New perspectives of genetic disorders in cattle

In the last decades a negative trend in inbreeding has accompanied the evident improvement in productivity and performance of bovine domestic population, predisposing to the occurrence of recessively inherited disorders. The objectives of this thesis were: a) the study of genetic diseases applying a “forward genetic approach” (FGA); b) the estimation of the prevalence of deleterious alleles responsible for eight recessive disorders in different breeds; c) the collection of well-characterized materials in a Biobank for Bovine Genetic Disorders. The FGA allowed the identification of seven new recessive deleterious variants (Paunch calf syndrome - KDM2B; Congenital cholesterol deficiency - APOB; Ichthyosis congenita - FA2H; Hypotrichosis - KRT71; Hypotrichosis - HEPHL1; Achromatopsia - CNGB3; Hemifacial microsomia – LAMB1) and of seven new de novo dominant deleterious variants (Achondrogenesis type II - two variants in COL2A1; Osteogenesis imperfecta - COL1A1; Skeletal-cardio-enteric dysplasia - MAP2K2; Congenital neuromuscular channelopathy - KGNG1; Epidermolysis bullosa simplex - KRT5; Classical Ehlers-Danlos syndrome - COL5A2) in different breeds, associated with a large spectrum of phenotypes affecting different systems. The FGA was based on the sequence of a clinical, genealogical, gross- and/or histopathological and genomic study. In particular, a WGS trio-approach (patient, dam and sire) was applied. The prevalence of deleterious alleles was calculated for the Pseudomyotonia congenita, Paunch calf syndrome, Hemifacial microsomia, Congenital bilateral cataract, Ichthyosis congenita, Ichthyosis fetalis, Achromatopsia and Hypotrichosis. A particular concern resulted the allelic frequency of 12% for the Paunch calf syndrome in Romagnola cattle. In respect to the Biobank for Bovine Genetic Diseases, biological materials of clinical cases and their available relatives as well as controls used for the allelic frequency estimations were stored at -20 °C. Altogether, around 16.000 samples were added to the biobank.

Regulating FinTech: The perspectives of law, economics, and technology

FinTech (financial technology, ‘‘FinTech’’) is a double-edged sword as it brings both benefits and risks. This study appraised FinTech’s technological nature that brings changes in complexity in modern financial markets to identify the information deficits and its undesirable outcomes. Besides, as FinTech is still developing, the information regarding, for instance, whether and how to apply regulation may be insufficient for both regulators and those regulated. More one-size-fits-all regulation might accordingly be adopted, thereby resulting in the adverse selection. Through the lens of both law and economics and law and technology, this study suggested AFR (adaptive financial regulation, ‘‘AFR’’) of FinTech to solve the underlying pacing issue. AFR is dynamic, enabling regulatory adjustments and learning. Exploring and collecting information through experiments and learning from experiments are the core of AFR. FinTech regulatory sandboxes epitomize AFR. This study chose Taiwan as a case study. This study found several barriers to adaptive and effective FinTech regulation. Unduly emphasizing consumer protection and the innovation entry criterion by improperly imposing limits on the entry into sandboxes, ignoring post-sandbox mechanisms, and relying on detailed, specific and prescriptive rules to formulate sandboxes are examples. To solve these barriers, this study proposed several solutions by looking into the experiences in other jurisdictions and analyzing. First, striking a balance between encouraging innovation and ensuring financial stability and consumer protection is indispensable. Second, entry to sandboxes should be facilitated by improving the selection criteria. Third, adhering to realizing regulatory adjustment and learning to adapt regulation to technology, this study argued that systematic post-sandbox mechanisms should be established. Fourth, this study recommended “more principles-based sandboxes”. Principles rather than rules should be the base on which sandboxes or FinTech regulation are established. Having principles could provide more flexibility, being easier to adjust and adapt, and better at avoiding.