외래 DNA단편이 잔존하지 않는 유전자교정식물에 대한 GMO규제 범위의 제외에 관한 국제 동향
Current status on the modification of the scope for GMO regulation on the gene edited plants with no remnants of inserted foreign DNA fragments
2
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Gene edited crops can be classified as SDN-1, SDN-2 and SDN-3 group depending on their mutation’s range and the usage of donor DNA. The SDN-1 and SDN-2 crops, in particular, could be developed as 100% transgenefree, which do not contain any DNA fragment of the vector or guide RNA used for gene editing such as CRISPR Cas9 system. Therefore, there are no scientific methods available for the detection of these crops and differentiation with the one produced by conventional cross breeding techniques. Additionally, it would be impossible to properly implement the existing GMO regulation law, in particular, the national legislation for “GMO labelling”. In this regard, Australia has announced that SDN-1 crops will not be subjected to the existing GMO regulation. Furthermore, Argentina and Brazil have established a new policy that GE crops with no transgene (100% transgene-free crops) should be exempted from the scope of the GMO. In addition, Japan has also announced that “an organism that has no remnants of inserted nucleic acid processed extracellularly is not subjected to the Cartagena Act”. It means that SDN-2 crops can also be exempted from the scope of GMO. In this trend, in South Korea, I suggested that gene edited crops with no remnants of inserted foreign DNA fragments should be excluded from the existing GMO regulation. Thus, I expect that diverse elite crop lines should be developed by using advanced gene editing technologies.
Abstract
Gene edited crops can be classified as SDN-1, SDN-2 and SDN-3 group depending on their mutation’s range and the usage of donor DNA. The SDN-1 and SDN-2 crops, in particular, could be developed as 100% transgenefree, which do not contain any DNA fragment of the vector or guide RNA used for gene editing such as CRISPR Cas9 system. Therefore, there are no scientific methods available for the detection of these crops and differentiation with the one produced by conventional cross breeding techniques. Additionally, it would be impossible to properly implement the existing GMO regulation law, in particular, the national legislation for “GMO labelling”. In this regard, Australia has announced that SDN-1 crops will not be subjected to the existing GMO regulation. Furthermore, Argentina and Brazil have established a new policy that GE crops with no transgene (100% transgene-free crops) should be exempted from the scope of the GMO. In addition, Japan has also announced that “an organism that has no remnants of inserted nucleic acid processed extracellularly is not subjected to the Cartagena Act”. It means that SDN-2 crops can also be exempted from the scope of GMO. In this trend, in South Korea, I suggested that gene edited crops with no remnants of inserted foreign DNA fragments should be excluded from the existing GMO regulation. Thus, I expect that diverse elite crop lines should be developed by using advanced gene editing technologies.
참고문헌 (37)
- Abbott A, "Europe’s genetically edited plants stuck in legal limbo, Scientists frustrated at delay in deciding if GM regulations apply to precision gene editing", Nature, 528, pp.319~320 (2015)
- "Advice on genome-edited Camelina plants with increased levels of oleic acid" (2018)[URL]
- Araki M, "Towards social acceptance of plant breeding by genome editing", Trends Plant Sci, 20(3), pp.145~149 (2015)
- Duensing N, "Bartsch D(2018)Novel features and considerations for ERA and regulation of crops produced by genome editing", Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 6, pp.79~95 (2018)
- Eckerstorfer MF, "Waßmann F(2019a)An EU perspective on biosafety considerations for plants developed by genome editing and other new genetic modification techniques(nGMs)", Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 7, pp.31~52 (2019)
