source

The major challenge in agriculture today is the production of sufficient food to adequately nourish the world's population.

Human population growth is exponential. Currently over 6 billion people and still increasing. Age structure of Sweden vs. Mexico . 25% of world lives in developed countries, 75% in underdeveloped. 25% of world's population is undernourished.

A. The Green Revolution.

1. Goal was to develop high yielding and disease-resistant varieties of plants. Norman Borlaug promised to provide sufficient food for all.

2. Problems with the Green Revolution

a. Crops are dependent on fertilizers, adequate water supply, mechanized farming (hence fuel). Poor farmers can't afford high-priced seed.

b. Continued population growth has eaten up some of these production gains

B. Crop Diversity.

Of the 300 species of plants cultivated by humans for food, only 3 provide 55% of nutrition. 20 species provide 80%. So, very narrow food base for human population.

1. Monocultures. Result in decreased genetic variability. Plants more prone to attack by pathogens. Examples:

a. Soybean and Fusarium (SDS = Sudden Death Syndrome).

b. Maize {0190} and Bipolaris maydis (Southern corn leaf blight). Inbred male-sterile corn lines were more suceptible to the pathogen. Destroyed at least 15% of the crop in 1970. See p. 188 in text.

c. Other monocultures: wheat, potato, citrus.

2. Difficulty with polycultures?

Hard to do mechanized farming with several crops in one field.

C. Sustainable Agriculture.

Use of perennial vs. annual crops. Examples being developed: Illinois bundleflower (Desmanthus illinoensis), Sorghum bicolor X S. halapense hybrid, etc.

D. Genetic Diversity: Germplasm & Seed Banks. Land races -

traditionally cultivated crop varieties are being replaced by newer, high-yield varieties. This results in loss of genetic diversity. Interest is in preserving this variability (to introduce into modern crops). One way to do this is to put the seeds in cold storage . Example: National Center for Genetic Resource Preservation in Ft. Collins, CO. This unit of the USDA develops strategies to conserve the genetic diversity of plants with current or future importance to US agriculture and landscapes.. The Plant Germplasm Preservation Unit is responsible for more than 10,000 globally distributed species with diverse physiologies and genetic backgrounds.

E. Alternate Crops

1. Quinoa (Chenopodium quinoa).. Related to the weed called goosefoot, Chenopodium album . The "grain" (not a grass) is very nutritious. Developed as a crop in the Andes of South America by the Quechua and Aymara. Quinoa from WholeHealthMD.com. All About Quinoa. NewCROP, the New Crop Resource Online Program from Purdue University.

2. Amaranth (Amaranthus spp.). Also not a grain but used like it. As much protein (12-17%) as milk! Was a staple (along with maize and beans) in Pre-Colombian era people of the New World. Good book on the subject "Amaranth: Modern Prospects for an Ancient Crop" (National Academy Press 1984).

3. Other South American alternate crops:

Tarwi (Lupinus mutabilis, Fabaceae)

Tamarillo (tree tomato, Cyphomandra betacea, Solanaceae)

Oca (Oxalis tuberosa, Oxalidaceae). See "Andean Tuber Crops: Worldwide Potential" by Calvin Sperling and Steven King

F. Biotechnology.

The use of techniques such as cell and tissue culture and genetic engineering to create plants with new and desirable characteristics. Similar goals as traditional breeding, different techniques.

1. Cell and tissue culture. Small parts of a plant (stem, leaf) can be cultured on a defined medium. The cells grow into callus. {0638} With hormone treatment, can recover complete plants from the callus cells. A method to produce lots of genetically identical individuals. Or can recover and propagate interesting and valuable mutants. For example: Cells in culture exposed to herbicide. The resistant ones survive. Whole plants are grown from these survivors.

