Genome editing: A new frontier for agriculture

In many ways, genome editing provides a new frontier for agriculture. 

The technology is still in its infancy, but potential for plant breeders to make precise changes to a plant’s DNA is seen as limitless.  

Genome editing, which can create new traits and benefits in crops, is more meticulous and faster than conventional plant breeding. Breeders can make a change to a plant by targeting a specific location in a gene within the DNA. It can be used to add, remove, or alter DNA in the plant genome. 

It often takes a plant breeder more than 10 years to develop a new plant trait through conventional breeding methods, but with genome editing, that time can be shortened to a few years — or less. 

The hope is that plant breeders will be able to bring new seed traits to the market faster, developing better crops such as deer-resistant soybeans, larger-cobbed corn plants, and more flavorful, nutritious tomatoes. 

Pairwise, a Durham, N.C. company, is a pioneer in bringing gene-edited products to the market. It is the first company in the world to use Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) to create a new leafy green vegetable. The new veggie is based on mustard greens, but with milder flavor for salad mixes. 

More than 11 million transformation

The Emerging Research Showcase was held April 17 at the Plant Sciences Building on the North Carolina State University Centennial Campus. During the event, Ian Miller, chief operating officer of Pairwise, said the company is involved with a multitude of other products.  

Using CRISPR technology, the company is working on everything from short-stature corn, to a pitless blackberry with higher yielding, compact plants. 

“We have conducted more than 11 million transformation experiments in our company. We have produced 80 potential products at various stages in 14 crops. We have a 70% success rate in getting to targeted genetic improvements,” Miller said at the showcase. 

“When we say we want to make an ear of corn bigger, we can edit to actually get a bigger ear of corn. That doesn’t equal products. They need to get to the field and be tested. It gives a sense of the maturity of the technology that this is something ready to deploy now,” he said. 

Miller said considering the skepticism of some consumers with genetically modified organisms, a key is to ensure public acceptance for gene-edited products. He said the challenge with GMOs is that the consumer benefit is considered indirect.  

But he noted that the release of Pairwise’s  gene-edited leafy green vegetable demonstrates that the technology can be used in a product that directly benefits consumers. “If you give them something that they like, then the barrier to that technology is much lower.”  

He said stressing the consumer benefit of genome-edited products to regulators and policymakers is more valuable than talking about using the technology for commodity crops, such as corn and soybeans, which can be abstract for many. 

He said success stories like this will help allow expansion of genome editing. 

“Products coming out solving real-world problems will be a rising tide that lifts all boats. We are on the cusp of that. This technology is best when you integrate it into a breeding program,” Miller said.  

Still, the biggest challenge is regulatory approval, particularly in Europe. “I have confidence they are going to get there. Bringing Europe in line with where the rest of the world is moving will really help to accelerate the pace of innovation,” Miller said. 

Nic Bate, senior program officer for the Gates Foundation, agrees with Miller that regulatory approval is key for advancing. He noted that six countries in Africa as well as India, Bangladesh and Pakistan all have policies accepting gene-edited products. 

“That’s pretty remarkable if you think about it,” he said. 

Developing potential

Bate said the developing world sees gene editing as a real solution. Momentum for the technology is gaining in low-income countries.  He emphasized the need for successful test cases to help the regulatory process and reduce technology barriers. 

“There are tons of solutions for gene editing that just need to be done. We need country engagement. We need more investor and funder engagement to get that done,” Bate said. 

“The technology barriers are decreasing. Gene editing will be easier. You will be able to conduct it in places that normally do not have high tech labs. It’s going to be part of a breeding scheme, much more integrated into breeding,” he said. 

Lisa Zannoni, attorney, pharmacist and ag technology and regulatory expert, noted that most countries already have ag biotech regulations in place. She said that a majority of places will look at using gene editing as a part of a conventional breeding program rather than using GMOs. 

She points out that small companies and universities are leading in making submissions for regulatory approval rather than large multinational companies as it was for ag biotech. Instead of commodity crops, specialty crops are leading the way. 

“Biotech was corn soybean, canola, and cotton. Now we are seeing much more variety in vegetables, flowers, and even field crops that are more specialized than the field crops that have gone through the regulatory process,” she said. 

Zannoni said the terminology for gene-edited products is different than for biotech products. “Instead of approvals, you get determinations. There is no approval for a gene-edited product. It is a determination that could be done through conventional means.” 

For a biotech product, safety data must be submitted for regulatory approval. Zannoni said no safety data is needed for submission for a gene-edited product. Information is submitted on the edit itself, rather than the safety information. 

“The other thing is timelines. Timelines for a biotech product goes from probably a year and a half to two years for some of the fastest countries, seven years and nine years for some of the slower countries. What you are seeing for statutory timelines for gene editing are months: 60 days, 90 days, 120 days, six months, so it is a much faster process,” she said. 

Original Source