Building biosecurity for synthetic biology

Benjamin D. Trump; S. E. Galaitsi; Evan Appleton; Diederik A. Bleijs; Marie Valentine Florin; Jimmy D. Gollihar; R. Alexander Hamilton; Todd Kuiken; Filippa Lentzos; Ruth Mampuys; Myriam Merad; Tatyana Novossiolova; Kenneth Oye; Edward Perkins; Natàlia Garcia-Reyero; Catherine Rhodes; Igor Linkov

doi:10.15252/msb.20209723

Building biosecurity for synthetic biology

Benjamin D. Trump, S. E. Galaitsi, Evan Appleton, Diederik A. Bleijs, Marie Valentine Florin, Jimmy D. Gollihar, R. Alexander Hamilton, Todd Kuiken, Filippa Lentzos, Ruth Mampuys, Myriam Merad, Tatyana Novossiolova, Kenneth Oye, Edward Perkins, Natàlia Garcia-Reyero, Catherine Rhodes, Igor Linkov

Research output: Contribution to journal › Comment/debate › peer-review

26 Scopus citations

Abstract

The fast-paced field of synthetic biology is fundamentally changing the global biosecurity framework. Current biosecurity regulations and strategies are based on previous governance paradigms for pathogen-oriented security, recombinant DNA research, and broader concerns related to genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Many scholarly discussions and biosecurity practitioners are therefore concerned that synthetic biology outpaces established biosafety and biosecurity measures to prevent deliberate and malicious or inadvertent and accidental misuse of synthetic biology's processes or products. This commentary proposes three strategies to improve biosecurity: Security must be treated as an investment in the future applicability of the technology; social scientists and policy makers should be engaged early in technology development and forecasting; and coordination among global stakeholders is necessary to ensure acceptable levels of risk.

Original language	English (US)
Article number	e9723
Pages (from-to)	e9723
Journal	Molecular Systems Biology
Volume	16
Issue number	7
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.15252/msb.20209723
State	Published - Jul 1 2020

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)
Immunology and Microbiology(all)
Agricultural and Biological Sciences(all)
Applied Mathematics

Access to Document

10.15252/msb.20209723

Cite this

Trump, B. D., Galaitsi, S. E., Appleton, E., Bleijs, D. A., Florin, M. V., Gollihar, J. D., Hamilton, R. A., Kuiken, T., Lentzos, F., Mampuys, R., Merad, M., Novossiolova, T., Oye, K., Perkins, E., Garcia-Reyero, N., Rhodes, C., & Linkov, I. (2020). Building biosecurity for synthetic biology. Molecular Systems Biology, 16(7), e9723. Article e9723. https://doi.org/10.15252/msb.20209723

@article{020a05b1ad024707877ed9bdcc962448,

title = "Building biosecurity for synthetic biology",

abstract = "The fast-paced field of synthetic biology is fundamentally changing the global biosecurity framework. Current biosecurity regulations and strategies are based on previous governance paradigms for pathogen-oriented security, recombinant DNA research, and broader concerns related to genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Many scholarly discussions and biosecurity practitioners are therefore concerned that synthetic biology outpaces established biosafety and biosecurity measures to prevent deliberate and malicious or inadvertent and accidental misuse of synthetic biology's processes or products. This commentary proposes three strategies to improve biosecurity: Security must be treated as an investment in the future applicability of the technology; social scientists and policy makers should be engaged early in technology development and forecasting; and coordination among global stakeholders is necessary to ensure acceptable levels of risk.",

author = "Trump, {Benjamin D.} and Galaitsi, {S. E.} and Evan Appleton and Bleijs, {Diederik A.} and Florin, {Marie Valentine} and Gollihar, {Jimmy D.} and Hamilton, {R. Alexander} and Todd Kuiken and Filippa Lentzos and Ruth Mampuys and Myriam Merad and Tatyana Novossiolova and Kenneth Oye and Edward Perkins and Nat{\`a}lia Garcia-Reyero and Catherine Rhodes and Igor Linkov",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2020 The Authors. Published under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 license",

year = "2020",

month = jul,

day = "1",

doi = "10.15252/msb.20209723",

language = "English (US)",

volume = "16",

pages = "e9723",

journal = "Molecular Systems Biology",

issn = "1744-4292",

publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",

number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Building biosecurity for synthetic biology

AU - Trump, Benjamin D.

AU - Galaitsi, S. E.

AU - Appleton, Evan

AU - Bleijs, Diederik A.

AU - Florin, Marie Valentine

AU - Gollihar, Jimmy D.

AU - Hamilton, R. Alexander

AU - Kuiken, Todd

AU - Lentzos, Filippa

AU - Mampuys, Ruth

AU - Merad, Myriam

AU - Novossiolova, Tatyana

AU - Oye, Kenneth

AU - Perkins, Edward

AU - Garcia-Reyero, Natàlia

AU - Rhodes, Catherine

AU - Linkov, Igor

PY - 2020/7/1

Y1 - 2020/7/1

N2 - The fast-paced field of synthetic biology is fundamentally changing the global biosecurity framework. Current biosecurity regulations and strategies are based on previous governance paradigms for pathogen-oriented security, recombinant DNA research, and broader concerns related to genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Many scholarly discussions and biosecurity practitioners are therefore concerned that synthetic biology outpaces established biosafety and biosecurity measures to prevent deliberate and malicious or inadvertent and accidental misuse of synthetic biology's processes or products. This commentary proposes three strategies to improve biosecurity: Security must be treated as an investment in the future applicability of the technology; social scientists and policy makers should be engaged early in technology development and forecasting; and coordination among global stakeholders is necessary to ensure acceptable levels of risk.

AB - The fast-paced field of synthetic biology is fundamentally changing the global biosecurity framework. Current biosecurity regulations and strategies are based on previous governance paradigms for pathogen-oriented security, recombinant DNA research, and broader concerns related to genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Many scholarly discussions and biosecurity practitioners are therefore concerned that synthetic biology outpaces established biosafety and biosecurity measures to prevent deliberate and malicious or inadvertent and accidental misuse of synthetic biology's processes or products. This commentary proposes three strategies to improve biosecurity: Security must be treated as an investment in the future applicability of the technology; social scientists and policy makers should be engaged early in technology development and forecasting; and coordination among global stakeholders is necessary to ensure acceptable levels of risk.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85088609297&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85088609297&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.15252/msb.20209723

DO - 10.15252/msb.20209723

M3 - Comment/debate

C2 - 32692486

AN - SCOPUS:85088609297

SN - 1744-4292

VL - 16

SP - e9723

JO - Molecular Systems Biology

JF - Molecular Systems Biology

IS - 7

M1 - e9723

ER -

Building biosecurity for synthetic biology

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this