2. Transgenic Plants:

Introduction of specific genes directly into crop species using techniques of genetic engineering.{0326} Plants can also undergo transformation, which means moving foreign DNA into a plant (e.g. into a protoplast). Can use bacteria (Agrobacterium) with plasmids {0325} or mechanical methods.

a. Herbicide resistance. Benefit: can spray your field and kill everything except your crop which is resistant. Risks: that gene will move into another species or that the crop will itself become a weed. Moreover, the resistant plants may have a narrow genetic base, making them more susceptible to other pathogens. Glyphosate (RoundUp?) resistance in soybeans (Glycine). Prevents the synthesis of aromatic amino acids.

b. Disease resistance. Many examples:

tomato (Solanum) and mosaic virus
tomato (Solanum) and leaf mold (Cladosporium)
barley (Hordeum) stem rust (Puccinia)
mustards (Brassica) and white rust (Albugo)
sorghum and head smut (Sporisorium)
potato (Solanum) and root cyst nematode (Globodwea)
sugar beet (Beta) and cyst nematode (Heterodera)
sunflower (Helianthus) and rust (Puccinia)

c. Insect resistance. Transgenic maize has a gene from a bacterium (Bacillus thuringiensis) that kills caterpillars of the European cornborer moth that feed on them. Concern has been raised that such plants are harmful to the environment because their pollen can be eaten by beneficial and nontarget insects such as Monarch butterfly caterpillars . The insecticidal compound can also get out of the plant and into the soil. Good discussion of the subject in article by M. Marvier (2001, Ecology of Transgenic Crops, American Scientist 89:160-167).

d. For an excellent discussion of the topic of "GM" (Genetically Modified) foods, see THIS REPORT on the NPR (National Public Radio) website. http://www.npr.org/programs/morning/features/2001/nov/biotech/011115.biotech.html

Mortality rate for new-born rats six times higher when mother was fed on a diet of modified soya

by Geoffrey Lean

Women who eat GM foods while pregnant risk endangering their unborn babies, startling new research suggests.

The World Trade Organization is expected next month to support a bid by the Bush administration to force European countries to accept GM foods. The study - carried out by a leading scientist at the Russian Academy of Sciences - found that more than half of the offspring of rats fed on modified soya died in the first three weeks of life, six times as many as those born to mothers with normal diets. Six times as many were also severely underweight. The research - which is being prepared for publication - is just one of a clutch of recent studies that are reviving fears that GM food damages human health. Italian research has found that modified soya affected the liver and pancreas of mice. Australia had to abandon a decade-long attempt to develop modified peas when an official study found they caused lung damage. And last May this newspaper revealed a secret report by the biotech giant Monsanto, which showed that rats fed a diet rich in GM corn had smaller kidneys and higher blood cell counts, suggesting possible damage to their immune systems, than those that ate a similar conventional one.

The United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organization held a workshop on the safety of genetically modified foods at its Rome headquarters late last year. The workshop was addressed by scientists whose research had raised concerns about health dangers. But the World Trade Organization is expected next month to support a bid by the Bush administration to force European countries to accept GM foods.

The Russian research threatens to have an explosive effect on already hostile public opinion. Carried out by Dr Irina Ermakova at the Institute of Higher Nervous Activity and Neurophysiology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, it is believed to be the first to look at the effects of GM food on the unborn. The scientist added flour from a GM soya bean - produced by Monsanto to be resistant to its pesticide, Roundup - to the food of female rats, starting two weeks before they conceived, continuing through pregnancy, birth and nursing. Others were given non-GM soya and a third group was given no soya at all. She found that 36 per cent of the young of the rats fed the modified soya were severely underweight, compared to 6 per cent of the offspring of the other groups. More alarmingly, a staggering 55.6 per cent of those born to mothers on the GM diet perished within three weeks of birth, compared to 9 per cent of the offspring of those fed normal soya, and 6.8 per cent of the young of those given no soya at all.

"The morphology and biochemical structures of rats are very similar to those of humans, and this makes the results very disturbing" said Dr Ermakova. "They point to a risk for mothers and their babies."

Environmentalists say that - while the results are preliminary - they are potentially so serious that they must be followed up. The American Academy of Environmental Medicine has asked the US National Institute of Health to sponsor an immediate, independent follow-up.

The Monsanto soya is widely eaten by Americans. There is little of it, or any GM crop, in British foods though it is imported to feed animals farmed for meat.

Tony Coombes, director of corporate affairs for Monsanto UK, said: "The overwhelming weight of evidence from published, peer-reviewed, independently conducted scientific studies demonstrates that Roundup Ready soy can be safely consumed by rats, as well as all other animal species studied."

