Abstract
The development of the genome editing system called CRISPR–Cas9 has opened a huge debate on the possibility of modifying the human germline. But the types of changes that could and/or ought to be made have not been discussed. To cast some light on this debate, I will describe the story of the CRISPR–Cas9 system. Then, I will briefly review the projects for modification of the human species that were discussed by biologists throughout the twentieth century. Lastly, I will show that for plenty of reasons, both scientific and societal, germline modification is no longer a priority for our societies.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barrangou, R., Fremaux, C., Deveau, H., Richards, M., Boyaval, P., et al. (2007). CRISPR provides acquired resistance against viruses in prokaryotes. Science, 315, 1709–1712.
Bosley, K. S., Botchan, M., Bredenoord, A. L., Carroll, D., Charo, R. A., et al. (2015). CRISPR germline engineering—The community speaks. Nature Biotechology, 33, 478–486.
Carroll, D. (2008). Progress and prospects: Zinc finger nucleases as gene therapy agents. Gene Therapy, 15, 1463–1478.
Christian, M., Cermak, T., Doyle, E. M., Schmidt, C., Zhang, E., et al. (2010). Targeting DNA double-strand breaks with TAL effector nucleases. Genetics, 186, 757–761.
Davis, B. (1970). Prospects for genetic intervention in man. Science, 170, 1279–1283.
Delisle, R. (2009). Les philosophies du néodarwinisme: Conceptions divergentes sur l’homme et le sens de l’évolution. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
Hotchkiss, R. D. (1965). Portents for a genetic engineering. Journal of Heredity, 56, 197–202.
Huxley, A. (1932). Brave new world. London: Chatto & Windus.
Jinek, M., Chylinski, K., Fonfara, I., Hauer, M., Doudna, J. A., & Charpentier, E. (2012). A programmable dual-RNA–guided DNA endonuclease in adaptive bacterial immunity. Science, 337, 816–821.
Knight, J. (2001). Biology’s last taboo. Nature, 413, 12–15.
Liang, P., Xu, Y., Zhang, X., Ding, C., Huang, R., et al. (2015). CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in human tripronuclear zygotes. Protein and Cell, 6, 363–372.
Long, C., Amoasil, L., Mireault, A. A., McAnally, J. R., Li, H., et al. (2016). Postnatal genome editing partially restores dystrophin expression in a mouse model of muscular dystrophy. Science, 351, 400–403.
Long, C., McAnally, J. R., Shelton, J. M., Mireault, A. A., Bassel-Duby, R., & Olson, E. N. (2014). Prevention of muscular dystrophy in mice by CRISPR/Cas9—Mediated editing of germline DNA. Science, 345, 1184–1188.
Makarova, K. S., Grishin, N. V., Shabalina, S. A., Wolf, Y. I., & Koonin, E. V. (2006). A putative RNA-interference-based immune system in prokaryotes: Computational analysis of the predicted enzymatic machinery, functional analogies with eukaryotic RNAi, and hypothetical mechanisms of action. Biology Direct, 1, 7.
Monod, J. (1971). Chance and necessity: An essay on the natural philosophy of modern biology. New York: Knopf.
Morange, M. (2015a). CRISPR–Cas: The discovery of an immune system in prokaryotes. Journal of Biosciences, 40, 221–223.
Morange, M. (2015b). CRISPR–Cas: From a prokaryotic immune system to a universal genome editing tool. Journal of Biosciences, 40, 829–832.
Morange, M. (2016). The success story of the expression ‘genome editing’. Journal of Biosciences, 41, 9–11.
Pennisi, E. (2013). The CRISPR craze. Science, 341, 833–836.
Perez, E. E., Wang, J., Miller, J. C., Jouvenot, Y., Kim, K. A., et al. (2008). Establishment of HIV-1 resistance in CD4+ T cells by genome editing using zinc-finger nucleases. Nature Biotechnoogy, 26, 808–816.
Pourcel, C., Salvignol, G., & Vergnaud, G. (2005). CRISPR elements in Yersinia pestis acquire new repeats by preferential uptake of bacteriophage DNA, and provide additional tools for evolutionary studies. Microbiology, 151, 653–663.
Puchta, H., Dujon, B., & Hohn, B. (1993). Homologous recombination in plant cells is enhanced by in vivo induction of double strand breaks into DNA by a site-specific endonuclease. Nucleic Acids Research, 21, 5034–5040.
Rouet, P., Smih, F., & Jasin, M. (1994). Expression of a site-specific endonuclease stimulates homologous recombination in mammalian cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 91, 6064–6068.
Stock, G. (2002). Redesigning humans. London: Profile Books.
Tang, Y.-P., Shimizu, E., Dube, G. R., Rampon, C., Kerchner, G. A., et al. (1999). Genetic enhancement of learning and memory in mice. Nature, 401, 63–69.
Tasan, I., Jain, S., & Zhao, H. (2016). Use of genome-editing tools to treat sickle cell disease. Human Genetics, 135, 1011–1028.
Thomas, K. R., & Capecchi, M. R. (1987). Site-directed mutagenesis by gene targeting in mouse embryo-derived stem cells. Cell, 51, 503–512.
Urnov, F. D., Rebar, E. J., Holmes, M. C., Zhang, H. S., & Gregory, P. D. (2010). Genome editing with engineered zinc finger nucleases. Nature Reviews/Genetics, 11, 636–646.
Wadman, M. (1998). Germline gene therapy ‘must be spared excessive regulation’. Nature, 392, 317.
Acknowledgements
I am indebted to David Marsh for his critical reading of the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Morange, M. Human germline editing: a historical perspective. HPLS 39, 34 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-017-0161-2
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-017-0161-2