Correction to "Perspectives on Genetically Engineered Microorganisms and Their Regulation in the United States"

Arik Shams,Alexandria Fischer,Anastasia Bodnar,Melinda Kliegman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.4c00325

IF: 5.249

2024-05-19

ACS Synthetic Biology

Abstract:ACS Synth Biol . 2024 May 18. doi: 10.1021/acssynbio.4c00325. Online ahead of print. NO

biochemical research methods

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Perspectives on Genetically Engineered Microorganisms and Their Regulation in the United States

Arik Shams,Alexandria Fischer,Anastasia Bodnar,Melinda Kliegman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.4c00048

2024-05-17

Abstract:Genetically engineered microorganisms (GEMs) represent a new paradigm in our ability to address the needs of a growing, changing world. GEMs are being used in agriculture, food production and additives, manufacturing, commodity and noncommodity products, environmental remediation, etc., with even more applications in the pipeline. Along with modern advances in genome-manipulating technologies, new manufacturing processes, markets, and attitudes are driving a boom in more products that contain or are derived from GEMs. Consequentially, researchers and developers are poised to interact with biotechnology regulatory policies that have been in effect for decades, but which are out of pace with rapidly changing scientific advances and knowledge. In the United States, biotechnology is regulated by multiple agencies with overlapping responsibilities. This poses a challenge for both developers and regulators to simultaneously allow new innovation and products into the market while also ensuring their safety and efficacy for the public and environment. This article attempts to highlight the various factors that interact between regulatory policy and development of GEMs in the United States, with perspectives from both regulators and developers. We present insights from a 2022 workshop hosted at the University of California, Berkeley that convened regulators from U.S. regulatory agencies and industry developers of various GEMs and GEM-derived products. We highlight several new biotechnologies and applications that are driving innovation in this space, and how regulatory agencies evaluate and assess these products according to current policies. Additionally, we describe recent updates to regulations that incorporate new technology and knowledge and how they can adapt further to effectively continue regulating for the future.
Corrigendum for “A Novel Kinase Subverts Aluminium Resistance by Boosting Ornithine Decarboxylase‐dependent Putrescine Biosynthesis”

Xiang P. Liu,Li J. Gao,Ben T. She,Gui X. Li,Yun R. Wu,Ji M. Xu,Zhong J. Ding,Jian F. Ma,Shao J. Zheng

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/pce.14419

2022-01-01

Abstract:In the published article, the author names in the byline which originally appeared as “Xiang P. Liu, Li J. Gao, Ben T. She, Gui X. Li, Yun R. Wu, Ji M. Xu, Zhong J. Ding, Jian F. Ma, Shao J. Zheng” have been corrected to “Xiangpei Liu, Lijun Gao, Bentao She, Guixin Li, Yunrong Wu, Jiming Xu, Zhongjie Ding, Jianfeng Ma, Shaojian Zheng” in the byline and the ORCID ID section. We apologize for this error.
Erratum for Wang et al., "Promiscuous Enzymes Cause Biosynthesis of Diverse Siderophores in Shewanella oneidensis".

Sijing Wang,Huihui Liang,Lulu Liu,Xinhang Jiang,Shihua Wu,Haichun Gao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.01515-20

2020-01-01

Applied and Environmental Microbiology

Abstract:Volume 86, no. 7, e00030-20, 2020, [https://doi.org/10.1128/AEM.00030-20][1]. Page 16: In the version of the paper originally published on 18 March 2020, the wrong article (originally, B. D. Bennett, K. E. Redford, and J. A. Gralnick, J Bacteriol 200:e00671-17, 2018, <https://doi.org/10.1128/JB.
Correction: The multifaceted nature of antimicrobial peptides: current synthetic chemistry approaches and future directions

Bee Ha Gan,Josephine Gaynord,Sam M. Rowe,Tomas Deingruber,David R. Spring

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/d1cs90109e

IF: 46.2

2022-01-01

Chemical Society Reviews

Abstract:Correction for ‘The multifaceted nature of antimicrobial peptides: current synthetic chemistry approaches and future directions’ by Bee Ha Gan et al. , Chem. Soc. Rev. , 2021, 50 , 7820–7880, DOI: 10.1039/D0CS00729C.
Are null segregants new combinations of heritable material and should they be regulated?

