Regulatory framework for gene editing and other new breeding techniques (NBTs) in Argentina

Socioeconomic Impact of Genome Editing on Agricultural Value Chains: The Case of Fungal-Resistant and Coeliac-Safe Wheat

Genome editing (GE) is gaining increasing importance in plant breeding, since it provides opportunities to develop improved crops with high precision and speed. However, little is known about the socioeconomic impact of genome editing on agricultural value chains. This qualitative study analyzes how genome-edited crops could affect agriculture value chains. Based on the hypothetical case of producing and processing fungal-resistant and coeliac-safe wheat in Germany, we conducted semi-structured, in-depth interviews with associations and companies operating in the value chains of wheat. A value chain analysis and qualitative content analysis were combined to assess the costs and benefits of the crops studied along the value chains of wheat. The results show that the use of fungal-resistant and coeliac-safe wheat can provide benefits at each step of the value chains. Fungal-resistant wheat benefits actors by reducing the problems and costs resulting from fungal-diseases and mycotoxins. Coeliac-safe wheat benefits actors by producing high value-added products, which can be safely consumed by patients suffering from coeliac disease. However, the results also show that low acceptance of GE by society and food retailers poses a significant barrier for the use of genome-edited crops in agricultural value chains.

Citrus Genetic Engineering for Disease Resistance: Past, Present and Future

Worldwide, citrus is one of the most important fruit crops and is grown in more than 130 countries, predominantly in tropical and subtropical areas. The healthy progress of the citrus industry has been seriously affected by biotic and abiotic stresses. Several diseases, such as canker and huanglongbing, etc., rigorously affect citrus plant growth, fruit quality, and yield. Genetic engineering technologies, such as genetic transformation and genome editing, represent successful and attractive approaches for developing disease-resistant crops. These genetic engineering technologies have been widely used to develop citrus disease-resistant varieties against canker, huanglongbing, and many other fungal and viral diseases. Recently, clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR)-based systems have made genome editing an indispensable genetic manipulation tool that has been applied to many crops, including citrus. The improved CRISPR systems, such as CRISPR/CRISPR-associated protein (Cas)9 and CRISPR/Cpf1 systems, can provide a promising new corridor for generating citrus varieties that are resistant to different pathogens. The advances in biotechnological tools and the complete genome sequence of several citrus species will undoubtedly improve the breeding for citrus disease resistance with a much greater degree of precision. Here, we attempt to summarize the recent successful progress that has been achieved in the effective application of genetic engineering and genome editing technologies to obtain citrus disease-resistant (bacterial, fungal, and virus) crops. Furthermore, we also discuss the opportunities and challenges of genetic engineering and genome editing technologies for citrus disease resistance.

Modern Trends in Plant Genome Editing: An Inclusive Review of the CRISPR/Cas9 Toolbox

Increasing agricultural productivity via modern breeding strategies is of prime interest to attain global food security. An array of biotic and abiotic stressors affect productivity as well as the quality of crop plants, and it is a primary need to develop crops with improved adaptability, high productivity, and resilience against these biotic/abiotic stressors. Conventional approaches to genetic engineering involve tedious procedures. State-of-the-art OMICS approaches reinforced with next-generation sequencing and the latest developments in genome editing tools have paved the way for targeted mutagenesis, opening new horizons for precise genome engineering. Various genome editing tools such as transcription activator-like effector nucleases (TALENs), zinc-finger nucleases (ZFNs), and meganucleases (MNs) have enabled plant scientists to manipulate desired genes in crop plants. However, these approaches are expensive and laborious involving complex procedures for successful editing. Conversely, CRISPR/Cas9 is an entrancing, easy-to-design, cost-effective, and versatile tool for precise and efficient plant genome editing. In recent years, the CRISPR/Cas9 system has emerged as a powerful tool for targeted mutagenesis, including single base substitution, multiplex gene editing, gene knockouts, and regulation of gene transcription in plants. Thus, CRISPR/Cas9-based genome editing has demonstrated great potential for crop improvement but regulation of genome-edited crops is still in its infancy. Here, we extensively reviewed the availability of CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing tools for plant biotechnologists to target desired genes and its vast applications in crop breeding research.

