Claimed damage to soil bacteria - DOESN'T HAPPEN!

Damage to soil bacteria non existent!

CONTINUATION OF A GMO PUNDIT DISCUSSION OF A PARTICULAR JIGMOD MEMORANDUM CLAIM:

"Damage to soil bacteria, notably through horizontal transfer: Heinemann J.A, Traavik T. (2004) Problems in monitoring horizontal gene transfer in field trials of transgenic plants. Nat. Biotechnol. 22, pp 1105-1109."

REBUTTAL COMMENT
GMO Pundit has carefully read this HT 2004 citation and it is grossly misleading: The JIGMOD claim is a clear missuse of science.

The "damage" doesn't exist. There is actually no explicit description of detected damage to soil bacteria in this paper.
The "problems" of its title refer to "analytical problems" in detection of extremely rare events. Eg difficuties in detection of trace genetic materials.

There is one necessary correction to a seriously misleading statement in the Heinemann Traavik 2004 paper (leading to a published corrigenda)

Quotes from the abstract of Heinemann and Traavik 2004:

(There is a Corrigenda (April 2005) associated with this Perspective.)
Problems in monitoring horizontal gene transfer in field trials of transgenic plants Jack A Heinemann & Terje Traavik

Summary: Transgenic crops are approved for release in some countries, while many more countries are wrestling with the issue of how to conduct risk assessments. Controls on field trials often include monitoring of horizontal gene transfer (HGT) from crops to surrounding soil microorganisms. Our analysis of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and of the sensitivity of current techniques for monitoring HGT from transgenic plants to soil microorganisms has two major implications for field trial assessments of transgenic crops: first, HGT from transgenic plants to microbes could still have an environmental impact at a frequency approximately a trillion times lower than the current risk assessment literature estimates the frequency to be; and second, current methods of environmental sampling to capture genes or traits in a recombinant are too insensitive for monitoring evolution by HGT. A model for HGT involving iterative short-patch events explains how HGT can occur at high frequencies but be detected at extremely low frequencies.

Corrigenda Nature Biotechnology 23, 488 (2005)
doi:10.1038/nbt0405-488d
Corrigendum: Problems in monitoring horizontal gene transfer in field trials of transgenic plants Jack A. Heinemann & Terje Traavik Nat. Biotechnol. 22, 1105−1109 (2004)

On page 1108, paragraph 1, line 7, reference 49 in the statement "B. thuringiensis has 'a significant history of mammalian pathogenicity'46 and is thus not irrelevant to food safety or other environmental issues" was inappropriately cited (reference 46 states: "Bt does not have a significant history of mammalian pathogenecity".) The text should have read that "B. thuringiensis belongs to a closely related clade of bacteria, which includes Bacillus cereus and Bacillus anthracis, and which has a significant history of mammalian pathogenicity1, 2 and is thus not irrelevant to food safety or other environmental issues. Members of this group are so closely related that they may be considered members of the same species, often differing only by the presence or absence of certain plasmids3, 4".

REFERENCES
1. Helgason, E., Caugant, D.A., Olsen, I. & Kolsto, A.-B. Genetic structure of population of Bacillus cereus and B. thuringiensis isolates associated with periodontitis and other human infections. J. Clin. Microbiol. 38, 1615−1622 (2000).
2. Økstad, O.A., Hegna, I., Lindbäck, T., Rishovd, A.-L. & Kolstø, A.-B. Genome organization is not conserved between Bacillus cereus and Bacillus subtilis. Microbiol. 145, 621−631 (1999).
3. Helgason, E. et al. Bacillus anthracis, Bacillus cereus, and Bacillus thuringiensis—one species on the basis of genetic evidence. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 66, 2627−2630 (2000).
4. Hoffmaster, A.R. et al. Identification of anthrax toxin genes in a Bacillus cereus associated with an illness resembling inhalation anthrax. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101, 8449−8454 (2004).

Note also there was another related Perspective, taking a different theme, on gene movement published jointly with the HT 2004 paper.

Monitoring and modeling horizontal gene transfer
Kaare M Nielsen & Jeffrey P Townsend

Monitoring efforts have failed to identify horizontal gene transfer (HGT) events occurring from transgenic plants into bacterial communities in soil or intestinal environments. The lack of such observations is frequently cited in biosafety literature and by regulatory risk assessment. Our analysis of the sensitivity of current monitoring efforts shows that studies to date have examined potential HGT events occurring in less than 2 g of sample material, when combined. Moreover, a population genetic model predicts that rare bacterial transformants acquiring transgenes require years of growth to out-compete wild-type bacteria. Time of sampling is there-fore crucial to the useful implementation of monitoring. A population genetic approach is advocated for elucidating the necessary sample sizes and times of sampling for monitoring HGT into large bacterial populations. Major changes in current monitoring approaches are needed, including explicit consideration of the population size of exposed bacteria, the bacterial generation time, the strength of selection acting on the transgene-carrying bacteria, and the sample size necessary to verify or falsify the HGT hypotheses tested.

Nature Biotechnology 22, 1110 - 1114 (2004)
Published online: 31 August 2004; | doi:10.1038/nbt1006

Analysis of Pusztai Study on GM Potatoes and their effect on Rats

Analysis of Pusztai Study on GM Potatoes and their effect on Rats

By Dr. Nina V. Fedoroff
Willaman Professor of Life Sciences and Evan Pugh Professor
Huck Institutes of the Life Sciences (http://www.lsc.psu.edu/)
201 Life Sciences Building
Pennsylvania State University
University Park, PA 16802

Website: http://hils.psu.edu/lsc/fedoroff.html


On August 10th, 1998, Arpad Pusztai of the Rowett Research Institute in Aberdeen, Scotland appeared on the British TV show "World in Action." In the course of the interview, he announced that his experiments showed that rats fed a diet of potatoes expressing a gene coding for a snowdrop sugar-binding protein showed stunted growth and reduced immune function (Enserink, Science 281.1184). He is further quoted as saying that he would not eat GM food and that he found it "very, very unfair to use our fellow citizens as guinea pigs" (Lee and Tyler, 1999).

The study made headlines around the world. According to Science’s Martin Enserink, the Rowett Institute was flooded with calls from reporters even before the show aired. He quotes Rowett director Philip James saying that the Institute was faced with “a megacrisis we didn't remotely anticipate.” James is said to have examined the experiments and found them a total “muddle.” Pusztai’s laboratory was sealed, his notebooks were turned over to an audit committee and Pusztai was put on indefinite leave – he was out of a job. The audit committee’s report, released in October of 1998, concluded that Pusztai’s data did not support the conclusion that the transgenic plants had a deleterious effect on growth, organ development, or immune function in rats.

Pusztai, whom Rowett had been forbidden to talk to the press, got in touch with a number of scientists and asked them to review the audit report and his rebuttal to it, as well as a transcript from the World in Action show (Enserink, Science 283:1094-5). On February 12 1999, Professors Edilbert van Driessche and Thorkild C. Bøg-Hansen, colleagues who had collected the responses, issued a memorandum supported by more that 20 other scientists who had studied Dr. Pusztai's findings (Lee and Taylor, 1999).

Their memorandum stated (the following is largely verbatim from the WSWS website): "Those of us who have known Dr. Pusztai's work or have collaborated with him, were shocked by the harshness of his treatment by the Rowett and even more by the impenetrable secrecy surrounding these events. It is an unacceptable code of practice by the Rowett and its Director, Professor James, to set themselves up as arbiters or judges of the validity of the data which could have such a profound importance not only for scientists, but also for the public and its health." The memorandum concludes, "There is no doubt in our minds that the reviews will remove the stigma of alleged fraud and will restore Dr. Pusztai's scientific credibility."

One of the scientists who reviewed Pustzai's work, Dr. Vyvyan Howard, foetal and infant toxico-pathologist at the University of Liverpool, told the World Socialist Web Site, "I am working on some features of lectin toxicity and that is how I came to know Arpad Pusztai, who is certainly one of the world's experts in this field." Dr. Howard said that he believed Dr. Pusztai's data was (sic) sound. "We think it would pass peer review and be published and we are at a loss to really explain why the Rowett Institute came to the conclusion it did." Dr. Howard added that Pusztai's findings "are of considerable importance in the current debate on the safety and hazard assessment of genetically modified foods".

Professor S. Pierzynowski, from the Department of Animal Physiology, Lund University, Sweden, said, " I must stress that there is enough strong evidence that the work of the audit group was not objective and per se dangerous, not only for Dr. Pusztai, but generally for free and objective science." Joe Cummins, Emeritus Professor of Genetics at the University of Western Ontario, Canada described the Rowett Institute's treatment of Pusztai as "a great injustice", adding that the "Institute continues to look inward to cover up its mistakes".
These eminent scientists have not only raised serious concerns about the way research into GM food is being conducted, but that those who have dissenting voices are being suppressed and have had their careers ruined, and sometimes their health. Dr. Pusztai has suffered a mild heart attack brought on by the stress caused by trying to restore his scientific reputation and the credibility of his research. These concerns were echoed by Dr. Kenneth Lough, FRSE, a former principal scientific officer at the Rowett Institute between 1956 and 1987. He said, "In my view the evidence presented in the audit report must be considered as unsafe and is without justification for use against the scientific reputation of Dr. Pusztai. The Institute is at risk in sending the wrong signals to scientists in this field of research that any sign of apparent default will be treated with the utmost severity. The awareness will of course act as strong deterrent to those who wish to conduct research in this vitally important field." (end of stuff from WSWS).

But a committee of six eminent members of the British Royal Society, set up in April of 1999 to review the Pusztai data, reached the opposite conclusion. The committee sent out the material they received from Pusztai, the Rowett and other sources to scientists with expertise in statistics, clinical trials, physiology, nutrition, quantitative genetics, growth and development, and immunology. The committee reviewed the opinions it received and issued a summary statement in June of 1999. The consensus of these experts was that the experiments were poorly designed, the statistical inappropriate, and the results inconsistent. Their recommendation was that the experiments be repeated and the results published.

Pusztai jumped to his own defense with a detailed response (http://www.freenetpages.co.uk/hp/a.pusztai/). He and a colleague with whom he had worked for some years published their study in medical journal Lancet (Ewen and Pusztai, 1999). Lancet, in turn, came under sharp criticism from a number of quarters, including U.K.'s Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, which called the journal "irresponsible." But Lancet’s editor, Richard Horton, stood by the publication. Five of 6 reviewers had favored publication and he believed that it was appropriate for the information to be available in the public domain (Enserink, Science 286:656).

So what’s this all about? Why this titanic battle of experts? Why is Pusztai, until this incident considered an authority on the plant proteins called lectins, under such fierce attack? He’s written three books on lectins and published 270 research papers. Moreover, he’d worked at the Rowett Institute for 35 years. On the surface of it, his now-controversial research was perfectly straightforward: he fed genetically modified potatoes expressing a snowdrop lectin to rats and looked to see whether this food affected their physiology, particularly the gut, metabolic process and immune system. What are lectins? Should we worry about them? Should we share Pusztai’s concern and conclusion that genetic engineering itself results in "……possible gene silencing, suppression and/or somaclonal variation"?

The protein in question is called the Galanthus nivalis agglutinin after the Latin name of the snowdrop and it is abbreviated GNA. It was originally isolated from snowdrop bulbs and is a kind of protein that recognizes and bind to sugars on proteins. Such proteins are called ‘lectins’ as a group. Although lectins were first discovered in plants, they are now known to exist in animals in great profusion (Rudiger 2000). Many proteins – in all kinds of organisms – are decorated with sugar molecules – sometimes with long strings or branches of several sugar molecules. Such derivatized proteins are called glycoproteins.

Each glycoprotein has a different complement of sugar molecules, depending on what it does and where it does it. The sugar signature works like a zip code in the cell, determining where the protein is delivered by the machinery that produces it. When such decorations are on the surface – be it of a virus, a bacterium, or a cell – they serve as a recognition molecules. Lectins recognize the sugar molecules with such exquisite correctness and specificity that they have long been used to identify what sugars are present on a protein. Today it is increasingly recognized that the sugar ‘codes’ serve a large variety of internal functions. One of these is recognizing disease organisms.

So, for example, it has been known for a number of years that the AIDS virus HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) has mannose sugars on its surface and the ability of cells to recognize these surface sugars with their own lectins is part of the infectious process (Hammar 1995). Plant lectins like GNA, which recognizes mannose, bind to the virus and inactivate it. They also interfere with its ability to infect cells (Hammar 1995). Because of its ability to bind to these surface sugars, GNA has been used to purify the HIV surface glycoproteins, which were in turn used to produce an immune response, albeit not much of one (Gilljam, 1993). Similarly, Chlamydia trachomatis has surface mannose-containing glycoproteins that allows the organism to infect cells by binding to a surface lectin (Siridewa 1993).

Plants – no less than animals – have mechanisms for defending themselves from microorganisms and insects. Plant produce lectins as one of their defense strategies against insects (Carlini 2002). Indeed, a good deal of evidence has accumulated that GNA, which binds specifically to a sugar called mannose, is rather toxic to certain kinds of insects pests of important crop plants, including rice (Du et al. 2000; Fitches et al., 2001). GNA does not seem to affect ladybird beetles, considered to be a beneficial insect (Down et al., 2000), although it does affect parasitic wasps, also considered to be beneficial insects (Romeis 2003). Some lectins, including ricin, are quite toxic because they’re taken up by cells and block protein synthesis (Olsnes 2001). These are called ribosome-inactivating proteins or RIPs. But GNA doesn’t have this activity (Batelli 1997).

Better yet, Pusztai’s own studies showed that purified GNA wasn’t toxic to rats (Pusztai 1990). In fact, he and his colleagues had shown that GNA had a protective effect against bacterial infection with Salmonella, a nasty intestinal bug (Naughton et al., 2000). All of this made the gene coding for GNA an attractive choice for increasing the insect resistance of crop plants. To test this possibility, the gene was introduced into a number of different crop plants, including potatoes and rice. And it does, indeed, increase their resistance to some important insect pests (Rao 1998; Foissac 2000). Because GNA binds to the surface cells of insects guts and enters their blood stream, it is also thought to have potential as a vehicle for delivering more toxic peptides to insects (Fitches 2002).

Sugar signatures are ubiquitous in biology – and as yet, we know rather little about what they do. It is known, for example, that there are two critical kinds of cells – the T and B cells – that must interact for the body’s immune response to be activated. It has been reported that these interactions occur through a mannose-containing glycoprotein and that this interaction can be blocked by GNA (Savage 1993). Thus some of the same signature sugars central to important cellular functions. Pathogens take advantage of essential intercellular recognition mechanisms to gain a foothold, both by binding to the cell’s own lectins and by evading the immune response because they resemble the cell’s own molecules. So, for example, a lectin called DC-SIGN (dendritic dell-specific intercellular adhesion molecule-3 grabbing nonintegrin) binds sugars on the HIV envelope and facilitates infection of its target CD4 T cells (Geijtenbeek 2003).
The DC-SIGN lectin is referred to as an HIV ‘receptor’ because of this specific recognition of HIV, but it is actually a universal pathogen receptor (Geijtenbeek 2003). It normally captures viruses and other pathogens through their sugar-containing protein molecules and pulls them into the cell, where they are broken down and displayed on the cell surface to trigger a protective immune response (Kooyk 2003). HIV hijacks this system. It stays intact when it binds to DC-SIGN and rides along to be presented to its target T4 cells in an infectious form. This is a rather effective evasion system. It makes it quite unlikely that the body will successfully fight back by making antibodies, the body’s proteins that recognize and destroy pathogens. This is because the immune system learns early in life to discriminate between its own proteins and foreign proteins. But one particular HIV glycoprotein, gp120, has a dense cluster of mannose residues that has not been seen in any mammalian glycoprotein (Calarese 2003) and a few HIV patients make good antibodies to this protein. Recent work on one such antibody showed that it binds to the gp120 – the same protein to which DC-SIGN binds to promote viral infection – in a very unusual way. Antibodies generally recognize and bind to just one sugar residue, but this unusual antibody has an extended structure that permits it to recognize more than one mannose residue at a time. This is actually similar to the way that certain lectins recognize sugars because lectins consist of two or more identical proteins, each of which has a sugar-binding site (Hester 1996; Calarese 2003). The discovery of this unusual antibody raises new hope for stimulating the immune system to produce anti-HIV antibodies, immunizing people against AIDS.

But there are many kinds of lectins and they can have quite different effects. For example, Pusztai and his colleagues had reported 10 years earlier that a kidney bean lectin, phytohemagglutinin or PHA, caused the surface cells of rats’ intestines to turn over more quickly (Pusztai 1993). The younger replacement cells on the tiny surface projections – called villi – of the intestinal cells had a high proportion of proteins with mannose sugars at the ends of their sugar signatures. This made the cells more susceptible to bacterial overgrowth with Escherichia coli, a common gut bacterium, because the bacterium has projections – called fimbrae – that recognize and bind to mannose. Including GNA in the diet reduced the extent of bacterial overgrowth because the GNA binds to the mannose on the intestinal cells.
PHA is a normal component of red kidney beans – and people get sick from eating too much of it. Allergist David Freed recounts an incident that occurred in 1988 when a hospital had a “healthy eating day” in its staff canteen at lunchtime (Freed 1999). He recounts that 31 portions of a dish containing red kidney beans were served that day and over the next several hours, 11 customers were experienced profuse vomiting, some with diarrhea – typical food-poisoning symptoms. All recovered by the next day, but no pathogen was found in the food. It turned out that the beans contained an abnormally high concentration of PHA.
There are many different kinds of plant lectins and they are present in most plants, especially abundant in seeds, including cereals and beans, and in tubers, including potatoes. They tend to survive cooking and digestive enzymes. Pusztai and many other investigators have shown that they affect intestinal cells. It isn’t surprising that they occasionally cause symptoms of food poisoning (Freed 1999). As in insects, some can get into and through cells and into the blood stream. Some lectins are also potent allergens. So even through GNA appears to be a relatively benign lectin as evidenced by rat feeding studies, there is absolutely no doubt that a food expressing such a protein needs careful testing, first in animals.

Sensibly, the Scottish Office Agriculture, Environment and Fisheries Department (SOAEFD) commissioned a 3-year study in 1995 titled “Genetic engineering of crop plants for resistance to insect and nematode pests: effects of transgene expression on animal nutrition and the environment.” Its objective was "to identify genes encoding antinutritional factors which will be suitable for transfer into plants to enhance their resistance towards insect and nematode pests, but will have minimum impact on non-target, beneficial organisms, the environment, livestock fed on these plants, and which will present no health risks for humans either directly or indirectly through the food chain." The University of Durham and the Scottish Crop Research Institute were to provide the transgenic plants and the Rowett Research Institute was to do a chemical analysis of the transgenic plant materials. They were also to do both short-term (10 day) and long-term (3 months) rat feeding trials to determine whether the effect of the transgenic plant materials was similar to that of the parent lines.

The chemical analysis of the transgenic plants showed them to be quite different from the parent lines (http://www.rowett.ac.uk/gmo/ajp.htm) – although the audit report curiously concludes that they weren’t (http://www.rowett.ac.uk/gmoarchive/gmaudit.pdf). The researchers measured total protein concentration, as well as the content of several relevant proteins, including GNA, potato lectin and several others. All of these differed between transgenic lines and in comparison with the parental lines. Rats in Pusztai’s study were fed either raw or cooked potatoes. Non-transgenic potatoes were supplemented with GNA. The results showed that rats fed the transgenic potatoes had significantly lower organ weights. They found that GNA added to the potatoes made the animal’s lymphocytes, which are cells in the immune system, more responsive to stimulation by other lectins. By contrast, lymphocyte responsiveness was depressed in the animals fed the transgenic potatoes expressing GNA.
What these studies basically showed was that the transgenic potato lines were different from each other, as well as from the parental potatoes. A later study on transgenic potatoes came to the same conclusion (Down 2001). Here Pusztai jumped to the conclusion that these differences must be attributable to the fact that the plants were transgenic – and he went public with his conclusion. What he probably didn’t know – because he was neither a plant breeder nor a plant biologist – was that the very process through which the plants are put during the introduction of the transgene – culturing through a callus stage and then regeneration of the plant – can cause marked changes in both the structure and expression of genes.

