In This
Issue:
GERMANY TO APPROVE GM CROPS
Germany is all set to come out with a law to regulate
the cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops. This was announced
by Renate
Kuenast, Agriculture and Consumer Protection Minister of Germany
and a member of the pro-environmentalist Greens party. In a press
conference, she said that “with or without a law, biotechnology
is on the market.”
The law which is expected to be approved by the Cabinet
in February, is intended to put into action existing European Union
directives
on what crops can be grown, where and under what conditions, and
on issues like labeling. “With this law we will allow the coexistence
of GM and non GM crops, provide liability rules and give consumers
a choice,” Kuenast said.
The law will set clear rules and responsibilities on growing GM
crops and offer protection to farmers whose non-GM produce might
be affected by accidental contamination. It will include measures
to prevent cross pollination and allow farmers to claim damages if
their non-GM crop is cross-pollinated by GM plants nearby.
For more information visit http://www.gene.ch/genet/2004/Jan/msg00047.html.
GM SCIENCE REVIEW FINAL REPORT
The
GM Science Review Panel's second report into GM crops and food
which was recently published now completes the independent review
by the United Kingdom of current scientific knowledge on GM crops
and foods. The GM Science Review was requested by the Secretary of
State for Environment Food and Rural Affairs with the agreement of
Ministers in the devolved administrations.
The
report clarified a number of points but did not alter the first
report's original findings. The first report found no scientific
case for ruling out all GM crops and their products. However, it
emphasized that GM is not a single homogeneous technology and its
applications should be considered on a case-by-case basis. The second phase of the expert panel's work considered the report
of the public debate, new scientific developments since the first
report including the Farm Scale Evaluation (FSE) results, and feedback
on the first report.
The second report of the GM Science Review found that:
- none
of the new research published since the first Report significantly
altered the earlier conclusions;
- the
FSEs were of high scientific caliber. The panel found that
if GM herbicide tolerant crops are managed as in the FSEs,
a significant
reduction would be expected in weeds with GMHT beet and spring oilseed
rape, whereas the opposite would be found with corn. These effects
arise from the herbicides and are not a direct consequence of the
GM process. The different findings for different GM crops reinforced
the conclusion of the first Science Review that GM crops must be
assessed on a case-by-case basis.
The full Science Review (including the first and second report),
full list of panel members, and more information is available at
http://www.gmsciencedebate.org.uk.
TOP 10 BIOTECHNOLOGIES TO IMPROVE GLOBAL HEALTH
Researchers at the University of Toronto's Joint
Centre for Bioethics (JCB) conducted a study to identify 10 genomic
and other biotechnologies
that have the potential to improve global health within five to ten
years. This study was conducted specifically to aid the developing
and poorer countries. The study entitled “Top 10 Biotechnologies
for Improving Global Health” represents the collective opinion
of 28 international scientists and experts involved in genome-related
technology and global health issues.
The top 10 list includes technologies that address a wide range
of developing world problems such as: infectious diseases, non-communicable
diseases, malnutrition, and environmental contamination. They include:
- Molecular
technologies for affordable, simple diagnosis of infectious diseases
- Recombinant
technologies to develop vaccines against infectious diseases
- Technologies
for more efficient drug and vaccine delivery systems
- Technologies
for environmental improvement (sanitation, clean water,
bioremediation)
- Sequencing
pathogen genomes to understand their biology and to identify
new antimicrobials
- Female-controlled
protection against sexually transmitted diseases, both
with and without contraceptive effect
- Bioinformatics
to identify drug targets and to examine pathogen-host
interactions
- Genetically
modified (GM) crops with increased nutrients to counter specific
deficiencies
- Recombinant
technology to make therapeutic products (e.g. insulin, interferons)
more affordable
- Combinatorial
chemistry for drug discovery
The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that by 2010 around
8 million lives per year could be saved in developing countries if
interventions against infectious diseases and nutritional deficiencies
could be made. The use of GM crops was also identified to address
the concern on nutritional deficiency.
The
full article on this issue can be seen at http://www.utoronto.ca/jcb/_genomics/pdfs/
top10.pdf.
