« August 2007 | Main | October 2007 »

September 30, 2007

Video on GM crops at Youtube starring McHughen and Holden

GMO Pundit
September 30, 2007

CBC News GMO Debate OECD Summit Edinburgh 2000

For those who prefer movies and civilized conversation to the text and still graphics at this blogsite, Youtube provides a video debate about GM crops. In this link, Canadian scientist Alan McHughen and Soil Association's Patrick Holden go head to head in Edinburgh.

Holden's 2000 prediction, made during the interview, of the impending demise of GM crops has yet to pan out.

Source: GMO Pundit

Seed Biotechnology Could Help Feed The Hungry

KTIV
September 30, 2007

Every day thousands of children in developing nations die of starvation. But scientists at U.C. Davis are working on new technology to bring them and a lot of other people healthier food. The problem.. some wonder if it's safe.

You're looking at the latest in what's called seed biotechnology. Critics call it food altering, but scientists believe engineering the gene make up of crops, like rice, can increase food production while also making it more nutritious.

Professor Kent Bradford says, "If we're going to double or triple food production without taking over rain forests, marginal lands, areas for wildlife and so on, then we have to be able to produce crops very efficiently and at high yield."

Researchers are convinced the new technology can help feed more people around the world in a way that's better for the environment.

Jorge Mayer says, "You can reduce the use of pesticides by introducing a gene that is not available in the genetic diversity of a crop and reduce the use of pesticides."

But critics from the environmental community say they are troubled by the concept of modifying the genetic code for crops.

Dan Jacobson says, "There's nothing wrong with feeding the world. The questions and concerns that we have are - is it a safe way to feed the world? And that hasn't been proven at all yet."

But many scientists insist the technology is safe, and that genetically engineered crops are already in production on 200-million acres worldwide. Critics say they'd like that food to be labeled clearly for consumers.

Source: KTIV

September 28, 2007

Sustainable Technology

Truth about Trade & Technology
Dean Kleckner, Chairman, Truth About Trade & Technology
September 28, 2007

GM crops are good for ladybugs.

That’s one of the fascinating results from a detailed study published recently in Science, the prestigious journal of the “Triple A-S,” also known as the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Biotechnology is also good for bees and earthworms--and presumably for lots of other species as well. The implications for sustainable agriculture are significant. The study suggests strongly that biotechnology not only can play a helpful role in conservation efforts but may in fact represent an environmental improvement over traditional methods of pest control.

These new findings are the result of what scientists call a “meta-analysis.” It means that they looked at an ark-load of separate research and tried to draw common lessons from it. In this particular case, they examined 42 field experiments involving Bt crops in America, Europe, Asia, and Australia.

The biologists who culled through all of this data aren’t exactly a bunch of corporate shills, either. They’re associated with four environmentally-minded organizations: the Nature Conservancy, the Environmental Studies Institute at Santa Clara University, the National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, and the University of California at Santa Barbara.

They did exactly what scientists are supposed to do: They set aside any biases they might have and took an honest look at the evidence.

Their most important observation can be summarized in a single sentence: “Nontarget invertebrates are generally more abundant in Bt cotton and Bt maize fields than in nontransgenic fields managed with insecticides.”

In other words, biotechnology allows crops to defend themselves against specific pests, such as rootworm, without imposing collateral damage on other species, such as ladybugs. And it’s accomplished using less resources while protecting our environment.

“This is a groundbreaking study and the first of its kind to evaluate the current science surrounding genetically modified crops,” said Peter Kareiva, the chief scientist of the Nature Conservancy. “The results are significant for how we think about technology and the future of sustainable agriculture.”

To be sure, the researchers also found that certain species were more abundant in control (that usually means ‘weedy’) fields that weren’t touched by either biotechnology or insecticides. But that’s no surprise, and it doesn’t have much bearing on agricultural practices because almost everybody expects farmers to employ pest-control strategies, especially consumers who enjoy eating fresh produce.

The authors of the article in Science realized that their findings had the potential to kick up a controversy--mainly because anti-biotech activists are always looking for ways to discredit data they don’t like in their never-ending quest to frighten the public about biotechnology. Yet the scientists were determined to stick to the facts: “Regardless of one’s philosophical perspective on risk assessment for GM crops, enough experimental data has accumulated to begin drawing empirically based conclusions, as opposed to arguing on the basis of anecdote or hand-picked examples.”

They went on to call for “further study,” as research scientists are prone to do. This should terrify the anti-biotech activists because further study, conducted along the same truthful lines as the article in Science magazine, is like a dagger pointed at the heart of their lies.

Ordinary people who don’t have ideological axes to grind will see this evidence as good news. In an opinion poll just released by the International Food Information Council, 63 percent of Americans indicated that agricultural sustainability is important to them--and many specifically cited “reducing the amount of pesticides needed to produce food” as a priority.

The bottom line is that biotechnology is not merely compatible with sustainable agriculture--it can actually provide some of the sustenance.

Source: Truth about Trade & Technology

September 27, 2007

Monsanto GM trait adoption to grow threefold, forecasts firm

Food Navigator USA
September 27, 2007

Monsanto, a leading global biotechnology company, yesterday said it expects to almost triple its presence outside of the United States.

Currently, there are some 95 million acres outside the US planted with Monsanto's biotech traits.

"We believe there is an untapped opportunity to grow our international traits business by approximately another 175 million acres," said the firm's vice president of global commercial business, Brett Begemann, yesterday.

"Strong global adoption of our proven traits coupled with recent approvals paves the way for expanded growth and sets the stage for new growth as we look to stack and upgrade these products in the coming years," he told investors at the 16th Credit Suisse Chemicals Conference held in New York.

The forecasts highlight a growing global adoption of genetically modified crops, resulting partly from the increased acceptance of the technology as a means to address climate and yield challenges.

According to Begemann, Monsanto's corn seeds technologies saw strong adoption in Argentina, Europe, South Africa and India, with growth in this field anticipated at one to two share points annually through the end of the decade.

