# data[].attributes.body
How genetic engineering is used to produce noval products

# data[].attributes.body
How Genetic Engineering is Used to Produce Novel Products
Avatar of SHERILYN ABARRA
SHERILYN ABARRA
 + 22
●
17h

# data[].attributes.body
How Genetic Engineering is Used to Produce Novel Products
Avatar of SHERILYN ABARRA
SHERILYN ABARRA
 + 22
●
22h

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
By Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D., University of California, Davis

The prospect of genetically modified food animals has been looming on the horizon for over 30 years, ever since the first genetically modified, or more correctly, "genetically engineered", mice were produced in the 1980s. Animal breeders have been "genetically modifying" animals using traditional breeding techniques for centuries, for example, developing the Chihuahua from its wolf progenitor. Genetic engineering (GE), however, refers to the use of recombinant DNA techniques or biotechnology to intentionally modify the genome of an animal to produce a desired outcome or trait. In the case of animals, this outcome might be an agriculturally related trait like improved disease resistance or a faster rate of growth, or something related to product composition such as pork with elevated levels of omega-3 fatty acids. There are currently no GE animals approved for food purposes.

Conversely, GE plants, which were first produced in 1983, were approved for food purposes in the 1990s and have been rapidly adopted by farmers globally. Approximately 420 million acres of GE crops (12% of total arable land) were cultivated worldwide by 17.3 million farmers in 2012. This is a 100-fold increase from the 4.2 million acres that were planted in 1996, making GE the most rapidly adopted crop technology in recent history. During the period from 1996 to 2011, the cumulative economic benefits from cost savings and added income derived from planting GE crops is estimated to have been $49.6 billion in developing countries and $48.6 billion in industrial countries[1]. A high proportion of the global soybean (81%), cotton (81%), corn (35%), and canola (30%) supplies are currently derived from GE crop varieties. Approximately 70% of processed foods available in US grocery stores contain an ingredient from a GE crop.

Animal agriculture is also highly dependent on GE crops; over 70% of harvested GE biomass is fed to food-producing animals throughout the world. Even in the European Union (EU), where there is little cultivation of GE crops, it has been estimated that 80% of all animal feed is imported and that more than half of this is from GE crops imported from Brazil, the USA, and Argentina. The EU imports approximately 70% of the soybean meal used in animal feed and of this 80% is GE. It has been projected that if the EU were not able to import soybean protein from outside the EU it would only be able to replace 10-20% of imports by high protein feed substitutes, and that this would result in a substantial reduction in animal protein production, exports and consumption, and a very significant increase of animal protein imports into the EU.

Despite the widespread adoption of GE crops, no GE animal has been approved for food consumption in any country. Pharmaceutical drugs produced by GE animals have received regulatory approval; however, the commercial approval of a GE food animal has yet to be accomplished. The first and currently only GE food animal up for approval, the fast-growing AquAdvantage salmon, has been undergoing regulatory review in the USA for over a decade. All regulatory studies, including food safety evaluations, were completed in 2009 at a cost of over $60 million. In 2010 the FDA determined that the " AquAdvantage Salmon is as safe as food from conventional Atlantic salmon" and that " no significant food safety hazards or risks have been identified with respect to the phenotype of the AquAdvantage Salmon ". Despite these findings and the proposed production of infertile triploid, all-female fish in contained inland tank systems to prevent escapement, no statement has yet been issued by the FDA regarding approval or otherwise of this first GE food animal.

Part of the reason for this protracted regulatory evaluation of the AquAdvantage salmon has been pressure from special interest groups and a handful of elected officials to prevent the product coming to market. Some activist groups have even begun actively targeting supermarket chains to boycott the GE salmon by threatening to cease purchasing at those chains unless they cede to their demands. The on-going regulatory uncertainty has had a pervasive chilling effect upon the development and commercial adoption of GE animals. Regulatory inaction has the consequence of threatening not only the AquAdvantage salmon, but animal biotechnology in general. Although some might argue that this is a desirable outcome, it is not in society's interest to give up on a promising set of technologies when science has consistently shown that there is nothing uniquely or inherently risky about food produced from GE animals or crops.

