GMO Pundit a.k.a. David Tribe

Next generation GM maize approved for commercial release in China

2009-11-23T08:06:00.001+11:00

Nov 21 2009, 9:00 AM EST GEN Eng NEWS

Origin Agritech Announces Final Approval of World’s First Genetically Modified Phytase Corn

News source: Business Wire

In this item Origin Agritech Limited (NASDAQ GS: SEED) (“Origin”), supplier of crop seeds and agri-biotech research in China, is reported to have received the Bio-safety Certificate from the Ministry of Agriculture as a final approval for commercial approval of the world’s first genetically modified phytase corn. The item goes on to say Origin’s phytase corn is the first transgenic corn to officially introduce the next generation of corn product to enter the domestic marketplace. See link for details

News: Origin Agritech Announces Final Approval of World’s First Genetically Modified Phytase Corn.

New US Organic Center report discounts value of no-till farming revolution

2009-11-20T10:28:00.001+11:00

Briefing note: 19 November 2009
Impact of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use: US Organic Center report evaluation by PG Economics

PG Economics welcomes the Organic Center (OC) latest release Impacts of genetically engineered crops on pesticide use: the first thirteen years by Charles Benbrook, which confirms the positive impact biotech crops have had on reducing insecticide use and associated environmental impacts. However, the OC’s assessment of the impact of biotech herbicide tolerant traits (HT) is disappointingly inaccurate, misleading and fails to acknowledge several of the benefits US farmers and citizens have derived from use of the technology.

For those reviewing the issues examined in the OC report, the following should be noted:

• Confirmation: of biotech insect resistant (IR) impact on insecticide use: the OC paper confirms the findings of other work that the use of IR technology has resulted in important reductions in
insecticide use on these crops that would otherwise have been used with conventional
technology;

• Failure to acknowledge the environmental benefits arising from use of HT technology. These include facilitation of no/reduced tillage production systems [2] which has resulted in important reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. For example, US HT biotech crops contributed, in
2007, to the equivalent of removing 9.48 billion pounds (4.3 billion kg) of carbon dioxide from
the atmosphere or equal to removing nearly 1.9 million cars from the road for one year. In
addition, whilst usage of broad spectrum herbicides, notably glyphosate (and to a lesser
extent glufosinate) has increased significantly, usage of less environmentally benign products
such as pendimethalin, metribuzin, fluazifop and metalochlor has fallen substantially, leading to net benefits to the environment [3];

• Inaccuracies: It uses assumptions relating to herbicide use on biotech crops in the US that do
not concur with actual practice. As a result, it overstates herbicide use on US biotech crops
significantly. For example, it overstates herbicide use on the HT crops of corn, cotton and
soybeans for the period between 1998 and 2008 by 63.4 million pounds (28.75 million kg) of
active ingredient;

• Misleading use of official data: The OC report states many times that the pesticide impact data
is based on official, government (USDA NASS) pesticide usage data. Whilst this dataset is
used, its limitations (namely not covering pesticide use on some of the most recent years and
not providing disaggregated breakdowns of use between conventional and biotech crops)
mean that the author’s analysis relied on own-estimates of usage and cannot reasonably claim
to be based on official sources. As a result, the herbicide usage assumptions on conventional
crops, if they replaced biotech HT traited crops, are significantly understated and unreliable.
Combined with the overstated use assumptions on HT biotech crops, it is therefore not surprising that the document concluded that biotech crops lead to an increase in US herbicide use. This contrasts sharply with the findings of PG Economics’ peer reviewed analysis [4] that estimated that biotech crop adoption in the US has reduced pesticide spraying in the US, eg, by 357 million lbs (162 million kg: -7.1% 1996-2007) relative to what might reasonably be expected if the crops were all planted to conventional varieties;

• Weak approach: the approach of the OC report author is based on personal assumptions of
herbicide use for biotech versus conventional crops and extrapolation of average trends in
total crop active ingredient use (from an incomplete dataset). It also does not present any
information about typical weed control regimes that might be expected in conventional
systems. Not surprisingly, this resulted in significant over estimation of herbicide use on
biotech HT crops (see above) and under estimation of usage on conventional alternatives. As
such, the approach delivers unreliable and unrepresentative outcomes. It is noted that the
OC author is critical of the approach used by other analysts5 to estimate the herbicide usage
regimes that might reasonably be expected on conventional crops if biotech HT traits were
not used in the US corn, cotton and soybean crops over the last thirteen years. The NCFAP/PG Economics approach, criticized by the OC report, is to present and estimate the conventional alternatives based on a survey of opinion from over 50 extension advisors in almost all states growing these three crops. Observers should note the key differences between the two approaches with the NCFAP & PG Economics approach being much more
reliable and representative.

Given the complexities of agricultural production systems and the nature of weed and pest control
systems, more detailed comment and critique of the OCS report is detailed below.(see linked PG Economics site for details).

For additional information: contact Graham Brookes, PG Economics on 00 44 1531 650123 or
graham.brookes@btinternet.com

PG Economics Home page

Some earlier GMO Pundit posts on Dr Benbrook:

Commentary on Charles Benbrook's anti-GM tour heats up

US Big picture at variance with Benbrook comments

Healthier GM soybean oils now being reviewed by USDA and FDA

2009-11-13T11:25:00.001+11:00

MONSANTO COMPLETES U.S. REGULATORY SUBMISSIONS IN SUPPORT OF VISTIVE III SOYBEANS THAT PRODUCE HEALTHIER COOKING OILS
Press release

Vistive III Oil Significantly Reduces Saturated Fats and Helps Eliminate Trans Fats

ST. LOUIS (November 12, 2009) – Monsanto Company (NYSE: MON) has completed regulatory submissions to the U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Food and Drug Administration in support of the Vistive III soybean trait. This second-generation product builds on Monsanto’s existing Vistive product and would provide food companies with a healthier, more stable soybean oil for frying and baking that contains significantly lower levels of saturated fat and eliminates trans fats.
Research has shown that a diet low in saturated and trans fats promotes heart health.
“Vistive III is a win for farmers, food producers and consumers,” said Jerry Hjelle, vice president of regulatory for Monsanto. “This provides a glimpse into the next-generation of biotech products that can bring direct health benefits to consumers. We also expect farmers to benefit from the premium pricing opportunity the market is likely to offer for the oil once it’s commercialized. And food producers should benefit from a more stable and more healthful soybean oil to use in its food products”
Completing regulatory submissions in the United States is an important step forward in bringing the benefits of this next-generation soybean product to the market, he added.
Vistive III soybean oil is more stable at high temperatures and is shown to have significantly extended fry life when compared to commodity soybean oil, or existing low-linolenic soybean products.
“Application studies show that products fried in the new oil maintain optimum flavor quality,” said Richard Wilkes food applications lead for Monsanto.
Vistive III eliminates the need for hydrogenation, resulting in foods with zero trans fats and reduced overall saturated fat content, thus bringing health benefits to consumers.
“Vistive III anticipates the needs of my customers and will help me offer them the best soybean product today’s technology can create,” said John Buck, a farmer in New Bloomington, Ohio, who has been growing the first-generation Vistive soybeans for several years. This year, Buck is growing only soybeans with the Vistive trait. “As a third-generation farmer who has been in agriculture for a decade, I look forward to advancements in soybeans that continue to improve food quality and can help me and my family eat healthier while enjoying the foods we eat.”

About Monsanto Company
Monsanto Company is a leading global provider of technology-based solutions and agricultural products that improve farm productivity and food quality. Monsanto remains focused on enabling both small-holder and large-scale farmers to produce more from their land while conserving more of our world's natural resources such as water and energy. To learn more about our business and our commitments, please visit: www.monsanto.com. Follow our business on Twitter at www.twitter.com/MonsantoCo, on Facebook at www.facebook.com/MonsantoCo, or subscribe to our News Release RSS Feed.

AN ECOPRAGMATIST MANIFESTO

2009-11-12T09:41:00.001+11:00

WHOLE EARTH DISCIPLINE: AN ECOPRAGMATIST MANIFESTO
By Stewart Brand
Viking, $25.95, 336 pages
REVIEWED BY MAX SCHULZ in the Washington Times

"If Greens don't embrace science and technology and jump ahead to a leading role in both, they may follow the Reds into oblivion."

That's strong, hard-hitting stuff. However, the author who derides environmentalists as anti-intellectual Luddites and compares them to communists isn't Michelle Malkin or Glenn Beck. It's Stewart Brand, one of the world's leading environmentalists and a founder of the modern green movement.

...The green left's policy prescriptions arise from a reflexive opposition to the things that have built our technologically advanced, urban society.

Hence, the greens have made theirs a movement of opposition. They oppose large-scale energy development and consumption. They push a regulatory structure that clamps down on private corporations and landowners in a bid to stop them from despoiling the environment. They oppose scientific efforts to improve food production to feed billions because that just means supporting more people who do damage to the planet.

Mr. Brand's "Whole Earth Discipline" says, in effect, that it isn't enough just to oppose. In fact, in some instances, that opposition has been disastrous.

"I daresay the environmental movement has done more harm with its opposition to genetic engineering than with any other thing we've been wrong about," he writes. "We've starved people, hindered science, hurt the natural environment and denied our own practitioners a crucial tool."

He notes that "Silent Spring" author Rachel Carson, patron saint of the modern environmental movement, actually encouraged pursuing the science of biotic controls, i.e. genetic engineering, but that greens have rejected that counsel in defense of a bizarre idea of what is "natural.

BOOKS: 'Whole Earth Discipline' - Washington Times

GM crops now $130 billion dollar market

2009-11-10T13:41:00.001+11:00

The Market Value of GM Products
- Rob Carlson, Nature Biotechnology 27, 984 (2009) http://www.nature.com/nbt/

To the Editor: I am writing to point out that the Data Page published in the March issue 1 substantially underestimates the market value of transgenic crops. Using a more accurate estimate dramatically changes the fraction of US gross domestic product (GDP) that can be attributed to genetically modified (GM) systems....

...Taken together, the reports enable an estimation of the revenues from the major GM crops at about $65 billion in 2008. The data demonstrate substantial fluctuations in revenues due to changes in annual prices, even as the fraction of GM crops planted continues to increase. The ISAAA reports that about half of all transgenic seeds were planted in the United States 2, and if one assumes that prices paid for crops in the United States are representative of global averages, then global farm-scale revenues from GM corn, soy and cotton in 2008 were about $130 billion

NYT have an intelligent conversation about crop technology

2009-10-29T07:42:00.001+11:00

Put Aside Prejudices
　
Paul Collier is a professor of economics at Oxford University and the director of the Center for the Study of African Economies. He is the author of "The Bottom Billion: Why the Poorest Countries Are Failing and What Can Be Done About It."
　