In Brazil, the recent acquisition of Agroeste corn brands expands Monsanto's market share to 40 percent. In addition, Brazilian farmers planted around 50 percent of acres with Monsanto's Roundup Ready soybean variety, which the company says is a "step towards" the 95 percent penetration levels it is aiming for.

In Argentina, Monsanto is aiming to have its stacked trait corn product planted on seven million acres by the end of the decade, while in India the firm believes its cotton trait product has the potential to be planted on 15 to 20 million acres in the period.

Although the popularity of biotech crops continues to grow as the market lets down certain barriers connected to the use of the technology, consumer demand continues to be a major challenge.

In an environment of a growing demand for all things natural, organic, ethical and sustainable, many consumers continue to turn their noses up at the idea of genetically modified foods, particularly in Europe.

In the US, the technology has generally been better accepted, although studies show that many consumers remain ignorant of the use of genetic modification in the food chain.

According to a new report by the International Food Information Council (IFIC), less than one quarter of American consumers believe that biotech foods are currently available in supermarkets, which highlights a huge gap in consumer education and informed choices.

This gap is largely a result of the fact that FDA regulations do not require the labeling of biotech foods, unless the use of biotechnology introduces an allergen, or if it substantially changes the food's nutritional content.

Source: Food Navigator USA

September 26, 2007

Doors opened for processed GM foods to enter Indian market

AgBios
Sonu Jain
September 26, 2007

In a move that’s likely to have a significant bearing on the food processing industry, the Government has allowed processed food containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and exempted it from regulatory approval.

The Ministry of Environment and Forests issued a notification on September 11 that grants exemption to foodstuff whose end-products are not Living Modified Organisms (LMOs) — living organisms can be used to propagate or reproduce, like in seeds.

The notification has tremendous implication for the food processing industry which uses ingredients and additives made of genetically modified corn, maize and soya.

Until now, producers and importers had to go through the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), the apex body for clearing all GMOs.

According to a GEAC member, the mandate of the committee is “environmental safety”. Since GMOs in this form do not propagate or grow, it “does not fall in their purview”. Rule 11 of the Environment Protection Act has been amended to make this exemption possible.

Regulators say it should be a “health-concern” and should be regulated as per the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act and Rules 1954 or under the new Food Safety and Standard Act 2005. But the system under this new Act is yet to become operational.

Both the Swaminathan Committee on Agricultural Biotechnology and Mashelkar Committee on r-Pharma have taken the view that the GEAC should be involved only in regulation of organisms or products where the end-product is a LMO.

This notification marks a major shift in the way GMOs are regulated in the country after being first introduced in the form of Bt cotton in 2002.

But activists are not too happy. Reacting to the new notification, Suman Sahai of Gene Campaign said: “This is introducing a new set of laxity in the system and violates our own laws.”

According to the new Food Safety and Standards Act, all genetically modified food need to have labels.

“This will mean that there will be no traceability and in case there is a problem, there is no way liability can be fixed. This is not desirable at all,” said Sahai. Though the US has been selling genetically modified food for nearly two decades now without labels, there have been stray cases of health hazards associated with processed GMOs.

The manufacturer, Showa Denko, Japan’s third largest chemical company, has already paid out over $2 billion in damages to EMS victims.

The import of soya oil for humanitarian aid has led to some controversy in the past. It was finally approved after certification from the country of export that it has been derived from Roundup Ready Soybeans. In case of crude soybean oil, the importer was asked to submit a series of analytical reports from government-approved laboratories.

For now, the lengthy regulatory route will no longer be required to import soya oil to India.

Infant formula to salad dressing

In the US, 7 out of 10 processed products on the shelf have some ingredient or the other that is a genetically modified corn or soya derivative. Labelling is not mandatory and unless specified as “organic”, it is likely to contain GMOs.

• Corn derivatives: Malt, corn syrup, baking powder, confectioner’s sugar, food starch and fructose sugar

• Soya derivatives: Bread, soya sauce, tofu, margarine, soya lecithin, protein isolates

• Common products: Infant formula, cereal, mayonnaise, crackers, candy, peanut butter, tomato sauce, ice cream, chips, chocolate, salad dressing, frozen yogurt

Source: AgBios

September 24, 2007

Food Safety Concerns Do Not Include Biotechnology, According to IFIC Survey

AgBios
September 24, 2007

Consumer familiarity and overall impression of food biotechnology remains little changed from a year ago in the United States, amidst major concern over food safety. Consumer familiarity and overall impression of food biotechnology remains little changed from a year ago in the United States, amidst major concern over food safety. According to a survey commissioned by the International Food Information Council (IFIC), there was little change in the American public's perception of food biotechnology, and those who have an opinion are twice as likely to have favorable-as opposed to unfavorable- impressions.

"The public's attitudes about food biotechnology remained constant despite a year of tremendous media attention on food concerns" said IFIC President and CEO David Schmidt. The national survey represents the 12th time IFIC has commissioned a survey on public attitudes about food biotechnology since 1997.

* Confidence in U.S. Food Supply

Overall confidence in the food supply remained at a high level with 69 percent of Americans indicating they were "very" or "somewhat" confident in the food supply compared to 72 percent last year. However, the number of Americans selecting "very confident" decreased from 21 percent in 2006 to 15 percent this year.

A sizeable number of Americans (25 percent) cited no particular food safety concern. Of the three-quarters of respondents who listed a specific food safety concern, disease and contamination topped the list at 38 percent; however, the biggest increase was in the "source" category, where concern about country of origin caused this category to rise from 6 percent of those citing a specific concern with the food supply in 2006 to 20 percent this year. Handling and preparation decreased as a food safety concern, cited by 26 percent of those citing a specific concern this year, dropping nine percent from last year's survey.

* Animal Biotechnology

While the public's overall favorable impression of plant biotechnology remained little changed in the past year, favorable impressions of animal biotechnology increased from 19 percent in 2006 to 24 percent this year. Nearly half of Americans (46 percent) said they were "somewhat" or "very" likely to buy meat, milk and eggs from cloned animals if the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) determined they were safe. When the phrase "from cloned animals" was replaced with "from animals enhanced through genetic engineering" the number of Americans who were "very" or "somewhat" likely to buy these food products jumped to 61 percent. Both of these figures show an increase from the 2006 survey.

