Scientific Communication and CRISPR

Thumbnail Image
Supplemental Files
Date
2019-01-01
Authors
Fleischmann, Sarah
Major Professor
Jeffrey Wolt
Thomas Lubberstedt
Advisor
Committee Member
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Authors
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Organizational Unit
Agronomy

The Department of Agronomy seeks to teach the study of the farm-field, its crops, and its science and management. It originally consisted of three sub-departments to do this: Soils, Farm-Crops, and Agricultural Engineering (which became its own department in 1907). Today, the department teaches crop sciences and breeding, soil sciences, meteorology, agroecology, and biotechnology.

History
The Department of Agronomy was formed in 1902. From 1917 to 1935 it was known as the Department of Farm Crops and Soils.

Dates of Existence
1902–present

Historical Names

  • Department of Farm Crops and Soils (1917–1935)

Related Units

Journal Issue
Is Version Of
Versions
Series
Department
Agronomy
Abstract

Genome editing technologies have the capability of providing a quick, relatively inexpensive method of plant breeding that could greatly expand breeding efforts across species. CRISPR-Cas9 has become one of the leading forms of genome editing, but the level of investment and number of products developed with the technology will be greatly affected by both regulatory decisions made around the world and the level of consumer acceptance. The ability of scientists who are involved with genome editing research to communicate with non-experts will impact the outcomes of both factors. This paper reviews available literature on scientific communication, provides a high-level discussion on the CRISPR-Cas9 system of genome editing, and links the two topics with a discussion of how scientific communication will affect the utilization of CRISPR-Cas9, providing recommendations for those who wish to engage in the discussion. This review of the literature makes it apparent that it will not be sufficient to solely educate the public about gene editing technologies; rather, a dialogue must be opened that will both educate and address regulatory and consumer concerns in an honest, transparent way.

Comments
Description
Keywords
Citation
DOI
Source
Copyright
Tue Jan 01 00:00:00 UTC 2019