What the experiment found

Russian scientists added flour made from a GM soya to the diet of female rats two weeks before mating them, and continued feeding it to them during pregnancy, birth and nursing. Others were give non-GM soya or none at all. Six times as many of the offspring of those fed the modified soya were severely underweight compared to those born to the rats given normal diets. Within three weeks, 55.6 per cent of the young of the mothers given the modified soya died, against 9 per cent of the offspring of those fed the conventional soya. common dreams

Genetically modified crops are now grown in more than 16 countries. In 2002, farmers around the world planted 60 million hectares of land with dozens of varieties of GM crops. Yet in the UK, the decision to approve or reject the technology could hinge on the results, out on Thursday, of four-year trials involving 280 fields of three GM crops.

Although these farm-scale evaluations are being portrayed as a test of the environmental credentials of GM crops, it is really the weedkillers to which they are resistant that are on trial. The studies looked only at the effect that these herbicides had on "wildlife" in fields, in the form of weeds and insects. But if the aim of the exercise really is to save farmland wildlife, banning any of the GM crops tested is unlikely to make much difference.

Non-GM herbicide-resistant plants

That is because herbicide use in the UK is soaring even before any GM crops are introduced. And in the long term, farmers denied GM crops may instead turn to non-GM crops bred to be resistant to herbicides. That might seem like a good thing to those who oppose GM technology, but like GM crops, the conventionally bred strains allow farmers to splash on the herbicide.

Their impact on farmland wildlife in Europe could be worse than that of the weedkiller-resistant GM crops, because many allow the use of more noxious herbicides than GM strains. And as with GM crops, the herbicide-resistance could spread to other crops and wild relatives.

Desired trait

Despite this, these crops do not have to undergo the same scrutiny as GM crops because they are not genetically engineered. The only hurdle they face in the UK is tests designed to confirm that they are indeed new varieties. And while GM crops can be banned under world trade rules on the grounds that they pose a threat to human health or the environment, the same is not true of conventional herbicide-resistant crops.

"We're as concerned about them as GM crops," says Brian Johnson, an adviser on GM technology to the conservation group English Nature. "The same principles should be applied to all crops, irrespective of their origin." The sequencing of plant genomes is making it much easier for breeders to create non-GM plants with a desired trait, he points out.

None of these crops is yet grown in the UK, unless one counts maize, which is naturally resistant to the herbicide atrazine. But one company has already tried to market them. An application to sell imidazolinone-resistant rapeseed in the UK was turned down in 1998 only because the strain proved low-yielding when trialled (New Scientist print edition, 27 February 1999).

This strain and others like it are already grown in several countries. More are being developed. And companies are likely to redouble their efforts if GM herbicide-resistant crops are banned in Europe. "We're continually looking at GM and non-GM solutions. If the market is there, we'd explore all avenues," a Syngenta spokesman told New Scientist.

"We would be foolish to turn our backs on the possibility that other methods of plant breeding could generate the same results without the transgenic approach," says a Monsanto spokesman. "The regulatory systems effectively ignore all these other methods, and are driven by politics, not science. As things stand, a non-GM plant would bypass the arguments against GM."

Rapid breakdown

But so far Monsanto has been unable to create conventional crops resistant to glyphosate, the herbicide it sells as Roundup. Glyphosate is regarded as one of the most benign herbicides because it breaks down relatively rapidly. That is not true of many of the herbicides to which companies have been able to breed resistant crops.

For instance, almost all Australia's oilseed rape now consists of strains bred to be resistant to broad-spectrum herbicides. The most popular, accounting for 72 per cent of the total grown, is "TT canola", which tolerates the triazine herbicides, including atrazine, an older herbicide suspected of poisoning frogs and polluting rivers.

The original strains were created by researchers at the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada, who cross-bred commercial canolas with a weedy relative, Brassica rapa, which had evolved resistance to triazines.

Another variety, "Clearfield" rapeseed, is resistant to the imidazolinone family of weedkillers. Scientists made it by chemically mutating rapeseed strains until they produced some strains resistant to the herbicide.

Both strains were approved without the fuss surrounding GM crops, despite arguments that imidazolinones and atrazine are worse for the environment than the herbicides such as glyphosate.

