Genome editing: references

• Abudayyeh et al. C2c2 is a single-component programmable RNA-guided RNA-targeting CRISPR effector. Science (2016), 353 (6299): aaf5573
• Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (ACRE) (2013). New techniques used in plant breeding.
• Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) (2017a) . Proposed rule published January 19, 2017 Federal Register (82 FR 7008-7039, Docket No. APHIS-2015-0057) and withdrawn as of November 7, 2017.
• Australian Academy of Science (2017). Discussion paper: Synthetic gene drives in Australia: implications of emerging technologies.
• Bibikova et al. Targeted chromosomal cleavage and mutagenesis in Drosophila using zinc-finger nucleases. Genetics (2002), 161(3), 1169-1175.
• Bortesi et al. Patterns of CRISPR/Cas9 activity in plants, animals and microbes. Plant Biotechnology Journal (2016), 14, 2203-2216.
• Breyer et al. Commentary: Genetic modification through oligonucleotide-mediated mutagenesis. A GMO regulatory challenge? Envion.Biosafety Res. 8 (2009), 57-64
• Bundesamt für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit (BVL) (2017).
• Carroll et al. Regulate genome-edited products, not genome editing itself. Nature Biotechnology (2016), 34, 477-479
• Commissie Genetische Modificatie (COGEM) (2017) CRISPR-Cas en gerichte mutagenese bij planten. CGM/170308-01.
• Dominguez et al. Beyond editing: repurposing CRISPR-Cas9 for precision genome regulation and interrogation.
• Nature Reviews Molecular cell Biology (2016),17, 5-15
• Eckerstorfer et al. (2014). New Plant Breeding Techniques and Risks Associated with their Application. Wien, 2014. Reports, Band 0477. ISBN: 978-3-99004-282-3. 94 p.
• Esvelt et al. Concerning RNA-guided gene drives for the alteration of wild population. eLife (2014); 3:e03401.
• European Academies Science Advisory Council (EASAC) (2015). EASAC Statement on New Breeding Techniques.
• European Plant Science Organisation (EPSO) 2015. Crop Genetic Improvement technologies
• Gantz and Bier. The mutagenic chain reaction: A method for converting heterozygous to homozygous mutations. Science (2015), 348 (6233), 442-444
• Haut Conseil des Biotechnologies (HCB) (2017). Publication de l’avis sur les moustiques GM.
• Haut Conseil des Biotechnologies (HCB) (2017). Scientific Opinion on new Plant Breeding techniques.
• House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (2015). Advanced genetic techniques for crop improvement: regulation, risk and perception. HC328. 
• Ji et al. Efficient creation of an APOE knockout rabbit. Transgenic Research (2015), 24(2), 227-235.
• Kim et al. Genome-wide analysis reveals specificities of Cpf1 endonucleases in human cells. Nature Biotechnology (2016), 34, 863-868.
• Kleinstiver et al. Genome-wide specificities of CRISPR-Cas Cpf1 nucleases in human cells. Nature Biotechnology (2016), 34, 869-874.
• Ladics et al. Genetic basis and detection of unintended effects in genetically modified crop plants. Transgenic research (2015), 24(4), 587-603
• Li et al. Reassessment of the Four Yield-related Genes Gn1a, DEP1, GS3, and IPA1 in Rice Using a CRISPR/Cas9 System. Front Plant Sci. (2016), 7:377
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016) Gene Drives on the Horizon.
• Nationale Akademie der Wissenschaften Leopoldina, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschat, Deutsche Akademie der Technikwissenschaften, Union der deutschen Akademien der Wissenschaften (2015). The opportunities and limits of genome editing.
• Opinion on the legal classification of New Plant Breeding Techniques, in particular ODM and CRISPR-Cas9.
• Pacher & Puchta. From classical mutagenesis to nuclease‐based breeding – directing natural DNA repair for a natural end‐product. The Plant Journal (2017), 90, 819-833
• Pauwels et al. Engineering nucleases for gene targeting: safety and regulatory considerations. New Biotechnology (2014), 31(1), 18-27
• Reardon. Welcome to the CRISPR zoo. Nature (2016), 531(7593)
• Ricroch et al. Editing EU legislation to fit plant genome editing. EMBO reports (2016), 17(10),1365-1369
• Schenkel and Leggewie. New techniques in molecular biology challenge the assessment of modified organisms. J.Verbr.Lebensm. (2015) 10: 263-268
• Spranger (2015). Legal Analysis of the applicability of Directive 2001/18/EC on genome editing technologies. Opinion commissioned by the German Federal for Nature Conservation.
• Swedisch Board of Agriculture (2015). CRISPR/Cas9 mutated Arabidopsis.
• van der Vlugt et al. A Framework for the Risk Assessment and Management of Gene Drive Technology in Contained Use. Applied Biosafety (2018), 23 (1), 25-31.
• Westra et al. (2016) Gene Drives:policy report. RIVM Letter report 2016-0023.
• Wolt et al. Achieving Plant CRISPR Targeting that Limits Off-Target Effects. Plant Genome (2016), 9(3), 1-8.
• ZKBS (2016). Position statement of the ZKBS on the classification of genetic engineering operations for the production and use of higher organisms using recombinant gene drive systems.