Why GMOs are dangerous?

Genetically modified organisms (GMO’s) are a broad group of plants, animals, and bacteria that are engineered for a wide variety of applications ranging from agricultural production to scientific research. The types of potential hazards posed by GMO’s vary according to the type of organism being modified and its intended application. Most of the concern surrounding GMO’s relates to their potential for negative effects on the environment and human health. Because GMO’s that could directly effect human health are primarily products that can enter the human food supply, this website focuses on genetically modified food. To date, the only types of products that have been approved for human consumption in the U.S. are genetically modified plants (FDA website).

All genetically modified foods that have been approved are considered by the government to be as safe as their traditional counterparts and are generally unregulated (FDA website). However, there are several types of potential health effects that could result from the insertion of a novel gene into an organism. Health effects of primary concern to safety assessors are production of new allergens, increased toxicity, decreased nutrition, and antibiotic resistance (Bernstein et al., 2003).Food AllergyFood Allergy affects approximately 5% of children and 2% of adults in the U.S. and is a significant public health threat (Bakshi, 2003). Allergic reactions in humans occur when a normally harmless protein enters the body and stimulates an immune response (Bernstein et al., 2003). If the novel protein in a GM food comes from a source that is know to cause allergies in humans or a source that has never been consumed as human food, the concern that the protein could elicit an immune response in humans increases. Although no allergic reactions to GM food by consumers have been confirmed, in vitro evidence suggesting that some GM products could cause an allergic reaction has motivated biotechnology companies to discontinue their development (Bakshi, 2003).Increased ToxicityMost plants produce substances that are toxic to humans. Most of the plants that humans consume produce toxins at levels low enough that they do not produce any adverse health effects. There is concern that inserting an exotic gene into a plant could cause it to produce toxins at higher levels that could be dangerous to humans. This could happen through the process of inserting the gene into the plant. If other genes in the plant become damaged during the insertion process it could cause the plant to alter its production of toxins. Alternatively, the new gene could interfere with a metabolic pathway causing a stressed plant to produce more toxins in response. Although these effects have not been observed in GM plants, they have been observed through conventional breeding methods creating a safety concern for GM plants. For example, potatoes conventionally bred for increased diseased resistance have produced higher levels of glycoalkaloids (GEO-PIE website). Decreased Nutritional ValueA genetically modified plant could theoretically have lower nutritional quality than its traditional counterpart by making nutrients unavailable or indigestible to humans. For example, phytate is a compound common in seeds and grains that binds with minerals and makes them unavailable to humans. An inserted gene could cause a plant to produce higher levels of phytate decreasing the mineral nutritional value of the plant (GEO-PIE). Another example comes from a study showing that a strain of genetically modified soybean produced lower levels of phytoestrogen compounds, believed to protect against heart disease and cancer, than traditional soybeans (Bakshi, 2003). Antibiotic resistance In recent years health professionals have become alarmed by the increasing number of bacterial strains that are showing resistance to antibiotics. Bacteria develop resistance to antibiotics by creating antibiotic resistance genes through natural mutation. Biotechnologists use antibiotic resistance genes as selectable markers when inserting new genes into plants. In the early stages of the process scientists do not know if the target plant will incorporate the new gene into its genome. By attaching the desired gene to an antibiotic resistance gene the new GM plant can be tested by growing it in a solution containing the corresponding antibiotic. If the plant survives scientists know that it has taken up the antibiotic resistance gene along with the desired gene. There is concern that bacteria living in the guts of humans and animals could pick up an antibiotic resistance gene from a GM plant before the DNA becomes completely digested (GEO-PIE website).

It is not clear what sort of risk the possibility of conferring antibiotic resistance to bacteria presents. No one has ever observed bacteria incorporating new DNA from the digestive system under controlled laboratory conditions. The two types of antibiotic resistance genes used by biotechnologists are ones that already exist in bacteria in nature so the process would not introduce new antibiotic resistance to bacteria. Never the less it is a concern and the FDA is encouraging biotechnologists to phase out the practice of using antibiotic resistance genes (GEO-PIE website).

Source:http://enhs.umn.edu 

Learn About F1 Hybrid Seeds

By Jackie Rhoades

Much is written in today’s gardening community about the desirability of heirloom plant varieties over F1 plants. What are F1 hybrid seeds? How did they come about and what are their strengths and weaknesses in the home garden of today?
 

What Are F1 Hybrid Seeds

What are F1 hybrid seeds? F1 hybrid seeds refers to the selective breeding of a plant by cross pollinating two different parent plants. In genetics, the term is an abbreviations for Filial 1 – literally ‘first children’. It is sometimes written as F₁, but the terms mean the same.

Hybridization has been around for a while now. Gregor Mendel, an Augustinian monk, first recorded his results in cross breeding beans in the 19^th century. He took two different but both pure (homozygous or same gene) strains of beans and cross-pollinated them by hand. He noted that the plants grown from the resulting F1 seeds were of a heterozygous or different gene make up. These new F1 plants carried the characteristics that were dominant in each parent, but were identical to neither. These beans were the first documented F1 plants and from Mendel’s experiments, the field of genetics was born.

Don’t plants cross pollinate in the wild? Of course they do. F1 hybrids can occur naturally if conditions are right. Peppermint is the result of a natural cross between two other mint varieties. However, the F1 hybrid seeds that you find packaged on the seed rack at your local garden center are different from wild crossed seeds in that their resultant plants have predictable characteristics that can be duplicated over and over. Not so for most wild crosses.

And the peppermint we just mentioned? It’s perpetuated through the regrowth of its root system and not through seeds. The plants are sterile and can’t propagate through normal genetic reproduction, which is another common characteristic of F1 plants. Most are either sterile or their seeds don’t breed true and yes, in some cases, seed companies do this with genetic engineering so that their F1 plant refinements can’t be stolen and replicated.

Why use F1 Hybrid seeds?

