Search


 
 

CRISPR-Cpf1: Hype by Association

Posted by Elliot Hosman on October 2nd, 2015


Untitled Document

Another week, a fresh slew of CRISPR gene editing news and developments.

On September 24 Thomson Reuters predicted that Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier would earn a Nobel Prize in chemistry for their widely celebrated 2012 research on the gene editing complex, CRISPR and associated protein Cas9. We could know as early as October 7 whether the Nobel committee will cut the wait time between publishing and laurels for a chemistry award from its 20-year average since 1985 to just three years.

The same day that the annual Nobel predictions hit the wire, Doudna, Charpentier, and a number of other researchers were gathered at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL) in New York for the first day of a conference called Genome Engineering: The CRISPR/Cas Revolution. That evening, Charpentier co-chaired a session with Feng Zhang, a co-discoverer of CRISPR’s gene editing capabilities and currently a rival of Charpentier’s and Doudna’s in a patent fight about the discovery. When Zhang took the stage after Charpentier, he pivoted away from CRISPR-Cas9 and, in the words of one participant, “blew us all out of the water.”

Zhang’s talk described a new CRISPR discovery that would be published the next day in Cell: an alternative CRISPR-associated protein called Cpf1. According to a Broad Institute press release,

“Zhang and his collaborators searched through hundreds of CRISPR systems in different types of bacteria, searching for enzymes with useful properties that could be engineered for use in human cells.”
The statement goes on to quote Broad Director Eric Lander asserting that the “Cpf1 system represents a new generation of genome editing technology…with the potential for even simpler and more precise genome engineering.”

Nature
’s and Science’s headlines echoed this assessment, celebrating the discovery as an improvement on Cas9 and a sharper pair of molecular scissors, respectively.

But coverage in MIT Technology Review included some additional views. Science writer Antonio Regalado quotes University of Minnesota researcher Dan Boytas, who notes that the “greatest value may be more in terms of the patent landscape than a scientific advancement,” and  George Church, who describes a coming “niche market for a collection of different proteins so that cuts can be placed anywhere in the genome.” Regalado also reports that researchers outside the Cpf1 research team “said the new system was likely to fill a limited role in what is a growing toolbox of DNA-editing techniques.”

Writing in Wired—a publication not averse to CRISPR hype—Sarah Zhang reinforced the idea that Cpf1 is not a Cas9 “rival so much as a complementary tool,” not so much an improvement as a method with slightly different capabilities. Wired quotes Feng Zhang’s research colleague John van der Oost: “We have the feeling it’s just the tip of the iceberg.” Doudna herself, in an October 1 interview on the Nobel Prize rumors, said that the research “underscores the wonderful diversity of these CRISPR systems” but that it was “unclear” whether Cpf1 will be “useful for genome editing.”

So for some, Cpf1 signals CRISPR 2.0, a “better way to edit the genome” or an “outsnip” of CRISPR/Cas9  potentially undercutting Doudna and Charpentier’s predicted grasp on a #NobelPrize. A different take is that we are still in the earliest stages of understanding the scientific, let alone the social, legal, and ethical, implications of CRISPR genome editing.

Previously on Biopolitical Times:

Image via Flickr



Posted in Biopolitics, Parties & Pundits, Biotech & Pharma, Elliot Hosman's Blog Posts, Inheritable Genetic Modification, Patents & Other IP, Synthetic Biology


Comments

Add a Comment
  1. Comment by trabalhar pela internet, Mar 19th, 2017 8:50am

    thanks for sharing


  2. Comment by trabalhar pela internet, Mar 19th, 2017 8:45am

    Thanks for sharing


  3. Comment by Fatura hipercard, Mar 4th, 2017 6:53pm

    How many uninteresting comments.


  4. Comment by Vanderson Ferreira, Feb 28th, 2017 9:11am

    This site is very good. A lot of good information. Thanks.


  5. Comment by Azenka, Feb 28th, 2017 9:09am

    Nice post. Thanks for information.


  6. Comment by Azenka, Feb 28th, 2017 9:08am

    Nice post. Thanks for information.


  7. Comment by Vagner Liberato, Feb 27th, 2017 6:40am

    The content has quality and always very well done!


  8. Comment by Haniel, Feb 22nd, 2017 3:12pm

    Post good.


  9. Comment by Haniel Almeida, Feb 22nd, 2017 3:07pm

    Post good.


  10. Comment by Jânio Fagundes, Feb 21st, 2017 1:55pm

    Very good post. I will aply this. Thanks


  11. Comment by José, Feb 14th, 2017 3:50pm

    I am very pleased with the information in this article, note 10!


