A TEMPORARY ban on GM maize has been lifted in Russia.
Join Scoop.it for Free
Share ideas that matter on the social web and experience
the benefits of curating the world's best content.
I don't have a Facebook, a Twitter or a LinkedIn account
Already have an account: Login
|
Scooped by Kwame Ogero onto Modern Agricultural Biotechnology |
Scoop.it!
No comment yet.
Sign up to comment
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
 Your new post is loading...
Scoop.it!
A newly-elected government provides a country with a rare opportunity for a fresh start, and President Uhuru Kenyatta’s nomination this week of Mr Felix Kiptarus Kosgey to become Kenya’s next Cabinet Secretary for Agriculture, Livestock, and Fisheries offers our nation a remarkable opening to make a hard push for food security. Success, however, will require President Kenyatta, Deputy President William Ruto, Mr Kosgey, and the rest of our new government to set aside the bad mistakes of the recent past and embrace biotechnology. There’s every reason to hope that they will. At the launch of the Jubilee Coalition manifesto in February, Mr Kenyatta and Mr Ruto promised to “put food and water on every Kenyan’s table”. At his inauguration, President Kenyatta reaffirmed that his government will fully implement the manifesto. This is both a tall order and a worthy goal — and one of the surest ways to achieving it is by accepting the latest advances in agricultural biotechnology, recognising that they have become conventional practices in many countries and should become so here as well. Everywhere farmers have had the chance, they have adopted genetically modified crops. Last year, more than 17 million farmers around the world planted more than 170 million hectares of GM crops, according to a new report from the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications. This is an all-time high. Moreover, farmers in poor countries made it possible: For the first time, developing nations accounted for more than half of the world’s GM crop plantings. Unfortunately, as much as Kenyan farmers have hailed the Green Revolution of the 20th century, they have not yet participated in this Gene Revolution of the 21st century. Our scientists have made strides towards developing biotech crops that would flourish in our soil and climate, but a toxic mix of scientific illiteracy and political pressure has prevented the commercialisation of these promising plants. To make matters worse, the previous government banned the importation of GM foods and ordered the Ministry of Public Health and Sanitation to remove all GM foods from grocery stores. This tragic decision came last November in the wake of a controversial French study that claimed to find a connection between GM food and tumours in rats. The results were immediately widely debunked by renowned scientists from around the world. Yet the political activists whose personal ideology opposes agricultural biotechnology — many of them wealthy Europeans who don’t have to wonder about their next meal — managed to smear a vital tool for fighting hunger. The government cannot move swiftly enough to overturn the previous government’s misbegotten ban on GM food. It may be the single most significant step they can take to improve our nation’s food security. They should accept what respected organisations, ranging from the American Association for the Advancement of Science, to Britain’s Royal Society, have said for a long time: GM food is safe to grow and eat. We have nothing to fear from it — and a great deal to gain. While farmers in countries like Argentina, Brazil, Canada, and the United States have jumped at the chance to take advantage of high-yielding GM crops, farmers in Kenya and its neighbours have been relegated to the side-lines. Last year, Sudan became only the fourth African country to permit the planting of GM crops, following the leads of Burkina Faso, Egypt, and South Africa. The boost in farm productivity alone is enough to justify Kenya’s adoption of crop biotechnology, because it would help us feed a growing population. But the benefits would not stop there. Improved access to GM seeds would create jobs by supplying the raw materials for our textile industries. Our leaders can show Africa a way to a better tomorrow — a future in which we enjoy true food security. After all, we elected this government on a platform of taking the country to the next level — through science and technology. Mr Bor teaches Commerce at the Catholic University of Eastern Africa, Eldoret, and is the chairman of Chepkatet Farmers Co-operative Society (gbor@cuea.edu)
Kwame Ogero's insight:
The new Kenyan government should urgently re-visit the temporary hold on GM food imports. Attaining food security will require us to embrace technologies that will help deal with crop production constraints such as droughts, insect pests and diseases. Biotech crops have clearly demonstrated this. Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
A record 170.3 million hectares of biotech crops were grown globally in 2012, at an annual growth rate of 6%, up 10.3 million from 160 million hectares in 2011. 2012 was the 17th year of commercialization of biotech crops... 2012 marked an unprecedented 100-fold increase in biotech crop hectarage from 1.7 million hectares in 1996 to 170 million hectares in 2012; this makes biotech crops the fastest adopted crop technology in recent history – the reason: it delivers benefits.
In the period 1996 to 2012, millions of farmers in ~30 countries worldwide, adopted biotech crops at unprecedented rates. The most compelling and credible testimony to biotech crops is that during the 17 year period 1996 to 2012, millions of farmers... worldwide, elected to make more than 100 million independent decisions to plant and replant an accumulated hectarage of more than 1.5 billion hectares – an area 50% larger than the total land mass of the US or China; there is one principal and overwhelming reason that underpins the trust and confidence of risk-averse farmers in biotechnology – biotech crops deliver substantial, and sustainable, socio-economic and environmental benefits...
Of the 28 countries which planted biotech crops in 2012, 20 were developing and 8 were industrial countries... Thus there are three times as many developing countries growing biotech crops as there are industrial countries... More than half the world’s population, 60% or ~4 billion people, live in the 28 countries planting biotech crops...
In 2012, a record 17.3 million farmers, up 0.6 million from 2011, grew biotech crops – notably, over 90%, or over 15 million, were small resource-poor farmers in developing countries. Farmers are the masters of risk aversion and in 2012, 7.2 million small farmers in China and another 7.2 million small farmers in India, collectively planted a record ~15.0 million hectares of biotech crops. Bt cotton increased the income of farmers significantly by up to US$250 per hectare and also halved the number of insecticide sprays, thus reducing farmer exposure to pesticides...
Via Alexander J. Stein Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
February 6, 2013 Issue: A weekly summary of world developments in agri-biotech for developing countries, produced by the Global Knowledge Center on Crop Biotechnology, International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications SEAsiaCenter...