So what are F1 hybrid seeds used for and are they better than the heirloom varieties we hear so much about? The use of F1 plants really blossomed when people began to do more vegetable shopping in grocery store chains than in their own back yards. Plant breeders sought more uniform color and size, looked for more definite harvest deadlines and durability in shipping.

Today, plants are developed with a specific purpose in mind and not all of those reasons are about commerce. Some F1 seeds may mature faster and flower earlier, making the plant more suitable for shorter growing seasons. There might be higher yields from certain F1 seeds that will result in larger crops from smaller acreage. One of the most important accomplishments of hybridization is disease resistance.

There is also something called hybrid vigor. Plants grown from F1 hybrid seeds tend to grow stronger and have greater survival rates than their homozygous relatives. These plants need fewer pesticides and other chemical treatments to survive and that’s good for the environment.

There are, however, a few downsides to using F1 hybrid seeds. F1 seeds are often more expensive because they cost more to produce. All that hand pollination doesn’t come cheap. Nor does the laboratory testing these plants undergo. F1 seeds can’t be harvested by the thrifty gardener for use the following year. Some gardeners feel that the flavor has been sacrificed to uniformity and those gardeners might be right, but others might disagree when they taste that first sweet taste of summer in a tomato that ripens weeks ahead of the heirlooms.

So, what are F1 hybrid seeds? F1 seeds are useful additions to the home garden. They have their strengths and weaknesses just as Grandma’s heirlooms plants do. Gardeners shouldn’t rely on fad or fancy, but should try a range of selections, regardless of the source, until they find those varieties best suited to their gardening needs.

Source:http://www.gardeningknowhow.com

Scientific truth about agri biotechnology

NASIR BUTT

Introduction of new technologies has always been resisted in any field by the people who are the beneficiaries of the status-quo and those afraid of any new technology. Same thing is happening to agriculture in Pakistan and there is heated debate in the country on the introduction of genetically-modified or biotech crops, although data shows it is the most rapidly adopted crop technology in the history of modern agriculture.
Introduced first in 1996, today genetically-modified or biotech crops are being grown by millions of farmers across the globe – from the United States to Philippines. According to the latest report of International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA), which has been tracking global biotech crop adoption trends since the inception of biotechnology in 1996, the global adoption of biotech crops continued to rise in 2012 with new countries realising the benefits. Hectarage of biotech crops increased every single year between 1996-2012 with double-digit growth rates, reflecting the confidence and trust of millions of risk-averse farmers around the world in both developing and industrial countries.At a time when the world is turning to science and technology, particularly biotechnology, to meet much-needed challenges in agriculture, Pakistan seems to be lacking a national strategy and plan of action to fully use this revolutionary science.
While there is a disinformation and misinformation campaign because of lack of understanding of agri-sciences, the voices of the experts, who know what agricultural biotechnology exactly is, are being ignored. Biotech crops are not new to Pakistan. Pakistan has already embraced crop biotechnology by commercialising Bt cotton (although through informal channel). According to the ISAAA, Pakistan is among the 10 countries which grew biotech crops on more than one million hectares in 2012. Now, Pakistan is in the process of approving GM corn, whose field trials have been completed as per government rules and regulations for commercial cultivation.
Before clarifying myths that are propagated by anti-science and low-quality seed companies, we must know that what exactly biotechnology is and how it works. Have you ever wondered where our crops come from and what were they like thousands of years ago, or hundreds of years ago? The truth is that our food crops today are in fact very different from the original wild plants from which they were derived. The fact is that crop biotechnology is just an evolution of traditional agricultural methods and merely an extension of traditional breeding.
Almost all GM crops are based on two well-established and rigorously tested technologies. First, Bt crops produce a bacterial protein known as Bacillus thuringiensis. It’s naturally occurring—and it’s widely used by organic farmers to selectively kill pest insects. Genetically engineered Bt crops simply produce their own Bt. The effects are identical to what happens on organic farms—which is what makes protests against genetically-engineered Bt crops seem so bizarre to scientists. The net result is that Bt crops increase yields because farmers lose fewer crops to insect pests.
The other major GM crops are those designed to be herbicide-tolerant, most commonly glyphosate, and better known as Roundup. Glyphosate is biodegradable and breaks down rapidly in the environment. Because the weed killer is more powerful and less toxic than the chemicals that it competed with, farmers quickly adopted glyphosate.
In case of GM corn, plants have been genetically modified to have agronomic desirable traits. Traits that have been engineered into corn include resistance to insect pests and herbicide tolerance. It means that GM corn makes a protein that kills specific insect pests without the use of insecticides. Besides, it can also reduce the losses caused by weeds. In a nutshell, GM corn is just an improved version of traditional corn and can be the solution to the major problems (insect pests and weeds) our corn farmers are facing today. The GM corn has the capability of significantly reducing the losses caused by certain chewing insect pests and weeds which in turn results in higher production. This transgenic maize provides in-plant protection with dual modes of action to protect against certain above-ground pests that plague Pakistani farmers including the corn Stem borer, (Chilo partellus), American Bollworm (Helicoverpa Armigera), army worm (Spodoptera Litura) and beet armyworm (Spodoptera Exigua). It also provides the corn plant with tolerance to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup(r) brand agricultural herbicides, opening up new possibilities for weed control for Pakistani farmers. This technology is also environment friendly because use of pesticides will decrease considerably.
Therefore, the scientific truth is that biotechnology is just a refinement of breeding techniques that have been used to improve plants for thousands of years. This technology is simply a more precise science, so scientists are able to isolate a specific gene to make exact changes to a crop. Scientists around the world agree that the risks associated with crop plants developed using biotechnology are the same as those for similar varieties developed using traditional breeding methods.

Source: http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk

Conventional Plant Breeding

Since the practice of agriculture began, eight to ten thousand years ago, farmers have been altering the genetic makeup of the crops they grow. Early farmers selected the best looking plants and seeds and saved them to plant for the next season. Then, once the science of genetics became better understood, plant breeders used what they knew about the genes of a plant to select for specific desirable traits to develop improved varieties.

