Ethical and legal implications of gene editing in plant breeding: a systematic literature review

Siti Hafsyah IDRIS; Nurzatil Sharleeza MAT JALALUDDIN; Lee Wei CHANG

doi:10.1631/jzus.B2200601

Your Location：

Home >

Browse articles >

Ethical and legal implications of gene editing in plant breeding: a systematic literature review

Scan for full text

Alert me when the article has been cited

Submit

Review | Updated：2024-01-19

Ethical and legal implications of gene editing in plant breeding: a systematic literature review
Ethical and legal implications of gene editing in plant breeding: a systematic literature review
基因编辑在植物育种中的道德和法律影响：一项系统性文献综述
Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE B (Biomedicine & Biotechnology) Vol. 24, Issue 12, Pages: 1093-1105(2023)
Affiliations：

1.Faculty of Law, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Jalan Sarjana 1/2, Shah Alam 40450, Selangor, Malaysia
2.Centre for Research in Biotechnology for Agriculture (CEBAR), Level 3, Research Management and Innovation Complex, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia
3.Centre for Civilisational Dialogue, Level 1, High Impact Research Building, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur 50603, Malaysia
Funds：
DOI：10.1631/jzus.B2200601
CLC：
CSTR：

Siti Hafsyah IDRIS,Nurzatil Sharleeza MAT JALALUDDIN,Lee Wei CHANG等.基因编辑在植物育种中的道德和法律影响：一项系统性文献综述[J].浙江大学学报（英文版）（B辑：生物医学和生物技术）,2023,24(12):1093-1105.

Siti Hafsyah IDRIS, Nurzatil Sharleeza MAT JALALUDDIN, Lee Wei CHANG. Ethical and legal implications of gene editing in plant breeding: a systematic literature review. [J]. Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE B (Biomedicine & Biotechnology) 24(12):1093-1105(2023)
Siti Hafsyah IDRIS,Nurzatil Sharleeza MAT JALALUDDIN,Lee Wei CHANG等.基因编辑在植物育种中的道德和法律影响：一项系统性文献综述[J].浙江大学学报（英文版）（B辑：生物医学和生物技术）,2023,24(12):1093-1105. DOI： 10.1631/jzus.B2200601.

Siti Hafsyah IDRIS, Nurzatil Sharleeza MAT JALALUDDIN, Lee Wei CHANG. Ethical and legal implications of gene editing in plant breeding: a systematic literature review. [J]. Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE B (Biomedicine & Biotechnology) 24(12):1093-1105(2023) DOI： 10.1631/jzus.B2200601.

摘要

生物技术的政策和法规必须不断修订和更新，以适应最新的植物育种技术进展。如基因编辑这样的新植物育种技术（NPBT），已被应用于解决植物育种中的各种难题，但同时，将NPBT作为新兴生物技术工具也引起了一系列的法律和伦理问题。本研究旨在突出基因编辑技术在现有文献中的实施情况，并研究基因编辑技术在植物育种中面临的道德和伦理问题。我们进行了系统性文献综述（SLR），以提供围绕此主题的伦理和法律论述的现状。我们还确定了在涉及基因编辑技术在植物育种中的未来治理时必须解决的关键研究优先领域和政策空白。

Abstract

Biotechnology policies and regulations must be revised and updated to reflect the most recent advances in plant-breeding technology. New Plant Breeding Techniques (NPBT) such as gene editing have been applied to address the myriad of challenges in plant breeding, while the use of NPBT as emerging biotechnological tools raises legal and ethical concerns. This study aims to highlight how gene editing is operationalized in the existing literature and examine the critical issues of ethical and legal issues of gene editing for plant breeding. We carried out a systematic literature review (SLR) to provide the current states of ethical and legal discourses surrounding this topic. We also identified critical research priority areas and policy gaps that must be addressed when designing the future governance of gene editing in plant breeding.

