2019
DOI: 10.1111/eva.12827
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Tethered homing gene drives: A new design for spatially restricted population replacement and suppression

Abstract: Optimism regarding potential epidemiological and conservation applications of modern gene drives is tempered by concern about the possibility of unintended spread of engineered organisms beyond the target population. In response, several novel gene drive approaches have been proposed that can, under certain conditions, locally alter characteristics of a population. One challenge for these gene drives is the difficulty of achieving high levels of localized population suppression without very large releases in t… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
91
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 67 publications
(91 citation statements)
references
References 84 publications
0
91
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Another limitation of TARE drives is that they cannot be used for population suppression, though other "TA" systems could possibly do so, at the cost of greater construction difficulty 50 . This limitation could potentially be overcome by using a "tethered" homing-type suppression drive 37 , either with a TARE system or a TARE-based two-locus underdominance system if a higher invasion threshold is desired. TARE systems can be "same-site" or ClvR-type 38 drives at a "distant-site".…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Another limitation of TARE drives is that they cannot be used for population suppression, though other "TA" systems could possibly do so, at the cost of greater construction difficulty 50 . This limitation could potentially be overcome by using a "tethered" homing-type suppression drive 37 , either with a TARE system or a TARE-based two-locus underdominance system if a higher invasion threshold is desired. TARE systems can be "same-site" or ClvR-type 38 drives at a "distant-site".…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By contrast, TARE drives with an invasion threshold could remain confined to contiguous populations without being able to invade sufficiently distant populations through occasional migrants. By this means, they may also provide a critical component in enabling so-called "tethered" drives, which could be used for both population modification and suppression strategies 37 .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The number of gRNAs was varied, and a resistance allele was considered to be a "complete" r1 allele only if all gRNA cleavage sites possessed r1 sequences. The vertical axis shows the frequency of complete r1 alleles after 100 generations easily and combined with a tethered homing suppression drive [54], as could other TA systems with an introduction threshold. Note, however, that the germline-only nuclease promoter needed for the tethered homing element may slow down a TARE-based drive due to the lack of embryo activity.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, despite the great potential for GD systems to modify or replace highly pestiferous insect strains in the field, it is well recognized that control or containment systems must be integrated into GD systems before the field release of these self-propagating strains can be considered 41,42 . A variety of containment strategies proposed, and in some cases tested, include drives that are self-limiting 43 such as multi-component daisy-chained drives 44 , split drives 45,46 and spatially restricted drives 45 and small molecule-dependent drives 47 , among others. However, similar to the lethality strain breakdown demonstrated here all of these strategies should be subject to mutation and modification and, potentially, at higher frequencies due to multi-generational GD strategies and larger target sites for some.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%