Kwame Ogero's insight:
GLOBAL[Top]
GLOBAL PARTNERSHIP TO BOOST AFRICA'S AG RESEARCH
The Consortium of International Agricultural Research Centers (CGIAR Consortium) and the African Union Commission (AUC) have signed a Memorandum of Agreement in Nairobi, Kenya for a program that will boost agricultural research and productivity in Africa. Aimed to create a food secure future for Africa, the collaboration will support the efforts of research institutions in Kenya, and in continental Africa. Piers Bocock, director of knowledge management and communications at the CGIAR Consortium said that the project will realize science-based agricultural transformations and advance science and technology agendas, and that research will focus on Africa's most pressing agricultural challenges. More information about this is available at http://www.scidev.net/en/agriculture-and-environment/news/global-partnership-launched-to-drive-africa-s-agricultural-research-.html.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] [Top]US-INDIAN PROJECT TO DEVELOP IMPROVED PIGEONPEA CULTIVARS
A pigeonpea molecular breeding project between the United States and India was recently launched in Hyderabad to help boost food, nutrition and income security of the world's dryland poor. The three-year project, named "Pigeonpea Improvement Using Molecular Breeding," will receive support from the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) India Mission, and will be implemented by the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) together with various government research institutions in India. The project have research component during its first phase, and application component in the second phase. Dr. William Dar, ICRISAT Director General, said that under the CGIAR Research Program on Grain Legumes led by ICRISAT, genomic research plays a crucial role in speeding up the development of improved varieties for smallholder farmer crops such as pigeonpea. The project team looks forward to enhancing pigeonpea productivity to help ensure food security in India, the world's largest producer, consumer, and importer of pigeonpea; and boost farmer income in Africa, where the crop is grown partly for export to India, but grown mostly in marginal environments. To learn more about this partnership, read the ICRISAT news release available athttp://www.icrisat.org/newsroom/news-releases/icrisat-pr-2013-media4.htm.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] AFRICA[Top]BURKINA FASO'S COTTON OUTPUT INCREASES BY 57% DUE TO GM
According to Burkina Faso National Cotton Producers' Union (UNPCB), Burkina Faso's cotton output for 2012 (which includes January 2013) has increased by 57.5 percent due to higher number of farmers who adoptgenetically modified (GM) cotton. Compared to its cotton output in the previous year (2011-2012) which accounted to 400,000 tonnes, the country's output for 2012-2013 rose to 630,000 tonnes . Burkina Faso, which relies on cotton as one of its major exports, is one of the first countries in Africa to approve GM cotton. The government authorized the planting of Monsanto's Bt cotton in 2008. The country's greater-than-expected output could also boost the regional total for West Africa for the year. In an April survey in six West African countries, producers had a forecast of 29 percent increase to 1,738,500 tonnes for 2012-2013. For more information, go to http://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/textile-news/newsdetails.aspx?news_id=120666 and http://www.sharenet.co.za/news/Burkina_Faso_cotton_output_soars_575_
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] [Top]TANZANIA HOSTS KEY INTERNATIONAL FORUM ON PLANT VIRAL DISEASES
Tanzania recently hosted the week long 12th International Plant Virus Epidemiology (IPVE) symposium from January 28 to February 2. With the theme "Evolution, Ecology and Control of Plant Viruses," the conference brought together over 200 scientists and leading experts on plant viruses from 40 countries all around the world. Dr. Lava Kumar, a virologist with the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) and chair of the 12thIPVE Symposium invited the participants to share experiences and the latest knowledge and technologies to control plant viruses. He also encouraged the development of a global strategy to combat emerging and reemerging plant virus diseases with a focus in Africa. An opening message from Dr. Fidelis Myaka, the Director for Research and Development at the Ministry of Agriculture, Food Security and Cooperatives (MAFC), delivered by Dr. Elly Kafiriti, the Director of the Naliendele Research Institute, noted the negative impact of plant viruses on food security in the continent where they are fueled by poor agronomic practices of resource-poor small-holder farmers. They also assured that the Tanzanian government is supportive of all efforts aimed at finding solutions to control plant viruses in the country. The meeting was co-organized by IITA, MARI Tanzania, the National Agricultural Research Organization (NARO) of Uganda, AVRDC-The World Vegetable Center in Arusha, and CORAF under the auspices of the International Committee on Plant Virus Epidemiology (ICPVE), a specialist committee on plant virus epidemiology of the International Society of Plant Pathology (ISPP). To read the full article, go to http://bit.ly/XneN2S.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] [Top]GHANA'S MINISTER SUGGESTS THE USE OF GMOS TO BOOST COUNTRY'S FOOD SECURITY
Clement Kofi Humado, Minister-designate for the Agricultural Committee in Ghana has advocated the utilization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in commercial farming to boost the country's food security. Humado gave the suggestion when he appeared before the Appointment Committee of Ghana's Parliament so that farmers who can afford to cultivate GMO seed varieties could do so. Humado added that more youth should be encouraged to cultivate soybean and yellow maize, the staple feed of the country's poultry industry. He also vowed to incorporate more educated youth in the agricultural sector to aid the rapid modernization of Ghana's agriculture; and to pursue reforms aimed at improving subsidy regimes, the efficiency of distributing agricultural inputs and assessing the needed credit to farmers to increase yields for food security. For more information, visit http://www.ghanaweb.com/GhanaHomePage/NewsArchive/artikel.php?ID=263246.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] [Top]NIGERIA TO HOST UNN BIOTECHNOLOGY SUMMIT
Nigeria will host the UNN Biotechnology Summit of the International Scientific Advisory Board for the International Institute for Biotechnology, at the University of Nigeria, Nsukka from 4 to 8 February 2013. The institute, a UNESCO Category II facility is the first Institute of its kind in Africa, established through an agreement between UNESCO and the government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria on 15 October 2012 in Paris. Stakeholders and experts in biotechnology from the region and beyond are expected to attend the week-long meeting, which is expected to address critical issues of food security and tropical disease research in Africa. A highlight of the meeting of the Scientific Board will be a one-day seminar with the theme, Biotechnology: Prospects and Challenges for Africa, to be discussed by Professor M. Nalecz, director of the Division of Basic Science and Engineering and Director General of the International Basic Science Program (IBSP) at UNESCO HQ. For more details on the event, go to http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/events/all-events/?tx_browser_pi1[showUid]=12315&cHash=37ae6b6b3d.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] AMERICAS[Top]RESEARCH SHOWS NEW MEANS TO BOOST MAIZE YIELDS
Scientists at the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL) in New York have finally proven a simple hypothesis for making significant increases in maize yields. Led by CSHL Professor David Jackson, the team looked at how quantitative variation in the pathways regulating plant stem cells contributes to its growth and yield. According to Jackson, "Our simple hypothesis was that an increase in the size of the inflorescence meristem will provide more physical space for the development of the structures that mature into kernels." Dr. Peter Bommert, a former postdoctoral fellow in the Jackson lab, performed an analytical technique on maize variants that revealed quantitative trait loci (QTLs), and the analysis pointed to a gene that Jackson has been interested in since 2001, when he was first to clone it, a maize gene called FASCIATED EAR2 (FEA2). The research has shown that by producing a weaker-than-normal version of the FEA2 gene, it is possible, to increase meristem size, and get a maize plant to produce ears with more rows and more kernels. The news release about this research is available at http://www.cshl.edu/Article-Jackson/plant-scientists-at-cshl-demonstrate-new-means-of-boosting-maize-yields. Results of this research appear online in the February issue of Nature Genetics. The paper can be viewed at:http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/vaop/ncurrent/index.html.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] [Top]COSTA RICA APPROVES GM CORN CULTIVATION
The National Biosecurity Technical Commission of Costa Rica has authorized a local subsidiary of multinational biotechnology company Monsanto to grow genetically modified (GM) corn in the country. The decision was confirmed by Alejandro Hernández, a member of the commission representing the Ministry of Science and Technology, and by a locally-based NGO in the country Coecoceiba. The ruling allows Monsanto to grow corn for obtaining seeds or for research purposes, but not for consumption or marketing in the country, as all seed to be produced will be exported. Currently there are 443.1 hectares ofbiotech crops in Costa Rica, of which 394.3 are of cotton, 44.6 are soybeans, 3.2 are pineapple and 1 is banana. They belong to Semillas Olson, D & PL Semillas, Bayer, Semillas del Trópico and Del Monte, according to data of Costa Rica's government agency Phytosanitary Service. See the original article at http://www.ticotimes.net/Current-Edition/News-Briefs/Costa-Rica-OKs-genetically-modified-corn_Monday-January-21-2013.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] [Top]DRAFT OF CHILE GENOMIC SEQUENCE COMPLETED, HOPE TO IMPROVE CHILE BREEDS
A high resolution draft of the chile pepper genome has been completed by researchers from New Mexico State University's (NMSU) Chile Pepper Institute and Seoul University in South Korea. "Having a sequenced genome will unlock the genetic secrets of the chile pepper providing a powerful tool to examine previously unimagined questions and will accelerate efforts to breed improved cultivars," said Paul Bosland, NMSU Regents Professor and director of the university's Chile Pepper Institute. According to the draft sequence, the chile pepper has approximately 3.5 billion base pairs and an estimated 37,000 chile pepper genes. NMSU researchers plan to use the data to decipher genes for resistance to chile wilt and to look at carotenoid genes for fortification in crops as well as in the food coloring industry. See the news article at http://newscenter.nmsu.edu/9188/nmsu-researchers-sequence-chile-genome-hope-unlock-genetic-secrets.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] ASIA AND THE PACIFIC[Top]TWO SEASONS OF GOLDEN RICE TRIALS IN THE PHILIPPINES COMPLETED
The two seasons of multi-location field trials of Golden Rice have been completed in the Philippine province of Camarines Sur. Data generated from these multi-loc trials are now being compiled to be submitted to the Bureau of Plant Industry under the Department of Agriculture (DA-BPI), who will evaluate the data as part of the government's biosafety regulatory process. Golden Rice is a new type of rice that contains beta carotene, a source of vitamin A. Leading nutrition and agricultural research organizations are working together to further develop and evaluate Golden Rice as a potential new way to reduce vitamin A deficiency. Golden Rice will only be made available broadly to farmers and consumers in the Philippines if it is approved by DA-BPI and shown to reduce vitamin A deficiency. This process may take another two years or more. View IRRI's news release http://www.irri.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=12466:two-seasons-of-golden-rice-trials-in-camarines-sur-concluded&lang=en.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] [Top]ILOILO AGRI EXTENSION OFFICERS GET UPDATES ON CROP BIOTECH
