Gene Drive

I am working towards organizing publications about gene drive topics here---this is not a complete listing. There is a lot of overlap with the topics of Sterile Insect Technique to suppress population numbers.

Misconceptions

Gene drive, to genetically engineer a population, and population suppression techniques, such as sterile insect technique, are often confused in the general media as being equivalent to each other. There is overlap in the methods and technologies used to achieve each, and they are not mutually exclusive, but they are two different approaches.

The recent focus on CRISPR/Cas9 has also caused a misconception of the equivalency between gene drive and CRISPR/Cas9. There are many more forms of gene drive than simply using a CRISPR/Cas9 mechanism and CRISPR/Cas9 drive is very similar to homing endonuclease drive.

There is also a misconception that this is a very new technology that only appeared in the last few years. However, work on gene drive goes back several decades to at least Curtis 1968 and is even proposed by Sandler and Novitski 1957. Many people are also surprised to learn that releases of mosquitoes, with modified chromosomes capable of both gene drive and population suppression, were carried out in field experiments in France in the 1970s (Laven et al. 1972).

Reviews

• Gould et al. 2006
• Sinkins and Gould 2006
• Gould 2008
• Burt 2014
• Champer et al. 2016
• Lindholm et al. 2016

Drive Systems

Underdominance

• Robinson 1976

Underdominance as an Effector Drive Mechanism

• Curtis 1968
• Foster et al. 1972
• Robinson and Curtis 1973
• Robinson 1975
• Altrock et al. 2010
• Altrock et al. 2011
• Reeves et al. 2014

Underdominance as a Population Suppression Mechanism

• Serebrovskii 1940
• Vanderplank 1944
• Laven et al. 1971
• Laven et al. 1972

Medea Systems

• Chen et al. 2007
• Akbari et al. 2014
• Buchman et al. 2017

Inverse Medea

• Marshall and Hay 2011
• Akbari et al. 2013

Naturally Occurring Medea

• Beeman et al. 1992

CRISPR/Cas9 Mechanism

Review

• Esvelt et al. 2014

Drive

• Gantz and Bier 2015
• DiCarlo et al. 2015
• Gantz et al. 2015
• Hammond et al. 2016

Population Suppression

• Kyrou et al. 2018

Transposable Element Mechanism

• Carareto et al. 1997

Homing Endonuclease

Gene Drive

• Windbichler et al. 2011

Population Suppression

• Galizi et al. 2014

Naturally Occurring

• Gogarten and Hilario 2006

Meiotic Drive

• Sandler and Novitski 1957 suggest using meiotic drive to transform wild populations.

Naturally Ocurring

• Sandler and Novitski 1957
• https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2871811/
• http://www.genetics.org/content/190/2/709

Wolbachia

Population Suppression

• Laven 1967

Effector Drive

• Hoffmann et al. 2014

News & Commentary

• Clarke 2002
• https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2018/5/31/17344406/crispr-mosquito-malaria-gene-drive-editing-target-africa-regulation-gmo

Public Interactions

• Knols et al. 2007
• Pauwels 2013
• https://genedrivenetwork.org/

Recommendations

• Reed 2017
• Emerson et al. 2017

See Also

Candidate Effector Genes

• Ito et al. 2002
• Moreira et al. 2002
• Yoshida et al. 2007

Notes

Shortening lifespan has a dramatic non-liner effect on reducing mosquito vectorial capacity (because mosquitoes have to live long enough to become infected from one bite and then later infect with another bite, McMeniman et al. 2009). There is a trade-off between fat metabolism, reproductive rate, and life-span in a range of organisms (e.g., Hansen et al. 2013). Effector genes that modulate lipid metabolism may result in reduced transmission of a wide range of mosquito vectored diseases.

Transgenesis Tools

• Meredith et al. 2013
• Eggleston 1991

Notes

http://journals.plos.org/plosgenetics/article?id=10.1371/journal.pgen.1007039

https://fnih.org/what-we-do/current-lectures-awards-and-events/gene-drive-research-forum