Harnessing the microbiome to prevent global biodiversity loss.

Global biodiversity loss and mass extinction of species are two of the most critical environmental issues the world is currently facing, resulting in the disruption of various ecosystems central to environmental functions and human health. Microbiome-targeted interventions, such as probiotics and microbiome transplants, are emerging as potential options to reverse deterioration of biodiversity and increase the resilience of wildlife and ecosystems. However, the implementation of these interventions is urgently needed. We summarize the current concepts, bottlenecks and ethical aspects encompassing the careful and responsible management of ecosystem resources using the microbiome (termed microbiome stewardship) to rehabilitate organisms and ecosystem functions. We propose a real-world application framework to guide environmental and wildlife probiotic applications. This framework details steps that must be taken in the upscaling process while weighing risks against the high toll of inaction. In doing so, we draw parallels with other aspects of contemporary science moving swiftly in the face of urgent global challenges.

Governing Gene Drive Technologies: A Qualitative Interview Study.

BACKGROUND: Gene drive technologies (GDTs) bias the inheritance of a genetic element within a population of non-human organisms, promoting its progressive spread across this population. If successful, GDTs may be used to counter intractable problems such as vector-borne diseases. A key issue in the debate on GDTs relates to what governance is appropriate for these technologies. While governance mechanisms for GDTs are to a significant extent proposed and shaped by professional experts, the perspectives of these experts have not been explored in depth. METHODS: A total of 33 GDT experts from different professional disciplines were interviewed to identify, better understand, and juxtapose their perspectives on GDT governance. The pseudonymized transcripts were analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Three main themes were identified: (1) engagement of communities, stakeholders, and publics; (2) power dynamics, and (3) decision-making. There was broad consensus amongst respondents that it is important to engage communities, stakeholders, and publics. Nonetheless, respondents had diverging views on the reasons for doing so and the timing and design of engagement. Respondents also outlined complexities and challenges related to engagement. Moreover, they brought up the power dynamics that are present in GDT research. Respondents stressed the importance of preventing the recurrence of historical injustices and reflected on dilemmas regarding whether and to what extent (foreign) researchers can legitimately make demands regarding local governance. Finally, respondents had diverging views on whether decisions about GDTs should be made in the same way as decisions about other environmental interventions, and on the decision-making model that should be used to decide about GDT deployment. CONCLUSIONS: The insights obtained in this interview study give rise to recommendations for the design and evaluation of GDT governance. Moreover, these insights point to unresolved normative questions that need to be addressed to move from general commitments to concrete obligations.

Laboratory-Generated DNA Can Cause Anomalous Pathogen Diagnostic Test Results.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has brought about the unprecedented expansion of highly sensitive molecular diagnostics as a primary infection control strategy. At the same time, many laboratories have shifted focus to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) research and diagnostic development, leading to large-scale production of SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acids that can interfere with these tests. We have identified multiple instances, in independent laboratories, in which nucleic acids generated in research settings are suspected to have caused researchers to test positive for SARS-CoV-2 in surveillance testing. In some cases, the affected individuals did not work directly with these nucleic acids but were exposed via a contaminated surface or object. Though researchers have long been vigilant of DNA contaminants, the transfer of these contaminants to SARS-CoV-2 testing samples can result in anomalous test results. The impact of these incidents stretches into the public sphere, placing additional burdens on public health resources, placing affected researchers and their contacts in isolation and quarantine, removing them from the testing pool for 3 months, and carrying the potential to trigger shutdowns of classrooms and workplaces. We report our observations as a call for increased stewardship over nucleic acids with the potential to impact both the use and development of diagnostics. IMPORTANCE To meet the challenges imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic, research laboratories shifted their focus and clinical diagnostic laboratories developed and utilized new assays. Nucleic acid-based testing became widespread and, for the first time, was used as a prophylactic measure. We report 15 cases of researchers at two institutes testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 on routine surveillance tests, in the absence of any symptoms or transmission. These researchers were likely contaminated with nonhazardous nucleic acids generated in the laboratory in the course of developing new SARS-CoV-2 diagnostics. These contaminating nucleic acids were persistent and widespread throughout the laboratory. We report these findings as a cautionary tale to those working with nucleic acids used in diagnostic testing and as a call for careful stewardship of diagnostically relevant molecules. Our conclusions are especially relevant as at-home COVID-19 testing gains traction in the marketplace and these amplicons may impact on the general public.

Reactions to the National Academies/Royal Society Report on Heritable Human Genome Editing.