Increased awareness of potential positive impacts of animal biotechnology continues to correlate with increased support among consumers. Two-thirds of consumers (66 percent) said they had a positive impression of animal biotechnology when informed that "animal biotechnology can improve the quality and safety of food," up from 59 percent in 2006. More than half of Americans (53 percent) reacted positively to the statement "animal biotechnology can increase farm efficiency," up from 36 percent in 2005 and 47 percent in 2006.

* Labeling

Satisfaction with current information on food labels remained high in 2007. Only 16 percent of consumers mentioned information they felt was missing, with less than one percent specifically mentioning biotechnology.

FDA requires special labeling only when the use of biotechnology introduces an allergen, or when it substantially changes the food's nutritional content. Well over half of those polled (61 percent) "strongly" or "somewhat" support the FDA labeling requirements for food produced using biotechnology, while 24 percent were "neutral" which was unchanged from last year's survey.

* Sustainability

This year, IFIC included questions about "sustainability" in the food biotechnology survey for the first time. Although Americans use a variety of terms to describe "sustainability," 83 percent equate the term to "long-lasting" or "self-sufficiency." Close to three-quarters of Americans (70 percent), however, say they have heard "nothing" about sustainable food production.

When sustainability was defined as a method to "operate in a manner which does not jeopardize the availability of resources for future generations," 63 percent of Americans said they thought it was important. In a question where consumers were asked to rank 5 factors related to growing crops in a sustainable way, the factor ranked number one was "increasing the production of food staples in the world, thereby reducing world hunger", with "reducing the amount of pesticides needed to produce food" coming in second. Other eco-friendly factors like rainforest conservation and reducing green house gas emissions ranked lower.

* Methodology

IFIC commissioned Cogent Research to conduct the 12th in a series (1997-2007) of quantitative assessments of U.S. adult consumer attitudes toward food biotechnology from July11- 27, 2007. The survey had a sample size of 1,000 and the data were weighted on age and education to be nationally representative. The Executive Summary can be obtained from http://ific.org/research/biotechres.cfm.

Source: AgBios

DuPont launches breakthrough technology that significantly increases soybean yields

Check biotech
September 24, 2007

DES MOINES, Iowa - DuPont today announced it is commercializing soybean varieties developed using a technology that increases yields by as much as 12 percent per acre. DuPont seed business Pioneer Hi-Bred is introducing five varieties with the technology for 2008 planting, pending wide-area product advancement trial results.

This announcement officially launches one of the company's three soybean yield traits from its pipeline to commercial status. It will be commercially known as Accelerated Yield Technology(TM) (AYT(TM)). AYT(TM) uses proprietary molecular breeding techniques to rapidly scan and identify genes that increase yield and then incorporate them into elite soybean genetics.

"AYT(TM) allows us to take a giant step forward on our promise to deliver industry-leading improvements in soybeans. Our customers are seeing dramatic increases in Pioneer soybean variety yields that have never been seen in such a short period of time," said William S. Niebur, vice president DuPont Crop Genetics Research and Development. "This technology embodies our business philosophy to increase the productivity and profitability of our customers to help them meet the rising demand for food, feed, fuel and materials."

Until now, molecular breeding techniques used by the seed industry have only produced single-gene defensive traits in commercial varieties. There are multiple genes in complex networks that determine the final yield level achieved. AYT(TM) builds upon DuPont industry-leading molecular breeding techniques by allowing researchers to simultaneously select multiple genes to significantly boost yields. AYT(TM) is not transgenic so soybeans developed from this process are not subject to additional regulatory approvals.

The first AYT(TM) varieties are higher yielding versions of the newest Pioneer elite soybean genetics. Pending final trial results this fall, Pioneer hopes to introduce an AYT(TM) version of Pioneer(R) brand 94M80, which set the world record soybean yield of 139 bushels per acre in 2006. New unique genetics are also being developed using AYT(TM) and other molecular breeding techniques.

"Full implementation of AYT(TM) combined with molecular breeding technologies will enable Pioneer to make a new class of soybeans that has unprecedented yield potential relative to anything we have ever seen," Niebur said. "These technologies allow us to incorporate a complete package of offensive and defensive characteristics that could make 100-plus bushel soybean yields a common occurrence in the very near future."

About Pioneer

Pioneer Hi-Bred, a DuPont business, is the world's leading source of customized solutions for farmers, livestock producers and grain and oilseed processors. With headquarters in Des Moines, Iowa, Pioneer provides access to advanced plant genetics in nearly 70 countries.

About DuPont

DuPontis a science-based products and services company. Founded in 1802, DuPont puts science to work by creating sustainable solutions essential to a better, safer, healthier life for people everywhere. Operating in more than 70 countries, DuPont offers a wide range of innovative products and services for markets including agriculture and food; building and construction; communications; and transportation.

Website: http://www.dupont.com/

Source: Check biotech

Developing countries’ interest in agri-biotech research encouraging

GMO Africa
September 24, 2007

Two weeks ago in this blog, I applauded a group of scientists from South Africa for discovering a maize (corn) variety genetically modified to resist Maize Streak Virus (MSV). Their discovery was first reported by the ScienceDaily.com.

MSV is, perhaps, the second gravest threat facing maize farmers in Africa and elsewhere after the stem borer. Scientists in the U.S. have already developed maize genetically modified to resist stem borer, and it’s already under commercial cultivation in several countries including South Africa. Known as Bt maize, it’s one of the most popular genetically modified food ever to have been developed by crop geneticists.

It’s quite a big deal that African scientists have developed transgenic maize that might be part of a solution to Africa’s food problems using modern agricultural biotechnology. This is a remarkable development because the central argument in the current debate about genetically modified (GM) crops is that they’re irrelevant to Africa. Critics argue that they have been developed by scientists, mainly from the U.S., who least understand Africa’s agricultural needs. Multinational biotech companies hoist them on Africa and other poor countries purely for profit, so the argument goes.

