Advertise on podcast: GES Center Lectures, NC State University

How to Store a Library in a Raindrop: DNA-based Data Storage James Tuck, PhD | Website Professor and Interim Department Head in Electrical and Computer Engineering, NC State University   Full details at https://ges.research.ncsu.edu/event/colloquium-2026-10-06/ | Watch the video Related links: Kyle J. Tomek, Kevin Volkel, Alexander Simpson, Austin G. Has, Elaine W. Indermaur, James M. Tuck, Albert J. Keung. Driving the Scalability of DNA-Based Information Storage Systems, ACS Synth. Biol.2019861241-1248, https://doi.org/10.1021  Zoom Summary Overview This colloquium presentation, delivered by James Tuck, Professor and Interim Department Head in the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at NC State University, explored the emerging field of DNA-based data storage. The talk addressed the fundamental question of whether an entire library's worth of data could be stored in a single raindrop, and provided a comprehensive overview of how DNA can serve as an ultra-dense, long-lasting storage medium for digital information. Key Concepts or Theories Binary-to-DNA Mapping: Digital data (zeros and ones) can be systematically converted into DNA base sequences (A, C, G, T), with each base representing two bits of information. Data Temperature Hierarchy: Data is classified as hot, warm, cold, or frozen based on access frequency, with DNA storage best suited for cold/frozen archival data. Six-Step DNA Storage Pipeline: The process of storing and retrieving data in DNA involves encoding, synthesis, storage, access, sequencing, and decoding. GC Balance and Homopolymer Avoidance: Effective DNA storage requires careful sequence design to maintain chemical stability and sequencing accuracy. Error Correction: Redundancy and mathematical coding techniques are used to ensure reliable data recovery despite synthesis and sequencing errors. Molecular Computing: Enzymatic and chemical reaction networks can potentially enable computation directly on stored DNA, reducing the need to transfer data back to digital systems. Important Questions Raised Can DNA storage be made cost-effective enough for widespread commercial adoption? How do existing data privacy regulations (e.g., the EU's right to erasure) apply when personal data is stored in a DNA archive that cannot be selectively unmixed? What knowledge should humanity choose to preserve in long-lasting DNA archives, and who controls that decision? Can living biological systems, such as yeast, be harnessed to store and maintain digital data? How do DNA strand length, synthesis cost, and sequencing error rates interact to define optimal storage parameters? Key Takeaways and Summary of Learning Objectives DNA offers extraordinary storage density, with a theoretical peak of approximately 450 exabytes per gram, far exceeding current digital storage technologies. The global data sphere is estimated at around 200 zettabytes and is growing exponentially, creating urgent demand for new storage solutions. DNA storage is most practical for cold or frozen data — information that must be retained for decades or centuries but accessed infrequently. A six-step pipeline (encode, synthesize, store, access, sequence, decode) forms the foundation of any DNA-based storage system. Error correction strategies, borrowed from decades of computer engineering research, can ensure reliable data recovery even in the presence of synthesis and sequencing errors. Commercialization of DNA storage is underway, with companies such as BioMemory and Atlas Biosciences actively developing the technology. Significant challenges remain, including reducing synthesis costs, scaling archive sizes beyond the current ~200 megabyte laboratory record, and integrating DNA storage with existing IT infrastructure. DNA storage raises important ethical, legal, and policy questions around data ownership, deletion rights, and the long-term stewardship of human knowledge. Topic 1: The Case for DNA-Based Data Storage The exponential growth of global data — estimated at approximately 200 zettabytes today and projected to continue rising — is straining the capacity, cost, and energy efficiency of conventional storage technologies. Hard drives, magnetic tape, CDs, and flash memory all have finite lifespans ranging from a few years to a few decades, and none can match the density that DNA theoretically offers. James Tuck introduced DNA as a compelling alternative by drawing on a straightforward back-of-the-envelope calculation: a human body, with roughly 30 trillion cells each containing approximately 3 billion base pairs, could theoretically hold around 22.5 zettabytes of information — comparable to the entire global data sphere. At the molecular level, the peak theoretical storage density of DNA is approximately 450 exabytes per gram. Translating this to a practical example, a single raindrop (approximately 50 microliters) could potentially hold around one exabyte of data, equivalent to roughly 56 copies of the Hunt Library at NC State. Beyond density, DNA offers exceptional longevity. Researchers have successfully sequenced DNA from fossils millions of years old, and laboratory aging studies suggest that properly preserved synthetic DNA could remain readable for centuries or longer — far surpassing the 5–30 year lifespans of current storage media. Additionally, DNA is likely to remain permanently relevant to humanity as long as we are biological beings, unlike obsolete formats such as floppy disks or cassette tapes. Within the data storage hierarchy, DNA is best positioned as a medium for cold or frozen data: information that must never be deleted but is accessed very rarely, such as medical records, government archives, research datasets, financial records, and the broader corpus of human knowledge. Relevant Q\&A Question: What are the density advantages of DNA compared to conventional storage, and how does this translate to a practical example like a library? Answer: At a theoretical peak density of approximately 450 exabytes per gram, a single raindrop of DNA-dissolved water could store around one exabyte of data — enough to hold approximately 56 copies of the Hunt Library. This density advantage stems from the fact that each DNA base can encode two bits of information, and DNA molecules can be packed extremely tightly in solution. Topic 2: How DNA Data Storage Works — The Six-Step Pipeline James Tuck outlined a six-step process that forms the operational backbone of any DNA-based storage system. Step 1 — Encode: Any digital file, regardless of format, is broken into small chunks (typically 20–40 bytes each) that can fit on a single short DNA strand. Each chunk is assigned an index to enable later reassembly, and a file identifier is added so that multiple files can coexist in the same archive. The binary data is then converted into DNA base sequences. Not all sequences are suitable: GC balance (roughly equal proportions of G/C and A/T bases) must be maintained, and homopolymer runs (e.g., long stretches of the same base) must be avoided to ensure sequencing accuracy. As a result, practical systems achieve approximately 1 to 1.5 bits per base rather than the theoretical maximum of 2 bits per base. Error correction codes are also embedded to enable recovery from synthesis and sequencing errors. Step 2 — Synthesize: The designed sequences are manufactured into physical DNA, either by sending sequence files to commercial providers such as IDT or Twist Biosciences, or using in-house DNA synthesis equipment. Current bulk oligosynthesis costs are approximately one-tenth of a cent per base, making large-scale synthesis expensive but improving. Strand lengths of 100–300 bases represent a practical and cost-effective sweet spot. Step 3 — Store: The synthesized DNA strands are stored in test tubes or arrays of tubes. A single tube can potentially hold between a terabyte and a petabyte of data. Multiple tubes can be organized into racks to form a large-scale archive. Step 4 — Access: Because molecules cannot be unmixed once combined, selective file retrieval relies on Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR). Unique primer sequences corresponding to each file's identifier are used to amplify only the target file's molecules, making them overwhelmingly abundant relative to the rest of the archive before sequencing. Step 5 — Sequence: The amplified DNA is read by a sequencing machine, producing base-called sequences and quality scores. Both high-throughput sequencing and nanopore sequencing can be used, though nanopore sequencing introduces higher error rates that must be accounted for in the encoding design. Step 6 — Decode: Software processes the raw sequencing reads to filter by file ID, cluster repeated reads, correct base errors, fill in missing data, and reassemble the chunks in their original order to reconstruct the original digital file. All decoding is performed in silico. Relevant Q\&A Question: Do the error correction sections account for mutations and errors that accumulate over long storage periods, and can data integrity be guaranteed to shareholders? Answer: Yes. Error correction is a well-established field dating back nearly a century. As long as the system's worst-case error rate is characterized, redundancy and mathematical coding techniques can be designed to reliably recover the original data. PCR naturally produces many copies, which aids error correction, and more sophisticated mathematical codes provide even stronger guarantees. Provided the system operates within its nominal parameters, a strong case can be made to shareholders that data will always be recoverable. Question: Is the decoding process performed in silico or in vitro? Answer: All decoding and translation steps are performed in silico. The sequencer produces base-called reads, and software handles all subsequent processing to reconstruct the original file. Question: What is the optimal strand length

