You might be overestimating our gene-editing abilities - our current knowledge is, in rough terms, a bunch of guesses where we only discover other roles a gene has years later. It’s anything but predictable.
Plant genes are odd.
From and old article by Michael Polan:
“When I got home from St. Louis, I phoned Richard Lewontin, the Harvard geneticist, to ask him what he thought of the software metaphor. ''From an intellectual-property standpoint, it's exactly right,'' he said. ''But it's a bad one in terms of biology. It implies you feed a program into a machine and get predictable results. But the genome is very noisy. If my computer made as many mistakes as an organism does'' -- in interpreting its DNA, he meant -- ''I'd throw it out.''
I asked him for a better metaphor. ''An ecosystem,'' he offered. ''You can always intervene and change something in it, but there's no way of knowing what all the downstream effects will be or how it might affect the environment. We have such a miserably poor understanding of how the organism develops from its DNA that I would be surprised if we don't get one rude shock after another.''”
https://www.nytimes.com/1998/10/25/magazine/playing-god-in-t...
Thats a brilliant metaphor.