"Personally, I distrust everything that comes from NGIN"
Alex Avery, Hudson Institute, 18 Jan 2001
---
2 interesting items from AgBioView. The first is particularly impoprtant as it looks at how non-GE biotech can assist plant breeding in a way that is compatible with organic agriculture. Marker Assisted Breeding has beeen called traditional breeding with the lights on:
"when Marker Assisted Breeding is used to assist traditional sexually-mediated breeding programmes, natural processes of gene regulation and placement are not by-passed. This avoids exposure to the novel health and environmental risks inherent in genetic engineering plant breeding methods."
As the man said: “Genetic transformation is just one particular wrench in the biotechnology tool box. We have lots of other tools to accelerate the development of new wheat varieties.... It's a numbers game and ultimately non-transformation [ie non-GM] biotech offers the greatest potential.” - Tom Crosbie, Monsanto's global head of plant breeding
1. Marker Assisted Plant Breeding and organic ag
2. Alternative to Edible Vaccines?
---
1. Subject: Organics is not 'anti-science'
From: Craig Sams This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Dear Dr. Prakash: I thought you might find this timely in the light of your recent comments as to the way genomics and plant breeding are likely to go in the future. I thought that it might help convince some of your list members that the organic sector are not anti-science. This issue came up at a meeting that Patrick Holden (the Soil Association Director) and I had with Hendrik Verfaillie of Monsanto in September 1999 in which he raised the question of whether organic farmers would use seeds bred conventionally but using genomics knowledge.
Kind regards, Craig Sams
--------------
POLICY PAPER
Campaigning for organic food and farming and sustainable forestry
Marker Assisted Plant Breeding
Summary: The Soil Association welcomes publicly funded research to map the genetic sequence and structure of plants, offering an opportunity to gain a better understanding of the molecular biology of crops. We support the use of this data in natural plant breeding programmes such as marker assisted breeding (MAB.) By 'natural plant breeding' the Soil Association refers to methods which do not by-pass the sexual breeding process.
Scientists have developed the means to read the genetic sequencing of plants. This genetic map can assist plant breeders to more reliably and rapidly identify desirable traits when selecting plants for sexual breeding programmes - a process which in the past has involved drawn out procedures. Utilising this mapping information whilst maintaining the sexual breeding process enables the more efficient development of new plant (and animal)varieties, but without the risks associated with genetic engineering (i.e. the artificial transfer of genetic material between or within speciesusing recombinant DNA). [note rDNA can be used to transfer genetic material between the same species].
Marker Assisted breeding - Genomics Marker assisted breeding (sometimes referred to as 'genomics') is a form of biotechnology which uses genetic fingerprinting techniques to assists plant breeders in matching molecular profile to the physical properties of the variety. This allows plant breeders to significantly accelerate the speed of natural plant breeding programmes, without exposure to the unpredictable health and environmental risks associated with genetic engineering techniques.
Local distinctiveness and genetic diversity.The Soil Association would welcome publicly owned research using MAB provided the technology is not used to promote a narrowing of genetic diversity in plant varieties (there is a risk that seed companies may use this technology to further reduce the genetic diversity of commercially available crop varieties thereby increasing the plant health risks associated with genetically un-diverse systems of agriculture - i.e. risk associated with moncultures).
Organic systems traditionally stress the importance of adaptation through natural evolution along the principle of natural breeds and natural selection. Any marker assisted breeding programme should therefore focus on the use of germplasm from locally distinct traditional seed lines from a particular area or region that are best suited for local weather patterns, soil type and other important agronomic factors when developing new varieties. Maintaining genetic diversity within agriculture is of fundamental importance. It serves as a basic insurance against local crop disease outbreaks becoming regional or national outbreaks. The less diversity in the system the wider and faster new bacterial, viral or other pathogens can spread throughout the national agricultural plant (or animal) base.The use of locally adapted plants which are more appropriate to locale cosystems are important in developing such systems of plant protection based on genetic diversity.
Plant breeding has become such a specialised and centralised industry that this essential diversity has been eroded in recent years. This represents a considerable threat not only to the economy of the farming industry, but also to national food security, human health and the national economy. The Irish potato famine of 1846 is an extreme example of a past national crisis which followed low genetic diversity in cropping patterns. Organic farming reverses this trend of genetic erosion by positively encouraging genetic diversity.
