Influential author and broadcaster Adam Rutherford delivered a keynote at CRISPRcon2019, comparing the evolution of music with genetic technologies. The public attending the conference in Wageningen was asked not to record the presentation, but nothing prevents me from redoing one of his slides. Continue reading
CRISPRcon goes to Wageningen
After Berkeley 2017 and Boston 2018, CRISPR takes center stage in the Netherlands later this week. We’ll be there to hear about science, society and the future of gene editing!
CRISPR weekly picks
Doudna meets GSK: University of California CRISPR researchers form drug discovery alliance with pharma giant (source Science)
From transposons to gene therapy: Hijack of CRISPR defences by selfish genes holds clinical promise, according to Fyodor Urnov (Nature News&Views)
Disaster waiting to happen: Russian biologist plans more CRISPR-edited babies (Nature’s editorial and news)
CRISPR news: the good, the bad and the ugly
History in the making: student experiment edits DNA with CRISPR technology in space (Iss national lab blog)
Emails reveal that a facility in Dubai and others have asked geneticist He Jiankui for help in gene-editing embryos (The Scientist)
New worries about CRISPR babies: gene edits might have shortened their life expectancy (Nature)
Edited shells turn left

Most snails live in right-coiled shells, and the general rarity of sinistral gastropods has long attracted comment and wonder, according to the late Stephen Jay Gould. “Aristotle declared them impossible, but d’ Argentville called them uniques, while Geoffroy dubbed them nonpareilles. Since no one has ever developed an even vaguely plausible argument for dextral advantage, the overwhelming predominance of right-handed coiling among gastropods has been a persistent puzzle.” Continue reading
Climate, biotech and biases
CRISPR gets a mention in the latest IPCC report as a potentially useful tool to cope with climate change. However, some people believe that biotech crops are safe and that climate change is not real (let’s call them libertarian capitalists, for convenience). Many ecological activists conversely think that genetically modified plants are evil and global warming threatens life on the planet. These stances could not be more different, yet they have something in common: they are both half right and half wrong. They are both examples of “selective science denial.” Continue reading
Neutralizing cryptic mutations in plant breeding
We talk of cryptic mutations when genes are changed in a way that remains hidden until they interact with other mutations. As a result, combining beneficial traits can have negative consequences hindering agricultural production (watch this video from Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory on unexpected negative interactions). Classic breeders have been dealing with this problem for decades, but researchers from CSHL are finally working on a solution suitable for the genomic era. Zach Lippman and colleagues have studied one infamous cryptic mutation affecting a tomato variety developed by the Campbell Soup Company in the 1960s and discuss an anti-negative-interaction strategy for the future. Please see their paper in Nature Plants and watch the video below offering a cautionary tale for crop gene editing.
CRISPR binge-watching
The best TED talks about gene editing, selected by The Bench blog

CRISPR & the media: a 5 years coverage analysis

Content analysis of the articles published in North America from 2012 to 2017 shows, overall, a strong promotion of CRISPR. See the paper by Alessandro Marcon et al. in Genetics in Medicine.
CRISPR breathes new life into fetal lungs

Researchers from Penn Medicine and Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia have fixed a lethal mutation in the prenatal mouse models of a rare pulmonary disease. The hope is that the approach of in utero editing described in Science Translational Medicine will work for other congenital lung diseases as well.
I asked one of the corresponding authors, Edward Morrison, scientific director of the Penn’s Institute for Regenerative Medicine, to explain what they have done and what to expect next. See Q&A below. Continue reading