Communicating Gene Editing Effectively: What Does the Research Tell Us? Katie Sanders, PhD, Assistant Professor and Extension Specialist, NC State University | Profile ******Joseph Opoku Gakpo, PHD, Founder, RM Communications | Profile Related links: Sanders, C. E. , Parrella, J. A., Lu, P., Landaverde, R., Gibson, K. E., & Gakpo, J. O. (2026). Perceptions of CRISPR and the role of risk information seeking and processing: An analysis of North Carolina consumers. Crisis and Risk Communication , 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/29986907.2026.2721662 Gakpo, J. O ., Gulabrai, B., Sanders, C. E ., Parrella, J. A., Proudman, J., Berger, T., & Mitloehner, F. (2026). U.S. consumers’ processing of information about CRISPR-edited pork products. GM Crops & Food , 17(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/21645698.2026.2719351 NC State Hub for Food Systems Communication and Engagement ---- Zoom Summary Overview This colloquium presentation featured Katie Sanders and Joseph Gakpo, who shared findings from two recently published research studies examining public perceptions and information-processing behaviors related to CRISPR gene-edited food products. The first study focused on North Carolina residents' information-seeking behaviors regarding CRISPR in food products generally, while the second examined a national sample's processing of information specifically about CRISPR-edited pork, following the high-profile approval of the PRRS-resistant pig. Both studies were grounded in the Risk Information Seeking and Processing (RISP) model and employed structural equation modeling and regression analysis to understand how consumers engage with emerging biotechnology information. Key Concepts or Theories Risk Information Seeking and Processing (RISP) Model: A theoretical framework examining how individuals seek, avoid, and process information about risks or innovations based on factors such as information sufficiency, channel beliefs, and self-efficacy. Information Sufficiency vs. Sufficiency Threshold: The gap between how much information a person currently has and how much they feel they need before making a comfortable decision about a technology. Systematic vs. Heuristic Processing: Systematic processing involves deep, critical engagement with information; heuristic processing relies on mental shortcuts to reach conclusions. Relevant Channel Beliefs: An individual's perception of how biased or credible a given information channel is. Perceived Information Gathering Capacity: A measure of self-efficacy — whether an individual believes they can effectively use a given channel to obtain information. Modular Approach to Communication: A strategy for disseminating information in layered formats, allowing audiences to self-select the depth of information they consume. Integrated Communication Strategy: Using multiple, complementary platforms and channels to deliver consistent and holistic messaging rather than relying on a single source. Audience Segmentation: Tailoring communication strategies not only by demographics but also by the values and worldviews of target audiences. Important Questions Raised How do consumers process information about CRISPR-edited food products, and what channels do they trust most? Why do people continue to use information sources they perceive as biased? How does prior knowledge of Extension services affect consumers' self-efficacy in seeking CRISPR-related information? What role do subjective norms play in shaping information-seeking behaviors around gene-edited products? How do worldviews and values — such as trust in science or aversion to tampering with nature — influence acceptance or rejection of CRISPR-edited foods? What are the implications of the RISP model's findings for science communicators and technology developers? Key Takeaways and Summary of Learning Objectives The RISP model was validated in both a North Carolina-specific and a national context, demonstrating its robustness across different populations and gene-editing topics. Consumers are generally open to learning more about CRISPR-edited pork and are not highly avoidant of related information, contrary to assumptions that the public disengages from complex scientific topics. People who perceive news media and social media as biased tend to seek more information, suggesting that perceived bias motivates rather than discourages information-seeking. Extension services represent a significant but underutilized opportunity for credible science communication, particularly once audiences are made aware of what Extension is and does. A modular, integrated, multi-platform communication approach is recommended to meet audiences where they are and allow them to self-select the depth of information they consume. Audience segmentation should go beyond demographics to include values and worldviews, which are increasingly important predictors of technology acceptance. Male respondents reported higher heuristic processing than female respondents; older respondents reported lower information avoidance than younger respondents (ages 25–35). Respondents with some college education reported higher information seeking and lower information avoidance than those with only a high school diploma or GED. Future research directions include examining institutional trust, worldview constructs, and producer-side attitudes toward gene-edited technologies. Topic 1: Study Overview and Theoretical Framework Both studies presented by Katie Sanders and Joseph Gakpo were grounded in the Risk Information Seeking and Processing (RISP) model, a well-established framework in science communication research. The model examines how individuals respond to information about risks or innovations by considering factors such as how much information they currently have (information sufficiency), how much they feel they need (sufficiency threshold), their perceptions of channel credibility (relevant channel beliefs), and their confidence in using those channels (perceived information gathering capacity). These factors collectively shape four key behaviors: information seeking, information avoidance, systematic processing, and heuristic processing. The first study focused on North Carolina residents and their information-seeking behaviors related to CRISPR use in food products broadly. The second study expanded to a national sample and concentrated specifically on CRISPR-edited pork, a topic that gained public attention following the regulatory approval of the PRRS-resistant pig. Both studies used structural equation modeling and regression analysis to identify relationships among these variables. A key contextual backdrop for the research was the growing landscape of gene-editing applications in agriculture. As of 2024, the literature documented 212 papers on gene editing in animals, with CRISPR-Cas9 as the leading technology. Commonly targeted traits in livestock included yield, reproduction, and disease resistance. Despite this scientific momentum, CRISPR-edited products are not yet widely available on the market, making public opinion research particularly timely. Relevant Q\&A Question : Are you differentiating between the kind of information being sought — for example, misinformation versus credible information? Answer : The studies did not attempt to differentiate between misinformation, disinformation, or malinformation. The research measured respondents' perceptions of information credibility through separate measures (relevant channel beliefs), but the information-seeking behaviors themselves were assessed without categorizing the type of information sought. Question : Is there a paradox in that people continue to use sources they perceive as biased? Answer : Katie Sanders acknowledged this paradox, noting that people may be inflating their perceived capacity to identify bias, or they may be continuing to use biased sources regardless. Joseph Gakpo added that seeking from multiple sources — including those perceived as biased — may be a rational strategy to triangulate information and manage perceived bias across channels. Topic 2: Study One — North Carolina CRISPR Information-Seeking Behaviors The first study examined how North Carolina residents seek and process information about CRISPR-edited food products, with a particular focus on the role of different information channels: news media, social media, Extension services, and interpersonal sources. Key findings revealed that individuals who perceived news media as more biased were actually more likely to seek information about CRISPR-edited products. Similarly, those with more negative perceptions of social media were more likely to both seek and deeply process CRISPR-related information. Interestingly, respondents with higher self-efficacy on social media — those who felt confident in their ability to use social media to find information — were more likely to avoid CRISPR-related information, at least within the North Carolina sample. Extension services emerged as a particularly noteworthy finding. Lower beliefs in Extension as an information channel were associated with greater avoidance of CRISPR-related information. However, once respondents were informed about what Extension is and does, their self-efficacy in using Extension for CRISPR information increased significantly. This suggests that Extension's challenge is less about credibility and more about brand visibility and public awareness. The study also found that interpersonal conversations about CRISPR were not significantly impacting the ways in which people seek and process information in the deep, critical manner that communicators would hope for. Social media, while important, cannot stand alone as an information delivery system and must be part of a broader integrated communication strategy. Relevant Q\&A Question : Were the information-seeking and processing behaviors measured generally or specifically in the contex