Patent Protection Abuse: The Soil Association believes that although marker assisted breeding can play a useful role in the development on new varieties, it must not become a means to patent specific genes and that access to genetic information provided by the technique must be made available free of charge to all scientists requiring it for research purposes. Experience with the human genome project has already shown that the biotechnology industry frequently seeks to patent the genes it discovers through mapping research, particularly where genetic sequences are believed to be linked to commercially exploitable traits. The Soil Association believes that this is immoral. It contravenes the most basic of traditional patenting principles , which allow patents on inventions made by humans, but not discoveries in nature. If novel traits identified by genomic discovery are allowed to be patented this potentially sound technology will be abused, restricting access to scientific knowledge of naturally occurring biological phenomena by others for the benefit of the wider community.
Genetic Engineering - The dangers Genetic engineering involves the artificial insertion of individual genes from one organism (typically, but not exclusively, from other unrelated species) into the genetic material of another. This methodology is the cause of much concern. Scientists have identified particular effects that some specific genes have on the characteristics of an organism (e.g. the identification of a gene in a plant which makes it resistant to a particular insect pest). However, wider effects may occur through different genes interacting with each other. At present, these interactions are not well understood by scientists, or even understood at all in many cases. The artificial introduction of novel genetic material out of context using recombinant DNA in this way is fraught with difficulties given the depth of such knowledge deficits.
In addition the very process of genetic engineering increases levels of risk by by-passing the integrated bio-regulatory systems inherent and generally conserved in the sexual breeding process.In nature genes are regulated by neighbouring (and sometimes distant) DNA sequences which, for example, control when or where in the plant the gene should operate. These processes have so far only been identified and understood to a limited degree. As a result current agricultural genetic engineering techniques are unable to take these fundamentally importan trelationships into account when creating new organisms incorporating recombinant DNA. Equally in the genetic engineering of plants little or no control is exercised over the locational placement on the genome of inserted genes.Placement is essentially random and multiple copies may also be inserted unintentionally.
Because of this lack of knowledge of the natural regulatory functions within plant genomes, as well as the random positioning of inserted foreign genes, unpredicted side effects occur routinely with genetic engineering techniques. Many of these have been recorded even in commercialised varieties. This approach can lead to dangers such as allergenicity, the creation of new toxins or poor agronomic performance. An example of an unpredictable physical side effect was reported in the new scientist, whereby more lignin in GM soya than non GM soya was found,causing stunted, weak stems which split open and reduced yields.
By contrast, however, when Marker Assisted Breeding is used to assist traditional sexually-mediated breeding programmes, natural processes of gene regulation and placement are not by-passed. This avoids exposure to the novel health and environmental risks inherent in genetic engineering plant breeding methods . Organic farming It should be noted that the principles of organic farming revolves essentially around animal and plant husbandry rather than merely theattributes of a specific variety.20
"The base line of the investigations [of seed varieties] of the future must be a fertile soil. The land must be got into good heart to begin with. A valuable method of testing our practice is to observe the effect of time on a variety. If it shows a tendency to run out something is wrong. If it seems to be permanent, our methods are correct.The efficiency of the agriculture of the future will therefore be measured by the reduction in the number of plant breeders. A few only will be needed when soils become fertile and remain so." Sir Albert Howard, An Agricultural Testament, 1940
Soil Association 40-56 Victoria Street, Bristol BS1 6BY
E: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. http://www.soilassociation.org
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
2. Subject: Vaccine Patch an Alternative to Edible Vaccines?
From: Red Porphyry <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>ÃÃ
Agricultural biotechnologists working on edible vaccines need to be aware of the fact that they are now facing some very formidable competition. The competition is in the form of a "vaccine patch" that one wears on the skin, just like a band-aid. Apparently, the immune response, both in animals and in humans, is much stronger if a vaccine is simply applied directly to the skin instead of being injected (or ingested?). You can read about the concept here:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/onair/WorldNewsTonight/wnt001020_21st_patchvac_feature.html
and here: http://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/hotnews/0ch27122148.html
Successful Phase I clinical trials in humans of a vaccine patch against heat-labile enterotoxin were reported in Nature Medicine (December 2000) by the Iomai Corporation: http://www.findarticles.com/m0EIN/2000_Nov_29/67404017/p1/article.jhtml
No need for needles or refrigeration, "one-use" means no risk of contamination, and modern manufacturing techniques guarantee precise vaccine dosage per patch. Vaccine patches are the *real* competitive technological alternative to edible vaccines. It's "fish or cut bait" time, ladies and gentlemen.
Red