A comparison of the EU regulatory approach to directed mutagenesis with that of other jurisdictions, consequences for international trade and potential steps forward

A special regulatory regime applies to products of recombinant nucleic acid modifications. A ruling from the European Court of Justice has interpreted this regulatory regime in a way that it also applies to emerging mutagenesis techniques. Elsewhere regulatory progress is also ongoing. In 2015, Argentina launched a regulatory framework, followed by Chile in 2017 and recently Brazil and Colombia. In March 2018, the USDA announced that it will not regulate genome-edited plants differently if they could have also been developed through traditional breeding. Canada has an altogether different approach with their Plants with Novel Traits regulations. Australia is currently reviewing its Gene Technology Act. This article illustrates the deviation of the European Union's (EU's) approach from the one of most of the other countries studied here. Whereas the EU does not implement a case-by-case approach, this approach is taken by several other jurisdictions. Also, the EU court ruling adheres to a process-based approach while most other countries have a stronger emphasis on the regulation of the resulting product. It is concluded that, unless a functioning identity preservation system for products of directed mutagenesis can be established, the deviation results in a risk of asynchronous approvals and disruptions in international trade.

Genetic Engineering for Disease Resistance in Plants: Recent Progress and Future Perspectives

A review of the recent progress in plant genetic engineering for disease resistance highlights future challenges and opportunities in the field.

Risk Assessment and Regulation of Plants Modified by Modern Biotechniques: Current Status and Future Challenges

This review describes the current status and future challenges of risk assessment and regulation of plants modified by modern biotechniques, namely genetic engineering and genome editing. It provides a general overview of the biosafety and regulation of genetically modified plants and details different regulatory frameworks with a focus on the European situation. The environmental risk and safety assessment of genetically modified plants is explained, and aspects of toxicological assessments are discussed, especially the controversial debate in Europe on the added scientific value of untargeted animal feeding studies. Because RNA interference (RNAi) is increasingly explored for commercial applications, the risk and safety assessment of RNAi-based genetically modified plants is also elucidated. The production, detection, and identification of genome-edited plants are described. Recent applications of modern biotechniques, namely synthetic biology and gene drives, are discussed, and a short outlook on the future follows.

Proposed U.S. regulation of gene-edited food animals is not fit for purpose

Dietary DNA is generally regarded as safe to consume, and is a routine ingredient of food obtained from any living organism. Millions of naturally-occurring DNA variations are observed when comparing the genomic sequence of any two healthy individuals of a given species. Breeders routinely select desired traits resulting from this DNA variation to develop new cultivars and varieties of food plants and animals. Regulatory agencies do not evaluate these new varieties prior to commercial release. Gene editing tools now allow plant and animal breeders to precisely introduce useful genetic variation into agricultural breeding programs. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced that it has no plans to place additional regulations on gene-edited plants that could otherwise have been developed through traditional breeding prior to commercialization. However, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has proposed mandatory premarket new animal drug regulatory evaluation for all food animals whose genomes have been intentionally altered using modern molecular technologies including gene editing technologies. This runs counter to U.S. biotechnology policy that regulatory oversight should be triggered by unreasonable risk, and not by the fact that an organism has been modified by a particular process or technique. Breeder intention is not associated with product risk. Harmonizing the regulations associated with gene editing in food species is imperative to allow both plant and animal breeders access to gene editing tools to introduce useful sustainability traits like disease resistance, climate adaptability, and food quality attributes into U.S. agricultural breeding programs.

Plants Developed by New Genetic Modification Techniques-Comparison of Existing Regulatory Frameworks in the EU and Non-EU Countries

The development of new genetic modification techniques (nGMs), also referred to as "new (breeding) techniques" in other sources, has raised worldwide discussions regarding their regulation. Different existing regulatory frameworks for genetically modified organisms (GMO) cover nGMs to varying degrees. Coverage of nGMs depends mostly on the regulatory trigger. In general two different trigger systems can be distinguished, taking into account either the process applied during development or the characteristics of the resulting product. A key question is whether regulatory frameworks either based on process- or product-oriented triggers are more advantageous for the regulation of nGM applications. We analyzed regulatory frameworks for GMO from different countries covering both trigger systems with a focus on their applicability to plants developed by various nGMs. The study is based on a literature analysis and qualitative interviews with regulatory experts and risk assessors of GMO in the respective countries. The applied principles of risk assessment are very similar in all investigated countries independent of the applied trigger for regulation. Even though the regulatory trigger is either process- or product-oriented, both triggers systems show features of the respective other in practice. In addition our analysis shows that both trigger systems have a number of generic advantages and disadvantages, but neither system can be regarded as superior at a general level. More decisive for the regulation of organisms or products, especially nGM applications, are the variable criteria and exceptions used to implement the triggers in the different regulatory frameworks. There are discussions and consultations in some countries about whether changes in legislation are necessary to establish a desired level of regulation of nGMs. We identified five strategies for countries that desire to regulate nGM applications for biosafety-ranging from applying existing biosafety frameworks without further amendments to establishing new stand-alone legislation. Due to varying degrees of nGM regulation, international harmonization will supposedly not be achieved in the near future. In the context of international trade, transparency of the regulatory status of individual nGM products is a crucial issue. We therefore propose to introduce an international public registry listing all biotechnology products commercially used in agriculture.