Jack A. Heinemann,Katrin Clark,Tessa C. Hiscox,Andrew W. McCabe,Sarah Z. Agapito-Tenfen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fgeed.2022.1064103

2023-01-10

Frontiers in Genome Editing

Abstract:Through genome editing and other techniques of gene technology, it is possible to create a class of organism called null segregants. These genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are products of gene technology but are argued to have no lingering vestige of the technology after the segregation of chromosomes or deletion of insertions. From that viewpoint regulations are redundant because any unique potential for the use of gene technology to cause harm has also been removed. We tackle this question of international interest by reviewing the early history of the purpose of gene technology regulation. The active ingredients of techniques used for guided mutagenesis, e.g., site-directed nucleases, such as CRISPR/Cas, are promoted for having a lower potential per reaction to create a hazard. However, others see this as a desirable industrial property of the reagents that will lead to genome editing being used more and nullifying the promised hazard mitigation. The contest between views revolves around whether regulations could alter the risks in the responsible use of gene technology. We conclude that gene technology, even when used to make null segregants, has characteristics that make regulation a reasonable option for mitigating potential harm. Those characteristics are that it allows people to create more harm faster, even if it creates benefits as well; the potential for harm increases with increased use of the technique, but safety does not; and regulations can control harm scaling.
Innovation and the regulation of products of agricultural biotechnology in the United States of America

Sally L McCammon,Mike Mendelsohn

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-019-00150-5

Abstract:The policy of the United States government is to seek regulatory approaches, consistent with applicable laws, that protect health and the environment while reducing unnecessary regulatory burdens and avoiding unjustifiably inhibiting innovation, stigmatizing new technologies, or creating unnecessary trade barriers [Adapted from the National Strategy for Modernizing the Regulatory System for Biotechnology Products, Product of the Emerging Technologies Interagency Policy Coordination Committee's Biotechnology Working Group (OSTP 2016)]. U.S. agencies are focused on delivering health and environmental protection based on the best available science; establishing transparent, coordinated, predictable, and efficient regulatory practices across agencies; and promoting public confidence in the oversight of the products of biotechnology through clear and transparent public engagement [Adapted from the Task Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity Report (USDA 2017)]. U.S. agencies that regulate the products of agricultural biotechnology discuss regulatory approaches presented during the June 2018 OECD Conference on Genome Editing Applications in Agriculture, focusing on plants developed using genome editing.
Correction to "Optogenetic Control of Bacterial Expression by Red Light"

Elina Multamäki,Andrés García de Fuentes,Oleksii Sieryi,Alexander Bykov,Uwe Gerken,Américo Tavares Ranzani,Jürgen Köhler,Igor Meglinski,Andreas Möglich,Heikki Takala

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.4c00601

IF: 5.249

2024-09-19

ACS Synthetic Biology

Abstract:ACS Synth Biol . 2024 Sep 18. doi: 10.1021/acssynbio.4c00601. Online ahead of print. NO

biochemical research methods
Regulation of genome edited organisms in Australia

Peter Thygesen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11248-024-00411-y

2024-10-25

Transgenic Research

Abstract:Whether organisms developed with the use of genome editing techniques, or food derived from such organisms, are, or should be, regulated as genetically modified organisms (GMOs) or genetically modified (GM) food, respectively, remains a subject of debate globally. Much of the discussion has been scientific and focussed on the similar genetic outcomes of some genome editing techniques and 'conventional' or natural mutagenesis. Many jurisdictions, including Australia, have considered, or are considering, how their regulatory frameworks will deal with such organisms and products. In Australia, organisms developed with site directed nuclease 1 (SDN-1, with no added template to guide homology-directed repair) are not regulated as GMOs, pursuant to exclusions in the Gene Technology Regulations 2001. The exclusion of SDN-1 organisms from regulation in Australia is sometimes misrepresented, including in scientific peer reviewed publications, as extending to all genome edited organisms. This highlights the importance for researchers, developers and other stakeholders to understand that whether genome edited organisms are, or are not, subject to regulation as GMOs in a particular jurisdiction may quintessentially be a legal question, not a scientific one.