The selection for features such as faster growth, higher yields, pest and disease resistance, larger seeds, or sweeter fruits has dramatically changed domesticated plant species compared to their wild relatives. For example, when corn was first grown in North and South America, thousands of years ago, the corn cobs farmers harvested were smaller than one’s little finger. Today, there are hundreds of varieties of corn, some of which produce cobs as long as one’s forearm.

Conventional plant breeding has been going on for hundreds of years, and is still commonly used today. Early farmers discovered that some crop plants could be artificially mated or cross-pollinated to increase yields. Desirable characteristics from different parent plants could also be combined in the offspring. When the science of plant breeding was further developed in the 20th century, plant breeders understood better how to select superior plants and breed them to create new and improved varieties of different crops. This has dramatically increased the productivity and quality of the plants we grow for food, feed and fiber.

The art of recognizing desirable traits and incorporating them into future generations is very important in plant breeding. Breeders scrutinize their fields and travel long distances in search of individual plants that exhibit desirable traits. A few of these traits occasionally arise spontaneously through a process called mutation, but the natural rate of mutation is very slow and unreliable to produce all the plant traits that breeders would like to see. (See box “Mutation Breeding”.)

Hybrid Seed Technology

The end result of plant breeding is either an open-pollinated (OP) variety or an F1 (first filial generation) hybrid variety. OP varieties, when maintained and produced properly, retain the same characteristics when multiplied. The only technique used with OP varieties is the selection of the seed-bearing plants.

Hybrid seeds are an improvement over open pollinated seeds in terms of qualities such as yield, resistance to pests and diseases, and time to maturity. Hybrid seeds are developed by the hybridization or crossing of parent lines that are ‘pure lines’ produced through inbreeding. Pure lines are plants that “breed true” or produce sexual offspring that closely resemble their parents. By crossing pure lines, a uniform population of F1 hybrid seed can be produced with predictable characteristics.

The simplest way to explain how to develop an F1 hybrid is to take an example. Let us say a plant breeder observes a particularly good habit in a plant, but with poor flower color, and in another plant of the same type he sees good color but poor habit. The best plant of each type is then taken and self-pollinated (in isolation) each year and, each year, the seed is re-sown. Eventually, every time the seed is sown the same identical plants will appear. When they do, this is known as a ‘pure line.’

If the breeder now takes the pure line of each of the two plants he originally selected and cross pollinates the two by hand the result is known as an “F1 hybrid.” Plants are grown from the seed produced, and the result of this cross pollination should have the combined traits of the two parents.

This is the simplest form of hybridization, but there are complications, of course. A completely pure line can sometimes take seven or eight years to achieve. Sometimes, a pure line is made up of several previous crossings to build in desirable features. The resulting plant is then grown on until it is genetically pure before use in hybridization.

In addition to qualities like good vigor, trueness to type, heavy yields and high uniformity which hybrid plants enjoy, other characteristics such as earliness, disease and insect resistance and good water holding ability have been incorporated into most F1 hybrids.

Unfortunately, these advantages come with a price. Because creating F1 hybrids involves many years of preparation to create pure lines that have to be constantly maintained so that F1 seeds can be harvested each year, the seeds then become more expensive. The problem is compounded because to ensure that no self-pollination takes place, all the hybridization of the two pure lines, sometimes, has to be done by hand.

Another disadvantage is if the seeds of the F1 hybrids are used for growing the next crops, the resulting plants do not perform as well as the F1 material - resulting in inferior yields and vigor. As a consequence, the farmer has to purchase new F1 seeds from the plant breeder each year. The farmer is, however, compensated by higher yields and better quality of the crop.

Though more expensive, hybrid seeds have had a tremendous impact on agricultural productivity. Today, nearly all corn and 50% of all rice are hybrids (DANIDA).

In the US, the widespread use of corn hybrids, coupled with improved cultural practices by farmers, has more than tripled corn grain yields over the past 50 years from an average of 35 bushels per acre in the 1930s to 115 bushels per acre in the 1990s. No other major crop anywhere in the world even comes close to equaling that sort of success story.

Hybrid rice technology helped China increase its rice production from 140 million tons in 1978 to 188 million tons in 1990. Research at the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) and in other countries indicates that hybrid rice technology offers opportunities for increasing rice varietal yields by 15-20%. And this is achievable with the improved, semi-dwarf, and inbred varieties (IRRI).

Many cultivars of popular vegetables or ornamental plants are F1 hybrids. In terms of improved plant characteristics, tropical vegetable breeders can point to some rather clear achievements over the last two decades:

• Yield improvement. Hybrids often outyield traditional OP selections by 50-100% due to its improved vigor, improved genetic disease resistance, improved fruit setting under stress, and higher female/male flower ratios.
• Extended growing season. Hybrids often mature up to 15 days earlier than local OP varieties. For many crops, the hybrid’s relative advantage over the OP is most pronounced under stress conditions.
• Quality improvement. Hybrids have helped stabilize product quality at a higher, and more uniform level – this implies improved consumption quality (e.g. firm flesh of wax gourd, crispy taste of watermelon).

Mutation Breeding

In the late 1920s, researchers discovered that they could greatly increase the number of these variations or mutations by exposing plants to X-rays and chemicals. “Mutation breeding” was further developed after World War II, when the techniques of the nuclear age became widely available. Plants were exposed to gamma rays, protons, neutrons, alpha particles, and beta particles to see if these would induce useful mutations. Chemicals, too, such as sodium azide and ethyl methanesulphonate, were used to cause mutations.

Mutation breeding efforts continue around the world today. Of the 2,252 officially released mutation breeding varieties, 1,019 or almost half have been released during the last 15 years. Examples of plants that have been produced via mutation breeding include wheat, barley, rice, potatoes, soybeans, and onions. (For FAOs’ Mutant Variety Database, visit http://www-mvd.iaea.org/MVD/default.htm.)