Opponents talk darkly of risks but provide no scientific basis for their amorphous expressions of concern. Meanwhile the true risks are mounting. Over the past decade global food demand has risen more rapidly than expected. Supply may not keep pace with demand, inducing rising prices and periodic spikes. If this happens there is a risk that the children of the urban poor will suffer prolonged bouts of malnutrition.
African governments are now recognizing that by imitating the European ban on genetic modification they have not reduced the risks facing their societies but increased them. Thirteen years, during which there could have been research on African crops, have been wasted. Africa has been in thrall to Europe, and Europe has been in thrall to populism.
Genetic modification alone will not solve the food problem: like climate change, there is no single solution. But continuing refusal to use it is making a difficult problem yet more daunting.

Movement of GM protective trait in pollen makes wild squash more attractive food for beetles

2009-10-27T15:11:00.001+11:00

Indirect costs of a nontarget pathogen mitigate the direct benefits of a virus-resistant transgene in wild Cucurbita. M A Sasu and others, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA (2009)

Abstract

Virus-resistant transgenic squash are grown throughout the United States and much of Mexico and it is likely that the virus-resistant transgene (VRT) has been introduced to wild populations repeatedly. The evolutionary fate of any resistance gene in wild populations and its environmental impacts depend upon trade-offs between the costs and benefits of the resistance gene. In a 3-year field study using a wild gourd and transgenic and nontransgenic introgressives, we measured the effects of the transgene on fitness, on herbivory by cucumber beetles, on the incidence of mosaic viruses, and on the incidence of bacterial wilt disease (a fatal disease vectored by cucumber beetles). In each year, the first incidence of zucchini yellow mosaic virus occurred in mid-July and spread rapidly through the susceptible plants. We found that the transgenic plants had greater reproduction through both male and female function than the susceptible plants, indicating that the VRT has a direct fitness benefit for wild gourds under the conditions of our study. Moreover, the VRT had no effect on resistance to cucumber beetles or the incidence of wilt disease before the spread of the virus. However, as the virus spread through the fields, the cucumber beetles became increasingly concentrated upon the healthy (mostly transgenic) plants, which increased exposure to and the incidence of wilt disease on the transgenic plants. This indirect cost of the VRT (mediated by a nontarget herbivore and pathogen) mitigated the overall beneficial effect of the VRT on fitness.

Indirect costs of a nontarget pathogen mitigate the direct benefits of a virus-resistant transgene in wild Cucurbita — PNAS

More on corn that has novel synthetic enzyme to digest starch

2009-10-26T23:48:00.001+11:00

Corn amylase improves efficiency and environmental footprint of corn to ethanol
25.oct.09
Crop Biotech Update

Corn Amylase (CA), an enzyme essential to convert available starch to fermentable sugars in the production of biofuels, can improve the efficiency, cost, and environmental footprint of biofuels. It will reduce the demand for natural resources, the consumption of fossil fuels, the emission of greenhouse gases, reduce utility costs at the plant and improve the energy balance (compared to ethanol produced from conventional corn). In Corn Amylase: Improving the Efficiency and Environmental Footprint of Corn to Ethanol through Plant Biotechnologypublished in the e-journal AgbioForum, John Urbanchuk and colleagues from LECG, LLC and Michigan State University review the potential economic and environmental benefits of CA on the production of ethanol from corn and sorghum.
Results were confirmed in a trial of a new variety of corn developed by Syngenta that expresses alpha-amylase directly in the seed endosperm. The authors noted that "This technology represents a novel approach to improving ethanol production in a way that can be integrated smoothly into the existing infrastructure."

For the full article visit http://www.agbioforum.org/v12n2/v12n2a01-stone.htm

See earlier Pundit Post
New Breakthrough Biotechnology Adds Value to Corn Growers Output & Reduces Costs of Ethanol Biofuel.

Royal Society on Reaping the benefits: Science and the sustainable intensification of global agriculture

2009-10-22T09:54:00.001+11:00

Reaping the benefits: Science and the sustainable intensification of global agriculture

21 Oct 2009

The Royal Society has published the report of a landmark study examining the contribution of the biological sciences to food crop production. The study was conducted by a working group chaired by Sir David Baulcombe FRS. The group included experts on agriculture, international development, conservation biology and plant science.

Food security is one of this century's key global challenges. Producing enough food for the increasing global population must be done in the face of changing consumption patterns, the impacts of climate change and the growing scarcity of water and land. Crop production methods must also sustain the environment, preserve natural resources and support livelihoods of farmers and rural populations around the world. This report discusses the need for a sustainable intensification' of global agriculture in which yields are increased without adverse environmental impact and without the cultivation of more land.

The report begins by setting out the challenges to food crop production. It then goes on to examine in detail the various technologies that might be used to enhance production, with the conclusion that a diversity of approaches are needed. Due to the scale of the challenge, no technology should be ruled out, and different strategies may need to be employed in different regions and circumstances. Finally, consideration is given to the consequences and complications of food crop innovation.

The recommendations of the report include the following:

Research Councils UK (RCUK) should develop a cross-council grand challenge' on global food crop security as a priority. This needs to secure at least £2 billion over 10 years to make a substantial difference.
RCUK should increase support for ecosystem-based approaches, agronomy and the related sciences that underpin improved crop and soil management.
Universities should work with funding bodies to reverse the decline in subjects relevant to a sustainable intensification of food crop production, such as agronomy, plant physiology, pathology and general botany, soil science, environmental microbiology, weed science and entomology

GM Eggplant passes safety assessment in India.

2009-10-16T13:27:00.001+11:00

BT brinjal safe for consumption
Thursday, October 15, 2009
By Kalyan Ray, CheckBiotech

　
BT brinjal to go commercial big time.
　
India is all set to commercialise its first ever genetically-modified (GM) food crop — Bt brinjal — as the country’s highest biotechnology regulatory authority on Wednesday declared the crop safe to be released in the environment.
"The Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), under the Union Environment Ministry, has cleared the introduction of Bt brinjal," Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh said. The government will formally approve the GM eggplant after discussing its scientific, bio-safety and licensing issues with stakeholders.

70 percent more food needed by 2050 says FAO

2009-10-14T11:25:00.001+11:00

Agriculture to 2050 – the challenges ahead
12-10-2009

FAO's Diouf opens High-Level Forum on food’s future

Director-General Jaques Diouf opening the High-Level Expert Forum
　
12 October 2009, Rome - Agriculture must become more productive if it is to feed a much larger world population while responding to the daunting environmental challenges ahead, FAO Director-General Jacques Diouf said here today.
Opening a two-day High-Level Expert Forum on How to Feed the World in 2050 Diouf told the 300 delegates that over the next 40 years:

"The combined effect of population growth, strong income growth and urbanization ... is expected to result in almost the doubling of demand for food, feed and fibre."

"Agriculture will have no choice but to be more productive," Diouf added, noting that increases would need to come mostly from yield growth and improved cropping intensity rather than from farming more land despite the fact that there are still ample land resources with potential for cultivation, particularly in sub-Sahara Africa and Latin America. He also noted that "while organic agriculture contributes to hunger and poverty reduction and should be promoted, it cannot by itself feed the rapidly growing population."

World population is projected to rise to 9.1 billion in 2050 from a current 6.7 billion, requiring a 70-percent increase in farm production.

Growing scarcity
In addition to a growing scarcity of natural resources such as land, water and biodiversity "global agriculture will have to cope with the effects of climate change, notably higher temperatures, greater rainfall variability and more frequent extreme weather events such as floods and droughts," Diouf warned.
Climate change would reduce water availability and lead to an increase in plant and animal pests and diseases. The combined effects of climate change could reduce potential output by up to 30 percent in Africa and up to 21 percent in Asia, the FAO Chief noted.
"The challenge is not only to increase global future production but to increase it where it is mostly needed and by those who need it most," he stressed. "There should be a special focus on smallholder farmers, women and rural households and their access to land, water and high quality seeds... and other modern inputs."

Water challenge
Diouf noted the special challenge posed by water as climate change would make rainfall increasingly unreliable. Investment in improved water control and water management should be considered a priority.
It is also important to bridge the technology gap between countries through knowledge transfer using North-South, South-South and triangular cooperation to achieve sustainable increases in agricultural production and productivity.

Competition from bioenergy
Food production would also face increasing competition from the biofuel market "which has the potential to change the fundamentals of agricultural market systems", with production set to increase by nearly 90 percent over the next 10 years to reach 192 billion litres by 2018.
At the Forum, about 300 eminent experts from around the world will review and debate the investment needs, technologies and policy measures needed to secure the world's food supplies on horizon 2050. It is calculated that $44 billion a year of official development assistance (ODA) will need to be invested in agriculture in developing countries - against the $7.9 billion that is being spent now. Higher investments, including from national budgets, foreign direct investment and private sector resources, should be made for better access to modern inputs, more irrigation systems, machinery, storage, more roads and better rural infrastructures, as well as more skilled and better trained farmers.

Through its conclusions and recommendations the Forum will contribute to the debate and outcome of the World Summit on Food Security scheduled at FAO headquarters on November 16-18, to be attended by Heads of State and Government from FAO's 192 Member Nations. It is hoped the Summit will agree then on the complete and rapid eradication of hunger so that every human being on Earth can enjoy the most fundamental of all human rights - the "right to food" and thus to decent life.

Eating too much of natural plant chemicals can be bad

2009-10-08T07:21:00.003+11:00

Monash research cautions against use of anti-oxidants
7 October 2009

Professor Tony Tiganis and Kim Loh

Press release
Monash University Press release

An international team of scientists, led by Monash University researchers, has found that anti-oxidants commonly touted for their health-promoting benefits, could contribute to the early onset of Type 2 diabetes.

The team, led by Professor Tony Tiganis from the Monash Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, has found that molecules known as Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) may play a protective role in the early stages of Type 2 diabetes by enhancing insulin action. Anti-oxidants prevent the beneficial effects of ROS.

The team showed that when ROS levels were elevated in muscles of genetically-modified mice they could prevent the onset of insulin resistance and diabetes that is induced by a high-fat diet.

However when these animals received anti-oxidants, which 'mop up' ROS, the improved insulin response was lost and the mice became more 'diabetic'.

The findings, published today in the prestigious journal Cell Metabolism, challenge the widely-held view that ROS are always harmful and that anti-oxidants are always beneficial.

"ROS molecules, such as hydrogen peroxide, are important for normal cell function. We have shown that ROS present in muscle enhance insulin action and help lower blood sugar levels," Professor Tiganis said.

"However, our studies do not negate the role of ROS in late-stage disease. There's a 'yin and yang' relationship that takes place, wherein ROS are beneficial in the early stages of Type 2 diabetes and shift to being harmful at later stages of the disease. We are now trying to find out when ROS make the switch from being 'good' to 'bad'.

