Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Towards responsible communication of agricultural biotechnology research for the common good

Lack of critical assessment and responsible reporting of proof-of-concept agricultural biotechnologies such as CRISPR–Cas can delay innovation, jeopardize public trust and waste resources, especially in the Global South. In this commentary, we propose solutions to facilitate a more responsible innovation pipeline and to realize the potential of biotechnology in agriculture.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

$32.00

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. Zhang, D., Li, Z. & Li, J.-F. Genome editing: new antiviral weapon for plants. Nat. Plants 1, 15146 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Mehta, D. et al. Linking CRISPR–Cas9 interference in cassava to the evolution of editing-resistant geminiviruses. Genome Biol. 20, 80 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Offord, C. Base editors cause off-target mutations in RNA. The Scientist (2019).

  4. Garcia-Molina, A. & Leister, D. Accelerated relaxation of photoprotection impairs biomass accumulation in Arabidopsis. Nat. Plants 6, 9–12 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Uslu, V. V., Bassler, A., Krczal, G. & Wassenegger, M. High-pressure-sprayed double stranded RNA does not induce RNA interference of a reporter gene. Front. Plant Sci. 11, 1–9 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Zaidi, S. S.-E.-A. et al. New plant breeding technologies for food security. Science 363, 1390–1391 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Fuglie, K., Gautam, M., Goyal, A. & Maloney, W. F. Harvesting prosperity: technology and productivity growth in agriculture. (World Bank, 2020).

  8. United Nations Education, Scientific & Cultural Organization. UNESCO Science Report: 2015: Towards 2030. 816 (2015).

  9. Eisen, M. B. et al. Implementing a “publish, then review” model of publishing. eLife 9, e64910 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Mehta, D. Highlight negative results to improve science. Nature https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-02960-3 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

D.M. and H.V would like to thank their collaborators in the Global South for fruitful discussions and debates. H.V. also acknowledges support from FNRS (grants F.4515.17 and J.0187.21) and LEAP-Agri (grant 288).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Devang Mehta or Hervé Vanderschuren.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mehta, D., Vanderschuren, H. Towards responsible communication of agricultural biotechnology research for the common good. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 22, 301–302 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41580-021-00343-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41580-021-00343-z

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing