Daisy-chain gene drives for the alteration of local populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract RNA-guided gene drive elements could address many ecological problems by altering the traits of wild organisms, but the likelihood of global spread tremendously complicates ethical development and use. Here we detail a localized form of CRISPR-based gene drive composed of genetic elements arranged in a daisy-chain such that each element drives the next. “Daisy drive” systems can duplicate any effect achievable using an equivalent global drive system, but their capacity to spread is limited by the successive loss of non-driving elements from the base of the chain. Releasing daisy drive organisms constituting a small fraction of the local wild population can drive a useful genetic element to local fixation for a wide range of fitness parameters without resulting in global spread. We additionally report numerous highly active guide RNA sequences sharing minimal homology that may enable evolutionary stable daisy drive as well as global CRISPR-based gene drive. Daisy drives could simplify decision-making and promote ethical use by enabling local communities to decide whether, when, and how to alter local ecosystems. Author’s Summary ‘Global’ gene drive systems based on CRISPR are likely to spread to every population of the target species, hampering safe and ethical use. ‘Daisy drive’ systems offer a way to alter the traits of only local populations in a temporary manner. Because they can exactly duplicate the activity of any global CRISPR-based drive at a local level, daisy drives may enable safe field trials and empower local communities to make decisions concerning their own shared environments. For more details and an animation intended for a general audience, see the summary at Sculpting Evolution .
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.004 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".