New technologies could one day potentially reengineer species in the wild

New technologies could one day potentially reengineer species in the wild.

Return to main article:

This July, Wyss Institute fellow Kevin Esvelt and Winthrop professor of genetics George Church coauthored a paper in the journal eLife outlining how new technologies containing self-replicating pieces of DNA could potentially be used to genetically reengineer entire species in the wild. A recently discovered bacterial system called CRISPR-Cas, named after the DNA and proteins involved, has allowed scientists to make highly specific genetic modifications with greater ease than ever before (see harvardmag.com/genomic-14). As Church and colleagues predicted in the recent paper, certain genetic changes that themselves include a CRISPR-Cas system could copy themselves in a process called a “gene drive,” enabling a modification to spread through an entire species during the course of many generations. Scientists might one day be able to alter or even eliminate entire species—reengineering herbicide susceptibility into populations of resistant weeds, for instance, or suppressing malaria mosquitoes or invasive plants.

 Church’s technical paper was published simultaneously with a policy paper in Science that assessed the technology’s possible impacts. The environmental and security effects of gene drives are still unclear, wrote the authors, a team of scientific and legal experts that included technologists Church and Esvelt, Ph.D. ’10, evolutionary ecologist and former National Science Foundation director for population biology and physiological ecology James P. Collins, and lead author Kenneth Oye, Ph.D. ’83, professor of political science at MIT. Moreover, regulatory gaps remain: domestic and international policies, built narrowly around lists of dangerous toxins or organisms, fail to address the uniquely broad character of gene drives. The authors made 10 recommendations for managing environmental and biosecurity risks. Certain types of gene drives might reverse prior genetic changes or immunize organisms from further modification, for instance, and new regulatory structures might adopt broader definitions of biological impact. The authors also called for a public discussion on how the new technology ought to be used. “For emerging technologies that affect the global commons, concepts and applications should be published in advance of construction, testing, and release,”  they wrote in conclusion. “Lead time will allow for broadly inclusive and well-informed public discussion to determine if, when, and how gene drives should be used.” 

Related topics

You might also like

What Do Puppies Know?

Canine capabilities emerge early and continue into adulthood.

Research in Brief

Cutting-edge discoveries, distilled

Bees and Flowers Are Falling Out of Sync

Scientists are revisiting an old way of thinking about extinction.

Most popular

Martin Nowak Placed on Leave a Second Time

Further links to Jeffrey Epstein surface in newly released files

Summers Will Retire as Harvard Professor

The former University president is stepping down in the wake of Harvard’s Epstein probe.

Inside Harvard’s Most Egalitarian School

The Extension School is open to everyone. Expect to work—hard.

Explore More From Current Issue

Illustration of a person sitting on a large cresting wave, writing, with a sunset and ocean waves in vibrant colors.

How Stories Help Us Cope with Climate Change

The growing genre of climate fiction offers a way to process reality—and our anxieties.

A black primate hanging lazily on a branch in a lush green forest.

What Bonobos Teach Us About Female Power and Cooperation

A Harvard scientist expands our understanding of our closest living relatives.