Conclusion

Conventional plant breeding resulting in open pollinated varieties (OP) or hybrid varieties has had a tremendous impact on agricultural productivity over the last decades. While an extremely important tool, conventional plant breeding also has its limitations. First, breeding can only be done between two plants that can sexually mate with each other. This limits the new traits that can be added to those that already exist in a particular species. Second, when plants are crossed, many traits are transferred along with the trait/s of interest - including those traits that have undesirable effects on yield potential.

References

1. Bauman, F. and Crane, P.L. 1992. Hybrid corn - History, development and selection considerations. National Corn Handbook. Purdue University, US.
2. DANIDA. 2002. Assessment of potentials and constraints for development and use of plant biotechnology in relation to plant breeding and crop production in developing countries. Working paper. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Denmark.
3. East-West Seeds 1982-2002. 2002. Vegetable Breeding for Market Development. Edited by Karl Kunz. Bangkok, Thailand.
4. Food and Agriculture Organization. 2002. Crop Biotechnology: A working paper for administrators and policy makers in Sub-Saharan Africa.
5. History of Plant Breeding (http://www.colostate.edu/programs/lifesciences/TransgenicCrops/history.html)
6. Hybrid varieties and saving seed (http://aggie-horticulture.tamu.edu/plantanswers/vegetables/seed.html)
7. International Rice Research Institute. (http://www.irri.org)

Source

Agricultural sector promotes biotechnology

Wednesday, July-10-2013

National Food Security and Research Federal Minister Sikandar Hayat Khan Bosan, discussed the need to promote biotechnology at the launch ceremony of the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) Report-44 on the global status of commercialised biotech crops.

The minister said Pakistan is an agricultural country and 70% of its population is directly or indirectly dependent on agriculture. In order to meet the needs of the growing population, modern agricultural technologies must be used to increase crop yields.

Bosan said biotech crops can significantly increase productivity and can fuel rural economic growth that helps reduce poverty in the country. He also said that the use of biotech crops can help ensure food security. The minister said that a farmer oriented national strategy was needed to promote understanding of biotechnology amongst farmers, and develop biotechnology at the grassroots level.

“In the future, our country needs to work out plans for drought control, use nitrogen efficiently, increase nutrition value of food crops by employing modern farming methods and also develop a chain for sustainable and quality supply of food and feed in the country”, said Bosan.

According to the minister, Pakistan was amongst the first few countries to realize the potential of biotechnology in the early 1970s but over time the implementation process slowed down.

Source: The Express Tribune
News Collected by agrinfobank.com Team

How to Avoid Genetically Engineered Food by Green Peace

How to Avoid Genetically Engineered Food by Green Peace

Biotechnology adoption can help overcome agriculture challenges

Pakistan can address challenges in agriculture by using biotechnology as globally the adoption of genetically modified crops has been a success with proven socio-economic benefits.
In addition to meeting food security challenge, genetically modified/biotech crops offer multiple economic, crop management, productivity, and environmental benefits. Benefits that these crops offer include, but not limited to, better yields and guarding against insect pests and weeds as well as being cost effective and less labour intensive.
These views were expressed by the experts of biotechnology industry while briefing a delegation of the Agricultural Journalists Association (AJA) about latest agricultural technologies including biotechnology during their visit to Monsanto Pakistan's state-of-the-art research centre in Manga Mandi, where the company is conducting field trials of its GM corn product and various vegetables and fruits. The journalists also visited the field trails sites.
On this occasion, Monsanto Pakistan Regulatory Affairs Lead Muhammad Asim, and Breeding Lead Abdul Ghaffar briefed the visitors about the benefits of GM corn as well as biotechnology. They informed the journalists that their company had completed the field trials of GM corn and now they were awaiting government's approval to launch the product in the market. They claimed that GM corn can increase the productivity of corn, an important food crop after wheat and rice, by considerably decreasing the losses caused by insect pests and weeds. They said that farmers were well aware of this problem with no solution. They said Pakistan already had a quantum jump in corn production after introduction of hybrid varieties. They claimed that yield increase in spring season is at 2.5 times higher whereas in autumn is 3.5 times. According to their briefing in 1990 spring yield of corn was around 40 maund per acre which jumped to 100 maund per acre in 2010.
However, they were of the view that more increase in production could only be ensured through introduction GM varieties. They said that corn is sown on one million hectares in Pakistan including 445,000 hectares in Punjab and 550,000 hectares in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. They said consumption of corn in Pakistan is approximately about 3.8 million tones and its increasing.

Source: http://www.brecorder.com

Original Article

Challenges to Biotechnology in Pakistan

By  Sayyar Khan Kazi

We are living in an age, where almost all aspects of human life have been revolutionized by the highly sophisticated and advanced technologies.  In recent years, we have witnessed on print and electronic media, several scientific endeavors to target innovations and discoveries beyond the boundaries of our planet Earth. Technologically advanced countries such as the USA, European Union, Japan and emerging powers like China and India are beating one another to have speedy access to the mysteries of other planets.

In the quest of unraveling scientific mysteries, several missions from these countries have been launched to Moon, Mars and other planets in order to lead and dictate the terms upon which the human future will rely. Overall, there has been unpreced- ented progress towards industrialization that revolutionized every aspect of human life including medical and health care, aviation, urbanization, infrastructure and agriculture. 

This off course presents a bright picture of the evolution of human civilizations as a result of thousands years of transformation from living in an age of stone to highly civilized societies equipped with social and scientific tools to govern this planet Earth.

Like other scientific disciplines, Agriculture science has received much importance due to the growing needs of expanding populations for more food, feed, fiber and alternative energy resources. In this connection, the advent of modern biotechnology and genetic engineering tools has enabled scientists to manipulate the genetic material of organisms in order to exploit its hidden enormous potential.

In the past two decades, biotechnological tools have brought a paradigm shift in the orthodox and traditional ways and means of improving our various industries, health sciences, environment and agriculture.

