Preliminary policy recommendations regarding the ethical use of CRISPR for human germline editing do not sufficiently consider the concerns of marginalized groups. Lauren's research project "CRISPR, Gatekeeping, and Genetic Determinism: Foregrounding Disabled and Marginalized Voices in Gene Editing Policies" draws on interdisciplinary sources from biology, philosophy, and disability studies to create new recommendations for using CRISPR in human reproduction that account for disabled and marginalized communities who will be disproportionately affected. These policy recommendations will address two areas of concern within the CRISPR technology literature: (1) problematic reliance on deterministic reasoning in genetics; and, (2) subtle gatekeeping ensured by current policy through “morbidity” stipulations.  

The future of xenotransplantation is promising. However, the scientific process behind xenotransplantation, shown through the methodology of history and bioethics, involves stakeholders beyond the laboratory. We present three short vignettes, the history of a 20 th -century pioneer in solid organ transplantation, the xenoheart received by David Bennett, and a global system of illegal organ procurement, to highlight the complexity of biomedical practice. Current solid organ transplantation systems are seemingly unsustainable and ineffective to satisfy a growing global demand for organs. Despite the shortcomings of current systems, we argue that the discourse surrounding xenotransplantation science is insufficient to construct a long-lasting and equitable replacement for solid organ transplantation. Xenotransplantation is more than a surgical technique, an interdisciplinary health concern, or a biomedical technology—it is deeply dependent on a series of cultural, historical, and social factors. Incorporating a greater variety of perspectives and disciplines into ongoing discussions of xenotransplantation science, while potentially frustrating in the short term, will act to maximize its potential as a paradigm-shifting science.

Root formation is a complex developmental process that involves cell elongation, differentiation, lateral root initiation, and responses to environmental factors - all processes dependent on gene products and the proper timing and location of their expression. Previous studies suggest the Arabidopsis thaliana PIRL9 gene could be involved in root development. If PIRL9 is involved in root development, PIRL9 should be expressed in root tissue, and pirl9 mutants should display abnormal phenotypes. To explore PIRL9 gene expression in primary and lateral roots, a reporter gene construct was made by attaching DNA encoding the GUS enzyme to the pirl9 promoter and inserted this construct into the A. thaliana genome.  A. thaliana lines containing this construct were used to examine PIRL9 gene expression in various tissues. In addition, PIRL9 expression was examined along the primary and lateral roots at different developmental stages. In order to elucidate PIRL9 function, primary root length and lateral root number and frequency in pirl9 knockout mutant plants were compared to wild-type controls, as well as in plants defective in a closely related gene, PIRL3. Findings confirm that PIRL9 is expressed in a variety of different developmental contexts, including early embryos at the start of primary root formation, and primary and lateral root tissue. PIRL9 was especially present in primary roots near the formation of lateral roots and lateral root buds. Pirl9 knockout studies revealed the diversity of morphology that A. thaliana primary and lateral roots exhibit under a variety of different environmental conditions.    

Environmental adaptation and species divergence often involve suites of co-evolving traits. Pigmentation in insects presents a variable, adaptive, and well-characterized class of phenotypes for which correlations with multiple other traits have been demonstrated. In Drosophila, the pigmentation genes ebony and tan have pleiotropic effects on flies' response to light, creating the potential for correlated evolution of pigmentation and vision. Here, we investigate differences in light preference within and between two sister species, Drosophila americana and D. novamexicana, which differ in pigmentation in part because of evolution at ebony and tan and occupy environments that differ in many variables including solar radiation. We hypothesized that lighter pigmentation would be correlated with a greater preference for environmental light and tested this hypothesis using a habitat choice experiment. In a first set of experiments, using males of D. novamexicana line N14 and D. americana line A00, the light-bodied D. novamexicana was found slightly but significantly more often than D. americana in the light habitat. A second experiment, which included additional lines and females as well as males, failed to find any significant difference between D. novamexicana-N14 and D. americana-A00. Additionally, the other dark line of D. americana (A04) was found in the light habitat more often than the light-bodied D. novamexicana-N14, in contrast to our predictions. However, the lightest line of D. americana, A01, was found substantially and significantly more often in the light habitat than the two darker lines of D. americana, thus providing partial support for our hypothesis. Finally, across all four lines, females were found more often in the light habitat than their more darkly pigmented male counterparts. Additional replication is needed to corroborate these findings and evaluate conflicting results, with the consistent effect of sex within and between species providing an especially intriguing avenue for further research. 

Cooley, A.M., S. Schmitz, *E. J. Cabrera, *M. Cutter, *M. Sheffield, *I. Gingerich, *G. Thomas, *C. N. M. Lincoln , *V. H. Moore, *A. E. Moore, *S. A. Davidson , *N. Lonberg, *E. B. Fournier, *S. Love, *G. Posch, *M. B. Bihrle, *S. D. Mayer, *K. Om, *L. Wilson, *C. Q. Doe, *C. E. Vincent , *E. R. T. Wong, *I. Wall, *J. Wicks, *S. Roberts (2021). Melanic pigmentation and light preference within and between two Drosophila species. Ecology & Evolution 12 August 2021. doi.org/10.1002/ece3.7998.