Around 80 municipal agriculture officers, agriculturists, and extension workers from the five districts of Iloilo province took part in the "Seminar on Crop Biotechnology for Food Security and Sustainable Agriculture" last January 29, 2013 in Sarabia Manor Hotel and Convention Center, Iloilo City, Philippines. Philippine biotech experts and proponents of the University of the Philippines Los Baños' (UPLB) fruit and shoot borer resistant Bt eggplant, presented the significant global and local impacts of biotech crops, the science, safety, and potential benefits of Bt eggplant, and biosafety policies. The seminar was organized by the DA-Region 6, Provincial Agriculture Office of Iloilo, ISAAA, Southeast Asian Regional Center for Graduate Study and Research in Agriculture-Biotechnology Information Center (SEARCA BIC), and Agricultural Biotechnology Support Project II (ABSPII). For more information about crop biotech developments in the Philippines, visit http://www.bic.searca.org/, or e-mail bic@agri.searca.org.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] [Top]PHILIPPINE POLICY MAKERS RECOGNIZE LOCAL BIOTECH RESEARCHES AND PRODUCTS
Philippine policy makers including the House of Representatives Speaker Jose Belmonte, Jr. and Chair of the House Committee on Science and Technology Congressman Julio Ledesma IV recognized the potentials of biotechnology in improving the country's food security during a four-day biotech exhibit and seminars conducted at the House of Representatives last January 21-24, 2013. The activity aimed to showcase local biotech efforts and raise awareness among policy makers and other constituents on the technology's benefits and potentials for the country. It involved biotech seminars for media practitioners and policy makers which served as an avenue to clarify the issues and concerns. The scientists and expert-resource speakers explained the importance of continuing public biotech researches such as the research and field trials on the insect resistant Bt eggplant. They said that these were government-funded projects, hence, the technology benefit should go back to the Filipino people. These upcoming biotech crops and technologies were also shown by studies to hold great potentials in bringing socio-economic benefits to its adopters. The activity was organized by legislative committees in science and technology, and food security, public sector organizations, ISAAA, SEARCA - Biotechnology Information Center, and Philippine Science Journalists Association, Inc. (PSciJourn). For more information about crop biotech in the Philippines, visit SEARCA BIC's website,http://www.bic.searca.org/, or e-mail bic@agri.searca.org.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] [Top]SURVEY ON EXTENSION OFFICIALS' AWARENESS ON BT BRINJAL
Scientists at Indian Institute of Vegetable Research (IIVR) conducted a survey to evaluate the awareness and knowledge level of extension officials in Eastern Uttar Pradesh about Bt brinjal (eggplant), a biotech crop nearing commercialization in India. Results showed that most of the respondents (77.12%) have inadequate basic knowledge about the crop. Thus, it is recommended that an awareness program would be implemented to increase the knowledge of extension officials on Bt brinjal. This is important because extension officials are the institutional mechanism of extension in the country and they are in direct contact with the farming community. The research article is published at a special issue of Indian Research Journal of Extension Education:http://www.seea.org.in/special_issue/vol1/45.pdf.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] [Top]STUDENTS VISIT BIOTECH INSTITUTES IN BANGLADESH
Bangladesh Biotechnology Information Center (BdBIC) of ISAAA in collaboration with Biotechnology Department of Bangladesh Agricultural University organized a study tour for 30 biotech students last December 17-18, 2012. The visit was conducted in Jute and Macrophomina genome sequencing laboratories of Bangladesh Jute Research Institute, National Institute of Biotechnology, and Bangladesh Sugarcane Research Institute. Biotech facilities and on-going activities of the laboratories were shown and explained, including the Genome Sequencing Lab where Jute and Macrophomina have been sequenced and published recently. For details, contact Prof. K. Nasirrudin of BdBIC at nasirbiotech@yahoo.com
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] [Top]KOREA APPROVES GM CORN STACKS FOR IMPORTATION
The Korean Regulatory Authorities have approved the importation of Syngenta's biotech corn Agrisure Viptera 3110 and 3220 trait stacks for food and feed use within Korea. The two stacked traits offer a broad spectrum of above-ground lepidopteran insects such the European corn borer and corn earworm. The same stacked traits have been given import approval from regulatory authorities in the Philippines, Japan,Mexico, South Africa, and Taiwan, and cultivation approval in the United States and Canada. See the original news for details at http://www.syngentacropprotection.com/news_releases/news.aspx?id=171519
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] EUROPE[Top]GM TOBACCO PRODUCES ANTIBODIES FOR POSSIBLE RABIES TREATMENT
A new research reports that scientists have produced a monoclonal antibody in genetically modified (GM)tobacco plants that can neutralize the rabies virus. This new antibody prevents the virus from traveling to the brain and from attaching to nerve endings around the bite site. A group of scientists from the Hotung Molecular Immunology Unit at St. George's University of London led by Leonard Both "humanized" the antibody sequences so people can tolerate it. The antibody was then produced from purifying GM tobacco leaves, and is active in neutralizing a broad panel of rabies viruses. According to Both, untreated virus infection is nearly 100 percent fatal, but producing an inexpensive antibody using GM plants makes rabies prevention possible, especially for low income families in developing countries. The report appears in the January edition of the FASEB Journal, published by the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB). The abstract is available at http://www.fasebj.org/content/early/2013/01/31/fj.12-219964.abstract.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] [Top]BASF STOPS EU APPROVAL BID FOR GM POTATOES
The German plant biotech company BASF Plant Science has announced that it will "discontinue the pursuit of regulatory approvals for the Fortuna, Amadea, and Modena potato projects in Europe because continued investment cannot be justified due to uncertainty in the regulatory environment and threats of field destructions." In the same press release, the company said it will also no longer pursue research and development activities into nutritionally enhanced corn for strategic reasons. The company, however, intends to strengthen its effort in developing high yielding and stress resistant crops in its research headquarters in the United States. A key focus of its new plant biotech research strategy will be in delivering fungal resistant corn. Read BASF's official press release at: http://www.basf.com/group/pressrelease/P-13-133. ; Follow related news article at: http://www.foodnavigator.com/Science-Nutrition/BASF-stops-seeking-EU-approval-of-GM-potatoes.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] Research[Top]COMPARISON OF AGROBACTERIUM AND PARTICLE BOMBARDMENT FOR DEV'T OF HIGH-EXPRESSING, LOW-COPY TRANSGENIC PLANTS
Scientists at the University of Queensland in Australia conducted a study to compare two mechanisms used in genetic transformation of plants, the Agrobacterium-mediated transformation (AMT) and particle bombardment using whole plasmid (WP) and excised minimal cassettes (MC). They aimed to compare the two in terms of transformation efficiency, transgene integration complexity, and transgene expression in plants. For direct comparison, the researchers used identical expression cassette for the linked selectable marker and reporter genes in all treatments. Results showed that there were no significant differences in the transformation efficiencies of WP and MC when equal amounts of DNA were delivered. When the MC concentration was decreased, the transformation efficiency became equivalent with ATM, and thus both can be used efficiently to generate sugarcane lines with low transgene copy numbers and strong transgene expression. Read the research article at http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11248-012-9639-6#page-1.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] [Top]EXPRESSION OF AQUAPORIN GENE IN SALT-STRESSED RICE PRE-TREATED WITH DOPAMINE
One of the major problems in rice production is coping with saline soils. Thus, Amal Abdelkader from Ain Shams University in Egypt, together with other scientists, conducted a study to investigate the function of neurotransmitter dopamine in enhancing salinity tolerance of rice by adjusting the plasma membrane intrinsic proteins (PIPs). Using RT-PCR, the expression of aquaporin gene (OsPIP1-s) was increased as a response to mild salt concentration. On the other hand, the expression of the gene was decreased in response to dopamine, which may imply that dopamine could have a regulatory role in water penetration. It was also observed that the content of pigment and proline was regulated significantly when the plants were pre-treated with dopamine before exposure to salt stress. Low membrane leakage was observed in salt stressed rice pre-treated with dopamine. The researchers concluded that dopamine has a role in regulation of OsPIP1-s gene, which is concentration-dependent. It was recommended that pre-treatment of dopamine in low concentrations can be a cheap and potential mechanism to improve salt stress-tolerance in rice through the neurotransmitter's effect on plasma membrane aquaporins. Read the abstract at http://www.pomics.com/abdelkader_5_6_2012_532_541.pdf.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] Beyond Crop Biotech[Top]RNA FRAGMENTS FROM MICROVESICLE CAN BE USED FOR CANCER DIAGNOSIS
Researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital discovered that strands of information preserved on microvesicles called exosomes may help detect and monitor progession of several types of cancers. Instead of conducting multiple biopsies, which could be life-threatening, new exosomal diagnostic tests can be done. Through the new tests, the exosomes from bio-fluids can be used to extract information on the genetic changes that occurred. Once the specific cancer mutation is known, additional bio-fluids can be collected at certain periods of time to monitor mutation levels as well as the patient's response to therapy. Read the original article at http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=rna-fragments-may-yield-rapid.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] [Top]MANIPULATION OF MOSQUITO GUT BACTERIA TO FIGHT MOSQUITO-BORNE DISEASES
Using metagenomics, an approach that studies different genomes of organisms in an ecosystem, a research group led by New Mexico State University assistant professor Jiannong Xu attempts to reduce the population of disease transmitting mosquitoes. Malaria, Dengue Fever and West Nile virus kill million of people in poor developing countries for decades and an effective control is yet to be discovered. The team previously found that there is a dynamic bacterial community that exists in the mosquito gut. Recently, the team developed a protocol to be able to perform mosquito metagenomic RNA sequencing. Hence, they were able to characterize taxonomic and functional composition of the gut microbiome. Moreover, the mosquito gut bacterial genome of Elizabethkigia which the group isolated was found to be identical with the one found in Europe, which means that the bacterium is very common with malaria transmitting mosquitos. Future collaborations and research is hoped to produce engineered bacterium that produce toxins in the mosquito gut. For more details on this story, see http://newscenter.nmsu.edu/9187/nmsu-researchers-fight-mosquito-borne-diseases-manipulation-mosquito-gut.