What is happening with AI, and what are our governments doing about it? Benjamin D. Trump Associate Professor, NC State University  About the speaker Dr. Benjamin D. Trump is an Associate Professor at NC State University, joining the Genetic Engineering and Society Cluster in 2026 through the Chancellor’s Faculty Excellence Program. His work centers on organizational and societal resilience, decision-making for defense, the risk governance of emerging technologies, and critical infrastructure. For his contributions, President Biden awarded him a Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE) in January 2025, the highest federal honor for early-career researchers. Dr. Trump served as a U.S. Embassy Science Fellow in Turkmenistan, focusing on multilateral water security, and has also worked in Iraq, Jordan, Ukraine and Libya. He is President of the Society for Risk Analysis and has contributed to numerous organizations, including USAID, the World Bank, NATO Science for Peace and Security, the UN Office for Disaster Risk Reduction, OECD, and the International Risk Governance Council. Dr. Trump has published nine books and more than 100 peer-reviewed papers. During the COVID-19 pandemic, he served as an emergency responder for two years, earning the U.S. Army Civilian Medal for Humanitarian Service and Army Superior Civilian Service Award for hands-on work that saved many lives in his area of responsibility. Dr. Trump holds a Ph.D. from the University of Michigan School of Public Health. Related links: The time window before biological AI spreads , Trump et al., EMBO Reports , 2026 Biotechnology and AI: Technological Convergence and Information Hazards , Conference proceedings from the NATO Advanced Research Workshop. Editors: Cummings, Trump , et al., 2026 [ Access via NCSU Libraries > ] Governing the AI–biotech convergence , Trump et al., EMBO Reports , 2026 ** Zoom Summary Overview This GES Colloquium featured Dr. Ben Trump, a newly hired faculty member in the Chancellor's Faculty Excellence Program for Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) at NC State. Dr. Trump presented on the current state of artificial intelligence, its technical underpinnings, emerging governance challenges, and the biological implications of AI-driven research. The talk spanned recent real-world incidents involving autonomous AI agents, comparative national policy approaches, and the open risk questions that governments, scientists, and the public must urgently address. Key Concepts or Theories Machine Learning: Defined as advanced curve fitting — using large datasets to identify statistical correlations and hidden connections between variables at a scale and speed impossible for human observers Deep Learning: An extension of machine learning focused on value judgments and subjective interpretation, enabling large language models (LLMs) to generate contextually relevant, non-pre-programmed responses Agentic AI / Multi-Agent Systems: AI agents that operate autonomously within defined engineering constraints, executing tasks inside or outside an LLM shell, including interacting with the internet Graph Engineering / Auto-Research: An innovation pioneered by figures such as Andres Karpathy, in which a "conductor" agent autonomously creates and coordinates sub-agents to solve complex problems collaboratively and efficiently Hallucination: A persistent flaw in LLMs where the model generates confident but factually incorrect outputs, particularly in speed-optimized modes with reduced reasoning First Actor Privilege: The geopolitical and economic advantage gained by whichever nation or company reaches a technological milestone first, allowing them to set standards others must follow Data and Cloud Sovereignty: The emerging field concerned with who owns AI infrastructure, on what software it runs, and whether it can be disabled by a foreign actor Important Questions Raised How do we govern AI technologies that are evolving faster than any existing regulatory framework can address? Who bears liability when an AI agent causes consumer harm, and what standards should define permissible AI behavior? How can frontier AI models be made accessible and affordable to the global majority who currently only use free, lower-capability versions? How do we protect sensitive personal, institutional, and biological research data from being ingested and used by LLM training pipelines? How can international collaboration be achieved on AI governance when dozens of governments have competing priorities and approaches? What safeguards are needed to prevent agentic AI systems from creating new classes of biological threats that current detection and remediation systems cannot handle? Key Takeaways and Summary of Learning Objectives Over 4 billion people globally have had direct personal interaction with a large language model, making AI governance an urgent and worldwide concern Machine learning is fundamentally advanced statistical curve fitting; deep learning adds the capacity for subjective, contextual reasoning Agentic and multi-agent AI systems can operate autonomously and, as demonstrated by the DSC Wiki and Hugging Face incidents, can break out of intended operational boundaries in unexpected ways Graph engineering represents a major leap in AI capability, enabling conductor-led teams of sub-agents to solve problems faster and more accurately than previous single-agent approaches No country currently has comprehensive, effective hard law governing AI; the EU AI Act is the most advanced but is already being outpaced by technological development The U.S. administration's dominant policy frame is competitive urgency — prioritizing winning the AI race over imposing safety regulations that might slow innovation China is investing heavily in renewable energy and grid infrastructure to power massive data center expansion, giving it a structural advantage in AI compute capacity The U.S. power grid, largely 50–70 years old, is a significant bottleneck for domestic AI infrastructure growth LLMs reflect the cultural and linguistic norms of their predominantly American and European training data, creating challenges for global deployment Biological research intersecting with AI — including genomic modification and synthetic biology — represents one of the highest-risk and least-governed frontiers Public AI literacy is critically underdeveloped, and education about responsible AI use is urgently needed Topic 1: How Large Language Models and Agentic AI Work Large language models emerged as a transformative technology approximately five years ago with the release of GPT-3, which for the first time allowed users to receive non-pre-programmed responses to open-ended prompts. Prior systems relied on scripted, triage-based responses. Since then, rapid innovation has produced increasingly capable models — including Mythos (from Anthropic), Astra (from OpenAI), Grok, Gemini, Perplexity, and others — each pushing the boundaries of reasoning, autonomy, and real-world interaction. At the foundational level, machine learning is best understood as sophisticated curve fitting: running millions to hundreds of millions of permutations across vast datasets to identify statistical correlations that would be impossible for humans to detect manually. A landmark example is AlphaFold, whose deep learning capabilities unlocked the field of protein folding prediction — previously considered near-impossible — and opened an entirely new methodology in biological science. Deep learning extends machine learning by enabling models to make value judgments and interpret subjective, contextual information. When a user inputs a prompt, the model breaks it down into tokens, assigns probabilistic weights to potential outcomes, and selects the most contextually appropriate response. Training involves running through massive datasets — including much of the internet — to minimize prediction error over time. A key limitation is hallucination: LLMs will sometimes generate confident but incorrect answers, particularly when reasoning depth is reduced for speed. Another systemic issue is cultural bias — because training data skews heavily toward American and European online behavior, models struggle to serve global populations with different cultural norms, languages, and values. This was directly observed in deployment work with UNDRR, where generating equally applicable outputs across contexts from Mexico to South Asia proved extremely difficult. Agentic AI refers to systems where individual agents are given a core mission and engineering constraints, then operate autonomously — either within an LLM environment or by interacting with the broader internet. Graph engineering takes this further: a single "conductor" agent evaluates a problem, spawns specialized sub-agents, and coordinates them as a team. The analogy offered was the difference between recording each instrument separately and stitching the audio together in post-production versus recording a full symphony live — the latter producing a richer, more coherent result. This approach yields faster, more accurate, and more robust outputs, but also introduces new governance challenges around visibility and control. Relevant Q\&A 1 Question: What is the difference between machine learning and deep learning? Answer: Machine learning is curve fitting — identifying statistical correlations across large datasets without assigning subjective value. Deep learning adds the capacity for value judgments and contextual reasoning, enabling LLMs to interpret nuanced, open-ended prompts and generate human-like responses. 2 Question: What are hallucinations and can they be eliminated? Answer: Hallucinations occur when an LLM generates confident but factually incorrect outputs. They are reduced — but never fully eliminated — by increasing reasoning intensity and using adversarial review

Transforming American Biosecurity Sam Weiss Evans, D. Phil., Senior Advisor at the Federation of American Scientists About the speaker Dr. Sam Weiss Evans is a Senior Advisor at the Federation of American Scientists (FAS). At FAS, Sam is working to bring about foundational biosecurity and biosafety governance reform. He recently completed a term as a Senior Policy Advisor for the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology, where he led the Commission’s work on biosecurity, biosafety, standards, and responsible innovation. Prior to joining NSCEB, Sam was a Senior Research Fellow at Harvard University, jointly with the Kennedy School of Government’s Program on Science, Technology & Society, and the School of Engineering and Applied Sciences. He has spent the past twenty years studying and building experimental governance capacity in bioengineering and several other areas of emerging technology and holds a D.Phil. from Oxford University. Related links: Video – Opening remarks for the National Academy of Medicine / CEPI recent workshop on Preparing for a Future of AI-Enabled Biotechnology (5 minutes) evansresearch.org > LinkedIn > --- Zoom Overview This colloquium talk, delivered by Sam Weiss Evans of the Federation of American Scientists, addressed the current state of biosecurity governance in the United States and the need for systemic reform. Drawing on his experience at the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnologies and the Harvard Kennedy School, Sam presented a critical analysis of how the U.S. currently manages biosecurity threats and proposed a more structured, cyclical approach to governance. The talk was the second in a series on biosecurity and related governance issues hosted by the Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Center. Key Concepts or Theories Whoops-Then-Fix (WTF) Governing: The current reactive model of biosecurity governance, where policy responses are triggered only after problems emerge, often resulting in fragmented and ineffective oversight. Design-Build-Test-Learn Cycle: A proposed alternative governance framework borrowed from engineering, emphasizing iterative assessment, innovation, testing, and deployment of biosecurity policies. Biosecurity Whack-a-Mole: A metaphor describing the issue-by-issue reactive approach to biosecurity, where attention jumps between emerging threats without addressing systemic root causes. Paradigm Shift (Kuhnian Framework): The application of Thomas Kuhn's concept of scientific revolutions to biosecurity governance, using anomalies in the current system to justify and drive structural reform. Fractal Democracy: A concept introduced to describe a governance model that maintains democratic contestability at multiple levels, allowing diverse communities to have a say in how biosecurity concerns are addressed. Gene Synthesis and Digital-to-Physical Biology: The process of converting digital genetic code into physical biological constructs, identified as a key governance gap with at least 7 federal agencies holding partial jurisdiction but no unified oversight. Important Questions Raised Where has biosecurity governance gone wrong such that it needs reform? Who should be in charge of tracing the entire lifespan of a new biotechnology? How do we balance valuable community feedback with potential public misunderstanding of complex biotechnologies? How can moratoriums be replaced or supplemented with more robust, scalable governance structures? What can the U.S. learn from international examples of biosecurity and biotechnology governance? What is the one small, achievable action individuals can take to contribute to biosecurity reform? Key Takeaways and Summary of Learning Objectives The current U.S. biosecurity governance system operates reactively, addressing threats only after they emerge rather than proactively building systemic capacity. Biosecurity oversight is fragmented across at least 7 federal agencies, none of which holds a complete picture or full authority over emerging biotechnology risks. A design-build-test-learn cycle, adapted from engineering, offers a more coherent and iterative model for biosecurity governance reform. Moratoriums, while useful as temporary pauses, are insufficient as long-term governance tools and must be replaced by structured, scalable systems. The loss of Chevron deference has complicated agencies' ability to independently govern new and emerging technology spaces. International examples, such as Indigenous-led innovation governance in Canada and New Zealand, offer valuable methodological insights for U.S. reform efforts. Individuals can contribute to biosecurity reform through research, policy writing, fellowship programs, shaping funding landscapes, and joining government bodies. The single most impactful small action is to consistently ask "whose science?" and "for whom?" when engaging with claims about scientific objectivity and research priorities. Topic 1: The Failure of Current Biosecurity Governance The existing U.S. biosecurity governance structure is characterized by what Sam Weiss Evans calls a "whoops-then-fix" (WTF) methodology. Rather than proactively building governance capacity, the system waits for a problem to emerge, then reaches for the nearest available tool and places it wherever is most politically expedient. This has resulted in biosecurity responsibilities being scattered across multiple agencies — each established in a different era, with different mandates and cultures — none of which can see or manage the full picture. A central example is the governance of gene synthesis, the process of converting digital genetic sequences into physical biological constructs. Despite over 20 years of awareness of this governance gap, no binding federal requirements exist to restrict what sequences can be synthesized. At least 7 agencies hold partial jurisdiction, yet none has the authority or appetite to unify oversight without top-level White House support and sustained political will. This fragmented system persists in part because it is functionally convenient for all stakeholders: companies appear responsible by raising concerns, agencies appear responsive by reacting to them, and the hype cycle around emerging biotechnology keeps funding flowing. However, the system produces few substantive obligations and is largely performative — effective only as long as nothing seriously goes wrong. Relevant Q\&A Question (online, Daryl Stover): Where has biosecurity gone wrong such that it needs reform? Answer (Sam Weiss Evans): The system is structured around reactive, issue-by-issue responses rather than systemic reform. Biosecurity concerns are spread across the government in ways that made sense at specific historical moments but are now misaligned with the pace and complexity of emerging biotechnology. The result is a performative system that satisfies appearances without producing substantive safety improvements. Topic 2: A Proposed Reform Framework — The Design-Build-Test-Learn Cycle Sam Weiss Evans proposed restructuring biosecurity governance around a design-build-test-learn cycle, adapted from engineering practice. This framework clusters biosecurity reform into four phases: assessment, innovation, testing, and deployment. In the assessment phase, the goal is to understand what is actually working in practice, including through no-fault reporting systems for laboratory incidents — a capability the U.S. currently lacks systematically. The NIH is currently proposing a national biosafety analysis center, and its draft guidelines are open for public comment. An equivalent of the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) for biotechnological events could enable root cause analysis and feed lessons back into governance design. In the innovation phase, the focus shifts to creating new organizational and financial structures for biosecurity — including novel funding mechanisms, market incentives, and research and development frameworks that embed safety and security considerations from the earliest stages of ideation through publication and beyond. In the testing phase, governance prototypes would be stress-tested in sandboxed environments before full deployment, with appropriate legal infrastructure already in place to enable this. In the deployment phase, successful governance innovations would be rolled out — whether as new training programs, regulations, or technical infrastructure such as AI model weighting systems. This cycle contrasts sharply with the current system, where each new biosecurity concern requires rebuilding the entire governance apparatus from scratch, consuming enormous resources and time. Relevant Q\&A Question (audience): In the IT world, beta testing covers many of the problems you mentioned, including whack-a-mole. To what extent could that model be adopted in biosecurity? Answer (Sam Weiss Evans): Cybersecurity and IT development offer a rich set of analogies for biosecurity governance, and this is an underexplored area. However, a key distinction is that biological "bugs" are actual living organisms that can evolve and are far harder to control than software bugs. That said, the cybersecurity industry grew from nothing into a multi-trillion-dollar sector, and biosecurity has the potential to follow a similar trajectory. Topic 3: Paradigm Shift and Strategies for Reform Sam Weiss Evans framed the needed governance transformation as a Kuhnian paradigm shift — one driven by the accumulation of anomalies that the current system cannot adequately handle, such as gene drives, cloud labs, and autonomous laboratories. He outlined four interconnected strategies for achieving this shift: Narrative Structure: Telling a compelling story about what an alternative governance system could look like, using the design-build-test-learn framework to help stakeholders think outside the constraints of the existing system. Netw

