Abstract
Cisgenesis is an emerging technology that has much potential in develo** crops and for other innovations. The possibilities of using Cisgenesis are discussed in the literature and there have been experiments to test it and they have proved that it is yet to be commercialized or adopted widely. A major reason is whether to assess it as a Genetically Modified Crop or as a traditionally bred crop or its equivalent. While the opinion on this is divided linking it with the regulation of Genetically Modified Organisms is resulting in controversies although the idea of cisgenesis was advocated by Schouten to overcome this issue. Describing the issue and the entanglements, and, by referring to two concepts ‘bio-object’ and ‘bio-identification’, this Chapter takes the view that the controversy will persist in the near future as regulations on genome edited crops are evolving but in a different direction. This chapter proposes a Global Consortium to pursue research and development in Cisgenesis and Cisgenic crops and suggests how this Consortium can use ideas and practices like Responsible Research and Innovation and Participatory Plant Breeding. Similarly better engagement with stakeholders and dealing with non-technical issues in risk assessment are suggested.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Beumer K, Stemerding D (2021) A breeding consortium to realize the potential of hybrid diploid potato for food security. Nat.plants 7:1530–1532. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41477-021-01035-4
Bruce A, Bruce D (2019) Genome editing and responsible innovation, can they be reconciled? J Agric Environ Ethics 32:769–788. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10806-019-09789-w
Chaturvedi S, Srinivas KR (eds) (2019) Socio-economic impact assessment of genetically modified crops—global implications based on case-studies from India. Springer, p 310. https://springer.longhoe.net/book/10.1007%2F978-981-32-9511-7
Chaturvedi S, Srinivas KR, Kumar A (2016) Agriculture technology choices and the responsible research and innovation (RRI) framework: emerging experiences from China and India. Asian Biotechnol Develop Rev 18(1):93–111. https://ris.org.in/sites/default/files/ABDR%20March%202016.pdf
Cotter J, Zimmermann D, van Bekkem H (2015) Application of the EU and Cartagena definitions of a GMO to the classification of plants developed by cisgenesis and gene-editing techniques. Greenpeace Research Laboratories Technical Report (Review) 07–2015
EFSA GMO Panel (EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms) (2011a) Guidance of the GMO Panel for risk assessment of food and feed from genetically modified plants. EFSA J 9(5):2150 37. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2011a.2150
EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), Paraskevopoulos K, Federici S (2021) Overview of EFSA and European national authorities’ scientific opinions on the risk assessment of plants developed through New Genomic Techn. EFSA J 19(4):6314, 43 pp. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6314
EFSA GMO Panel (EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (2012a) Scientific opinion addressing the safety assessment of plants developed through cisgenesis and intragenesis. EFSA J 10(2):2561, 33 pp. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2012a.2561
Entine J, Felipe MSS, Groenewald JH et al (2021) Regulatory approaches for genome edited agricultural plants in select countries and jurisdictions around the world. Transgenic Res 30:551–584
Eriksson D, Stymne S, Schjoerring JK (2014) The slippery slope of cisgenesis. Nat Biotechnol 32:727
European Food Safety Authority [EFSA] (2012) Scientific opinion addressing the safety assessment of plants developed through cisgenesis and intragenesis. EFSA J 10:2561
Hou H, Atlihan N, Lu Z-X (2014) New biotechnology enhances the application of cisgenesis in plant breeding. Front Plant Sci 5:389. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2014.00389
Indian Council of Agricultural Research [ICAR] (2015) Vision 2050, New Delhi: ICAR
Jacobsen E, Nataraja KN (2008)—Cisgenics—Facilitating the second green revolution in India by improved traditional plant breeding. Curr Sci 94(11):1365–1366
