CRISPR-Cas immunity: beyond nonself and defence

Biology and Philosophy 34 (1):6 (2019)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this commentary of Koonin’s target paper, we defend an extended view of CRISPR-Cas immunity by arguing that CRISPR-Cas includes, but cannot be reduced to, defence against nonself. CRISPR-Cas systems can target endogenous elements and tolerate exogenous elements. We conclude that the vocabulary of “defence” and “nonself” might be misleading when describing CRISPR-Cas systems.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,100

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

“Editing”: A Productive Metaphor for Regulating CRISPR.Ben Merriman - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):62-64.
CRISPR Critters and CRISPR Cracks.R. Alta Charo & Henry T. Greely - 2015 - American Journal of Bioethics 15 (12):11-17.
Is CRISPR an Ethical Game Changer?Marcus Schultz-Bergin - 2018 - Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 31 (2):219-238.
CRISPR Becomes Clearer.Andrew W. Torrance - 2017 - Hastings Center Report 47 (5):5-6.
The Mechanism and Applications of CRISPR-Cas9.Paul Scherz - 2017 - The National Catholic Bioethics Quarterly 17 (1):29-36.

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-01-04

Downloads
54 (#296,486)

6 months
22 (#123,258)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Thomas Pradeu
CNRS & University Of Bordeaux

Citations of this work

Not by structures alone: Can the immune system recognize microbial functions?Gregor P. Greslehner - 2020 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 84 (C):101336.

Add more citations