The variation that arises as a result of passage through tissue culture is called “somaclonal variation” and is both a nuisance and a potent source of new materials for plant breeding. The variation is both genetic (single base changes, deletions, insertions, transpositions) and epigenetic – this means modifications that can affect expression of genes, but not their structure. For plant breeders, this means that new materials and new varieties derived using culturing techniques must be evaluated for both their growth and their food properties. This is particularly important for potato breeding, because potatoes produce toxic substances called glycoalkaloids (Kozukue 1999). Glycoalkaloids are normally present in potatoes, can contribute to inflammatory bowel disease, and are concentrated by frying potatoes (Patel 2002). So potato breeders must carefully monitor these compounds, irrespective of the means by which new potato varieties are generated.

Unfortunately, Pusztai’s analyses of the chemical composition of the transgenic lines were rather superficial. And his quick leap to the conclusion that the variation he observed was attributable to the fact that they were transgenic was simply unwarranted. This mistake has proved costly to Pusztai himself. And unfortunately, the expertise battle that sprang up around the experiments has obscured the importance of carrying out well-designed experiments to evaluate the food qualities of transgenic crop plants expressing proteins that have the potential of affecting human health. Lectins are clearly in this category.

Pusztai has been criticized severely for the quality of his experiments. His experiments have been attacked for their small sample sizes, the use of inappropriate statistical procedures, and the fact that a diet of raw – or even cooked – potatoes is a bad diet for rats (people too), even when supplemented with a bit of extra protein. But oddly enough, in all that has been written about these experiments, no one seems to have seen their central flaw, which was that he did not use appropriate controls. A “control” is the part of an experiment that allows the researcher to examine the consequences of just the change (in this case) or the treatment (in the case of a drug) under study. In Pusztai’s experiments, the control potatoes had a different history than the transgenic potatoes and, in particular, that history included a culture procedure that induces somaclonal variation. The likeliest source of the variation he detected – and of the differences he attributed to the fact that they contained foreign DNA – was the culture procedure itself. In order to be able to attribute the deleterious effects of the transgenic potatoes to the newly introduced gene or to some other part of the introduced DNA, he would have had to make a comparison between potatoes that had the very same history, but either had or lacked the transgenic construct. This can be done, but the study that Pusztai participated in was simply not designed for such a test.


Battelli MG, Barbieri L, Bolognesi A, Buonamici L, Valbonesi P, Polito L, Van Damme EJ, Peumans WJ, Stirpe F. (1997) Ribosome-inactivating lectins with polynucleotide:adenosine glycosidase activity. FEBS Lett. 408:355-9.

Calarese DA, Scanlan CN, Zwick MB, Deechongkit S, Mimura Y, Kunert R, Zhu P, Wormald MR, Stanfield RL, Roux KH, Kelly JW, Rudd PM, Dwek RA, Katinger H, Burton DR, Wilson IA (2003) Antibody domain exchange is an immunological solution to carbohydrate cluster recognition. Science 300:2065-71.

Carlini CR, Grossi-de-Sa MF (2002) Plant toxic proteins with insecticidal properties. A review on their potentialities as bioinsecticides. Toxicon 40:1515-39.

Down RE, Ford L, Woodhouse SD, Raemaekers RJ, Leitch B, Gatehouse JA, Gatehouse AM. (2000) Snowdrop lectin (GNA) has no acute toxic effects on a beneficial insect predator, the 2-spot ladybird (Adalia bipunctata L.). J. Insect. Physiol. 46:379-391.

Down RE, Ford L, Bedford SJ, Gatehouse LN, Newell C, Gatehouse JA, Gatehouse AM (2001) Influence of plant development and environment on transgene expression in potato and consequences for insect resistance. Transgenic Res. 10:223-36.

Du J, Foissac X, Carss A, Gatehouse AM, Gatehouse JA. (2000) Ferritin acts as the most abundant binding protein for snowdrop lectin in the midgut of rice brown planthoppers (Nilaparvata lugens). Insect. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 30:297-305.

Enserink, M. (1998) Institute copes with genetic hot potato. Science 281.1184

Enserink, M. (1999) Preliminary data touch off genetic food fight. Science. 1999 283:1094-5

Enserink, M. (1999) The Lancet scolded over Pusztai paper. Science. 286:656.

Ewen SW, Pusztai A. (1999) Effect of diets containing genetically modified potatoes expressing Galanthus nivalis lectin on rat small intestine. Lancet 354:1353-4.

Fitches E, Woodhouse SD, Edwards JP, Gatehouse JA. (2001) In vitro and in vivo binding of snowdrop (Galanthus nivalis agglutinin; GNA) and jackbean (Canavalia ensiformis; Con A) lectins within tomato moth (Lacanobia oleracea) larvae; mechanisms of insecticidal action. J Insect Physiol. 47:777-787.

Fitches E, Audsley N, Gatehouse JA, Edwards JP. (2002) Fusion proteins containing neuropeptides as novel insect contol agents: snowdrop lectin delivers fused allatostatin to insect haemolymph following oral ingestion. Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol. 32:1653-61.

Foissac X, Thi Loc N, Christou P, Gatehouse AM, Gatehouse JA. (2000) Resistance to green leafhopper (Nephotettix virescens) and brown planthopper (Nilaparvata lugens) in transgenic rice expressing snowdrop lectin (Galanthus nivalis agglutinin; GNA). J. Insect. Physiol. 46:573-583.

Freed, D. (1999) Do dietary lectins cause disease? British Med. J. 318.1023-4.

Geijtenbeek TB, van Kooyk Y. (2003) DC-SIGN: a novel HIV receptor on DCs that mediates HIV-1 transmission. Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol. 276:31-54.

Gilljam G. (1993) Envelope glycoproteins of HIV-1, HIV-2, and SIV purified with Galanthus nivalis agglutinin induce strong immune responses. AIDS Res. Hum. Retroviruses. 9:431-8.

Hammar L, Hirsch I, Machado AA, De Mareuil J, Baillon JG, Bolmont C, Chermann JC. (1995) Lectin-mediated effects on HIV type 1 infection in vitro. AIDS Res. Hum. Retroviruses. 11:87-95.

Hester G, Wright CS. (1996) The mannose-specific bulb lectin from Galanthus nivalis (snowdrop) binds mono- and dimannosides at distinct sites. Structure analysis of refined complexes at 2.3 A and 3.0 A resolution. J. Mol. Biol. 262(4):516-31.

Kooyk Y, Appelmelk B, Geijtenbeek TB. (2003) A fatal attraction: Mycobacterium tuberculosis and HIV-1 target DC-SIGN to escape immune surveillance. Trends Mol Med. 9:153-9.

Kozukue N, Misoo S, Yamada T, Kamijima O, Friedman M (1999) Inheritance of morphological characters and glycoalkaloids in potatoes of somatic hybrids between dihaploid Solanum acauleand tetraploid Solanum tuberosum. J. Agric. Food Chem. 47:4478-83.

Lee, K and Tyler, R. International scientists raise concerns over genetically modified food. http://www.wsws.org/articles/1999/feb1999/food-f17.shtml

Naughton PJ, Grant G, Bardocz S, Pusztai A. (2000) Modulation of Salmonella infection by the lectins of Canavalia ensiformis (Con A) and Galanthus nivalis (GNA) in a rat model in vivo. J. Appl. Microbiol. 88:720-7.

Olsnes S, Kozlov JV (2001) Ricin. Toxicon 39:1723-8.

Patel B, Schutte R, Sporns P, Doyle J, Jewel L, Fedorak RN (2002) Potato glycoalkaloids adversely affect intestinal permeability and aggravate inflammatory bowel disease. Inflamm Bowel Dis. 8:340-6.

Pusztai A, Ewen SW, Grant G, Peumans WJ, van Damme EJ, Rubio L, Bardocz S. (1990) Relationship between survival and binding of plant lectins during small intestinal passage and their effectiveness as growth factors. Digestion 46 Suppl 2:308-16.

Pusztai A, Grant G, Spencer RJ, Duguid TJ, Brown DS, Ewen SW, Peumans WJ, Van Damme EJ, Bardocz S. (1993) Kidney bean lectin-induced Escherichia coli overgrowth in the small intestine is blocked by GNA, a mannose-specific lectin. J. Appl. Bacteriol. 75:360-8.

Rao KV, Rathore KS, Hodges TK, Fu X, Stoger E, Sudhakar D, Williams S, Christou P, Bharathi M, Bown DP, Powell KS, Spence J, Gatehouse AM, Gatehouse JA. (1998) Expression of snowdrop lectin (GNA) in transgenic rice plants confers resistance to rice brown planthopper. Plant J. 15:469-77.

Romeis J, Babendreier D, Wackers FL. (2003) Consumption of snowdrop lectin (Galanthus nivalisagglutinin) causes direct effects on adult parasitic wasps. Oecologia. 134:528-36.

Rudiger H, Siebert HC, Solis D, Jimenez-Barbero J, Romero A, von der Lieth CW, Diaz-Marino T, Gabius HJ. (2000) Medicinal chemistry based on the sugar code: fundamentals of lectinology and experimental strategies with lectins as targets. Curr. Med. Chem. 7:389-416.

Savage SM, Donaldson LA, Sopori ML. (1993) T cell-B cell interaction: autoreactive T cells recognize B cells through a terminal mannose-containing superantigen-like glycoprotein. Cell Immunol. 146:11-27.

Siridewa K, Froman G, Hammar L, Mardh PA. (1993) Characterization of glycoproteins from Chlamydia trachomatis using lectins. APMIS 101:851-7.


GMO Pundit on this topic:

For a collection of comments and references on this first see

Rats fed bad diets have lots of changes in their guts, which is the best the Pundit can collect from the web and from his advisers.


but also here and here, Potatoes not perfect food, Genetic Roulette.

Academics Review on this topic


1.1—Pusztai’s Flawed Claims

Some examples of Nina V Fedoroff' s Scientific leadership.

Prehistoric GM Corn
Nina V. Fedoroff

Corn (maize) is arguably man's first, and perhaps his greatest, feat of genetic engineering. Its huge ears--each packed with firmly attached kernels filled with starch, protein, and oil--make it a food staple. Contemporary corn, unlike its wild grassy ancestor teosinte, can't survive without people because it can't disperse its own seeds. The origins of maize have long intrigued geneticists, but only recently have new molecular methods enabled evolutionary sleuths to pinpoint its origins and identify the genetic modifications (GMs) that enabled the radical transformation of teosinte into contemporary maize. On page 1206 of this issue, Jaenicke-Després, Doebley, and their colleagues (1) provide the latest chapter in this detective story and suggest that prehistoric people were quick to adopt GM corn.

Teosinte and corn (Zea mays) don't look much alike, but they are interfertile. Teosinte-corn hybrids arise in the wild but look so different from either parent that they were originally classified as a different species (Zea canina). In the 1920s, Beadle examined chromosomes in teosinte-corn hybrids and concluded that the two plants belonged to the same species, and even shared the same chromosomal order of genes...

So how, when, and where was teosinte transformed into maize? Beadle gave his mentor, Emerson, credit for the idea that just a few mutations changed teosinte into maize (4). Analyzing backcrossed maize-teosinte hybrids with molecular probes, Doebley's group came to a startlingly similar conclusion: The differences between maize and teosinte could be traced to just five genomic regions (5). In two of these regions, the differences were attributable to alternative alleles of just one gene: teosinte glume architecture (tga1) and teosinte branched (tb1), which affect kernel structure and plant architecture.

The tga1 gene controls glume hardness, size, and curvature (6). Teosinte kernels are surrounded by a stone-like fruitcase, assuring their unscathed passage through an animal's digestive tract, which is required for seed dispersal. But the plant's reproductive success is the consumer's nutritional failure. Not surprisingly, one of the major differences between maize and teosinte kernels lies in the structures (cupule and outer glume) enclosing the kernel. Maize kernels don't develop a fruitcase because the glume is thinner and shorter and the cupule is collapsed. The hardness of teosinte kernels comes from silica deposits in the glume's epidermal cells and from impregnation of glume cells with the polymer lignin. The maize tga1 allele supports slower glume growth and less silica deposition and lignification than does the teosinte tga1allele.

The tb1 locus is largely responsible for the different architecture of the two plants. Teosinte produces many long side branches, each topped by a male flower (tassel), and its female flowers (ears) are produced by secondary branches growing off the main branches. Modern corn has one main stalk with a tassel at the top. Its lateral branches are short and bear its large ears. Much of the difference is attributable to the tb1 gene, originally identified in a teosinte-like maize mutant. Mutations generally abrogate gene function, indicating that the maize allele acts by suppressing lateral shoot development, converting grassy teosinte into slim, single-stalked modern corn and male into female reproductive structures (7).

Knowing that this cluster of traits is controlled by just two genes makes it less surprising that genetic differences in these genes could render teosinte a much better food plant. Yet however useful to people, a tga1 mutation would have been detrimental to teosinte, making it more vulnerable to destruction in the digestive tract of the consumer and so less able to disperse its seeds. Thus, the only way this mutation could have persisted is if our ancestors propagated the seeds themselves. This implies that people were not only harvesting--and likely grinding and cooking--teosinte seeds before these mutations came along, but also were selecting for favorable features such as kernel quality and cob size. In turn, this suggests a "bottleneck" in corn evolution: Several useful GMs were brought together in a single plant and then the seeds from this plant were propagated, giving rise to all contemporary maize varieties. Such a prediction can be tested by calculating the number of generations and individuals it would take to account for the molecular variability present in contemporary maize. The results of such a test suggest a bottleneck for maize domestication of just 10 generations and a founding population of only 20 individuals (8). Did this happen once or many times? Because genetic differences arise at a fairly constant rate, this question can be answered by constructing family trees using similar sequences from different varieties of teosinte and contemporary maize. The results are unequivocal: All contemporary maize varieties belong to a single family, pointing to a single domestication event.

Knowing how quickly differences arise, how many there are today, and where the family of origin survives, it is possible to determine when--and where--it all started. The answer is that maize most probably arose from teosinte of the subspecies parviglumis in the Balsas River basin of southern Mexico roughly 9000 years ago (9). Recent redating of cobs from the Guilá Naquitz cave (about 500 km from the Balsas River basin) demonstrated that they were more than 6200 years old, providing archaeological support for the molecular findings (10, 11). These earliest corn cobs don't look much like those of modern corn, but they look even less like teosinte cobs (see the figure). They are tough and have several rows of tightly attached kernels, implying that the plants wouldn't have survived without people to detach and plant the seeds. By contrast, teosinte's reproductive structure, the rachis, falls apart when mature to release its hard seeds. Thus, even 6000 years ago, ancient maize cobs were already corn-like.

The GM corn spread far--and fast. Maize appears in the archaeological record of the southwestern United States more than 3000 years ago (12), and it is evident that cob size had already increased under selection. The Jaenicke-Després et al. study (1) examines the selection of traits that can't be observed in fossilized cobs...They report that alleles of these genes typical of modern corn were already present more than 4000 years ago, implying that plant architecture and kernel nutritive properties were selected early, long before corn reached North America.

The authors conclude that "... by 4400 years ago, early farmers had already had a substantial homogenizing effect on allelic diversity at three genes associated with maize morphology and biochemical properties of the corn cob." This suggests that once this special combination of GMs was assembled, the plants proved so superior as a food crop that they were carefully propagated and widely adopted, perhaps causing something of a prehistoric Green Revolution. It also implies that the apparent loss of genetic diversity following the introduction of high-yielding Green Revolution wheat and rice varieties in the 1960s and 1970s, and attending the rapid adoption of superior GM crops today, is far from a new phenomenon.

Science. 2003 Nov 14;302(5648):1158-9.

Transposable Elements As a Molecular Evolutionary Force
NINA V. FEDOROFF

So voluminous is the recent literature on transposable elements that it is difficult to imagine making an original observation; it seems that virtually anything that can be said about them, has been. My modest goal is to reexamine what we already know, viewing transposable elements as central players in a dynamic system of complex chromosome structure. McClintock often expressed the intuition that the genome responds to perturbation as an integrated system and acknowledged that we did not know how to think about such a higher level of integration. Although we still lack the analytic tools, there is a growing appreciation that organisms constitute complex, self-organizing systems whose properties can be understood through the study of interactions within and between networks of mutually interacting components, be they DNA sequences, proteins, or cells. Organisms must also be appreciated as historic entities. Today's genome reveals its evolution, which in turn is shaped and limited by the tools and materials available.

In an endeavor to see the familiar with new eyes, I begin by examining a property of eukaryotic genomes so familiar today that it is largely taken for granted: the presence of repetitive DNA. Whereas a high level of internal redundancy is appreciated as one of the most distinctive features of the complex genomes of higher eukaryotes, the theoretic and practical difficulties associated with the origin and maintenance of redundancy, in my view, have gone largely unrecognized and may be central to understanding contemporary genome structure. Redundant sequences can be either adjacent in the genome or dispersed. Different, albeit related, replication mechanisms give rise to each and pose different challenges to the stability and flexibility of the genome as a system. I will address the evidence that eukaryotes have special mechanisms to process duplications.

A rapidly growing body of data from genome characterization, cloning, and sequencing in a variety of organisms is making it increasingly evident that transposable elements have been instrumental in sculpting the contemporary genomes of all organisms. 1-7 The conversation has shifted from conjecture to fact. An understanding of genome evolution must necessarily include consideration of the role of transposable elements in the derivation of today's genomes. Transposable elements comprise a special category of reduplicated sequence whose inherent propensity for dispersal may be its most important property. I will review some of the mechanisms, both genetic and epigenetic, that regulate the movement of transposons and minimize their impact. Finally, the discussion must address the limits of the epigenetic regulatory systems, asking questions about the short- and long-term stability of eukaryotic genome structure.

My central theses are three: (1) that the distinctive feature of complex genomes is the existence of epigenetic mechanisms that permit extremely high levels of both tandem and dispersed redundancy, (2) that the special contribution of transposable elements is to modularize the genome, maintaining it in a structurally dynamic state despite increasing size and complexity, and (3) that the labilizing forces of recombination and transposition are just barely contained, giving a dynamic system of ever increasing complexity, verging on the chaotic.

Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1999 May 18;870:251-64.
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 870:251-264 (1999)

Nina Fedoroff
Huck Institute of Life Sciences, Pennsylvania State University
Evan Pugh Professor of Biology
Willaman Professor of Life Sciences, Biology Department
External Faculty, Santa Fe Institute
B.S., Syracuse University, Biology and Chemistry, summa cum laude (1966)
Ph.D., The Rockefeller University, Molecular Biology (1972)

Research Interests:
• Plant stress response
• Hormone signaling
• Transposable elements
• Epigenetic mechanisms

Plant stress response: A major project in the laboratory is investigating the responses of plants to biotic (pathogens) and abiotic (ozone, temperature, chemicals) stresses using DNA microarray gene expression profiling and reverse genetics. We have identified more than 1200 stress-modulated Arabidopsis genes and studying their expression under various conditions. The illustration shows the change in gene expression of 366 genes that are induced (red) or repressed (green) by ozone. Among the genes induced by various stresses are signaling genes, transcription factors, and effector genes that include enzymes that alter the cells structure and properties in response to stress. The signaling molecules include MAP kinases and receptor-like kinases. We are suppressing and overexpressing potential regulatory genes to identify the genes under their control. We want to understand the structure of the stress-response gene networks and to explores molecular genetic approaches to modifying the stress response (see Holter et al, 2000, 2001).