Certain new plant breeding techniques and their marketability in the context of EU GMO legislation - recent developments

The comparatively low adoption rate of GMO products in the European Union (EU) market seems to be connected with the strictness of authorization regulations and inefficiency of the authorization process itself. These problems will apply to any product deemed to be a GMO that could potentially be marketable in the EU. Since modern methods of plant breeding involving oligonucleotide-directed mutagenesis (ODMs) or site-directed nucleases (SDNs), including Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR), are becoming ever more popular, it is crucial to establish whether the products of such new breeding techniques (NBTs), in particular those which involve precise methods of mutagenesis, are exempted from the EU legislation on GMOs or not. Legal uncertainty as to their status may result in reluctance to invest in such methods and develop them further. Here, developments are presented in the legal classification of certain NBTs products in the context of recent decisions and jurisprudence. The socioeconomic aspects of GMO adoption in both global and European contexts are discussed. The legal and practical landscape of GMO regulation in the EU is presented and how it may pose an obstacle to investment and the development of new products. The latest jurisprudence (e.g., Case C-528/16) [1] on the interpretation of the legal concept of GMOs and the scope of the legislation are analyzed, with the conclusion that the strict regulations will probably also apply to products of the NBTs involving precise methods of mutagenesis. This in turn will probably result in the restriction of their application in the development of new plant varieties in the EU.

Genetic Alterations That Do or Do Not Occur Naturally; Consequences for Genome Edited Organisms in the Context of Regulatory Oversight

The ability to successfully exploit genome edited organisms for the benefit of food security and the environment will essentially be determined by the extent to which these organisms fall under specific regulatory provisions. In many jurisdictions the answer to this question is considered to depend on the genetic characteristics of the edited organism, and whether the changes introduced in its genome do (or do not) occur naturally. We provide here a number of key considerations to assist with this evaluation as well as a guide of concrete examples of genetic alterations with an assessment of their natural occurrence. These examples support the conclusion that for many of the common types of alterations introduced by means of genome editing, the resulting organisms would not be subject to specific biosafety regulatory provisions whenever novelty of the genetic combination is a crucial determinant.

Reduced Enzymatic Browning in Potato Tubers by Specific Editing of a Polyphenol Oxidase Gene via Ribonucleoprotein Complexes Delivery of the CRISPR/Cas9 System

Polyphenol Oxidases (PPOs) catalyze the conversion of phenolic substrates to quinones, leading to the formation of dark-colored precipitates in fruits and vegetables. This process, known as enzymatic browning, is the cause of undesirable changes in organoleptic properties and the loss of nutritional quality in plant-derived products. In potato (Solanum tubersoum L.), PPOs are encoded by a multi-gene family with different expression patterns. Here, we have studied the application of the CRISPR/Cas9 system to induce mutations in the StPPO2 gene in the tetraploid cultivar Desiree. We hypothesized that the specific editing of this target gene would result in a lower PPO activity in the tuber with the consequent reduction of the enzymatic browning. Ribonucleoprotein complexes (RNPs), formed by two sgRNAs and Cas9 nuclease, were transfected to potato protoplasts. Up to 68% of regenerated plants contained mutations in at least one allele of the target gene, while 24% of edited lines carried mutations in all four alleles. No off-target mutations were identified in other analyzed StPPO genes. Mutations induced in the four alleles of StPPO2 gene, led to lines with a reduction of up to 69% in tuber PPO activity and a reduction of 73% in enzymatic browning, compared to the control. Our results demonstrate that the CRISPR/Cas9 system can be applied to develop potato varieties with reduced enzymatic browning in tubers, by the specific editing of a single member of the StPPO gene family.