The risks associated with GE animals may even be less than those associated with existing production systems. For example, Atlantic salmon are commonly produced in floating ocean net-pens. Hazards presented by conventional production include: (1) local eutrophication due to nutrient enrichment from decomposition of uneaten feed and animal wastes, (2) transmission of parasites and pathogens among cultured and wild fish populations, and (3) escapement of selectively-bred, fast-growing fertile salmon and interbreeding of cultured and wild Atlantic salmon populations. A shift to greater aquacultural production in on-shore facilities presents an option to reduce these environmental impacts and concomitantly decrease pressure on wild-caught fisheries.

Demand for livestock products is expected to continue growing strongly through the middle of this century, and by 2050 nearly twice as much meat will be produced as today. Some of the promising applications of this technology involve the development of GE animals that are disease resistant. For example, a consortium of scientists from New York University, the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) in Nairobi, Kenya, the Roslin Institute and The University of Liverpool have been awarded a grant by The National Science Foundation of the USA and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to develop GE cattle that are resistant to African Bovine Trypanosomiasis.

Trypanosomiasis is a disease caused by blood parasites of the genus Trypanosoma that are transmitted in Africa by tsetse flies ( Glossina spp). Tsetse and trypanosomiasis threatens approximately 45-50 million head of cattle and are the major factors preventing the establishment of sustainable agricultural systems in many parts of sub-Saharan Africa. Direct losses in meat production and milk yield and the costs of programs that attempt to control trypanosomiasis are estimated to amount to up to $1.2 billion each year. If the disease did not exist, many more families could use draught animals to plough their fields rather than manual labor. All told, trypanosomiasis is estimated to cost sub-Saharan Africa $4 billion or more each year.

There are many other examples of potentially beneficial applications of GE animals including applications that improve the healthfulness of animal products, and the health and welfare of the animals themselves. These include GE animals with altered milk (e.g. decreased lactose) and meat (e.g. increase omega-3 fatty acids) composition for food purposes. Researchers at UC Davis are working on goats that produce milk which is protective against juvenile diarrhea, a major killer of infants in developing countries. Other researchers are working to develop GE animals that produce single-sex offspring in species where only one gender produces the food product, such as eggs or milk. Yet another group is working to edit the DNA sequence of a single gene in the bovine genome of horned cattle breeds to render them naturally hornless or polled, thereby negating the need for dehorning, an unpleasant process that is routinely carried out for both farmer and animal safety.

Relative to GE crops, the commercialization of GE food animals is at a nascent stage. Subjecting the GE animal approval process to prolonged political interference and unaccountable regulatory delay is having an inhibitory effect on the commercialization of this potentially beneficial technology. Focusing solely on the potential risks associated with GE animals while ignoring both the known risks associated with current production practices, and as importantly the potential benefits, results in an uneven evaluation of the potential of this technology. World-wide GE regulations have disproportionately focused only on the potential, and largely unrealized, risks associated with GE technology. While regulation to ensure the safety of new technologies is necessary, in a world facing burgeoning demands on agriculture from population growth, economic growth, and climate change; creating an impassable regulatory hurdle for promising technologies is a roadblock that global food security can ill afford.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
GM animals: Why do we need them, what is in the pipeline, and what are the risks?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Alison Van Eenennaam, Ph.D., University of California, Davis The prospect of genetically modified food animals has been looming on the horizon for over 30 years, ever since the first genetically modified, or more correctly, "genetically engineered", mice were produced in the 1980s.

# data[].attributes.body
How Genetic Engineering is Used to Produce Novel Products
Avatar of SHERILYN ABARRA
SHERILYN ABARRA
 + 17
●
18h

# data[].attributes.body
cts
Avatar of SHERILYN ABARRA
SHERILYN ABARRA
 + 15
●
1d

# data[].attributes.body
asdawtrdsHeh
Pick a post to connect to
CANCEL

# data[].attributes.body
asdawtrdsHeh
Pick a post to connect to
CANCEL

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
HSC ICT Lecture 8 | Genetic Engineering, Nano Technology, Biometrics & Bio-informatics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
how is genetic engineering (biotechnology) used to produce novel biomedical and agricultural products.?

# data[].attributes.headline
Genetic Engineering of Algae for Biofuel Production

# data[].attributes.subject
Genetic Engineering of Algae for Biofuel Production

# data[].attributes.body
Microalgae and other microorganisms, which include prokaryotic species of cyanobacteria and eukaryotic algae, are widely used for the extraction of biofuels which can truly suffice the growing concern of the society when it comes to the issue of depleting non renewable sources of fuels. Bioengineers forecast that microalgae will be redesigned to produce biofuels to using insights from synthetic biology, an advanced method of creating genetically engineered organisms.