Jochemsen H, Schouten HJ (2000) Ethische beoordeling van genetische modifi catie. In: Jochemsen H (ed) Toetsen en Begrenzen. Een Ethische en Politieke Beoordeling van de Moderne Biotechnologie. Buijten and Schipperheijn, Amsterdam, pp 88–95
Krause SMB, Näther A, Ortiz Cortes V, Mullins E, Kessel GJT, Lotz LAP, Tebbe CC (2020) No tangible effects of field-grown Cisgenic potatoes on soil microbial communities. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 8:603145. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2020.603145
Kumar K, Gambhir G, Dass A et al (2020) (2020) Genetically modified crops: current status and future prospects. Planta 251:91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00425-020-03372-8
Macnaghten P, Habets MGJL (2020) Breaking the impasse: towards a forward-looking governance framework for gene editing with plants. Plants, People, Planet 2:353–365. https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10107
Pavone V, Martinelli L (2015) Cisgenics as emerging bio-objects: bio-objectification and bio-identification in agrobiotech innovation. New Genet Soc 34(1):52–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2014.998816
Roberts P et al (2020) Responsible innovation in biotechnology: stakeholder attitudes and implications for research policy. Elem Sci Anth 8:47. https://doi.org/10.1525/elementa.446
Sara Nawaz (2021) Beyond naturalness? Social dimensions of gene editing in agriculture (PhD Dissertation) Vancouver: University of British Columbia. https://open.library.ubc.ca/soa/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/24/items/1.0401729?o=8
Sarmah BK, Gohain M, Borah BK, Acharjee S (2021) Cisgenesis: engineering plant genome by Harnessing compatible gene pools. In: Sarmah BK, Borah BK (eds) Genome engineering for crop improvement. concepts and strategies in plant sciences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63372-1_8
Schouten HJ, Krens FA, Jacobsen E (2006) Cisgenic plants are similar to traditionally bred plants: international regulations for genetically modified organisms should be altered to exempt cisgenesis. EMBO Rep 7:750–753
Schouten H (2014) Reply to the slippery slope of cisgenesis. Nat Biotechnol 32:728. https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt.2981
Srividhya Venkataraman, Uzma Badar, Kathleen Hefferon (2019) Agricultural innovation and the global politics of food trade, Editor(s): Pasquale Ferranti, Elliot M. Berry, Jock R. Anderson, Encyclopedia of Food Security and Sustainability, Elsevier, 2019, pp 114-121
Van Hove L, Gillund F (2017) Is it only the regulation? Broadening the debate on cisgenic plants. Environ Sci Eur 29(1):22–31
Vincenzo Pavone and Lucia Martinelli (2015) Cisgenics as emerging bio-objects: bio-objectification and bio-identification in agrobiotech innovation. New Genet Soc 34(1):52–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/14636778.2014.998816
Whelan AI, Lema MA (2017) A research program for the socioeconomic impacts of gene editing regulation. GM Crops Food 8(1):74–83. https://doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2016.1271856
Whelan AI, Lema MA (2019) Regulation of genome editing in plant biotechnology: Argentina. In: Dederer H-G, Hamburger D (eds) Regulation of genome editing in plant biotechnology. Springer International Publishing, pp 19–62
Woolley J, Johnson VB, Ospina B, Lemaga B, Jordan T, Harrison G, Thiele G (2011) Incorporating stakeholder perspectives in international agricultural research: the case of the CGIAR Research Program for Roots, Tubers, and Bananas for Food Security and Income. International Potato Center (CIP), Lima, Peru. Social Sciences Working Paper 2011–3, p 92
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to the editors for the suggestion to contribute and the opportunity. Their comments have been useful in writing and revising the text for the chapter.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Srinivas, K.R. (2023). CISGENESIS AND CISGENIC CROPS: Need for a Paradigm Shift in Harnessing and Governance. In: Chaurasia, A., Kole, C. (eds) Cisgenic Crops: Safety, Legal and Social Issues. Concepts and Strategies in Plant Sciences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10721-4_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-10721-4_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-10720-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-10721-4
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)