Risk, Responsibility, and Standardization: Lessons from multiple NATO-Sponsored Biotechnology Workshops Christopher L. Cummings, Ph.D. Research Social Scientist at the US Army Corp of Engineers and Senior Research Fellow at the GES Center, NC State University**** About the speaker Christopher L. Cummings, PhD, is a behavioral theorist and social science researcher specializing in risk perception, public engagement, and the governance of emerging technologies. He leads the Center for Health Engineering at the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center, where he integrates behavioral science with engineering, risk analysis, and public health systems. At North Carolina State University, he is a Senior Research Fellow with the Genetic Engineering and Society Center and a Research Social Scientist with the NSF-funded Precision Microbiome Engineering Research Center, where he examines the societal and governance dimensions of biotechnology. Dr. Cummings has directed multiple NATO Advanced Research Workshops addressing biotechnology convergence, risk governance, standardization, and defense resilience. He also served on a National Academies committee reviewing environmental, biosafety, and biosecurity considerations for synthetic cell research. Author of more than 100 peer-reviewed publications and Secondary Risk Theory, his work connects technical risk assessment with public values, trust, policy acceptance, and strategic communication. Google Scholar > --- Zoom Overview This colloquium session, hosted by the Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Center at NC State, featured a presentation by Dr. Christopher Cummings, Director of the Center for Health Engineering within the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ERDC) and Senior Research Fellow at GES. Dr. Cummings presented findings and lessons learned from a series of NATO-funded Advanced Research Workshops (ARWs) focused on biotechnology risk, responsibility, and standardization. The talk addressed the growing gap between rapidly advancing biotechnologies and the governance frameworks intended to oversee them, with particular emphasis on the need for international standards, adaptive governance, and responsible innovation. Key Concepts or Theories The Pacing Problem: The phenomenon where technological development outstrips the pace of regulatory and governance responses Standards as Governance Tools: The use of voluntary, flexible, and performance-based standards as a bridge between hard law and rapid innovation ELSI (Ethical, Legal, and Societal Implications): A framework for identifying non-technical barriers across the biotechnology development pipeline TAPIC Model: A governance values framework comprising Transparency, Accountability, Participation, Integrity, and Capacity Soft Law: Non-binding governance mechanisms such as voluntary consensus standards, codes of conduct, and ethics guidelines used to guide behavior in the absence of formal legislation Information Hazards: Situations where scientific knowledge itself poses a potential risk if disseminated without appropriate safeguards Interoperability: The ability of different nations and sectors to use shared technical and safety standards to collaborate effectively across borders Important Questions Raised How can international standards be developed that respect national regulatory differences while enabling cross-border collaboration? What are the risks and hazards of standardization itself, including blind spots and power imbalances? How do information hazards from AI-enabled biotechnology get governed before they cause harm? How can data sharing be encouraged in a competitive landscape where both market and national security interests incentivize secrecy? How do human values get institutionalized into technology governance in a durable, evolving way? What role does public perception, misinformation, and media framing play in shaping biotechnology investment and policy? Key Takeaways and Summary of Learning Objectives Biotechnology is advancing at a pace that far outstrips existing governance and regulatory frameworks — a phenomenon known as the "pacing problem." Standards, particularly flexible and performance-based ones, can serve as effective governance tools to bridge the gap between innovation and regulation. Non-technical barriers — including public trust, ethical concerns, and misinformation — are significant drivers of biotechnology failure in the marketplace. International collaboration through forums like NATO Advanced Research Workshops is essential for developing shared frameworks and fostering cross-sector trust. Data sharing remains a critical and unresolved challenge, complicated by both market competitiveness and national security concerns. The TAPIC model (Transparency, Accountability, Participation, Integrity, Capacity) offers an aspirational framework for responsible governance. AI and biotechnology convergence is creating new and compounding risks that current governance structures are ill-equipped to handle. Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI) principles, including early ELSI assessment, can help anticipate and mitigate downstream societal harms. Topic 1: Background and Context — Dr. Christopher Cummings and the NATO Advanced Research Workshops Dr. Christopher Cummings introduced himself as an NC State alumnus who began his career as a communication scholar studying political rhetoric before being drawn into science and risk communication through a nanoparticles research grant. Over time, his work evolved to span academic, governmental, and international domains. He currently leads the Center for Health Engineering within the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ERDC), where his team conducts highly academic research in service to government, including work for the Principal Director for Biotechnology in the Office of the Undersecretary of War. Dr. Cummings has directed multiple NATO-funded Advanced Research Workshops (ARWs), including a 2024 meeting in Malta focused on biotechnology standards, and an upcoming April workshop in Brussels on biomanufacturing standards across the NATO enterprise. These workshops bring together experts from across NATO member nations to identify emerging problems, deliberate in working groups, and produce actionable publications and frameworks. He also noted his recent appointment to the National Academies Committee on the External Review of Environmental Biosafety and Biosecurity Considerations for Synthetic Cell Research and Development. Relevant Q\&A Question: How do you get industry participants to show up and genuinely participate in these workshops? Answer: Dr. Cummings explained that industry participants benefit from direct access to national leaders and decision-makers who can influence commercialization pathways. The workshops also provide visibility into larger international conversations that directly affect R\&D agendas, which is valuable even for participants who are focused on narrow technical work. Topic 2: The Pacing Problem and the Role of Standards in Biotechnology Governance A central theme of Dr. Cummings' presentation was the "pacing problem" — the persistent gap between the speed of biotechnology development and the ability of governance systems to keep up. Technologies such as CRISPR, AI-driven biology, and synthetic biology are evolving exponentially, while regulatory responses remain slow and incremental. Traditional hard law is too rigid and time-consuming to address rapidly emerging risks effectively. Dr. Cummings argued that standards — particularly voluntary, performance-based, and adaptive standards — offer a practical alternative. Unlike hard law, standards can be updated more quickly, provide clarity for developers and investors, and enable a degree of international consistency even amid regulatory divergence. He emphasized that a one-size-fits-all approach will not work given the breadth of biotechnology across health, agriculture, energy, environment, and defense sectors. Key lessons from the NATO ARWs include: Divergent national approaches create duplication, trade barriers, and collaboration failures Interoperability at key junctions such as tech transfer and international trade is essential Conformance testing and certification should be required before widespread product use Global data sharing and biosafety validation best practices are critical but remain contested Performance-based standards that focus on outcomes rather than rigid procedural rules are better suited to biological complexity Historical examples such as the failure of Golden Rice due to lack of public trust, the 15-year regulatory delay of the AquAdvantage salmon, and preemptive state bans on cell-cultured meats illustrated the real-world consequences of neglecting non-technical barriers. Relevant Q\&A Question: Is the intersection of AI and biotechnology — including the potential to generate functioning pathogens — a topic discussed at these workshops? Answer: Dr. Cummings confirmed that information hazards are a central concern. He noted that top journals already screen submissions for potentially dangerous knowledge, and that his colleague Dr. Benjamin Trump is actively working with AI companies to implement guardrails. He also noted that AI can be used defensively — for example, to accelerate vaccine development — and that alarming headlines, while concerning, can serve a useful agenda-setting function by prompting government action. Question: Could you speak more about negative labeling and its parallels to AI-enabled products? Answer: Dr. Cummings noted that the GMO debate became so contentious that the U.S. government eliminated the term entirely, replacing it with "bioengineered" under a national standard. He expressed concern that similar dynamics are emerging around AI-enabled products, particularly given EU AI Act labeling requirements taking effect in December. Topic 3: Misinformation,