For example, in agriculture, since 1995, there has been a sudden boom in the production of transgenic varieties of agricultural crops with enhanced protection from insect pests and diseases. Farmers around the world have gained maximum economic gains from the adoption of these improved crop varieties.

The wide adoption of these improved crop varieties by farmers around the world has resulted a huge economic benefit and positive effects on the environment by less pesticide application.

After the successful production and adoption of disease resistant crop plants, agriculture biotechnology is entering into a new phase of developing second generation transgenic crops that will be able to grow on marginal lands with high water and soil salinity and drought stresses.

It is anticipated that the development of these crop varieties will help to feed the growing populations, particularly in regions of Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia, where majority people are facing hunger, poor quality and malnourished food.

Keeping in view the promising role of biotechnology for securing the future of our coming generations, increasing number of countries, public, private sectors and multinational companies have joined the race and invested billions of dollars for research and development activities.

In some areas, scientists have excelled and accomplished significant targets like crop disease resistance as mentioned above and development of accurate laboratory tools for genetic dissection, diagnosis and research on human genetic diseases.

Pakistan, a developing country is facing multi-faceted challenges including energy crisis, food security, rapid urbanization and declining fresh water resources in the wake of increasing population and the more global phenomenon of climate change.

Like other countries, Pakistan also took a bold step towards adoption of modern biotechnology and started to establish biotechnology centers across the country. In all key national science and technology policies, the role of biotechnology as a potential tool for the growth and socio-economic development has been well acknowledged.
In National science and technology policies launched in 1997 and later in 2009, biotechnology was emphasized one of the priority areas. Pakistan also contributed and pioneered the establishment of an International Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (ICGEB), initially proposed to be built in Pakistan but later on jointly built in India and Italy.
Despite the initial recognition and quick response, biotechnology did not take roots as an emerging source of socio-economic development in the country. For example, we started research on insect resistant transgenic cotton varieties back in 1995 and developed some transgenic lines but it took almost 15 years to launch legal commercial cultivation of these varieties in 2010.

The other leading cotton producing countries namely USA, China and India adopted and commercialized transgenic cotton varieties in 1996, 1997 and 2002 respectively and farmers in these countries earned huge economic gains.

In addition, we are also lagging behind other countries in development of second generation transgenic crops with improved tolerance to environmental stresses and crops for bio-energy production. The dependency on fossil fuels as energy sources is on the decline because of the enormous potential of bio-feed stocks (crops, trees and grasses) to produce bio-energy products such as ethanol, biodiesel, butanol and petroleum on industrial scale.Source: The Frontier Post

Biotechnology: Cotton Production Set to Increase

BY ORTON KIISHWEKO, 28 APRIL 2013

RECENTLY, the Ministry of State in the Vice-President's Office (Environment) convened a meeting for stakeholders in the science community to deliberate on how crop genetic engineering can be used in the interest of agriculture and the local people in general.

At the meeting some stakeholders had concerns on whether there is conclusive research findings that show genetically engineered crops have no harm on human beings.

The same week, a renowned Harvard University scholar, Prof Calestous Juma visited East Africa and said biotechnology and genetic engineering have the potential to do for agriculture, what mobile technology has done for the communications sector in Africa.

Prof Juma advocated for the adoption of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), saying they would boost food and income security. He, however, cautioned that it would be detrimental to adopt GMOs without clear, flexible and supportive biotechnology regulations. Prof Juma has authored several books on Africa's development, including The New Harvest, which is arguably today's most authoritative scholarly work on agriculture in Africa.

In his book, he argued that African agriculture is currently at a crossroads, at which persistent food shortages are compounded by threats from climate change. But, as the book argues, Africa faces three major opportunities that can transform its agriculture into a force for economic growth: advances in science and technology; the creation of regional markets and the emergence of a new crop of entrepreneurial leaders dedicated to the continent's economic improvement.

Filled with case studies from within Africa and success stories from developing nations around the world, The New Harvest outlines the policies and institutional changes necessary to promote agricultural innovation across the African continent. Incorporating research from academia, government, civil society and private sector, the book suggests multiple ways that individual African countries can work with others at the regional level to develop local knowledge and resources, harness technological innovation, encourage entrepreneurship, increase agricultural output, create markets and improve infrastructure.

He emphasised the role of technology in transforming livelihoods, insisting that if Africa didn't embrace GMOs in agriculture, the problems like climate change, pests and diseases that have dogged the sector over the years would devour production to shocking levels. He decried the phenomenon of resisting new technologies, saying it won't help Africa to develop. On the safety of GMOs, he compared the current debate to the rumours that were circulated during the early days of mobile technology that the phones would cause brain cancer.

He said instead of focusing on rumours that discredit GMOs, it is prudent for governments to empower institutions to effectively check the safety standards of each product introduced on the market. He said biotechnology had caused a 24 per cent increase in cotton yield per acre and a 50 per cent growth in cotton profit among US smallholder farmers between 2006 and 2008. It raised consumption expenditure by 18% during the period.

He cited another report which said GMO crops that are pest-resistant had suppressed pests even beyond gardens where they were planted to assist farmers who don't grow GMOs. "Biotechnology and in particular GMOs are not per se more risky than conventional plant breeding," he asserted, and explained that genetic engineering would make agriculture more attractive and reduce the number of youth running away from rural areas.

The scholar's position brought into focus the importance of genetic engineering perhaps starting with non-food crops in Tanzania, including cotton. Locally, stakeholders have urged that the government should institute a policy that allows agricultural scientists to conduct research and trials on GMOs in different research centres. The Environmental Management Act does not allow the application of such research and that it should therefore be amended. For example, one of the crops whose future has elicited so much debate is cotton.

Questions have been asked as to whether Bt Cotton can address the challenges in the cotton sector. The Tanzanian cotton sector has undergone dramatic changes since liberalisation in 1994. Stimulated by high producer prices, it has held either its position as either the most or second most important export crop in Tanzania in recent years. An estimated 40 per cent of the entire Tanzanian population is believed to derive their livelihood either directly or indirectly from cotton, grown by as many as half a million of mostly smallholder farmers.