"Although we need to undertake further studies in humans, our results indicate that the widespread use of anti-oxidants by the general public as a preventative measure is something that should be discouraged, particularly if you are otherwise healthy," Professor Tiganis said.

"Eat healthy and exercise as this is a natural source of ROS that promotes insulin action."

Diabetes is Australia's fastest growing disease, with an estimated 275 people developing the disorder each day. Type 2 diabetes, which is linked to genetic and lifestyle factors including obesity, low physical activity and poor diet, costs our health care system an estimated $3 billion dollars annually.

Professor Tiganis led a team of 12 Monash researchers, scientists from the Baker IDI Heart and Diabetes Institute, University of Melbourne, and Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in the US.

Mexican race debate heats up further.

2009-10-04T07:18:00.006+11:00

It is indeed interesing to witness real scientic debate is alive and well in crusty scientific journals:

Molecular Ecology, 2009 News and Views
COMMENT
Insufficient evidence for the discovery of transgenes in Mexican landraces
BERND SCHOEL and JOHN FAGAN
Genetic ID NA, Inc, SO4 N 4th Street, Fairfield, Iowa 52556, USA
　
　
The authors claim either sampling effects or reporting of false negatives as the most likely source of differing detection results between their study and that of Ortiz-Garcı´a et al. (2005). Our interpretation leads to the conclusion that Pin˜eyro-Nelson et al. (2009) essentially came up with negative results in their survey of Oaxaca for transgenic maize.
Although sample 5 appears to be positive, it is hard to conclude from the provided data whether this is a true positive result as the authors provided neither confirmatory Southern blot data nor information regarding the specific corn event. This interpretation is consistent with the conclusions reported by Ortiz-Garcı´a et al. (2005). We contend that the sample number was too small in both the study (Ortiz-Garcı´a et al. and Pin˜eyro-Nelson et al.) and that sampling was not representative of the total Oxacan maize population. Therefore, our conclusion from both publications on this topic is that results obtained to date are not sufficient to ascertain whether introgression of transgenic traits into the Mexican maize population has or has not taken place.

References include
Ortiz-Garcıa S, Ezcurra E, Schoel B et al. (2005) Absence of detectable transgenes in local landraces of maize in Oaxaca, Mexico.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102, 12338–12343.
　
Pineyro-Nelson A, van Heerwaarden J, Perales HR et al. (2009) Transgenes in Mexican maize: molecular evidence and methodological considerations for GMO detection in landrace populations. Molecular Ecology, 18, 750–761.
　

Response
Molecular Ecology, 2009 News and Views
　
REPLY
Resolution of the Mexican transgene detection controversy: error sources and scientific practice in commercial and ecological contexts
A. PIN˜ EYRO-NELSON,* J . VAN HEERWAARDEN,† H. R. PERALES,‡J . A. SERRATOS-HERNA´ NDEZ,§ A. RANGEL,–M. B. HUFFORD,**, P. GEPTS,** A. GARAYARROYO,*
R. RIVERA-BUSTAMANTE– and E. R. A ´ LVAREZ-BUYLLA*

Bernd Schoel and John Fagan (Vice-President and Founder ⁄ CEO, respectively, of Genetic ID, henceforth BS&JF) criticize and dismiss our recent publication in Molecular Ecology by focusing on our use of the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) to detect specific DNA sequences. They raise important questions about the standards required to use PCR in various environmental conditions, pointing to the well-known fact that this delicate method may lead an unskilled operator to false results. They further suggest that our observations of transgenic DNA sequences in Mexican landrace maize should be attributed to false positives, i.e. a type I error. After considering their challenge and reviewing the evidence, we find their arguments seriously
lacking in substance, and their practice permissive of false negatives, a type II error.

We seem to have attracted BS&JF’s attention because, in an effort to corroborate our own results, we utilized the services of Genetic ID as full-paying customers. We established that Genetic ID failed on occasion to detect positive blind samples, which should not be surprising given the known vagaries of the PCR method. Yet for BS&JF this detection failure is not a
factual possibility; instead, to explain our observations they would have us both (i) contaminating our samples and (ii) lying about the origin and nature of our materials. Specifically, BS&JF state:

1 ‘We contend that results such as these are incorrectly interpreted as positive and are more likely to be indicative of contamination in the laboratory.’ and
2 ‘We would argue that the leaf sample provided by the authors did not contain the claimed NK603 event and, furthermore, does not contain material from any commercialized
transgenic single plant.’

Other charges include an implication that we used false evidence and ⁄ or withheld inconvenient data (BS&JF, p.5, lines 5–11) to reach our conclusions.
All of these are indeed very serious challenges to our technical capacity and expertise, as well as our professional and personal integrity.

PCR contamination or false negatives (type II error)?

BS&JF declare their suspicion that all of our PCR positive results arose from systematic contamination. They note the presence of bands in the PCR gels that are weaker than they would expect for a ‘100% (homozygous) or 50% (heterozygous) GMO level’, the only evidence that they would take as a positive result. Such a view is based on the unwarranted expectation
that an end-point PCR could be used as a quantitative method. In our experience and that of other independent laboratories, the PCR amplification of transgenic sequences in landrace maize backgrounds tends to produce relatively faint bands of variable intensity in end-point reactions visualized on agarose gels, which so far has been the standard approach in the field (Quist &
Chapela 2001; Alvarez- Morales 2002; Pin˜ eyro-Nelson et al. 2009). Genetic ID’s own gels (their standard to screen-out ‘negatives’) show this kind of variability, even for repeats of a single sample in a single assay, or for different assays performed for the same sample at different times [see Fig. S1 (Supporting information)]...

...There is evidence arguing against BS&JF’s PCR contamination hypothesis. We observe, for example, that the presence of positive bands in our samples is neither randomly nor homogeneously distributed as would be required by such a hypothesis. Specifically, at the inception of our study, maize ears were collected, seeds were subdivided from each ear and distributed independently to our separate laboratories (RR in Irapuato and EAB in Mexico
City) by an outside researcher (S. Ortı´z-Garcı´a, a co-author with B.S. in Ortı´z-Garcı´a et al. 2005). Maintaining each laboratory in complete isolation from the other through double-blind coding, seeds from these subsamples were germinated, emergent leaf tissue lyophilized in facilities free of cloning or PCR products, extracted and PCR-amplified, after which we compared all results for congruence. As explicitly described in our original study, we took a highly
conservative position before we would call a positive sample: samples were never scored as positive unless we had at least two repeated confirmatory results in each separate laboratory based on independent DNA extractions and amplifications.

Under these circumstances, the laboratory contamination implied by BS&JF should be expected to either appear in all samples or to be randomly distributed among families within laboratories, with a possible differentiation between the two laboratories reflecting their differing patterns of contamination. None of these scenarios occurred. Families and ⁄ or localitiesconsistently appeared with positive individuals in both laboratories while others consistently failed to show positives. We have now subjected all our results to a statistical analysis showing that the distribution pattern of positive samples among seed families or localities is indistinguishable between the two independent laboratories; i.e., overall, the frequency of positives among families matches across laboratories. The probability of this pattern emerging from a contamination source is <0.001.>There are good reasons to believe that such limited focus may place Genetic ID’s methods at a relative disadvantage for detecting transgenic DNA sequences in landrace maize. Using real-time PCR, we found that there are significant differences when comparing a hybrid transgenic commercial line against a landrace sample in the relative amplification of an internal control, a zein gene, included in the TaqMan(R) kit for the quantification of the 35S CaMV promoter sequence (see Fig. 1.)...

1 We have already pointed out the expectation of much higher levels of molecular diversity in Mexican landrace samples with a diverse genetic background compared with hybrid, commercial varieties (Pin˜eyro-Nelson et al.2009). Significant genome size variation among landraces has been reported (1700 to 3300 megabases; see comment in Walbot 2008), while lack of genetic colinearity and pervasive gene duplication have been described (Fu & Dooner 2002; Wang & Dooner 2006).

We stand by our expectation that such diversity could cause inefficiencies and variability in PCR results stemming from direct or indirect molecular effects on any of the components and conditions of PCR assays. In these conditions, a protocol with no flexibility for careful observation and follow-up of bands that are less than optimal would create ample opportunity for false negatives.

2 BS&JF dismiss any discussion of PCR inconsistencies by vaguely invoking an undefined and unaccountable protocol, thus: ‘[Genetic ID] includes at several points in its analytical procedures controls that would detect the kinds of problems cited by the authors and therefore ensure accurate reporting of results. For example, PCR inhibition tests are routinely conducted to rule out the presence of compounds ‘metabolites’) that could interfere with PCR amplification.’ Of particular interest is their claim of a standard, routine test for inhibition of the PCR assay, which should stand for any and all sources of inhibition possible from commercial and landrace materials that have a wide range of, for example, phenolic compounds in their constitution (Arnason et al. 1994); no details are given about the specific sequences used in such tests,gene dosage or specific genetic behaviour. Our own experimental routine shows this facile dismissal of the inhibition problem to be fallacious. Specifically, we showed as part of our careful method evaluation that there are indeed differences between commercial, hybrid maize varieties and landrace materials as far as their PCR performance is concerned.

3 In their critique, BS&JF deride our expectation of sequence diversity in our target sequences by claiming that such an expectation violates ‘the known and accepted norms of genetics’ (Schoel & Fagan, p. 3). BS&JF’s sole source of support is a general evaluation of the average rate of spontaneous mutation across broad taxonomic groups (Drake et al. 1998). This approach fails to recognize site-specific differences in mutation rates, especially well known in transgenic constructs where, for example, the borders of the transgenic construct are prone to sequence variation (Matsuoka et al.2002). Maize itself has highly variable mutation rates at different loci, ranging from <0.1>

Selected References

Fu H, Dooner HK (2002) Intraspecific violation of genetic colinearity and its implications in maize. Proceedings of the National Academyof Sciences USA, 99, 9573–9578.

Drake JW, Charlesworth B, Charlesworth D, Crow JF (1998) Rates of spontaneous mutation. Genetics, 148, 1667–1686. Matsuoka T, Kuribara H, Takubo K et al. (2002) Detection of recombinant DNA segments introduced to genetically modified maize (Zea mays). Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 50, 2100–2109.

Pin˜eyro-Nelson A, van Heerwaarden J, Perales HR et al. (2009) Transgenes in Mexican maize: molecular evidence and methodological considerations for GMO detection in landrace populations. Molecular Ecology, 18, 750–761.

Walbot V (2008) Meeting report: maize genome in motion. Genome Biology, 9, 303. doi:10.1186/gb-2008-9-4-303)

Wang Q, Dooner HK (2006) Remarkable variation in maize genome structure inferred from haplotype diversity at the bz locus. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 103, 47.