Hormone responses: The hyl1 Arabidopsis mutant (right) has a transposon insertion mutation in a gene that is involved in several hormonal signaling pathways, including those for abscisic acid, auxin and cytokinin. The mutant is affected in many growth parameters, including graviperception. It is not as sensitive to exogenous auxins and cytokinins as the wiltype, but it is hypersensitive to abscisic acid. The HYL1 protein binds to double-stranded RNA and localizes to the nucleus. The mutant is described in Lu and Fedoroff (2000). We are investigating how this protein affects hormone signaling.

Transposable elements: transposable elements or transposons were discovered in corn (maize) plants by the famous geneticist Barbara McClintock through classical genetic analysis of unstable mutations (for a brief history, see http://www.ergito.com or Fedoroff 2001). Maize transposons were cloned in our laboratory almost 20 years ago and are now widely used for insertional mutagenesis. We have created a database of several hundred Arabidopsis transposon insertion lines using a transposon tagging system developed in the laboratory (Smith et al., 1996; Raina et al., 2001). A map of the insertions is shown and the database can be searched at: http://sgio2.biotec.psu.edu/sr.

Epigenetic mechanisms: The maize Suppressor-mutator (Spm) transposon is epigenetically inactivated by methylation and encodes a protein, TnpA, which is capable of reversing the inactivation (Schläppi et al., 1994; Fedoroff et al., 1995). Using an inducible promoter to express TnpA, current experiments seek to understand how it demethylates the Spm promoter. Some ideas about plant transposon evolution are explored in Fedoroff (2000).



MENDEL IN THE KITCHEN: A Scientist's View of Genetically Modified Foods
Nina Fedoroff and Nancy Marie Brown.
Joseph Henry, (352p) ISBN 0-309-09505-1

Wall Street Journal Review
The Miracles of Modifying
By HENRY I. MILLER

November 11, 2004; Page D9
In the distant past, ruddy husbandmen tilled the earth, yielding the pure bounty of nature. Then scientists came along, and nature gave way to artifice with the use of unnatural hybrids and chemicals, and, inevitably, despoliation of the environment. Or so the story goes.
As it happens, agricultural practices have been "unnatural" for 10,000 years. With the exception of wild berries and wild mushrooms, virtually all the grains, fruits and vegetables in our diets (including "organic" ones) are, strictly speaking, genetically modified. Potatoes, tomatoes, oats, rice and corn, for instance, come from plants created -- during the past half-century -- by "wide cross" hybridizations that transcend "natural breeding boundaries."
This is only one of the many surprises in store for readers of "Mendel in the Kitchen" (John
Henry, 370 pages, $24.95) (Gregor Mendel, a 19th-century Austrian monk, first described the
basic laws of heredity that became the foundation for modern genetics.) Nina V. Fedoroff, a plant biologist, and her co-writer Nancy Marie Brown meticulously depict the past, present and future of genetics in agriculture. They mix didactic science (including diagrams reminiscent of a highschool biology textbook) with accounts of what farmers, naturalists, plant breeders and biologists have wrought over time. The saga brings rationality to the controversy now haunting the newest, most precise and most predictable manifestation of genetic modification -- gene-splicing.

...continues.

Nina V Fedoroff

Evan Pugh professor of biology and Willaman professor of life science at Pennsylvania State University
Scientific ideas can and must be tested and verified in the real world, in order for people to believe in them

What I wish everyone understood about science is that scientific ideas are like philosophical, political or religious ideas, in the sense that they are the products of people's minds and imaginations. But at the same time, scientific ideas are profoundly different from philosophical, political and religious ideas, because they can - and must - be tested and verified in the real world, in order for people to believe in them.

This means that scientific ideas are constantly changing, self-correcting and useful, as evidenced by the way they have allowed humans to grow food, build buildings and cities, travel, cure diseases, communicate and understand the universe. But I wish people understood that science as a way of living provides us with a viable social organising principle, that does not demand the kinds of rigid loyalty that is at the heart of much of the cultural and religious strife in the world. Science may therefore be the only way that human cultures can get beyond the social, cultural, economic and religious differences that underlie wars.

Survey of Recent studies on Mutator like elements (Mules) , mobile DNA that moves and different species and scrambles and mutates the genome.

Mutator mobile genes (Mules) that move around between species such as maize, millet, rice diverse angiosperms, yeast Yarrowia lipolytica, Petunia, flatworm Caenorhabditis, sugarcane, fungus Fusarium oxysporum, fruitfly Drosophila, and grasses, which scramble and delete genes, are genetically unstable, and which are common in nature - and completely NATURAL:

Diao X, Freeling M, Lisch D.
Horizontal Transfer of a Plant Transposon.
PLoS Biol. 2005 Dec 20;4(1):e5 [Epub ahead of print]

McCarty DR, Settles AM, Suzuki M, Tan BC, Latshaw S, Porch T, Robin K, Baier
J, Avigne W, Lai J, Messing J, Koch KE, Hannah LC.
Steady-state transposon mutagenesis in inbred maize.
Plant J. 2005 Oct;44(1):52-61.

Cowan RK, Hoen DR, Schoen DJ, Bureau TE.
MUSTANG is a novel family of domesticated transposase genes found in diverse
angiosperms.
Mol Biol Evol. 2005 Oct;22(10):2084-9. Epub 2005 Jun 29.
6: Mol Biol Evol. 2005 Oct;22(10):2084-9. Epub 2005 Jun 29.


While transposons have traditionally been viewed as genomic parasites or "junk DNA," the discovery of transposon-derived host genes has fueled an ongoing debate over the evolutionary role of transposons. In particular, while mobility-related open reading frames have been known to acquire host functions, the contribution of these types of events to the evolution of genes is not well understood. Here we report that genome-wide searches for Mutator transposase-derived host genes in Arabidopsis thaliana (Columbia-0) and Oryza
sativa ssp. japonica (cv. Nipponbare) (domesticated rice) identified 121 sequences, including the taxonomically conserved MUSTANG1. Syntenic MUSTANG1 orthologs in such varied plant species as rice, poplar, Arabidopsis, and Medicago truncatula appear to be under purifying selection. However, despite the evidence of this pathway of gene evolution, MUSTANG1 belongs to one of only two Mutator-like gene families with members in both monocotyledonous and
dicotyledonous plants, suggesting that Mutator-like elements seldom evolve into taxonomically widespread host genes.

Neuveglise C, Chalvet F, Wincker P, Gaillardin C, Casaregola S.
Mutator-like element in the yeast Yarrowia lipolytica displays multiple
alternative splicings.
Eukaryot Cell. 2005 Mar;4(3):615-24.

Stuurman J, Kuhlemeier C.
Stable two-element control of dTph1 transposition in mutator strains of Petunia
by an inactive ACT1 introgression from a wild species.
Plant J. 2005 Mar;41(6):945-55.

Brownlie JC, Johnson NM, Whyard S.
The Caenorhabditis briggsae genome contains active CbmaT1 and Tcb1 transposons.
Mol Genet Genomics. 2005 Mar;273(1):92-101. Epub 2005 Feb 9.


Rossi M, Araujo PG, de Jesus EM, Varani AM, Van Sluys MA.
Comparative analysis of Mutator -like transposases in sugarcane.
Mol Genet Genomics. 2004 Sep;272(2):194-203. Epub 2004 Aug 24.

The maize Mutator ( Mu) system has been described as the most active and mutagenic plant transposon so far discovered. Mu -like elements (MULEs) are widespread among plants, and many and diverse variants can coexist in a particular genome. The autonomous regulatory element MuDR contains two genes:
mudrA encodes the transposase, while the function of the mudrB gene product remains unknown. Although mudrA -like sequences are ubiquitous in plants, mudrB seems to be restricted to the genus Zea. In the SUCEST (the Brazilian Sugarcane EST Sequencing Project) database, several mudrA -like cDNAs have been identified, suggesting the presence of a transcriptionally active Mu system in sugarcane. Phylogenetic studies have revealed the presence in plants of four classes of mudrA -like sequences, which arose prior to the monocot/eudicot split. At least three of the four classes are also found in the progenitors of
the sugarcane hybrid (Saccharum spp.), Saccharum officinarum and S. spontaneum.
The frequency of putatively functional transposase ORFs varies among the classes, as revealed at both cDNA and genomic levels. The predicted products of some sugarcane mudrA -like transcripts contain both a DNA-binding domain and a transposase catalytic-site motif, supporting the idea that an active Mu system exists in this hybrid genome.

Xu Z, Yan X, Maurais S, Fu H, O'Brien DG, Mottinger J, Dooner HK.
Jittery, a Mutator distant relative with a paradoxical mobile behavior:
excision without reinsertion.
Plant Cell. 2004 May;16(5):1105-14. Epub 2004 Apr 9.

The unstable mutation bz-m039 arose in a maize (Zea mays) stock that originated from a plant infected with barley stripe mosaic virus. The instability of the mutation is caused by a 3.9-kb mobile element that has been named Jittery (Jit).
Jit has terminal inverted repeats (TIRs) of 181 bp, causes a 9-bp direct duplication of the target site, and appears to excise autonomously. It is predicted to encode a single 709-amino acid protein, JITA, which is distantly related to the MURA transposase protein of the Mutator system but is more closely related to the MURA protein of Mutator-like elements (MULEs) from Arabidopsis thaliana and rice (Oryza sativa). Like MULEs, Jit resembles Mutator in the length of the element's TIRs, the size of the target site duplication, and in the makeup of its transposase but differs from the autonomous element Mutator-Don Robertson in that it encodes a single protein. Jit also differs from Mutator elements in the high frequency with which it excises to produce germinal revertants and in its copy number in the maize genome: Jit-like TIRs are present at low copy number in all maize lines and teosinte accessions examined, and JITA sequences occur in only a few maize inbreds. However, Jit cannot be considered a bona fide transposon in its present host line because it does not leave footprints upon excision and does not reinsert in the genome. These unusual mobile element properties are discussed in light of the structure and gene organization of Jit and related elements.


Sijen T, Plasterk RH.
Transposon silencing in the Caenorhabditis elegans germ line by natural RNAi.
Nature. 2003 Nov 20;426(6964):310-4.

Slotkin RK, Freeling M, Lisch D.
Mu killer causes the heritable inactivation of the Mutator family of
transposable elements in Zea mays.
Genetics. 2003 Oct;165(2):781-97.

May BP, Liu H, Vollbrecht E, Senior L, Rabinowicz PD, Roh D, Pan X, Stein
L, Freeling M, Alexander D, Martienssen R.
Maize-targeted mutagenesis: A knockout resource for maize.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003 Sep 30;100(20):11541-6. Epub 2003 Sep 3.

Vastenhouw NL, Fischer SE, Robert VJ, Thijssen KL, Fraser AG, Kamath RS,
Ahringer J, Plasterk RH.
A genome-wide screen identifies 27 genes involved in transposon silencing in C.
elegans.
Curr Biol. 2003 Aug 5;13(15):1311-6.

Chalvet F, Grimaldi C, Kaper F, Langin T, Daboussi MJ.
Hop, an active Mutator-like element in the genome of the fungus Fusarium
oxysporum.
Mol Biol Evol. 2003 Aug;20(8):1362-75. Epub 2003 May 30.


Pooma W, Gersos C, Grotewold E.
Transposon insertions in the promoter of the Zea mays a1 gene differentially
affect transcription by the Myb factors P and C1.
Genetics. 2002 Jun;161(2):793-801.


Bessereau JL, Wright A, Williams DC, Schuske K, Davis MW, Jorgensen EM.
Mobilization of a Drosophila transposon in the Caenorhabditis elegans germ
line.
Nature. 2001 Sep 6;413(6851):70-4.


Lisch DR, Freeling M, Langham RJ, Choy MY.
Mutator transposase is widespread in the grasses.
Plant Physiol. 2001 Mar;125(3):1293-303.

Singer T, Yordan C, Martienssen RA.
Robertson's Mutator transposons in A. thaliana are regulated by the
chromatin-remodeling gene Decrease in DNA Methylation (DDM1).
Genes Dev. 2001 Mar 1;15(5):591-602.

Fedoroff NV.
The suppressor-mutator element and the evolutionary riddle of transposons.
Genes Cells. 1999 Jan;4(1):11-9. Review.

Kloeckener-Gruissem B, Freeling M.
Transposon-induced promoter scrambling: a mechanism for the evolution of new
alleles.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1995 Mar 14;92(6):1836-40.

Eisen JA, Benito MI, Walbot V.
Sequence similarity of putative transposases links the maize Mutator autonomous
element and a group of bacterial insertion sequences.
Nucleic Acids Res. 1994 Jul 11;22(13):2634-6.




Pan and Peterson (1988) note that it would appear that the corn genome is highly volatile. That is, these transposons are now known to be quiescent in the genome. They appear also to be spontaneously activated. This is evident in almost any line one looks at with appropriate reporter alleles as indicated in the paper by Pan and Peterson (1988), where sectors were pervasive in these lines. It would appear, therefore, that the corn genome has a built-in system of activation and redeployment of genome segments and in a final result, leads to a great deal of variability.

Annual Review of Genetics
Vol. 23: 71-85 (Volume publication date December 1989)
(doi:10.1146/annurev.ge.23.120189.000443)
Maize Transposable Elements
A Gierl, ­H Saedler, and ­P A Peterson­


Genetics, Vol 128, 823-830, Copyright © 1991
INVESTIGATIONS
Spontaneous Germinal Activation of Quiescent Uq Transposable Elements in Zea mays L
Y. B. Pan and P. A. Peterson
Department of Agronomy and Department of Genetics, Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011 Present address: Department of Immunology/Microbiology, Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center, 1653 West Congress Parkway, Chicago, Illinois 60612-3864.

The spontaneous germinal activation of quiescent Uq transposable elements is reported. Thirty-nine spotted exceptions were observed at a rate of about 2 X 10(-4) from 687 otherwise colorless ears produced from the cross of a-ruq/a-ruq (colorless or occasionally sectored) X an a-ruq tester (colorless). All exceptions had spotting patterns distinct from the pattern of our original standard Uq (Uq1)-a-ruq spotting. From these spotted exceptions five new Uq elements (Uq2, Uq3, Uq4, Uq5 and Uq6) have been isolated. Genetic evidence for the Uq nature of the five germinal isolates is presented. First, each of the five spotted exceptions was homozygous for the a-ruq reporter allele. Second, four new Uq isolates (Uq2, Uq3, Uq4 and Uq5), after being reconstituted into a a{deg} sh2/a{deg} sh2 (no Uq) line, could transactivate the standard a-ruq allele and continue to produce their distinct spotting phenotypes. Third, these five new Uqs are also capable of transactivating the c-ruq65 and c-ruq67 alleles. However, the transactivation of c-ruq is generally weaker than that of a-ruq.


Tagging of a maize gene involved in kernel development by an activated Uq transposable element
Yong-Bao Pan1 and Peter A. Peterson1 Contact Information
(1) Department of Genetics and Department of Agronomy, Iowa State University, 50011 Ames, IA, USA
Received: 12 April 1989
Communicated by H. Saedler

Summary A quiescent Uq transposable element has been activated in a maize plant treated with 5-aza-2prime-deoxycyti-dine. This activated Uq cosegregates with a heritable dominant miniature (Mn) kernel phenotype, indicating its physical association with a maize miniature locus (Mn:: Uq). The Mn:: Uq mutant is dominant in producing a miniature seed phenotype of variable size and in reducing seedling vigor in the early growth stage. Genetic experiments indicate that the Mn:: Uq mutant also affects the activity of the male gametophyte, whereby pollen germination is inhibited, thus lacking pollen tube growth resulting in the male nontransmissibility of this mutant. Proof for the Uq element in this mutant is derived by its ability to transactivate the standard a-ruq reporter allele to yield spotted aleurone tissue. However, the Mn:: Uq mutant does not transactivate a normally Uq-responsive c-ruq allele, suggesting a structural difference between the two ruq receptors at the A1 and C1 loci. It is anticipated that cloning of the Uq transposable element would facilitate the molecular cloning and characterization of the maize miniature gene.

Key words Zea mays - Uq transposable element - miniature gene - Mn:: Uq - Activation
Journal Paper No. J-13425 of the Iowa Agriculture and Home Economics Experiment Station, Ames, Iowa 50011, USA, Project No. 2850

Genetics, Vol 120, 587-596, Copyright © 1988
INVESTIGATIONS
The Mutator-Related Cy Transposable Element of Zea mays L. Behaves as a Near-Mendelian Factor

P. S. Schnable and P. A. Peterson
Present address: Department of Genetics Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa 50011.

The bz-rcy allele arose in a single gamete of the TEL (transposable-element laden) population, when the rcy receptor element inserted into the Bronze1 locus. This newly arisen receptor allele conditions a stable bronze kernel phenotype in the absence of the independently segregating regulatory element, Cy. In the presence of Cy, bz-rcy conditions fully colored spots on a bronze background. The spots represent clonal sectors arising from mutations of bz-rcy to Bz'. Although Cy exhibits genetic interactions with the Mutator system it differs from Mu-homologous elements in its near-Mendelian behavior which is in contrast to the non-Mendelian inheritance of Mutator and Mu-homologous elements. Evidence is presented which suggests that the timing and mode of Cy transposition differ from those of Mu1.

Further reading at Academics Review

2.1—Any DNA Insertion can cause a mutation

2.5—Promoters can insert naturally into DNA

2.7—Mobile DNA drives evolution

2.8—Food Contains Lots of Novel RNAs

2.9—All Plant Breeding Causes DNA Scrambling

Submission to Agriculture and Food Policy Reference Group

By Dr David Tribe, Senior Lecturer, University of Melbourne and Dr Roger Kalla, Director Korn Technologies.

The issues paper on ‘Ensuring a profitable and sustainable agriculture and food sector in Australia’ presents a number of challenges facing Australian governments’ agricultural producers, marketers, scientists and consumers now and in the future.

We have focussed our submission on the benefits arising from the continued adoption of Biotechnology to Australian agriculture and food sector and a way forward for the testing of parallel GM and non- GM grains supply chains.

In a recent paper presented to the 9th Conference on Agricultural Biotechnology hosted by the International Consortium on Agricultural Biotechnology Research (www. economia.uniroma2.it/conferenze/icabr2005/papers/Tribe_Davi_Kalla_Roger.pdf) we described the results of an analysis of the economic and environmental impact of genetically modified insect resistant cotton in Australia.

The paper outlines the factors that have contributed to the rapid adoption of GM cotton in the well integrated cotton supply chain. The conversion to insect resistant GM cotton in Australia has provided direct economic benefits while at the same time reduced use of pesticide with concomitant reduction in yield losses in yield. Put in another way the land sown to cotton in Australia is now more productive giving a raised output while requiring less input. The adoption of GM cotton has also ensured the competitiveness of Australian cotton growers against GM cotton producers in India, China, Mexico and USA as evidenced in a recent report from ABARE on Market issues for GM crops where Australia’s share of cotton exports over the five years from 1999 to 2003 represented 37 % of world export while Australia produced less than 3% of world cotton seed (Market Access Issues for Genetically Modified Products: Implications for Australia, abareonlineshop.com/product.asp?prodid=12559).

Innovation in Australia’s first fibre, food and feed crop continues unabated and in addition to input traits now output traits with direct health benefits to the consumer are being evaluated in small scale field trials (DIR 039/2003 - Field Evaluation of Genetically Modified High Oleic (HO) Cotton, www.ogtr.gov.au).

The main concern raised by participants in the canola and cereal grains supply chain against full scale commercial production of GM canola the second GM food and feed crop that has received federal regulatory approval (DIR 021/2002 - Commercial release of InVigor® hybrid canola (Brassica napus) for use in the Australian cropping system and DIR 020/2002 - General release of Roundup Ready® canola in Australia, www.ogtr.gov.au) has been the perceived threat against the international marketing advantage of the projected default ‘GM free’ status for Australian grain producers.