A recent World Bank publication remarks that the sector is unique in that it is marked with too much competition amongst buyers - resulting in higher producer prices yet lower qualities - compared to the other sub Saharan cotton economies. This increased competition- as a trade-off-also resulted in comparatively lower yields, as credit based input provisioning is challenging in an environment where an overcapacity in ginning fuels side-selling.

The earlier South African case is illustrative in that the Tanzanian supply chain put into place via contract farming could serve a similar fate of struggling with recovering the debt and providing subsidized inputs, although measures are developed by the TCB to combat these issues. In addition to low yields obtained in a rain-fed environment, farmers in the sector struggle with lack of access to credit and extension service.

Research in the cotton sector also has been limited with poor seed quality, although the new UK M08 variety - developed at the Ukiriguru Cotton Institute - is planned for release as early as 2013/14. Furthermore, the intense competition has resulted in a comparatively lower cotton quality, as buyers are more focused on securing their quantities for their orders. While the quality is improved by half the ginneries operating roller gins and the entire harvest being hand-picked, the sector continues to suffer from the collapse of the textile industry after liberalization.

On average, only around 20 percent of the ginned cotton is consumed by domestic textile industries. The other 80 per cent are exported, thus revealing a potential source of domestic value addition as an estimated 90 per cent of the profits are obtained abroad (TCB 2010). These challenges were recognised by the Tanzanian Cotton Board as outlined in its Cotton Board Strategy of 2011-2013.

Outside of its domestic domain, the cotton sector is plagued by a range of global structural issues. These include competition from synthetic fibres and a long term decline in terms-of-trade for agricultural commodities (that was reversed in the short-term during the commodity booms in the last few years).

Courtesy: All Africa

BASIC QUESTIONS ON GMO’S

By: Frank Lipman

 

WHAT ARE GMO’S OR GE’S?

A GMO (genetically modified organism) or GE (genetically engineered) food is created when the DNA of different species is fused to form a type of plant or food that does not exist in nature or is not created by traditional cross-breeding. Foreign genes from one species are extracted and artificially forced into the genes of an unrelated plant or animal usually in a laboratory.

WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS?

The major benefit of all commercial GMO’s is that they are bred to either tolerate direct application of herbicides and/or have the ability to produce their own pesticides. They have not been bred to increase yield, become drought tolerant, improve nutrition or to have any other benefit to the consumer. So at present they have no health benefit, their benefits are purely economic.

 

HAVEN’T FARMERS BEEN DOING THIS FOR YEARS?

No they have not! Traditional breeding makes it possible to mate a pig with a different pig to create a new variety of pig, the same with hybridizing different tomato seeds for example. They never combined totally unrelated species such as plants and animals together. With genetic engineering however, scientists can now overcome the barriers established by nature and create traits that are almost impossible to achieve through natural processes such as cross-breeding or grafting. For example, they have spliced fish genes into tomatoes.

ARE GMO FOODS LABELLED AS SUCH?

No they are not, despite the fact that 80% of processed foods are believed to contain GMO’s. Political influence and money has once again wielded its power and prevented the passing of labeling laws even though 87% of Americans are in favor of labeling them and 53% would not eat GM foods.
This is in sharp contrast to most other developed nations around the world, where there are significant restrictions or outright bans on GMO’s because they’re not considered proven safe. The industry is fighting hard to prevent labeling of GM foods, so we, the consumers, need to make a stand.

 

WHAT’S HAPPENING IN OTHER PLACES AROUND THE WORLD?

Many parts of the world are demanding an end to GMO crop cultivation. In Europe, over 175 regions and over 4500 municipalities have declared themselves GM-free zones. And in 2009, Germany along with France, Hungary, Italy, Greece, Austria, Poland and Romania banned Monsanto’s MON 810 GM corn because of its documented dangers to biodiversity and human health. Additionally, states in Australia, regions in New Zealand and Brazil and the countries like Venezuela, Zambia, Sudan, Angola and others, all want to be GM-free.The balanced reporting of the press in Europe of the dangers of GMO’s made a significant contribution to the decision to reject GMO’s.

ARE THERE ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS?

Yes there are. Except for soy which does not cross-pollinate, pollen from GM crops can contaminate nearby crops of the same kind. In Mexico for example, it has been found that almost all heritage varieties of corn have some contamination. In addition, studies are showing that pesticide producing crops (GMO crops) are contaminating nearby streams thereby affecting aquatic life too. Additionally, beneficial insects may be harmed too and super weeds are evolving as the develop resistance to herbicides. When that happens, more herbicide is used to try to control the weeds and the benefits of herbicide resistant crops is decreased or negated. There is little doubt then that the long- term effects on the environment can be disastrous.
These have been adapted from http://www.responsibletechnology.org/ and a few other sources.

If you want to watch an indepth video of GMO foods, please watch this excellent video http://www.drfranklipman.com/video-on-gmo-foods/

 

Refernce: http://www.drfranklipman.com/basic-questions-on-gmos/

 

 

 

 