Final public colloquium of the semester! How can governance keep pace with emerging technologies? Dr. Diana Bowman, inaugural Dean of the School of Law at RMIT University, will reflect on adaptive, responsible approaches to law, innovation, and the public interest. -------- Recorded from NC State’s GES Colloquium, this podcast examines how biotechnologies take shape in the world: microbiome engineering in built environments, gene editing and gene drives, forest and agricultural genomics, data governance and equity, risk and regulation, sci-art, and public engagement in practice. -------- A Conversation on Governing Emerging Technologies: Law, Innovation, and the Public Good Emerging technologies often outpace the legal and governance systems meant to guide them. In this informal conversation, Dr. Diana Bowman will reflect on how law, regulation, and institutions can respond more thoughtfully to emerging technologies across areas such as public health, nanotechnology, precision medicine, and smart cities. The discussion will consider what “smarter” governance can look like in practice, including how societies might better anticipate uncertainty, address ethical and social concerns, and support innovation while protecting the public interest. Related links: Learning From Emerging Technology Governance for Guiding Quantum Technology , Marchant, G.E., Bazzi, R., Bowman, D. et al.,  (2024). Arizona State University Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law Paper No. 4923230. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4923230 Emerging Technologies and the Future of Assisted Reproductive Technology , Johnson, W.G. and Bowman, D. ,  (2020). 60(3) Jurimetrics J., 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3584803 Download seminar poster Diana Bowman, PhD Dean of the School of Law at RMIT University | Profile Dr. Diana Bowman is inaugural Dean of the School of Law at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia. Before joining RMIT, she served as Associate Dean for Applied Research and Partnerships and Professor of Law at Arizona State University, where her work bridged law, public health, sustainability, and innovation. Her research examines the governance and regulation of emerging technologies, with a focus on how legal and policy systems can foster innovation while engaging the ethical, legal, and societal dimensions of technological change. She has published extensively on topics including nanotechnology, precision medicine, reproductive technologies, smart cities, and other emerging technology governance challenges. The Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Colloquium is a seminar series that brings in speakers to present and stimulate discussion on a variety of topics related to existing and proposed biotechnologies and their place within broader societal changes. GES Colloquium is taught by Dr. Zack Brown, and the seminars serve as a great opportunity for our students to build their networks and grow as professionals. To support their efforts, we encourage you to join our in-person seminars, which will now take place in Nelson 4305. Remember, we regularly post colloquium seminars as videos on Panopto and on our GES Lectures podcast, allowing you to revisit or catch up on these recordings at your convenience. Please subscribe to the GES newsletter and LinkedIn for updates. Genetic Engineering and Society Center Colloquium Home | Zoom Registration | Watch Colloquium Videos | LinkedIn | Newsletter GES Center at NC State University—Integrating scientific knowledge & diverse public values in shaping the futures of biotechnology. Produced by Patti Mulligan, Communications Director, GES Center, NC State Find out more at https://ges-center-lectures-ncsu.pinecast.co

Recorded from NC State’s GES Colloquium, this podcast examines how biotechnologies take shape in the world: microbiome engineering in built environments, gene editing and gene drives, forest and agricultural genomics, data governance and equity, risk and regulation, sci-art, and public engagement in practice. ________ Genomic Vulnerability and Selective Intervention: Navigating Climate Adaptation in Freshwater Fisheries Nelson 4305 + Zoom | Can precision genomics help save freshwater fish threatened by climate change? We’ll explore how genomic and climate data can inform difficult decisions about when and where to intervene, including efforts such as assisted migration and genetic rescue. Freshwater fishes worldwide are facing unprecedented threats from rising water temperatures, shifting hydrological regimes, and declining habitat quality and availability. As climate change accelerates, traditional conservation strategies may no longer suffice to prevent widespread population declines. Precision genomics offers a potentially transformative toolkit to assess climate vulnerability and guide active interventions, yet the transition from molecular data to management action remains a significant challenge. Our recent work in brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) addresses this gap by integrating genomic and climate datasets at a continental scale to quantify the adaptive potential and climate risk of native populations. By identifying which populations possess the genetic variation necessary to survive future warming, we provide a framework to inform high-stakes interventions such as assisted migration and genetic rescue. As we develop these genomic tools, we must also examine the broader ethical and policy implications for stakeholders. This includes addressing critical questions about when the risk of inaction outweighs the risk of intervention, and how to prioritize limited resources between populations facing imminent extirpation versus those with greater probability of persistence. Ultimately, this work seeks to provide a framework for the long-term sustainability of commercial and recreational fisheries in an era of rapid environmental change. Related links: Mamoozadeh Lab Meek, Mamoozadeh, et al. (2025) Range-wide climate risk in a cold-water fish species Mamoozadeh et al. (2025) Genomic resources for brook trout Download seminar poster Nadya Mamoozadeh, PhD Assistant Professor at North Carolina State University | Profile Dr. Nadya Mamoozadeh is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Applied Ecology at North Carolina State University. Her research focuses on integrating molecular insights into fisheries management and aquatic conservation. The Mamoozadeh Lab explores the spatiotemporal distribution of genetic diversity in aquatic populations, examining how natural and anthropogenic factors shape these patterns to forecast future population risk. A central goal of her work is to support the long-term sustainability of sport and wild-capture fisheries across both marine and freshwater environments. Dr. Mamoozadeh collaborates closely with management agencies, NGOs, and stakeholders to integrate shared knowledge into research and translate complex genetic findings into applied conservation practice. ____ The Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Colloquium is a seminar series that brings in speakers to present and stimulate discussion on a variety of topics related to existing and proposed biotechnologies and their place within broader societal changes. GES Colloquium is taught by Dr. Zack Brown, and the seminars serve as a great opportunity for our students to build their networks and grow as professionals. To support their efforts, we encourage you to join our in-person seminars, which will now take place in Nelson 4305. Remember, we regularly post colloquium seminars as videos on Panopto and on our GES Lectures podcast, allowing you to revisit or catch up on these recordings at your convenience. Please subscribe to the GES newsletter and LinkedIn for updates. Genetic Engineering and Society Center Colloquium Home | Zoom Registration | Watch Colloquium Videos | LinkedIn | Newsletter GES Center at NC State University—Integrating scientific knowledge & diverse public values in shaping the futures of biotechnology. Produced by Patti Mulligan, Communications Director, GES Center, NC State Find out more at https://ges-center-lectures-ncsu.pinecast.co