The notion that Australia could protect the image of its agriculture and food export sector as being 100 % GM free (in spite of rapidly having converted to GM cotton which constituted 80% of last year cotton harvest) by delaying the introduction of GM canola has been challenged by the recent finding of minuscule amounts of a strain of GM canola mixed up in an export consignment of conventional canola and detected by sensitive forensic DNA analysis technology. The origin of this approved, but obsolete, GM strain is under investigation by the Victorian Department of Primary Industries.

The most likely explanation is that this particular strain of GM canola got mixed up in a batch of conventional canola seed imported into Australia from North America.

The modern breeding of novel types of canola and cereal grains is a global pursuit with novel genes ( derived using GM or non GM technologies in molecular breeding research centres all over the world ) being crossed into plants that are well adapted to the local growth conditions in collaborative research programs between private and publicly funded agricultural R & D organisations. Often these programs take advantage of the counter seasons with seeds being multiplicated and evaluated on both sides of the globe and frequently exchanged before commercialisation in any one country.

There are previous examples of human error creeping into this interconnected system. A GM canola strain, mislabelled as of non-GM origin, was delivered by an overseas private seed company for evaluation in the field to the Victorian Department of Primary Industries in 2003. However, this case of mistaken identity was detected before the GM canola plants had flowered and the plants were destroyed. The incident was investigated by OGTR without any action and reported on its web site (www.ogtr.gov.au/rtf/public/sept2003qrpt.rtf).

We would argue that the benefits to Australian agriculture and food industries and the consumers of Australian research organisation continuing to take part in global technology diffusion far outweighs the perceived risks to our export markets by the tarnishing of a projected ‘GM free’ image due to such mix ups.

It is in the interest of private and public research organisations to carefully manage these risks due to real issues with IP management. Such incidences, if carefully monitored, certainly doesn’t warrant that we pull out of all work with overseas research organisations nor that Australia unilaterally ban all imports of any grains from North America due to the perceived risk of ‘contamination’ of the Australian ‘GM free’ image as has been suggested by some groups ideologically opposed to GM crops.

Likewise it is unreasonable to expect that parallel GM and non- GM canola and cereal grains supply chains could guarantee 100 % purity of any type of canola in our export grain.

We see a role for the Australian Government in partnership with companies involved in the providing services in the grains supply chain and State Governments to determine what are tolerable levels of admixture of GM canola in any type of exported grain. The Australian position needs to be underpinned by scientific and economic analysis of cost vs. benefit of the testing regimes that are required to adequately address the cut –off criteria.

It is worth noting that forensic DNA testing is technically challenging and costly (in the order of $ 100 -250 per sample analysed). There are also issues with standardisation of sampling protocols of bulk consignments seed for presence of GM canola seed along the supply chain.

If it was decided that Australia required to DNA test some or all of its export grains to meet internal or external market requirements there would be a potential role for Government in advising and accrediting research organisations involved in such analysis.

The EC Directorate General Joint Research Centre, within the Institute for Health and Consumer Protection, has got a dedicated Community Reference Laboratory (CRL) for GM food and Feed. The CRL develops tests for GM crops and evaluates their efficacy. A recent example is the standardised test it developed for the Bt 10 maize strain (http://gmo-crl.jrc.it/detectionmethods/Bt10%20Detection%20Protocol.pdf).

We believe that a thorough test of the capability of the grains supply chain to keep GM canola apart from non-GM canola is required. An approach to a trial of coexistence using the GM canola strains that had received regulatory approval was originally suggested by the Australian Oilseeds Federation in submissions to a number of State Governments in the beginning of 2003. We would suggest that the original proposal could be augmented by the establishment of independent testing authority modelled on the EC Community reference laboratory for GM food and feed.

There are companies involved in DNA testing of food and feed in Australia (www.agriquality.co.nz/horticulture/agriquality_gmo_services.cfm). Other major grain marketing organisation, including AWB, has decided to join groupings such as the Global Laboratory Alliance (GLA) which is supported by large US DNA testing companies such as Genetic ID. Genetic ID has recently also developed a test to Bt10 maize that is legally recognized by the EU (www.genetic-id.com/pr/bt10_test.pdf) and aligned with the CRL protocol.

Incidences such as the discovery of the non-approved Bt10 maize mixed in shipments of approved GM maize from US to Europe and the recent minor incidence with the approved GM canola strain being detected in Australian non-GM canola destined for export to Japan provides ample proof that the moratoria on GM canola and other GM novel crops are only a holding pattern and that proactive leadership from the Federal Government is required in order for Australia to continue to benefit from the world leading research being undertaken in agricultural biotechnology by Australian public and private research organizations. Australia’s agriculture and food sector and the Australian Government needs to take a pro active role in the development and ordered conversion of these technologies into solutions for the agricultural and food sectors.

Best wishes,

Yours sincerely,

Roger Kalla

PhD, Director Korn Technologies

David Tribe

Reader, University Of Melbourne, Department of Immunology and Microbiology

SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS:


1) BENEFITS OF GM COTTON TO AGRICULTURE AND END CONSUMERS NOW AND IN THE FUTURE

§ Our paper outlines the large economic and environmental benefits that insect resistant BT cotton, the first Australian GM fibre, food and feed crop, has provided until know.

§ The direct benefits to end consumers of GM cottonseed with modified oil content will be realised with High Oleic GM cotton strains being evaluated in the field.

2) GM CANOLA AND THE BLOCKAGE TO ITS COMMERCIALISATION

§ The present blockage to the commercialization of GM canola, the second Australian GM food and feed crop is unsustainable.

§ The projected ‘GM free’ image of Australian agriculture and food export sector based on the State moratoria on GM canola is misleading and doesn’t acknowledge the realities of the globally integrated efforts in the development of novel strains of major food and feed crops such as cotton and canola.


3) FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO TAKE A LEADERSHIP ROLE IN DEVELOPING A ROAD MAP PAST THE MORATORIA SPEED HUMPS

§ Revamped Coexistence trials to evaluate the capacity for segregation along the grains supply chain needs to be undertaken by agriculture and food industry sector organizations and facilitated by Federal Government.

§ Standardized DNA testing protocols based on scientific and economically sound cut-off levels for admixture of GM crops in non-GM canola and grain bulk consignments overseen by independent national authority like the EU Community Reference Laboratory (CRL) for GM food and Feed.

§ In order for Australian agriculture and food sector to continue to be competitive in overseas markets Federal government needs to take a more proactive role in ensuring that Australian world class research and development efforts in these sectors converts good ideas and smart work to solutions that will benefit Australian rural communities, economy and end consumers.

Attached: Abstract to paper by Tribe and Kalla submitted and published by ICABR July 2005.

Collected scare stories about GM crops.

(This is a draft work in progress.)

Please go instead here
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2006/02/what-on-earth-is-jigmod-and-what-does.html

Green water efficiencies help salinity on Australian drylands.

Drainage and change in soil water storage below the root-zone under long fallow and continuous cropping sequences in the Victorian Mallee
Mark G. O'Connell, Garry J. O'Leary and David J. Connor

Abstract
A field study investigated drainage and changes in soil water storage below the root-zone of annual crops on a sandy loam soil in the Victorian Mallee for 8 years. It was designed to compare the effects of the common long (18-month) fallow in a 3-year rotation (fallow–wheat–pea, FWP) with a rotation in which the fallow was replaced with mustard (Brassica juncea), viz. mustard–wheat–pea (MWP). Drainage was measured over 2 periods (1993–98 and 1998–2001) using 9 in situ drainage lysimeters in each rotation. The first period of ~5 years was drier than average (mean annual rainfall 298 cf. 339 mm) and drainage was low and variable. Drainage was greater under the fallow rotation (average 0.24 mm/year) than under the non-fallow rotation (average <0.01>
Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 54, 663–675 (2003)


Production and Environmental Aspects of Cropping Intensification in a Semiarid Environment of Southeastern Australia
Víctor O. Sadras* and David K. Roget

Low and highly variable rainfall are major sources of risk for farms in semiarid environments, including the Mallee region of Australia where risk management is largely based on a conservative, low-input approach. This approach has substantial opportunity costs (missing the benefits of wetter seasons) and low yield per unit rainfall. We combined field and modeling experiments to evaluate an intensive, flexible cropping approach based on (i) an opportunistic combination of crops, including wheat (Triticum aestivum L), canola (Brassica napus L.), and grain legumes, and (ii) a close matching of N input to soil and seasonal conditions. In a 4-yr field trial established on a coarse-textured soil, an intensive cropping approach doubled gross margin and halved its coefficient of variation in relation to current practice. Modeling experiments revealed the underlying mechanisms of this response and estimated the effect of cropping intensification on N leaching and deep drainage. Simulated yield improvement under intensive cropping was related to increased water use efficiency [biomass per unit evapotranspiration (ET)] at the expense of N use efficiency (biomass per unit of N uptake); this is consistent with the theoretical expectation that plant growth is maximized when all resources are equally limiting. Simulations indicated no substantial increase in N leaching and moderate decrease in drainage beyond the root zone with the more intensive approach. The approach to intensification in this research provides a platform to improve production and profit and to reduce its seasonal variation with neutral or positive effects on environmentally relevant processes.
Abbreviations: ET, evapotranspiration • MAP, monoammonium phosphate • PAW, plant available water • T, transpiration


Published in Agron. J. 96:236-246 (2004).


Water balance changes in a crop sequence with lucerne
F. X. Dunin, C. J. Smith, S. J. Zegelin and R. Leuning
Abstract

In a detailed study of soil water storage and transport in a sequence of 1 year wheat and 4 years of lucerne, we evaluated drainage under the crop and lucerne as well as additional soil water uptake achieved by the subsequent lucerne phase. The study was performed at Wagga Wagga on a gradational clay soil between 1993 and 1998, during which there was both drought and high amounts of drainage (>10% of annual rainfall) from the rotation. Lucerne removed an additional 125 mm from soil water storage compared with wheat (root-zone of ~1 m), leading to an estimated reduction in drainage to 30–50% of that of rotations comprising solely annual crops and/or pasture.

This additional soil water uptake by lucerne was achieved through apparent root extension of 2–2.5 m beyond that of annual crops. It was effective in generating a sink for soil water retention that was about double that of annual crops in this soil. Successful establishment of lucerne at 30 plants/m2 in the first growing season of the pasture phase was a requirement for this root extension. Seasonal water use by lucerne tended to be similar to that of crops in the growing season between May and September, because plant water uptake was confined to the top 1 m of soil. Uptake of water from the subsoil was intermittent over a 2-year period following its successful winter establishment. In each of 2 annual periods, uptake below 1 m soil depth began late in the growing season and terminated in the following autumn.

Above-ground dry matter production of lucerne was lower than that by crops grown in the region despite an off-season growth component that was absent under fallow conditions following cropping. This apparent lower productivity of lucerne could be traced in part to greater allocation of assimilate to roots and also to late peak growth rates at high temperatures, which incurred a penalty in terms of lower transpiration efficiency. The shortfall in herbage production by lucerne was offset with the provision of timely, high quality fodder during summer and autumn. Lucerne conferred indirect benefits through nitrogen supply and weed control. Benefits and penalties to the agronomy and hydrology of phase farming systems with lucerne are discussed.

Keywords: crop rotation, evapotranspiration, deep drainage, water use efficiency.



Australian Journal of Agricultural Research 52(2) 247 - 261
Full text doi:10.1071/AR00089




Estimating episodic recharge under different crop/pasture rotations in the Mallee region. Part 2. Recharge control by agronomic practices
L. Zhanga, W. R. Dawesa, T. J. Hattonb, I. H. Humec, M. G. O'Connelld, D. C. Mitchellc, P. L. Milthorpe and M. Yeee
Abstract

Much environmental degradation, including salinity in the Mallee region of southeastern Australia, is associated with the loss of native vegetation and increased recharge. As a result, various agronomic practices have been proposed to reduce groundwater recharge. This study was conducted to evaluate the impact of these practices on recharge, in particular episodic recharge. A biophysically based model (WAVES) was used to estimate recharge rates under some typical crop and pasture rotations in the region using long-term meteorological data. Results show that: (1) recharge just below the root zone was episodic and that just 10% of annual recharge events contributed over 85% of long-term totals. Management options such as incorporating lucerne and deep-rooted non-fallow rotations can reduce both, mean annual recharge, and the number of episodic events, but not eliminate recharge completely; (2) winter fallows increased soil-water storage and some of the additional water was stored in the lower portion of the root zone or below it. This can increase the risk of recharge to groundwater system; (3) changes in land management may take a considerable period of time (>10 years) to have any noticeable impacts on recharge; and (4) recharge under lucerne was ≈30% of that under medic pasture.
Author Keywords: Agronomic practices; Episodic recharge; Fallowing; Root zone.



Agricultural Water Management
Volume 42, Issue 2 , November 1999, Pages 237-249
doi:10.1016/S0378-3774(99)00034-7

Salinity Solutions: Working with Science and Society

(A supplement to GMO Pundit Salinity Solutions Webpage)

Full table of contents:
Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture
Volume 45 Number 11 2005
Salinity Solutions: Working with Science and Society


Preface: Salinity Solutions — Working with Science and Society
M. Crawford and K. Goss

The role of plants and plant-based research and development in managing dryland salinity in Australia
A. M. Ridley and D. J. Pannell
pp. 1341-1355

Potential of current perennial plant-based farming systems to deliver salinity management outcomes and improve prospects for native biodiversity: a review
E. C. Lefroy, F. Flugge, A. Avery and I. Hume
pp. 1357-1367

Capture of agricultural surplus water determines the productivity and scale of new low-rainfall woody crop industries
D. Cooper, G. Olsen and J. Bartle
pp. 1369-1388

Using soil and climatic data to estimate the performance of trees, carbon sequestration and recharge potential at the catchment scale
R. J. Harper, K. R. J. Smettem and R. J. Tomlinson
pp. 1389-1401

The economics of managing tree–crop competition in windbreak and alley systems
R. Sudmeyer and F. Flugge
pp. 1403-1414

Multi-disciplinary approaches suggest profitable and sustainable farming systems for valley floors at risk of salinity
E. G. Barrett-Lennard, R. J. George, G. Hamilton, H. C. Norman and D. G. Masters
pp. 1415-1424

Improving salt tolerance of wheat and barley: future prospects
T. D. Colmer, R. Munns and T. J. Flowers
pp. 1425-1443

Genetic variation in five populations of strawberry clover (Trifolium fragiferum cv. Palestine) in Western Australia
K. S. McDonald, P. S. Cocks and M. A. Ewing
pp. 1445-1451

Predicted salinity impacts from land use change: comparison between rapid assessment approaches and a detailed modelling framework
C. Beverly, M. Bari, B. Christy, M. Hocking and K. Smettem
pp. 1453-1469

Farm, food and resource issues: politics and dryland salinity
D. J. Pannell
pp. 1471-1480

Lessons from agri-environmental policies in other countries for dealing with salinity in Australia
A. Weersink and A. Wossink
pp. 1481-1493

Social persistence of plant-based management of dryland salinity
N. Barr and R. Wilkinson
pp. 1495-1501

Epilogue: from propaganda to practicalities — the progressive evolution of the salinity debate
J. Passioura
pp. 1503-1506

Why tryptophan is bad for people who have chemical imbalances related to histamine and serotonin.

This post is a continuation, with all the fine print, and gory pathological detail, of a post that starts at GMO Pundit as follows:

By a strange twist of fate, GMO Pundit is ideally placed to alert readers to a real hazard - excessive tryptophan intake in the wrong circumstances - that is widely misunderstood in the community, and is a previously falsely diagnosed risk.

The main point of this posting is to help people avoid ill health - that is avoid generalised muscular pains (myalgia, called EMS) - that might be caused by ill-advised self-medication with tryptophan, or excessive intake of foods rich in tryptophan. Such intake is commonly taken because it is perceived to help overcome mental depression caused by chemical imbalances in the brain.

GMO Pundit Golden Oldie December Part 1 2005 Stack

December 2005 Oldest posts last
Post from Archives 2005 11 27, 2005 12 04

Items with text details given below in the following order. Go to Archives for images and links

1. EU cropping and commerce developments in GM crops. Monsanto sees 37 mio-acre europe biotech corn market
2. Just say no -tillage. The hills are sagging, December 8, 2005 Agricultural Research Service, USDA
3. Another gene giving tolerance of drought
4. Assessments of risks with herbicide tolerant wheat varieties
5. Progress with trans-fatty acid oils. Kellogg to use genetically modified oil. December 9, 2005
6. Drought resistance partnership with ACPFG in Adelaide
7. Seed breeder website comment on Aussie GM peas
8. US Big picture at variance with Benbrook GM comments. Jennifer Marohasy: Costly harvest of ignorant GM campaign. The Australian
9. To be or not to be GM, that is the question....answered by a "GM-free stance". Answering the riddle of a GM-free stance in Victoria that is not GM-free.
10. GM corn stock-feed imports to Australia needed especially during drought. From GRDC Groundcover Magazine
11. Natural GMOs Part 4. All you ever wanted to know about wandering genes of plants, mariner's friends.
12. Natural GMOs Part 3. Cereal genes change naturally.
13. GM wheat offers new salinity hope
14. Western Australia.
15. US has another bumper cotton crop
16. The End of Poverty Part III. The Poverty Trap is a Rural Phenomenon. CHAPTER 3. WHY SOME COUNTRIES FAIL TO THRIVE.
17. Farmer: Use GM to rotate your herbicide chemistry each season.
18. Accolades for GM cotton. Australia
19. GM GE cotton area grows in India
20. Impact of GM GE crops in USA 2004: Thumbs Up
21. Environmental and Production Benefits Drive Greater Demand for Biotech Crops Farmers experience year-on-year improvements from biotech crops. (NCFAP)
22. GM-lite works its magic on peanuts. From Agnet: A&M unlocks key to 1 fatal peanut allergen.
23. Journal of Public Affairs publishes an issue on GM foods
24. The US floor on crop prices (countercyclical support) is given to both GM and non-GM equally.
25. Natural GMOs Part 2. Genes move around, and I mean really around, like in the Ancient Mariner
26. Ten years of steady increases in the crop area percentages of "GM trait" crops in the US.
27. Agriculture is the Indian livelihood generator. Interview with Eminent Indian agriculture scientist Dr M S Swaminathan--winner of the prestigious Indira Gandhi Prize.
28. GE / GM Expert Charles Benbrook comments on US Agriculture are silly
29. GM food can stop allergies
30. Natural GMOs Part 1. Bees in practice versus Bees in theory
31. Background reading on drought tolerance and HVA 1 gene. The barley gene HVA1 has been found to assist protection against stresses in rice, oats and wheat. This article provides the background for understanding this topic better.
32. GM Oats can tolerate continuous salt stress
33. European attitude to GM products suffocating African development?
34. Relative area of herbicicide tolerant canola varieties in Canada
35. Scientific evidence that GM Canola can perform better. Herbicide-tolerant canola: Weed control and yield comparisons in western Canada
36. Good news For Canadian farmers using GM GE GMO canola
37. GM GE GMO, whatever: drought proof cotton
38. Is the European attitude to GM products suffocating African development? Greg Bodulovic
39. The End of Poverty Part II. A reversal of fortune. Continuation of posting of Jeffrey Sachs THE END OF POVERTY, 2005 pages 53-54
40. GE /GM canola and corn food safety trials funded by Western Australia
41. More on CSIRO genetically engineered (GE) pea. Maarten Chrispeels
42. Greenpeace and Network of Concerned Farmers. Farmer Lobby Confirms Greenpeace Link.

Saturday, December 10, 2005
EU cropping and commerce developments in GM crops.

Monsanto sees 37 mio-acre europe biotech corn market
- BLOOMBERG, By Jack Kaskey, 07 Dec 2005

Monsanto Co., the world's biggest developer of genetically modified crops, said farmers in five European Union nations this year planted engineered corn, boosting the potential EU market to 37 million acres.

Farmers in France, Germany, Spain, Portugal and the Czech Republic this year planted seed engineered to resist the corn borer insect, Brett D. Begemann, Monsanto executive vice president, said today in a presentation on the St. Louis-based company's Web site. He didn't say how many acres were planted.

