Legal Regulation of Plant Genome Editing with the CRISPR/Cas9 Technology as an Example

Medvedieva, Maryna; Blume, Ya. B.

doi:10.3103/s0095452718030106

Cited by 18 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…How this is achieved is country or region dependent. Commonly, the GM regulations are categorized as either process or product oriented ( Callebaut, 2015 ; Medvedieva and Blume, 2018 ; Eckerstorfer et al, 2019 ). Process-oriented regulations regard GM technologies as a novel technique compared to conventional methods, thus, triggering specific legislation to be applied.…”

Section: An Overview Of the Global Legislative Landscapementioning

confidence: 99%

Global Regulation of Genetically Modified Crops Amid the Gene Edited Crop Boom – A Review

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Products derived from agricultural biotechnology is fast becoming one of the biggest agricultural trade commodities globally, clothing us, feeding our livestock, and fueling our eco-friendly cars. This exponential growth occurs despite asynchronous regulatory schemes around the world, ranging from moratoriums and prohibitions on genetically modified (GM) organisms, to regulations that treat both conventional and biotech novel plant products under the same regulatory framework. Given the enormous surface area being cultivated, there is no longer a question of acceptance or outright need for biotech crop varieties. Recent recognition of the researchers for the development of a genome editing technique using CRISPR/Cas9 by the Nobel Prize committee is another step closer to developing and cultivating new varieties of agricultural crops. By employing precise, efficient, yet affordable genome editing techniques, new genome edited crops are entering country regulatory schemes for commercialization. Countries which currently dominate in cultivating and exporting GM crops are quickly recognizing different types of gene-edited products by comparing the products to conventionally bred varieties. This nuanced legislative development, first implemented in Argentina, and soon followed by many, shows considerable shifts in the landscape of agricultural biotechnology products. The evolution of the law on gene edited crops demonstrates that the law is not static and must adjust to the mores of society, informed by the experiences of 25 years of cultivation and regulation of GM crops. The crux of this review is a consolidation of the global legislative landscape on GM crops, as it stands, building on earlier works by specifically addressing how gene edited crops will fit into the existing frameworks. This work is the first of its kind to synthesize the applicable regulatory documents across the globe, with a focus on GM crop cultivation, and provides links to original legislation on GM and gene edited crops.

show abstract

Section: An Overview Of the Global Legislative Landscapementioning

confidence: 99%

Global Regulation of Genetically Modified Crops Amid the Gene Edited Crop Boom – A Review

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At present, the United States has granted GMO crop exemptions for gene-edited rapeseed, high-oleic acid soybeans, waxy corn, and low lignin alfalfa, , and most gene-edited crops are industrialized and regulated as conventional plants. Japan, Finland, Sweden, Russia, Brazil, Argentina, and many other countries also list gene-edited plant products as non-GMO products. − In contrast, many European countries believe that gene-edited products should be regulated as strictly as GMO products . Although China has made a series of internationally leading research progress in the gene-edited crop breeding, for instance, many gene-edited crop varieties including tobacco, rice, corn, sorghum, soybean, watermelon, cucumber, tomato, banana, poplar, etc., have been successfully developed, no gene-edited crops have been approved for marketing .…”

Section: Current Status Of Global Gene-edited Crop Industrialization ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…North American countries represented by the United States and Canada are relatively positive and mainly follow the case analysis principle. But the EU keeps a conservative and cautious attitude toward gene-edited crops and treats them the same as GMO crops . Araki et al divided the regulatory policies in various countries into two categories: the product management mode and the process management mode.…”

Section: Current Status Of Global Gene-edited Crop Industrialization ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…12−16 In contrast, many European countries believe that gene-edited products should be regulated as strictly as GMO products. 17 Although China has made a series of internationally leading research progress in the gene-edited crop breeding, for instance, many gene-edited crop varieties including tobacco, rice, corn, sorghum, soybean, watermelon, cucumber, tomato, banana, poplar, etc., have been successfully developed, no gene-edited crops have been approved for marketing. 18 Part of the detailed information on gene-edited crops is listed in Table 1.…”

Section: Current Status Of Global Gene-edited Crop Industrialization ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Commercialization and Supervision Policies of Gene Edited Crops in China and Other Main Countries

Wei

Liu

et al. 2021

ACS Agric. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the birthplace of crop gene-editing technology, European and American countries have initially formed a complete industrial technology chain layout from basic research to technology services and breeding application, as well as to a supervision policy system. This review comprehensively summarizes the latest progress and trends of global gene-edited crop commercialization and supervision policies and puts forward countermeasures and suggestions for the commercialization and supervision of crop geneediting technology in China and other countries, in order to narrow down the policy gap between crop gene-editing technology progress and market demands.

show abstract

“…However, an exemption to this is the classical, random mutagenesis techniques that has been conventionally used to develop mutant crop varieties [590]. This declaration from the European Court of Justice has been a burden on biotech industries using the CRISPR systems to market their products as it requires additional permissions and labelling adding up to the nancial cost [591]. Moreover, this restriction will be a limitation in obtaining the fruit of this e cient technology that can produce highly desirable and pro table mutants.…”

Section: Random Mutagenesis; An Alternative To Targeted Engineering In Nannochloropsismentioning

confidence: 99%

A “CRISPY” tale on microalgal genome editing: featuring Nannochloropsis oceanica IMET1

Naduthodi

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

CHAPTER 1 General Introduction CHAPTER 2 Progress of CRISPR-Cas based genome editing in photosynthetic microbes CHAPTER 3 CRISPR-Cas ribonucleoprotein mediated homology-directed repair for e cient targeted genome editing in microalgae Nannochloropsis oceanica IMET1 CHAPTER 4 A comprehensive genome engineering toolbox for microalgae Nannochloropsis oceanica based on CRISPR-Cas systems CHAPTER 5 High-throughput insertional mutagenesis reveals novel targets for enhancing lipid accumulation in Nannochloropsis oceanica CHAPTER 6 Heterologous expression of EPA speci c Lysophosphatidic acid acyltransferase in Nannochloropsis oceanica increases the EPA content in Triglycerides CHAPTER 7 Synthetic biology approaches to enhance microalgal productivity CHAPTER 8 General Discussion References

show abstract

Legal Regulation of Plant Genome Editing with the CRISPR/Cas9 Technology as an Example

Cited by 18 publications

References 18 publications

Global Regulation of Genetically Modified Crops Amid the Gene Edited Crop Boom – A Review

Global Regulation of Genetically Modified Crops Amid the Gene Edited Crop Boom – A Review

Commercialization and Supervision Policies of Gene Edited Crops in China and Other Main Countries

A “CRISPY” tale on microalgal genome editing: featuring Nannochloropsis oceanica IMET1

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About