Piers Millett 1 , Thomas Binz 2 , Sam Weiss Evans 3 , Todd Kuiken 4 , Ken Oye 5 , Megan J Palmer 6 , Cécile van der Vlugt 7 , Kathrina Yambao 8 , Samuel Yu 9 . Show Affiliations »
Abstract
Introduction: The international synthetic biology competition iGEM (formally known as the international Genetically Engineered Machines competition) has a dedicated biosafety and biosecurity program. Method: A review of specific elements of the program and a series of concrete examples illustrate how experiences in implementing the program have helped improved policy, including an increasing diversity of sources for genetic parts and organisms, keeping pace with technical developments, considering pathways toward future environmental release, addressing antimicrobial resistance, and testing the efficacy of current biosecurity arrangements. Results: iGEM's program is forward-leaning, in that it addresses both traditional (pathogen-based) and emerging risks both in terms of new technologies and new risks. It is integrated into the technical work of the competition-with clearly described roles and responsibilities for all members of the community. It operates throughout the life cycle of projects-from project design to future application. It makes use of specific tools to gather and review biosafety and biosecurity information, making it easier for those planning and conducting science and engineering to recognize potential risks and match them with appropriate risk management approaches, as well as for specialists to review this information to identify gaps and strengthen plans. Discussion: Integrating an increasingly adaptive risk management approach has allowed iGEM's biosafety and biosecurity program to become comprehensive, be cross-cutting, and cover the competition's life cycle. © ABSA International 2019.
Introduction: The international synthetic biology competition iGEM (formally known as the international Genetically Engineered Machines competition) has a dedicated biosafety and biosecurity program. Method: A review of specific elements of the program and a series of concrete examples illustrate how experiences in implementing the program have helped improved policy, including an increasing diversity of sources for genetic parts and organisms, keeping pace with technical developments, considering pathways toward future environmental release, addressing antimicrobial resistance, and testing the efficacy of current biosecurity arrangements. Results: iGEM's program is forward-leaning, in that it addresses both traditional (pathogen-based) and emerging risks both in terms of new technologies and new risks. It is integrated into the technical work of the competition-with clearly described roles and responsibilities for all members of the community. It operates throughout the life cycle of projects-from project design to future application. It makes use of specific tools to gather and review biosafety and biosecurity information, making it easier for those planning and conducting science and engineering to recognize potential risks and match them with appropriate risk management approaches, as well as for specialists to review this information to identify gaps and strengthen plans. Discussion: Integrating an increasingly adaptive risk management approach has allowed iGEM's biosafety and biosecurity program to become comprehensive, be cross-cutting, and cover the competition's life cycle. © ABSA International 2019.
Entities: Chemical
Keywords:
adaptive biosafety; biological engineering; biotechnology; genetic engineering; iGEM; synthetic biology
Year: 2019
PMID: 36033940 PMCID: PMC9387731 DOI: 10.1177/1535676019838075
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Appl Biosaf ISSN: 1535-6760