Personally, I am opposed to segregating scientific research, and I have written as much on this topic. In fact, a couple of weeks ago, I faulted the Alliance for Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA), a nongovernmental organization led by the former UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan, for trying to play down the relevance of agricultural biotechnology to Africa’s agriculture.

Scientific research, including in the field of agricultural biotechnology, knows no boundaries. The increasing interest in agricultural biotechnology research by scientists in developing countries attests to this.

I gather that Chinese scientists have, also, genetically modified maize that could help increase nutritional value of livestock feedstock, another testimony that developing countries are keen to explore potential benefits of genetically modified crops. According to a news article on the SciDev.net web site, the corn “…produces seeds containing high levels of an enzyme called phytase…which helps livestock to digest phosphorous.” Phosphorous is an important nutritional element found in corn and soy feeds.

The next step should be for developing countries to develop the necessary infrastructure to commercialize agricultural biotechnology innovations. China is well placed to attain this goal.

Much, however, needs to be done in Africa. For Africa to develop, scientific innovations must be commercialized. African governments and the donor community must join hands to ensure this happens. This way researchers will be encouraged to word harder. There’s no doubt that scientists in developing countries are increasingly engaging in agricultural biotechnology research. They must soldier on. There’s so much potential in this field that they can’t afford to neglect it.

Source: GMO Africa

September 20, 2007

AgBioWorld Blog: GMO rat research and Pro-GM farmers sssaulted with tear gas

GMO Food for Thought
Compiled by C.S. Prakash, Ph.D.
September 17, 2007

AgBioworld is comprised of agbiotech experts who take a keen interest in the latest news and events important to ag-biotech. This blog aims to be a reflection of those events and news stories that have captured our attention. Please share your comments and feelings on the current climate for biotech with us as well.
Best regards,
C.S. Prakash

Members discuss GMO rat research

Abstract: Members discussed a British Medical Journal article in which a flawed GM research study concerning rats was the topic.

One member noted that the article needed to be distributed widely until people realize that “anti-biotech scientists starve their rats.” Another member said that he didn’t think that the researcher intentionally starved the rats in question, but merely made the mistake of substituting too much test material into the rat’s diet. The member did agree that the researcher was still negligent and cruel to the lab animals.

Link to article being discussed: http://www.bmj.com/cgi/reprint/319/7217/1089.pdf

Soil Association’s attack of scientist Shane Morris

Abstract: Member commented on a letter Shane Morris sent to Peter Melchett, Policy Director at the Soil Association in the UK in response to a letter written to James Wright, High Commissioner for Canada regarding Shane’s work. The letter asked the government of Canada to takes action against one of its employees, Shane Morris for causing two Web sites belonging to GM Watch and GMO Free Ireland to be shut down. Morris writes that he did not ask for the two sites to be shut down, but merely asked that defamatory comments about him on the Web sites be taken down. Their failure to do so is what caused to sites to be shut down.

One member commented that he found it interesting that the Soil Association, having anointed itself a defender of the right to free speech, is demanding that Canada take action against someone for engaging in free speech.

Link to Peter Melchett’s letter: http://www.gmwatch.org/archive2.asp?arcid=8256.

Pro-GM Farmers Assaulted with Tear Gas at Protest

Abstract: Members discussed an article in the Belfast Telegraph concerning the use of tear gas and batons on a group of pro-GM French farmers who wanted to protest an anti-GM picnic.

Several members questioned why such force was used on pro-GM farmers on public property and not on anti-GM protesters when they burn down fields of biotech crops, on private property. One member also noted that many Americans are not aware of this activity because it is not occurring in the US, mainly only in France and due to the language barrier Americans aren’t reading the articles.

Link to Belfast Telegraph article: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/article2898542.ece

September 19, 2007

Cornell helps develop pest-resistant eggplant, the first genetically modified food crop in South Asia

Chronicle Online
By Krishna Ramanujan
September 19, 2007

Cornell researchers and Sathguru Management Consultants of India have successfully led an international consortium through the first phase of developing a pest-resistant eggplant. By about 2009 this eggplant is expected to be the first genetically engineered food crop in South Asia. Farmers have grown genetically altered cotton in India since 2002.

The engineered eggplant expresses a natural insecticide derived from the bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), making it resistant to the fruit and shoot borer (FSB), a highly destructive pest. The tiny larvae account for up to 40 percent of eggplant crop losses each year in India, Bangladesh and the Philippines, and other areas of South and Southeast Asia.

The work on the resistant eggplant is part of the Agricultural Biotechnology Support Project (ABSP) II, which is funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development and administered by Cornell in partnership with Sathguru, a firm associated with Cornell's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences (CALS).

Cornell researchers from plant breeding, entomology, molecular biology, applied economics, communication, international programs and the Cornell Center for Technology Enterprise and Commercialization began collaborating on the development of the Bt eggplant in 2002. Another partner, Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds, is on schedule to commercialize the genetically modified fruit by 2009.

"Cornell has worked effectively to facilitate a productive partnership between the public and private sectors that will make this technology available to eggplant producers at every economic level," said Ronnie Coffman, international professor of plant breeding and genetics and director of International Programs in CALS.

"In five years, with support from Sathguru and Cornell, our partners were able to bring this flagship program to field trials and get food, feed and environmental safety approvals," said K.V. Raman, Cornell professor of plant breeding.

All the safety tests for the Bt eggplant have been conducted in India, starting in greenhouses and now moving to large-scale field trials. The eggplant has been found to be nontoxic to fish, chickens, rabbits, goats, rats and cattle as well as nonallergenic. Ongoing tests will examine such questions as whether the plant will continue to resist FSB in the field and for how long; whether the Bt eggplant cross pollinates with other eggplants in the field and how far the Bt plants should be from other eggplant fields; whether nontarget insect populations are affected in the long term; and how yields compare with those of other eggplant varieties.