MONSANTO PULLS OUT GM SOYBEAN IN ARGENTINA
Agricultural seed company Monsanto announced that it will end soybean
seed sales in Argentina due to piracy concerns, and the increased
use of illegal biotech soy seeds. Associated Press reported that
the company is unable to recoup its investments because of a huge
black market for genetically modified seeds. Unless the government
combats illegal seed sales, Monsanto Argentina said it will not sell
new-and-improved soy seeds or carry out research to develop new varieties
tailored to local conditions.
Argentina is the third largest soy-producing country and derives
significant economic boost from soybean production. It is estimated
that 50 to 60 percent of all soybean seeds in Argentina are bought
on the black market.
MANDATORY & VOLUNTARY
LABELING OF GM FOOD
Mandatory labeling of genetically modified (GM) foods
provide food processors and retailers a choice, however it does
not facilitate
consumer choice. This type of labeling is seen as a market barrier
due to the rational decisions made by food processors. As a result,
GM food products have disappeared from the retail shelves and have,
so far, failed to provide consumers a choice. Colin A. Carter and
Guillaume P. Gruere of the University of California-Davis share this
insight in their article entitled “Mandatory Labeling of Genetically
Modified Foods: Does it Really Provide Consumer Choice?”
Carter and Gruere added that voluntary labeling, on the other hand,
provides consumers a choice - as long as the willingness to pay for
non-GM products exceeds the corresponding price premium. The authors
further stated that some economists perceive voluntary labeling to
be more efficient since it allows consumers to choose the quality
of the products. It also allows them to choose between buying only
non-GM food, and buying both conventional and GM food.
Read the full article at http://www.agbioforum.org/v6n12/v6n12a13-carter.htm.
AGBIOTECH RESEARCH BUILDS K-BASED ECONOMY
Plant biotechnology is helping to create a vibrant knowledge-based
economy throughout the United States. This was a finding of a study
by C. Ford Runge, professor of economics at the University of Minnesota.
The study, "The economic status and performance
of plant biotechnology in 2003: Adoption, research and development
in the United States
provides a view of biotechnology's value at the farm level and beyond
the farm gate. It notes that additional jobs, income and investment
in the agrifood chain and public and private research community have
been created.
"It's clear why farmers have been adopting these crops: managerial
efficiencies and increased profits per acre," said Runge. "The
most compelling evidence for me as an economist of the value of biotech
crops is the preference of farmers to plant these crops year after
year after year," he said. The report predicts that the "plant
biotech sector will grow wider and deeper in its activities and applications
in the years to come."
Download the full report at http://www.apec.umn.edu/faculty/frunge/plantbiotech.pdf.
For additional information email C. Ford Runge at frunge@apec.umn.edu.
SCIENTISTS
URGE "SCIENCE-BASED APPROACH" FOR
UK GM CROPS
More than 150 scientists are calling on the United Kingdom government
to base their decisions on “science-based policies that foster
the development of demonstrated safe technologies with significant
environmental and economic benefits in the UK." The scientists
signed a letter delivered to Prime Minister Tony Blair noting "the
positive impact that biotechnology is contributing to conventional
agricultural practices in many parts of the world."
The letter to the Prime Minister outlines the scientists'
concerns that the government's science-based reviews of new technologies,
including crops enhanced through agricultural biotechnology, are
being adversely impacted by politics. According to the letter's authors, "It
is distressing to us to see the impacts that anti-science efforts
in the UK have had on the development of excellent basic research
into new technologies, as well as those engaged in it."
The
letter and full list of signers can be seen at http://www.agbioworld.org/openletterUK.html
INTEGRATED APPROACH FOR BIOCONFINEMENT OF GMOS
Developers of genetically engineered organisms should
consider how biological techniques (“bioconfinement”) such as induced
sterility can prevent transgenic animals and plants from escaping
into natural ecosystems and breeding or competing with their wild
relatives, or passing engineered traits to other species. This is
the gist of a report from the US National Academies' National Research
Council entitled “Biological Confinement of Genetically Engineered
Organisms.”
"Deciding whether and how to confine a genetically engineered
organism cannot be an afterthought," said committee chair T.
