Sustainable use of CRISPR/Cas in fish aquaculture: the biosafety perspective.

Aquaculture is becoming the primary source of seafood for human diets, and farmed fish aquaculture is one of its fastest growing sectors. The industry currently faces several challenges including infectious and parasitic diseases, reduced viability, fertility reduction, slow growth, escapee fish and environmental pollution. The commercialization of the growth-enhanced AquAdvantage salmon and the CRISPR/Cas9-developed tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) proffers genetic engineering and genome editing tools, e.g. CRISPR/Cas, as potential solutions to these challenges. Future traits being developed in different fish species include disease resistance, sterility, and enhanced growth. Despite these notable advances, off-target effect and non-clarification of trait-related genes among other technical challenges hinder full realization of CRISPR/Cas potentials in fish breeding. In addition, current regulatory and risk assessment frameworks are not fit-for purpose regarding the challenges of CRISPR/Cas notwithstanding that public and regulatory acceptance are key to commercialization of products of the new technology. In this study, we discuss how CRISPR/Cas can be used to overcome some of these limitations focusing on diseases and environmental release in farmed fish aquaculture. We further present technical limitations, regulatory and risk assessment challenges of the use of CRISPR/Cas, and proffer research strategies that will provide much-needed data for regulatory decisions, risk assessments, increased public awareness and sustainable applications of CRISPR/Cas in fish aquaculture with emphasis on Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) breeding.

Revisiting Risk Governance of GM Plants: The Need to Consider New and Emerging Gene-Editing Techniques.

New and emerging gene-editing techniques make it possible to target specific genes in species with greater speed and specificity than previously possible. Of major relevance for plant breeding, regulators and scientists are discussing how to regulate products developed using these gene-editing techniques. Such discussions include whether to adopt or adapt the current framework for GMO risk governance in evaluating the impacts of gene-edited plants, and derived products, on the environment, human and animal health and society. Product classification or definition is one of several aspects of the current framework being criticized. Further, knowledge gaps related to risk assessments of gene-edited organisms-for example of target and off-target effects of intervention in plant genomes-are also of concern. Resolving these and related aspects of the current framework will involve addressing many subjective, value-laden positions, for example how to specify protection goals through ecosystem service approaches. A process informed by responsible research and innovation practices, involving a broader community of people, organizations, experts, and interest groups, could help scientists, regulators, and other stakeholders address these complex, value-laden concerns related to gene-editing of plants with and for society.

A plant 35S CaMV promoter induces long-term expression of luciferase in Atlantic salmon.

The long-term persistence and activity of a naked plasmid DNA (pGL3-35S) containing a luc gene (reporter gene) controlled by a plant 35S CaMV promoter was studied in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) after injection. Atlantic salmon (mean weight 70 grams) were injected intramuscularly with 100 µg of plasmid DNA. Blood, different tissues and organs were sampled at different time points up to day 535 after injection. Southern blot analysis suggested the presence of extra-chromosomally open circular, linear and supercoiled topoforms of pGL3-35S at day 150 after injection. At day 536 open circular and supercoiled topoforms were detected. Luciferase activity was detected at the injection site up to 536 days post-injection of pGL3-35S, where it peaked at day 150 and decreased to approximately 17% of its maximum activity by day 536. Our study demonstrated that a plasmid containing the 35S promoter was able to induce expression of a reporter gene/protein in fish in vivo and that the plasmid DNA persisted for a prolonged time after intramuscular injection.

Strategies and hurdles using DNA vaccines to fish.

DNA vaccinations against fish viral diseases as IHNV at commercial level in Canada against VHSV at experimental level are both success stories. DNA vaccination strategies against many other viral diseases have, however, not yet yielded sufficient results in terms of protection. There is an obvious need to combat many other viral diseases within aquaculture where inactivated vaccines fail. There are many explanations to why DNA vaccine strategies against other viral diseases fail to induce protective immune responses in fish. These obstacles include: 1) too low immunogenicity of the transgene, 2) too low expression of the transgene that is supposed to induce protection, 3) suboptimal immune responses, and 4) too high degradation rate of the delivered plasmid DNA. There are also uncertainties with regard distribution and degradation of DNA vaccines that may have implications for safety and regulatory requirements that need to be clarified. By combining plasmid DNA with different kind of adjuvants one can increase the immunogenicity of the transgene antigen - and perhaps increase the vaccine efficacy. By using molecular adjuvants with or without in combination with targeting assemblies one may expect different responses compared with naked DNA. This includes targeting of DNA vaccines to antigen presenting cells as a central factor in improving their potencies and efficacies by means of encapsulating the DNA vaccine in certain carriers systems that may increase transgene and MHC expression. This review will focus on DNA vaccine delivery, by the use of biodegradable PLGA particles as vehicles for plasmid DNA mainly in fish.

Do uncertainty analyses reveal uncertainties? Using the introduction of DNA vaccines to aquaculture as a case.

The Walker and Harremoës (W&H) uncertainty framework is a tool to systematically identify scientific uncertainty. We applied the W&H uncertainty framework to elicit scientists' judgements of potential sources of uncertainty associated with the use of DNA vaccination in aquaculture. DNA vaccination is considered a promising solution to combat pathological fish diseases. There is, however, lack of knowledge regarding its ecological and social implications. Our findings indicate that scientists are open and aware of a number of uncertainties associated with DNA vaccination e.g. with regard to immune response, degradation and distribution of the DNA plasmid after injection and environmental release, and consider most of these uncertainties to be adequately reduced through more research. We proceed to discuss our experience of using the W&H uncertainty framework. Some challenges related to the application of the framework were recognised. This was especially related to the respondents' unfamiliarity with the concepts used and their lack of experience in discussing qualitative aspects of uncertainties. As we see it, the W&H framework should be considered as a useful tool to stimulate reflection on uncertainty and an important first step in a more extensive process of including and properly dealing with uncertainties in science and policymaking.