"I'm not here to tell you biotech is being accepted in Europe," Begemann said. "It definitely shows a sea change in the attitudes toward biotechnology in Europe."

The EU last year lifted a six-year moratorium on the use of biotech crops. The European Commission, the EU's executive body, is battling countries including Austria and Greece that have unilaterally banned some genetically modified plants, citing safety concerns. The U.S., Canada and Argentina have complained to the World Trade Organization that the EU is unfairly inhibiting trade.

European farmers this month are seeking greater access to biotech seeds to improve yields as they face reduced government subsidies at global trade talks in Hong Kong, Begemann said.

Demanding Access
"Farmers are demanding now that they get access to biotech," he said.
Less than 1 percent of world biotech crops are harvested in the EU's 25 countries, compared with the two-thirds share held by the U.S. Food-safety advisers from European governments today failed to approve the import for human consumption of a modified corn variety developed by DuPont Co. and Dow Chemical Co. amid squabbles over the merits of the technology.
The so-called 1507 corn, which resists the corn borer pest, didn't win sufficient support for use in the European Union, European Commission spokeswoman Barbara Helfferich told reporters in Brussels. Ministers from the EU's 25 governments now get to vote on the crop.
The U.S., Brazil, India and Australia will drive near-term demand for seeds altered to resist pests and weed killers, Begemann said.
The European market for corn modified to resist Monsanto's Roundup herbicide is 24 million acres, Begemann said. That's the same acreage of Roundup Ready corn planted this year by U.S. farmers and greater than the 20 million-acre Brazilian market potential, Monsanto said. The U.S. market potential is 60 million acres, the company said.
Stacked Traits
The EU market for seed engineered to resist the corn borer insect is 8 million acres, and the EU potential for corn modified to resist the rootworm is 5 million acres, Begemann said. That compares with U.S. market opportunities of as much as 60 million acres for corn borer resistance and 30 million acres for rootworm resistance, he said in the presentation.
The figures may double-count some acres, as farmers in the U.S. and other countries can buy seeds with so-called "stacked traits" that combine resistance to multiple insects and weed killer, spokesman Lee Quarles said.
Monsanto's genetics were planted on 197 million acres this year, including licenses to rival companies such as DuPont's Pioneer seed unit, the company said June 29.
EU government ministers on Dec. 2 failed to approve for animal feed a Monsanto corn variety containing stacked traits that resist the corn borer and rootworm. The technology still may be approved by European Commissioners, responsible for the day-to-day running of the EU.
Shares of Monsanto rose 18 cents to $77.57 at 4:02 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. They have gained 61 percent in the past year.

Just say no -tillage.

The hills are sagging, December 8, 2005
Agricultural Research Service, USDA
View this report online, plus any included photos or other images, at www.ars.usda.gov/is/pr
The pallid color of the North American prairies' rolling landscape is a tell-tale sign of soil erosion. The hilltop knobs have lighter-colored soil and less lush, green wheat than do the hill bottoms. This was long thought to be the result of dry soil only. Researchers at the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) studied one such wheat field and found that gravity and erosion from annual plowing also have a great deal to do with the pallid soil.

After more than 40 years of annual plowing, tillage erosion moved more than 27 tons of soil an acre a year in some spots, with water erosion moving another 9 tons an acre. The light spots are where topsoil moved down the hill, exposing shallow subsoil whitened by calcium. Wheat yields on the knob were at most half of those on the rest of the field, with the highest yields on hill bottoms.

Another gene giving tolerance of drought

Gene reported to give drought tolerance, December 9, 2005, Agnet/ ISAA CropBiotech Net

Abscisic acid is a plant hormone that regulates growth, and transcription factors associated with a plant s response to it play a key role in allowing plants to survive under drought stress.
One such transcription factor is AREB1, and Yasunari Fujita and colleagues from Tsukuba, Japan find, from their research, that AREB1 Is a Transcription Activator of Novel ABRE-Dependent ABA Signaling That Enhances Drought Stress Tolerance in Arabidopsis.
In their paper, which appears in the latest issue of Plant Cell, researchers report that under normal growth conditions, the intact AREB1 gene is insufficient to induce the expression of genes. They thus created an activated form of the gene, called AREB1 QT, and over expressed it in Arabidopsis in the laboratory. Researchers found that the plants were hypersensitive to abscisic acid, and showed enhanced tolerance to drought. Plants without the gene were insensitive to abscisic acid, and displayed reduced survival under dehydration.


GMOs Farming Biology

Access the abstract at:
http://www.plantcell.org/cgi/content/abstract/17/12/3470

Assessments of risks with herbicide tolerant wheat varieties

December 9, 2005, Via Agnet/ISAA CropBiotech Net

Wheat varieties grown all over the world may be classified as conventional, produced by genetic engineering, or generated by mutagenic techniques. With three such methods in place, Robert K.D. Peterson and Leslie M. Shama of Montana State University carry out A comparative risk assessment of genetically engineered, mutagenic, and conventional wheat production systems using the risk assessment paradigm. Their paper appears in the current issue of Transgenic Research.
Among others, researchers found that the herbicides glyphosate and imazamox, which are used to protect wheat, actually present lower human health and ecological risks than many other herbicides associated with conventional wheat production systems. The researchers acknowledge that their assessment is not comprehensive, but state that the approach they presented demonstrates the potential risk trade-offs (especially for herbicides) when implementing the newer biotechnologies.

A comparative risk assessment of genetically engineered, mutagenic, and conventional wheat production systems
Robert K.D. Peterson* & Leslie M. Shama
Agricultural and Biological Risk Assessment, Montana State University, 334 Leon Johnson Hall, Bozeman, MT,
59717-3120, USA
Received 25 March 2005; accepted 27 July 2005
Some comments made about herbicide risks:
Human dietary risk
Ten of the 16 herbicides had greater dietary risks than glyphosate. All of the herbicides had greater dietary risks than imazamox.



Progress with trans-fatty acid oils

Kellogg to use genetically modified oil
December 9, 2005
Associated Press/ New York Times
BATTLE CREEK, Mich. -- Kellogg Co., the world's largest cereal maker, was cited as saying Friday that it will begin using oils derived from genetically modified soybeans in some of its products to lower fat contents beginning in 2006.
The stories say that the company will begin using Vistive, an oil low in the trans fatty acid linolenic acid that is made from Monsanto Co.'s genetically modified soybeans. Kellogg said that it is one of the first food manufacturers to use the oil to lower levels of trans fat and saturated fat in its products.
Because there is a shortage in low-linolenic acid soybean oil, however, Kellogg will also work with the Bunge/DuPont Biotech Alliance to increase production of Nutrium, another oil made from genetically modified soybeans, which the company will begin using in 2007.
The stories explain that the move comes as seed companies like Monsanto and the Hi-Bred International unit of DuPont, are planting hundreds of thousands of acres of new soybean varieties and that both are planning for new rules on Jan. 1 that will require nutritional labels to list whether foods contain trans fats. David MacKay, Kellogg's president and chief operating officer, was cited as saying in an interview on Thursday that his company had determined through extensive testing that a soybean oil known as low-linolenic was the best alternative to partially hydrogenated oils, which are high in trans fats, adding, "This is the only solution we have found where we take trans fats out and minimize the amount of saturated fats. We need to encourage growers and processors to make more of this oil."
The new soybean oils reduce the need for partial hydrogenation, so that fewer trans fats are produced during processing. The oil is stable enough to replace hydrogenated oils and did not show any statistical difference in taste and shelf life in Kellogg's testing, Mr. MacKay said. But the new soybean oil is not stable enough to withstand the high temperatures required in the cooking of fried foods like McDonald's French fries, said Dave Stark, vice president for consumer traits at Monsanto. "There are still too many polyunsaturated fats," he said. "We are still at least a few years off" from a soybean oil that could serve as a substitute. McDonald's has been widely criticized for the high trans fat content in its fries.

Friday, December 09, 2005
Drought resistance partnership with ACPFG in Adelaide

Drought tolerance a target of new international crop research agreement
ADELAIDE, Australia, 8 December, 2005
The Australian Centre for Plant Functional Genomics Pty Ltd (ACPFG) has signed a research collaboration agreement with Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc., based in Iowa, USA.
Improving plants’ tolerance to abiotic (environmental) stresses such as drought and lack of nitrogen are targets for the new collaboration. The overall goal is to provide farmers with better crop varieties.


Seed breeder website comment on Aussie GM peas

December 2, 2005

There has been considerable media interest in an announcement by CSIRO that it has discontinued the development of a particular type of genetically modified (GM) pea after the publication of a paper reporting an immune response in mice that were fed the peas under laboratory conditions compared with those given non-GM peas.

Between 1997 and 2002, CSIRO conducted research and development field trials of genetically modified (GM) peas that were protected against pea weevils as a result of introducing an insecticidal protein (alpha-amylase inhibitor) derived from bean plants. These field trials enable data to be collected progressively under controlled conditions to enable researchers to decide whether results justify proceeding with further development. The trials were conducted under strict containment conditions – none of the GM material has been permitted to enter the human food chain.

FSANZ has not conducted any safety assessment of the peas since they are still in research and development, nor has any data been submitted to Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) for assessment. However, CSIRO approached FSANZ several years ago to obtain advice on the type of data they would need to support an application to FSANZ to approve the peas for human consumption. FSANZ gave advice to conduct studies to, amongst other things, fully characterise the novel protein and in particular to determine its potential for toxicity and allergenicity in line with internationally accepted guidelines.

CSIRO has subsequently reported that these protein characterisation studies revealed that a modified form of the alpha-amylase inhibitor protein had unexpectedly been produced in the GM peas. In further studies, seed meal from the GM crops was fed to mice to determine if the modified form of the alpha-amylase inhibitor protein would also have a modified immune response. The results show that, under the specified experimental conditions, the modified protein has an altered immune response. However, the results do not show that the mice became allergic to the modified protein in food, nor does the study make any conclusions in relation to its relevance in humans.

The current approach internationally to the assessment of potential allergenicity is to use ‘an integrated, stepwise, case-by-case approach’. As no single definitive test can be relied upon to predict allergenic response in humans to a novel protein, a variety of information is considered in the assessment. At present, the information considered most relevant to the assessment is:

* the source of the novel protein;
* the physicochemical characteristics of the protein;
* similarity of the novel protein to known allergenic proteins; and
* susceptibility of the novel protein to enzymatic degradation in conditions that mimic normal digestion.

By using this ‘weight of evidence’ approach, a conclusion can be made as to the likelihood of the novel protein being a food allergen.

This internationally accepted approach has been elaborated by the Codex Alimentarius Commission, the Food and Agricultural Organisation of the United Nations and the World Health Organisation (WHO), and is followed by FSANZ. It uses a variety of data and information, which when considered together can be used to reach a conclusion about potential allergenicity of a new protein. The various animal models that are available are not considered to be sufficiently well developed or validated to use at the present time for this assessment. It is recognized however that, once developed and validated, they will form an important component of the weight of evidence approach.

As the modified form of the alpha-amylase inhibitor protein has not been subjected to this standard assessment for potential allergenicity, it is not possible to make any conclusions about its potential to be a food allergen in humans. Furthermore, the animal model used by the study authors has not been validated to predict human immune or allergic responses and the authors make no such predictions. It is therefore not clear what relevance (if any) the findings have in relation to human food allergy. Amongst other factors, the genetic composition of the host influences the outcome of exposure to the foreign protein.

While the significance of the research results for human allergenicity is not clear, the CSIRO has decided to end the research program. This type of situation is not unique to the development of GMOs - the development of conventionally bred, non-GM plants have also been terminated when unexpected or adverse effects have been detected.

FSANZ continues to monitor new scientific information from all sources and internationally agreed methodologies as they becomes available and will take this into account and modify safety assessment requirements where appropriate.

US Big picture at variance with Benbrook GM comments

Jennifer Marohasy: Costly harvest of ignorant GM campaign
The Australian
December 09, 2005

During the past two weeks the Australian organics industry has sponsored a lecture tour by anti-GM advocate and US-based consultant Charles Benbrook.

As part of this tour, Benbrook has made several claims, such as GM crops have been a failure in the US and herbicide use, particularly for GM soybeans, is at record levels. This story was picked up and run by numerous media outlets, including ABC radio.

The only problem is that what Benbrook has said is not supported by the available evidence.

Information on herbicide use is available at the US Department of Agriculture website. This data shows that during the past 10 years the area planted with GM soy has increased and that overall herbicide use has remained steady.

GMOs Farming Biology

More detailed statistics at Jennifer's weblog, including comments.


Thursday, December 08, 2005
To be or not to be GM, that is the question....answered by a "GM-free stance"

Answering the riddle of a GM-free stance that is not GM-free.

The Marketing of dairy produce in the State of Victoria has very high power PR support. It must have, since it is able to enlist government help to create the perception that the State has banned GM, but also getting it to continue to allow GM stock-feed for calves. The key to this success is tolerance thresholds for GM and high level political support.

Lets go back to 2004. In announcing a ban on commercial farming of GM canola in Victoria in March 2004, State Premier Steve Bracks had this to say:

“The OGTR has determined GM canola is safe for human health and the environment but the State Government has a responsibility to consider market implications for our exporters. Victoria is the largest exporter of food and fibre products. In particular, the State is Australia’s largest dairy exporter with products worth about $2.5 billion each year - on average, Victoria exports more than $1 billion of grain a year.”

Steve Bracks said the decision would protect the state's "clean and green image".

The Victorian Government creates the perception of “Clean and Green” by having a "GM-free stance" or a "GM-free status".

This are very interesting choices of words. GM-free stance does not mean GM-free. It means it's OK to deliberately import GM feeds, and deliberately feed GM to cows. Its only accidental feeding of trace amounts of GM that tarnish the state's “Clean and Green” perceptions.

The hard reality, rather than PR perception, is that tolerance of deliberate feeding of GM stock-feed is economically crucial, as use of stock-feed to supplement pasture feeding is becoming more and moreimportant in Australia due to the severity of droughts. GM stock-feeds play an important role in this.

The main GM stock-feeds include GM soy-meal imports, GM cottonseed meal from NSW and Queensland, and GM maize from the USA. Around 80% of Australian cotton is now GM.

Usage of GM stock-feed in the Victorian dairy industry was kept very quiet during the period in early 2004 when Mr Bracks made his announcement, in the name of preserving the “clean and green” image of Victoria dairy products, of a ban on planting of GM canola .

Bracks' Government certainly knew that its dairy industry used GM feed. It's mentioned in reports they commissioned. I told them.

The 2004 ACIL Tasman Report to the Victorian Government explains

"Victoria is also Australia’s major dairy producing state. Australian dairy product exports to over 100 countries around the world average $2.5billion per year. Virtually all of the dairy cows in Victoria are grazed on pastures with protein and energy supplements contributing approximately 20 – 30 per cent of the total diet. The majority of this supplement is made up of cereals with 20-30 per cent made from protein meals such as soybean meal (imported), cotton seed meal from NSW and Queensland and canola meal from the Victorian and NSW canola crushing industry.

As explained by Peter Hunt, the key to being able to claim not to use GM feed, while at the same time continue using it, is judicious thresholds:

The Weekly Times, Victoria, Australia April 21 2004 By PETER HUNT

[UDV president Mr Owen said], "Certainly our dairy companies mostly believe these segregation systems are adequate, since we've already got GM soy and GM cottonseed (known as meal in Australia). Dairy companies like Murray Goulburn already have a threshold of 5 per cent on GM in feed."
The Victorian dairy industry is already using GM soy meal in calf feed. ... But Stockfeed Manufacturers Council of Australia executive director John Spragg said manufacturers were already handling GM cottonseed meal and GM soy, none of which went into milking herd feeds. "The pig and poultry industry don't have any problem with it (GM feed)," Mr Spragg said. "The real difficulty for us is that one dairy company allows up to 5 per cent GM in the milking herds' diet (Murray Goulburn), while others want 1 per cent and others still don't even have a level.

Victoria definitely imports GM soy for feeding poultry and dairy cows.

Melbourne Thursday, 29 April, 2004 :

The controversial cargo ship The Rhein, carrying 6300 tons of genetically engineered soy and surrounded by police vessels, was met by a flotilla of protest boats upon arrival in Melbourne last night. "Up to 300,000 tons of GE soy comes into our food chain" [as soy-meal imports].

Successful marketing of Victorian dairy produce as not GM has enlisted not only Premier Bracks, but also the anti-GM groups, who graciously do not mention the use of GM stock-feeds in dairying. The poultry industry are not so good at this “Clean and Green” marketing and have been heavily targeted by anti-GM activists.

Normally the ACCC are very picky about the semantic details of claims about product virtues. But they too are a party to this cone of silence about GM dairy feed. They have been as quiet as a mouse about the semantic difficulties entailed in Victoria being both GM and not GM at the same time.
All in all, a superb PR triumph for “Clean and Green” Victorian exports. That is, provided you’re a dairy farmer and not a canola grower.


See also: Political Science "Green Blackmail and the Victorian Government" Graeme O'Neill, originally published in Australian Biotechnology News, 14 May 2004

GM corn stock-feed imports to Australia needed especially during drought

From GRDC Groundcover Magazine

The severe drought throughout Australia has meant that many farmers are looking overseas to source necessary stockfeed. A shipment of 48,000 tonnes of corn (maize), destined for the poultry industry, arrived in Australia in January. The corn came from the USA where genetically modified (GM) and non-GM crops are co-mingled, and as a result the corn was thoroughly assessed and approved by two federal government agencies, the Australian Quarantine Inspection Service for quarantine issues and the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator because of its GM component. As part of the licence conditions imposed on the grain, it had to be processed before use so that the seed was no longer viable.

Studies conducted around the world to examine GM animal feed on the animals themselves and on their by-products have found no evidence to suggest GM animal feed poses any risk to human health and safety.

Labelling of by-products (meat, milk, eggs) from animals fed GM feed is not required by Australian law because they are no different to those from animals fed non-GM feed. GM animal feed, like all feed, is broken down during digestion.

Natural GMOs Part 4. All you ever wanted to know about wandering genes of plants, mariner's friends.

Nina Federoff has written a superb scholarly history of mobile genes in plants.

For the more general reader, she has written Mendel in the Kitchen, perhaps one of the three best books on plant beeding and GM foods, available electronically.

Thanks Nina.

But Matt Ridley and GMO Pundit have got in the act too, with useful introdutions to this topic.


(see also GMO Pundit on Mariner)


Natural GMOs Part 3. Cereal genes change naturally.

Proceeding of Natl. Academy of Sciences. USA Vol. 95, Issue 1, 370-375, January 6, 1998
Plant Biology

Rapid reorganization of resistance gene homologues in cereal genomes
Dario Leister, Joachim Kurth, and others.

Our data suggest a dramatic rearrangement of R gene loci between related species and implies a different mechanism for nucleotide binding site plus leucine-rich repeat gene evolution compared with the rest of the monocot genome.

Some Details:
Plant resistance to particular pathogens involves specific recognition events. These resistance reactions are race-specific and triggered by corresponding resistance (R) genes in the host and avirulence (Avr) genes in the pathogen. Resistance mechanisms operate in both major classes of flowering plants, dicots and monocots. Several dicot and one monocot R gene to diverse pathogens have been isolated, revealing structural similarities of the deduced proteins.

One class comprises genes containing both a 5' terminal nucleotide binding site (NBS) and 3' terminal leucine-rich repeats (LRRs) of various length.

Monocot and dicot plants are believed to have diverged from each other 120-200 million years ago (14). All resistance genes, except Xa-21 in rice (15), have been isolated so far from dicot plants. Isolation of genetically characterized resistance genes in the grasses has been hampered mainly by their large genome size. A fundamental feature of grass species is their tight conserved gene order (synteny) (16, 17), which may facilitate map-based gene isolation by using DNA marker information from syntenic intervals across monocot species.