Kent Kirk, professor emeritus, department of bacteriology, University
of Wisconsin, Madison. "Confinement won't be warranted in most
cases, but when it is, worst-case scenarios and their probabilities
should be considered. He also noted that developing new biological
confinement methods will further minimize risks and boost the public's
confidence in biotechnology.
Since no single bioconfinement method is likely to be 100% effective,
the committee recommended that developers of GMOs use more than one
method to lower the chance of a failure. The committee added that
scientists need to do more research to understand how well specific
methods work, and that planned combinations of confinement methods
will need to be tested.
The report is available at http://www.nap.edu/books/0309090857/html.
WHAT MAKES FLOWERS BLOOM?
Two researches were conducted by Sibum Sung and Richard M. Amasino
of the Department of Biochemistry, University of Wisconsin-Madison,
and Caroline Dean and colleagues at the Department of Cell and Developmental
Biology, John Innes Centre. These researches separately investigated
flower development at the molecular level, and aimed at uncovering
the mechanism that prevents the model plant Arabidopsis thaliana
from blooming until spring.
Dean and colleagues studied the VRN1 and VRN2 genes
found in the Flowering Locus C (FLC) gene – a protein product
that blocks flowering by repressing the numerous genes required
for flower development.
Sung and Amasino, on the other hand, identified another gene, the
VIN3.
These three genes are controlled by the Flowering
Locus C (FLC) gene, and are among the numerous genes required for
plant flowering.
The FLC gene also controls when plants should flower, specifically:
the length of day, the plant’s age, and requirements for vernalization
(a process employed by the plants during an extended cold period).
During cold seasons, the high levels of expression of the FLC gene
are lowered, and stays at this low level even after warm weather
returns.
Sung and Amasino identified the gene that is involved in the measurement
of the duration of cold exposure and in the establishment of the
vernalized state. They concluded that vernalization induces changes
in histone proteins (components of chromatin) in the vicinity of
the FLC gene, and that VRN1, VRN2 and VIN3 mediate these changes.
They also discovered that VIN3 is necessary to deacetylate H3 during
the cold seasons, while VRN1 and VRN2 are required afterwards to
maintain the silenced state.
For more information, email Richard M. Amasino at amasino@biochem.wisc.edu,
and Caroline Dean at caroline.dean@bbsrc.ac.uk. Their full researches
can also be downloaded at http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/NATURE/journal/v427/n6970/
full/nature02195_fs.html and at http://www.nature.com/cgi-taf/DynaPage.taf?file=/
NATURE/journal/v427/n6970/full/nature02269_fs.html.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
BIODIVERSITY
CONFERENCE IN MALAYSIA
The
7th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention
on Biological Diversity and the first
meeting of the Conference of
the Parties will be held from February 9 to 27, 2004 in Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia. For more information go to http://www.biodiv.org.
CROP SCIENCE CONGRESS
“
New directions for a diverse planet” is the theme of the 4th
International Crop Science Congress to be held at the Brisbane Convention
and Exhibition Centre, Queensland, Australia from September 26 to
October 1, 2004. Deadline for poster paper submission is February
27, 2004. For more information visit their website at http://www.cropscience2004.com.
CARTAGENA PROTOCOL REPORT
"
The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety: A record of the negotiations" is
now available. It seeks to record the evolution of the Cartagena
Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity from
the initial provision in Article 19(3) of the Convention itself through
the final adoption of the text of the Protocol in January 2000. The
140-page paper was developed by the Foundation for International
Environmental Law and Development (FIELD). See http://www.biodiv.org/doc/publications/bs-brochure-03-en.pdf (1.2 MB) or contact secretariat@biodiv.org for more information and
copies of the report.
NEW K-SHEET
The “Nuffield Council: Explore GM Crops for Developing Countries” is
the latest K (Knowledge) Sheet of the International Service for the
Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications-Global Knowledge Center
on Crop Biotechnology. This K-Sheet summarizes the Nuffield Council
on Bioethics’ views on the possible costs, benefits and risks
associated with GM crops in developing countries. Download the article
at http://www.isaaa.org/kc. |
