proposed release; to ameliorate dangers of technological optimism; and to increase the public legitimacy of decisions. Yet there is a "democratic deficit" in the United States' oversight system for GEdOs and GDOs, as unconflicted experts, publics, and skeptical stakeholders are most often excluded from decision-making and unavailable to critically examine potential risks and benefits or raise broader concerns about socioeconomic or cultural impacts. This article argues for the need to open up decision-making for GEdOs and GDOs, discusses the challenges for doing so within the current oversight framework, and finally, proposes institutional, policy, and attitudinal changes that are likely important for overcoming barriers to public deliberation.
Public Deliberation about Gene Editing in the Wild
19648M. K. Gusmano, G. E. Kaebnick, K. J. Maschke, C. P. Neuhaus and B. C. Wills, Hastings Center Report, 51 Suppl 2:S2-s10. 2021-12-14 18:42:52.
Genetic editing technologies have long been used to modify domesticated nonhuman animals and plants. Recently, attention and funding have also been directed toward projects for modifying nonhuman organisms in the shared environment-that is, in the "wild." Interest in gene editing nonhuman organisms for wild release is motivated by a variety of goals, and such releases hold the possibility of significant, potentially transformative benefit. The technologies also pose risks and are often surrounded by a high uncertainty. Given the stakes, scientists and advisory bodies have called for public engagement in the science, ethics, and governance of gene editing research in nonhuman organisms. Most calls for public engagement lack details about how to design a broad public deliberation, including questions about participation, how to structure the conversations, how to report on the content, and how to link the deliberations to policy. We summarize the key design elements that can improve broad public deliberations about gene editing in the wild.
Empowering Indigenous Knowledge in Deliberations on Gene Editing in the Wild
19646R. Taitingfong and A. Ullah, Hastings Center Report, 51 Suppl 2:S74-s84. 2021-12-14 18:38:07.
Proposals to release genetically engineered organisms in the wild raise complex ethical issues related to their safe and equitable implementation. While there is broad agreement that community and public engagement is vital to decision-making in this context, more discussion is needed about who should be engaged in such activities and in what ways. This article identifies Indigenous peoples as key stakeholders in decisions about gene-editing in the wild and argues that engagement activities need not only include Indigenous peoples but also be designed, conducted, and analyzed in ways that confront longstanding power imbalances that dismiss Indigenous expertise. We offer specific recommendations to guide deliberative activities to not only be inclusive of Indigenous peoples but also to empower their diverse, situated knowledges. We call on those committed to the inclusive design of broad public deliberation to pursue strategies that shift dominant power dynamics to include Indigenous communities in more meaningful ways.
The Decision Phases Framework for Public Engagement: Engaging Stakeholders about Gene Editing in the Wild
19643S. K. Barnhill-Dilling, A. Kokotovich and J. A. Delborne, Hastings Center Report, 51 Suppl 2:S48-s61. 2021-12-14 18:30:37.
Some experts and advocates propose environmental biotechnologies such as genetic engineering, gene drive systems, and synthetic biology as potential solutions to accelerating rates of species loss. While these tools may offer hope for a seemingly intractable problem, they also present potential governance challenges for which innovative decision-making systems are required. Two of the perennial governance challenges include, when are broader stakeholder groups involved in these decisions and who exactly should be involved? We propose the decision phases framework-which includes research and development, regulatory review, and deployment, management, and monitoring-as a framework for identifying which stakeholders might be best suited for different phases throughout the innovation and deployment of emerging environmental biotechnologies for species protection.
Contact Us
Alex Sullivan
Foundation for the
National Institutes of Health
geneconvenevi@fnih.org