Revisiting Risk Governance of GM Plants: The Need to Consider New and Emerging Gene-Editing Techniques

New and emerging gene-editing techniques make it possible to target specific genes in species with greater speed and specificity than previously possible. Of major relevance for plant breeding, regulators and scientists are discussing how to regulate products developed using these gene-editing techniques. Such discussions include whether to adopt or adapt the current framework for GMO risk governance in evaluating the impacts of gene-edited plants, and derived products, on the environment, human and animal health and society. Product classification or definition is one of several aspects of the current framework being criticized. Further, knowledge gaps related to risk assessments of gene-edited organisms-for example of target and off-target effects of intervention in plant genomes-are also of concern. Resolving these and related aspects of the current framework will involve addressing many subjective, value-laden positions, for example how to specify protection goals through ecosystem service approaches. A process informed by responsible research and innovation practices, involving a broader community of people, organizations, experts, and interest groups, could help scientists, regulators, and other stakeholders address these complex, value-laden concerns related to gene-editing of plants with and for society.

Bottlenecks for genome-edited crops on the road from lab to farm

Gene discovery and government regulation are bottlenecks for the widespread adoption of genome-edited crops. We propose a culture of sharing and integrating crop data to accelerate the discovery and prioritization of candidate genes, as well as a strong engagement with governments and the public to address environmental and health concerns and to achieve appropriate regulatory standards.

Novel Features and Considerations for ERA and Regulation of Crops Produced by Genome Editing

Genome editing describes a variety of molecular biology applications enabling targeted and precise alterations of the genomes of plants, animals and microorganisms. These rapidly developing techniques are likely to revolutionize the breeding of new crop varieties. Since genome editing can lead to the development of plants that could also have come into existence naturally or by conventional breeding techniques, there are strong arguments that these cases should not be classified as genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and be regulated no differently from conventionally bred crops. If a specific regulation would be regarded necessary, the application of genome editing for crop development may challenge risk assessment and post-market monitoring. In the session “Plant genome editing—any novel features to consider for ERA and regulation?” held at the 14th ISBGMO, scientists from various disciplines as well as regulators, risk assessors and potential users of the new technologies were brought together for a knowledge-based discussion to identify knowledge gaps and analyze scenarios for the introduction of genome-edited crops into the environment. It was aimed to enable an open exchange forum on the regulatory approaches, ethical aspects and decision-making considerations.

Development and characterization of transgenic dominant male sterile rice toward an outcross-based breeding system

Genomic selection is attracting attention in the field of crop breeding. To apply genomic selection effectively for autogamous (self-pollinating) crops, an efficient outcross system is desired. Since dominant male sterility is a powerful tool for easy and successive outcross of autogamous crops, we developed transgenic dominant male sterile rice (Oryza sativa L.) using the barnase gene that is expressed by the tapetum-specific promoter BoA9. Barnase-induced male sterile rice No. 10 (BMS10) was selected for its stable male sterility and normal growth characteristics. The BMS10 flowering habits, including heading date, flowering date, and daily flowering time of BMS10 tended to be delayed compared to wild type. When BMS10 and wild type were placed side-by-side and crossed under an open-pollinating condition, the seed-setting rate was <1.5%. When the clipping method was used to avoid the influence of late flowering habits, the seed-setting rate of BMS10 increased to a maximum of 86.4%. Although flowering synchronicity should be improved to increase the seed-setting rate, our results showed that this system can produce stable transgenic male sterility with normal female fertility in rice. The transgenic male sterile rice would promote a genomic selection-based breeding system in rice.

Scandinavian perspectives on plant gene technology: applications, policies and progress

Plant research and breeding has a long and successful history in the Scandinavian countries, Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden. Researchers in the region have been early in adopting plant gene technologies as they developed. This review gives a background, as well as discuss the current and future progress of plant gene technology in these four countries. Country-specific details of the regulation of genetically modified plants are described, as well as similarities and differences in the approach to regulation of novel genome-editing techniques. Also, the development of a sustainable bioeconomy may encompass the application of plant gene technology and we discuss whether or not this is reflected in current associated national strategies. In addition, country-specific information about the opinion of the public and other stakeholders on plant gene technology is presented, together with a country-wise political comparison and a discussion of the potential reciprocal influence between public opinion and the political process of policy development. The Scandinavian region is unique in several aspects, such as climate and certain agriculturally related regulations, and at the same time the region is vulnerable to changes in plant breeding investments due to the relatively small market sizes. It is therefore important to discuss the role and regulation of innovative solutions in Scandinavian plant research and breeding.

