Genetically Modified Crops

Author(s):  
Glenn Davis Stone

In 1958, a Nobel laureate predicted that one day scientists would be able to use “biological engineering” to improve all species. Genetic modification of viruses and bacteria was performed in the early 1970s. Genetic modification of plants was announced in the early 1980s, followed by predictions of revolutionary improvements in agriculture. But nearly forty years later, the improvements brought by genetic modification are meager: few crops have been modified and 87 percent of all area planted to genetically modified (GM) crops contains traits for herbicide tolerance (HT), which increases use of herbicide but not productivity. The only other widely used modification, which causes plants to produce insecticide, has improved agriculture in some areas but not others. Debate on why genetic modification has fallen so short of expectations have centered on three factors. Public resistance to GM crops and foods is blamed for slow progress by some. Excessive regulation is cited by some, especially those involved in the development of GM crops. But the main factor has been patent regimes that concentrate the development of marketable GM crops in the hands of a small number of companies that hold large patent portfolios and that can afford to enforce the patents. New technologies for genetic modification such as CRISPR-Cas9 are being heralded as offering revolutionary change in agriculture, much as genetic modification was in the 1980s.

2019 ◽  
Vol 116 (8) ◽  
pp. 3006-3011 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. H. Boyle ◽  
H. J. Dalgleish ◽  
J. R. Puzey

Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) decline over the past 25 years has received considerable public and scientific attention, in large part because its decline, and that of its milkweed (Asclepias spp.) host plant, have been linked to genetically modified (GM) crops and associated herbicide use. Here, we use museum and herbaria specimens to extend our knowledge of the dynamics of both monarchs and milkweeds in the United States to more than a century, from 1900 to 2016. We show that both monarchs and milkweeds increased during the early 20th century and that recent declines are actually part of a much longer-term decline in both monarchs and milkweed beginning around 1950. Herbicide-resistant crops, therefore, are clearly not the only culprit and, likely, not even the primary culprit: Not only did monarch and milkweed declines begin decades before GM crops were introduced, but other variables, particularly a decline in the number of farms, predict common milkweed trends more strongly over the period studied here.


2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 167-183
Author(s):  
Aniket Aga

A fierce controversy over genetically modified (GM) crops has been raging in India for over two decades. Analyzing India’s regulatory regime for GM crops, this article focuses on the modes through which state bureaucracies know the environment. It argues that two epistemologies - scientific and legal-administrative – underpin environment protection. By unraveling the course of regulatory disputes, I demonstrate that bureaucracies are not just hierarchically divided but are also segmented by horizontal, functional specializations. There is thus an inherent ambiguity lodged between environment as a technical discourse and as statecraft. This ambiguity both fosters and constrains democratic participation in policy decisions and can even partially disrupt power relations in unanticipated ways.


2012 ◽  
Vol 14 (02) ◽  
pp. 1250013 ◽  
Author(s):  
DENISE GALLO PIZELLA ◽  
MARCELO PEREIRA DE SOUZA

Brazil is the second largest producer of genetically modified crops (GM crops) and the National Technical Commission on Biosafety (CTNBio) the decision making agency on this matter. The country uses Risk Analysis (RA) and project EIA as tools for biosafety evaluation. This paper aims to review the appropriateness of these tools for evaluating the environmental impacts of GM crops, also considering institutional aspects. An overview of the process of release of GM crops in Brazil along with important operational and institutional aspects is provided. The results indicate that project EIA could be applied to GM crops in specific sites and RA could give support to the evaluation of GM crop itself. Regarding institutional issues, it is concluded that decisions should be made by the environmental bodies, and not by the CTNBio.


2018 ◽  
Vol 27 (8) ◽  
pp. 952-966 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla Almeida ◽  
Luisa Massarani

Genetically modified organisms have been at the centre of a major public controversy, involving different interests and actors. While much attention has been devoted to consumer views on genetically modified food, there have been few attempts to understand the perceptions of genetically modified technology among farmers. By investigating perceptions of genetically modified organisms among Brazilian farmers, we intend to contribute towards filling this gap and thereby add the views of this stakeholder group to the genetically modified debate. A comparative analysis of our data and data from other studies indicate there is a complex variety of views on genetically modified organisms among farmers. Despite this diversity, we found variations in such views occur within limited parameters, concerned principally with expectations or concrete experiences regarding the advantages of genetically modified crops, perceptions of risks associated with them, and ethical questions they raise. We then propose a classification of prevailing profiles to represent the spectrum of perceptions of genetically modified organisms among farmers.