[ Send to a Friend | Rate this Article ] DOCUMENT REMINDERS[Top]DEVELOPING SOYBEAN CULTIVARS, A VIDEO PRESENTATION
University of Maryland Emeritus Professor William J. Kenworthy discussed in a video presentation how the inheritance of soybean cultivar traits impacts the breeding program to develop new cultivars. Genetic principles that influence selection response and breeding techniques were discussed for the understanding of soybean growers. A 5-minute Executive Summary video and the Full Presentation video (27 minutes) can be viewed and downloaded athttp://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/edcenter/seminars/Soybean/DevelopingSoybeanCultivars/. Do not hesitate to tell other colleagues/contacts about this mail list. If they wish to join, they may do so athttp://www.isaaa.org/subscribe Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
Sharenet provides financial information and services for investors on The JSE Securities Exchange and other South African markets including online share trading, real-time streaming quotes, graphs, news, fundamentals, portfolios, watch lists, Unit...
Kwame Ogero's insight:
Cotton production in Burkina Faso, one of the first countries in Africa to approve genetically modified cotton, jumped 57.5 percent in 2012-2013 due to an increase in GMO crops, the producers' association said.
Output for the year to end-January 2013 rose to 630,000 tonnes from 400,000 tonnes in 2011/2012 and exceeded the association's expectations for 532,000 tonnes, the Burkina National Cotton Producers' Union (UNPCB) said on Thursday.
Burkina Faso, which relies on cotton as one of its major exports, approved the planting of Monsanto's Bt cotton GMO variety in 2008.
"Genetically modified cotton production is experiencing growth every year," said Karim Traore, UNPCB president.
Burkina Faso's top cotton producer, SOFITEX, collected 500,000 tonnes, 55 percent of which came from genetically modified crops, while the Gourma Cotton company collected 100,000 tonnes, he said.
The country's greater-than-expected output could also boost the regional total for West Africa for the year. In an April survey in six West African countries, producers had forecast a 29 percent increase to 1,738,500 tonnes for 2012-2013.
Although an increasing number of farmers are turning to cotton in West Africa, production remains hobbled by a lack of agricultural technology and stiff competition from subsidised growers such as in the United States.
The Benchmark March cotton contract on the ICE Futures U.S. exchange was trading at 83.19 cents per lb, up 0.27 percent by 1612 GMT on Thursday. Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
Television chefs and other public figures have been blamed for preventing science from feeding the poor by campaigning against genetically modified foods.
Kwame Ogero's insight:
The environmentalist Mark Lynas said GM crops could help provide more food at a lower price by reducing the need for pesticides and fertilisers. He said the poorest people of the world could benefit from crops with added nutritional benefits or designed to resist droughts and floods, but such crops were not being developed because people in positions of power said GM was dangerous. Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall, the chef, the gardener Monty Don and the Prince of Wales have all spoken against GM. “My message to the anti-GM lobby, from the ranks of the British aristocrats and celebrity chefs to the US foodies to the peasant groups of India is this: you are entitled to your views, but you must know by now that they are not supported by science,” said Mr Lynas. “We are coming to a crunch point, and for the sake of both people and the planet, now is the time for you to get out of the way and let the rest of us get on with feeding the world sustainably.” Mr Lynas, author of The God Species, apologised for previously opposing GM crops. Speaking to the Oxford Farming Conference, Mr Lynas said the argument for GM crops was now “rock solid”.
He said trillions of GM meals had been eaten without any deleterious health effects and that in 2011, an area of land six times the size of Britain was planted with GM crops without harming the environment. The public must be taught the benefits of GM so an “avalanche” of regulations suffocating the technology and “not based on any rational scientific assessment” were lifted, said Mr Lynas. “The risk today is not that anyone will be harmed by GM food, but that millions will be harmed by not having enough food, because a vocal minority of people in rich countries want their meals to be what they consider natural,” he said. Owen Paterson, the Environment Secretary, agreed that policy makers, farmers and scientists should be promoting GM to the public and that more GM crops should be licensed for planting in Europe. The Rothamsted Research Institute in Hertfordshire is planting GM wheat and is planning to plant GM oilseed rape. The Omega 3 oilseed rape could be fed to farmed salmon rather than fish from the oceans, to help prevent over-fishing. The campaign group GM Freeze claimed that the public has already debated and decided against GM because of the possible long-term threat to the environment and human health. Greenpeace, the Soil Association and Friends of the Earth are also against GM. Tom MacMillan, director of innovation at the Soil Association, said the world could be fed through techniques such as plant breeding, which does not threaten the environment. He also said cutting over-consumption and waste could help feed deprived people and that results on GM food so far “have been poor”. Mr MacMillan said figures show pesticide use has increased where GM crops have been grown because “superweeds and resistant insects have multiplied”, so GM enthusiasts “must beware of opening floodgates to real problems like this”. Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
Scientists fear that Kenya's recent banning of the import of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) may be a significant blow to progress on biotechnology research and development in the country...
The government's imposition of a ban while continuing to fund research on biotechnology... is a contradictory position. "The essence of GMO research is to provide a product that can complement efforts towards food security. This ban will discourage research, as the product for which the research is being conducted has been placed on import ban" ...
Biotechnology research funding might be compromised, as international donors could be reluctant to provide funds following the ban...