"The two canolas that were classically bred have greater problems with persistence of herbicides and resistance than the GM ones do," says Rick Roush, now of the University of California at Davis, who served for five years with Australia's GM regulation body, the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. "Atrazine is probably the most problematic of these two herbicides, as it is mobile in water and frequently appears in groundwater and waterways," says Chris Preston of the University of Adelaide. "Atrazine is persistent and in dry years may cause minor damage to subsequent wheat crops."

Rising use

Imidazolinones, meanwhile, can last so long in soil that it is impossible to grow a crop the following season. "Australians opposed to GM crops have totally ignored the fact that most of our canola is already herbicide tolerant, and have also ignored problems with currently used herbicides," says Preston.

In the UK the use of atrazine has increased from 34,000 kilograms a year in 1992 to over 130,000 kg in 2002, mostly because more naturally resistant maize and sweetcorn is being grown. Atrazine was one of the "conventional" treatments against which GM glyphosate-resistant maize was evaluated in the UK's farm-scale trials.

Critics say that glyphosate-resistant GM maize is bound to look good compared with atrazine, and that the comparison is irrelevant because of an impending European ban. But the UK has applied for an exemption from the ban for sweetcorn.

The EU ban does mean that TT Canola is unlikely to be grown in Europe. But Clearfield products are edging closer, with launch this year of imidazolinone-resistant sunflowers in Turkey, and the development of similar varieties for southern and eastern Europe. BASF, the company that makes Clearfield strains, has just launched imidazolinone-resistant wheat in Australia and may develop variants for the European market.

Even without herbicide-resistant crops, GM or otherwise, herbicide use has soared in the UK, with glyphosate use more than quadrupling in a decade (see graph). The biggest rise has been on farms, where farmers receive subsidies to reduce overproduction by temporarily leaving fields fallow, but keep these "set aside" fields free of weeds with glyphosate. Glyphosate use has also soared on cereals such as wheat and barley, to compensate for a side effect of a popular fungicide.

"There's no strategic control over technologies used in the countryside," says Johnson. "We have many well-meaning technologies, but not a means to regulate them." New scientist

By: Greenpeace

The first report into the extent to which genetically engineered organisms have 'leaked' into the environment - released today - reveals a disturbing picture of widespread contamination, illegal planting and negative agricultural side effects.

The report is a summary of incidents uncovered by the on-line Contamination Register (1) set up by Greenpeace and GeneWatch UK. It reveals a catalogue of highly disturbing incidents right across the world, including:

- Pork meat from genetically engineered pigs being sold to consumers
- Ordinary crops being contaminated with GE crops containing pharmaceuticals
- Growing and international distribution of illegal antibiotic resistant Maize seeds
- Planting of outlawed GE crops which have been smuggled into countries
- Mixing of unapproved GE crops in food, including shipments of food aid
- Inadvertent mixing of different GE strains even in high profile scientific field trials

The report reveals 113 such cases worldwide, involving 39 countries - twice as many countries as are officially allowed to grow GM crops since they were first commercialised in 1996. Worryingly, the frequency of these cases is increasing, with 11 countries affected in 2005 alone. Contamination has even been found in countries conducting supposedly ''carefully controlled" high-profile farm-scale evaluations, such as the UK. "This may well only be the tip of the iceberg, as there is no official global or national contamination register so far," said Dr. Sue Mayer of GeneWatch UK, who leads the team of investigators. "Most incidents of contamination are actually kept as confidential business information by companies as well as public authorities."

Greenpeace is calling for a mandatory international register of all such events to be set up, along with the adoption of minimum standards of identification and labelling of all international shipments of GE crops. "Without such biosafety standards ,the global community will have no chance of tracing and recalling dangerous GMOs, should this become necessary." said Benedikt Haerlin of Greenpeace International's Biosafety Protocol delegation.

The publication of the report comes only days before the latest meeting of the 132 countries who have signed the Biosafety Protocol (2), which is to establish standards of safety and information of GE crops in global food and feed trade. At their last meeting an imminent agreement was blocked by only two member states, Brazil and New Zealand. They were backed by the major GE exporting countries USA, Argentina and Canada, who are not members of the Protocol and want to restrict required identification to a meaningless note that a shipment "may contain" GE.