Recorded from NC State’s GES Colloquium, this podcast examines how biotechnologies take shape in the world: microbiome engineering in built environments, gene editing and gene drives, forest and agricultural genomics, data governance and equity, risk and regulation, sci-art, and public engagement in practice. Innovating for Sustainable Agrifood Futures Khara Grieger, PhD, Assistant Professor, Director of the GES Center at NC State | Profile Nelson 4305 + Zoom | This talk highlights USDA/NIFA-funded GES research on the societal implications of genetic engineering and nanotechnology in food and agriculture, drawing on stakeholder perspectives to inform responsible innovation. New and emerging technologies have the potential to deliver significant societal benefits and contribute to more sustainable futures. Genetic engineering in food and agriculture, for example, may enable the production of nutritious foods aligned with consumer preferences, support more environmentally sustainable protein production, and help develop crops that are resilient to a changing climate. Similarly, nanotechnology may improve the efficiency of agrochemical delivery through innovations such as nano-pesticides and nano-fertilizers and extend the shelf life of fresh-cut produce through nano-emulsion coatings. At the same time, past experiences with novel food and agricultural technologies—such as first-generation genetic modification—highlight the importance of understanding and addressing societal concerns early in the research and development process. Integrating these perspectives can help identify potential risks, align technological development with stakeholder priorities, and support responsible innovation. GES-centered research conducted through a USDA/NIFA-funded project examines the societal implications of genetic engineering and nanotechnology in the food and agriculture sectors. Drawing on stakeholder perspectives from case studies involving these technologies, the research highlights key societal considerations and offers recommendations for ensuring that emerging innovations contribute to sustainable agrifood futures. These insights may be particularly valuable for researchers developing new food and agricultural technologies involving genetic engineering or nanotechnology, offering guidance on potential societal implications and stakeholder perspectives. The presentation concludes with reflections on future research directions that align with GES’s mission of integrating scientific knowledge and diverse public values in shaping the futures of biotechnology. Related links: Horgan et al., Stakeholder perceptions of GE and nano-agrifoods, 2025 Cimadori et al., Gene Edited Animals, 2025 Lowry et al., Nanotech for precision delivery, 2024 Grieger and Kuzma, Novel Plant Biotech, 2023 Kuzma et al., Parameters and practices biotech, 2023 Download seminar poster Khara Grieger, PhD Dr. Grieger is currently an Assistant Professor in Environmental Health & Risk Assessment and University Faculty Scholar at NC State. She is also the new Director of the GES Center. Her research focuses on risk analysis and risk governance of emerging technologies, including genetic engineering. Her work also focuses on extending and translating complex knowledge to diverse stakeholders to inform decisions. In addition to Directing the GES Center, she is a Project Director of USDA/NIFA funded grants, Associate Director for the Bezos Center for Sustainable Protein at NC State, and Co-Director of the NSF-funded Science and Technologies for Phosphorus Sustainability (STEPS) Center. She has published more than 80 peer-reviewed articles and 13 book chapters on risk governance and stakeholder engagement related to emerging technologies. She is an Editor for Environment Systems and Decisions, and serves on the board of the Society for Risk Analysis (SRA). Before joining NC State, Dr. Grieger was a Senior Environmental Research Scientist at RTI International in the Health and Environmental Risk Analysis Program (2012–2019) and a Duke University Scholar (2017–2018). In those roles, she led independent research and provided technical support for federal agencies, including the FDA, EPA, NIOSH, and the U.S. Army. She obtained her PhD and MSc in Environmental Engineering from the Technical University of Denmark, where she lived and worked for nearly a decade. The Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Colloquium is a seminar series that brings in speakers to present and stimulate discussion on a variety of topics related to existing and proposed biotechnologies and their place within broader societal changes. GES Colloquium is taught by Dr. Zack Brown, and the seminars serve as a great opportunity for our students to build their networks and grow as professionals. To support their efforts, we encourage you to join our in-person seminars, which will now take place in Nelson 4305. Remember, we regularly post colloquium seminars as videos on Panopto and on our GES Lectures podcast, allowing you to revisit or catch up on these recordings at your convenience. Please subscribe to the GES newsletter and LinkedIn for updates. Genetic Engineering and Society Center Colloquium Home | Zoom Registration | Watch Colloquium Videos | LinkedIn | Newsletter GES Center at NC State University—Integrating scientific knowledge & diverse public values in shaping the futures of biotechnology. Produced by Patti Mulligan, Communications Director, GES Center, NC State Find out more at https://ges-center-lectures-ncsu.pinecast.co

Recorded from NC State’s GES Colloquium, this podcast examines how biotechnologies take shape in the world: microbiome engineering in built environments, gene editing and gene drives, forest and agricultural genomics, data governance and equity, risk and regulation, sci-art, and public engagement in practice. The Ark and the Archive: Genetics, Manuscripts, and the Emerging Field of Biocodicology Nelson 4305 + Zoom | What can genetics tell us about old books? This talk explores how next-generation sequencing and other biomolecular tools are opening exciting new frontiers in medieval manuscript studies. Medieval parchment manuscripts have long been studied as repositories of textual and historical information, but they are equally remarkable as repositories of biological data. Biocodicology, or the study of books through the lens of the biological information they contain, is an emerging interdisciplinary field that brings together humanists, scientists, veterinarians, and conservation scientists to ask new questions of old cultural heritage artifacts. This talk introduces the field and traces its development, from early experiments confirming DNA survival in parchment to current collaborative work employing next-generation sequencing, palaeoproteomics, and microbiome analysis. Drawing on nearly two decades of research into the genetic analysis of medieval manuscripts, I will discuss the considerable potential of biocodicological methods for addressing long standing humanistic questions, including localizing and dating manuscripts, reconstructing dispersed leaves from books, tracing the medieval parchment trade, and resolving debates about individual books, while also opening entirely new lines of inquiry into animal husbandry, breed development, and the history of human-animal interaction. The talk concludes by reflecting on both the opportunities and challenges in conducting this work. Related links: Evaluating non-destructive sampling methods of parchment for genomic sequencing – Diaz, L.D., Scheible, M., Stinson, T.L. et al. npj Herit. Sci. , 2025 The development of non-destructive sampling methods of parchment skins for genetic species identification – Scheible, M., Stinson, T. L. , et al. Plos One , 2024 Download seminar poster Timothy Stinson, PhD Associate Professor at North Carolina State University | Profile Timothy Stinson is Associate Professor of English and a University Faculty Scholar at North Carolina State University, where his research focuses on Middle English poetry, codicology, history of the book, and digital humanities. He is a leader in applying digital technologies to medieval studies, serving as co-founder and co-director of the Medieval Electronic Scholarly Alliance, director of the Society for Early English and Norse Electronic Texts, co-director of the Piers Plowman Electronic Archive, and is editor of The Siege of Jerusalem Electronic Archive. Stinson has pioneered the use of DNA analysis to study medieval manuscripts, collaborating with colleagues in the biological sciences to analyze genetic material found in parchment. This innovative work has garnered international press coverage in outlets including the BBC’s The World Today, National Geographic, Science, and The Chronicle of Higher Education. His work has been supported by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the Council on Information and Library Resources, and the Bibliographical Society of America. He has published in leading journals including Speculum, The Chaucer Review, Manuscript Studies, and The Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America. The Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Colloquium is a seminar series that brings in speakers to present and stimulate discussion on a variety of topics related to existing and proposed biotechnologies and their place within broader societal changes. GES Colloquium is taught by Dr. Zack Brown, and the seminars serve as a great opportunity for our students to build their networks and grow as professionals. To support their efforts, we encourage you to join our in-person seminars, which will now take place in Nelson 4305. Remember, we regularly post colloquium seminars as videos on Panopto and on our GES Lectures podcast, allowing you to revisit or catch up on these recordings at your convenience. Please subscribe to the GES newsletter and LinkedIn for updates. Genetic Engineering and Society Center Colloquium Home | Zoom Registration | Watch Colloquium Videos | LinkedIn | Newsletter GES Center at NC State University—Integrating scientific knowledge & diverse public values in shaping the futures of biotechnology. Produced by Patti Mulligan, Communications Director, GES Center, NC State Find out more at https://ges-center-lectures-ncsu.pinecast.co