biochemistry & molecular biology,biochemical research methods,biotechnology & applied microbiology
Erratum regarding missing ethics approval and consent to participate statements in previously published articles

Jessica Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioactmat.2024.06.006

2024-06-14

Abstract:[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.10.045.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.09.001.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.05.005.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.06.024.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2023.01.005.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.10.047.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.11.011.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.09.004.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.02.006.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2024.01.014.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.04.015.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.10.013.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.11.031.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.08.013.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.03.022.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2024.02.019.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2023.07.021.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.10.037.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.11.019.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.12.003.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.01.032.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.12.026.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.08.028.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2019.03.002.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.08.019.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.06.008.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.11.015.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.04.042.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.05.028.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.05.016.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.06.014.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.07.017.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.04.004.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.12.014.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.12.020.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.09.025.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.08.023.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.05.019.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.11.012.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.05.035.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2023.12.028.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.06.013.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2021.09.028.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.07.009.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.07.001.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2022.05.020.][This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.bioactmat.2020.11.002.].
Erratum: "Dioxins vs. PFAS: Science and Policy Challenges"

Alex J George,Linda S Birnbaum

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp16380

IF: 11.035

2024-10-26

Environmental Health Perspectives

Abstract:Environ Health Perspect . 2024 Oct;132(10):109001. doi: 10.1289/EHP16380. Epub 2024 Oct 25. NO

environmental sciences,public, environmental & occupational health,toxicology
Correction to "Light-Activable On-Demand Release of Nano-Antibiotic Platforms for Precise Synergy of Thermochemotherapy on Periodontitis"

Lingling Zhang,Yulan Wang,Can Wang,Ming He,Jiangshan Wan,Yan Wei,Jinglun Zhang,Xiangliang Yang,Yanbing Zhao,Yufeng Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.4c08187

IF: 9.5

2024-05-29

ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces

Abstract:ACS Appl Mater Interfaces . 2024 May 28. doi: 10.1021/acsami.4c08187. Online ahead of print. NO

materials science, multidisciplinary,nanoscience & nanotechnology
Erratum: Synthesis and photodynamic antimicrobial chemotherapy against multi-drug resistant Proteus mirabilis of ornithine-porphyrin conjugates in vitro and in vivo

Frontiers Production Office

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2023.1260368

IF: 5.2

2023-08-09

Frontiers in Microbiology

Abstract:[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1196072.].

microbiology
Genetic Engineering in the United States: Regulation of Crops and Their Food Products

Margaret Rosso Grossman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17119-3_7

2019-01-01

Abstract:In the United States, federal administrative agencies, including the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), implement statutes and regulations that govern genetically engineered plants and their products. US regulatory measures were developed in light of genetic modification using rDNA, before the advent of new technologies, including gene editing, that offer simple, elegant paths to genetic improvement in plants. After a brief review of global and US production of GE crops, this Chapter analyzes US policy and regulation of these crops and their food products, with emphasis on the role of USDA. The Chapter addresses significant issues raised by GE crops: coexistence of GE and non-GE crops, low-level presence, tort liability, and the new US labeling law for bioengineered foods. Recent policy statements encourage modernized science-based regulation, but some uncertainty applies to regulation of crops developed with new genetic technologies. The Chapter analyzes USDA’s governance of new crop varieties with a focus on the “Am I Regulated?” process, which determines whether new organisms are subject to USDA regulation. The USDA has declined regulatory jurisdiction for a number of products of gene editing and has indicated its intention not to regulate crops developed with certain new technologies. Finally, the Chapter outlines some regulatory challenges posed by advances in biotechnology.
Correction: Intracellular regulation of zinc by metal–organic framework-mediated genome editing for prostate cancer therapy