2007 ◽  
Vol 90 (5) ◽  
pp. 1508-1512
Author(s):  
Khondoker Md Nasiruddin ◽  
Anwar Nasim

Abstract Bangladesh is on the verge of adopting genetically modified (GM) crops for commercial cultivation and consumption as feed and food. Most of the laboratories are engaged in tissue culture and molecular characterization on plants, whereas some have started living modified organism research with shortages of trained manpower, infrastructure, and funding. Nutritionally improved Golden Rice, biotech brinjal, and late blight-resistant potato are in contained trials in a greenhouse, and potato ring spot virus-resistant papaya is in the process of approval for a field trial. The government has taken some initiative in support of GM organism research, which include the formation of a Biotechnology Department in all institutes and the formation of the apex body, the National Task Force Committee on Biotechnology of Bangladesh under the chairpersonship of the Prime Minister. Biosafety policy guidelines and related aspects of biotechnology issues have been approved, and the laws are in the process of being promulgated. Being a party to the Cartagena Protocol, proper biosafety measures are regulated by the appropriate authority as stated. Although there are no laws made yet directly for biosafety of GM crops/foods, the relevant laws on agriculture, medicine, food, import, trade, environment, etc. may suffice and explain the situation.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcos José Andrade Viana ◽  
Adhemar Zerlotini ◽  
Mauricio de Alvarenga Mudadu

ABSTRACTBackgroundThe development of genetically modified crops (GM) includes the discovery of candidate genes through bioinformatics analysis using genomics data, gene expression, and others. Proteins of unknown function (PUFs) are interesting targets for GM crops breeding pipelines for the novelty associated to such targets and also to avoid copyright protections. One method of inferring the putative function of PUFs is by relating them to factors of interest such as abiotic stresses using orthology and co-expression networks, in a guilt-by-association manner.ResultsIn this regard, we have downloaded, analyzed, and processed genomics data of 53 angiosperms, totaling 1,862,010 genes and 2,332,974 RNA. Diamond and InterproScan were used to discover 72,266 PUFs for all organisms. RNA-seq datasets related to abiotic stresses were downloaded from NCBI/GEO. The RNA-seq data was used as input to the LSTrAP software to construct co-expression networks. LSTrAP also created clusters of transcripts with correlated expression, whose members are more probably related to the molecular mechanisms associated to abiotic stresses in the plants. Orthologous groups were created (OrhtoMCL) using all 2,332,974 proteins in order to associate PUFs to abiotic stress related clusters of co-expression and therefore infer their function in a guilt-by-association manner.ConclusionA freely available web resource named “Plant Co-expression Annotation Resource” (https://www.machado.cnptia.embrapa.br/plantannot), Plantannot, was created to provide indexed queries to search for PUF putatively associated to abiotic stresses. The web interface also allows browsing, querying and retrieving of public genomics data from 53 plants. We hope Plantannot to be useful for researchers trying to obtain novel GM crops resistant to climate change hazards.


2004 ◽  
Vol 87 (6) ◽  
pp. 1423-1432 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard E Goodman ◽  
John N Leach

Abstract Global commercial production of genetically modified (GM) crops has grown to over 67 million hectares annually, primarily of herbicide-tolerant and insect protection crop varieties. GM crops are produced by the insertion of specific genes that either encode a protein, or a regulatory RNA sequence. A comprehensive safety evaluation is conducted for each new commercial GM crop, including an assessment of the potential allergenicity of any newly introduced protein. If the gene was derived from an allergenic organism, or the protein sequence is highly similar to a known allergen, immunoassays, e.g., Western blot assays and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay tests, are performed to identify protein-specific IgE binding by sera of individuals allergic to the gene source, or the source of the sequence-matched allergen. Although such assays are commonly used to identify previously unknown allergens, criteria have not been established to demonstrate that a protein is unlikely to cause allergic reactions. This review discusses factors that affect the predictive value of these tests, including clinical selection criteria for serum donors, selection of blocking reagents to reduce nonspecific antibody binding, inhibition assays to verify specificity of binding, and scientifically justified limits of detection (sensitivity) in the absence of information regarding biological thresholds.


2021 ◽  

Meeting future food needs without compromising environmental integrity is a central challenge for agriculture globally but especially for the Asia Pacific region – where 60% of the global population, including some of the world’s poorest, live on only 30% of the land mass. To guarantee the food security of this and other regions, growers worldwide are rapidly adopting genetically modified (GM) crops as the forerunner to protect against many biotic and abiotic stresses. Asia Pacific countries play an important role in this, with India, China and Pakistan appearing in the top 10 countries with acreage of GM crops, primarily devoted to Bt cotton. Genetically Modified Crops in Asia Pacific discusses the progress of GM crop adoption across the Asia Pacific region over the past two decades, including research, development, adoption and sustainability, as well as the cultivation of insect resistant Bt brinjal, drought-tolerant sugarcane, late blight resistant potato and biotech rice more specific to this region. Regulatory efforts of the Asia Pacific member nations to ensure the safety of GM crops to both humans and the environment are also outlined to provide impetus in other countries initiating biotech crops. The authors also probe into some aspects of gene editing and nanobiotechnology to expand the scope into next generation GM crops, including the potential to grow crops in acidic soil, reduce methane production, remove poisonous elements from plants and improve overall nutritional quality. Genetically Modified Crops in Asia Pacific provides a comprehensive reference not only for academics, researchers and private sectors in crop systems but also policy makers in the Asia Pacific region. Beyond this region, readers will benefit from understanding how GM crops have been integrated into many different countries and, in particular, the effects of the take-up of GM cropping systems by farmers with different socioeconomic backgrounds.