关键词

系统性文献综述基因编辑植物育种法律和伦理问题结果论美德伦理原则

Keywords

Systematic literature reviewGene editingPlant breedingEthical and legal issuesConsequentialismVirtue ethics principles

references

Antonsen T, Dassler T, 2021. How to do what is right, not what is easy: requirements for assessment of genome-edited and genetically modified organisms under ethical guidelines. Food Ethics, 6(2):12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-021-00091-yhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s41055-021-00091-y

Bain C, Lindberg S, Selfa T, 2020. Emerging sociotechnical imaginaries for gene edited crops for foods in the United States: implications for governance. Agric Human Values, 37(2):265-279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-019-09980-9https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-019-09980-9

Baker T, 2019. What is Freedom to Operate (FTO) in Relation to Patents and IP? https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=38c0d68a-6a95-4769-bcf1-adc805e19c58https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=38c0d68a-6a95-4769-bcf1-adc805e19c58

Barrett H, Rose DC, 2022. Perceptions of the fourth agricultural revolution: what’s in, what’s out, and what consequences are anticipated? Sociol Ruralis, 62(2):162-189. https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12324https://doi.org/10.1111/soru.12324

Bartkowski B, Theesfeld I, Pirscher F, et al., 2018. Snipping around for food: economic, ethical and policy implications of CRISPR/Cas genome editing. Geoforum, 96:172-180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.07.017https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.07.017

Bate NJ, Dardick CD, de Maagd RA, et al., 2021. Opportunities and challenges applying gene editing to specialty crops. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol Plant, 57(4):709-719. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11627-021-10208-xhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11627-021-10208-x

Bearth A, Kaptan G, Kessler SH, 2022. Genome-edited versus genetically-modified tomatoes: an experiment on people’s perceptions and acceptance of food biotechnology in the UK and Switzerland. Agric Human Values, 39(3):1117-1131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-022-10311-8https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-022-10311-8

Bechtold S, 2018. Beyond risk considerations: where and how can a debate about non-safety related issues of genome editing in agriculture take place? Front Plant Sci, 9:1724. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01724https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01724

Blakeney M, 2012. Patenting of plant varieties and plant breeding methods. J Exp Bot, 63(3):1069-1074. https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/err368https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/err368

Boettcher M, McManus MT, 2015. Choosing the right tool for the job: RNAi, TALEN, or CRISPR. Mol Cell, 58(4):575-585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2015.04.028https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2015.04.028

Brinegar K, Yetisen AK, Choi S, et al., 2017. The commercialization of genome-editing technologies. Crit Rev Biotechnol, 37(7):924-932. https://doi.org/10.1080/07388551.2016.1271768https://doi.org/10.1080/07388551.2016.1271768

Broad Institute, 2022. Information about Licensing CRISPR Systems, Including for Clinical Use. Broad Institute, Cambridge. https://www.‍broadinstitute.‍org/partnerships/office-strategic-alliances-and-partnering/information-about-licensing-crispr-genome-edihttps://www.‍broadinstitute.‍org/partnerships/office-strategic-alliances-and-partnering/information-about-licensing-crispr-genome-edi

Busch G, Ryan E, von Keyserlingk MAG, et al., 2022. Citizen views on genome editing: effects of species and purpose. Agric Human Values, 39(1):151-164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-021-10235-9https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-021-10235-9

Chen KL, Wang YP, Zhang R, et al., 2019. CRISPR/Cas genome editing and precision plant breeding in agriculture. Annu Rev Plant Biol, 70:667-697. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-arplant-050718-100049https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-arplant-050718-100049

Clapp J, Ruder SL, 2020. Precision technologies for agriculture: digital farming, gene-edited crops, and the politics of sustainability. Glob Environ Polit, 20(3):49-69. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00566https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00566

Dassler T, Myhr AI, 2021. The ethical sustainability matrix: a practical tool for assessment of GMOs including genome-edited organisms. In: Schübel H, Wallimann-Helmer I (Eds.), Justice and Food Security in A Changing Climate. Wageningen Academic Publishers, the Netherlands, p.368-373. https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-915-2_57https://doi.org/10.3920/978-90-8686-915-2_57

