GM Watch
  • Main Menu
    • Home
    • News
      • Newsletter subscription
      • Daily Digest
      • News Reviews
      • News Languages
    • Articles
      • GM Myth Makers
      • GM Reports
      • GM Quotes
      • GM Myths
      • Non-GM successes
      • GM Firms
        • Monsanto: a history
        • Monsanto: resources
        • Bayer: a history
        • Bayer: resources
    • Videos
      • Latest Videos
      • Must see videos
      • Cornell videos
      • Agriculture videos
      • Labeling videos
      • Animals videos
      • Corporations videos
      • Corporate takeover videos
      • Contamination videos
      • Latin America videos
      • India videos
      • Asia videos
      • Food safety videos
      • Songs videos
      • Protests videos
      • Biofuel myths videos
      • Index of GM crops and foods
      • Index of speakers
      • Health Effects
    • Contact
    • About
    • Donations
    • How donations will help us
News and comment on genetically modified foods and their associated pesticides    
  • News
    • Latest News
    • Newsletter subscription
    • News Reviews
    • News Languages
      • Notícias em Português
      • Nieuws in het Nederlands
      • Nachrichten in Deutsch
    • Archive
      • 2021 articles
      • 2020 articles
      • 2019 articles
      • 2018 articles
      • 2017 articles
      • 2016 articles
      • 2015 articles
      • 2014 articles
      • 2013 articles
      • 2012 articles
      • 2011 articles
      • 2010 articles
      • 2009 articles
      • 2008 articles
      • 2007 articles
      • 2006 articles
      • 2005 articles
      • 2004 articles
      • 2003 articles
      • 2002 articles
      • 2001 articles
      • 2000 articles
  • Articles
    • GM Myth Makers
    • GM Reports
    • How donations will help us
    • GM Quotes
    • GM Myths
    • Non-GM successes
    • GM Firms
      • Monsanto: a history
      • Monsanto: resources
      • Bayer: a history
      • Bayer: resources
  • Videos
    • Index of speakers
    • Glyphosate Videos
    • Latest Videos
    • Must see videos
    • Health Effects
    • Cornell videos
    • Agriculture videos
    • Labeling videos
    • Animals videos
    • Corporations videos
    • Corporate takeover videos
    • Contamination videos
    • Latin America videos
    • India videos
    • Asia videos
    • Food safety videos
    • Songs videos
    • Protests videos
    • Biofuel myths videos
    • Index of GM crops and foods
  • Contact
  • About
  • Donations

LATEST NEWS

  • Regenerative organic farming, not GM, is the solution to the climate crisis

  • First application for approval of CRISPR/Cas plants in the EU

  • Residents adopt council land to stop it using toxic glyphosate weedkiller

  • Germany: 94 associations call for strict regulation of genetic engineering

  • Glyphosate-based herbicides do not contribute to sustainable agriculture

GMWatch Facebook cornfield banner

SCIENCE SUPPORTS REGULATION OF GENE EDITING

Plant tissue cultures

GENE EDITING: UNEXPECTED OUTCOMES AND RISKS

Damaged DNA on fire

GENE EDITING MYTHS AND REALITY

A guide through the smokescreen

Gene Editing Myths and Reality

LATEST VIDEOS

  • Seed keepers and truth tellers: From the frontlines of GM agriculture
  • Myths and Truths of Gene-Edited Foods
  • Dangers of gene-edited foods

News Menu

  • Latest News
  • News Reviews
  • Archive
  • Languages

Please support GMWatch

Donations

You can donate via Paypal or credit/debit card.

Some of you have opted to give a regular donation. This is greatly appreciated as it helps place us on a more stable financial basis. Thank you for your support!

CRISPR gene editing unintentionally causes changes in gene regulation

Details
Published: 22 December 2020
Twitter

Multicolored neon light twisted DNA strand

Changes were heritable and could still be identified after ten generations

A new scientific publication shows that CRISPR/Cas gene scissor applications in animals unintentionally leave traces. The findings, as commented on by Testbiotech, are not related to unintended changes in the DNA, which have often been described, but to gene regulation, i.e. epigenetics. The effects are heritable and may, for example, result in disruption of embryonic development.

The new scientific publication describes CRISPR/Cas experiments with mice in which their DNA is cut and additional genetic information inserted. Besides intended changes in DNA in the target region, the findings also showed unintended changes in so-called epigenetic markers that control gene regulation. The effects were heritable and could still be identified after ten generations. According to the authors, the effects can also be used to identify CRISPR/Cas gene scissor applications.

The results were specific to some particular gene scissor applications and not observed if no additional genetic information was inserted. Further experiments are necessary to investigate the effects of the epigenetic changes in each specific organism. It is also not known whether the gene scissors may cause changes in other epigenetic markers, or if similar effects might be expected in insects and plants.

Testbiotech comments that epigenetic effects are often heritable without the DNA itself being changed. Epigenetic factors are, for example, decisive for embryonic development. In addition, reactions to environmental stressors are also influenced by epigenetics. In this context, epigenetic markers determine which genes are activated or silenced in which cells, thereby controlling gene expression. These epigenetic markers are not mutations in DNA, but biochemical attachments.

Testbiotech adds that the recent findings not only indicate risks for medical applications but also for the environment. For example, gene drive organisms generated by CRISPR/Cas are altered in a way that epigenetic changes, which can result in alterations in the patterns of gene expression, are present in the genomic makeup of all offspring. If this process also causes unintended changes in gene regulation, environmental risk assessment is much more complicated.

Health risks

The new study showed that the original methylation pattern of the DNA was unexpectedly changed and that more methylation groups were present. DNA methylation is the addition of a methyl group, which most frequently takes place on certain cytosine DNA base units and which is usually associated with the silencing of gene expression.

Commenting on the new findings, London-based molecular geneticist Dr Michael Antoniou said, "This unexpected and intriguing finding clearly calls for research to ascertain whether similar stably inherited epigenetic DNA methylation changes take place in CRISPR/Cas edited food plants.  

"This type of investigation is essential, since these epigenetic changes add yet another mechanism by which unintended alterations in gene function can result from gene editing.

"Alterations in patterns of gene function will inevitably lead to changes in the biochemistry of the organism, which could negatively affect crop performance, or more worryingly, could include the production of novel toxins or allergens."

Background and summary (by "Project Genetic Engineering and the Environment"):
https://fachstelle-gentechnik-umwelt.de/en/detection-of-crispr-mediated-genome-modifications-2/

Source of comment: Testbiotech
https://www.testbiotech.org/en/news/new-ge-unintentionally-leaves-traces-cells
---
The new study:
Detection of CRISPR-mediated genome modifications through altered methylation patterns of CpG islands
M. Heath Farris, Pamela A. Texter, Agustin A. Mora, Michael V. Wiles, Ellen F. Mac Garrigle, Sybil A. Klaus & Kristine Rosfjord
BMC Genomics volume 21, Article number: 856 (2020)
https://bmcgenomics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12864-020-07233-2

Menu

Home

News

News Archive

News Reviews

Videos

Articles

GM Myth Makers

GM Reports

GM Myths

GM Quotes

How Donations Will Help Us

Contacts

Contact Us

About

Facebook

Twitter

RSS

Content 1999 - 2021 GMWatch.
Web Development By SCS Web Design