Shaping ecological risk research for synthetic biology

被引:0
|
作者
Kuiken T. [1 ]
Dana G. [2 ]
Oye K. [3 ]
Rejeski D. [1 ]
机构
[1] Science and Technology Innovation Program, Woodrow Wilson Center, WA, DC, 20004, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave, NW
[2] Dana and Sharpe Risk Associates, Arlington, VA
[3] Engineering Systems Division and Department of Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Ecological risk; Gene flow; Genetically modified organisms; Synthetic biology; Trading zones;
D O I
10.1007/s13412-014-0171-2
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Synthetic biology is an interdisciplinary field that brings together biology and engineering at its core. Understanding and evaluating the ecological effects of synthetic biology applications also require broad interdisciplinary convergence and the ability to adapt to rapid technological developments. This article describes a series of workshops designed to provide a space for interdisciplinary groups of synthetic biologists, natural and social scientists, and other stakeholders to identify priority ecological hazards and to begin to design research programs to inform ecological risk assessments and risk management of synthetic biology applications. Participants identified gene flow, fitness, and competition as the key hazards of synthetic biology applications using engineered microorganisms. The rapid pace of synthetic biology research and product development, the potential environmental release of numerous applications, and the diffuse and diverse nature of the research community are prompting renewed attention on how to design robust ecological risk research programs to investigate such hazards. © 2014 AESS.
引用
收藏
页码:191 / 199
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Synthetic Biology, Dual Use Research, and Possibilities for Control
    Wimmer, Eckard
    DEFENCE AGAINST BIOTERRORISM: METHODS FOR PREVENTION AND CONTROL, 2018, : 7 - 11
  • [42] A tRNA-guided research journey from synthetic chemistry to synthetic biology
    Soll, Dieter
    RNA, 2015, 21 (04) : 742 - 744
  • [43] The synthetic microbiology caucus: are synthetic biology standards applicable in everyday research practice?
    Tas, Huseyin
    Amara, Adam
    Cueva, Miguel E.
    Bongaerts, Nadine
    Calvo-Villamanan, Alicia
    Hamadache, Samir
    Vavitsas, Konstantinos
    MICROBIAL BIOTECHNOLOGY, 2020, 13 (05): : 1304 - 1308
  • [44] Risk in synthetic biology-views from the lab
    McLeod, Carmen
    de Saille, Stevienna
    Nerlich, Brigitte
    EMBO REPORTS, 2018, 19 (07)
  • [45] Dealing with dual use: Risk governance in synthetic biology
    Palmer, Megan
    ABSTRACTS OF PAPERS OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY, 2016, 252
  • [46] Synthetic biology: Time for a synthetic biology asilomar?
    不详
    SCIENCE, 2004, 303 (5655) : 159 - 159
  • [47] Computers in biology - A model information management system for ecological research
    Ingersoll, RC
    Seastedt, TR
    Hartman, M
    BIOSCIENCE, 1997, 47 (05) : 310 - 316
  • [48] Biology Ecological research harder due to lack of butterfly collectors
    Bodin, Madeline
    NEW SCIENTIST, 2021, 245 (3321) : 18 - 18
  • [49] pClone: Synthetic Biology Tool Makes Promoter Research Accessible to Beginning Biology Students
    Campbell, A. Malcolm
    Eckdahl, Todd
    Cronk, Brian
    Andresen, Corinne
    Frederick, Paul
    Huckuntod, Samantha
    Shinneman, Claire
    Wacker, Annie
    Yuan, Jason
    CBE-LIFE SCIENCES EDUCATION, 2014, 13 (02): : 285 - 296
  • [50] Benchmarking Intrinsic Promoters and Terminators for Plant Synthetic Biology Research
    Tian, Chenfei
    Zhang, Yixin
    Li, Jianhua
    Wang, Yong
    BIODESIGN RESEARCH, 2022, 2022