Kenya only has three biosafety officers, and poor infrastructure and human capacity may make implementing the ban very challenging. Via Alexander J. Stein Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
The recent Cabinet ban on the importation of GM foods citing health risks was unfortunate. It was clear proof that we are still sceptical about the role of science in economic growth. I fully support the Cabinet’s concern on the rising cases of cancer. However, this should be investigated holistically without pointing fingers at GM foods. It should be noted that genetic modification, which is the application of scientific knowledge to transfer beneficial genetic traits from one species to another to obtain desired results, is not alien science. This technology was first accomplished in 1973 and soon found commercial applications in medicine. In 1982 the Food and Drug Administration of the US approved the use of human insulin produced by a genetically engineered bacterium. Genetically modified animal vaccine came next, followed by genetically modified agricultural crops, first approved for commercial use in 1996. Approximately one-quarter of all the drugs coming into the market today are produced using GMOs and the boom in GM medical drugs is likely to continue. No one has raised a voice against GM drugs even in cases where there is clear evidence, developed from clinical trials, of extreme side effects. For example, zevalin, a popular GM drug for non-Hodgkin lymphoma, can cause severely reduced white blood cell count resulting in both gastrointestinal and respiratory complications. This is a clear indication that the opposition meted on GMs foods is not all about the technology. We should not apply double standards. The development of a GM crop normally requires at least 10 years, during which rigorous laboratory and field trials are done. Feeding trials are then done with animals. The scientific methods used to develop GM products assure safety. In fact, there are reports that in the case of maize, the consumer health risk is decreased when eating food from GM varieties. Modern crop biotechnology has the potential to improve use of scarce land, improve crop yield, enhance nutritional value of some food crops and most importantly minimise the use of pesticides, insecticides and herbicides. Yet, despite this immense potential, genetic modification is still widely misunderstood and is a victim of premeditated smear and scare campaigns. As a country, we stand to gain a lot in terms of food productivity if we adopt GM technology, hence it is paramount that we make decisions based on proven facts; we should not reject this technology out of ignorance. Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
Poor communications, an unregulated market, and weak farmer-researcher links are damaging uptake of pest-resistant rice... Rice farmers in China and South-East Asia are neglecting to adopt new pest-resistant cultivars, preferring to rely on excessive use of insecticide to combat pests... This has led to outbreaks of pests and disease in rice, affecting thousands of farmers, mainly in China, Indonesia and Thailand...
While there are many varieties of pest-resistant cultivars to choose from, farmers' decisions over what to plant are usually dependent on yield, quality, and the demands of rice millers, Heong explained.
... because of weak communication with experts, local farmers rely on shopkeepers or pesticide salesmen for advice instead, often resulting in farmers falling victim to uncontrolled pesticide advertising and incentives. "Researchers, scientists and extension officers need to understand farmers well. To appreciate the constraints farmers live under, these groups will have to spend time in the villages, hold focus group discussions, carry out interviews, and experience the farmers' lives directly"...
Participatory experiments are needed to show farmers products and best practice, make scientific concepts easier to understand, and make learning more pleasurable... researchers should listen to other players in the value chain, particularly traders and processors, because they may be able to introduce cost-reduction or value-improvement technologies that will eventually benefit the farmers...
Via Alexander J. Stein Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
Their version of truth is their own belief not backed by evidence, but because of a rapidly changing world. In their topsy-turvy world, they dismiss scientific evidence as just another scientific point of view and march off to the fringes of pseudoscience to forage for “studies” that conform to their internal belief. All plant and animal breeding is based on rearranging genetic material. All our food is the result of human intervention unless it is harvested from the wild. GM crops have the potential for higher yield, need less pesticides (hence better for the environment), and require less weeding. They could be made to grow in less than desirable locales, and some are even resist to viruses. Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
A chief provider and curator of Catholic information on the web since 1996. Our editorial voice, always faithful to the teachings of the Church, assists and inspires Catholic clergy and laity. Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
* South American country to OK new seeds before year end* Paraguay world's No. Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
Pathogens and parasites can induce changes in host or vector behavior that enhance their transmission.
"We propose the “Vector Manipulation Hypothesis” to explain the evolution of strategies in plant pathogens to enhance their spread to new hosts." Via Jeff Habig, Marthèlize Tredoux Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
There never any plausible scientific reason to believe that genetically engineered crops posed risks any different from other crops.
By Henry I. Miller and Bruce Chassy Last week French microbiologist Gilles-Eric Séralini and several colleagues released the results of a long-term study in which rats were fed genetically engineered (AKA genetically modified, or “GM”) corn that contains enhanced resistance to insects and/or the herbicide glyphosate. They took the unprecedented step of pre-releasing the paper to selected media outlets under an embargo on the condition that they sign a non-disclosure agreement. (That prevented the journalists from seeking scientific experts’ opinions on the article.) At a carefully orchestrated media event they then announced that their long-term studies found that the rats in experimental groups developed tumors at an alarming rate. Within hours news of their “discovery” echoed around the world. As we say today, the story “went viral.” But there is both more and less to this story than meets the eye. Who is Professor Séralini and how did he make this shocking discovery which conflicts with decades of research and extensive worldwide use of genetically engineered crops? Whom should non-experts believe? Is there now evidence that suggests that genetically engineered crops are dangerous? To begin to answer those questions we need to roll the clock back a few months. In a Forbes.com article earlier this year, we speculated that Séralini was less guilty of actually fudging data to get the desired answer than of performing poorly designed experiments and grossly misrepresenting the results. (Séralini has made a specialty of methodologically flawed, irrelevant, uninterpretable — but over-interpreted — experiments intended to demonstrate harm from genetically engineered plants and the herbicide glyphosate in various highly contrived scenarios.) The experiment we wrote about purported to show toxicity in vitro to a line of cultured embryonic kidney cells exposed to two proteins commonly incorporated into many varieties of corn, soybean and cotton to enhance their insect-resistance. As we discussed, because the experiment was so poorly conceived, any result would have been meaningless. We were mistaken about Séralini. The experiments reported last week show that he has crossed the line from merely performing and reporting flawed experiments to committing gross scientific misconduct and attempting fraud. Séralini claimed that his experiments found harmful effects, including a high incidence of tumors, in laboratory rats fed genetically modified corn and/or water spiked with the commonly used herbicide, glyphosate. The treatments lasted for two years. There is so much wrong with the experimental design that the conclusion is inescapable that the investigators intended to get a spurious, preordained result. Here are a few of the criticisms that have been raised by the scientific community: – the investigators used a strain of rats that were bred to develop tumors as they aged (a detail they failed to disclose). Significantly, mortality rates and tumor incidence in all experimental groups fall within historical norms for this strain of laboratory rats. Therefore, the claim that the genetically engineered corn component of the diet or the herbicide caused the tumors is insupportable. – Séralini et al. argue that the exceedingly long time-frame of their study was necessary to reveal the experimental effects, but animal researchers long ago established that such lengthy studies add no additional meaningful or valid information beyond that which can be collected in shorter times; there is no documentation of the rats’ food intake, which strongly affects the incidence of tumors in this strain;– the experiment included 180 rats (9 groups of 20) fed the genetically engineered or herbicide-containing diets (the “treated rats”), while only 20 rats were fed a standard (control) diet. Both common sense and a rudimentary understanding of statistics tell you that even if there were no actual differences between the groups, the greater numbers of animals in the pooled treated groups increases the odds that one of the treated rats would die first (one of the parameters reported in the paper); – the statistical methods employed were unconventional and appeared to be selected specifically in order to give a certain result. Tom Sanders, head of the nutritional sciences research division at King’s College London, called the treatment of data “a statistical fishing trip”; absence of statistical analysis for mortality or tumor incidence. Statistical analysis is a basic requirement of scientific research, and given that the claims of the study allege tumor and mortality effects, the omission of statistical analysis is inexcusable;– the investigators have refused to release all the data from the experiment, which constitutes scientific misconduct; – insufficient information is provided about the source and quality of corn varieties used in the rats’ diet (contamination with molds could be a critical factor); – absence of data concerning liver or kidney histopathology and liver function tests; – insufficient explanation of the absence of a dose-response relationship between the experimental variables and supposed effects; – inappropriate, unnecessary suffering of the rats, which should have been euthanized long before the tumors became so huge – an especially egregious ethics violation given that the study is, in any case, worthless. – the reported results conflict with innumerable experiments conducted by laboratories around the world on both genetically engineered corn and glyphosate, and also with vast real-world experience. Finally, the authors wrongly claim that they have no conflicts of interest. Séralini is president of the scientific board of a self-described anti-genetic engineering NGO which apparently is hosted by his laboratory; he has a long and sordid history of anti-genetic engineering and anti-agricultural chemicals activism; and his research is funded by two large, “GM-free” French supermarket chains, purveyors of organic and homeopathic products, and perhaps by other undisclosed parties who stand to profit from the smear campaign against genetically engineered foods. It also deserves mention that the publication of this article represents an abject, egregious failure of peer-review and editorial competence at Food and Chemical Toxicology, the journal in which it appeared. The honorable course of action for the journal would be to retract the paper immediately – a point on which the editors have thus far been silent. An obvious question is why Séralini would publish such obviously shoddy studies. The answer may be that negative headline stories laden with color pictures of rats with grotesque tumors are not easily forgotten even if the studies are fraudulent. Also, it may be hard for the non-expert to ignore the reported differences between control and experimental groups, and many non-experts will probably believe that where there is smoke, there is fire even if there are flaws in the experiment. But scientists understand that if the design, execution, or analysis of a study is fundamentally flawed, any conclusions are disqualified. There is no question that the publication of Séralini’s latest attack on genetically engineered foods was a well-planned and cleverly orchestrated media event. The study was designed to produce exactly the false result that was observed and was deliberately allowed to continue until large, grotesque tumors developed. The conduct of the study, including the treatment of the animals, raises serious ethical concerns and questions of scientific misconduct. In the past Séralini and other anti-genetic engineering activists have played the media like a fiddle, but this time even journalists usually willing to trade accuracy and integrity for an “if it bleeds, it leads” story were skeptical of Séralini’s claims. Maybe we have reached a turning point where the media will finally realize that they have been manipulated for years by expert professional con-men.