In September 2020, a detailed report on Heritable Human Genome Editing was published. The report offers a translational pathway for the limited approval of germline editing under limited circumstances and assuming various criteria have been met. In this perspective, some three dozen experts from the fields of genome editing, medicine, bioethics, law, and related fields offer their candid reactions to the National Academies/Royal Society report, highlighting areas of support, omissions, disagreements, and priorities moving forward.

Ethical issues related to brain organoid research.

This review provides a snapshot of the current ethical issues related to research with human brain organoids. The issues fall into the following main themes: research oversight; human biomaterials procurement and donor consent; translational delivery; animal research; and organoid consciousness and moral status. Each of these areas poses challenges for researchers, bioethicists, regulators, research institutions, and tissue banks. However, progress can be made if these parties build on past experiences with stem cell research, ethics, and policy, but adapted accordingly to new aspects of brain organoid research.

Pharmacogenomics education in medical and pharmacy schools: conclusions of a global survey.

Aim: The need for pharmacogenomic education is becoming more and more urgent. Our aim was to evaluate the progress in pharmacogenomics education since then, and to put forward further recommendations. Methods: A survey was sent to 248 schools of medicine, pharmacy, nursing and health professions around the world. Results: The majority of the study programs (87%) include pharmacogenomics education, which is generally taught as part of the pharmacology curriculum. On average, educators and teachers have selected appropriate and highly relevant pharmacogenomics biomarkers to include in their teaching programs. Conclusions: Based on the results, we can conclude that the state of pharmacogenomics education at the surveyed universities has improved substantially since 2005.

Implications of Mitochondrial Dysfunction for the Anesthetic and Perioperative Management: A Case Report of Spinal Fusion, Genetic Confusion, and a Patient's Perspective.

We describe a patient's personal struggle with a symptom complex consisting of profound muscle weakness requiring pyridostigmine, and metabolic abnormalities suggestive of mitochondrial disease. This included a profound sensitivity to opioids, which in the past caused severe respiratory depression during a prior hospital admission. Interestingly, the patient herself is a professor of ethics in genomic sciences, and she and her medical team thus far have not been able to formally diagnose her with mitochondrial disease. The patient now presented for a multilevel lumbar spine fusion and her hospital course and perspective on her medical odyssey are described here.

Erratum: Revisiting the Warnock rule.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.1038/nbt.4015.

An unbiased index to quantify participant's phenotypic contribution to an open-access cohort.

The Personal Genome Project (PGP) is an effort to enroll many participants to create an open-access repository of genome, health and trait data for research. However, PGP participants are not enrolled for studying any specific traits and participants choose the phenotypes to disclose. To measure the extent and willingness and to encourage and guide participants to contribute phenotypes, we developed an algorithm to score and rank the phenotypes and participants of the PGP. The scoring algorithm calculates the participation index (P-index) for every participant, where 0 indicates no reported phenotypes and 100 indicate complete phenotype reporting. We calculated the P-index for all 5,015 participants in the PGP and they ranged from 0 to 96.7. We found that participants mainly have either high scores (P-index > 90, 29.5%) or low scores (P-index < 10, 57.8%). While, there are significantly more males than female participants (1,793 versus 1,271), females tend to have on average higher P-indexes (P = 0.015). We also reported the P-indexes of participants based on demographics and states like Missouri and Massachusetts have better P-indexes than states like Utah and Minnesota. The P-index can therefore be used as an unbiased way to measure and rank participant's phenotypic contribution towards the PGP.

Harvard Personal Genome Project: lessons from participatory public research.

BACKGROUND: Since its initiation in 2005, the Harvard Personal Genome Project has enrolled thousands of volunteers interested in publicly sharing their genome, health and trait data. Because these data are highly identifiable, we use an 'open consent' framework that purposefully excludes promises about privacy and requires participants to demonstrate comprehension prior to enrollment. DISCUSSION: Our model of non-anonymous, public genomes has led us to a highly participatory model of researcher-participant communication and interaction. The participants, who are highly committed volunteers, self-pursue and donate research-relevant datasets, and are actively engaged in conversations with both our staff and other Personal Genome Project participants. We have quantitatively assessed these communications and donations, and report our experiences with returning research-grade whole genome data to participants. We also observe some of the community growth and discussion that has occurred related to our project. SUMMARY: We find that public non-anonymous data is valuable and leads to a participatory research model, which we encourage others to consider. The implementation of this model is greatly facilitated by web-based tools and methods and participant education. Project results are long-term proactive participant involvement and the growth of a community that benefits both researchers and participants.