"All of these countries have national legislation to protect themselves from illegal GE imports. Still they want to deny the same rights and level of information to less developed countries, with no national Biosafety-laws and means to enforce them," concluded Haerlin. "Do they really want such unethical double standards and create dumping grounds for unidentified and illegal GE imports? We hope that Brazil, who will be hosting this meeting, will not betray the developing countries and cater to large agro-businesses at the expense of the environment."

Greenpeace is an independent campaigning organisation that uses non-violent creative confrontation to expose global environmental problems to force solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future. - raiders newsupdate

see - GM Contamination Report: Executive Summary from GreenPeace [93 Kb PDF]

- GM Contamination Report: Full Report from GreenPeace [470 Kb PDF]

By Carey Gillam Mon Mar 27, 3:46 PM ET KANSAS CITY, Missouri (Reuters) -

As he pores over plant tissue and petri dishes in a biotech seed lab in Johnston, Iowa, Luke Mehlo is half a world away from his home in South Africa.

But though the corn fields of Iowa bear little resemblance to the arid plains of Africa, the research center where Mehlo toils has become home to a unique joint venture that is merging African agricultural interests with U.S. money and technology.

The goal is to turn sorghum -- a common U.S. row crop used in animal feed, cereals and industrial products -- into a plant that can not only weather devastating drought but also yield a rich blend of vitamins and minerals. Researchers believe such a combination could help combat the hunger and malnutrition ravaging parts of Africa.

"A lot of people have died on the African continent, quite unnecessarily," said Mehlo, a molecular biotechnologist who came to Iowa from South Africa in October. "We seek to have a crop that will enable us to survive during disasters and food shortages."

TWEAKING GENES

Mehlo is one of a team of African scientists who will be working in Iowa over the next three years, tinkering with the genes of sorghum seeds. An estimated 300 million people in arid regions of Africa rely on sorghum as a food source along with other crops. But while conventional sorghum is already known to do well in drought conditions, it lacks certain key nutrients.

By taking genes from other crops as well as manipulating genes within the sorghum plant itself, scientists believe they can remake sorghum into a more easily digestible crop richer in vitamins A and E, iron, zinc and amino acids and protein.

Pioneer Hi-Bred International, a subsidiary of Dupont, is a key U.S. partner and the sole commercial player in the endeavor. Pioneer has donated $4.8 million in gene technology, and is lending manpower and facilities for visiting African scientists at its Johnston headquarters.

"Africa is a place where biotechnology is necessary," said Dean Oestreich, President of Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc. "It would be a big step to take and make a food crop more nutritious for people in Africa."

The patented technology donated by Pioneer has already shown feasibility in corn seeds, making successful genetic changes in sorghum likely as well, according to Paul Anderson, a Pioneer grain manager and a member of the oversight committee for the "African Biofortified Sorghum" project.

Still, it is expected to take eight years and a second round of funding before a specialized seed is ready for market.

Pioneer will have no rights to revenues from the biotech sorghum once it is developed and commercialized, said Anderson. But the company, already locked into tight competition in the commercial seeds market, hopes that success with biotech sorghum might help open doors for other biotech crops in countries currently skeptical of genetically altered crops.

GATES GIVES MONEY

Chief funding for the project comes from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in partnership with the National Institutes of Health. The foundation last summer awarded a $16.9 million grant for the project, making it the largest of four grants handed out by the foundation for the improvement of food through technology.

"Sorghum is a huge staple throughout the world, particularly in Africa where people suffer from some of the worst conditions," said Carol Dahl, director of the foundation's global health technologies group.

Indeed, millions of people in Africa are currently suffering starvation and malnutrition as extended drought and baking heat strip them of food and water.

Along with the sorghum project, the Gates group is funding projects aimed at creating more nutritious bananas, cassava and rice as part of a total of $450 million in grants for improved nutrition, disease prevention and treatment, Dahl said.

Biotech sorghum and other crops are not expected to eradicate the devastation caused by drought, but they could partly ease the pain, researchers believe.

"We have to wait... until we have a complete story," said Mehlo. "But we are already ahead of schedule and we have materials that are very very promising. There is so much light at the end of the tunnel." - yahoo.com