Davarnejad L, 2011. In the shadow of soft law: the handling of corporate social responsibility disputes under the OECD guidelines for multinational enterprises. J Disp Resol, 2011(2):351-385.

de Jonge B, Salazar R, Visser B, 2022. How regulatory issues surrounding new breeding technologies can impact smallholder farmer breeding: a case study from the Philippines. Plants People Planet, 4(1):96-105. https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10219https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10219

Esvelt KM, 2018. Gene Drive Should be a Nonprofit Technology. STAT, Boston. https://www.statnews.com/2018/11/27/gene-drive-should-be-nonprofit-technologyhttps://www.statnews.com/2018/11/27/gene-drive-should-be-nonprofit-technology

European Commission, 2019. Corporate Social Responsibility, Responsible Business Conduct, and Business & Human Rights: Overview of Progress. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium, p.1-64. https://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/34482/attachments/1/translations/en/renditions/nativehttps://ec.europa.eu/docsroom/documents/34482/attachments/1/translations/en/renditions/native

European Commission, 2021. European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies Opinion on the Ethics of Genome Editing. European Commission, Brussels, Belgium, p.1-112. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/659034https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/659034

Faber N, Jorna R, van Engelen J, 2005. The sustainability of “sustainability”—a study into the conceptual foundations of the notion of “sustainability”. J Environ Assess Policy Manage, 7(1):1-33. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1464333205001955https://doi.org/10.1142/S1464333205001955

Feeney O, Cockbain J, Morrison M, et al., 2018. Patenting foundational technologies: lessons from CRISPR and other core biotechnologies. Am J Bioethics, 18(12):36-48. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2018.1531160https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2018.1531160

Feeney O, Cockbain J, Sterckx S, 2021. Ethics, patents and genome editing: a critical assessment of three options of technology governance. Front Polit Sci, 3:731505. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2021.731505https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2021.731505

Genetic Literacy Project, 2022. Human and Agriculture Gene Editing: Regulations and Index. https://crispr-gene-editing-regs-tracker.geneticliteracyproject.orghttps://crispr-gene-editing-regs-tracker.geneticliteracyproject.org

Gepts P, Papa R, 2003. Possible effects of (trans)gene flow from crops on the genetic diversity from landraces and wild relatives. Environ Biosafety Res, 2(2):89-103. https://doi.org/10.1051/ebr:2003009https://doi.org/10.1051/ebr:2003009

Gordon K, 2001. The OECD guidelines and other corporate responsibility instruments: a comparison. OECD Working Papers on International Investment. OECD Publishing, Paris, p.1-17. https://doi.org/10.1787/302255465771https://doi.org/10.1787/302255465771

Guerrini CJ, Curnutte MA, Sherkow JS, et al., 2017. The rise of the ethical license. Nat Biotechnol, 35(1):22-24. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3756https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.3756

Harfouche AL, Petousi V, Meilan R, et al., 2021. Promoting ethically responsible use of agricultural biotechnology. Trends Plant Sci, 26(6):546-559. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2020.12.015https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2020.12.015

Hartung F, Schiemann J, 2014. Precise plant breeding using new genome editing techniques: opportunities, safety and regulation in the EU. Plant J, 78(5):742-752. https://doi.org/10.1111/tpj.12413https://doi.org/10.1111/tpj.12413

Hefferon KL, Herring RJ, 2017. The end of the GMO? Genome editing, gene drives and new frontiers of plant technology. Rev Agrar Stud, 7(1):1-32. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.308366https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.308366

Helliwell R, Hartley S, Pearce W, 2019. NGO perspectives on the social and ethical dimensions of plant genome-editing. Agric Human Values, 36(4):779-791. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-019-09956-9https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-019-09956-9

Hughes SM, 2022. CRISPR-Cas9 and food in the European Union: an organic solution to an undetectable problem for food business operators. Eur J Risk Regul, 13(2):254-269. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2021.54https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2021.54

IFOAM Organics International, 2017. Compatibility of Breeding Techniques in Organic Systems. Position Paper. IFOAM Organics International, Bonn, Germany, p.1-32.

