While gene-editing technologies such as CRISPR-Cas9 have revolutionised plant breeding, it is unlikely that they signal the end of conventional plant breeding. CRISPR-Cas9 and other gene-editing tools have the potential to accelerate and enhance the process of plant breeding by enabling precise and targeted modifications to plant genomes. However, they do not replace conventional plant breeding methods entirely. Here's why:

Genetic diversity: Conventional plant breeding relies on the natural genetic diversity found within plant populations. This diversity arises from mutations, cross-pollination, and recombination during sexual reproduction. Gene editing, on the other hand, introduces specific, targeted changes to the genome, but it does not create new genetic diversity. Therefore, conventional breeding remains essential for accessing and utilising the vast genetic diversity present in nature.

Complex traits: Many important plant traits, such as yield, drought tolerance, and disease resistance, are influenced by multiple genes and environmental factors. Gene editing can be used to modify individual genes, but it may be challenging to address complex traits that involve the interplay of multiple genes and pathways. Conventional breeding, which involves selecting and crossing plants with desirable traits over multiple generations, allows for the simultaneous improvement of multiple traits.

Regulatory considerations: Gene-edited plants may face regulatory scrutiny and approval processes, especially if they are intended for commercial use. The regulatory landscape can vary among countries and regions, and the approval process can be time-consuming and costly. Conventional plant breeding methods, on the other hand, are generally not subject to the same level of regulatory oversight.

Cost and accessibility: Gene-editing technologies require specialised knowledge, equipment, and expertise, which may limit their accessibility, especially for small-scale farmers and breeding programmes in developing countries. Conventional plant breeding methods, on the other hand, are relatively low-cost and do not require expensive technologies or infrastructure.

Consumer acceptance: There may be concerns among consumers and advocacy groups regarding the safety and ethical implications of gene-edited plants. Public acceptance of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), including gene-edited plants, can vary widely, and market acceptance can influence the success of new plant varieties.

Therefore, while gene-editing technologies have great potential to contribute to plant improvement, it is unlikely that they will completely replace conventional plant breeding. Both approaches have their strengths and limitations, and they are likely to continue to coexist and complement each other in the field of plant breeding.