Not only was there never any plausible scientific reason to believe that genetically engineered crops posed risks any different from other crops, but hundreds of risk-assessment experiments and the vast cultivation and consumption of them during the past 17 years provide a high level of confidence about their safety and usefulness.
Henry I. Miller, a physician and molecular biologist, is the Robert Wesson Fellow in Scientific Philosophy and Public Policy at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He was the founding director of the Office of Biotechnology at the FDA. Bruce M. Chassy, a biochemist and molecular biologist, is former head of the Department of Food Science and Nutrition at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and is now Professor Emeritus of Food Science.
Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
|
Scoop.it!
worldVIEW: A Global Biotechnology Perspective
Kwame Ogero's insight:
There’s only one place to find comprehensive global data on biotech crops, and it’s not the United Nations’s Food and Agriculture Organization or the World Bank or any national agency. It’s a tiny not-for-profit called the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, or ISAAA. This group serves as the go-to source for everyone from government officials to journalists. Behind the data is one very connected scientist: Clive James. A plant pathologist with a more than 40-year career in global agriculture and development, James believes that biotechnology is a viable part of the solution to food insecurity in poor countries, and that the best way to encourage the adoption of genetically modified (GM) crops in those areas is by sharing knowledge about how the technology is being used globally. The task his harder than you’d think. James has spent decades building an extensive network of international fact finders who supply him with numbers on an annual basis; usually more than one estimate for any one data point. It’s a tough task when each country comes up with its own statistics based on its own definitions and, often, its own biases. ISAAA’s signature data set is a tally of the global land area planted with biotech crops, which has been growing steadily since the organization began tracking it in 1996. According to ISAAA’s graph, a record 395 million acres were planted with biotech crops in 2011 and, most important to James, developing countries for the first time accounted for half of that. “I call it the Clive curve,” says Dafang Huang, former director of biotechnology at the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences in Beijing. Huang says he has used the graph, along with other data, to encourage China’s former and current prime ministers to embrace the technology. “We make policy to develop biotechnology based on that curve,” Huang says. That’s just how James hoped his data would make its mark. “A farmer in a developing country sees that a farmer in Burkina Faso is using biotechnology and thinks: ‘Why can’t I do that?’” says James. “We share with them what has already been achieved and let them decide what to do.” It’s not the most direct way to get GM crops into the hands of poor farmers. But as James sees it, knowledge is the foundation for the acceptance of the technology. Without it, fear and misunderstanding stirred up by naysayers would guide policy, leaving no pathway for crop development. Power of Being a People Person He moved to Mexico in 1981 to work for the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) where he served as deputy director general for research. There he developed a close working relationship with Norman Borlaug, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate who is known as the “father of the green revolution.” Borlaug valued strongly the role of technology in achieving food security, and James admired him for that. “It’s not often that you have the chance to get to know a Nobel laureate and travel around the world with him, getting his wisdom,” says James. James adopted much of Borlaug’s way of thinking. “Norman didn’t fear people and some of that rubbed off on Clive,” says Richard Flavell, chief scientific adviser at Ceres in Thousand Oaks, California, and former secretary to ISAAA. “Norman was willing to say to any government leader what he believed,” Flavell says. “Clive has that directness.” James’s first major foray into biotechnology was helping create a molecular genetics lab at CIMMYT in 1986. The lab established CIMMYT’s capacity to collaborate in biotech’s early years. It also gave James an opportunity to build a network of international contacts in crop biotechnology. “Clive thought nothing of having breakfast in one country, lunch in another country and dinner in another,” says Ronald Phillips, a genomics professor emeritus at the University of Minnesota who accompanied James on several networking trips to Europe. But James wanted to do more to bring biotech crops to developing countries. “Clive, from his experience with CIMMYT, felt that developing countries were unlikely to get into the technology with the urgency that we all thought was important,” says Flavell. In 1990 James retired from CIMMYT to found ISAAA. The Biotech Broker He was a natural. James went on to broker 10 public-private deals in ISAAA’s first decade. “There wasn’t another organization doing that at the time, and that was its value,” says Flavell. But by the late 1990s, public opinion of biotech had changed. “It became harder to raise money from foundations and part of the reason it was hard was because of the unease stirred up by the Greenpeaces of the world,” says Flavell. Also by then, other agencies began serving as liaisons in agricultural biotech, and ISAAA’s role ceased to be unique, he says. Undeterred, James began to see knowledge dissemination as the crucial piece to his mission. ISAAA’s primary communication, its annual report, now reaches millions in 70 countries in more than 50 languages. The nearly 300-page document breaks down the distribution of crops by country, crop and trait, and James seems to have much of it memorized. Ask him a question about the regulatory barriers blocking the adoption of biotech crops, and he’ll invariably answer with a number that suggests that things are looking up. “Fifty percent of growth in biotech crop production is in developing countries,” he might say. Like his mentor Borlaug, James’s legacy, in part, may end up being his optimism. Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
FoodNavigator.com Genetic engineering: It's a technology, not an ideology FoodNavigator.com Genetic engineering shouldn't be a political issue, no matter how much sci-fi-sensitive individuals might be reminded of the plot from The Day of the... Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
Kwame Ogero's insight:
Clement Kofi Humado, Minister designate for the Agric Ministry on Friday advocated the utilization of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s) in commercial farming to boost the country’s food security. Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
Golden rice, a new strain that boosts vitamin A levels and reduces blindness in developing countries, is about to be sown in the Philippines... In a few months, golden rice – normal rice that has been genetically modified to provide vitamin A to counter blindness and other diseases in children in the developing world – will be given to farmers in the Philippines for planting in paddy fields.
Thirty years after scientists first revealed they had created the world's first GM crop, hopes that their potential to ease global malnutrition problems may be realised at last. Bangladesh and Indonesia have indicated they are ready to accept golden rice in the wake of the Philippines' decision, and other nations, including India, have also said that they are considering planting it.
"Vitamin A deficiency is deadly," said Adrian Dubock, a member of the Golden Rice project. "It affects children's immune systems and kills around two million every year in developing countries. It is also a major cause of blindness in the third world. Boosting levels of vitamin A in rice provides a simple, straightforward way to put that right." Recent tests have revealed that a substantial amount of vitamin A can be obtained by eating only 60g of cooked golden rice. "This has enormous potential," said Dubock.
But scientists' satisfaction over the Golden Rice project has been tempered by the fact that it has taken an extraordinarily long time for the GM crop to be approved. Golden rice was created late last century, but its development and cultivation has been opposed vehemently by campaigners who have flatly refused to accept that it could deliver enough vitamin A, ... the anti-GM movement... sees golden rice as a tool of global capitalism.
This view is rejected by the scientists involved. "We have developed this is conjunction with organisations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation as a way of alleviating a real health problem in the developing world," says Dubock. "No one is going to make money out of it. The companies involved in developing some of the technologies have waived their licences just to get this off the ground."
