Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

CRISPR01:59

CRISPR

57.3K
Genome editing technologies allow scientists to modify an organism’s DNA via the addition, removal, or rearrangement of genetic material at specific genomic locations. These types of techniques could potentially be used to cure genetic disorders such as hemophilia and sickle cell anemia. One popular and widely used DNA-editing research tool that could lead to safe and effective cures for genetic disorders is the CRISPR-Cas9 system. CRISPR-Cas9 stands for Clustered Regularly Interspaced...
57.3K
CRISPR/Cas9 Genome Editing01:28

CRISPR/Cas9 Genome Editing

1.5K
The CRISPR-Cas system serves as a bacterial defense mechanism against invading genetic elements such as viruses and plasmids, forming the foundation for its adaptation as a powerful genome-editing tool. Originally discovered in prokaryotes, this system has been repurposed to revolutionize genetic engineering across a wide range of organisms, including plants, animals, and humans. The core component, Cas9, is an endonuclease derived from Streptococcus pyogenes, capable of introducing...
1.5K
CRISPR and crRNAs02:53

CRISPR and crRNAs

18.6K
Bacteria and archaea are susceptible to viral infections just like eukaryotes; therefore, they have developed a unique adaptive immune system to protect themselves. Clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats and CRISPR-associated proteins (CRISPR-Cas) are present in more than 45% of known bacteria and 90% of known archaea.
The CRISPR-Cas system stores a copy of foreign DNA in the host genome and uses it to identify the foreign DNA upon reinfection. CRISPR-Cas has three different...
18.6K
Homologous Recombination02:31

Homologous Recombination

62.0K
The basic reaction of homologous recombination (HR) involves two chromatids that contain DNA sequences sharing a significant stretch of identity. One of these sequences uses a strand from another as a template to synthesize DNA in an enzyme-catalyzed reaction. The final product is a novel amalgamation of the two substrates. To ensure an accurate recombination of sequences, HR is restricted to the S and G2 phases of the cell cycle. At these stages, the DNA has been replicated already and the...
62.0K
What is Genetic Engineering?00:49

What is Genetic Engineering?

79.4K
Overview
79.4K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

From small beginnings: to build an anti-eugenic future.

Lancet (London, England)·2022
Same author

Response to Levrier re: Human Germline and Heritable Genome Editing: The Global Policy Landscape.

The CRISPR journal·2021
Same author

Human Germ Line and Heritable Genome Editing: The Global Policy Landscape.

The CRISPR journal·2020
Same author

Geneva Statement on Heritable Human Genome Editing: The Need for Course Correction.

Trends in biotechnology·2020
Same author

Did a permissive scientific culture encourage the 'CRISPR babies' experiment?

Nature biotechnology·2019
Same author

Corrigendum to "What's in a name? Variations in terminology of third-party reproduction" [Reproductive BioMedicine Online 31 (2015) 805-814].

Reproductive biomedicine online·2016

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Dec 28, 2025

Genome Editing in Mammalian Cell Lines using CRISPR-Cas
07:56

Genome Editing in Mammalian Cell Lines using CRISPR-Cas

Published on: April 11, 2019

23.0K

CRISPR's Twisted Tales: Clarifying Misconceptions about Heritable Genome Editing.

Marcy Darnovsky, Katie Hasson

    Perspectives in Biology and Medicine
    |February 18, 2020
    PubMed
    Summary

    The debate on heritable genome editing is flawed by misunderstandings and requires a shift towards societal values. A new framework is needed for inclusive decision-making on its future role.

    More Related Videos

    Enhanced Genome Editing with Cas9 Ribonucleoprotein in Diverse Cells and Organisms
    09:51

    Enhanced Genome Editing with Cas9 Ribonucleoprotein in Diverse Cells and Organisms

    Published on: May 25, 2018

    35.3K
    Genome-Wide CRISPR Screen for Unveiling Radiosensitive and Radioresistant Genes
    08:32

    Genome-Wide CRISPR Screen for Unveiling Radiosensitive and Radioresistant Genes

    Published on: May 23, 2025

    979

    Related Experiment Videos

    Last Updated: Dec 28, 2025

    Genome Editing in Mammalian Cell Lines using CRISPR-Cas
    07:56

    Genome Editing in Mammalian Cell Lines using CRISPR-Cas

    Published on: April 11, 2019

    23.0K
    Enhanced Genome Editing with Cas9 Ribonucleoprotein in Diverse Cells and Organisms
    09:51

    Enhanced Genome Editing with Cas9 Ribonucleoprotein in Diverse Cells and Organisms

    Published on: May 25, 2018

    35.3K
    Genome-Wide CRISPR Screen for Unveiling Radiosensitive and Radioresistant Genes
    08:32

    Genome-Wide CRISPR Screen for Unveiling Radiosensitive and Radioresistant Genes

    Published on: May 23, 2025

    979

    Area of Science:

    • Bioethics
    • Genetics
    • Societal Implications of Science

    Background:

    • The discourse surrounding heritable genome editing is marked by significant shortcomings and distortions.
    • Reactions to the 2018 gene-edited babies announcement revealed underlying disagreements despite apparent consensus on ethical violations.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To identify and correct misunderstandings in the heritable genome editing debate.
    • To propose a refocused approach for societal decision-making on heritable genome editing.

    Main Methods:

    • Analysis of prevailing narratives and reactions to key events in heritable genome editing.
    • Critical evaluation of omissions and misrepresentations in public discourse.
    • Development of criteria for an inclusive decision-making process.

    Main Results:

    • Widespread condemnation of the 2018 gene-edited babies incident masked deeper divisions within the heritable genome editing debate.
    • Current public understanding is distorted by key omissions and misrepresentations.
    • A shift from technical to societal considerations is necessary for genuine debate.

    Conclusions:

    • The heritable genome editing conversation needs to move beyond scientific and medical aspects to encompass societal values, context, and consequences.
    • Criteria for an inclusive and just decision-making process are essential for determining the future of heritable genome editing.