Cyanobacteria have already been engineered to produce a number of different biofuel related compounds (Machado and Atsumi, 2012). Previous efforts have focused on producing ethanol (Deng and Coleman, 1999), isobutanol (Atsumi et al., 2009), and isobutyraldehyde (Atsumi et al., 2009). These successes clearly demonstrate the malleability of cyanobacteria as a chemical production platform. Over the past 15 years we have moved from detection of the first industrial chemicals produced from exogenous genes in cyanobacteria, through a burst of discovery and experimentation with pathways and design in photosynthetic prokaryotes, to our current status of balancing and matching of production to the metabolism of the host (Oliver et al., 2013). Sustainable biofuel production in cyanobacteria can be fully realized as we focus on pathway engineering and strain development.

# data[].attributes.body
SIGN UP
LOG IN

favorite_border

share_arrow
SHARE

help_outline

more_horiz
Icon
How Genetic Engineering is Used to Produce Novel Products
Avatar of SHERILYN ABARRA
SHERILYN ABARRA
 + 6
●
2mo
📎 Photo



Add comment
📎 Photo



Add comment
Ò
Ò
 

Add comment
M
M
 

Add comment
📎 Photo

2 comments

Anonymous 5mo
3

Anonymous 5mo
ll


Add comment
Nice 😂
 Nice 😂
1 comment

Anonymous 4mo
k


Add comment
slkls
slkls
 

Add comment
Genetic Engineering of Algae for Biofuel Production
Genetic Engineering of Algae for Biofuel Production
Microalgae and other microorganisms, which include prokaryotic species of cyanobacteria and eukaryotic algae, are widely used for the extraction of biofuels which can truly suffice the growing concern of the society when it comes to the issue of depleting non renewable sources of fuels. Bioengineers forecast that microalgae will be redesigned to produce biofuels to using insights from synthetic biology, an advanced method of creating genetically engineered organisms. 
 
Cyanobacteria have already been engineered to produce a number of different biofuel related compounds (Machado and Atsumi, 2012). Previous efforts have focused on producing ethanol (Deng and Coleman, 1999), isobutanol (Atsumi et al., 2009), and isobutyraldehyde (Atsumi et al., 2009). These successes clearly demonstrate the malleability of cyanobacteria as a chemical production platform. Over the past 15 years we have moved from detection of the first industrial chemicals produced from exogenous genes in cyanobacteria, through a burst of discovery and experimentation with pathways and design in photosynthetic prokaryotes, to our current status of balancing and matching of production to the metabolism of the host (Oliver et al., 2013). Sustainable biofuel production in cyanobacteria can be fully realized as we focus on pathway engineering and strain development.
 
 

Add comment

more_vert
References:
References:
Atsumi, S., Higashide, W., and Liao, J. C. (2009). Direct photosynthetic recycling of carbon dioxide to isobutyraldehyde. Nat. Biotechnol. 27, 1177–1180. doi:10.1038/nbt.1586 
Deng, M.-D., and Coleman, J. R. (1999). Ethanol synthesis by genetic engineering in cyanobacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 65, 523–528.
Eenennaam A. 2013. GM animals: Why do we need them, what is in the pipeline, and what are the risks? < http://takingstock.asas.org/?p=9537>
Key S, Ma J, Drake P. 2008. Genetically modified plants and human health. J R Soc Med. 101: 290–298. DOI 10.1258/jrsm.2008.070372
Machado, I. M., and Atsumi, S. (2012). Cyanobacterial biofuel production. J. Biotechnol. 162, 50–56. doi:10. 1016/j.jbiotec.2012.03.005
Nozzi N, Oliver J Atsumi S. 2013. Cyanobacteria as a platform for biofuel production. Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology. Vol 1: 7 doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2013.00007
Oliver, J. W. K., Machado, I. M. P., Yoneda, H., and Atsumi, S. (2013). Cyanobacterial conversion of carbon dioxide to 2,3- butanediol. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 110, 1249–1254. doi:10.1073/pnas.1213024110
Snow A. and Smith V. 2012. Genetically engineered algae: A key role for ecologist. BioScience. Vol. 62:8; 765-768
 

Add comment
Questions:
Questions:
1. What are the benefits of using genetic engineering in producing biofuels?
2. How can genetic engineering benefit the agricultural sector?
3. What is your opinion in using animals for genetic engineering studies?
 