Fluffy revolution

2009-09-29T18:52:00.001+10:30

Financial Chronicle, India Sep 23 2009

EDITORIAL

Bt cotton farmers are raising acreage, unfazed by activist protests

It was ultimately the users of genetically modified cotton who would decide the success or failure of what has been dubbed as ‘Frankenstein’s seeds’. Despite the uproar by activists, and strong campaign by non-governmental organisations, the test was to be whether it would be beneficial to farmers. And whether they would come back to sow the seeds again after the first harvest. ...Despite doomsday scenarios painted by some well-known opponents of hybrid varieties, Bt cotton has spread to around 80 per cent of the fields in seven producing states. Had the seeds impoverished the farmers, as claimed by these activists, would they have adopted it so readily? Numbers often are answers to irrational opposition. And, in this case, they are telling. In 2002, when the Centre’s genetic engineering approval committee allowed the use of Bt cotton seeds, the country’s production was 13.6 million bales. According to the cotton advisory board, the yield per hectare was 302 kg and the total area under cotton cultivation was 7.67 million hectares. Within four years, with widespread usage of the new seed, production had more than doubled to 28 million bales. The yield has moved to 521 kg and the area under cotton has risen to 9.14 million hectares. For several years before the introduction of the new variety, cotton exports from India fluctuated between few thousands bales and one lakh bales. Within three years, exports moved to 5.8 million bales, peaking at 8.5 million in 2007-08 and earning foreign exchange worth Rs 8,366 crore. Compared with the other two top producers of cotton in the world, India’s performance is even more impressive. In 2002, the United States produced 17.2 million bales and China 25.2 million bales, according to figures published by the US department of agriculture. The spurt in India’s cotton production took it to 29 million bales in 2008-09, while the US declined to 13.52 million bales, having peaked at 23.89 in 2005-06. China produced 36. 5 million. From producing around 40 per cent of what China did, India has now touched a level of almost 70 per cent. Against the US, India’s output was 61 per cent...If the farmers are happy and are expanding the use of Bt cotton; if the spinning mills are elated by the raw material; and if markets abroad are giving a thumbs up to India’s exports, should the voices of doom have a say in the cotton future of the country? The answer is obvious.

Fluffy revolution | mydigitalfc.com

Linseed takes root in Germany

2009-09-28T18:41:00.001+10:30

Genetically modified linseed found growing illegally in Germany - The Local

Published: 11 Sep 09 07:09 CET
Online: http://www.thelocal.de/sci-tech/20090911-21853.html

Officials in Baden-Württemberg have discovered large quantities of genetically modified linseed growing illegally in the southwestern German state. It has apparently been unwittingly sold to several EU countries.

Peter Hauk, the state’s agriculture minister, said on Thursday the majority of the seeds came from Canada, which is the principal supplier of linseed to Germany.

"We assume that this discovery will affect not only Germany, but rather all of Europe" Hauk said.

Though the GM linseed is not considered dangerous to consume, it has not been approved for human consumption in the European Union.

Linseed, also known as flax, is used in a number of food products such as pastries or muesli. Linseed oil, which is a high-grade cooking oil, is also a product of the plant...

A Tribute to Norman Borlaug

2009-09-14T23:56:00.001+10:30

Norman Borlaug: The Man Who Saved More Human Lives Than Any Other Has Died
Reason Online, 13 September 2009

Ronald Bailey

Norman Borlaug, the man who saved more human lives than anyone else in history, has died at age 95. Borlaug was the Father of the Green Revolution, the dramatic improvement in agricultural productivity that swept the globe in the 1960s. For spearheading this achievement, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970. One of the great privileges of my life was meeting and talking with Borlaug many times over the past few years. In remembrance, I cite the introduction to Reason's 2000 interview with Borlaug below:

Borlaug grew up on a small farm in Iowa and graduated from the University of Minnesota, where he studied forestry and plant pathology, in the 1930s. In 1944, the Rockefeller Foundation invited him to work on a project to boost wheat production in Mexico. At the time Mexico was importing a good share of its grain. Borlaug and his staff in Mexico spent nearly 20 years breeding the high-yield dwarf wheat that sparked the Green Revolution, the transformation that forestalled the mass starvation predicted by neo-Malthusians.
In the late 1960s, most experts were speaking of imminent global famines in which billions would perish. "The battle to feed all of humanity is over," biologist Paul Ehrlich famously wrote in his 1968 bestseller The Population Bomb. "In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now." Ehrlich also said, "I have yet to meet anyone familiar with the situation who thinks India will be self-sufficient in food by 1971." He insisted that "India couldn't possibly feed two hundred million more people by 1980."

But Borlaug and his team were already engaged in the kind of crash program that Ehrlich declared wouldn't work. Their dwarf wheat varieties resisted a wide spectrum of plant pests and diseases and produced two to three times more grain than the traditional varieties. In 1965, they had begun a massive campaign to ship the miracle wheat to Pakistan and India and teach local farmers how to cultivate it properly. By 1968, when Ehrlich's book appeared, the U.S. Agency for International Development had already hailed Borlaug's achievement as a "Green Revolution."...
　

Plant biotech reduces poverty

2009-09-10T09:48:00.001+10:30

To the Editor:
A News story in your July issue highlights a controversial report from the Union of Concerned Scientists concluding that commercialized genetically modified (GM) crops have had negligible effect on food crop yields in the United States 1. Despite the increasing use of GM crops around the world 2, agricultural biotech remains contentious in some countries, especially in Europe 3. Influenced by biased reports, Europeans tend to overrate GM crop risks, while underrating the benefits 4. Claims that the technology is needed to ensure food security and poverty reduction are often considered empty promises and are dismissed as industry propaganda. This in turn prompts widespread public concerns about negative social implications in developing countries 5. Correspondence in this journal has also documented how GM crop opposition in Europe is hurting farmers and researchers 6. More seriously, through trade relations and lobbying efforts of antibiotech groups, European attitudes are spilling over to developing countries, where they crucially impede biotech developments as well 7. Here, we summarize our recent research on the socioeconomic effects of insect-resistant Bacillus thuringiensis toxin (Bt) cotton in India 8,9. In this case, at least, there is strong evidence that the trait in this crop is already contributing to poverty reduction in the subcontinent.... continues in the journal.

Nature Biotechnology
volume 27 number 9 page 803-4 September 2009
Matin Qaim, Arjunan Subramanian &
Prakash Sadashivappa

Science versus politics in Germany: The Scientists fill in what Politicians gloss over in banning corn to please the populace

2009-09-04T14:30:00.005+10:30

Statement of the ZKBS on the risk assessment of MON810 – New studies on the environmental impact of MON810
Ref. No. 6788-02-13 from July 2009

Summary
The German Central Committee on Biological Safety (ZKBS) has taken the cultivation ban on Bt maize MON810 of April 2009 as an opportunity to review its risk assessment of the cultivation of Bt maize MON810 of 2007 and to subject six new studies on the impact of Bt maize on non-target organisms to a detailed assessment. These studies mostly comprise laboratory test and have partially been drawn on as decisive factors for the cultivation ban on MON810 ordered by the BMELV (Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture and Consumer Protection). The studies have been conducted by Rosi-Marshall et al. (2007), Bøhn et al. (2008), Kramarz et al. (2007), Schmidt et al. (2009), Hofmann (2007) and Hofmann et al. (2009).

A scientific assessment of the study results has revealed that none of them confirm potential adverse effect on non-target organisms by MON810 under cultivation conditions. The assessment is also considering the fact that some of the studies are of scientifically lower quality. The conclusion of the ZKBS is in line with the expert assessment of a French author group (Ricroch et al., 2009) and the opinion of the EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) on the request for renewal MON810 (EFSA, 2009). Both documents regard the German ban as scientifically not justified.

The ZKBS states that the cultivation of MON810 has no adverse effect on the environment.

Introduction
In April 2009 the cultivation of the Bt maize line MON810 was prohibited in Germany at the instigation of the BMELV. At this point, the ZKBS was not consulted on the safety of the cultivation of MON810. Since the last assessment of the potential environmental effects associated with the cultivation of MON810, several scientific studies have been published on this issue, examining potential environmental effects that have previously not been considered but cannot be completely excluded. Some of these studies have been drawn on as decisive factors for the cultivation ban on MON810 (BVL order of 17th April, 2009 - Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety).

The biological safety of approved Bt plants, including MON810, is supported by the publication of Ricroch et al. (2009) and the opinion for renewal of MON810 application of the EFSA (EFSA, 2009). Ricroch et al. (2009) consider more than 40 publications on the potential environmental effects of Bt plants for 2008-2009 in their statement. The assessment of additional studies published from 1996 to 2008 (376 according to Ricroch et al., 2009) does not question the biological safety of Bt plants either. In its statement, the EFSA (2009) refers to more than 250 environmentally relevant publications. The safety assessment of the ZKBS of 2007 is thus basically confirmed.

This statement of the ZKBS predominantly refers to the studies specifically selected to justify the cultivation ban. These are six publications on five different subject areas:

1.Effects of Bt maize pollen and crop residues on water organisms (Rosi-Marshall et al., 2007)
2.Effects of Bt maize flour on water fleas (Bøhn et al., 2008)
3.Effects of Bt maize plant residues on healthy and nematode-infected snails (Kramarz et al., 2007)
4.Effects of the Bt proteins Cry1Ab and Cry3Bb in feeding tests with larvae of the two-spotted ladybird (Schmidt et al., 2009)
5.Pollen deposition from maize fields to adjacent biotopes (Hofmann et al., 2009)

In view of the significance of these studies for the cultivation ban on MON810, a statement is made to the contents of each of them.

