Undisputed success of CRISPR gene-editing

Year: 2019

There has been a lot of excitement about the gene-editing tool CRISPR/Cas9. Many published articles extolled the fantastic success of this technology. The method involves cutting and pasting plant DNA to create new plants that for example are resistant to viruses or drought. The possibilities are endless!

However, the focus on success did not leave much room for discussions about possible failures. In 2019, a group of plant biologists tried to use CRIPSR to make cassava plants immune to the African cassava mosaic virus. Even though they managed to alter the cassava, they found that the virus quickly adapted. The authors concluded that gene-editing plants for higher virus resistance, might only have a short-term effect in the lab, and no real practical application.

Although this is not the result researchers hope to find, it is still essential for their colleagues to know. If you’re trying to reduce crop damage and solve world hunger with gene-editing, it is good to be aware in what situations it doesn’t work. Nevertheless: the authors of the cassava study were rejected by scientific journals because their results were not positive. While they eventually found a journal willing to publish, it exemplifies the positive publishing bias that plagues the scientific community.

When researchers and journals are focused on only positive findings, many important negative findings remain unpublished. The negative results are very important. Without them, how is the genetic editing method to be developed and refined?

Sources: article and this editorial in Nature editorial.