Jasanoff S, Hurlbut J, Saha K, 2015. CRISPR democracy: gene editing and the need for inclusive deliberation. Issues Sci Technol, 32(1):25-32.

Jiang L, 2020. Commercialization of the gene-edited crop and morality: challenges from the liberal patent law and the strict GMO law in the EU. New Genet Soc, 39(2):191-218. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2019.1686968https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2019.1686968

Johnson JA, Altwegg R, Evans DM, et al., 2016. Is there a future for genome-editing technologies in conservation? Anim Conserv, 19(2):97-101. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12273https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12273

Jongsma KR, Bredenoord AL, Lucivero F, 2018. Digital medicine: an opportunity to revisit the role of bioethicists. Am J Bioeth, 18(9):69-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2018.1498952https://doi.org/10.1080/15265161.2018.1498952

Jung C, Capistrano-Gossmann G, Braatz J, et al., 2018. Recent developments in genome editing and applications in plant breeding. Plant Breed, 137(1):1-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/pbr.12526https://doi.org/10.1111/pbr.12526

Kelsey A, Stillinger D, Pham TB, et al., 2020. Global governing bodies: a pathway for gene drive governance for vector mosquito control. Am J Trop Med Hyg, 103(3):976-985. https://doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh.19-0941https://doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh.19-0941

Kuzma J, 2018. Regulating gene-edited crops. Issues Sci Technol, 35(1):80-85.

Lassoued R, Macall DM, Hesseln H, et al., 2019. Benefits of genome-edited crops: expert opinion. Transgenic Res, 28(2):247-256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-019-00118-5https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-019-00118-5

Lenßen M, 2006. The overlap between patent and plant variety protection for transgenic plants: problems and a solution. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.924343https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.924343

Li C, Brant E, Budak H, et al., 2021. CRISPR/Cas: a Nobel Prize award-winning precise genome editing technology for gene therapy and crop improvement. J Zhejiang Univ-Sci B (Biomed & Biotechnol), 22(4):253-284. https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.B2100009https://doi.org/10.1631/jzus.B2100009

Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al., 2009. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ, 339:b2700. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2700https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2700

Louwaars N, Jochemsen H, 2021. An ethical and societal analysis for biotechnological methods in plant breeding. Agronomy, 11(6):1183. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11061183https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy11061183

Lucivero F, 2016. Promises, expectations and visions: on appraising the plausibility of socio-technical futures. In: Lucivero F (Ed.), Ethical Assessments of Emerging Technologies: Appraising the Moral Plausibility of Technological Visions. Springer, Cham, p.37-61. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23282-9_2https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-23282-9_2

Macnaghten P, Habets MGJL, 2020. Breaking the impasse: towards a forward-looking governance framework for gene editing with plants. Plants People Planet, 2(4):‍353-365. https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10107https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10107

Mali F, 2020. Is the patent system the way forward with the CRISPR-Cas 9 technology? Sci Technol Stud, 33(4):2-23. https://doi.org/10.23987/sts.70114https://doi.org/10.23987/sts.70114

Menz J, Modrzejewski D, Hartung F, et al., 2020. Genome edited crops touch the market: a view on the global development and regulatory environment. Front Plant Sci, 11:5860267. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.586027https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2020.586027

Mepham B, 2000. A framework for the ethical analysis of novel foods: the ethical matrix. J Agric Environ Ethics, 12(2):165-176. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009542714497https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1009542714497

Metje-Sprink J, Sprink T, Hartung F, 2020. Genome-edited plants in the field. Curr Opin Biotechnol, 61:1-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2019.08.007https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2019.08.007

Meyer M, Heimstädt C, 2019. The divergent governance of gene editing in agriculture: a comparison of institutional reports from seven EU member states. Plant Biotechnol Rep, 13(5):473-482. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11816-019-00578-5https://doi.org/10.1007/s11816-019-00578-5