2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-23
Author(s):  
Marina Mühl

Worldwide, there are many Insect-Resistant Genetically Modified Crops (IR-GMCs) planted with the purpose of controlling their many insect pests. All genetically modified (GM) plants have to pass through a regulatory system before being commercialized. In the case of Argentina, specific information is requested for these particular GM crops. This review will cover all the data required of IR-GMCs in Argentina in relation to insect resistance to the insecticidal products expressed (the most common in Argentina: Bt proteins) as well as the current situation of Bt crops in Argentina. From earliest times, man has used living organisms and their products in order to produce goods and services to meet their basic needs. For instance, man has modified, first unconsciously and then intentionally, the genome of many commodities so as to obtain improved cultivars. Taking the example of maize, its ancestor, the teocintle, is different in appearance (compared to the maize we consume nowadays). The selection process, which has taken place over many years, introduced improvement in many phenotypic characteristics such as the size of the grain. This example illustrates what is considered "Traditional Agrobiotechnology" or 'Traditional Plant Breeding'. The advent of Genetic Engineering and Molecular Biology in the second half of the 20th century has opened the door to "Modern Agrobiotechnology". The increase of agricultural production worldwide is demanded by a constantly increasing global population. As result of this, man has taken advantage of this valued tool so as to produce more in the same amount of land in a sustainable and cost-effective way. Thus different kinds of crops have been genetically engineered around the world with beneficial traits like insect resistance, herbicide tolerance and nutritional improvement. Worldwide, insects are a major cause of crop damage and yield loss, often requiring farmers to make multiple applications of chemical insecticides to control pests. For that reason, the commercial release of IR-GMCs also called Insect-resistant biotech crops has been an important contribution from Modern Agrobiotechnology to increase the global agricultural production. By the end of 2016, the cultivated area under GM crops reached 185.1 million hectares. 53% of that area was planted with IR-GMCs (single and stacked events with tolerance to herbicides). The commercialized genetically engineering crops that have protection against insect damage around the world are cotton, maize, soybean, potato, rice, tomato, eggplant and poplar. Insect-resistant biotech crops provide a number of benefits, such as a reduction in the use of chemical insecticides, improvement in yield, quality and lower production costs compared to the conventional crops.


Global Jurist ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Chiarabolli

The objective of the research is to analyse the way the European Union is addressing the issue of the coexistence between traditional, organic, and GM crops.In the European Union no form of agriculture, whether conventional, organic, GM, should be excluded. Farmers are free to choose the production type they prefer, without being forced to change patterns already established in the area, and without spending more resources.Today EU rules on genetically modified crops are very rigid; in particular, before starting a GM crops commercial cultivation, it is compulsory to obtain a specific European Commission authorisation (based on a safety risk assessment carried out by the European Food Safety Authority), and GM food and feed (threshold 0,9%) must be labeled (to inform consumers) and traced.Coexistence is the weak point of the European legislation in the field. The European Commission defines the term coexistence as the farmers’ ability to make a practical choice between conventional, organic and GM-crop production, in compliance with the legal obligations for labeling and/or purity standards. In simple terms, coexistence is a way of allowing farmers to choose between the three agricultural systems. Farmers’ choice to grow GM or non-GM crops depends not only on technical aspects related to the productivity gains and agronomic benefits to be gained from adopting this technology, but also on consumers’ preferences. Particularly in Europe, consumers continue to be concerned about the potentially adverse implications of widespread GM crop production for the environment and food safety. According to Directive 2001/18/EC (Article 26 bis), Member States may organise measures to avoid the unadventitious presence of GMOs in other non-GM products. In order to help the Member States to organise national coexistence measures, the European Commission adopted the Recommendation 2003/556/EC on the guidelines for the development of national strategies and best practices to ensure the coexistence of genetically modified crops with conventional and organic farming. The act establishes that the approaches to coexistence need to be developed in a transparent way, based on technical guidelines and in co-operation with all stakeholders concerned. The guidelines are based on experiences with existing segregation practices and, at the same time, they ensure an equitable balance between the interests of farmers of all production types. Further, they state that management measures to ensure coexistence should be efficient and cost-effective, without going beyond what is necessary to comply with EU threshold levels for GMO labeling. Today it is accepted that total isolation of GM material, certainly once agricultural biotechnology is widespread in the EU, is impossible; coexistence focuses on the practices used to decrease the adventitious GM presence. The implementation of coexistence measures is a complex process owing to the diversity in field, farming and natural conditions extending over Europe.On 13 July 2010, the European Commission adopted a new coexistence package that consists of a coexistence Communication, a new Recommendation on co-existence of GM crops with conventional and/or organic crops, and a draft Regulation proposing a change to the GMO legislation. The new approach aims to achieve the right balance between maintaining an EU authorisation system and the freedom for Member States to decide on GMO cultivation in their territory. The new flexible European scenario will give to the Member States the possibility to decide whether to cultivate biotech crops, maintaining at the same time an EU wide science-based authorization system.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document