- Eckerstorfer MF, "Plants developed by new genetic modification techniques—comparison of existing regulatory frameworks in the EU and Non-EU countries", Front Bioeng Biotechnol, 7(26), pp.1~16 (2019)
- "EASAC Statement on New Breeding Techniques" (2015)[URL]
- "Judgement of the court in case C-528/16" (2018)[URL]
- "Opinion of advocate general Bobek in Case C-528/16" (2018)[URL]
- Jean-Denis Faure, "Europe’s first and last field trial of gene-edited plants?", eLife, 7, pp.42379~ (2018), eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd[DOI]
- Hajiahmadi Z, "Strategies to increase on-target and reduce off-target effects of the CRISPR", Cas9 system in plants, 2019, pp.20, 3719~3738
- Hilscher J, "Targeted modification of plant genomes for precision crop breeding", Biotechnol J, 12, pp.1~4 (2017)
- Jones HD, "Regulatory uncertainty over genome editing", Nat Plants, 1, pp.14011~ (2015)
- Jouanin A, "Development of wheat with hypoimmunogenic gluten obstructed by the gene editing policy in Europe", Front Plant Sci, 9, pp.1523~1531 (2018)
- 정유진, "신식물육종기술의 현황과 사회적 수용을 위한 노력", Journal of Plant Biotechnology, 45(4), pp.299~305 (2018), 한국식물생명공학회
- Kang J, "Identification of three genes encoding microsomal oleate desaturases (FAD2) from the oilseed crop Camelina sativa.", Plant Physiol Biochem, 49, pp.223~229 (2011)
- Kim H, "CRISPR", Cpf1-mediated DNA-free plant genome editing, 2017, pp.8, 14406~14412
- Komor AC, "Programmable editing of a target base in genomic DNA without double-stranded DNA cleavage", Nature, 533, pp.420~424 (2016)
- Lawler M, "Silencing the voice of scientific reason", Lancet Oncol, 16, pp.4~5 (2015)
- 이신우, "유전자편집 작물의 개발 현황 및 농업생명공학기술의 국가 경쟁력 강화", Journal of Plant Biotechnology, 45(3), pp.155~170 (2018), 한국식물생명공학회
- New plant breeding techniques, State-of-the-art and prospects for commercial development, "Lusser M", JRC European Commission, ~, pp.EUR 24760 EN (2011)
- Morineau C, "Selective gene dosage by CRISPR-Cas9genome editing in hexaploid Camelina sativa", Plant Biotechnol J, 15, pp.729~739 (2017)
- Nguyen HT, "Camelina seed transcriptome: a tool for meal and oil improvement and translational research", Plant Biotechnol J, 11, pp.759~769 (2013)
- "Conference on genome editing: Applications in agriculture" (2018)[URL]
- OECD, "33rd meeting of the OECD working group on the harmonisation of regulatory oversight in biotechnology", 33rd meeting of the OECD working group (2019), OECD headquarters
- "Technical review of the Gene Technology Regulations 2001-2017-18 Amendment proposals consultation"[URL]
- "Open letter to the commission on new genetic engineering methods" (2015)[URL]
- Lei Qin, "High-efficient and precise base editing of CㆍG to TㆍA in the allotetraploid cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) genome using a modified CRISPR", Cas9 system, 2019, pp.18(1), 45~56[DOI]
- Smyth SJ, "Canadian regulatory perspectives on genome engineered crops", GM Crops & Food, 8, pp.35~43 (2017)
- Sprink T, "Plant genome editing by novel tools: TALEN and other sequence specific nucleases", Curr Opin Biotechnol, 32, pp.47~53 (2015)
- Sprink T, "Regulatory hurdles for genome editing: process- vs. product-based approaches in different regulatory contexts", Plant Cell Rep, 35, pp.1493~1506 (2016)
- Thorben Sprink, "Plant genome editing in the European Union—to be or not to be—a GMO", Plant Biotechnology Reports, 10(6), pp.345~351 (2016), 한국식물생명공학회
- "Am I regulated under 7 CFR part 340" (2018)[URL]
- Waltz E, "With a free pass, CRISPR-edited plants reach market in record time", Nat Biotechnol, 36, pp.6~7 (2018)
- Whelan AI, "Regulatory framework for gene editing and other new breeding techniques (NBTs) in Argentina", GM crops Food, 6, pp.253~265 (2015)
- Wolt JD, "Yang B(2016)The regulatory status of genome edited crops", Plant Biotechnol J, 14, pp.510~518 (2016)
- Zhang Y, "Efficient and transgene-free genome editing in wheat through transient expression of CRISPR", Cas9 DNA or RNA, 2016, pp.7, 12617~12619