A New Zealand Perspective on the Application and Regulation of Gene Editing

New Zealand (NZ) is a small country with an export-led economy with above 90% of primary production exported. Plant-based primary commodities derived from the pastoral, horticultural and forestry sectors account for around half of the export earnings. Productivity is characterized by a history of innovation and the early adoption of advanced technologies. Gene editing has the potential to revolutionize breeding programmes, particularly in NZ. Here, perennials such as tree crops and forestry species are key components of the primary production value chain but are challenging for conventional breeding and only recently domesticated. Uncertainty over the global regulatory status of gene editing products is a barrier to invest in and apply editing techniques in plant breeding. NZs major trading partners including Europe, Asia and Australia are currently evaluating the regulatory status of these technologies and have not made definitive decisions. NZ is one of the few countries where the regulatory status of gene editing has been clarified. In 2014, the NZ Environmental Protection Authority ruled that plants produced via gene editing methods, where no foreign DNA remained in the edited plant, would not be regulated as GMOs. However, following a challenge in the High Court, this decision was overturned such that NZ currently controls all products of gene editing as GMOs. Here, we illustrate the potential benefits of integrating gene editing into plant breeding programmes using targets and traits with application in NZ. The regulatory process which led to gene editing's current GMO classification in NZ is described and the importance of globally harmonized regulations, particularly to small export-driven nations is discussed.

Development of Wheat With Hypoimmunogenic Gluten Obstructed by the Gene Editing Policy in Europe

Coeliac Disease (CD) is an auto-immune reaction to gluten in 1-2% of the human population. A gluten-free (GF) diet, excluding wheat, barley, and rye, is the only remedy. This diet is difficult to adhere to, partly because wheat gluten is added to many processed products for their viscoelastic properties. In addition, GF products are less healthy and expensive. Wheat products containing only hypoimmunogenic gluten proteins would be a desirable option. Various gluten peptides that trigger CD have been characterized. A single wheat variety contains around hundred gluten genes, producing proteins with varying numbers of epitopes. Gene editing using CRISPR/Cas9 can precisely remove or modify the DNA sequences coding for immunogenic peptides. Wheat with hypoimmunogenic gluten thus exemplifies the potential of gene editing for improving crops for human consumption where conventional breeding cannot succeed. We describe here, in relation to breeding hypoimmunogenic wheat varieties, the inconsistencies of applying GM regulation in Europe for gene-edited plants while mutation breeding-derived plants are exempted. We explain that healthy products derived from this new technology may become available in the United States, Canada, Argentina and other countries but not in Europe, because of strict regulation of unintended GM risk at the expense of reduction the existing immunogenicity risks of patients. We argue that regulation of gene-edited plants should be based on scientific evidence. Therefore, we strongly recommend implementing the innovation principle. Responsible Research and Innovation, involving stakeholders including CD patient societies in the development of gene-editing products, will enable progress toward healthy products and encourage public acceptance.

Potential impact of genome editing in world agriculture

Changeable biotic and abiotic stress factors that affect crop growth and productivity, alongside a drive to reduce the unintended consequences of plant protection products, will demand highly adaptive farm management practices as well as access to continually improved seed varieties. The former is limited mainly by cost and, in theory, could be implemented in relatively short time frames. The latter is fundamentally a longer-term activity where genome editing can play a major role. The first targets for genome editing will inevitably be loss-of-function alleles, because these are straightforward to generate. In addition, they are likely to focus on traits under simple genetic control and where the results of modification are already well understood from null alleles in existing gene pools or other knockout or silencing approaches such as induced mutations or RNA interference. In the longer term, genome editing will underpin more fundamental changes in agricultural performance and food quality, and ultimately will merge with the tools and philosophies of synthetic biology to underpin and enable new cellular systems, processes and organisms completely. The genetic changes required for simple allele edits or knockout phenotypes are synonymous with those found naturally in conventional breeding material and should be regulated as such. The more radical possibilities in the longer term will need societal engagement along with appropriate safety and ethical oversight.

