Gene drive was a term I had admittedly not heard before coming across a recent article in the agriculture press, and it took only a few paragraphs of that article to feel excited by its potential and also shudder with fear regarding its possible repercussions.
So for a bit of background on gene drive I turned to the Internet.
鈥淚n genetics, gene drive is the phenomenon in which the inheritance of a particular gene or set of genes is favorably biased. Gene drive can arise through a variety of mechanisms and results in its prevalence increasing in a population,鈥� detailed Wikipedia.
The Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde side to this comes when you start to consider engineered gene drives. In other words science would tinker with a gene or two, release individuals of the species with the modification back into the wild, and over time the modification would take effect.
It has already been proposed to provide an effective means of genetically modifying populations or even whole species.
In a Nov. 16 article at www.nytimes.com it was related back in 2013 Kevin M. Esvelt and his colleagues at Harvard University: suggested such technology 鈥渃ould be used to save endangered wildlife from extinction by implanting a fertility-reducing gene in invasive animals 鈥� a so-called gene drive.
鈥淲hen the genetically altered animals were released back into the wild, the fertility-reducing gene would spread through the population, eradicating the pests.鈥�
The science is obviously intriguing.
鈥淎pplications of gene drive include preventing the spread of insects that carry pathogens (in particular, mosquitoes that transmit malaria, dengue, and zika pathogens), controlling invasive species, or eliminating herbicide or pesticide resistance. The technique can be used for adding, disrupting, or modifying genes, such as to cause a crash in the populations of a disease vector by reducing their reproductive capacity,鈥� notes Wikipedia.
The potential benefits in terms of human health, and farm production are rather obvious.
But take a step down this path and the questions quickly mount.
On the surface getting rid of mosquitos, every darned buzzing one of the blood sucking little devils, seems like a rather fantastic idea.
But what happens to the bat and bird species which rely on the pesky mosquito as a major food source?
Get rid of any number of crop pests from wild oats to flea beetles and it seems a win in terms of boosting production, and reducing costs in terms of herbicides and pesticides, which are already an issue with some consumers.
But again there are beneficial bugs that feed on specific weeds and birds which rely on invasive bugs and weed seeds as a feed source.
The birds feeding on bugs and seeds are in turn a food source for some hawks and so on the ripple could be felt through rather broad and dramatic ecosystems. Few things, if any, in a natural ecosystem survive in isolation of the species around them.
The fear is a gene drive ripple might easily cascade into a tsunami science could not stop.
Because it is a way to artificially bias inheritance of desired genes, gene drive constitutes a major change in biotechnology. The potential impact of releasing gene drives in the wild raises major bioethical concerns regarding their development and management.
Calvin Daniels is Editor with Yorkton This Week.