Yanan Xue,Honglin Tang,Guangpeng Chen,Yubin Pan,Da Li,Yuan Ping

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/d3bm90068a

2024-01-13

Biomaterials Science

Abstract:Correction for 'Intracellular regulation of zinc by metal–organic framework-mediated genome editing for prostate cancer therapy' by Yanan Xue et al. , Biomater. Sci. , 2023, https://doi.org/10.1039/d3bm00002h.

materials science, biomaterials
Correction to "Design, Synthesis, and Mechanistic Studies of ( R )-3-Amino-5,5-difluorocyclohex-1-ene-1-carboxylic Acid as an Inactivator of Human Ornithine Aminotransferase"

Allison N. Devitt,Abigail L. Vargas,Wei Zhu,Benjamin James Des Soye,Fatma Ayaloglu Butun,Tyler Alt,Nicholas Kaley,Glaucio M. Ferreira,Graham R. Moran,Neil L. Kelleher,Dali Liu,Richard B. Silverman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acschembio.4c00478

IF: 4.634

2024-07-19

ACS Chemical Biology

Abstract:ACS Chem Biol . 2024 Jul 18. doi: 10.1021/acschembio.4c00478. Online ahead of print. NO

biochemistry & molecular biology
The Ever-Expanding Boundaries of Synthetic Biology.

Huimin Zhao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.2c00582

IF: 5.249

2022-01-01

ACS Synthetic Biology

Abstract:ADVERTISEMENT RETURN TO ISSUEEditorialNEXTThe Ever-Expanding Boundaries of Synthetic BiologyHuimin Zhao*Huimin ZhaoDepartment of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana−Champaign, Urbana, Illinois 61801, United States*Email: [email protected]More by Huimin ZhaoCite this: ACS Synth. Biol. 2022, 11, 11, 3550Publication Date (Web):November 18, 2022Publication History Published online18 November 2022Published inissue 18 November 2022https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acssynbio.2c00582https://doi.org/10.1021/acssynbio.2c00582editorialACS PublicationsCopyright © 2022 American Chemical Society. This publication is available under these Terms of Use. Request reuse permissions This publication is free to access through this site. Learn MoreArticle Views1396Altmetric-Citations-LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICSArticle Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated. Share Add toView InAdd Full Text with ReferenceAdd Description ExportRISCitationCitation and abstractCitation and referencesMore Options Share onFacebookTwitterWechatLinked InRedditEmail PDF (798 KB) Get e-AlertscloseSUBJECTS:Carbon capture and storage,Cells,Gene therapy,Genetics,Synthetic biology Get e-Alerts
Correction to: AI (Re)Defining Pharmaceutical Exclusivities, by Jonathan Kimball and Srividhya Ragavan, Biotechnol Law Rep 2022;41(1):23–29; doi: 10.1089/blr.2021.29257.sr

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1089/blr.2021.29257.sr.correx

2022-04-01

Biotechnology Law Report

Abstract:In the February 2022 issue of Biotechnology Law Report (vol. 41, no. 1; 23–29), the article titled AI (Re)Defining Pharmaceutical Exclusivities, by Jonathan Kimball and Srividhya Ragavan requires correction.

biotechnology & applied microbiology
Corrigendum: Biologically engineered microbes for bioremediation of electronic waste: Wayposts, challenges and future directions

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1049/enb2.12023

2022-06-01

Engineering Biology

Abstract:[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1049/enb2.12020.].
Correction: Photodynamic antimicrobial chemotherapy with cationic phthalocyanines against Escherichia coli planktonic and biofilm cultures

Min Li,Bingjie Mai,Ao Wang,Yiru Gao,Xiaobing Wang,Xin Liu,Shanshan Song,Quanghong Liu,Shaohua Wei,Pan Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/d2ra90106d

IF: 4.036

2022-11-01

RSC Advances

Abstract:Correction for 'Photodynamic antimicrobial chemotherapy with cationic phthalocyanines against Escherichia coli planktonic and biofilm cultures' by Min Li et al. , RSC Adv. , 2017, 7 , 40734–40744, https://doi.org/10.1039/C7RA06073D.