Add comment
Designer Babies
Designer Babies


 Genetic Engineering Will Change Everything Forever – CRISPR
Genetic Engineering Will Change Everything Forever – CRISPR
Designer babies, the end of diseases, genetically modified humans that never age. Outrageous things that used to be science fiction are suddenly becoming reality. The only thing we know for sure is that things will change irreversibly.
youtube


Add comment
Genetically engineered animals: Are they the future?
Genetically engineered animals: Are they the future?
The prospect of genetically modified food animals has been looming on the horizon for over 30 years, ever since the first genetically modified, or more correctly, “genetically engineered”, mice were produced in the 1980s. Animal breeders have been “genetically modifying” animals using traditional breeding techniques for centuries, for example, developing the Chihuahua from its wolf progenitor. Genetic engineering (GE), however, refers to the use of recombinant DNA techniques or biotechnology to intentionally modify the genome of an animal to produce a desired outcome or trait. In the case of animals, this outcome might be an agriculturally related trait like improved disease resistance or a faster rate of growth, or something related to product composition such as pork with elevated levels of omega-3 fatty acids.  There are currently no GE animals approved for food purposes.
 
Despite the widespread adoption of GE crops, no GE animal has been approved for food consumption in any country. Pharmaceutical drugs produced by GE animals have received regulatory approval; however, the commercial approval of a GE food animal has yet to be accomplished. The first and currently only GE food animal up for approval, the fast-growing AquAdvantage salmon, has been undergoing regulatory review in the USA for over a decade. All regulatory studies, including food safety evaluations, were completed in 2009 at a cost of over $60 million.  In 2010 the FDA determined that the “AquAdvantage Salmon is as safe as food from conventional Atlantic salmon” and that “no significant food safety hazards or risks have been identified with respect to the phenotype of the AquAdvantage Salmon”.  Despite these findings and the proposed production of infertile triploid, all-female fish in contained inland tank systems to prevent escapement, no statement has yet been issued by the FDA regarding approval or otherwise of this first GE food animal.
 
Part of the reason for this protracted regulatory evaluation of the AquAdvantage salmon has been pressure from special interest groups and a handful of elected officials to prevent the product coming to market. Some activist groups have even begun actively targeting supermarket chains to boycott the GE salmon by threatening to cease purchasing at those chains unless they cede to their demands. The on-going regulatory uncertainty has had a pervasive chilling effect upon the development and commercial adoption of GE animals.  Regulatory inaction has the consequence of threatening not only the AquAdvantage salmon, but animal biotechnology in general. Although some might argue that this is a desirable outcome, it is not in society’s interest to give up on a promising set of technologies when science has consistently shown that there is nothing uniquely or inherently risky about food produced from GE animals or crops.
 

Add comment
Food applications for GM plants
Food applications for GM plants

Increasing nutritional content

An important example of the potential of this technology is the ‘Golden Rice Project’. It is estimated that 72 g of dry Golden Rice will provide 50% of the RDA of vitamin A for a 1–3-year-old Child. Vitamin A deficiency is widespread in the developing world and golden rice is an impressive example of a health solution that can be offered by plant biotechnology.
 
Increasing food production
 
Crop yields worldwide are significantly reduced by the action of pathogens, parasites and herbivorous insects. Two examples of commercial GM crop growth in this area are the insect-resistant crops expressing the bt gene (from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis) and virus-resistant GM papaya. The first of these has been particularly successful; in the USA, for example, insect resistant GM maize is grown over an area of 10.6 million hectares and comprises 35% of all maize (GM and non-GM) grown in the country. At the laboratory level, resistance has also been engineered to bacterial and fungal plant pathogens
 

Add comment
Genetically Modified Plants and Human Health
Genetically Modified Plants and Human Health
Transgenic (GM) plants are those that have been genetically modified using recombinant DNA technology. The technology can be utilized in a number of ways, for example to engineer resistance
to abiotic stresses, such as drought, extreme temperature or salinity, and biotic stresses, such as insects and pathogens, that would normally prove detrimental to plant growth or survival. The technology can also be used to improve the nutritional content of the plant, an application that could be of particular use in the developing world. New-generation GM crops are now also being developed for the production of recombinant medicines and industrial products, such as monoclonal antibodies, vaccines, plastics and biofuels.
 

