Synthetic biology and the conservation of biodiversity

Kent H. Redford March, 2016

First Seminar on Synthetic Biology to Regulatory Decision Takers from Latin

America

I was raised to think that Nature was something obvious and entrancing

Courtesy: P. Coppolillo

It was different from us – the natural world that wasn’t human.

We wanted to conserve it from destruction …

…. by people

Because humans were bad for nature

So to save nature remove humans

Nature would thrive without human interference

Management of nature meant no management

Then the way I understood the world changed dramatically…

Habitat Destruction Invasive Species Climate Change Economic Exploitation

Human Impact is Pervasive

COMMUNITY / ECOSYSTEM

POPULATION/SPECIES

GENES

Affecting all biodiversity Components

Human impact so pervasive that we are now in a new geological epoch

Yellowstone

Berger 2008

Two examples: Moose in Yellowstone NP use roads to avoid bear predation

2. Lyre Birds Sing the song of Chain saws

Biodiversity will need to be managed to be saved.

Human-dependent species – 82% of US Endangered species

http://clas.wayne.edu/dankashian/Disturbance-Ecology-of-Lake-States-Pine-Systems

http://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/birds/Kirtland/kiwafctsht.html

Kirtland’s Warbler

Active Management Work in Latin America 1. Reintroduction of injured giant anteaters:

Argentina 2. Increasing number of eggs w/ macaws:

Guatemala 3. Captive breeding of endangered frogs:

Panama 4. Raising turtle hatchlings: Peru

New York Aquarium Post- Hurricane Sandy Julie Larsen Mahar

Informed management decisions made more complicated by climate change

In lieu of the simple dichotomy with which I had been raised …

People bad! Nature good!

We found out we live in a hybrid world

Major Lesson: Saving nature requires management

Conservation Action – in the Past

Conservation Action in the Future

What will happen in this novel operating space?

Synthetic Biology

Biology is Technology Rob Carlson

http://www.synthesis.cc/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?blog_id=1&tag=Carlson%20Curves&limit=20

The Changes are/will be fast: Carlson Curves

The changes are/will be across societies: Democratization of Science

(e.g. publiclab.org)

https://www.google.com/fusiontables/embedviz?viz=MAP&q=select+col0+from+1BbV5lAgDKG58zQsSnPrFrgJtF6nbVs7RasPW8so&h=false&lat=45.73165899691809&lng=-87.456805025&z=4&t=1&l=col0&y=3&tmplt=3

LATIN AMERICA Buenos Aires AR http://www.diybioba.org Guanajuato MX https://www.facebook.com/groups/DIYbioMexico/ Sao Paulo BR http://www.syntechbio.com/ Sao Paulo BR https://garoa.net.br/wiki/Biohacking/ Sao Paulo BR http://synbiobrasil.org/

(Do It Yourself Biology)

2013: 214 Undergrad Teams

The Changes are/will Be driven by the younger generation

Genome Editing – CRISPR Technologies

a novel technique of gene editing (silencing, enhancing or changing specific genes)

SPECIES TRAIT TARGETED w/ SYNBIO TECHNOLOGIES Pigs swine flu; fattened w/ less food; miniaturized (pets) suitable for xenotransplants*; resist flu* Chickens produce only females* Dogs more muscles Goats more meat; longer hair Cattle expression of horns; only males*; resist sleeping sickness* Mice sickle-cell anemia; muscular dystrophy; cystic fibrosis; cataracts; receptors that H.I.V. uses to access human cells Mosquitos malaria transmission Diamondback Moths only females Wheat powdery mildew Rice more starch & less methane *In progress

(Harmon 2015 NYT; Specter 2015 New Yorker)

Things are happening across a broad – and rapidly changing front:

Very little consideration in synthetic biology of the issues of importance to conservation or of the impact on the natural world

How will synthetic biology and conservationshape the future of nature?

Save the DateApril 9-11, 2013

April 2013 Clare College Cambridge Univ. U.K.

Three meetings in last 2 years

April 2015 Cavello Pt., California

December 2015 Bellagio, Italy

Potential Conservation Applications of SynBio

Revive and restore extinct species

H. T

hom

pson

. 201

2. N

atur

e 49

0: 2

2

http://delmardustpan.blogspot.com/2010/09/so-goes-passenger-pigeon-so-go-we.html Rare.longnow.org

Restore lost genetic diversity

Tackle persistent threats Fungal Diseases

• Amphibians • Rice/wheat • Juniper • Corals • Bees • Sea turtles • Rattlesnakes

Fisher et al. 2012

Coral resistance to ocean warming - Manipulating genes to enable adaptation

(courtesy: S. Palumbi)

http://phys.org/news/2014-01-palau-coral-reefs-surprisingly-resistant.html

Enhance capacity to restore degraded ecosystems

Land degradation costs an estimated US$40 billion annually worldwide, without taking into account hidden costs of increased fertilizer use, loss of biodiversity and loss of unique landscapes (http://www.fao.org/nr/land/degradation/en/)

Address problems arising from detrimental patterns of human production and consumption

U.S. manufacturers had legally released about 271 million pounds of pharmaceuticals into waterways as of 2009.

http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2011/10/05/pharm

aceuticals-in-the-water-supply-is-this-a-threat/

Control invasive species

Rats/mice on islands

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/technology/2012/01/burmese-pythons-invading-the-everglades/

Burmese pythons in the Everglades

http://d.ibtimes.co.uk/en/full/320761/invasive-species-rats-galapagos-islands-photo-galapagos-national-park.jpg

Significant Concerns

Synthetic life will evolve

http://www.economist.com/images/20060902/D3506SB1.jpg

CRISPR-Cas-9 modified animals vs

Animals altered with other Genetically modified technologies

Altering of native genome with itself vs

Altering native genome with genome of other species

Nature’s services will be synthesized.

http://io9.com/in-fifty-years-carbon-fiber-will-be-spun-from-the-trun-1603040049

Private synthetic life meets the public good

BCC 2013

Impact of synbio technologies on rural livelihoods contested

So what might this mean for conservation?