Mitchell PD, Brown Z, McRoberts N, 2018. Economic issues to consider for gene drives. J Responsible Innov, 5(S1):S180-S202. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2017.1407914https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2017.1407914

Myskja BK, Myhr AI, 2020. Non-safety assessments of genome-edited organisms: should they be included in regulation? Sci Eng Ethics, 26(5):2601-2627. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00222-4https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-020-00222-4

Nawaz S, Satterfield T, 2022. Climate solution or corporate co-optation? US and Canadian publics’ views on agricultural gene editing. PLoS ONE, 17(3):e0265635. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0265635https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0265635

Nawaz S, Klassen S, Lyon A, 2020. Tensions at the boundary: rearticulating ‘organic’ plant breeding in the age of gene editing. Elementa Sci Anthrop, 8:34. https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.429https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.429

Preston CJ, Antonsen T, 2021. Integrity and agency: negotiating new forms of human-nature relations in biotechnology. Environ Ethics, 43(1):21-41. https://doi.org/10.5840/enviroethics202143020https://doi.org/10.5840/enviroethics202143020

Qaim M, 2020. Role of new plant breeding technologies for food security and sustainable agricultural development. Appl Econ Perspect Policy, 42(2):129-150. https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13044https://doi.org/10.1002/aepp.13044

Quist D, Chapela IH, 2001. Transgenic DNA introgressed into traditional maize landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico. Nature, 414(6863):541-543. https://doi.org/10.1038/35107068https://doi.org/10.1038/35107068

Research and Markets, 2021. Agricultural Biotechnology Market Research Report 2021. researchandmarkets.‍com. https://www.‍researchandmarkets.‍com/reports/4470325/agricultural-biotechnology-market-research#src-pos-9https://www.‍researchandmarkets.‍com/reports/4470325/agricultural-biotechnology-market-research#src-pos-9

Rippe KP, Willemsen A, 2018. The idea of precaution: ethical requirements for the regulation of new biotechnologies in the environmental field. Front Plant Sci, 9:1868. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01868https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2018.01868

Robbins M, Calabrese C, Featherstone JD, et al., 2021. Understanding knowledge and perceptions of genome editing technologies: a textual analysis of major agricultural stakeholder groups. JCOM J Sci Commun, 20(5):A07. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.20050207https://doi.org/10.22323/2.20050207

Schmidt SM, Belisle M, Frommer WB, 2020. The evolving landscape around genome editing in agriculture. EMBO Rep, 21(6):e50680. https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.202050680https://doi.org/10.15252/embr.202050680

Selfa T, Lindberg S, Bain C, 2021. Governing gene editing in agriculture and food in the United States: tensions, contestations, and realignments. Elem Sci Anth, 9(1):00153. https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.2020.00153https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.2020.00153

SER, 2020. Working Together for Sustainable Supply Chain Impact: Futureproof Policy for International RBC. Social and Economic Council, Hague, the Netherlands, p.1-52.

Shipman EN, Yu JW, Zhou JQ, et al., 2021. Can gene editing reduce postharvest waste and loss of fruit, vegetables, and ornamentals? Hortic Res, 8:1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41438-020-00428-4https://doi.org/10.1038/s41438-020-00428-4

Siebert R, Herzig C, Birringer M, 2022. Strategic framing of genome editing in agriculture: an analysis of the debate in Germany in the run-up to the European Court of Justice ruling. Agric Human Values, 39(2):617-632. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-021-10274-2https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-021-10274-2

Stokstad E, 2021. Thaw coming for U.K. gene-editing regulations: government expected to loosen rules for some biotech crops and animals. Science, 372(6545):895. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.372.6545.895https://doi.org/10.1126/science.372.6545.895

Tanksley SD, McCouch SR, 1997. Seed banks and molecular maps: unlocking genetic potential from the wild. Science, 277(5329):1063-1066. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5329.1063https://doi.org/10.1126/science.277.5329.1063