This view is shared by Mark Lynas, the environmental campaigner and one of the founders of the anti-GM crop movement. He has publicly apologised for opposing the planting of GM crops in Britain. "The first generation of GM crops were suspect, I believed then, but the case for continued opposition to new generations – which provide life-saving vitamins for starving people – is no longer justifiable. You cannot call yourself a humanitarian and be opposed to GM crops today."
Golden rice was created by Peter Beyer, professor for cell biology at Freiburg University in Germany, and Ingo Potrykus of the Institute of Plant Sciences in Switzerland, in the late 1990s. They... modified the rice's genes so that the plants started to make beta-carotene, a rich orange-coloured pigment that is also a key precursor chemical that is used by the body to make vitamin A... Via Alexander J. Stein Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
A TEMPORARY ban on GM maize has been lifted in Russia.
Kwame Ogero's insight:
A TEMPORARY ban on GM maize has been lifted in Russia. The ban was put in place in September last year after a study linked Monsanto’s weed killer Roundup and the NK603 strain of maize genetically modified to be resistant to the herbicide, to cancer in lab rats. This week the Federal Service for Supervision of Consumer Rights Protection and Human Welfare reported the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences had performed safety assessment of GM maize NK603 tolerant to glyphosate, and the analysis of results of post-monitoring for the entire period of use of the product in the human diet. The report said: “Chemical composition of corn genetically modified maize NK603 is equivalent to its conventional counterpart; CP4 EPSPS protein is neither toxic to humans nor is an allergen; medical and biological research of genetically modified maize NK603 conducted during its official registration in the Russian Federation reveals absence of any toxic, genotoxic, sensitization, allergic and immune-modulating action, and compositional equivalence with its conventional counterpart.” At the moment, GM maize NK603 is registered and approved for use in the diet of the population of 17 countries including European Union, USA, China, Brazil, Japan, Argentina and Canada. Over the entire period of use no adverse effects of genetically modified maize NK603 on human health were found.
Scoop.it!
There’s an old saying that no good deed goes unpunished. That certainly seems to be true for many breakthroughs in genetic engineering. Here are several particularly egregious examples. 1. “Biopharming” — a new way to make drugs Diarrhea is the number-two infectious killer of children under the age of five in developing countries, surpassed only by respiratory diseases. It accounts for roughly 2 million deaths a year. But thanks to a simple but ingenious innovation by an emerging biotech company, Ventria Bioscience, those numbers could become a relic of the past, like mortality from smallpox and bubonic plague. Advertisement Since the 1960s, the standard of care for childhood diarrhea in the developing world has been the World Health Organization’s formulation of rehydration solution, a glucose-based, high-sodium liquid that is administered orally. This low-tech product was revolutionary. It saved countless lives and reduced the need for costly (and often unavailable) hospital stays and intravenous rehydration.However, this product did nothing to lessen the severity or duration of the condition, which over time leads to malnutrition, anemia, and other chronic health risks. The solution (literally and figuratively) may be an ingenious, affordable innovation from Ventria that combines high- and low-tech components to deliver what could be a veritable Holy Grail: two proteins produced inexpensively in rice that radically improve the effectiveness of oral rehydration solutions. It has been known for decades that breast-fed children get sick with diarrhea and other infections less often than those fed with formula. Research in Peru has shown that fortifying oral rehydration solution with two of the primary protective proteins in breast milk, lactoferrin and lysozyme, lessens the duration of diarrhea and reduces the rate of recurrence. The availability of such an improved oral rehydration solution to people in the developing world would thus be a near-miraculous advance. Ventria joined with researchers at the University of California, Davis, and at a leading children’s hospital and a nutrition institute in Lima, Peru, to test the effects of adding lactoferrin and lysozyme to a rice-based oral rehydration solution. They found that the addition of the two proteins to the solution reduced the average duration of the children’s illness from more than five days to 3.7. Moreover, over the twelve-month follow-up period, the children who had received the rice-based solution had less than half the recurrence rate of diarrhea (8 percent versus 18 percent in the control sample). What makes this approach to managing diarrhea feasible is Ventria’s invention of a genetically engineered method that uses rice to produce lactoferrin and lysozyme. This process, dubbed “biopharming,” is an inexpensive and ingenious way to synthesize the large quantities of these proteins that will be necessary. The rice kernel is processed to extract and purify the proteins, which are then used to formulate the improved rehydration solution. They have the same structure and functional properties as the proteins in natural breast milk, and the process is analogous to that used routinely for the production of therapeutic proteins from other organisms, such as bacteria and yeast. The proven life-saving potential of these products has not prevented activists from opposing them. In Peru, left-wing protesters raised completely baseless and malicious objections to the clinical trials, claiming that the rights of the pediatric subjects were being violated. Typically, the activists grossly misrepresented the facts pertaining to the conduct of the trial and the product iself. The proteins used to supplement the oral rehydration solution are considered Generally Recognized as Safe, or GRAS, by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, and the protocols, consent forms, and study design of the trial were, in fact, approved not only by the Peruvian Ministry of Health, but also by review panels that oversee clinical trials at the University of California and the Nutritional Institute in Peru. The naysayers seem unimpressed by the fact that the experimental therapy was found to be both safe and effective. 2. Genetically engineered mosquitoes are all the buzz A second example is a genetically engineered mosquito intended to reduce the mosquito population that carries dengue fever, a debilitating and often fatal disease. With more than one-third of the world’s population living in areas at risk for transmission, dengue infection is a leading cause of illness and death in the tropics and subtropics. As many as 100 million people may be infected yearly, and tens of thousands, mostly children, die. Caused by four different but related viruses, it is spread by the bite of mosquitoes, most commonly the mosquito Aedes aegypti. A British company, Oxitec, uses ingenious genetic-engineering techniques to create new varieties of the mosquito species that transmit the disease. Their approach introduces a gene that produces a protein that stops mosquitoes’ cells from functioning normally. The modified mosquitoes produce high levels of the protein, which, although not toxic itself, confounds some of the cell’s essential machinery and causes death. The modified males carrying the lethal gene are not affected as long as they are fed a special diet. When they are released, they survive long enough to mate with wild females, but the offspring die. Working with local health officials and university scientists and after receiving appropriate approvals, Oxitec undertook experimental releases of these modified mosquitoes in the Cayman Islands and in the Juazeiro region of Brazil. According to the published accounts of these releases, the Oxitec approach to controlling mosquito population was highly effective, reducing the infected mosquito population by 80 percent in the Cayman Islands and by 90 percent in Brazil. Oxitec is awaiting Brazilian Health Ministry approval of this approach as an acceptable dengue-control policy. In the Cayman Islands and Brazil, GeneWatch activists spread alarming, false rumors that the field trials of genetically engineered mosquitoes were dangerous and had been undertaken without informing the public. Similarly, activists have circulated petitions in Key West, Florida — where dengue reappeared three years ago after an absence of more than 70 years — to prevent the release of the mosquitoes there. The sentiments of the director of a mosquito-control agency in Florida illustrate the difficulties of dealing with the activists: “I thought that if I presented the facts in a reasonable manner, people would respond in a reasonable way. But that’s not happening.” Advertisement 3. Nice rice prevents blindness and deathThe third example is a potential nutritional/medical breakthrough called Golden Rice. Rice is a food staple for billions of people, especially in Asia, and although it is an excellent source of calories, it lacks certain micronutrients necessary for a complete diet. In the 1980s and 1990s, German scientists Ingo Potrykus and Peter Beyer developed rice varieties that are biofortified, or enriched, by the introduction of genes that enable the edible endosperm of rice to produce beta-carotene, the precursor of vitamin A. (It is converted in the human body, as needed, to the active form of the vitamin.) The scourge of vitamin A deficiency is epidemic among poor people whose diet consists largely of rice (the edible portion of which contains neither beta-carotene nor vitamin A) or other carbohydrate-rich, vitamin-poor sources of calories. In developing countries, 200–300 million children of preschool age are at risk of vitamin A deficiency, which increases their susceptibility to common childhood infections such as measles and diarrheal diseases and is the single most important cause of childhood blindness in developing countries. Every year, about half a million children go blind as a result of vitamin A deficiency, and 70 percent of those die within a year of losing their sight. To test the Golden Rice, in 2008, researchers from Zehjiang Academy of Medical Sciences, in cooperation with Tufts University, undertook clinical trials in children. These researchers had received approval from the appropriate ethics and institutional-review boards of the respective institutions. As reported in their published paper on the clinical trials, children who ate the Golden Rice had higher levels of vitamin A than if they had consumed traditional rice or other food sources of the vitamin. Once again, in spite of the unequivocal benefits to public health, activists not only opposed the product but made bogus allegations about its testing. In China, Greenpeace criticized the Golden Rice trial, claiming in a press release that children had been “used as guinea pigs.” Chinese news agencies picked up the story, inaccurately reporting that the researchers had conducted dangerous, unauthorized experiments on poor children, and within days, police had interrogated the researchers and coerced from them statements disavowing the research. Their homes were searched and research documents seized. (Previously, Greenpeace activists had first alleged that Golden Rice would deliver toxic amounts of vitamin A, and when that was shown to be virtually impossible, changed tack and claimed that it would provide too little Vitamin A to be effective.) 