/
Part 3 Commercial application of these two types of resistance

Part 3 Commercial application of these two types of resistance

We have studied two types of resistance to viruses, both obtained with CRISPR/Cas9. Suppose both methods lead to commercial plant varieties. Indicate the advantages and disadvantages of these two resistances with regard to the following aspects, in commercial application:



21. Biosafety.

    a. Would the CRISPR/Cas construct be in the final cultivar in the approach of Xiang et al. and in Chandrasekaran et al.?

    b. Could such varieties also be obtained through classical breeding or classical mutagenesis? If so, how? If not, why not?

    c. Are there possible risks for human health when consuming the two types of resistant plants compared to traditionally improved plants? Explain. Consider also specificity of the CRISPR/Cas construct.

    d. When crops are grown, seeds or pollen from those crops can end up in natural vegetations and pollinate wild relatives. In which of the two virus-resistant plants can foreign DNA escape to a vegetation? Could it have a fitness effect on those wild relatives, and thus have a disruptive effect on the vegetation? Compare this with the risks of 'escape' of DNA via pollen in classical breeding, where it is crossed with plants from the natural vegetation. Also explain your answers!



22. GMO regulations. Which of the two applications would lead to varieties that are covered by the GMO legislation in the EU and which ones in the US? Explain. See for example https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05814-6 and https://newatlas.com/usda-will-not-regulate-crispr-gene-edited-plants/54061/.

23. Which resistance will be more sustainable? What is needed for the virus to break the resistance? Explain.

24. Do you expect negative fitness effects for the plant in one or both types of resistance? Explain.