  12. Comment by José, Feb 14th, 2017 3:49pm

    I am very pleased with the information in this article, note 10!


  13. Comment by Vinicius de Casa, Jan 21st, 2017 5:10am

    Very good article. Human biotech is a serious issue.


  14. Comment by Calvicie, Dec 27th, 2016 9:15am

    This site is very good.


  15. Comment by Curso SEO para afiliados, Dec 18th, 2016 4:04am

    Congratulations. Very good.


  16. Comment by DHT, Dec 18th, 2016 3:50am

    Great site


  17. Comment by DHT, Dec 18th, 2016 3:46am

    Great site


  18. Comment by Sarah, Dec 9th, 2016 9:57am

    Very Good


  19. Comment by Sarah, Dec 9th, 2016 9:57am

    Very Good


  20. Comment by confeitaria, Nov 27th, 2016 4:06pm

    Very good information! I will favorite it. Good site.


  21. Comment by Sidney, Nov 22nd, 2016 10:31am

    This is the best site. Thanks.


  22. Comment by Lucas, Nov 18th, 2016 1:52pm

    Very good this site.


  23. Comment by Laércio, Nov 15th, 2016 5:30am

    Great site. Thanks.


  24. Comment by Aluisio, Nov 15th, 2016 5:09am


    I really like this site.
    Already in favorites.


  25. Comment by Maicon, Nov 9th, 2016 6:57pm

    Nice site.


  26. Comment by Maicon, Nov 9th, 2016 6:53pm

    Nice site.


  27. Comment by Everton Santos, Nov 2nd, 2016 5:07pm

    This site surprised me.


  28. Comment by Isaque Sachez, Nov 2nd, 2016 2:34pm

    Very good site.


  29. Comment by Tiago, Oct 4th, 2016 5:41am

    thank you very good


  30. Comment by Joao, Oct 4th, 2016 5:39am

    very good


  31. Comment by Lari, Sep 13th, 2016 1:04pm

    The role of the game and play in the life of a young
    child will provide them many benefits.
    The body exercise is a very important part of
    keeping the young body fit as it turns into an adult
    body. Once we reach adulthood, if we had the
    benefit of exercise and play, all tend to
    Continue this habit in our adult lives.


  32. Comment by Koorsq48, Sep 13th, 2016 12:53pm

    Although interacting with ourselves seems to be
    a rather pointless exercise, is actually a
    important part of maintaining the best sense of the
    health and wellness. There will always be times
    When our bodies are trying to tell us things
    on our physical or mental condition, that we
    They will simply refuse to listen.


  33. Comment by Lizaq48, Sep 13th, 2016 12:43pm

    O que aprendemos na linguagem corporal, habilidades de enfrentamento, e
    a interação da mente e do corpo durante a nossa
    interação com outras pessoas é inestimável. Quando nós
    aprender esta habilidades ao máximo, não só a vontade
    aprendemos a conviver com os outros, mas nós iremos
    também aprenda a interagir melhor conosco mesmos.


  34. Comment by Faby Gon, Aug 23rd, 2016 1:35pm

    Very good written article. It will be supportive to anyone who utilizes it, including me.
    Keep doing what you are doing – can’r wait to read more posts.


  35. Comment by Roberto Milane, Aug 16th, 2016 1:38pm

    I was very pleased to find this site.Everything here is just top notch,The information is absolutely amazing.


  36. Comment by Pedro Paulo, Aug 16th, 2016 7:27am

    “greatest value may be more in terms of the patent landscape than a scientific advancement”. Interesting how reading can open our minds. I was reading the article under the scientific point of view only, till I saw this quote. ;-)


  37. Comment by Pedro Paulo, Aug 16th, 2016 7:24am

    “greatest value may be more in terms of the patent landscape than a scientific advancement”. Interesting how reading can open our minds. I was reading the article under the scientific point of view only, till I saw this quote. ;-)


  38. Comment by Lala q48, Jul 12th, 2016 9:32am

    Great information.
    Thank you.


  39. Comment by Doutor, May 20th, 2016 11:45am

    I read this post twice. I liked!


  40. Comment by Andre, Oct 10th, 2015 2:42pm

    Usefull.


 


ESPAÑOL | PORTUGUÊS | Русский

home | overview | blog | publications | about us | donate | newsletter | press room | privacy policy

CGS • 1120 University Ave, Suite 100, Berkeley, CA 94702 USA • • (p) 1.510.625.0819 • (F) 1.510.665.8760