4. Life-saving products obstructed by irresponsible activism Although these three safe, effective, genetically engineered products — which are only a microcosm of what is possible — offer tremendous promise for public health, especially in poorer countries, all have elicited tenacious and cynical antagonism from activists. Part of the ripple effect is that the intransigent opposition to genetic engineering by anti-science, anti-technology groups provides already risk-averse regulators the political “cover” to delay regulatory approvals. The result is that more people — especially children — continue to die unnecessarily and potential innovators are discouraged from entering the field. Activism intended to delay progress toward life-saving products and technologies is irresponsible and despicable. If actions by leaders of nations resulted in such public-health calamities, they would be accused of crimes against humanity. The callousness of the anti-genetic-engineering activists should appall us, and if we fail to oppose these malefactors, we should also be ashamed. — Henry I. Miller, a physician and molecular biologist, is the Robert Wesson Fellow in Scientific Philosophy and Public Policy at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution. He was the founding director of the Office of Biotechnology at the FDA. Drew L. Kershen is the Earl Sneed Centennial Professor of Law (Emeritus), University of Oklahoma College of Law, in Norman, Okla. Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
UN warns on food security as prices hit six-month high http://t.co/TUBgJz4B via @Telegraph... Via Bibiana Iraki Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
The planting of genetically modified corn protected against pests has reached a record high of 116,306 ha in 2012, which represents 30% of total maize grain sown in the country. This is clear from recent data provided by the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment (MAGRAMA) on the area of corn planted in Spain during 2012. A total of 116,306.6 hectares were cultivated with maize in Spain in 2012, which represents an increase of 18,980.88 hectares or 20% over the previous year. Regarding the total production of grain corn, genetically modified crops have accounted for 30% of the total planted in the country, 3.5% more than in 2011... Spanish original: http://fundacion-antama.org/los-agricultores-espanoles-hacen-crecer-un-20-los-cultivos-biotecnologicos-en-en-2012 ; Via Alexander J. Stein Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
One of the most authoritative reviews of the study in Europe where the study was conducted has been offered by the European Food Safety Authority (Efsa) — the EU’s organ in charge of risk assessment regarding food and feed safety. The Efsa review returned the verdict that the study is of “insufficient scientific quality”. Further, the review also revealed that the type of rats used in the two-year study (Sprague Dawley rats) has long been found to be prone to developing tumours during their life expectancy of about two years. This means the observed frequency of tumours is influenced by the natural incidence of tumours typical of this type, regardless of any treatment. This is neither disclosed nor discussed by the authors. In a separate review by the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), the presentation and interpretation of data of the study has also been questioned. BfR in its final review report note that the data used and presented by the study do not support the main allusions of the study about GM food safety. Although this study has been published in a peer–reviewed journal, various other experts have raised several significant anomalies throughout the study. The major deficiencies include the fact that the objectives of the study are not clear; no information is given about the composition of the food given to the rats, how it was stored or details of harmful substances — such as aflatoxins that it might have contained. Before being certified as safe for human consumption, GMOs undergo rigorous testing procedures that can last up to more than 10 years or more. The debate about the safety of GM food as suggested in the Séralini study is therefore misleading by nature and is one meant to unnecessarily castigate GMO technology. JONATHAN ODHONG’, International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
Dolly the sheep scientist Keith Campbell dies
Biologist worked on controversial cloning that captured public imagination in mid-90s but outraged animal rights campaigners.
Keith Campbell, a prominent biologist who worked on cloning Dolly the sheep, has died aged 58, the University of Nottingham said. Campbell, who had worked on animal improvement and cloning at the university since 1999, died on 5 October, a spokesman, Tim Utton, said on Thursday. He did not specify the cause of death, saying only that Campbell had worked at the university until his death. Campbell began researching animal cloning at the Roslin Institute near Edinburgh in 1991. The experiments led to the birth in 1996 of Dolly the sheep, the first mammal to be cloned from an adult cell. The sheep was named after the singer Dolly Parton. Researchers at the time said the sheep was created from a mammary gland cell, and that the voluptuous Parton offered an excellent example. The creation of the sheep captured the public imagination and instantly became a scientific sensation. The experiments drew admiration but also anger from some who raised questions about the ethics of cloning. Animal rights activists were outraged, while the Church of England expressed reservations. Dolly was put down in 2003 after she developed lung disease. Campbell's interest in cellular growth dated back to his college days studying microbiology in London. "At this time it was known that the majority of cells within an adult contain an intact genome; however, many scientists were sceptical that the nuclei of such cells could be reprogrammed to control development. Stubbornly, I always believed that such technology was possible," he wrote in an autobiographical essay in 2008, when he was awarded the Shaw prize for medicine and life sciences. He received the recognition along with Ian Wilmut, the lead scientist in the team that created Dolly, and the Nobel-winning scientist Shinya Yamanaka. After the birth of Dolly, Campbell oversaw the successful cloning of pigs and lambs. In 1999, he joined Nottingham University as professor of animal development, where he continued research into the cloning process. He was particularly interested in assisted reproduction in both animals and humans, and studied ways to develop reproductive technologies in farm animals to enhance breeding and maintain food security. He believed research into medical use of embryonic stem cells would eventually lead to important breakthroughs despite opposition from some who found the technique abhorrent. "There are groups that believe that life begins at conception and that you should not do any research involving embryos at all," he said in a 2001 interview. "But we have also been able to inform people of the potential benefits, and once they learn about it they are much more likely to be in favour of it." Campbell said stem cells from embryos had the unique ability to be developed into many different types of human cells, including blood, muscle and nerve cells. "Broadly, I would say they may be a major breakthrough in human medicine that will improve the quality of life for a large number of the population, particularly those with age-related disorders," he said. Campbell is survived by two daughters, Claire and Lauren. Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
EFSA is the EU risk assessment body for food and feed safety. It provides independent scientific advice to risk managers. Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
Scoop.it!
Dr Seetharama highlighted that the Meeting of Parties (MOP 6) to the Cartagena Protocol scheduled to be held in Hyderabad from October 1-5, 2012 will play an important role in deciding the future of plant biotechnology in ... Delete the scoop?
Are you sure you want to delete this scoop?
Yes
|
A TEMPORARY ban on GM maize has been lifted in Russia.
The ban was put in place in September last year after a study linked Monsanto’s weed killer Roundup and the NK603 strain of maize genetically modified to be resistant to the herbicide, to cancer in lab rats.
This week the Federal Service for Supervision of Consumer Rights Protection and Human Welfare reported the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences had performed safety assessment of GM maize NK603 tolerant to glyphosate, and the analysis of results of post-monitoring for the entire period of use of the product in the human diet.
The report said: “Chemical composition of corn genetically modified maize NK603 is equivalent to its conventional counterpart; CP4 EPSPS protein is neither toxic to humans nor is an allergen; medical and biological research of genetically modified maize NK603 conducted during its official registration in the Russian Federation reveals absence of any toxic, genotoxic, sensitization, allergic and immune-modulating action, and compositional equivalence with its conventional counterpart.”
At the moment, GM maize NK603 is registered and approved for use in the diet of the population of 17 countries including European Union, USA, China, Brazil, Japan, Argentina and Canada.
Over the entire period of use no adverse effects of genetically modified maize NK603 on human health were found.