It is estimated that the Bt eggplant will reduce insecticide use by 30 percent while doubling the yield of marketable fruit (although eggplant is eaten as a vegetable).

Eggplant is a popular crop in the subtropics and tropics, especially in India and Bangladesh, where it is grown on about 1.5 million acres.

India and Bangladesh together expect to plant 110,000 acres of the FSB-resistant eggplant commercially by the end of 2010 and 650,000 acres by 2015. Economists from Cornell and other institutions report that the Bt eggplant would result in lower prices for consumers, higher yields for farmers and, by 2015, boost the Indian economy by $411 million and the Bangladeshi economy by $37 million.

"In spite of the green revolution in India, agricultural growth has stagnated there to less than 2 percent per year," said Raman. "It is important for a land-grant university like Cornell to be engaged in the improvement of technologies and help create a road map that leads to agricultural and economic growth in places like South and Southeast Asia and Africa."

Source: Chronicle Online

September 18, 2007

GM Potatoes with Improved Freezing Tolerance

The Meridian Institute
September 18, 2007

U.S. and Korean researchers have developed genetically modified (GM) potatoes with increased freezing tolerance of up to -5 °Celsius. To develop the potatoes, researchers introduced the genes AtBCF for freezing tolerance from Arabidopsis thaliana, as well as a promoter that acts to promote expression of the genes under cold conditions. The introduction of the cold-inducible promoter, together with the AtBCF genes, was found to minimize the expression of certain agronomically undesirable traits, such as delayed flowering and retarded growth, which had previously been attributed to the AtBCF genes. The article says that efforts to develop freeze-tolerance potatoes through conventional breeding have so far been unsuccessful. However, the trait is an important one because even a brief exposure to frost can significantly reduce potato yields, while hard frosts can completely destroy entire crops. The researchers are working to apply their freeze tolerance technology in additional crops as well. Their research results are published in the September edition of the Plant Biotechnology Journal. The article and a link to the scientific abstract are available online at the link below.

Source: The Meridian Institute

Deep Sequencing May Lead To Hardier Strains Of Rice

ScienceDaily
University of Delaware
September 18, 2007

Science Daily Using a novel “deep sequencing” technology that can in one fell swoop decode 50 million sequences representing well over a billion bases of DNA, a research team led by University of Delaware scientists is working to unmask where, why and how certain genes are switched on or off in rice--a crop vital to the world's food supply.

The goal of the four-year project, which is supported by a $5.3-million grant from the National Science Foundation (NSF), is to advance scientific understanding of the rice epigenome--the series of biochemical modifications of the rice DNA that can toggle a gene on or, conversely, silence it. Ultimately, the research may lead to the development of hardier strains of rice, as well as shed light on similar mechanisms at work in corn and other important cereal grains that are closely related to rice.

Blake Meyers, associate professor of plant and soil sciences at UD, is the principal investigator on the project, which also involves Guo-Liang Wang, a rice biologist from Ohio State University; Steven Jacobsen, an expert in epigenetics, and computer scientist Matteo Pellegrini, both from the University of California at Los Angeles; and Yulin Jia, a plant pathologist at the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Dale Bumpers National Rice Research Center in Stuttgart, Ark.

The effort builds on Meyers' previous awards from the NSF Plant Genome Research Program, as well as ongoing investigations of small RNAs--short lengths of ribonucleic acids that act as gene regulators--performed in collaboration with Pamela Green, the Crawford H. Greenewalt Endowed Chair in Plant Molecular Biology at UD, whose lab is next door to Meyers' in the Delaware Biotechnology Institute. These projects have now propelled the research in a new direction, to new frontiers in the field of epigenetics.

“Epigenetics refers to a heritable change that is not a result of a change in DNA sequence, but rather a chemical modification of nucleotides in the DNA or its associated proteins,” Meyers said. “That means that these changes can be reversible, and it's easier to switch them on or off. Small RNAs are one of the key 'control switches,' directing these modifications,” Meyers noted.

State-of-the-art sequencing by synthesis (SBS) technology developed by Solexa Inc., in Hayward, Calif., will provide the data essential to the project. This novel “deep sequencing” tool, which can decode tens of millions of sequences during a single run, has become available over the last year. The application of SBS to epigenetics research was demonstrated in the human genome only within the past few months. The UD-led effort will be one of the first large-scale projects to use this approach in crop plants.

“If you think of a gene as part of a set of chromosomes, a gene is just a small fraction of a percent of a complete genome,” Meyers said. “If we learn about that gene by random sampling, by using 50 million total sequences, which is what SBS provides, we can characterize that gene at depth,” he noted. “Using this method, we can obtain statistically robust data for nearly all genomic regions in a single experiment.”

The scientists will use the technology to look for chemical modifications in chromatin, the building-block material of chromosomes, consisting of DNA and the proteins that interact with it. The scientists want to know how the chromatin is configured and what role changes in the material play in plant development.

“Formerly, we had a very narrow picture of a plant's genome; with these new sequencing technologies, we now have the opportunity to acquire a comprehensive picture at fine detail,” Meyers said. “It's like looking through a high-powered telescope--but now we have a wide-angle lens on that telescope to take in a view with both breadth and depth.”

Besides studying the state of the genome using a variety of different strains of rice plants, the research team will develop new bioinformatics methods to process the vast amounts of data and mine new discoveries.

“The project is part biology and part technology,” Meyers said. “Developing the bioinformatics to handle the data is critical. You have to know what to do with it. As our bioinformatics capabilities have grown, so have the resources available to the public through our web sites,” he noted. “And these online resources have led to important new collaborations.”

The data from the current project will be accessible through web sites of UD and UCLA.

The research project also includes an innovative education and outreach component targeting graduate students in plant science. Students will write, submit and exchange research proposals with students from different universities. They will then serve on a panel to critique and rank the proposals, modeled after the National Science Foundation's own proposal review process.