Here we describe the isolation and characterization of NBS-LRR homologues via PCR from two monocot species, rice and barley, based on structurally conserved motifs in dicot NBS-LRR R genes. We have analyzed their sequence diversity and their linkage to genetically characterized R genes. The results from a comparative mapping in rice, barley, and foxtail millet indicates a rapid evolution of R genes in each species and suggests possible mechanisms to generate diversity in resistance loci.

Isolation, sequence, and mapping of R gene homologues from two grass species have provided surprising insights into both R gene evolution and genome organization. We interpret our data in the context of the close evolutionary relationship of grass species and the rigorous collinear gene order of their genomes (16, 17). We interpret them also on the basis that rice, barley, and foxtail millet represent three separate grass tribes (Pooideae, Bambusoideae, and Panicoideae). Four lines of evidence strongly suggest a rapid rearrangement of NBS-LRR genes in the genomes analyzed: (i) the occurrence of intraspecific copy number variation both in rice and barley, (ii) the existence of mixed R gene homologue clusters comprising highly dissimilar genes, (iii) the absence of interspecific cross-hybridization signals for several NBS-LRR probes, and (iv) the frequent nonsyntenic map locations for NBS-LRR loci detected by probes that displayed interspecific cross-hybridization signals. These observations raise the question as to whether a specific mechanism acts to generate diversity of NBS-LRR genes, involving frequent ectopic recombination events (37-39) to both inter- and intrachromosomal sites and consequently leading to lack of syntenic map positions.

Our data suggest a dramatic rearrangement of R gene loci between related species and implies a different mechanism for nucleotide binding site plus leucine-rich repeat gene evolution compared with the rest of the monocot genome.

Natural genetic variability and food safety, food and feed risks and hazards.



GM wheat offers new salinity hope
- THE WEST AUSTRALIAN (Perth), By Jennifer Eliot, December 7, 2005

WA's first genetically modified wheat crop - which scientists hope will lead to strains that are tolerant to waterlogging, frost and salt - will be harvested today.
The crop is the culmination of a three-year, $2 million program carried out amid strict quarantine by Grain Biotech Australia and the Grains Research Development Corporation.
The trial modified two standard wheat varieties in a bid to produce grain that could be sown on land lost to salinity.
GBA business development manager Alan Trough said a full analysis on yield, grain quality, starch and protein levels would be available in March but, on the face of it, the trial had been a success and offered hope for salt-affected farmland.
"Further testing will show if the grain is good or if increasing the hardiness of the grain has sacrificed quality," he said.
Mr Trough said the Corrigin trial was part of an ongoing program to bring GM wheat to a stage where it could be grown commercially.
It was one of only a handful of GM wheat trials in the world and it was unlikely GM wheat would be available for commercial planting in Australia before 2011.
There is a moratorium on commercial GM crops in WA until 2009 but GM cotton and canola crops have been tested.
Agriculture Minister Kim Chance said this week that a lot could be learnt from the wheat trial and the State Government would like to see similar trials to improve knowledge of the science behind GM technology.
orrigin farmer Lex Stone, who faces losing half the family farm to salinity, said that for every year he had to wait for a crop that was salt tolerant the less viable his farm became.
"Managing salinity is a seven-day-a-week job for me and in the last few years I have spent upwards of $250,000 on landcare works and rebuilding the farm and that is why I am interested in this technology," he said.
"GM wheat won't fix the salinity but it will allow us to grow crops. I say bring it on."
The prospect of more tolerant wheat comes amid fears that bad weather will see this season's WA harvest fall short of the projected 12.8 million tonnes.


Update:
Solutions to salinity in Australia see here.

US has another bumper cotton crop

Despite a marathon hurricane season that threatened to damage the US cotton crop just months ago, 2005 crop production and yields are trying to break last year's record.
... recent reports from USDA reveal that yields nationally are expected to average 813 pounds per acre, up 16 pounds from last month but down 42 pounds from 2004."
SOURCE: Australian Cotton Outlook.

Wednesday, December 07, 2005
The End of Poverty Part III. The Poverty Trap is a Rural Phenomenon.

CHAPTER 3. WHY SOME COUNTRIES FAIL TO THRIVE

Poor countries have a significant chance of falling into a poverty trap. Out of the fifty-eight non-oil countries with per capita incomes below $3,000, twenty-two (or 38 percent) experienced an outright decline [in the years 1980-2000]. Yet the thirty-six other countries [in that category] enjoyed economic growth.

How is it that some very poor countries escaped the ravages of a poverty trap while the rest did not? Comparing those countries that made it and those that did not, the success stories show certain characteristics. The most important determinant, it seems, is food productivity.

Countries that started with high cereal yields per hectare, and that used high levels of fertilizer input per hectare, are the poor countries that tended to experience economic growth. Countries that began with very low yields in 1980 are the countries that tended to experience economic decline between 1980 and 2000…

...The poverty trap is mainly a rural phenomenon of peasant farmers caught in a spiral of rising populations and stagnant or falling food production per person.

***

Lack of Innovation

Consider the plight of inventors in an impoverished country. Even if these inventors are able to develop new scientific approaches to meet local economic needs, the chances of recouping investments in research and development through later sales in the local market are very low. The local purchasing power to buy a new product is tiny, and will not provide for sufficient profits if an invention is successfully brought to market, even if the impoverished country has state-of-the-art patent legislation. The problem is not the property rights to the invention, but the size of the market.

There is, therefore, a huge difference between rich and poor countries in their tendency to innovate. Rich countries have a big market, which increases the incentive for innovation, brings new technologies to market, further raises productivity and expands the size of the market, and creates new incentives for innovation. This momentum creates, in effect, a chain reaction, which economists call endogenous growth. Innovation raises the size of the market; a larger market raises the incentives for innovation. Therefore, economic growth and innovation proceed in a mutually reinforcing process.


From Jeffrey Sachs. The End of Poverty, Penguin Books, 2005

Updates:

GMOs Farming Biology

Is the European attitude to GM products suffocating African development?

Data on benefits provided by GM crops for developing country farmers, 2006 overview.

Farmer: Use GM to rotate your herbicide chemistry each season.

Herbicide tolerant weeds have been known for decades. An early report was G. F. Ryan 1970. Resistance of the common groundsel to simazine and atrazine. Weed Science volume 18, p614-6.

Kim Nill of the American Soybean Association has kindly reminded me of how new GM based crop traits provide new tools to manage the weed resistance problem, and the following notes are a paraphrase of his good advice.

The key message is - you need to rotate your chemistries, and GM technology opens up more flexible chemistries and crop rotations. By this "rotate chemistries" catch-phrase we mean use herbicides with different mode of action in each subsequent year.

When the first biotech herbicide-resistant soybean was commercialized in 1996, it helped PREVENT THE EMERGENCE OF HERBICIDE-RESISTANT WEEDS, because it gave U.S. farmers a new herbicide chemistry to apply to soybeans.

Thus, for example, a given field in the standard soybean/corn rotation would have been planted to soybeans in 1994 (e.g. sprayed with a sulfonylurea-type herbicide), would have been planted to corn in 1995 (e.g., sprayed with a triazine-type herbicide), could then would have been planted to biotech soybeans in 1996 (i.e. sprayed with a glyphosate-type herbicide, a completely different chemical category).

If GM glufosinate resistant soybeans were available, they would further improve this rotation strategy for minimising the emergence of weed herbicide-resistance.



Accolades for GM cotton. Australia
Tuesday, 6 December 2005


The Australian cotton industry is one of the success stories of biotechnology.

Once heavily reliant on insecticide for survival, the introduction of genetically modified cotton in 1996 was the start of a new beginning for the industry.

Currently more than 400 million hectares of biotechnology have been planted in 20 different countries.

For Bongeen cotton growers Stuart and Maxine Armitage it has been a godsend.

"It has given cotton a whole new image," Mr Armitage said


Herbicide use drops due to GM cotton

- Australian ABC News, By Simone Cobb, Dec 6, 2005

While there are a few cases of some weeds getting stronger, the Cotton CRC says the use of insecticides has decreased by more than 70 per cent due to the Bollgard varieties and herbicide use has approximately dropped by 40 per cent with Round-Up Ready cotton.
Cotton Seed Distributors agronomist David Kelly told Simone Cobb Round-Up Ready cotton is not a silver bullet for controlling weeds, but part of an integrated weed management strategy.


GM GE cotton area grows in India

INDIA: BT cotton growing area
- BharatTextile.com, December 6, 2005
MUMBAI: According to Ministrial sources reveals that BT cotton growing area has extended from 2,30,000 acres in 2003 to 12, 13,359 acres in 2004.
In a written reply to the Rajya Sabha, Sharad Pawar, Agriculture Minister said that according to information forwarded by Bt Cotton growing states, the seed has been found cultivable in these states.
Mr Pawar added that Agriculture Ministry is compiling the area under Bt cotton crop in all states during 2005 .
Contrast to the belief that Tamil Nadu failed to cultivate Bt cotton after the crop failure in Andhra Pradesh, the state has been coming a cropper, stated Pawar.
Some Bt cotton hybrids for commercial farming have been notified by the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) in the Environment and Forests Ministry after evaluating the performance through several multilocation after large scale field experiments, added Pawar.
Other cotton breeds have been allotted larger areas in comparison with the Bt cotton, he also informed.

Impact of GM GE crops in USA 2004: Thumbs Up

Pesticide use impacts
The 11 applications of biotechnology-derived crops planted in 2004 reduced the use of pesticides in crop production by 62.0 million pounds. This represents a further 34% decrease in pesticide usage compared with 2003. Herbicide-resistant crops accounted for the largest reduction of pesticide use compared to other applications. Increased acreage of Liberty Link crops (canola, corn, and cotton) has contributed to further reductions in pesticide use in 2004. While herbicide-resistant soybean accounted for 36% of the reduction, herbicide-resistant corn and cotton contributed 30 and 23%, respectively. About 11% reduction in pesticide use was due to insect-resistant crops.
Crop impacts
The planting of biotechnology-derived varieties resulted in significant impacts in all the six crops evaluated in this study. While yield improvement and pesticide use reduction was greatest in biotechnology-derived field corn, planting of soybean led to largest reduction in production costs and greatest net economic impact. Both crops were leaders in the same categories in 2003. Biotechnology-derived varieties improved corn production by 5.9 billion pounds in 2004. Cotton ranked second in yield improvement, with an additional 587 million pounds produced due to biotechnology-derived varieties. Biotechnology-derived soybean
reduced production costs by $1.37 billion, and therefore increased growers’ net returns by the same amount. Overall reduction in pesticide use due to biotechnology-derived varieties was greatest in corn (23.3 million pounds), followed by soybean (22.4 million pounds), and cotton (15.9 million pounds).

From NCFAP Report Dec 2005


Environmental and Production Benefits Drive Greater Demand for Biotech Crops
Farmers experience year-on-year improvements from biotech crops

WASHINGTON, D.C. (Dec. 6, 2005) — As a result of increasing benefits from biotechnology-derived (biotech) crop varieties, farmers are adopting the technology with greater ease than ever before, according to a new study update released by the National Center of Food and Agricultural Policy (NCFAP).

In 2004, U.S. farmers planted biotech crops on 118 million acres, an increase of 11 percent over the previous year. Compared to conventional crops, biotech varieties increased food production by 6.6 billion pounds, a 24 percent improvement from 2003, and provided $2.3 billion in additional net returns for U.S. growers, a 21 percent increase from the previous year. Biotech crops also reduced pesticide use by an additional 34 percent, or 15.6 million pounds. Pesticide use dropped by 15.6 million from 2003 to 2004.

“After nine years of commercialization, the benefits of biotech crops are self-evident, and growers are responding to better yields and greater financial return by further increasing the number of acres planted to these varieties,” said Jill Long Thompson, Ph.D., and Chief Executive Officer of the National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy. “Obviously, these crops have demonstrated great benefits to growers, but what we’re seeing now is the significant extent to which these benefits increase each year.”
The study examined 11 case studies of six biotech crops planted in the United States in 2004 —
corn, soybean, cotton, papaya, canola and squash — and is based on data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Agricultural Statistics Service and surveys of Crop Specialists from various universities.
According to the study, insect-resistant crops again produced the greatest yield increase among the crops studied, improving food and fiber production by 6.5 billion pounds. While insect-resistant traits increased production, herbicide-resistant varieties generated the greatest reduction in production costs by reducing the amount of pesticide needed and lowering costs associated with hand weeding and mechanical cultivation. Herbicide-resistant varieties cut costs by $1.8 billion and reduced pesticide use by 55.5 million pounds.

Regionally, Midwestern states of Iowa, Nebraska, Indiana, Illinois and Minnesota experienced the greatest benefits from biotech crops. Iowa farmers experienced the largest increase in farm income ($266 million) and the greatest reduction in pesticides (9.1 million pounds annually).
Donna Winters, who grows biotech cotton, corn and soybean on her farm in Lake Providence, La., has personally experienced the benefits of growing biotech crops. Winters said adopting the technology not only helps her operation remain profitable, but also lessens agriculture’s environmental footprint.

“When biotech crops were first commercialized, many farmers were interested in trying out the new varieties, and now we’re realizing more benefits with each year of planting,” said Winters. “In my operation, biotech crops have improved my profitability by 5 to 10 percent because I can spend less money on inputs while boosting production by 10 to 15 percent. Many production
factors vary each year, but we are able to sustain improved profitability and yield by using biotechnology despite those variances. Most importantly, planting biotech varieties promotes conservation farming practices, which is important to me because I want my grandchildren to continue farming on our land.”
While the economic and production benefits have been significant, biotech crops also make growers confident that they can control weeds while reducing the need to plow the land. Farmers who practice “no-till” farming leave their soil undisturbed, thereby reducing soil erosion and pesticide runoff. No-till cotton acreage increased in the United States by 371 percent in 2004, while soybean and corn no-till acres increased by 64 and 20 percent, respectively.
“Farmers want to be good stewards of the land because it is the source of their livelihood,” said Sujatha Sankula, Ph.D., and lead author of the study. “Biotech crops have helped them make great strides and adopt conservation tillage practices, which not only reduces erosion but also
decreases greenhouse gas emissions that result from cultivating the soil.”

The study is an annual update of a 2002 report by NCFAP that analyzes, quantifies and documents the agronomic, economic and environmental impacts of biotech crops on U.S. agriculture. The complete study, “Biotechnology-Derived Crops Planted in 2004 — Impacts on U.S. Agriculture,” is available on the Internet at http://www.ncfap.org.

See later related posts;
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/effect-of-gm-cotton-in-reducing.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2006/03/sharing-of-economic-and-environmental.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/12/environmental-and-production-benefits.html

Tuesday, December 06, 2005

GM-lite works its magic on peanuts

From Agnet: A&M unlocks key to 1 fatal peanut allergen
December 5, 2005
Huntsville Times
Researchers at Alabama A&M University were cited as announcing last week they have successfully eliminated one major allergen in peanuts that sometimes causes fatal reactions in people.
There are at least six distinct peanut allergens that pose problems for some people, according to Dr. Hortense Dodo and research colleague Dr. Koffi Konan. Using a process called RNA Interference (RNAi), the scientists were able to transform peanut tissues and silence the Ara h2 allergen gene, thus eliminating one of the proteins which triggers allergic reactions.
Studies are under way at AAMU to determine if the new transgenic peanuts maintain their nutritional quality.


INFORMATION SYSTEMS FOR BIOTECHNOLOGY
ISB News Report
December 2005
Covering Agricultural And Environmental Biotechnology Developments

OPEN-SOURCE AGRICULTURE
C. Neal Stewart, Jr.

Computer software is amenable for duplication, modification, and improvement and therefore has greater utility and value ... DNA as well. Sharing software freely has enabled the open-source movement and has led to numerous innovations in operating systems and products. What about open-sourcing DNA–is that the key to agricultural innovation and feeding an ever-growing population?

Complete article:
pdf: http://www.isb.vt.edu/news/2005/artspdf/dec0501.pdf
web: http://www.isb.vt.edu/news/2005/news05.dec.htm#dec0501

Journal of Public Affairs publishes an issue on GM foods

From Agbioview: Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2005 18:13:40 -0500

From: "Gale West"
Some of your readers may be interested in the latest issue of the Journal of Public Affairs, which is a special issue about GM foods. Here is the web page for the journal with information about the articles and their authors.
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/110484432

The articles are not yet available in PDF format. Interested readers may, of course, either purchase the issue or the individual articles, or they may contact the various authors in order to obtain copies of the papers.
Yours,
Gale West, Ph.D.
Centre de recherche en economie agroalimentaire (CREA)
Universite Laval
Quebec, Canada

Monday, December 05, 2005
The US floor on crop prices (countercyclical support) is given to both GM and non-GM equally.

GMO Pundit:

Visiting Agricultural Economist Charles Benbrook has raised the idea that US farm price supports favour the introduction of GM crops in the US. Is there any basis to that claim?

An overview of US Farm support systems is given at the USDA ERS website and it is interesting to see that these price supports are structured so as to ignore whether crops are GM or not GM.

In the US all crops, GM or not, are just plain crops.

US price supports have a "counter-cyclical" farm support provision in which, as the price drops, farmers get more of a subsidy per unit (bushel, pound, ton, etc.) of wheat, feed grains, rice, cotton, and oilseeds. If the price rises, the federal government (through the USDA) makes smaller or no subsidy payments.

Since the US farm support does not distinguish between GM and non-GM crops, it requires complicated arguments to explain how these "neutral" price supports could possibly favour the introduction of GM crops.

One way is to argue that GM technology is so effective in improving yields that the boost it gives to global supply has driven down world prices. In this (imaginary?) scenario, all farmers are affected by lower prices, whether they adopt GM or not.

If this is the case, its the farmers that lag in adoption of the GM technology that lose the most, because they don't capture the real cost reductions provided by crop yield increases. It is also worth noting that transgenic crops have no different impact by this mechanism than crops created through any other breeding program that gives yield improvement.

But the real world of commodity markets is full of surprises: with the latest cpmplete harvest(2004), US soy growers had record yields of 42.2 bushels/acre even though there has been a drought. In 2005 yields are pegged at 42.7 bu/acre.

They likely will get minimal countercyclical price support payments though. Soybean prices were well above the target price of $5.80 in 2004, and close to it in 2005.

Soy Crop Statistics:

http://www.cbot.com/cbot/pub/static/files/snd_cbt.pdf


Sunday, December 04, 2005
Natural GMOs Part 2. Genes move around, and I mean really around, like in the Ancient Mariner

The Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner

Samuel Taylor Coleridge

Farewell, farewell! but this I tell
To thee, thou Wedding-Guest!
He prayeth well, who loveth well
Both man and bird and beast.

He prayeth best, who loveth best
All things both great and small;
For the dear God who loveth us,
He made and loveth all.

The Mariner, whose eye is bright,
Whose beard with age is hoar,
Is gone: and now the Wedding-Guest
Turned from the bridegroom's door.

He went like one that hath been stunned,
And is of sense forlorn:
A sadder and a wiser man,
He rose the morrow morn.

Mariner mobile genes are large family of mobile DNA entities that are usually called transposons in reference to their ability to move to new chromosome locations.

Representatives of Mariner have been found in diverse insects, nematodes, flatworms, hydras, and mammals (including humans).

Analysis of Mariners demonstrates that, in the course of evolutionary history, they have undergone numerous transfers between different host species, some times across animal phyla. The so called species boundary does not exist for Mariner.

Mariner expert Hugh Robertson has this to say about them:

Robertson and Lampe (1995) describe the remarkably similar irritans subfamily mariners (Figure 16.4) found in the green lacewing, Chrysoperla plorabunda (order Neuroptera), the horn fly, Haematobia irritans and a drosophilid fly D. ananassae (order Diptera, suborder Brachycera), and the African malaria mosquito Anopheles gambiae (order Diptera, suborder Nematocera). For example, the consensus DNA sequences of the 1044 bp transposase [movement enzyme] genes of the lacewing and horn fly mariners differ by just 2 [DNA residues], leading to the 345 amino acid sequences of their encoded transposases differing by just one.