Add comment
Potential risks of growing algae
Potential risks of growing algae

Genetically engineered microalgae are nearing commercial release for biofuel production without sufficient public information or ecological studies to investigate their possible risks. Cyanobacteria and eukaryotic green algae are likely to disperse widely from open ponds and, on a smaller scale with a lower probability, from enclosed photobioreactors. With powerful molecular techniques, thousands of algal strains have been screened, hybridized, and redesigned to grow quickly and tolerate extreme conditions. Some biologists do not expect genetically engineered microalgae to survive in the wild. However, thorough ecological and evolutionary assessments are needed to test this assumption and, if the algae do survive, to confirm that their persistence is highly unlikely to cause environmental harm.
 

Add comment
 add

# data[].attributes.body
Nice 😂

# data[].attributes.body
Atsumi, S., Higashide, W., and Liao, J. C. (2009). Direct photosynthetic recycling of carbon dioxide to isobutyraldehyde. Nat. Biotechnol. 27, 1177–1180. doi:10.1038/nbt.1586

Deng, M.-D., and Coleman, J. R. (1999). Ethanol synthesis by genetic engineering in cyanobacteria. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 65, 523–528.

Eenennaam A. 2013. GM animals: Why do we need them, what is in the pipeline, and what are the risks? < http://takingstock.asas.org/?p=9537>
Key S, Ma J, Drake P. 2008. Genetically modified plants and human health. J R Soc Med. 101: 290–298. DOI 10.1258/jrsm.2008.070372
Machado, I. M., and Atsumi, S. (2012). Cyanobacterial biofuel production. J. Biotechnol. 162, 50–56. doi:10. 1016/j.jbiotec.2012.03.005

Nozzi N, Oliver J Atsumi S. 2013. Cyanobacteria as a platform for biofuel production. Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology. Vol 1: 7 doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2013.00007
Oliver, J. W. K., Machado, I. M. P., Yoneda, H., and Atsumi, S. (2013). Cyanobacterial conversion of carbon dioxide to 2,3- butanediol. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 110, 1249–1254. doi:10.1073/pnas.1213024110

Snow A. and Smith V. 2012. Genetically engineered algae: A key role for ecologist. BioScience. Vol. 62:8; 765-768

# data[].attributes.body
1. What are the benefits of using genetic engineering in producing biofuels?
2. How can genetic engineering benefit the agricultural sector?
3. What is your opinion in using animals for genetic engineering studies?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Genetic Engineering Will Change Everything Forever – CRISPR

# data[].attributes.headline
Genetically engineered animals: Are they the future?

# data[].attributes.subject
Genetically engineered animals: Are they the future?

# data[].attributes.body
The prospect of genetically modified food animals has been looming on the horizon for over 30 years, ever since the first genetically modified, or more correctly, “genetically engineered”, mice were produced in the 1980s. Animal breeders have been “genetically modifying” animals using traditional breeding techniques for centuries, for example, developing the Chihuahua from its wolf progenitor. Genetic engineering (GE), however, refers to the use of recombinant DNA techniques or biotechnology to intentionally modify the genome of an animal to produce a desired outcome or trait. In the case of animals, this outcome might be an agriculturally related trait like improved disease resistance or a faster rate of growth, or something related to product composition such as pork with elevated levels of omega-3 fatty acids.  There are currently no GE animals approved for food purposes.

Despite the widespread adoption of GE crops, no GE animal has been approved for food consumption in any country. Pharmaceutical drugs produced by GE animals have received regulatory approval; however, the commercial approval of a GE food animal has yet to be accomplished. The first and currently only GE food animal up for approval, the fast-growing AquAdvantage salmon, has been undergoing regulatory review in the USA for over a decade. All regulatory studies, including food safety evaluations, were completed in 2009 at a cost of over $60 million.  In 2010 the FDA determined that the “AquAdvantage Salmon is as safe as food from conventional Atlantic salmon” and that “no significant food safety hazards or risks have been identified with respect to the phenotype of the AquAdvantage Salmon”.  Despite these findings and the proposed production of infertile triploid, all-female fish in contained inland tank systems to prevent escapement, no statement has yet been issued by the FDA regarding approval or otherwise of this first GE food animal.