“Since planning experiments and justifying these through writing proposals is such an integral part of what a scientist does, I thought this would be a good experience for our students,” Meyers said. “This way, they can also see what their advisers go through,” he added, grinning.

Meyers developed the educational project several years ago in the advanced plant genetics course (PL636) he teaches in the UD College of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Since then, several colleagues and their classes at Iowa State and Penn State have participated in the program, exchanging proposals with UD, and UCLA and Ohio State are planning to join the program during the current four-year grant.

“My hope is that this program and its proposal exchange system can be used broadly by plant genetics and genomics courses at universities to build writing, communication and critical thinking skills among graduate students,” Meyers said.

Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by University of Delaware.

Source: ScienceDaily

September 17, 2007

Ministers back plans to grow genetically modified crops in Britain

Daily Mail
September 17, 2007

Several government ministers are throwing their weight behind a campaign to get genetically modified crops back on the public agenda, it has been reported.

Some senior ministers now believe the public is ready to embrace the controversial technology, which will enable crops to produce a higher yield and be used for bio-fuel.

It is believed they are liaising with key agricultural supporters of GM to push the government into launching a national debate on the issue to highlight the benefits.

One government source said: "GM will come back to the UK, the question is how it comes back, not whether it's coming back."

Attempts to introduce GM to Britain in the late 1990s met a wave of hostility from varied sources.

Activists took direct action tearing up crops while supermarkets such as Sainsbury's and Marks & Spencer barred GM ingredients from their products for fear of sparking a consumer backlash.

In 2004, the government announced that no GM crops would be grown in the country for the 'foreseeable future' sparking Lord Peter Melchett, policy director of the Soil Association, to declare, "This is the end of GM in Britain".

Currently, only one UK company - the plant science company BASF - is trialing GM crops, in this case a blight-resistant potato in tests in Cambridge and Yorkshire.

The Government claims that it still considers applications by companies to grow GM crops on a 'case by case basis'.

But at the moment, it is not believed that any other UK companies are applying for licences to grow GM crops.

Recent polls also revealed that about 70 per cent of the European public is opposed to GM foods.

But despite this, several ministers and key agricultural figures now believe the time is right to get the issue back on the agenda.

Julian Little, chairman of the Agricultural Biotechnology Council, said: "We have absolutely every confidence that GM will be used in the UK."

Last night, a Defra spokeswoman insisted the Government's position had not changed.

She said: "GM technology is not wholly good or bad and the only sensible approach is to consider GM crops on a case-by-case basis."

"Each proposed crop will go through a detailed risk assessment that involves careful scrutiny by independent scientists - not only here but throughout the EU."

"We do not expect any commercial cultivation of GM crops in the UK before 2009 at the very earliest."

"And before any GM crops are grown here commercially we will introduce measures to ensure they can coexist with non-GM crops."

"Ultimately it will be for farmers and consumers to decide whether they want GM products. If there is no market for them GM crops will not be grown."


Source: Daily Mail

September 14, 2007

European Court of Justice rejects Austrian biotech ban, supports right to choose biotech crops

SeedQuest
Brussels, Belgium
September 14, 2007

Yesterday, the European Court of Justice confirmed that statutory GMO-free regions are illegal. The Court dismissed the appeals of Upper Austria and the Austrian Government against their ban on the use of biotech crops in the region of Upper Austria.

“This is great news for farmers, for the scientific based risk assessment of the EFSA and for the EU biotech regulatory framework which the Member States put in place. Industry now calls on the region of Upper Austria to drop its illegal and unscientific opposition to approved biotech crops and allow Austrian farmers the choice to grow GMOs if they so wish.” said Johan Vanhemelrijck, Secretary General EuropaBio – the EU association for bioindustries. “Attempts to create socalled “GMO-free regions” should be seen for what they are: a denial of the freedom of choice for farmers and consumers.”

The Judgement says that practices like organic agriculture and small scale farming cannot be used as an argument to ban cultivation of approved biotech crops. Both the Commission and the Commissioner for Agriculture, Mariann Fischer Boel have stated in the past that “farmers should be able to produce in a traditional way, be it conventional or organic, according to the high quality and safety standards in the EU. And they should as well have the choice to produce GM-crops, if they see advantages in doing so and find a market for them.” (1)

Farmers can take official action against their region if it tries to stop them from cultivating EU approved biotech crops, while freedom of choice guarantees that individual or groups of farmers are free to cultivate conventional, organic or biotech crops. Today’s decision confirms that it is illegal for regional or national governments to impose bans and deprive individual farmers of the choice to grow biotech crops which have been approved for commercial cultivation in the EU.

EuropaBio is the European Association for Bioindustries, solely and uniquely bringing together bioscience companies from all fields of research and development, testing, manufacturing and distribution of biotechnology products. It has 84 corporate members operating worldwide, 12 associate members, 5 BioRegions and 25 national biotechnology associations representing some 1800 small and medium sized enterprises involved in research.

(1) (European Report, 8 April 2005, “Genetic engineering: Fischer Boel tells GM free regions all-out ban 'not justified”).

Source: SeedQuest

Gene-modified eucalyptus ingests more CO2

Checkbiotech
September 14, 2007

TAIPEI, Taiwan - Eucalyptus trees genetically modified by a team of Taiwanese and U.S. biologists have proven capable of ingesting up to three times more carbon dioxide than normal strains, indicating a new path to reducing greenhouse gases and global warming, team members said yesterday.

Under the auspices of National Science Council, staff members at the Taiwan Forestry Research Institute (TFRI) under the cabinet-level Council of Agriculture and North Carolina State University in the United States carried out the gene modification project that not only creates eucalyptus with a higher than normal CO2 absorptive capacity, but also causes them to produce less lignin and more cellulose.

TFRI researcher Chen Zenn-zong explained that cellulose, hemicelluloses, and lignin in trees are all created from carbon elements. "However,only cellulose can be used in commercial processes of pulp manufacturing and bio-ethanol extraction, " he added.