1. Rosi-Marshall et al., 2007
The authors measured the dispersion and transport of pollen and crop residues of Bt and non-Bt maize fields near headwater stream ecosystems. In addition, pollen and maize residues expressing Bt protein were fed in laboratory tests to detritivore larvae of the Trichoptera species Lepidostoma liba as well as to filtering larvae of the Trichoptera species Hydropsyche borealis. The authors concluded that the intake of Bt maize plant material led to a lower growth rate of the L. liba and the intake of Bt maize pollen to an increased mortality rate of the H. borealis.
The use of Trichoptera larvae as test organisms for the Lepidoptera-specific Cry1Ab protein is understandable, as Trichopterae are relatively closely related to butterflies. Thus, effects of the Cry1Ab protein on Trichoptera could be possible.
The work of Rosi-Marshall et al. (2007), however, exhibits substantial methodological shortcomings. For instance, the source of the Bt maize pollen and the non-Bt maize pollen is not indicated. The type, line and isogenity of the Bt maize inputs remain unclear as well. Dose-effect relations, as usual for toxicological examinations, are not recorded for the Bt protein.
In addition, the authors failed to measure the Bt protein content of pollen and maize residues during the examination of the dispersion into surface water near fields. No clear difference between the decomposition rates of Bt and non-Bt maize waste was observed. Furthermore, information on the possible exposure of the Trichoptera larvae to the Bt protein contained in headwater stream ecosystems is missing. However, from the authors data contained in a figure on the dispersion of Bt pollen into waters and the known contents of Bt proteins in maize pollen one can estimate that the annual dispersion is extremely low (9 - 90 ng/m2 water surface). With a maximum of 8 g/m2, the annual amount of dispersed plant material can also be regarded as low. In both cases, the respective Bt protein amounts can be regarded as negligible for Trichoptera larvae even in case of short-term occurrence of the sources of exposure (blooming period) and in view of the protein degradation that starts immediately (Douville et al., 2005, 2007).
Feeding tests with the Trichoptera species L. liba also raise questions. The origin of the Bt maize leaves and the non-Bt maize leaves is not indicated either. It is certain, however, that not the leaves of an isogenic maize line have been used as non-Bt variant. This was substantiated by the study of Saxena & Stotzky (2001), who found a higher lignin content of between 33 and 97% in the leaves of the isogenic Bt line. In the authors’ opinion, the higher lignin content deteriorates the nutritional quality of the leaves. Thus, Rosi-Marshall et al. (2007) selected another maize line with an alleged lignin content and C/N ratio similar to that of Bt maize. Quantitative data on the constituents (lignin, C/N or others) of the maize plants tested in the laboratory, however, are not specified. Due to the missing data on the origin and the characteristics of the plant material used, it cannot be excluded that the Bt and non-Bt pollen and the Bt and non-Bt leaves did not only differ with respect to the presence of Bt protein. In addition, the concentration of the Bt protein in the leave material has not been determined. The leave amounts administered during the feeding tests have not been indicated either (Quote: "Leaves were added to aquaria as needed.").
The missing standardisation is a crucial deficit, which above all applies to the laboratory tests conducted by the authors. Irrespective of this fact, the ZKBS attaches little importance to the observed in vitro effects on Trichoptera, although possibly large amounts of Bt material might be dispersed into waters. This assessment is based on the following reasons: The natural exposure of Trichoptera larvae to Bt protein in headwater stream ecosystems adjacent to fields is limited both with regard to space (distance to waters and distribution of maize fields in the landscape) and time (short blooming period). Furthermore, the potential exposure of water organisms is substantially limited by the small amount and the low concentration of Bt protein in the plant material as well as its comparatively rapid degradation in waters.
The mortality effects observed in the laboratory have only been found in case of unnaturally high exposure and for one species only. Although the authors verified a significantly higher mortality rate of the Trichoptera species H. borealis when fed with Bt maize pollen compared to non-Bt maize pollen, the pollen amount was two to three times higher than the maximum annual pollen input into waters measured. During the experiments with the Trichoptera species L. liba, no increased mortality rate could be observed when fed with Bt maize plant material, but a reduced growth rate.
In view of the temporarily limited exposure period in nature (blooming period of maize) in line with the mostly low Bt concentration in natural habitats the reduced growth rate demonstrated in the laboratory can also be classified as non-relevant environmental effect.

Conclusion
The ZKBS states that the causal correlation between the Bt protein or the genetic alteration and the negative effects on Trichoptera larvae has not been sufficiently demonstrated in the publication of Rosi-Marshall et al. (2007)..The study has also been criticised by other authors with regards to its experimental execution and the conclusions drawn (Beachy et al., 2008; Parrott, 2008). The authors themselves admit that they cannot exclude that the difference between the maize varieties used and not the Bt protein may have caused the observed effects (Rosi-Marshall et al., 2008). In addition, the ZKBS states that the results obtained by Rosi-Marshall et al. (2007) within the scope of laboratory experiments cannot be regarded as relevant, when considering the estimated exposure under field conditions. This conclusion has also been considered by the authors in their reply to critical comments (Rosi-Marshall et al., 2008).

2. Bøhn et al., 2008
Following the OECD directive 211 for toxicological Daphnia tests (OECD, 1998), Bøhn et al. (2008) fed Bt and non-Bt maize flour to the test organism "large water flea" (Daphnia magna). The goal of the study was to examine whether or not the feeding of Bt maize limits the fitness of water fleas. For this purpose, the survival rate, growth and reproduction were examined. The water fleas reacted to the feeding of Bt maize flour with reduced survival rates, earlier reproduction and reduced egg deposition. The authors interpreted the results as fitness disadvantage and a direct effect of the feeding with Bt maize flour.
The ZKBS notes, that the study of Bøhn et al. (2008) exhibits a series of severe deficits.
The - in particular exclusive - feeding of maize flour in toxicological studies with aquatic non-target organisms is unusual. Although water fleas are capable of surviving with a great variety of food sources, however, the aquaculture with maize flour as the only nutrient constitutes an unbalanced diet and a completely unnatural exposure of water fleas to Bt protein.
This is reflected in the test results. The extremely late maturation period of the water fleas (50% maturation only on the 17. - 18. day) even observed in the reference group (non-Bt maize) as well as their unusually high mortality rate are clear indications for unnatural, species-inappropriate cultural conditions. According to the OECD directive 211, growth and reproduction studies on water fleas should not last longer than 21 days, as the natural mortality rate usually considerably increases after about 28 days. Bøhn et al. (2008), however, doubled the test period (42 days) and obtained different data on the reproduction of the test animals in the second half of the test. Thus, the study in no way complies with the OECD quality requirements on Daphnia tests.
Another key weakness of the study is the plant material used. The used ground maize grains of one genetically modified (hybrid of MON810) and one reference maize line (a local variety of the Philippines) were harvested at the Philippines in 2003. There were no information provided about the conditions under which the material was cultivated (plant phytosanitary measures, pest infestation and the like). The nutritional composition or the equivalence of the used Bt and non-Bt maize flours has not been examined either (e.g. nutrient or mycotoxin contents). The evaluation and interpretation of the observed differences would only have been possible by using clearly characterised maize varieties or by extending the studies (e.g. by feeding studies with further maize varieties of clear origin and treatment). Whether or not the observed effects can be traced back to the presence or absence of Bt protein remains unclear.
The authors recognized the earlier reproduction as a consequence of the feeding with Bt maize flour. They concluded that increased stress caused the premature reproduction in case of the water flea fed with Bt maize flour. According to the OECD directive 211, however, rather a late or reduced reproduction is to be considered as stress indicator in Daphnia tests.
The differences in the total number of all eggs produced as observed by Bøhn et al. (2008) are to be classified as minor, when taking the test conditions into account (altogether 80 eggs during Bt treatment and 96 during non-Bt treatment). The reason for the relatively small quantitative difference must be seen in the strongly deviating results of the repeated tests. While two of three repeated tests yielded an increased reproduction rate using the Bt maize variant the third test variant resulted in an extremely low number of eggs per female. This again points to technical problems during experiment.
Furthermore, the authors determined a reduced survival rate of the water fleas fed with Bt maize flour. These data are not convincing in the light of the unnatural and unbalanced nutritional situation. Tests in line with requested conditions for standard tests would presumably have led to reliable results. Also, the inclusion of further reference maize lines would probably have allowed for distinguishing between the effects of the Bt protein and the impacts of the diet as such.

Conclusion
In summary, the ZKBS concludes that the study of Bøhn et al. (2008) provides no reliable and meaningful results due to the improper test conditions (deviation from the OECD directive for tests with water fleas, species-inappropriate nutrition of the test animals, use of uncharacterised maize samples, poor test execution and evaluation). The study is not suitable for questioning the previous risk assessment of MON810. In order to examine the suspected hazardousness of the Bt protein to water fleas, active Bt protein would have to have been used directly or a uniform, species-appropriate feed material, e.g. "spiked" with Bt protein. The publication lacks such clear-cut test approaches.

3. Kramarz et al., 2007
Kramarz et al. (2007) fed the snail Helix aspersa with plant material of MON810 maize and an isogenic reference maize line. Furthermore, the snails were additionally infected with snail-pathogenic nematodes, as snails are frequently parasitised in the field. The Bt maize material fed had no negative impact on the mortality rate or the growth of the snails; however, the growth of the snails was slightly limited after an additional infection with nematodes during treatment with the largest nematode concentration, compared to the treatment without nematodes. The mortality rate, however, had not changed at all.
The study exhibits a clear experimental design; however, it cannot be distinguished whether the observed effects can be traced back to the Bt protein or the differences of the maize lines. Thus, in future tests several conventional maize varieties should be used as references, so that variety differences can be distinguished from direct Bt effects (comp. the internet page of BMBF on safety research).

Conclusion
Synergetic effects between several, simultaneously effecting stress factors are known in ecotoxicology. This aspect has been a major subject in biological safety research for a long time. Suggestions of the improvement of laboratory test procedures considering such aspects are being discussed (see Duan et al., 2008a; EFSA, 2008).
A solid, environmental risk assessment of MON810 by the ZKBS, however, cannot merely include results from laboratory studies, such as this one. Results of field tests, such as e.g. the ones that have been conducted by the BMBF for many years within the scope of the safety research of genetically modified organisms (GMO), are of special significance. Only in the field effects of GMO can be examined under conditions like in commercial cultivation. Apart from weather and nutritional conditions, a great number of factors with disadvantageous potential, e.g. diseases, the use of pesticides or with advantageous ones, e.g. rapid drop of Bt toxins, avoidance of pathogens and pesticides has an impact on non-target organisms.
Against the background of the minor effect obtained under extreme conditions (high parasite occurrence) and a missing dose-effect relationship, the risk of MON810 for the snail population is regarded by the ZKBS as minor.