Given the age of these insect lineages (200 Myr in the case of fly suborders, and 265 Myr for the orders) it is inconceivable that these mariners have evolved vertically within these lineages, been conserved to such an extent, including third codon positions and non-coding sequence, and have been lost from most other neuropteran and fly lineages examined.

Indeed, when the evolution of the individual copies from their consensus sequences within each host lineage was examined, most copies appeared to be evolving neutrally, and therefore rapidly...

... The implications of these observations for mariner transposons, and likely also the closely related Tcl family of transposons, are twofold. First, they must be capable of functioning in diverse host cellular environments. This inference has been confirmed for two mariners, the hornfly irritans subfamily element Himarl (Lampe et al., 1996) and the canonical Mosl element (Tosiand Beverley, 2000), and the Tcl element from C. elegans (Vos et al., 1996). In each case purified transposase [enzyme coded by the mobile gene] was able to catalyze transposition [movement] of a marked cognate transposon from one plasmid to another...

Secondly, there must be some mechanism by which these transposons are able to move from one host to another. This movement has to be into the germline of the new host and across orders of insects and phyla of animals. It seems unlikely that there will be a single mechanism for such transfers (Kidwell, 1992), however the best current candidates are perhaps various DNA viruses, some of which are known to be suitable targets for transposons from their hosts(Fraser et al., 1985), including two members ofthe Tcl family Gehle et al., 1995, 1998).


From H. Robertson and others, The mariner Transposons of Animals: Horizontally Jumping Genes, Chapter 16, in Horizontal Gene Transfer, M. Syvanen and C Kado, 2nd Edition, Academic Press 2002

See Also:
GMO Pundit overview on gene movement between species.
Jumping genes
Helitron nanobots
Helitrons up close and sweaty
Mule nanobots

Ten years of steady increases in the crop area percentages of "GM trait" crops in the US.


ERS, USDA comment:

U.S. farmers have adopted genetically engineered (GE) crops widely since their introduction in 1996, notwithstanding uncertainty about consumer acceptance and economic and environmental impacts. Soybeans and cotton genetically engineered with herbicide-tolerant traits have been the most widely and rapidly adopted GE crops in the U.S., followed by insect-resistant cotton and corn. This product summarizes the extent of adoption of herbicide-tolerant and insect–resistant crops since their introduction in 1996.



Saturday, December 03, 2005
Agriculture is the Indian livelihood generator.

Interview with Eminent Indian agriculture scientist Dr M S Swaminathan--winner of the prestigious Indira Gandhi Prize.


"In India, agriculture is not just a food-producing industry. It is largely a livelihood-generating industry. This, however, is not the case in industrialised nations where hardly 2-3 per cent -- maybe a maximum of 4 per cent -- of the population is involved in agriculture. "


GE / GM Expert Charles Benbrook comments on US Agriculture are silly

Today in AgBioView from http://www.agbioworld.org : December 2, 2005
Debunking Benbrook
- Kim Nill, KNill.at.ussoyexports.org

'U.S. Soybean Yield Per Acre was a Record High For 2005, Even Though Some States Had A Drought in 2005'

Dear Agbioview: Today's edition of your newsletter contained several repetitions of Mr. Benbook's silly assertion that biotechnology-derived soybeans have supposedly caused a "flattening" of the yield curve for the U.S. soybean crop.

On November 11, 2005, the U.S. Department of Agriculture reported that the nationwide yield/acre for America's 2005 crop (i.e., when more than 90% of U.S. soybean acres were planted to biotech soybeans) was a record highest-ever.

Update:

2004-5 Soybean Yields, 2004 Production, Largest in History

Soybean production in 2004 totaled 3.14 billion bushels, the largest U.S. soybean crop in history and 28 percent above the 2003 level. The average yield per acre is estimated at a record-high 42.5 bushels, 8.6 bushels above the 2003 final yield and 1.1 bushels above the previous record set in 1994. Planted and harvested area in the U.S., at 75.2 million acres and 74.0 million acres respectively, are both up 2 percent from last year and are record breakers.

See also:

USDA Review Soybean Supply and Demand Review November 10 2005

2004 Yields 42.2 bu/acre, 2005 yields 42.7 bu/acre


PG Economics debunking comments on Benbrook speculations (in this case made to a UK select committee):

http://www.pgeconomics.co.uk/environment_select_committee_report.htm
PDF version
http://www.pgeconomics.co.uk/pdf/Envauditcomments9Marchforweb-site.pdf



GM food can stop allergies

Rice developed to treat allergies
December 2, 2005
CropBiotech Net
ISAAA
Allergy is a significant health problem, and affects over 15% of all children and adults worldwide. It may involve the skin, respiratory tract, and gut, and may arise due to a great variety of environmental triggers, such as exposure to pollen, fiber, or certain kinds of molecules present in certain types of food.
Synthetic medicines are currently the most common treatment for most allergies, but Hidenori Takagi of Tsukuba, Japan, and colleagues seek another route by exploring how A rice-based edible vaccine expressing multiple T cell epitopes induces oral tolerance for inhibition of Th2-mediated IgE responses. Their work appears in the latest issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences online.
Researchers utilized dominant epitopes found in allergens carried by Japanese cedar pollen. Epitopes are short amino acid sequences which, on their own, can trigger a mild immune response. By fusing the gene sequence of the epitope with the seed storage protein glycinin, and by introducing this into rice, researchers were able to produce crops with about 0.5% of total seed protein composed of the glycinin-epitope fusion protein.
When mice were fed with this transgenic rice, researchers found, among others, that the mice were expressing lower levels of histamine, and did not develop the symptoms of pollen-induced allergies. The protein was also shown to be stable for 6 months in the transgenic seed, even when stored at room temperature.
For more information, read the complete article or its accompanying commentary
allergy GMO GE Genetic engineering




Natural GMOs Part 1. Bees in practice versus Bees in theory

Dear Dr. Tatiana,
I'm a queen bee, and I'm worried. All my lovers leave their genitals inside me and then drop dead. Is this normal?
Perplexed in Cloverhill

Dr. T.:
For your lovers, this is the way the world ends-with a bang, not a whimper. When a male honeybee reaches his climax, he explodes, his genitals ripped from his body with a loud snap. I can see why you find it unnerving.

Why does it happen? Alas, Your Majesty, your lovers explode on purpose. By leaving their genitals inside you, they block you up. In doing so, each male hopes you will not be able to mate with another. In other words, his mutilated member is intended as the honeybee version of a chastity belt.

You may think this is no way to treat a queen. But even queens are not exempt from the battle of the sexes. Indeed, I'm afraid your situation appears to exemplify the full, complex, and dynamic conflicts of interest that can arise as a consequence of female promiscuity.


From Dr. Tatiana's Sex Advice to All Creation, Olivia Judson, Metropolitan Books, 2002


Background reading on drought tolerance and HVA 1 gene

The barley gene HVA1 has been found to assist protection against stresses in rice, oats and wheat. This article provides the background for understanding this topic better.

Drought- and desiccation-induced modulation of gene expression in plants
S. Ramanjulu & D. Bartels

Desiccation is the extreme form of dehydration. Tolerance of desiccation is acquired by seeds and in resurrection plants, a small group of angiosperms. Desiccation tolerance is the result of a complex cascade of molecular events, which can be divided into signal perception, signal transduction, gene activation and biochemical alterations leading to acquisition of tolerance. Many of these molecular processes are also observed during the dehydration of non-tolerant plants. Here we try to give an overview of the gene expression programmes that are triggered by dehydration, with particular reference to protective molecules and the regulation of their expression. Potential transgenic approaches to manipulating stress tolerance are discussed.

Plant, Cell & Environment
Volume 25 Issue 2 Page 141 - February 2002 Volume 25 Issue 2


GM Oats can tolerate continuous salt stress

Barley gene confers salt tolerance in transgenic oats
December 1, 2005
Meridian Food Security and Ag-Biotech News
Researchers at Michigan State University in the U.S. have successfully introduced the HVA1 stress tolerance gene from barley into oat plants.
The resulting genetically modified (GM) oat plants show better performance than non-GM controls under continuous salt stress, although they still experience a decrease in performance at the highest tested salinity stress level (200 mM).
The [HVA1 ] gene has been found in the past to confer salt tolerance when introduced into rice, oat, and wheat plants.
The researchers say that their new study provides further evidence of the role of the HVA1 protein in water deficit damage prevention and in the protection of oats against salinity.
According to their report, osmotic stress due to drought and/or salinity is a major cause of global oat crop yield loss. The researchers say that traditional breeding has limitations and cannot solve this problem alone, perhaps because of the inefficiency of selection methods, the lack of the genetic variability in the oat background, and the complexity of the salt tolerance trait.
ABSTRACT: Barley HVA1 Gene Confers Salt Tolerance in R3 Transgenic Oat
Via Agnet on GM GE GMO Genetic engineering Issues

See also post on background reading
Solutions to salinity in Australia


Friday, December 02, 2005
European attitude to GM products suffocating African development?

From : Is the European attitude to GM products suffocating African development?


Zambia has followed in Europe’s footsteps in embracing the precautionary principle in its draft national biosafety legislation (Republic of Zambia 2004), which provides that GM crops should not be allowed, since their safety cannot be conclusively proven. There are a variety of reasons for Zambia’s reluctance to accept any GM crops. Officially, the decision to not allow GM crops was made after consultations with foreign experts by a delegation of Zambian scientists in 2002, which determined that health and environmental concerns posed by GM crops outweighed the immediate need for food by the Zambian people (Lewanika 2003).

The delegation charged with obtaining advice about GM food aid from experts in the field visited various organisations throughout Europe and the United States, including Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and several other groups that are fundamentally opposed to agricultural biotechnology (Wilson 2002). Amongst the organisations consulted was Farming and Livestock UK, which is reported to have told the delegation that the virus used in the creation of most GM crop varieties could form a retrovirus which in turn could cause symptoms similar to HIV (Wilson 2002). Given unsubstantiated and clearly misleading information such as this about health effects, it is unsurprising that the delegation’s report took a negative view of agricultural biotechnology.

The environmental impact particularly feared by the Zambian government was that seeds from GM corn food aid could be planted and could cross-pollinate with locally grown corn. If this happened, Zambia’s corn could not be certified as being free of genetic modification. This was a concern because future Zambian agricultural exports to the European Union may have been adversely affected, due to the profoundly negative attitude to GM crops prevalent in Europe (Lewanika 2003). The leader of the Zambian government delegation on GM crops has stated that this was one of the factors that were considered when deciding whether to allow GM food aid (Lewanika 2003), although its importance in the decision was downplayed.

However, export figures suggest that preserving the European Union market for southern African countries’ agricultural products may have been the primary factor affecting the decision not to accept GM food aid. Exports of agricultural commodities to the European Union account for significant revenue for southern African nations (Laidlaw 2002). In many African nations, agriculture is the second most important source of revenue, after mining (Action for Southern Africa 2002). With a continually decreasing amount of natural resources left to mine, agriculture is poised to become a more important source of revenue than ever for most African nations. Currently, horticultural exports are a vital export-earning sector for Malawi, Zambia, Zimbabwe and South Africa (Action for Southern Africa 2002). European markets are critical for Southern African farmers, as approximately half of the region’s agricultural exports are purchased by the European Union (Action for Southern Africa 2002). Zambia’s horticultural exports alone exceeded 5000 tonnes in 1997–1998 and 8400 tonnes the following year and contributed over $110 million to the country’s economy over the two seasons (Action for Southern Africa 2002).



Greg Bodulovic
Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Integrative Legume Research, Genomic Interactions Group, Research School of Biological Sciences, Australian National University, PO Box 475, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia. gregor.bodulovic@anu.edu.au


Functional Plant Biology 32(12) 1069–1075

GMO Pundit on Africa
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2006/02/south-africa-portal-for-gmos-slipping.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2006/01/africans-welcome-gm-crops-for-more.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2006/01/african-experiences-show-conservation.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2006/01/ban-on-gm-maize-still-in-place-in.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/12/end-of-poverty-part-ii-reversal-of.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/advice-to-zambia-from-charles-benbrook.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/grain-toxins-that-cause-birth-defects.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/super-sorghum.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/12/plenty-of-food-in-world-but-in-africa.html



Seeds improve farmer income


Relative area of herbicicide tolerant canola varieties in Canada

(Image of a graph)

From A decade of herbicide-resistant crops in Canada, H. J. Beckie et al 2005

Steady growth of transgenic (GM / GE) variety area over 10 years attests to the economic benefit of these varieties to the farmers. Glyphosate-HR and Glufosinate-HR are both GM / GE herbicide tolerant varieties that together constitute most of Canadian canola.

See Good news for Canadian Farmers


Scientific evidence that GM Canola can perform better

Herbicide-tolerant canola: Weed control and yield comparisons in western Canada

Abstract Field experiments were conducted at five western Canadian locations in 1996 and 1997 to compare weed control and canola (Brassica napus L.) seed yields in the three major herbicide-tolerant canola (HTC) systems. The main objective of this study was to determine if significant weed control and yield advantages could be expected by using herbicides "designated" for HTC compared to a more "standard" application of sethoxydim plus ethametsulfuron.


In 3 of 10 site-years, glyphosate in Quest canola and imazethapyr/imazamox in 45A71 canola provided a yield advantage over the standard treatment. The yield advantages were restricted to the Lacombe and Lethbridge sites and ranged from 13 to 39% increases over the sethoxydim plus ethametsulfuron treatments.

Among the HTC, weed control was usually greatest with glyphosate, followed by imazethapyr/imazamox, and then glufosinate. Glufosinate efficacy was often restricted due to advanced growth stages on some weeds. The standard treatment of sethoxydim plus ethametsulfuron did not provide better weed control than glyphosate, but in some cases did improve Weed control compared to imazethapyr/imazamox or glufosinate.

The HTC provide growers with new opportunities for the control of difficult weeds along with the option to employ in-crop herbicides with new modes of action in canola.


Harker, K. N. Blackshaw, R. E. Kirkland, K. J. Derksen, D. A.Wall, D.
Lacombe Research Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 6000 C and E Trail, Lacombe, AB, T4L 1W1, Canada.
Canada
Canadian Journal of Plant Science. 80(3). July, 2000. 647-654.
GE GMO GM Genetic engineering


Good news For Canadian farmers using GM GE GMO canola

A decade of herbicide-resistant crops in Canada. In the latest Canadian Journal of Plant Science, Beckie, H. J. et al. 2005.

This review examines some agronomic, economic, and environmental impacts of herbicide-resistant (HR) canola, soybean, corn, and wheat in Canada after 10 years of growing HR cultivars. The rapid adoption of HR canola and soybean suggests a net economic benefit to farmers. HR crops often have improved weed management, greater yields or economic returns, and similar or reduced environmental impact compared with their non-HR crop counterparts. There are no marked changes in volunteer weed problems associated with these crops, except in zero-tillage systems when glyphosate is used alone to control canola volunteers. Although gene flow from glyphosate-HR canola to indigenous populations of bird’s rape in eastern Canada has been measured, enrichment of hybrid plants in such populations should only occur when and where herbicide selection pressure is applied. Weed shifts as a consequence of HR canola have been documented, but a reduction in weed species diversity has not been demonstrated. Reliance on HR crops in rotations using the same mode-of-action-herbicide and/or multiple in-crop herbicide applications over time can result in intense selection pressure for weed resistance and consequently, greater herbicide use in the future to control HR weed biotypes.

History has repeatedly shown that cropping system diversity is the pillar of sustainable agriculture; stewardship of HR crops must adhere to this fundamental principle.

Some details:
ADOPTION OF HERBICIDE-RESISTANT CROPS
Transgenic-HR canola was introduced commercially in Canada in 1995. Of the approximately
5.5 million ha of canola grown in 2005 (Statistics Canada 2005), about 95% (5.2 million ha) is estimated to be resistant to GLY, GLU, or IMI (Fig. 1). Eighty-two percent of HR canola is transgenic. Cultivation of the crop in eastern Canada accounts for only 0.6% of the nation’s canola area. In 1997, the number of non-HR canola cultivars commercially available peaked at 46, compared with only seven HR cultivars (Anonymous 1995-2005). By 2005, there were only
two non-HR cultivars and 43 private-sector HR cultivars (28 GLY-HR, 11 IMI-HR, 4 GLU[fosinate]-HR).

Public institutions have an important role in ensuring non-HR cultivars, which have similar
agronomic performance as HR cultivars, continue to be available to farmers.

Similar to canola, adoption of HR soybean has been rapid. All registered HR cultivars are resistant to GLY (Table 2). Nearly 80% of the Canadian soybean crop is grown in Ontario
(Statistics Canada 2005). GLY-HR soybean was first grown in 1997, and now constitutes about 55% (518,000 ha) of the total crop area in that province (Fig. 2).

HR canola cultivars that were initially released were slightly inferior in yield or quality to non-HR cultivars (Stringam et al. 2003). Private breeding efforts were increased by the development of marketable HR traits and the introduction of hybrid cultivars, which provided some measure of trait protection as well as yield and agronomic improvement. As a result, HR cultivars now yield the same or greater than non-HR cultivars and have equal quality (Stringam et al. 2003).

A survey in 2000 commissioned by the Canola Council of Canada (Serecon Management2 Consulting Inc. and Koch Paul Associates 2001) of HR (GLY or GLU) and non-HR canola 3 producers indicated that yields of HR cultivars averaged about 10% more than non-HR cultivars (1.7 vs. 1.5 t ha-1). The greater yields of HR cultivars were attributed to higher yield potential and reduced weed competition. Similar results were reported by Harker et al. (2000); yields of HR canola were greater when treated with GLY, GLU, or IMI than herbicides typically used in non-HR canola, particularly when difficult-to-control weed populations were present. Yields are often similar among GLY, GLU, and IMI-HR canola systems (Clayton et al. 2004a, b; Harker et al. 2004). Breeding efforts focused almost exclusively on HR germplasm will likely further widen the yield gap with non-HR canola.

In a survey of seedlot samples from registration plot trials and commercial fields, GLY- and
12 GLU-HR canola had improved seed quality with slightly greater oil content, and significantly
less glucosinolates and chlorophyll content than non-transgenic canola (Daun 2004). In transgenic canola seedlots, lower glucosinolate levels were attributed to decreased contamination by cruciferous weeds, such as wild mustard, whereas more even and earlier maturation due to improved field management linked to the HR trait was a possible reason for the reduced chlorophyll content.

HR canola has allowed farmers to plant earlier compared with a non-HR canola system using
soil-incorporated herbicides. Greater yields of canola planted in early spring compared with mid-May are a result of better utilization of moisture from snow melt and reduced environmental stress during the flowering period (Kirkland and Johnson 2000). Planting earlier than usual also incorporates operational diversity into cropping systems, thus diversifying weed management systems (Harker and Clayton 2003).

Hybrid-HR cultivars are becoming increasingly popular with farmers because of their yield performance. In 2004, hybrids constituted half of the canola market, of which two-thirds were GLU[fosinate]-HR cultivars (M. Gerhardt, pers. comm.). Hybrid cultivars are often taller, more vigorous, establish a denser canopy, and are more weed-competitive than open-pollinated cultivars (Zand and Beckie 2002; Harker et al. 2003). In a study conducted in Manitoba, GLU-HR hybrid canola had greater biomass, faster canopy closure, greater seed yield (under both weedy and weed-free conditions), and was more competitive with volunteer barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) than GLU3 HR open-pollinated canola (Linde et al. 2001).

The 15% average yield advantage (up to 30% for GLU-HR hybrids; Anonymous 2005 in Anonymous 1995-2005) combined with reduced seeding rates of hybrids vs. open-pollinated cultivars (mean reduction of 0.7 kg ha-1; J. Y. Leeson and A.G. Thomas, unpubl. data), as a means to reduce seed costs, are contributing to the popularity of hybrid-HR canola.

see also Harker, K. N., Blackshaw, R. E., Kirkland, K. J., Derksen, D. A. and Wall, D. 2000.
Herbicide-tolerant canola: weed control and yield comparisons in western Canada. Can. J. Plant Sci. 80: 647-654.