Safety, Security, and Policy Considerations for Plant Genome Editing

Genome editing with engineered nucleases (GEEN) is increasingly used as a tool for gene discovery and trait development in crops through generation of targeted changes in endogenous genes. The development of the CRISPR-Cas9 system (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats with associated Cas9 protein), in particular, has enabled widespread use of genome editing. Research to date has not comprehensively addressed genome-editing specificity and off-target mismatches that may result in unintended changes within plant genomes or the potential for gene drive initiation. Governance and regulatory considerations for bioengineered crops derived from using GEEN will require greater clarity as to target specificity, the potential for mismatched edits, unanticipated downstream effects of off-target mutations, and assurance that genome reagents do not occur in finished products. Since governance and regulatory decision making involves robust standards of evidence extending from the laboratory to the postcommercial marketplace, developers of genome-edited crops must anticipate significant engagement and investment to address questions of regulators and civil society.

A research program for the socioeconomic impacts of gene editing regulation

Gene editing technologies are a group of recent innovations in plant breeding using molecular biology, which have in common the capability of introducing a site-directed mutation or deletion in the genome. The first cases of crops improved with these technologies are approaching the market; this has raised an international debate regarding if they should be regulated as genetically modified crops or just as another form of mutagenesis under conventional breeding. This dilemma for policymakers not only entails issues pertaining safety information and legal/regulatory definitions. It also demands borrowing tools developed in the field of social studies of science and technology, as an additional basis for sound decision making.

A future scenario of the global regulatory landscape regarding genome-edited crops

The global agricultural landscape regarding the commercial cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops is mosaic. Meanwhile, a new plant breeding technique, genome editing is expected to make genetic engineering-mediated crop breeding more socially acceptable because it can be used to develop crop varieties without introducing transgenes, which have hampered the regulatory review and public acceptance of GM crops. The present study revealed that product- and process-based concepts have been implemented to regulate GM crops in 30 countries. Moreover, this study analyzed the regulatory responses to genome-edited crops in the USA, Argentina, Sweden and New Zealand. The findings suggested that countries will likely be divided in their policies on genome-edited crops: Some will deregulate transgene-free crops, while others will regulate all types of crops that have been modified by genome editing. These implications are discussed from the viewpoint of public acceptance.

Canadian regulatory perspectives on genome engineered crops

New breeding techniques in plant agriculture exploded upon the scene about two years ago, in 2014. While these innovative plant breeding techniques, soon to be led by CRISPR/Cas9, initially appear to hold tremendous promise for plant breeding, if not a revolution for the industry, the question of how the products of these technologies will be regulated is rapidly becoming a key aspect of the technology's future potential. Regulation of innovative technologies and products has always lagged that of the science, but in the past decade, regulatory systems in many jurisdictions have become gridlocked as they try to regulate genetically modified (GM) crops. This regulatory incapability to efficiently assess and approve innovative new agricultural products is particularly important for new plant breeding techniques as if these techniques are classified as genetically modified breeding techniques, then their acceptance and future will diminish considerably as they will be rejected by the European Union. Conversely, if the techniques are accepted as conventional plant breeding, then the future is blindingly bright. This article examines the international debate about the regulation of new plant breeding techniques and then assesses how the Canadian regulatory system has approached the regulation of these technologies through two more public product approvals, GM apples and GM potatoes, then discusses other crop variety approval and those in the regulatory pipeline.

Future of breeding by genome editing is in the hands of regulators

We are witnessing the timely convergence of several technologies that together will have significant impact on research, human health and in animal and plant breeding. The exponential increase in genome and expressed sequence data, the ability to compile, analyze and mine these data via sophisticated bioinformatics procedures on high-powered computers, and developments in various molecular and in-vitro cellular techniques combine to underpin novel developments in research and commercial biotechnology. Arguably the most important of these is genome editing which encompasses a suite of site directed nucleases (SDN) that can be designed to cut, or otherwise modify predetermined DNA sequences in the genome and result in targeted insertions, deletions, or other changes for genetic improvement. It is a powerful and adaptive technology for animal and plant science, with huge relevance for plant and animal breeding. But this promise will be realized only if the regulatory oversite is proportionate to the potential hazards and has broad support from consumers, researchers and commercial interests. Despite significant progress in research and development and one genome edited crop close to commercialization, in most regions of the world it still remains unclear how or whether this fledgling technology will be regulated. The various risk management authorities and biotechnology regulators have a unique opportunity to set up a logical, appropriate and workable regulatory framework for gene editing that, unlike the situation for GMOs, would have broad support from stakeholders.