4. Schmidt et al., 2009
The authors conducted laboratory toxicity tests with the Bt proteins Cry1Ab and Cry3Bb as well as the expression vector pBD10 at various stages of development (L1-L4) of the two-spotted ladybird Adalia bipunctata. The ladybird larvae were fed with the eggs of the flour moth (Ephestia kuehniella), which were sprayed with solutions containing the Bt protein or the DNA of the expression vector pBD10. The Bt protein solutions had concentrations of 0, 5, 25 and 50 µg/ml; the pBD10 DNA was applied in the concentrations of 0, 10, 50 and 100 µg/ml. In case of the test variants sprayed with Cry1Ab and Cry3Bb solutions, the mortality rate increased significantly compared to the reference. The expression vector had no effect. According to the authors, the observed damage of the ladybird larvae could be directly traced back to the activated Bt proteins. The authors called the previous scientific view on the host specificity and the mechanism of action of Cry-proteins into question particularly for the Cry1Ab in view of the effect on the two-spotted ladybird.
The ZKBS states that the study exhibits substantial deficits regarding the material used, the execution of the test and the interpretation of the results, through which the correctness of the results and the statements are principally questioned:
•The description of the test set-up does not indicate how the Bt protein solutions were applied to the Ephestia eggs and how it was ensured that the ladybird larvae of the respective stages were exposed to the same Cry-concentrations every time the test was repeated. The level and the homogeneity of the Cry-concentration in the larva feed cannot be estimated. The scientifically sound test execution is thus not given and a test repetition by third parties prevented.
•Neither the concentration by means of quantitative ELISA nor the biological activity by means of biotests were examined in the Bt protein solutions used (see e.g. Duan et al., 2008b). Schmidt et al. (2009) used immunostrips (Agidia Inc.) for the mere qualitative identification of the Bt protein in the solutions. In the view of the ZKBS this is not sufficient for the realistic, scientifically correct estimation of the exposure of the larvae to the active Bt proteins.
•The untypical effects of the Bt proteins on the test animals may be due to some hazardous constituents of the protein preparations. In order to be able to exclude this, inactivated samples of the Bt protein solutions (e.g. by means of chemical or heat treatment) would have to have been used as references during the experiments.
•The ZKBS concludes that the methodical problems lead to the unclear and/or inconsistent results of the study; the effects observed are untypical of scientific laboratory toxicity tests under controlled conditions in several respects.
◦Clear dose-effect relations were obtained neither for Cry1Ab nor for Cry3Bb toxin. For instance, the mortality rate even decreased at the highest concentration stage, compared to the medium concentration stage. The authors cannot explain this effect.
◦The L1-larvae exhibited unusually high mortality rates (up to 21% without the feeding of Bt and 44% with Bt). Occasionally, there was no difference between the mortality rates of the reference and the highest concentration stage (tests with Cry3Bb). In contrast, the L2 to L4 stages were largely unaffected.
◦In contrast to the mortality rate, there was no difference between the references and the variants fed with Cry-protein solutions regarding the development periods of the larval stages, above all of the L1-larvae. At least it would have been expected that the development period of the L1-larvae is prolonged due to the postulated toxic effect.
•The ZKBS notes that the erratic evaluation of results by the authors raises doubts in the careful execution the study. The source AGBIOS 2008 quoted by the authors states a Bt concentration of 0.09 µg/g in MON810 pollen; however, the authors use a value of 7.9-10.3 µg/g for the Bt protein content in MON810 pollen, i.e. a value 100 times too high, and thus overestimate the actual environmental exposure. In the view of the ZKBS, the high concentrations used in the study bear no biologically relevant relation to the actual Bt protein content in MON810 pollen (even when considering the fluctuation range in biological systems), to which ladybird larvae could be exposed. It is to be pointed out that the staple food of ladybird larvae and adults is aphids which do not take in Bt proteins from Bt plants, according to Raps et al. (2001).
•As a matter of principle, in a scientific work the authors’ own results are related to the current level of knowledge. In this work, however, the results of other laboratory and field tests on the effects of Cry-proteins on ladybirds are not even mentioned, which do not support the results of Schmidt et al. (2009), neither for Adalia bipunctata (Wold et al., 2001) nor for other ladybird species (Pilcher et al., 1997; Jasinski et al., 2003; Candolfi et al., 2004); Dively & Rose, 2004; Bai et al., 2005; Lundgren & Wiedenmann, 2005; Poza et al., 2005; Álvarez-Alfageme et al., 2008).

Conclusion
The results of the laboratory study, which supposedly reveal lethal effects of Bt proteins without a clear dose-effect relation at simultaneous lack of impacts on the development and the weight increase of the test animals, are not solid without independent scientific verification considering numerous deficits in the study. Furthermore, several laboratory and field tests do not confirm the results of Schmidt et al. (2009). Even if taking the aspect of precautionary safety assessment into account, the ZKBS sees no reason to change its previous risk assessment of the environmental effects of MON810 due to the study of Schmidt et al. (2009).

5. Hofmann, 2007 and Hofmann et al., 2009
These tests are not available as publications in scientific journals but as reports at the BfN (Federal Agency for Nature Conservation). The study of Hofmann (2007) presents results of the deposition of maize pollen, collected by means of technical pollen samplers. According to the authors, the data (pollen collection starting at the margin of maize fields and extending to different distances) indicates that maize pollen is deposited in much larger amounts than assumed so far.
The ZKBS states that the data of Hoffmann (2007) do not provide any fundamentally new scientific insights. Although the author detected large pollen amounts at first view, this is due to the long measuring periods, reaching over the entire blooming period of maize. As the author himself writes, the results of other works provide similar deposition values, when extrapolated to the entire blooming period (e.g. Wraight et al., 2000; Pleasant et al., 2001; Wolt et al., 2003; Lang et al., 2004; Felke & Langenbruch, 2005; Shirai & Takahashi, 2005).
In the study of Hofmann et al. (2009), the authors developed what is referred to as "worst-case scenarios" for pollen deposition, which are supposed to apply to special weather conditions and unfavourable topographic conditions. The results demonstrate that under certain conditions the deposited pollen amount may theoretically be higher than previously determined by means of the pollen sampling measurements (Hofmann, 2007).

Conclusion
Pollen density data measured by means of pollen samplers are not suggestive of the real exposure of non-target organisms in natural surfaces. In order to determine the exposure of host plants relevant to non-target organisms, climate factors, such as e.g. wind and rain, the surface structure of leaves and host plants as well as the structure (frequency of the specific host plants) and the architecture of the vegetation layer are to be taken into account. In addition, the biology of the non-target organisms has strong influence. Phenology, feeding behaviour, development-dependent exposure and sensitivity to the Bt protein are of central significance for a realistic risk assessment of non-target organisms. As a matter of principle, the ZKBS additionally considers the occasionally occurring higher exposure due to large pollen amounts in its risk assessments. On the other hand, the ZKBS also includes in its assessments the especially low Bt concentration detected in pollen of the maize line MON810 as well as possible impacts of the weather and the vegetation structure on the exposure of non-target organisms (see statement of the ZKBS of July 2007); this point has also especially been taken into account in the EFSA statement on MON810 (EFSA, 2009).
Bearing in mind the influence variables described and insights available at population level, the ZKBS sees no specific hazard posed to non-target organisms, even if in individual cases these may be exposed to higher pollen amounts for a short period of time than expected on the average. The tests of Hofmann (2007) and Hofmann et al. (2009) do not provide any new indications for the potential hazard of non-target organisms but rather confirm the risk assessment approach of the ZKBS.

Final Conclusion
Considering all scientific information available and keeping the precautionary principle in mind, the ZKBS concludes that the cultivation of the maize line MON810 poses no danger to the environment. The risk assessment contained in the statement of the ZKBS of 2007 is thus confirmed, taking the current publications into account.