"The idea behind the whole project is to increase the value of genetically-modified eucalyptus to related industries, so we adjusted the ratio of cellulose and lignin, " Chen said. "Meanwhile, we enhance the tree's capacity in absorbing CO2 to reduce greenhouse gases, so that more trees planted for production, the more CO2 are consumed."

With every eucalyptus carrying 18 percent less lignin and 4.5 percent more cellulose, Chen estimated that a pulp factory with an annual output of 1 million tons could generate extra revenues of NT$1. 2 billion (about US$36 million) every year.

Source: Checkbiotech

September 13, 2007

GM corn 'improves animal feed, cuts pollution'

SciDev.Net
Jia Hepeng
September 13, 2007

[BEIJING] Chinese scientists have developed a genetically modified (GM) corn that could help improve the nutritional value of livestock feed and reduce pollution.

The research was announced by the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS) this week (10 September). The corn has now entered pre-production field trials.

The GM corn produces seeds containing high levels of an enzyme called phytase. The enzyme helps livestock to digest phosphorus, an important nutritional element found in corn and soy feeds.

Cereal grains and oilseeds, the main ingredients of feeds, contain large quantities of phytic acid, which has adequate phosphorus content, but livestock such as pigs lack sufficient phytase in their digestive tract to absorb enough phosphorus. This means large amounts of phosphorus are released into the environment through animal waste.

As a result, farmers add phytase to animal feed to help livestock digest phosphorus. The enzyme is a product of fermentation by microorganisms, a process which has high production costs.

The CAAS scientists — funded by the state — isolated the gene that produces phytase from a species of the fungus Aspergillus, and inserted it into corn.

Chen Rumei, of the Institute of Biotechnology under CAAS and a member of the research team, said that when compared to other corn varieties, the rate of seed germination, growth speed and yield of the GM corn were no different.

She told SciDev.Net that, under current industry criteria for feed additives, adding just a few grams of the GM corn seed per kilogram of animal feed would be enough to satisfy livestock's nutritional demand for phosphorus.

"If this technology is commercialised, we can save up to 450 million yuan (US$60 million) per year in energy costs used to produce industrial phytase enzyme additives," Chen adds.

"This could be translated into saved costs for farmers in purchasing additives," she says. And farmers who plant the GM corn rather than common corn varieties could increase their income by about 1500 yuan (US$200) per hectare.

Li Zhensheng, former vice-president of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the chair of the Ministry of Agriculture team who evaluated the project, says phosphorus pollution caused by animal waste has been a serious problem, resulting in widespread algal blooms in the Chinese lakes (see Pollution control key to beating China's algal blooms).

"If the phytase enzyme-rich feed produced from the GM corn is widely applied, phosphorus pollution caused by animal waste will be significantly reduced, and the ecology could be largely improved," Li says.

China has not yet approved any GM corn for commercial sale.

Source: SciDev.Net

Droughts Drive Up Crop Prices, Spur Push For Engineered Seeds

Truth About Trade and Technology
September 13, 2007

From dust bowls in Australia to drought-hit regions in the U.S., Africa, Asia and the Mideast, growing areas are drying out, helping push crop prices to record highs.

Wheat prices topped $9 a bushel for the first time Wednesday, after the U.S. Department of Agriculture said strong global demand and tight supplies will push U.S. stockpiles to a 33-year low.

U.S. crop-year-ending stocks of wheat are forecast to fall to 362 million metric tons in 2007-08 vs. 456 million a year earlier.

Some blame bad farming. Others cite climate changes that reduce rainfall and raise temperatures.

Arid Agriculture

The good news is that big agribusiness players such as Monsanto, DuPont and Novartis are using genetic engineering to produce drought-resistant crops — including corn and grain — that grow on far less water than regular strains.

"If one result of global climate change could be increased drought, then drought-resistant corn and other crops would certainly help mitigate this stress," said Sara Duncan, a Monsanto spokeswoman.

Even if global warming proves more of a fizzle than a threat, scientists warn that the expanding world population intensifies the use of wells and other irrigation sources to grow food. This drains local water tables, rivers and lakes — exacerbating the drought issue.

"It's an irrigation issue, not a climate issue," said Kendal Hirschi, a molecular geneticist and associate director of research for the Vegetable and Fruit Improvement Center at Texas A&M University. "Most drought is caused by bad irrigation practices and not climate change. And it's a matter of making crops more productive as the amount of arid regions increase."

The U.N. Environment Program estimates that 70% of the world's fresh water used annually goes to agriculture. Nations like Brazil that never faced water shortages are seeing them now, the U.N. says.

Monsanto is using genetic engineering to develop drought-resistant corn, soybeans and cotton.

"Corn is the furthest along and will most likely be the first to market," said Duncan, who expects it to be rolled out in a few years.

She says such designer crops will also help satisfy growing demand for corn for use in making ethanol.

Shlomo Aronson, a professor of political science at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, says drought-resistant crops are an important option in dealing with climate change.

"It applies to any area of the world where you have problems with diminishing water supplies," said Aronson, whose university is spearheading work on drought-resistant crops.

Hebrew University researchers have developed a tomato strain that grows in desert areas.

"The tomatoes are very tasty and are also insect- and disease-resistant," Aronson said.

Major droughts will be more common in the middle latitudes and semiarid low latitudes of the globe in coming decades, according to a 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Affected areas include the U.S., China, Australia, the Middle East and southern Africa.

Biotech Crops Gain Favor

One upshot is that rising demand for drought-resistant crops could lead to wider public acceptance of biotech-based plants.

Some critics blast these so-called "Frankenfoods" as dangerous, since their effects on the human body and the environment are still unknown. But Aronson and others say climate change will make such scientific techniques more acceptable by force of necessity.

In drought-hit Australia, a July poll found that public support for genetically modified crops surged to 73% in 2007 from 46% in 2005. The survey by Biotechnology Australia says support rose because of gene-spliced crops' role in countering drought and pollution.

Aronson says China and India, with their billions to feed, are keen on exploiting drought-resistant crops. China will boost spending on agriculture-based biotechnology by almost 400% by 2010 to shore up its food-growing ability.