WikiLeaks: US targets EU over GM crops

The US embassy in Paris advised Washington to start a military-style trade war against any Euroxpean Union country which opposed genetically modified (GM) crops, newly released WikiLeaks cables show. In response to moves by France to ban a Monsanto GM corn variety in late 2007, the ambassador, Craig Stapleton, a friend and business partner of former US president George Bush, asked Washington to penalise the EU and particularly countries which did not support the use of GM crops. "Country team Paris recommends that we calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU since this is a collective responsibility, but that also focuses in part on the worst culprits. "The list should be measured rather than vicious and must be sustainable over the long term, since we should not expect an early victory. Moving to retaliation will make clear that the current path has real costs to EU interests and could help strengthen European pro-biotech voices," said Stapleton, who with Bush co-owned the Dallas/Fort Worth-based Texas Rangers baseball team in the 1990s. In other newly released cables, US diplomats around the world are found to have pushed GM crops as a strategic government and commercial imperative. Because many Catholic bishops in developing countries have been vehemently opposed to the controversial crops, the US applied particular pressure to the pope's advisers. Cables from the US embassy in the Vatican show that the US believes the pope is broadly supportive of the crops after sustained lobbying of senior Holy See advisers, but regrets that he has not yet stated his support. The US state department special adviser on biotechnology as well as government biotech advisers based in Kenya lobbied Vatican insiders to persuade the pope to declare his backing. "… met with [US monsignor] Fr Michael Osborn of the Pontifical Council Cor Unum, offering a chance to push the Vatican on biotech issues, and an opportunity for post to analyse the current state of play on biotech in the Vatican generally," says one cable in 2008. "Opportunities exist to press the issue with the Vatican, and in turn to influence a wide segment of the population in Europe and the developing world," says another. But in a setback, the US embassy found that its closest ally on GM, Cardinal Renato Martino, head of the powerful Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace and the man who mostly represents the pope at the United Nations, had withdrawn his support for the US. "A Martino deputy told us recently that the cardinal had co-operated with embassy Vatican on biotech over the past two years in part to compensate for his vocal disapproval of the Iraq war and its aftermath – to keep relations with the USG [US government] smooth. According to our source, Martino no longer feels the need to take this approach," says the cable. In addition, the cables show US diplomats working directly for GM companies such as Monsanto. "In response to recent urgent requests by [Spanish rural affairs ministry] state secretary Josep Puxeu and Monsanto, post requests renewed US government support of Spain's science-based agricultural biotechnology position through high-level US government intervention." It also emerges that Spain and the US have worked closely together to persuade the EU not to strengthen biotechnology laws. In one cable, the embassy in Madrid writes: "If Spain falls, the rest of Europe will follow." The cables show that not only did the Spanish government ask the US to keep pressure on Brussels but that the US knew in advance how Spain would vote, even before the Spanish biotech commission had reported. • This article was amended on 21 January 2011. The original sited the Texas Rangers team in St Louis. This has been corrected.

The right to know what you are eating

BY: Gary Hirshberg and Eric Schlosser

An unprecedented agricultural experiment is being conducted at America's dinner tables. While none of the processed food we ate 20 years ago contained genetically engineered ingredients, now 75 percent of it does - even though the long-term human health and environmental impacts are unknown. The Food and Drug Administration doesn't require labeling of genetically engineered foods. But as the current drive to get labeling on the ballot in California confirms, consumers want to know whether our food contains these revolutionary new things.
In 1992, the FDA ruled that genetically engineered foods didn't need independent safety tests or labeling requirements before being introduced. But one of its own scientists disagreed, warning there were "profound differences" with genetically engineered foods. Genetically engineered seed manufacturers were allowed to sell their products without telling consumers. A 2006 survey found that 74 percent of Americans had no idea that genetically engineered foods were already being sold.
Biotech companies have fought labeling, claiming genetically engineered crops are "substantially the same" and produce larger yields - both unproven claims. But genetically engineered crops have led to the increased use of pesticides, often sold by the same companies that make genetically engineered seeds.
About 94 percent of U.S. grown soybeans are genetically engineered and contain a gene that protects them against glyphosate, now the nation's most widely used pesticide. But glyphosate is becoming ineffective as "superweeds" become resistant to it, forcing farmers to use even stronger herbicides. Widespread adoption of genetically engineered corn has also led to pesticide resistance.
Almost all the research on the safety of genetically engineered foods has been conducted by the companies that sell them. The potential harm to developing fetuses is of concern. A study of pregnant women found genetically engineered corn toxins in 93 percent of the women and 80 percent of their unborn children. All of their umbilical cords had glyphosate residues. Biotech companies say genetically engineered crops aren't different - but defend their patent rights by arguing they're unique and that anybody who grows them without permission should be prosecuted. These companies want it both ways.
Genetically engineered crops are different. They often contain genetic material from different species. Some survive large doses of pesticide, others produce their own pesticide, and many do both. That's why they must be labeled. A label allows people to choose. It lets the free market, not industry lobbyists, determine the fate of genetically engineered foods. If genetically engineered foods are so great, companies that sell them should be proud to label them.
Fifty countries, including the European Union, require genetically engineered food labeling.
A recent poll found 93 percent of Americans think genetically engineered foods should be labeled. This month, 384,000 people signed a Just Label It ( www.justlabelit.org) petition urging the FDA to mandate genetically engineered food labeling nationally. The FDA justifies its refusal to label on an agency rule that requires labeling only if a food tastes or smells different or has a different nutritional value. The FDA should change that policy - or make an exception for genetically engineered foods, as it did for irradiated foods.
The FDA doesn't let pharmaceutical companies test new drugs on people without their informed consent. Consumers should have the same right to know when it comes to what they eat. But even the narrow dictates of that FDA rule shouldn't block the labeling of genetically engineered foods. Everything about how they were introduced and spread nationwide, without our knowledge or consent, leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

Gary Hirshberg is the president and CE-Yo of Stonyfield Yogurt. Eric Schlosser is the author of "Fast Food Nation" and co-producer of the documentary "Food, Inc."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/The-right-to-know-what-you-are-eating-2289668.php#ixzz2GkPQyvKO

Tomato’s Genome Sequence Finally Cracked!

4

4

 

Though science has still not replied to the eternal question of whether tomato is a fruit or a vegetable, it has stepped closer to answering it. The full genome sequence of tomato has been discovered by an international team of scientists, working across nationalities. Not only has the team cracked the genetic code of cultivated tomato but also that of the wild variety. It is being hoped that this development would help farmers grow tastier and more nutritious varieties of tomatoes in the future.

