Military research raises concerns about bioterror attack by insects

However, the project can be "widely seen as an effort to develop biological agents for hostile purposes and their vectors, which, if true, would constitute a violation of the Biological Weapons Convention" , writes Guy Reeves, a geneticist at the Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Biology, and his co-authors in an editorial published Thursday in the journal Science.

Generally, when creating genetically modified foods, agronomists introduce DNA modifications into the chromosomes of plant seeds in a laboratory. The modified genes are then revealed as new traits in the cultivated plant. This is what is called vertical gene transfer because new traits can then be inherited from one generation to the next.

In contrast, the DARPA project uses "horizontal environmental genetic alteration agents", in which common pests are the agents of genetic modification. Insects generate genetically modified viruses that can alter the chromosomes of mature plants to make them more resistant to disease and drought.

Seen through the eyes of Reeves and his co-authors, the biological, economic and societal implications of the dispersion of horizontal genetic alteration agents in ecosystems are "deep", particularly in light of the system. insect rescue.

"It will not always be possible to identify with certainty which plants or fields have been infected by the genetically modified virus (due to the inevitable uncertainty about insect movements and susceptibility of cultures to infection viral), "they wrote. In addition, "easy simplifications" of biotechnology could be used to generate "a new class of biological weapons", a weapon "extremely transmissible to sensitive species" – in other words, an attack aimed at annihilate cultures, for example.

"We are of the opinion that the knowledge to be derived from this program seems very limited in its ability to improve American agriculture or respond to national emergencies," the authors wrote. And so they call for more transparency from DARPA in addition to more opportunities for public discussion of this new strategy.

& # 39; Double use & # 39;

Jared B. Adams, head of communications at DARPA, said that the defense agency – which does not conduct research itself but provides funding – does not subscribe to some of the claims of the DARPA. editorial.

Concerns about possible dual use led DARPA to structure the Insect Allies program as "a transparent, basic research effort by a university that has the active participation of regulators and ethicists," in an e-mail. "We have also implemented a lot of layered backups to maintain biosecurity and ensure that the systems we are developing are working just as expected." Guarantees include completion of all program work in biosecured and contained facilities.

"Spray treatments are not practical for introducing large-scale and potentially unworkable genetic modifications," wrote Bextine. "Meanwhile, traditional selective breeding methods to introduce protective traits into plants require years of propagation, which is far from the speed required to prevent a rapid threat from turning into a crisis."

Adams noted that if, by chance, Insect Allies technology is successful, "it will be entities other than DARPA that will determine if and how the technology is used."

"If our Insect Allied Research Institutes succeed and implement their work in the future, they will have to go through the standard regulatory process for approval," he said.

Meanwhile, Reeves and his co-authors remain concerned.

Even if the DARPA funding for this project was withdrawn, it would not close the "Pandora's box" that this new technology represents, they wrote.