Monsanto is finishing its fifth season of field testing drought-resistant corn and other biotech crops.

Duncan says genetic engineering is so exact that crops can be developed for specific growing conditions in arid areas of states like Kansas, Nebraska and California.

Monsanto also is testing drought-resistant strains in undisclosed locations in the Southern Hemisphere, in a range of environments.

Once these crops have been successfully commercialized in the U.S., Duncan says, Monsanto will offer them to other countries.

Ted Schettler warns that drought-resistant crops solve just a small part of food-growing problems.

"With climate change we'll not only see drought, but other wild climate swings like floods," said Schettler, science director at the nonprofit Science and Environmental Health Network.

He says researchers and governments must also focus on efforts to increase soil fertility and crop diversification — not just biotech.

"We ought to be looking at the entire system of agriculture," said Schettler, "rather than a technological fix that's pointed at a small part of a much larger problem."

Source: Truth About Trade and Technology

September 10, 2007

HARDY rice: less water, more food

EurekAlert
Barry Whyte
September 10, 2007

Blacksburg, Va. – An international team of scientists has produced a new type of rice that grows better and uses water more efficiently than other rice crops. Professor Andy Pereira at the Virginia Bioinformatics Institute (VBI) has been working with colleagues in India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Mexico and The Netherlands to identify, characterize and make use of a gene known as HARDY that improves key features of this important grain crop. The research, which was recently published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, shows that HARDY contributes to more efficient water use in rice, a primary source of food for more than half of the world’s population. *

Rice (Oryza sativa) is a water guzzler when compared to other crops. It typically uses up to three times more water than other food crops such as maize or wheat and consumes around 30 percent of the fresh water used for crops worldwide. In conditions where water is scarce, it is important to have crops that can efficiently generate biomass (plant tissue) using limited amounts of water. HARDY rice shows a significant increase in biomass under both drought and non-drought conditions. The researchers found that the biomass of HARDY rice increased by around 50 percent under conditions of water deprivation (drought) compared to the unmodified version of the same type of rice.

Dr. Andy Pereira, professor at VBI, stated: “This transdisciplinary research project involved the study of two plants. First we used a powerful gain-of-function screening technique to look at a large number of Arabidopsis plants that might have features favorable to water and drought resistance. We were able to identify the HARDY mutant due to its considerable reluctance to be pulled from the soil and its smaller, darker green leaves. Molecular and physiological characterization showed that the improved water usage efficiency was linked to the HARDY gene.”

Dr. Aarati Karaba, who worked on the project as a graduate student jointly at the University of Agricultural Sciences in Bangalore, India, and at Plant Research International, Wageningen, The Netherlands, commented: “The next step was to introduce the HARDY gene into rice and examine the features arising from this transformation. In rice, HARDY seems to work in a slightly different way than Arabidopsis but it still leads to improved water-use efficiency and higher biomass. Further studies showed that HARDY significantly enhances the capacity of rice to photosynthesize while at the same time reducing water loss from the crop.”

Dr. Andy Pereira, added: “DNA microarray analysis allowed us to look at gene expression patterns regulated by HARDY. We specifically focused on genes that have gene ontology (GO) terms, namely genes that have been assigned by the scientific community to specific biological processes or functions. Using this approach we were able to identify clusters of known genes regulated by HARDY whose levels changed under conditions of plant water deprivation. We also saw distinct changes of gene clusters linked to the metabolism of key proteins and carbohydrates, which probably explains some of the feature differences we have detected in Arabidopsis and rice.”

The scientists have been able to track down these improvements in water-use efficiency to a specific type of molecule known as AP2/ERF-like transcription factor. Transcription factors are proteins that bind to DNA and control gene expression and the HARDY gene encodes a protein that belongs to a specific class of AP2/ERF-like transcription factors. Shital Dixit, Graduate student at Plant Research International, Wageningen, The Netherlands, commented: “At this point in time, we do not know the exact function of this transcription factor although we suspect that it impacts maturation processes linked to tissue desiccation. More work remains to be done to elucidate the precise function of this protein as well as the processes on which it has a major impact. What is clear is that HARDY rice offers the exciting prospect of improved water-use efficiency and drought resistance in rice and perhaps other grain or seed crops. This should contribute in a sustainable way to maintaining high crop yields under conditions of limited water availability.”

###

* Karaba A, Dixit S, Greco R, Aharoni A, Trijatmiko KR, Marsch-Martinez N, Krishnan A, Nataraja KN, Udayakumar M, Pereira A (2007) Improvement of water use efficiency in rice by expression of HARDY an Arabidopsis drought and salt tolerance gene. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, in press. Available in advance on-line at http://www.pnas.org/papbyrecent.shtml

Source: EurekAlert

September 3, 2007

Alleviating Peanut Allergy Using RNAi

ISAAA
September 03, 2007

Peanut allergy is one of the most common causes of deaths from food allergies, accounting for more than 100 deaths in the US alone per year. It is characterized by more severe symptoms and at a higher rate on minimal contact as compared to other food allergies. Up to now there is no available cure for peanut allergy. Avoidance of peanuts is very difficult because it is commonly used as an ingredient in several food preparations. With the advent of genetic engineering, novel strategies are now being tested to solve the problem of food allergies from the source.

A group of US scientists constructed transgenic peanut lines expressing significantly lower amount of Ara h 2, the immunodominant allergen found in peanuts, using RNA interference (RNAi). Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay (ELISA) using sera of patients allergic to peanut was used to monitor Ara h 2 expression. Several constructs showed complete absence of the Ara h 2 protein. Other phenotypic features and characteristics of the transgenic peanuts are the same as that of the wild type. Similar studies are now being made to silence other food allergens using RNAi.

Read the full paper published by the Plant Biotechnology Journal at http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1467-7652.2007.00292.x or the abstract at http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-7652.2007.00292.x

Source: ISAAA

About Me

Name: Dr. C Kameswara Rao

Contact:
fbaeblog@fbaeblog.org

Categories

Powered by Movable Type 3.35