We should envision a new field: “Synthetic biology conservation stewardship” that might engage in:

http

://w

ww

.opb

.org

/art

sand

life/

arti

cle/

mys

teri

ous-

kille

r-w

hite

-nos

e-sy

ndro

me-

thre

aten

s-ba

ts/

White-nosed syndrome and U.S. colonial roosting bats

http

://w

hite

nose

synd

rom

e.or

g/re

sour

ces/

map

Treatment of frogs with “probiotics”

Bletz et al. 2013

Coral resistance to ocean warming - Moving genes to enable adaptation

(courtesy: S. Palumbi)

http://phys.org/news/2014-01-palau-coral-reefs-surprisingly-resistant.html

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28454-gene-editing-saves-life-of-girl-dying-from-leukaemia-in-world-first/

Synthetic biology is inevitable:

A tabletop lab for the consumer market Modify bacterial cells to create medicinal chemicals,

scents and foodstuffs $799 – to decrease soon

IRRI working to transform rice from inefficient C3 photosynthesis to C4 photosynthesis (as in corn, sugarcane, and sorghum). That switch has been made in plants 60 independent times by evolution. Three billion people depend on rice for survival. A change from C3 to C4 would: 1) generate a 50% greater yield, 2) use half the water, 3) need far less fertilizer, 4) greater resilience to climate change?

Big changes coming in Agriculture too

If this happened, how many other things would change?

To respond to such major changes conservation needs to engage with the Synthetic Biology community across the full range of things they are doing that influence the natural world

What will conservation want in a world of synthetic biology?

• Persistence of evolution – autonomous in some form

• More, better managed, “wild” areas and species • An elevated sense of the long-term and of

precaution in interventions and risk management

• A sense of humility in management • Our diverse perspectives consulted and

incorporated • As much of “nature” saved as possible

Frame message with Counterfactuals The difference between what we can observe and what we would have observed had we done conservation differently.

P. Ferraro 2015 Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci.

Counterfactuals The difference between what we can observe and what we would have observed had we done conservation differently.

P. Ferraro 2015 Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci.

Counterfactual Thinking with Synbio and Conservation

The state of the natural world if we proceeded with ‘business as usual’ compared to The state of the natural world if we used synbio approaches

In the new poll, 71 percent of Americans said that they're excited about the possibility that DNA research could bring major scientific and medical breakthroughs. But 44 percent said they worry that DNA research involves unforeseen dangers. Thirty-three percent of Americans said they were both excited and worried.

Poll Shows We Want Those DNA Breakthroughs But Worry Scientists May

Be 'Playing God

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/02/dna-science-poll-scientists-playing-god_n_4697595.html

Engaging the Public Early and Often …

The advantage of leading with conservation applications: Members of the public show enthusiasm for synthetic biology applications when those applications are developed to address societal, medical, and sustainability needs, whereas engineering biology is seen as a potential concern if this research is done without investigations of its potential risks and long-term implications. Members of the public also support funding for research that leads to applications that actually meet social and sustainability goals. Pauwels (2013) BioScience

Thank you

http://farmwars.info/?p=6726http://naturallysavvy.com/eat/genetically-modified-salmon-approved-by-the-fda

February 16, 2016

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/17/world/americas/conspiracy-theories-about-zika-spread-along-with-the-virus.html

February 16, 2016

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/11/19/fda-approves-first-genetically-engineered-animal-salmon/76042682/

Public framing of synbio: Two works of fiction ….

Technologists say that the future is already here, it is just unevenly distributed*

* Nature editorial Nature 530: 25 February 2016.

www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1422301112

Printing Reefs

Some Neandertal gene variants today can raise the risk of depression, skin lesions, blood clots and other disorders

The phenotypic legacy of admixture between modern humans and Neandertals Simonti, CN et al. 2015 Science 351, 6274, 737-741

Machine-Invertebrate hybrids

( Hybrid Insect Micro-Electro-Mechanical System

http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21602661-crowd-funded-project-aims-build-worlds-first-simulated-organism-computer

Building the world’s first simulated organism -- an accurate, open-source, digital clone of the roundworm Caenorhabditis elegans

Humans and nature have become co-mingled

Making it hard to know what conservation is about

Unfortunately, current conservation debates are important but limited by being:

circumscribed by the past not informed by the novelty of the emerging future not alert to the perils and possibilities of this future not fit for purpose – our responsibility to the natural world.

Some exciting possibilities are starting to be made public

http://www.foe.org/projects/food-and-technology/synthetic-biology

KnipBio – a new synbio company

Converting methane from natural gas to animal feedstocks – specifically feed for fish aquaculture

https://gust.com/companies/knipbio

Simplifying complex signaling systems in plants allowed the production of the first synthetic signal transduction system, linking the presence of external substances [such as trinitrotoluene (TNT)] to internal responses with only two or three genes; when coupled with computational protein redesign, the result was “computerized”

detection technology in plants. Medford and Prasad. 2014. Science

Sentinel Plants