Literature
Alvarez-Alfageme F., Ferry N., Castanera P., Ortego F., Gatehouse A.M.R. (2008) Prey mediated effects of Bt maize on fitness and digestive physiology of the red spider mite predator Stethoruspunctiltum Weise (Coleoptera: Coccineliidae). Transgenic Res., DOI: 10.1007/s 11248-008-9177-4.
Bai Y.Y., Jiang M.X., Cheng JA. (2005) Effects of transgenic rice pollen on fitness of Propylea japonica. J. Pest Sci., 78,123-128.
Beachy R.N., Fedoroff N.V., Goldberg R.B., McHughen A. (2008) The burden of proof: A response to Rosi-Marshall et al.. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., 105, 7, E9.
Bonn T.T Primicerio R., Hessen D.O., T. Traavik (2008) Reduced fitness of Daphnia magna fed a Bt-transgenic maize variety. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 55, 584 -592.
Candolfi M.P., Brown K., Grimm C, Reber B., Schmidli H. (2004) A faunistic approach to assesspotential side-effects of genetically modified Bt-corn on non-target arthropods under fieldconditions. Biocon. Sci. Techno!., 14, 129-170.
Dively G.P., Rose R. (2004) Effects of Bt transgenic and conventional insecticide control on the non-target natural enemy Community in sweet com. 1st International Symposium on Biological Control of Arthropods, 265-274.
Douville M., Gagne F., Masson L., McKay J., Blaise C. (2005) Tracking the source of Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ab endotoxin in the environment. Biochem. Syst. Ecol., 33, 219-232.
Douville M., Gagne F., Blaise C, Andre C. (2007) Occurrence and persistence of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) and transgenic Bt com Cry1Ab gene from an aquatic environment. Ecotox. Environ. Safety, 66, 195 - 203.
Duan J.J., Marvier M., Huesing J., Dively G., Huang Z.Y. (2008a) A meta-analysis of effects of Bt crops on honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae). PLoS ONE 1, e1415.
Duan J.J., Teixeira D., Huesing J.E., Jiang C. (2008b) Assessing the risk to nontarget organisms from Bt com resistant to com rootworms (Coleoptera: ChrysomeJidae): Tier-I testing with Orius insidiosus (Heteroptera: Anthocoridae). Environ. Entomol, 37, 838-844.
EFSA (2008) Environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants - challenges and approaches. EFSA Scientific Colloquium Summary Report 8, 1-159.
EFSA (2009) Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms on applications (EFSA-GMORX-MON810) for the renewal of authorisation for the continued marketing of (1) existing food and food ingredients produced from genetically modified insect resistant maize MON810; (2) feed consisting of and/or containing maize MON810, including the use of seed for cultivation; and of (3) food and feed additives, and feed materials produced from maize MON810, all under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Monsanto. The EFSA Journal, 1149, 1-84.
Felke M., Langenbruch G.A. (2005) Auswirkungen des Pollens von transgenem Bt-Mais auf ausge-wählte Schmetterlingslarven. BfN-Skripten 157, 1-143.
Hofmann F. (2007) Kurzgutachten zur Abschätzung der Maispollendeposition in Relation zur Entfer-nung von Maispollenqueilen mittels technischem Pollensammler PMF. BfN, Bonn. www.bfn.de/fileadmin/MDB/documents/themen/agrogentechnik/07-05-
31_Gutachten_Pollendeposition_end.pdf
Hofmann F. Janicke L., Janicke U., Wächter RM Kuhn U. (2009) Modellrechnung zur Ausbreitung von Maispollen unter Worst-Case-Annahmen mit Vergleich von Freilandmessdaten. BfN Bonn, http://www.bfn.de/fileadmin/MDB/documents/service/Hofmann_et_al_2009_Maispollen_Worst Case_ModelI.pdf
Jasinski J.R., Eisley J.B., Young C.E., Kovach J., Wilson H. (2003) Select nontarget arthropod abundance in transgenic and nontransgenic field crops in Ohio. Environ. Entomol. 32, 407-413.
Kramarz P.E., De Vaufleury A., Zygmunt P.M.S., Verdun C. (2007) Increased response to cadmium and Bacillus thuringiensis maize toxicity in the snail Helix aspersa infected by the nematode Phasmarhabditis hermaphrodita. Environ. Tox. Chem., 26, 73-79.
Lang, A., Ludy C, Vojtech E. (2004). Dispersion and deposition of Bt maize pollen in field margins. J.
Plant Dis. Prot, 111,417-428.
Lundgren J.G., Wiedenmann R.N. (2005) Tritrophic interactions among Bt (Cry3Bb1) com, aphid prey, and the predator Coleomegilla maculata (Coleoptera: Coccineilidae). Environ. Entomol., 34, 1621-1625.
OECD (1998) Daphnia magna reproduction test. OECD Guidelines for Testing of Chemicals, 211, 1-21.
Parrott W. (2008) Study of Bt impact on caddisflies overstates its conclusions: response to Rosi-Marshall et al. Proc. Nat. Acad. Page 105, 7, E10.
Pilcher C.P., Obrycki J.J., Rice M.E., Lewis L.C. (1997) Preimaginal development, survival and field abundance of insect predators on transgenic Bacillus thuringiensis com. Environ. Entomol., 26, 446-454.
Pleasants J.M., Hellmich R.L., Diveiy G.P., Sears M.K., Stanely-Horn D.E., Mattila H.R., Foster J.E., Clark T.L., Jones G.D. (2001) Com pollen deposition on milkweeds in and near cornfields. Proc. Nat. Acad. Page 98, 11919-11924.
Poza de la M., Pons X. Farinös G.P., Lopez C, Ortego F., Eizaguirre M., Castanera P., Albajes R. (2005) Impact of farm-scale Bt maize on abundance of predatory arthropods in Spain. Crop Prot, 24, 677-684.
Raps A., Kehr J., Gugerli P., MoarW.J., Bägler F., Hilbeck A. (2001) Immunological analysis of phloem sap of Bacillus thuringiensis com and of the nontarget herbivore Rhopaiosiphum padi (Homoptera: Aphididae) for the presence of Cry1Ab. Mol. Ecol., 10, 525-533.
Ricroch A., Berge J.B., Kuntz M. (2009) Is the German Suspension of MON810 maize cultivation scientifically justified? Transgenic Res.,
http://www.springerlink.corn/content/r6052757667ng364/fulltext.pdf.
Rosi-Marshall E.J., Tank J.L., Royer T.V., Whiles M.R., Evans-White M., Chambers C, Griffiths N.A. (2007). Toxins in transgenic crop by-products may affect headwater stream ecosystems. Proc. Nat. Acad. Page 104, 204-208.
Rosi-Marshall E.J., Tank J.L., Royer T.V., Whiles M.R. (2008) Reply to Beachy et al. and Parrott: Study indicates Bt com may affect caddisflies. Proc. Nat Acad. Page 105, E11.
Saxena D., Stotzky G. (2001) Bt com has a higher lignin content than non-Bt com. Amer. J. Bot, 88, 1704-1706.
Schmidt J.E.U., Braun C.U., Whitehouse L.P., Hilbeck A. (2009) Effects of activated Bt transgene
products (Cry1Ab, Cry3Bb) on immature stages of the ladybird Adalia bipunetata in laboratory ecotoxicity testing. Arch. Environ. Contam. Toxicol., 56, 221-228.
Shirai Y., Takahashi M. (2005) Effects of transgenic Bt com pollen on a non-target lycaenid butterfly, Pseudozizeeria maha. Appl. Entomol. Zool., 40, 151-159.
Wold S.J., Burkness E.C., Hutchison W.D., Venette R.C. (2001) In-field monitoring of beneficial insect populations in transgenic com expressing a Bacillus thuringiensis toxin. J. Entomol. Page 36, 177-187.
Wolt J.D., Peterson R.K.D, Bystrak P., Meade T. (2003) A screening level approach for nontarget insect risk assessment: Transgenic Bt com pollen and the monarch butterfly (Lepidoptera: Danaidae). Environ. Entomol., 32, 237-246.
Wraight C.L., Zangerl A.R., Carroll M.J., Berenbaum M.R. (2000) Absence of toxicity of Bacillus thuringiensis pollen to black swallowtails under field conditions. Proc. Nat. Acad. Page 97, 7700-7703.
ZKBS (2007) Stellungnahme der ZKBS zum Bescheid des BVL (Teilweises Ruhen der Inverkehrbrin-gens-Genehmigung des gentechnisch veränderten Maises MON810) vom 27. April 2007. Az. 6788-02-13 vom Juli 2007. http://www.bvl.bund.de/nn_1071104/DE/06_Gentechnik/093_ZKBS/01_Allg_Stellungnahmen/04_pflanzen/Mon810.html
to the topPrinter friendly versionRecommend this page
© BVLlast change: 2.9.2009

Two years before golden paddies bloom

2009-09-01T23:04:00.000+10:30

Golden Rice to hit market by 2011
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
CheckBiotech

A genetically modified variety of rice called the Golden Rice will hit the market by 2011. This rice is developed to produce a carotenoid called beta carotene which gives the rice an organgish-yellow hue, and hence its name. Moreover, the beta carotene becomes vitamin A when processed by the body, according to a report from Manila, Philippines. As per WHO statistics, four out of 10 children aged between six months and five years, and three out of 10 school children show symptoms of vitamin A deficiency.

Feed costs likely to push meat prices up even more because of zero-tolerance GM policy in the EU

2009-08-27T08:26:00.001+10:30

Feed prices up now EU sticks to GM-zero tolerance policy

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

The concession that feed groups have been clamouring for to restart US soybean shipments to Europe has been put on hold raising the prospect of rocketing feed prices.

The European Commission has sidelined a proposal to soften its zero tolerance on imports of unapproved genetically modified crops, for fear of the controversy such a measure would cause, an insider told Agrimoney.com.
"Even if it was agreed at commission level, the difference of opinion [over GM] in EU member states would make this very difficult," the source said. "It has been put on the backburner for the foreseeable future."
The move dashes the hopes of feed groups who had viewed some tolerance of genetically modified crops as the best way of lifting the threat of a "total loss" of US soybean imports to Europe after traces of an unapproved GM corn were found in shipments to Germany and Spain...

Feed prices up now EU sticks to GM-zero tolerance policy | Checkbiotech

Without GM protection against corn rootworm a crop disaster scenario is unfolding in Northern Italian cornfields

2009-08-24T07:37:00.001+10:30

Schweizerischer Bauernverband: Maiswurzelbohrer macht Lombardei zum Katastrophengebiet

Corn rootworm turns Lombardy into a disaster area
11.08.2009 -- The corn rootworm has move this year in northern Italy with great damage. Already in the Lombardy region crop losses of around one million tonnes have been reported.
This is already 30 percent of this corn production in the Po Valley that have been destroyed. Agra-Europe reports that Lombardy is officially a disaster area. Meanwhile, the pest of the maize crop has spread to the regions of Piedmont, Veneto and Fraul-Venezia-Giulia . The Roman Agriculture Ministry has therefore under EU rules introduced quarantine measures arranged for the quarantine zone...

Iron bio-fortified rice announced in Zurich. Less anemia now among poor people, we hope.

2009-08-21T09:06:00.004+10:30

(Image: flickr)

Glimmer of hope in fight against iron deficiency

Press releas from ETH.
Author: MM Published: 21.07.09

Scientists at ETH Zurich have developed rice plants that contain six times more iron in polished rice kernels. To accomplish this, the researchers transferred two plant genes into an existing rice variety. In the future, the high-iron rice could help to combat iron deficiency, especially in developing countries in Africa and Asia.

Peeled rice, also called polished rice, does not have enough iron to satisfy the daily requirement, even if consumed in large quantities. According to the World Health Organization, approximately two billion people suffer from iron deficiency. They tire easily, experience problems in metabolizing harmful substances in their bodies and eventually suffer from anemia. Women and children are particularly affected in developing countries, where rice is the major staple food. Peeled rice, also called polished rice, does not have enough iron to satisfy the daily requirement, even if consumed in large quantities. For many people, a balanced diet or iron supplements are often unaffordable.

Rice actually has a lot of iron, but only in the seed coat. Because unpeeled rice quickly becomes rancid in tropical and subtropical climates, however, the seed coat – along with the precious iron – has to be removed for storage. Researchers working with Christof Sautter and Wilhelm Gruissem in the laboratory of plant biotechnology at ETH Zurich have now succeeded in increasing the iron content in polished rice by transferring two plant genes into an existing rice variety. Their work was published today in the online edition of „Plant Biotechnology Journal".

Genes help to mobilize and store iron
The rice plants express the two genes to produce the enzyme nicotianamin synthase, which mobilizes iron, and the protein ferritin, which stores iron. Their synergistic action allows the rice plant to absorb more iron from the soil and store it in the rice kernel. The product of nicotianamine synthase, called nicotianamin, binds the iron temporarily and facilitates its transportation in the plant. Ferritin acts as a storage depot for iron in both plants and humans. The researchers controlled the genes introduced in such a way that nicotianamin synthase is expressed throughout the rice plant, but ferritin only in the rice kernel. Together, the expression of the genes has a positive impact on iron accumulation in the rice kernel and increases the iron content more than six-fold compared to the original variety.

No negative impacts anticipated
The ETH scientists are excited about the new rice variety. The prototypes behave normally in the greenhouse and show no signs of possible negative effects. «Next we will have to test whether the rice plants also perform well in the field under agronomical conditions», says Wilhelm Gruissem. The ETH Professor does not expect the plants to have a negative impact on the environment. It is unlikely that they will deplete the soil of iron, as iron is the most abundant metallic element in it.

Distribution to farmers still many years away
The rice plants will have to undergo many greenhouse and field tests for biosafety and agronomic performance before the high-iron rice varieties eventually become available to farmers. The current prototypes are unsuitable for agricultural production yet. Although the new rice variety already has an iron content that is nutritionally relevant, Gruissem wants to increase it further. After all, many people who suffer from iron deficiency can only afford one meal per day. If the scientists manage to increase iron in the rice kernel up to twelve-fold, one rice meal will be sufficient to satisfy the daily iron requirement.

The experience with the high-vitamin A „Golden Rice", which was developed at ETH Zurich in collaboration with researchers at the University of Freiburg (Germany), has shown that it takes years before genetically engineered rice can actually be planted by farmers. The regulatory hurdles and costs involved in making genetically modified plants available to agriculture and consumers are very high. The ETH scientists aim to make their high-iron rice plants available to small-scale and self-sufficient farmers free of charge.