Thompson PB, 2021. Food system transformation and the role of gene technology: an ethical analysis. Ethics Int Aff, 35(1):35-49. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0892679421000034https://doi.org/10.1017/S0892679421000034

Torgersen H, 2009. Synthetic biology in society: learning from past experience? Syst Synth Biol, 3(1-4):9-17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11693-009-9030-yhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11693-009-9030-y

United Nations, 1987. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future. The United Nations, New York, USA.

van de Water JAJM, Tignat-Perrier R, Allemand D, et al., 2022. Coral holobionts and biotechnology: from Blue Economy to coral reef conservation. Curr Opin Biotechnol, 74:‍110-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2021.10.013https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2021.10.013

van de Wouw M, van Hintum T, Kik C, et al., 2010. Genetic diversity trends in twentieth century crop cultivars: a meta analysis. Theor Appl Genet, 120(6):1241-1252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-009-1252-6https://doi.org/10.1007/s00122-009-1252-6

van de Wouw M, van Treuren R, van Hintum T, 2013. A historical analysis of diversity trends in French and Dutch lettuce cultivars. Euphytica, 190(2):229-239. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-012-0811-0https://doi.org/10.1007/s10681-012-0811-0

Vieira LR, Freitas NC, Justen F, et al., 2021. Regulatory framework of genome editing in Brazil and worldwide. In: Molinari HBC, Vieira LR, Silva NV, et al. (Eds.), CRISPR Technology in Plant Genome Editing. Embrapa, Brasilia, p.169-195.

Whelan AI, Lema MA, 2015. Regulatory framework for gene editing and other new breeding techniques (NBTs) in Argentina. GM Crops Food, 6(4):253-265. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2015.1114698https://doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2015.1114698

Whelan AI, Gutti P, Lema MA, 2020. Gene editing regulation and innovation economics. Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 8:303. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.00303https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.00303

Wray-Cahen D, Bodnar A, Rexroad III C, et al., 2022. Advancing genome editing to improve the sustainability and resiliency of animal agriculture. CABI Agric Biosci, 3:21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43170-022-00091-whttps://doi.org/10.1186/s43170-022-00091-w

Yang Y, Hobbs JE, 2020. Supporters or opponents: will cultural values shape consumer acceptance of gene editing? J Food Prod Mark, 26(1):17-37. https://doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2020.1715316https://doi.org/10.1080/10454446.2020.1715316

Zhang H, Zhang JS, Lang ZB, et al., 2017. Genome editing-principles and applications for functional genomics research and crop improvement. Crit Rev Plant Sci, 36(4):291-309. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352689.2017.1402989https://doi.org/10.1080/07352689.2017.1402989

Views

Downloads

CSCD

Tools

Publicity Resources

Gene editing: an instrument for practical application of gene biology to plant breeding

Efficient gene editing in a medaka (Oryzias latipes) cell line and embryos by SpCas9/tRNA-gRNA

Related Author

No data

Related Institution

National Key Laboratory of Rice Biology, Institute of Crop Sciences, Zhejiang University

The Rural Development Academy, Zhejiang University

Key Laboratory of Healthy Mariculture for the East China Sea, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Engineering Research Center of the Modern Technology for Eel Industry, Ministry of Education, Fisheries College, Jimei University

College of Fisheries, Key Laboratory of Freshwater Animal Breeding, Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Affairs, Huazhong Agricultural University

Address：Journal of Zhejiang University-SCIENCE, 38 Zheda Road, Hangzhou, China Postal code：310027
Tel：+86-571-87952783 Email：cjzhang@zju.edu.cn
Technical support is provided by Beijing Founder electronics co., LTD 京ICP备09064830号-19 京公网安备11010802024621
It is recommended to read the content of this site in Chrome&IE9+. Please switch to extreme mode in browser 360.
Cookies We use cookies to help provide and enhance our service and tailor content. By continuing, you agree to the use of cookies.

⁰