Part of the reason for this protracted regulatory evaluation of the AquAdvantage salmon has been pressure from special interest groups and a handful of elected officials to prevent the product coming to market. Some activist groups have even begun actively targeting supermarket chains to boycott the GE salmon by threatening to cease purchasing at those chains unless they cede to their demands. The on-going regulatory uncertainty has had a pervasive chilling effect upon the development and commercial adoption of GE animals.  Regulatory inaction has the consequence of threatening not only the AquAdvantage salmon, but animal biotechnology in general. Although some might argue that this is a desirable outcome, it is not in society’s interest to give up on a promising set of technologies when science has consistently shown that there is nothing uniquely or inherently risky about food produced from GE animals or crops.

# data[].attributes.body
Increasing nutritional content

An important example of the potential of this technology is the ‘Golden Rice Project’. It is estimated that 72 g of dry Golden Rice will provide 50% of the RDA of vitamin A for a 1–3-year-old Child. Vitamin A deficiency is widespread in the developing world and golden rice is an impressive example of a health solution that can be offered by plant biotechnology.

Increasing food production

Crop yields worldwide are significantly reduced by the action of pathogens, parasites and herbivorous insects. Two examples of commercial GM crop growth in this area are the insect-resistant crops expressing the bt gene (from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis) and virus-resistant GM papaya. The first of these has been particularly successful; in the USA, for example, insect resistant GM maize is grown over an area of 10.6 million hectares and comprises 35% of all maize (GM and non-GM) grown in the country. At the laboratory level, resistance has also been engineered to bacterial and fungal plant pathogens

# data[].attributes.headline
Genetically Modified Plants and Human Health

# data[].attributes.subject
Genetically Modified Plants and Human Health

# data[].attributes.body
Transgenic (GM) plants are those that have been genetically modified using recombinant DNA technology. The technology can be utilized in a number of ways, for example to engineer resistance

to abiotic stresses, such as drought, extreme temperature or salinity, and biotic stresses, such as insects and pathogens, that would normally prove detrimental to plant growth or survival. The technology can also be used to improve the nutritional content of the plant, an application that could be of particular use in the developing world. New-generation GM crops are now also being developed for the production of recombinant medicines and industrial products, such as monoclonal antibodies, vaccines, plastics and biofuels.

# data[].attributes.body
Genetically engineered microalgae are nearing commercial release for biofuel production without sufficient public information or ecological studies to investigate their possible risks. Cyanobacteria and eukaryotic green algae are likely to disperse widely from open ponds and, on a smaller scale with a lower probability, from enclosed photobioreactors. With powerful molecular techniques, thousands of algal strains have been screened, hybridized, and redesigned to grow quickly and tolerate extreme conditions. Some biologists do not expect genetically engineered microalgae to survive in the wild. However, thorough ecological and evolutionary assessments are needed to test this assumption and, if the algae do survive, to confirm that their persistence is highly unlikely to cause environmental harm.

# data[].attributes.headline
Genetic Engineering of Algae for Biofuel Production

# data[].attributes.subject
Genetic Engineering of Algae for Biofuel Production

# data[].attributes.body
Microalgae and other microorganisms, which include prokaryotic species of cyanobacteria and eukaryotic algae, are widely used for the extraction of biofuels which can truly suffice the growing concern of the society when it comes to the issue of depleting non renewable sources of fuels. Bioengineers forecast that microalgae will be redesigned to produce biofuels to using insights from synthetic biology, an advanced method of creating genetically engineered organisms.

Cyanobacteria have already been engineered to produce a number of different biofuel related compounds (Machado and Atsumi, 2012). Previous efforts have focused on producing ethanol (Deng and Coleman, 1999), isobutanol (Atsumi et al., 2009), and isobutyraldehyde (Atsumi et al., 2009). These successes clearly demonstrate the malleability of cyanobacteria as a chemical production platform. Over the past 15 years we have moved from detection of the first industrial chemicals produced from exogenous genes in cyanobacteria, through a burst of discovery and experimentation with pathways and design in photosynthetic prokaryotes, to our current status of balancing and matching of production to the metabolism of the host (Oliver et al., 2013). Sustainable biofuel production in cyanobacteria can be fully realized as we focus on pathway engineering and strain development.