Original:
Rice endosperm iron biofortification by targeted and synergistic action of nicotianamine synthase and ferritin.
Wirth, Judith, Poletti, Susanna,Aeschlimann, Beat, Yakandawala, Nandadeva, Drosse, Benedikt,Osorio, Sonia, Tohge, Takayuki, Fernie, Alisdair R.,Günther, Detlef, Gruissem, Wilhelm , Sautter, Christof
Plant Biotechnology Journal; Sep2009, Vol. 7 Issue 7, p631-644, 14p, 6 graphs

Rumble in the Jungle between Monsanto and DuPont

2009-08-20T07:37:00.001+10:30

EXCLUSIVE: Monsanto chief accuses rival DuPont of deceit - Washington Times

Originally published 04:45 a.m., August 18, 2009, updated 12:41 p.m., August 18, 2009
Chuck Neubauer , The Washington Times

The chairman of agribusiness giant Monsanto demanded Monday that his counterpart at DuPont - his firm's leading competitor in the seed business - appoint a special committee to investigate what he said was a pattern of covert attacks on Monsanto's business practices by DuPont.

Hugh Grant, chairman of Monsanto Co., accused DuPont of using third parties to attack Monsanto, activities which he said "were misleading to the public and a serious breach of business ethics far beyond honest competitor behavior."

He made the request for an investigation by a committee of DuPont's independent directors in a letter to Charles O. Holliday Jr., chairman of E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co.

He accused DuPont of being "dishonest, disingenuous and downright deceitful."

An attorney for Monsanto said the tactics used against his company included forged letters to Congress, misinformation, attempts to improperly influence public officials and support for a special interest group which opposed Monsanto.

A DuPont spokesman said the company had not received the letter... continues at link

Why Europeans are shunning innovation.

2009-08-18T21:47:00.001+10:30

EurActiv.com - Risk consultant: EU R&D hostage of 'eco-religious fundamentalism' | EU - European Information on Science & Research

David Zaruk at Euroactiv 29 July 2009

Historically, Europeans and Americans see nature differently. This affects the way they see the world. Americans see themselves historically as pioneers pushing westward and going out to conquer nature. Meanwhile, Europeans were building walls around their cities to protect themselves from nature. In the EU, the view is that conquering nature is not something that man should be doing. This precautionary preoccupation persists today.

Science, from the time of the Renaissance, was originally considered as the 'saviour' to fight nature and stop nature from destroying yields and diseases, etc. This was the case until after WWII, when science began to move from its focus on discovery and problem-solving to being progress driven (more technological).

After we more or less 'conquered' nature, industry began to come up with innovations to make life more comfortable (and marketable) and a lot of that science was technology-oriented and thus more expensive. Science was no longer perceived as a saviour (except for rare occurrences of public vulnerability to nature, like the emergence of AIDS or H1N1), but a convenience.

And nature is no longer seen as the vicious beast it used to be. It is now seen more as the polar bear adrift on a melting glacier, and it is science and its technological advances that caused all the carbon increase and global warming. Our view of the role of science has changed now from a force of good to protect us from the evils of nature to, suddenly, a force or technological machine that big businesses brought in and which is destroying and polluting nature. And perhaps nature is going to take its revenge on us in a way with global warming, which is going to be cataclysmic.

And here we are talking about a new religion, the eco-religion. We've killed our Christian religion, but man can't live without one. So rather than God we have Gaia and a certain sense of purpose in our lives to save the world. Ecological rituals to recycle and to try to lessen our ecological footprint are all very strong religious symbols which add meaning to our lives. We have an Armageddon principle of climate change, and of course good and evil depends on whether we live our lives sustainably or not. So it is a religion.

I don't mean to be cynical about this, as religion can be quite good. But religion also tends to fight science - especially if you are creationist. And a lot of environmentalists look at science as a threat, as did the Catholic Church. There are interesting parallels between these, then.

Secondly, precaution was created as a tool for policy, particularly by those who think science has gone too far, and if we are not sure where the research is going, perhaps we should opt for precaution.

There are different definitions of precautionary principle, and here we see where science and policy break down. The first definition was formulated in the Rio Earth Summit Declaration, at a time when scientists started to talk about climate change and when the idea of sustainable development was introduced. It is referred to as the triple negative: 'If you don't have enough information on something, it does not give you a reason to not do something'. At Rio, there was not enough evidence to prove that the world was warming (or that it was due to human activities), but this was not enough of a reason not to take action to cut emissions. This definition of precaution supported science as a policy tool.

Another definition was set out by the European Commission in their 2000 Communication, which basically said: "If you don't have enough information on something, you should withhold judgement until you get more."

The third definition was formulated by the European Environment Agency and forcefully espoused by its science policy head David Gee, previously an environmental activist and director of Friends of the Earth UK: "Until you have enough information to be certain about something, you should take precautions". This definition is the most widely used in Europe now. This definition switched the burden of proof – science now has to prove that something is safe with certainty before we permit further research.

Before, scientists could develop an innovation, and market it and it was then up to us to prove and test that it is dangerous. Now, you need to prove something is safe before it can be marketed. But proving something safe is rather difficult. The best example of this is GMOs: a company does tests and proves that a biotech seed is safe according to policy requirements, but once it asks for market authorisation, opponents come up with more questions, such as 'are they safe for a type of a butterfly?' or '[are you sure] that GMO pollen won't be a threat to other strains?' They can ask for anything really. This is good business for research labs, but not for innovation.

It is extremely difficult and challenging to do science and scientific exploration nowadays. Scientific research is not encouraged. And on top of that, with the reversal of the burden of proof, the whole mentality has been changed - you are guilty until proven innocent now.

The REACH Regulation states at the beginning that REACH is based on the precautionary principle 'as defined in the Treaty'. But the Treaty only has a half a sentence on precaution (the second half makes reference to the 'polluter pays' principle). REACH is a good example of the reversal of the burden of proof. During the process, the whole point of REACH shifted from ensuring the safe use of chemicals to that of substitution, but how can you prove that substitutes are safe? It is impossible! So it is very interesting to see that REACH is based on something that is not very well defined.

David Zaruk is an associate professor in risk and corporate communications at Vesalius College in Brussels and a senior research associate at the Institute for European Studies at the Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB). He is also an independent risk lobbying analyst at Risk Perception Management, a consultancy

Path forward to clearer guidelines allowing independent public sector evaluation of biotech crops

2009-08-15T09:45:00.001+10:30

New dialogue makes significant progress in addressing independent seed research research on commercial, patent-protected seed products in the USA .

Alexandria, Virginia, USA
August 13, 2009
Source: American Seed Trade Association (ASTA) Seed E-News

Significant progress and alignment was achieved by the 27 representatives from the research community and the seed industry who met on June 30, 2009, in Ames, Iowa, to discuss research on commercial, patent-protected seed products and opportunities to improve the process overall.
Agricultural biotechnology has brought tremendous innovation to the seed industry. A system of regulatory oversight and mechanisms to protect intellectual property has evolved along with the development and commercialization of patent-protected seed products. For this reason, commercial purchases of biotech seed, such as by farmers, requires an accompanying agreement to meet environmental stewardship needs and regulations.
Agronomic studies by public sector scientists on commercially available seed have been and are routinely being conducted, and biotechnology companies provide researchers with access to this seed. Although companies support hundreds of research studies annually, procedures to enable this work have not always been as clear or straight forward as possible and can vary from company to company. Further, these processes are not always transparent within the university systems themselves, often creating an additional layer of challenges for the scientists in meeting their research goals.
As a result, earlier this year, some public sector researchers voiced the challenges they face in conducting research on commercially available seed with patent-protected traits. When these concerns were brought to the attention of two trade associations representing the seed industry and the agricultural biotechnology industry, the American Seed Trade Association (ASTA) and the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), a meeting was proposed with the research community to better understand, discuss and address the points raised by the researchers.
The June 30 meeting brought together the appropriate industry representatives and members of the public sector research community around the same table to work toward a more harmonized and transparent approach to collaboration. Through this dialogue, both sides were able to gain insight into the others' concerns, address some misunderstandings and bring a sense of clarity and direction for public sector research with commercial, patent-protected seed products. The dialogue identified opportunities that will help improve the overall process.
The key to this significant progress was the seed industry's commitment to a set of principles supporting public sector research on commercially available, patent-protected seed products. The goal of the principles is to enable the public sector research community to conduct independent research on commercially available seed products for the purpose of understanding the technology, education, extension and the safe and effective use of these products. The principles also recognize that the public sector research community is free to design robust, scientifically sound experimental protocols and methodologies, as well as to derive independent conclusions.
Companies will facilitate these institutions' access to commercial, licensed technologies in a way that continues to assure compliance with applicable laws and regulations, respect for intellectual property and use of comprehensive stewardship programs that promote the responsible and safe management of these commercially available products.
In addition, the principles commit to a regular and ongoing dialogue between the seed industry and the public sector researchers and institutions.
A final version of the principles will be presented at the ASTA's Executive Committee of the Board of Directors on Sept. 17 and at BIO's Food and Agriculture Section Governing Board Sept. 10 for approval and adoption. Although every company must determine independently the terms under which it will implement these principles, they demonstrate the commitment of the seed and biotechnology industries to public sector research.
"Although the 'devil is in the details,' we'll have to see how each company implements the principles. However, it was reassuring to see that the seed industry is taking public researchers' concerns seriously and has made tremendous progress in developing consensus on a set of principles in support of public research," said Ken Ostlie, an entomologist at the University of Minnesota.
The collaborative group is exploring plans for the next meeting to foster an ongoing dialogue and fulfill the mission to support the public good through broad-based laboratory and field research programs, educational outreach, continued pursuit of knowledge using controlled and rigorous experiments, and publication in scientific and popular literature.
"I went into the meeting hopeful, but also somewhat skeptical. Although I'm still a little wary, the seed companies represented at the meeting seem committed to solving the problems we discussed. They certainly can be solved, and I'm cautiously optimistic they will be," said one researcher in attendance of the Ames meeting. "In the end, we had a substantive discussion. If the draft principles we saw are adopted and acted on in the spirit in which they were presented, they will definitely take us in the right direction. Anticipated agreements based on the principles should functionally provide us with the freedom to conduct independent research on commercially available seed and to report our findings, whatever they may be, without interference."
"The seed industry continues to be strongly committed to supporting research by public sector scientists," responded ASTA President and CEO Andy LaVigne. "This research ensures agricultural technologies are used responsibly in the environment, deliver value to growers, and provide food, feed, fiber and fuel for a growing world."
The news item on this page is copyright by the organization where it originated - Fair use notice