Soil Secrets Unlock Equitable Futures Carter Clinton, PhD, Assistant Professor at NC State University GES Colloquium 3/10/2026 | Learn how burial soil genomics paired with descendant community partnership and bioethical data governance, can reconstruct buried histories and inform more equitable, socially accountable biomedical futures. __ Recorded from NC State’s GES Colloquium, this podcast examines how biotechnologies take shape in the world: microbiome engineering in built environments, gene editing and gene drives, forest and agricultural genomics, data governance and equity, risk and regulation, sci-art, and public engagement in practice. __ This talk will describe how applications of biotechnology, specifically DNA sequencing and computational genomics, are reshaping what we can learn about past communities while raising important questions about ethics, governance, and public trust. My lab develops non destructive approaches that recover DNA from burial soils, enabling research that minimizes disturbance of human remains and expands the scientific toolkit for studying historical populations. I will share what this technology can and cannot tell us about ancestry, health, and environmental context, and why careful interpretation matters when working with complex, sensitive samples. Using the Hillsborough Legacy Project as a case study, I will show how we integrate burial soil genomics and archaeological evidence from a historically enslaved population with saliva derived DNA from local living descendants, paired with genealogical and health surveys and community interviews. I will demonstrate how this combined design strengthens inference by linking molecular signals to documented histories and lived experience, while also requiring explicit attention to bioethical practice, including consent, governance of data use, and responsible communication of results. A central theme is how scientific innovation and social responsibility must be built together. I will discuss how descendant community partnership, consent, and data governance influence research design, what counts as evidence, and how results are communicated and used. The broader impacts extend beyond any single site. These methods can broaden representation in genomics, inform more equitable approaches to precision medicine, and provide communities with scientifically grounded narratives that complement archival records and oral histories. The talk will highlight how biotechnology interacts with society through questions of ownership, benefit sharing, and the risks of misinterpretation, and why interdisciplinary collaboration across biological sciences, social sciences, and the humanities is essential for responsible, high impact research. Related links: Persistent human-associated microbial signatures in burial soils from the 17th and 18th century New York African burial ground , CK Clinton , FLC Jackson – ISME Communications , 2025 Core issues, case studies, and the need for expanded Legacy African American genomics , F Jackson, CK Clinton , J Caldwell – Frontiers in Genetics , 2023 www.carterclinton.com Download seminar poster Carter Clinton, PhD Assistant Professor at North Carolina State University | Profile Dr. Carter Clinton is a genetic anthropologist, National Geographic Explorer, and Assistant Professor of Biological Sciences at North Carolina State University, where he directs the Ancestry, Soil, Health, and Evolutionary Studies (ASHES) Lab. He earned his PhD in Biology at Howard University and completed postdoctoral training at Pennsylvania State University. His research advances non-destructive genomics for historical populations, including work at the New York African Burial Ground that helped establish recovery and authentication of human ancient DNA (aDNA) from burial soils as an alternative to destructive skeletal sampling. The ASHES Lab applies these methods to newly documented burial sites in North Carolina, integrating soil derived human, microbial, plant, and animal aDNA using targeted and shotgun sequencing and unique bioinformatic pipelines (specific to highly fragmented, soil derived DNA) to connect molecular signatures with archaeological and archival context. With descendant community partnership, the lab compares human aDNA with genetic data from local living descendants, alongside health and genealogical surveys, and interviews, to support an evolutionary medicine framework that links ancestry, the environment, and social determinants of health to contemporary disease risk. Ethical stewardship, consent, data governance, and benefit sharing are embedded in each project. The Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Colloquium is a seminar series that brings in speakers to present and stimulate discussion on a variety of topics related to existing and proposed biotechnologies and their place within broader societal changes. GES Colloquium is taught by Dr. Zack Brown, and the seminars serve as a great opportunity for our students to build their networks and grow as professionals. To support their efforts, we encourage you to join our in-person seminars, which will now take place in Nelson 4305. Remember, we regularly post colloquium seminars as videos on Panopto and on our GES Lectures podcast, allowing you to revisit or catch up on these recordings at your convenience. Please subscribe to the GES newsletter and LinkedIn for updates. Genetic Engineering and Society Center Colloquium Home | Zoom Registration | Watch Colloquium Videos | LinkedIn | Newsletter GES Center at NC State University—Integrating scientific knowledge & diverse public values in shaping the futures of biotechnology. Produced by Patti Mulligan, Communications Director, GES Center, NC State Find out more at https://ges-center-lectures-ncsu.pinecast.co

Recorded from NC State’s GES Colloquium, this podcast examines how biotechnologies take shape in the world: microbiome engineering in built environments, gene editing and gene drives, forest and agricultural genomics, data governance and equity, risk and regulation, sci-art, and public engagement in practice. --- African Conversations: Insights of African stakeholders on biocontrol technologies for malaria control Zoom ONLY | Insights from African stakeholders on the opportunities, concerns, and governance priorities shaping the future of gene drive technologies for malaria control This presentation shares insights from the African Conversations Initiative, a multi-phase effort to integrate African stakeholder perspectives into the research and development of gene drive modified mosquitoes for malaria control and elimination. Engaging more than 500 participants across multiple countries, including researchers, regulators, policymakers, community and faith leaders, youth groups, civil society, and media, the initiative examines awareness, perceptions, perceived benefits, and major concerns surrounding emerging biocontrol technologies. It identifies critical scientific, regulatory, governance, and communication gaps that may hinder responsible research and future implementation, and highlights stakeholder-driven recommendations to strengthen local capacity, transparency, and context-specific evidence generation across African settings. Related links: African Conversations Initiative Download seminar poster Lina Finda, PhD Director at African Conversations Initiative and Senior Researcher at Ifakara Health Institute | Profile Lina Finda is a public health researcher and co-founder of the African Conversations Initiative, which convenes diverse African stakeholders to reflect on emerging health priorities and ensure that new technologies and innovations serve communities ethically, responsibly, and effectively. She is also a senior researcher at Ifakara Health Institute in Tanzania, where her work focuses on malaria transmission dynamics, particularly human-mosquito interactions, and the potential of innovative strategies to reduce and eliminate transmission. Lina holds an MPH, an MBA, and a PhD in Public Health, and her research focuses on inclusive stakeholder engagement to identify critical gaps and shape practical, community-driven solutions that advance health and wellbeing across Africa. The Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Colloquium is a seminar series that brings in speakers to present and stimulate discussion on a variety of topics related to existing and proposed biotechnologies and their place within broader societal changes. GES Colloquium is taught by Dr. Zack Brown, and the seminars serve as a great opportunity for our students to build their networks and grow as professionals. To support their efforts, we encourage you to join our in-person seminars, which will now take place in Nelson 4305. Remember, we regularly post colloquium seminars as videos on Panopto and on our GES Lectures podcast, allowing you to revisit or catch up on these recordings at your convenience. Please subscribe to the GES newsletter and LinkedIn for updates. --- Genetic Engineering and Society Center Colloquium Home | Zoom Registration | Watch Colloquium Videos | LinkedIn | Newsletter GES Center at NC State University—Integrating scientific knowledge & diverse public values in shaping the futures of biotechnology. Produced by Patti Mulligan, Communications Director, GES Center, NC State Find out more at https://ges-center-lectures-ncsu.pinecast.co

Recorded from NC State’s GES Colloquium, this podcast examines how biotechnologies take shape in the world: microbiome engineering in built environments, gene editing and gene drives, forest and agricultural genomics, data governance and equity, risk and regulation, sci-art, and public engagement in practice. Genome editing in corals Zoom ONLY | An overview of the state of genome editing technology in corals and the ethical issues they elicit. Coral reefs worldwide are experiencing unprecedented losses. Rising sea surface temperatures, declining seawater pH, pollutants, and disease are among the many factors that have led to coral population decline. Given the varied nature of these threats, it is unlikely that a ‘one size fits all’ approach to conservation and restoration will be sufficient. Precision genomics, including genome modification and transgenics, affords new opportunities to develop tailored solutions to these problems. Genomic modification in corals has thus far been hindered by technical difficulties including logistical challenges associated with coral reproduction and the low success rate of traditional transgenic approaches more broadly. Our group has overcome both limitations by successfully spawning corals in captivity year over year, and by developing a novel, high- throughput, gene knock-in strategy which we have demonstrated in several cnidarians including corals. There are potentially transformative applications of this technology: coral transgenic lines could, eventually, be used to drive expression of beneficial gene products that confer tolerance to heat, disease, or other stressors. At the same time, with our bioethics collaborators we are examining the potential ethical, environmental, and policy implications of deploying this technology in corals to generate a framework to guide future stakeholders in its implementation. Warner Lab Download seminar poster > Jake Warner, PhD Associate Professor at UNC Wilmington | Profile Dr. Warner’s lab seeks to understand early development of Stony corals, a long overlooked field of developmental biology. He uses a combination of single cell omics, imaging, and perturbations to derive the gene regulatory networks of early cell type specification in developing corals. His group recently published the first transgenic ‘knock-in’ coral (Warner et al 2025). His group has garnered significant recognition and is funded by the NSF, NIH and international organizations The Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Colloquium is a seminar series that brings in speakers to present and stimulate discussion on a variety of topics related to existing and proposed biotechnologies and their place within broader societal changes. GES Colloquium is taught by Dr. Zack Brown, and the seminars serve as a great opportunity for our students to build their networks and grow as professionals. To support their efforts, we encourage you to join our in-person seminars, which will now take place in Nelson 4305. Remember, we regularly post colloquium seminars as videos on Panopto and on our GES Lectures podcast, allowing you to revisit or catch up on these recordings at your convenience. Please subscribe to the GES newsletter and LinkedIn for updates. Genetic Engineering and Society Center Colloquium Home | Zoom Registration | Watch Colloquium Videos | LinkedIn | Newsletter GES Center at NC State University—Integrating scientific knowledge & diverse public values in shaping the futures of biotechnology. Produced by Patti Mulligan, Communications Director, GES Center, NC State Find out more at https://ges-center-lectures-ncsu.pinecast.co