chemistry, multidisciplinary
Unintended Genomic Outcomes in Current and Next Generation GM Techniques: A Systematic Review

Philomena Chu,Sarah Zanon Agapito-Tenfen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/plants11212997

2022-11-07

Abstract:Classical genetic engineering and new genome editing techniques, especially the CRISPR/Cas technology, increase the possibilities for modifying the genetic material in organisms. These technologies have the potential to provide novel agricultural traits, including modified microorganisms and environmental applications. However, legitimate safety concerns arise from the unintended genetic modifications (GM) that have been reported as side-effects of such techniques. Here, we systematically review the scientific literature for studies that have investigated unintended genomic alterations in plants modified by the following GM techniques: Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated gene transfer, biolistic bombardment, and CRISPR-Cas9 delivered via Agrobacterium-mediated gene transfer (DNA-based), biolistic bombardment (DNA-based) and as ribonucleoprotein complexes (RNPs). The results of our literature review show that the impact of such techniques in host genomes varies from small nucleotide polymorphisms to large genomic variation, such as segmental duplication, chromosome truncation, trisomy, chromothripsis, breakage fusion bridge, including large rearrangements of DNA vector-backbone sequences. We have also reviewed the type of analytical method applied to investigate the genomic alterations and found that only five articles used whole genome sequencing in their analysis methods. In addition, larger structural variations detected in some studies would not be possible without long-read sequencing strategies, which shows a potential underestimation of such effects in the literature. As new technologies are constantly evolving, a more thorough examination of prospective analytical methods should be conducted in the future. This will provide regulators working in the field of genetically modified and gene-edited organisms with valuable information on the ability to detect and identify genomic interventions.

Correction to "Perspectives on Genetically Engineered Microorganisms and Their Regulation in the United States"

Perspectives on Genetically Engineered Microorganisms and Their Regulation in the United States

Corrigendum for “A Novel Kinase Subverts Aluminium Resistance by Boosting Ornithine Decarboxylase‐dependent Putrescine Biosynthesis”

Erratum for Wang et al., "Promiscuous Enzymes Cause Biosynthesis of Diverse Siderophores in Shewanella oneidensis".

Correction: The multifaceted nature of antimicrobial peptides: current synthetic chemistry approaches and future directions

Are null segregants new combinations of heritable material and should they be regulated?

Innovation and the regulation of products of agricultural biotechnology in the United States of America

Correction to "Optogenetic Control of Bacterial Expression by Red Light"

Regulation of genome edited organisms in Australia

Erratum regarding missing ethics approval and consent to participate statements in previously published articles

Erratum: "Dioxins vs. PFAS: Science and Policy Challenges"

Correction to "Light-Activable On-Demand Release of Nano-Antibiotic Platforms for Precise Synergy of Thermochemotherapy on Periodontitis"

Erratum: Synthesis and photodynamic antimicrobial chemotherapy against multi-drug resistant Proteus mirabilis of ornithine-porphyrin conjugates in vitro and in vivo

Genetic Engineering in the United States: Regulation of Crops and Their Food Products

Correction: Intracellular regulation of zinc by metal–organic framework-mediated genome editing for prostate cancer therapy

Correction to "Design, Synthesis, and Mechanistic Studies of ( R )-3-Amino-5,5-difluorocyclohex-1-ene-1-carboxylic Acid as an Inactivator of Human Ornithine Aminotransferase"

The Ever-Expanding Boundaries of Synthetic Biology.

Correction to: AI (Re)Defining Pharmaceutical Exclusivities, by Jonathan Kimball and Srividhya Ragavan, Biotechnol Law Rep 2022;41(1):23–29; doi: 10.1089/blr.2021.29257.sr

Corrigendum: Biologically engineered microbes for bioremediation of electronic waste: Wayposts, challenges and future directions

Correction: Photodynamic antimicrobial chemotherapy with cationic phthalocyanines against Escherichia coli planktonic and biofilm cultures

Unintended Genomic Outcomes in Current and Next Generation GM Techniques: A Systematic Review