Achieving Plant CRISPR Targeting that Limits Off-Target Effects

The CRISPR-Cas9 system (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats with associated Cas9 protein) has been used to generate targeted changes for direct modification of endogenous genes in an increasing number of plant species; but development of plant genome editing has not yet fully considered potential off-target mismatches that may lead to unintended changes within the genome. Assessing the specificity of CRISPR-Cas9 for increasing editing efficiency as well as the potential for unanticipated downstream effects from off-target mutations is an important regulatory consideration for agricultural applications. Increasing genome-editing specificity entails developing improved design methods that better predict the prevalence of off-target mutations as a function of genome composition and design of the engineered ribonucleoprotein (RNP). Early results from CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing in plant systems indicate that the incidence of off-target mutation frequencies is quite low; however, by analyzing CRISPR-edited plant lines and improving both computational tools and reagent design, it may be possible to further decrease unanticipated effects at potential mismatch sites within the genome. This will provide assurance that CRISPR-Cas9 reagents can be designed and targeted with a high degree of specificity. Improved and experimentally validated design tools for discriminating target and potential off-target positions that incorporate consideration of the designed nuclease fidelity and selectivity will help to increase confidence for regulatory decision making for genome-edited plants.

Regulatory hurdles for genome editing: process- vs. product-based approaches in different regulatory contexts

Novel plant genome editing techniques call for an updated legislation regulating the use of plants produced by genetic engineering or genome editing, especially in the European Union. Established more than 25 years ago and based on a clear distinction between transgenic and conventionally bred plants, the current EU Directives fail to accommodate the new continuum between genetic engineering and conventional breeding. Despite the fact that the Directive 2001/18/EC contains both process- and product-related terms, it is commonly interpreted as a strictly process-based legislation. In view of several new emerging techniques which are closer to the conventional breeding than common genetic engineering, we argue that it should be actually interpreted more in relation to the resulting product. A legal guidance on how to define plants produced by exploring novel genome editing techniques in relation to the decade-old legislation is urgently needed, as private companies and public researchers are waiting impatiently with products and projects in the pipeline. We here outline the process in the EU to develop a legislation that properly matches the scientific progress. As the process is facing several hurdles, we also compare with existing frameworks in other countries and discuss ideas for an alternative regulatory system.

Consumer acceptance of food crops developed by genome editing

One of the major problems regarding consumer acceptance of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) is the possibility that their transgenes could have adverse effects on the environment and/or human health. Genome editing, represented by the CRISPR/Cas9 system, can efficiently achieve transgene-free gene modifications and is anticipated to generate a wide spectrum of plants. However, the public attitude against GMOs suggests that people will initially be unlikely to accept these plants. We herein explored the bottlenecks of consumer acceptance of transgene-free food crops developed by genome editing and made some recommendations. People should not pursue a zero-risk bias regarding such crops. Developers are encouraged to produce cultivars with a trait that would satisfy consumer needs. Moreover, they should carefully investigate off-target mutations in resultant plants and initially refrain from agricultural use of multiplex genome editing for better risk-benefit communication. The government must consider their regulatory status and establish appropriate regulations if necessary. The government also should foster communication between the public and developers. If people are informed of the benefits of genome editing-mediated plant breeding and trust in the relevant regulations, and if careful risk-benefit communication and sincere considerations for the right to know approach are guaranteed, then such transgene-free crops could gradually be integrated into society.

The Role of Public Opinion in Shaping Trajectories of Agricultural Biotechnology

Science and technology are not autonomous entities and research trajectories are largely influenced by public opinion. The role of political decisions becomes especially evident in light of rapidly developing new breeding techniques (NBTs) and other genome editing methods for crop improvement. Decisions on how those new techniques should be regulated may not be based entirely on scientific rationale, and even if it is decided that crops produced by NBTs do not fall under the umbrella of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), their commercialization is by no means certain at this time. If and when adopted regulations do not comply with the public's perception of risks, policy makers will find themselves under pressure to ban or restrict the use of the respective products.