Recorded from NC State’s GES Colloquium, this podcast examines how biotechnologies take shape in the world: microbiome engineering in built environments, gene editing and gene drives, forest and agricultural genomics, data governance and equity, risk and regulation, sci-art, and public engagement in practice. Gene Drive Research Forum: Convening Evidence, Governance, and Dialogue Through a One Health Lens Nelson 4305 + Zoom | Learn how GeneConvene’s Gene Drive Research Forum brings together cross-sector expertise and dialogue to strengthen decision-making and responsible governance for gene drive and related genetic biocontrol approaches. This colloquium will introduce GeneConvene’s Gene Drive Research Forum as an interdisciplinary convening platform that strengthens responsible research and decision-making on gene drive and related genetic biocontrol approaches through a One Health lens. The presentation will show how GeneConvene—and the Forum in particular—integrates evidence from the life sciences, social sciences, ethics, and regulatory practice to inform governance and support meaningful dialogue among researchers, public health practitioners, environmental stakeholders, and communities. We will review the Forum’s core activities and share emerging lessons on translating complex evidence into accessible, context-sensitive insights that can inform policy and practice. Related links: GeneConvene LinkedIn Download seminar poster Mr. J. Royden Saah, MS Senior Technical Expert at GeneConvene/Foundation for the National Institutes of Health | Profile J. Royden Saah is a global health and biosafety leader with more than two decades of experience building pandemic preparedness, infectious disease response, and research-to-operations programs in the U.S. and internationally. He currently serves as a Senior Technical Expert at FNIH’s GeneConvene. He came to the foundation after coordinating the Genetic Biocontrol of Invasive Rodents program at Island Conservation, supporting a multi-institution, multinational network developing novel biotechnologies for vector and pest management. His prior roles include senior leadership at the North Carolina State Laboratory of Public Health and international outbreak response deployments, including COVID-19 and the West African Ebola epidemic. He holds a BS in Zoology and an MS in Microbiology, both from North Carolina State University. The Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Colloquium is a seminar series that brings in speakers to present and stimulate discussion on a variety of topics related to existing and proposed biotechnologies and their place within broader societal changes. GES Colloquium is taught by Dr. Zack Brown, and the seminars serve as a great opportunity for our students to build their networks and grow as professionals. To support their efforts, we encourage you to join our in-person seminars, which will now take place in Nelson 4305. Remember, we regularly post colloquium seminars as videos on Panopto and on our GES Lectures podcast, allowing you to revisit or catch up on these recordings at your convenience. Please subscribe to the GES newsletter and LinkedIn for updates. Genetic Engineering and Society Center Colloquium Home | Zoom Registration | Watch Colloquium Videos | LinkedIn | Newsletter GES Center at NC State University—Integrating scientific knowledge & diverse public values in shaping the futures of biotechnology. Produced by Patti Mulligan, Communications Director, GES Center, NC State Find out more at https://ges-center-lectures-ncsu.pinecast.co

Recorded from NC State’s GES Colloquium, this podcast examines how biotechnologies take shape in the world: microbiome engineering in built environments, gene editing and gene drives, forest and agricultural genomics, data governance and equity, risk and regulation, sci-art, and public engagement in practice. _________ Governing Genome Editing at the Boundaries: Empirical Insights from Human Health Applications *Zoom* Only | Drawing on empirical research on human genome editing, this talk examines how ethical questions around enhancement, disease seriousness, and governance are negotiated in practice, with implications beyond human health. This talk draws on empirical research on human genome editing to examine how ethical boundaries around enhancement, disease seriousness, and governance are understood and negotiated in practice. Focusing on how scientists, clinicians, and policy professionals make sense of emerging genome‑editing technologies, the presentation highlights tensions between categorical policy distinctions and the context‑sensitive judgments required under conditions of uncertainty and clinical urgency. Rather than treating ethical boundaries as fixed or purely normative, the findings illustrate how they are shaped through anticipatory reasoning, institutional constraints, and efforts to act responsibly in the face of incomplete knowledge. Although grounded in human health applications, this analysis offers insights relevant to broader debates about responsible innovation and the governance of genetic engineering across domains. Related links: Incidental Enhancement: Addressing a Neglected Policy Issue in Human Genome Editing , NIH National Human Genome Research Institute project, R.J. Cadigan (PI) Download seminar poster Jean Cadigan, PhD Professor at University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill | Profile Jean Cadigan, PhD, is a Professor of Social Medicine at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill whose work focuses on the ethical, legal, and social implications of emerging genomic technologies. A medical anthropologist, she conducts empirical research on how scientists, clinicians, policymakers, and publics understand and navigate ethical boundaries in areas such as human genome editing and genomic medicine. She recently led an NIH‑funded study, “Incidental Enhancement: Addressing a Neglected Policy Issue in Human Genome Editing,” which investigated how concerns about enhancement arise in the context of ostensibly therapeutic genome‑editing interventions. She is delighted to be affiliated with GES through PreMiEr’s Social and Ethical Implications (SEI) research focus. The Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Colloquium is a seminar series that brings in speakers to present and stimulate discussion on a variety of topics related to existing and proposed biotechnologies and their place within broader societal changes. GES Colloquium is taught by Dr. Zack Brown, and the seminars serve as a great opportunity for our students to build their networks and grow as professionals. To support their efforts, we encourage you to join our in-person seminars, which will now take place in Nelson 4305. Remember, we regularly post colloquium seminars as videos on Panopto and on our GES Lectures podcast, allowing you to revisit or catch up on these recordings at your convenience. Please subscribe to the GES newsletter and LinkedIn for updates. Genetic Engineering and Society Center Colloquium Home | Zoom Registration | Watch Colloquium Videos | LinkedIn | Newsletter GES Center at NC State University—Integrating scientific knowledge & diverse public values in shaping the futures of biotechnology. Produced by Patti Mulligan, Communications Director, GES Center, NC State Find out more at https://ges-center-lectures-ncsu.pinecast.co

Recorded from NC State’s GES Colloquium, this podcast examines how biotechnologies take shape in the world: microbiome engineering in built environments, gene editing and gene drives, forest and agricultural genomics, data governance and equity, risk and regulation, sci-art, and public engagement in practice. _________ Catching up with the CRISPR Craze Nelson 4305 + Zoom | Deploying and commercializing genome editing technologies: challenges, opportunities, and implications of disruptive technologies The advent of CRISPR-based technologies has revolutionized our ability to manipulate the genetic content of organisms across the tree of life and democratized genome editing across the globe. Repurposed from obscure adaptive immune systems in bacteria, CRISPR molecular machines have been broadly deployed in academia and industry in the past 10 years to manipulate the genomes of organisms relevant to medicine, biotechnology, and agriculture. We now have access to a portable CRISPR toolbox enabling flexible editing from a single nucleotide to large-scale genome manipulation in organisms that span minimalistic viruses to large trees and their corresponding genome range and complexities. So far, most applications focus on the design of efficacious and safe gene and cell therapies to address human disease. Yet, there are un(der)-appreciated opportunities to deploy genome editing modalities for sustainable agriculture, to enhance crops (yield and traits), but also livestock, trees, and organisms used throughout the food supply chain. There is a path to next-generation therapies by 2030, sustainable agriculture by 2040, and breeding healthier forests by 2050. Besides the technical bottlenecks, it is also necessary to account for regulatory frameworks, intellectual property pursuit, public engagement, ethical deployment, consumer acceptance, and geopolitical issues impacting our practical ability to harness genome editing to address medical, agricultural, and environmental challenges that require such disruptive technologies. Related links: CRISPR Lab – Publications CRISPR Lab – Research Download seminar poster Rodolphe Barrangou, PhD Distinguished Professor at NC State University | Profile Rodolphe Barrangou, Ph.D., is the Todd R. Klaenhammer Distinguished Professor at North Carolina State University. Rodolphe spent 9 years in R\&D and M\&A at Danisco and DuPont, and has been at NC State since 2013. For his CRISPR work, Rodolphe received several international awards, including the 2016 Canada Gairdner International Award, the 2016 Harvard Medical School Warren Alpert Prize, the 2017 NAS Award in Molecular Biology, and the 2018 NAS Prize in Food and Agriculture Sciences. He has been elected into the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, the National Academy of Inventors, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and the National Inventors Hall of Fame. Dr. Barrangou earned a BS in Biological Sciences from Rene Descartes University, France, an MS in Biological Engineering from the University of Technology in Compiegne, France, an MS in Food Science from NC State, a PhD in Genomics from NC State, and an MBA from the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Dr. Barrangou is also the former Chairman of the Board of Caribou Biosciences (NASDAQ CRBU), a co-founder of Intellia Therapeutics (NASDAQ NTLA), Locus Biosciences, TreeCo, Ancilia Biosciences, and CRISPR Biotechnologies, an advisor to Inari Ag, Provaxus, the KiTua fund, and the Editor in Chief of the CRISPR Journal. At NC State, Professor Barrangou holds appointments and affiliations in a dozen departments, academic programs, and centers, supporting the land-grant mission of the University. __________ The Genetic Engineering and Society (GES) Colloquium is a seminar series that brings in speakers to present and stimulate discussion on a variety of topics related to existing and proposed biotechnologies and their place within broader societal changes. GES Colloquium is taught by Dr. Zack Brown, and the seminars serve as a great opportunity for our students to build their networks and grow as professionals. To support their efforts, we encourage you to join our in-person seminars, which will now take place in Nelson 4305. Please subscribe to the GES newsletter and LinkedIn for updates. Genetic Engineering and Society Center Colloquium Home | Zoom Registration | Watch Colloquium Videos | LinkedIn | Newsletter GES Center at NC State University—Integrating scientific knowledge & diverse public values in shaping the futures of biotechnology. Produced by Patti Mulligan, Communications Director, GES Center, NC State Find out more at https://ges-center-lectures-ncsu.pinecast.co