GM GE GMO, whatever: drought proof cotton

Biotechnology to drought proof cotton By GENEVIEVE McAULAY - Australia
Thursday, 1 December 2005

Could biotechnology solve the age old problem of drought for Australian farmers?

According to Monsanto managing director John Raines this is achievable

Addressing delegates at a forum to celebrate 10 years of biotechnology Mr Raines assured Australian cotton growers that this was a very real prospect.

"We have been testing this in California for the last two years, we have had it in field trials and we have seen in the neighbourhood of about 20pc increases in yield," he said.

"It has significant opportunities not only in cotton but also in the grains industry."

In fact Monsanto is already working today with the appropriate regulatory bodies in Australia to be able to bring in the first progeny seed for drought tolerance in cotton.

But Mr Raines warned it would be a long process.

"We will be looking at a 2012 to 2015 timeline before we can commercialise it, but I think the thing that is really important is that we wouldn't even have the opportunity to have this discussion if hadn't been for the efforts of the Australian cotton industry," he said.

"It has been very strong in having one voice and having so much success with Bollgard cotton.

"This aids in giving us an opportunity to work with regulators and bring this type of technology in."

Source:Australian Cotton Outlook


Is the European attitude to GM products suffocating African development?

Greg Bodulovic

Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Integrative Legume
Research, Genomic Interactions Group, Research School of Biological Sciences,
Australian National University, PO Box 475, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.
gregor.bodulovic@anu.edu.au



Abstract
Currently, parts of Southern Africa are experiencing the third major drought in five years. The previous two droughts greatly affected food production, resulting in food shortages, which necessitated the provision of food aid to the region by developed nations. However, some of the food aid included genetically modified (GM) crops, the supply of which triggered hostile reactions by southern African governments, and in one case resulted in food aid being withheld from people on the verge of starvation. This article will examine the background and reasons behind the condemnation of GM crops by southern African nations, and will consider whether the lack of support of agricultural biotechnology by European nations has contributed to this situation. Furthermore, the necessity of agricultural biotechnology in future African development will be considered.


Functional Plant Biology 32(12) 1069–1075
Submitted: 7 March 2005 Accepted: 4 August 2005 Published: 1 December 2005
Selected quotes from paper
See also
How many children have to die?

http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/12/end-of-poverty-part-ii-reversal-of.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/12/end-of-poverty-part-i-positives.html
http://gmopundit2.blogspot.com/2005/11/do-you-know-what-hunger-really-is.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2006/02/south-africa-portal-for-gmos-slipping.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2006/01/africans-welcome-gm-crops-for-more.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2006/01/african-experiences-show-conservation.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2006/01/ban-on-gm-maize-still-in-place-in.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/12/end-of-poverty-part-ii-reversal-of.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/advice-to-zambia-from-charles-benbrook.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/grain-toxins-that-cause-birth-defects.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/super-sorghum.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/12/plenty-of-food-in-world-but-in-africa.html




The End of Poverty Part II. A reversal of fortune. Continuation of posting of Jeffrey Sachs THE END OF POVERTY, 2005 pages 53-54

In Part I Pundit excerpts a section of Sachs’ book, where Sachs has described the ways in which an African family could prosper. In this post, Sachs looks at a reversal of fortunes.

Pundit has noted that the idea that there is plenty of food in the world is commonly cited as the reason why new agricultural technologies are not needed. In reading through these sections of Sachs, GMO Pundit was struck by the fact that this excess of food was of no help to this African family as they were isolated from those supplies, and in any case, are dependent almost exclusively on their own farm productivity for income. Pundit is also struck by the positive role of technology in so many of the factors promoting greater prosperity in this family, and its potential to mitigate the threats to its prosperity. Pundit thinks that the arguments that better nutrition (such as Golden Rice) can improve farmer prosperity that have been made by Australian economist Kym Anderson are also very persuasive. In the Transkei, Republic of South Africa, for instance malnutrition in poor farmers is one of many contributers to poor farm productivity and poverty.

See also

http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/improved-farmer-income-is-much-more.html

http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/farming-and-hunger_24.html


THE GROWTH OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME


Consider a household consisting of a husband, wife, and four children (two daughters and two sons) living on a two-hectare fann. The household grows maize and provides for its own shelter in an adobe hut. Being extremely poor, the family consumes its own maize harvest and earns no other cash income during most years. The children collect fuelwood in the vicinity of the farm for cooking, and fetch drinking water from a nearby spring.

This year the household produces two tons of maize per hectare, or four tons in total. Even though the household eats its own maize, the statisticians in the government will assign this household an income based on the market value of the maize. Suppose that each ton of maize sells in the local market for $150 per ton. The household's imputed annual income will be $600 ($150 per ton times four tons), or $100 per capita ($600 divided by six people). The government will add this figure to other household incomes to calculate the country's gross national product. The family's income per capita can increase in at least four ways thefollowing year...
...What, instead, could lead to a reduction of household income per capita? In general, an economy can rewind the clock, moving backward rather than forward. Here are a number of ways that this might happen.

Lack of Saving

Suppose that the household is chronically hungry and, therefore, consumes all of the four tons of maize, leaving nothing to sell to the market and no income to use to purchase a new plow. In fact, during the year, the existing plow breaks down. Next year's crop falls below four tons, and household income per person declines. The broken plow counts as capital depreciation, or a fall in the amount of capital available per worker.

Absence of Trade

In another case, suppose the household hears about the vanilla opportunity, but is unable to make use of it. There may be no road linking the farm and the regional market, so it is not possible for the household to market the vanilla or to use the proceeds to buy food. As a result, the household passes up the opportunity to specialize in a cash crop and stays with the food crop on which it depends to stay alive. Trade can similarly be hampered, or blocked altogether, by violence (which impedes the reliable shipment of goods), monetary chaos (so that money is not a reliable medium of exchange), price controls, and other forms of government intervention that may impede specialization and trade.

Technological Reversal

What if, as often happens in rural Africa, the children lose their mother and father to HIV / AIDS? The oldest child takes charge, but has not yet had time to master proper farming techniques. The next crop fails, and the children must depend on other households in the village. The family income has declined to zero because the level of technological knowledge has actually declined. Technological know-how is not automatically inherited. Each new generation must learn technological expertise.

Natural Resource Decline

To illustrate another possibility, not only is there no additional land, but part of the existing farmland gives way to environmental decline. Specifically, the household has not been able to afford fertilizer and does not know about nitrogen-fixing trees, so the nitrogen in the farmland is seriously depleted. The result is that only one hectare remains in production, and household annual income falls to a devastating $50 per capita (two tons times $150 per ton divided by six}.

Adverse Productivity Shock

A natural disaster, perhaps a flood, drought, heat wave, frost, pests, or disease in the household (for example, a bout of malaria), or some combination, wipes out household income for the year.

Population Growth

A generation passes. The parents die, and the two hectares are divided between the two sons. Each son now has a wife and four children. Assuming that crop yields of two tons per hectare remain unchanged, household income per capita has declined by half because the size of the population living on the same farm has doubled. This experience has been prevalent in rural Africa's in the most recent generations.

These simple illustrations show the many ways that even a simple one household "economy" may grow, as well as the many ways that the household economy can decline.

see
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/12/is-european-attitude-to-gm-products.html


GE /GM canola and corn food safety trials funded by Western Australia

More news on genetic engineered food safety:

GM-canola in lab tests, By Linda Sharman Countryman December 1 2005 pg 5

Genetically modified canola varieties Roundup Ready and Invigor are likely to be assessed under an animal feeding trial to be funded by the [West Australian] State Government. And Topas 19/2, the Bayer variety found in non-GM canola recently, may also be added to the trial.

Agriculture Minister Kim Chance anounced the trial earlier this week, which aims to gain independent data on the safety, or otherwise, of GM food crops. The Government has approved a proposal from the Institute of Health and Environmetal Research in Adelaide, a not-for-profit research institute which describes itself as having a scientific interest in the safety of GM organisms. The announcement follows news that a study on a variety of GM pea caused inflammation of the lungs of mice.

IHER director Judy Carman told Countryman that in the initial proposal put to the Government a few months ago, she had recommended two canola varieties - Monsanto's Roundup Ready and Bayer Cropscience's InVigor - and three corn varieties, probably Bt varieties, be investigated.

But Dr Carman said she would recommend that now be expanded to three varieties to include Topas 19/2, also produced by Bayer Cropscience. "We're wanting to pick a few key GM plants where there are some significant concerns about the safety of them, do the independent, thorough, long-term safety testing and see if there are any concerns or not," she said.

Dr Carman said while IHER believed there was a need for independent safety testing, with Food Standards Australia and New Zealand not requiring any animal testing before determining if a GM product was safe to eat, she stressed the research was not setting to get a pre-determined result.
"We're trying to work out if there are problems or not," she said.

And Mr Chance is of a similar view, saying the trial would be an independent study of GM food crops so that the WA government could gets its own data on GM foods, with much of the research usually done or funded by the companies promoting the product.

Rats will be used in the feeding studies, which will be conducted over several months to allow for any ill health to become apparent.

The study will examine the rats for any cancerous or precancerous growths, and assess the potential for GM DNA to enter their bodies, although Dr Carman expects the finer details of exactly how the trial will be conducted and assessed to be run by a sterering committee.

This is expected to be formed by the end of the year, and will be made up of 8-10 people from animal and human health and agriculture backgrounds to oversee the work and ensure the experiment is conducted properly.

More on CSIRO genetically engineered (GE) pea

Although disappointing, the CSIRO genetically engineered transgenic pea project close down is important for the science of GM food safety and will be big news for a while.
We have already posted a useful comment on the CSIRO pea by respected plant scientist Maarten Chrispeels from California.
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/chrispeels-comments-on-australian-gm.html

GMO Pundit totally agrees with his interpretation. The CSIRO science is sophisticated, sensitive, and uses very powerful techniques. In the Pundit's humble opinion, the proper conclusion - that the bean protein immune charactoristics are changed when expressed in peas - is rock solid.

Its also interesting to note that no public comment was made about these findings until after they were published. That's the way science should ethically proceed on controversial issues and where the findings affect public policy decisions of substance.

Given this current interest in the potential allergenicity of the GM Peas bred by CSIRO, it is worthwhile reviewing the relevant FSANZ requirements for GM foods:

"In assessing the safety of a GM food, FSANZ checks to ensure that the levels of naturally occurring allergens in GM foods have not significantly increased above the natural range in the conventional food. FSANZ also checks to ensure that the new proteins in GM foods are not likely to be allergenic. It does this by asking the following questions:

• Do the new proteins come from living organisms that contain significant
allergens?
• Is the sequence of amino acids (the building blocks that make up proteins)
in the new proteins similar to that of any known allergens?
• Do the new proteins have any other physical or biochemical characteristics
typical of allergens?

If the answer to one or more of these questions is ‘yes’, then further information is required for FSANZ to work out whether or not the new protein is allergenic.

If FSANZ had scientific evidence that a new protein in a GM food was allergenic, it is unlikely that the food containing that protein would be given approval for sale in Australia or New Zealand, even with appropriate labelling. This is because it would not be appropriate to increase the community’s exposure to allergenic proteins in the food supply."


Given the protein involved in the pea research has allergenic cousins, FSANZ would have required studies on allergenicity to approve the pea for food use.

See FSANZ booklet
What about allergens in GM foods? (pages 16-17)
Potential allergenicity of new proteins (pages 29-30)

http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/chrispeels-comments-on-australian-gm.html
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/gm-pea-project-discontinued-during.html


Update:

CSIRO GMO wheat found to have potential to improve bowel health.

Thursday, December 01, 2005
Greenpeace and Network of Concerned Farmers.

Farmer Lobby Confirms Greenpeace Link.
Peter Hunt
The Weekly Times, Melbourne, 7 April 2004

The Network of Concerned Farmers lobby group has confirmed it recieves support from the international conservation group Greenpeace.
Greenpeace paid for the construction of the Network of Concerned Farmers website and chaired several teleconferences with the network members.
Network spokesman in South Australia{n}, Nic Kentish, said he sat in on several teleconferences chaired by Greenpeace, which also offered the network executive support.
"Greenpeace chairs our conferences. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't," Mr Kentish said.
"There's an executive officer provided by Greenpeace, there's a couple of them - Jeremy Tager and John Hepburn."
Mr Tager, a Greenpeace GM campaigner, said the teleconference involved other groups, not just the network.
"There our own teleconference, not the network's," Mr Tager said.
"We have discussions about strategy issues. We provide them with advice and they may provide (us with) advice."
Victorian Farmer Federation President Paul Weller saidthat if the network was genuinely concerned about farmers they would not side with Greenpeace.
"Its Greenpeace that opposes the diesel rebate for farmers, its Greenpeace that would like more than 1500 gigalitres for the Murray and it's Greenpeace who'd like to see an end to piggeries and a lot of other intensive livestock industries," Mr Weller said.
"And Greenpeace doesn't form their party democratically."

Last week, the network's national spokesman Julie Newman told The Weekly Times that Greenpeace had nothing to do with her network.

But on Monday, Ms Newman said she had found out that Greenpeace had built the network's website.
"But the money to build the website was donated to Greenpeace by a farmer who supported us," Ms Newman said.
Mr Tager said Greenpeace had simply provided an administrative service in terms of funding the website.

The End of Poverty Part I. The Positives.

Quotation from THE END OF POVERTY, Jeffrey Sachs, Penguin 2005

THE GROWTH OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME

Consider a household consisting of a husband, wife, and four children (two daughters and two sons) living on a two-hectare fann. The house hold grows maize and provides for its own shelter in an adobe hut. Being extremely poor, the family consumes its own maize harvest and earns no other cash income during most years. The children collect fuelwood in the vicinity of the farm for cooking, and fetch drinking water from a nearby spring.

This year the household produces two tons of maize per hectare, or four tons in total. Even though the household eats its own maize, the statisticians in the government will assign this household an income based on the market value of the maize. Suppose that each ton of maize sells in the local market for $150 per ton. The household's imputed annual income will be $600 ($150 per ton times four tons), or $100 per capita ($600 divided by six people). The government will add this figure to other household incomes to calculate the country's gross national product.
The family's income per capita can increase in at least four ways thefollowing year.

Saving

The household might decide to consume only three out of the four tons of maize, and take one ton to market. With the $150, the household in vests in livestock (perhaps chickens or sheep or a bull or dairy cow). The livestock generate a new stream of income, whether from improved food yields by using the bull for manure and animal traction, or the cow for sales of milk, or the animals for meat, eggs, or hides. In economic jargon, the saving has led to capital accumulation (in the form of live-stock), which in turn has raised household productivity.

Trade

In a different scenario, the household learns from a neighboring farmer that it has the right kind of farmland, climate, and soil to produce vanilla beans, with a much higher income. Mter some deliberation, the household decides to shift to vanilla as a cash crop. The next year the household earns $800 in vanilla, and uses $600 to buy four tons of grain for food. As more vanilla farmers arise in the region, a new group of trading firms also forms, specializing in shipping and storage of vanilla food, and farm inputs.

This pattern exemplifies Adam Smith's insight into the two-way link from
specialization to expanded markets back to increased specialization. The farm household specializes in high-value vanilla farming because it lives in favorable ecological conditions for vanilla trees. It relies on the market to trade with other ouseholds, which instead specialize in producing food. As incomes rise, and the "extent of the market" increases, to use Smith's phrase, there is room for further specialization, in this case in transport services. Later on, economic activities
will be further divided among firms specializing in housing construction, clothing manufacturing, road maintenance, plumbing, electricity, water and sanitation systems, and so forth.

Technology

Alternatively, an agricultural extension officer teaches the farm house hold how to manage the soil nutrients in a new and improved manner by planting special nitrogen-fixing trees that replenish the vital nitrogen nutrients of the soil, and to multiply the benefits by using improved grains. The new cereal varieties are faster maturing and pest resistant, and they flourish with the replenished soil nutrients. As a result, the crop yield rises in a single year to three tons of maize per hectare, or six tons in total. The income per capita therefore rises to $150 (three tons per hectare times two hectares at $150 per ton divided by six people).

Resource Boom

The farm household is able to move to a much larger and more fertile farm after the government's success in controlling the breeding of black flies, which spread Mrican river blindness. Suddenly there are thousands of hectares of new farmland and a significant expansion of production capacity as a result. Incomes rise and hunger falls as each household in the newly opened region is able to triple its previous food output.

These four pathways to higher income are the main ways that economies grow, albeit in much more complicated settings than I have just described. In actual economies, a rise in gross domestic product (GDP) per capita is typically the result of most or all of these four processes simultaneously at work: saving and capital accumulation, increasing specialization and trade, technological advance (and a resulting rise in output for a given amount of inputs), and greater natural resources per person (and a resulting increase in the level of output per person). Although I have illustrated these pathways to rising income at the level of an individual household, in fact each of these processes operates through the interactions of thousands or millions of households linked together by markets and collective actions through public policies and public investments.


For GMO Pundit, a very interesting and morally relevant question is to ask: What are the ways and possibilities by which better agricultural technology can contribute to improving these family incomes?

The IFPRI website is a good place to start researching this question, as is anything written by Gordon Conway, Amartya Sen, Carl Pray, Robert Evenson, or indeed Jeffrey Sachs and his partner Bono of U2 fame. GMO Pundit also has other hunger related pages.



If we live in times of END OF OIL, shouldn’t we wheel out GE and GM-LITE to save the planet?

MEDIA RELEASE - SCIENTISTS INVENT “GM-LITE”

Australian scientists have developed a major alternative to conventional GM (gene modification), by harnessing the natural defense mechanisms of plants to create safer, cheaper and more productive food crops – without adding foreign proteins.

“The potential of RNA interference technology is huge,” says CSIRO’s Dr Peter Waterhouse. “Hopefully, it will make a big difference in agriculture and in certain pharmaceutical productions.”

Dr. Waterhouse is among the leading international scientists taking part in the Sir Mark Oliphant Conference on Epigenetic Regulation in Canberra.

RNA interference technology depends on a natural ‘seek and destroy’ mechanism which plants use to protect themselves against viral infection.

RNA interference is a major topic at the Sir Mark Oliphant Conference on Epigenetic Regulation of Development & Disease, at the CSIRO Discovery Centre in Canberra, Australia from November 29-December 2, 2005.


Energy analysis

Brazilian ethanol exports to Japan

Propping up corn prices

Biodiesel boom.


Genetically engineered thirst continued
(Image of Kenth Beer)

Ready for a GM Beer?

If you travel through Sweden this summer, don't forget to try the first genetically modified (GM) beer in the world. According to CNN.com in this short article, the Kenth beer contains "corn that has been genetically modified to protect it against pests." Sometimes, corn is named maize in Europe, and the brewer chose to use this unusual Bt maize to 'spice up' his beer. Of course, his goal is to produce a great new beer, but he also wants to introduce new technologies that will be good for the environment without compromising the consumers' health -- I guess he based his assumptions on a 'reasonable' number of bottles on a very warm day... Anyway, GM food products have been approved by the European Union since April 2004 -- if they're properly labeled. So you might find this beer outside Sweden anytime soon. Read more...First, here is a picture of this delightful new beer (Credit: Oesterlenbryggarna brewery in Osterlen,Sweden).


See also
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/outside-view-on-australian-gm-wine_30.html

http://gmopundit.blogspot.com/2005/11/gmo-wine-in-america.html

WARNING HEALTH HAZARD
Don't forget, genetically engineered beer and wine taken together create a hangover for brewers and drinkers, and genetically engineered alcohol (GE GM or whatever) is still just as unhealthy as real alcohol.
DO NOT DRIVE GM AND DRINK GM