1) The Genetic Code

The full genome sequence of tomato, Solanum lycopersicum, has been named “Heinz 1706” and it has been published in the science journal “Nature.” Describing the details of the genetic code, the scientists said that all the 35,000 genes of tomato are well displayed in this sequence along with their functional parts, orientation, types, and relative positions. The researchers found that the tomatoes were made up of about 35,000 genes, arranged on 12 chromosomes and each of those genes is responsible for any characteristic that tomato shows. The “Nature” article describes the genetic results, “The tomato genome sequence provides insights into fleshy fruit evolution.” Apart from the domesticated or cultivated tomato, the researchers have also been able to crack the genetic sequence of its wild relative Solanum pimpinellifolium. James Giovannoni, who works at the “Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research at Cornell University," shows his excitement through words, “For any characteristic of the tomato, whether it’s taste, natural pest resistance or nutritional content, we’ve captured virtually all those genes.” Giovannoni further adds, “Tomato genetics underlies the potential for improved taste every home gardener knows and every supermarket shopper desires and the genome sequence will help solve this and many other issues in tomato production and quality.”

2) The Significance

In the US alone, tomatoes are worth $2 billion pie of the market share and Britain dabbles in $980 million worth of tomato business a year. In the rest of the world too, tomatoes are an inherent part of daily diet in all forms. Therefore, their consumption depends, to a large extent, on their quality. It is no wonder then that the scientists are excited about the possibilities arising out of knowing tomato’s genetic code. One of the main benefits would be for the researchers to identify links between tomato genes and the characteristics like taste, shape, color and nutrition level shown by various tomatoes. The scientists will also be able to pinpoint the specific environmental factors that enhance or affect the overall health of tomato crops. Graham Seymour, a member of the scientific team working on this project, and a professor of biotechnology at the “Nottingham University”, explains, “Tomatoes are one of the most important fruit crops in the world, both in terms of the volume that we eat and the vitamins, minerals and other phytochemicals that both fresh and processed tomato products provide to our diets.”

3) The Team

It was an international collaboration between more than a dozen countries that was named the “Tomato Genomics Consortium” and was entrusted with the responsibility to identify the genetic sequence of this popular fruit/vegetable of the world. The researchers, who were members of this Consortium, belonged to various nationalities, such as Argentina, Germany, China, France, India, Israel, the Netherlands, South Korea, Italy, Spain, Belgium, Japan, United Kingdom, and the US.

4) The Future

It took the international Consortium many years and millions of dollars to find out the first genome sequence in case of tomato. However, the scientists are hopeful that further studies in this direction would yield results at a much less cost because they will have initial findings to work with. Besides, buoyed by the tomato findings, scientists are also ready to work on fruits like strawberries, apples, bananas, etc to identify their genome sequence and work for their improvement too. As Giovannoni explains, “Now we can start asking a lot more interesting questions about fruit biology, disease resistance, root development and nutritional qualities.”

Tomato has many health benefits, especially when eaten raw. Now armed with the genetic information, it is going to be much easier for the scientists to provide significant inputs to the farmers to grow better varieties of tomatoes as well as other fruits and vegetables. As for that cup of salsa, it is gonna get better now!

Image Courtesy: malcolmallison.lamula.pe, ifood.tv

Read more at http://www.ifood.tv/blog/tomato-s-genome-sequence-finally-cracked#0p0AgEfPPI8EqMFi.99

Tomato Genome Decoded: Researchers To Publish Fruit's DNA Sequence In Full

By: Jennifer Welsh, LiveScience Staff Writer
Published: 05/30/2012 01:07 PM EDT on LiveScience
For years scientists have slaved away, trying to piece together the genes that make up the ripe, red goodness that is the tomato. They have finally published the fleshy fruit's genome in full.
The genome of any species is the DNA code that is stored as a blueprint inside every cell of every individual of that species. The DNA letters, called base pairs, are organized into genes, which are translated into proteins, the building blocks and machinery of every cell.
Decoding these genes can help researchers understand the different types of proteins found in organisms, and how these proteins make that species different from every other species. These kinds of insights from the genome could help crop researchers improve the yield, nutritional content, disease resistance, taste and color of tomatoes, they say.
"For any characteristic of the tomato, whether it's taste, natural pest resistance or nutritional content, we've captured virtually all those genes," study researcher James Giovannoni, of Cornell University, said in a statement. "Tomato genetics underlies the potential for improved taste every home gardener knows and every supermarket shopper desires and the genome sequence will help solve this and many other issues in tomato production and quality."
Generic and wild genomes
The researchers sequenced the genome of the tomato species Solanum lycopersicum, of the variety "Heinz 1706," as their type tomato. These tomatoes possess some 35,000 genes arranged on 12 chromosomes (large arrangements of hundreds of genes packed into one strand), the researchers said.

The researchers also sequenced the garden tomato's wild ancestor, Solanum Pimpinellifolium.
Knowing the sequence of one tomato can help seed companies and plant breeders get a grasp on what makes different varieties, like heirloom tomatoes, different from the generic grocery tomato.
Because the variability between two varieties is pretty small, it's easier to use the Heinz 1706 genome as a guide, and pinpoint the differences that lead to changes in color, taste, texture, size and shapethat distinguish one variety from another.
Tomato vs. potato
The genome is also important in learning why the tomato is so different from its genetic relatives in the nightshade family of flowering plants, which includes the potato, pepper and even coffee. Scientists want to know what genes have changed that gives each of these species their distinct flavor and look.
"Now we can start asking a lot more interesting questions about fruit biology, disease resistance, root development and nutritional qualities," Giovannoni said.
Tomatoes represent a $2 billion market in the United States alone. The USDA estimates that Americans consume, on average, more than 72 pounds (33 kilograms) of tomato products annually. Researchers have even developed a robot tomato harvester to go into space (or just use here on Earth).

The tomato decoded: holds more genes than humans

The tomato has always been a complex fruit. Or is it a vegetable? Either way. Tomato, tomahto, right?
The tomato, which is considered a fruit by botanists and a vegetable to the US government, has been demystified by a consortium of plant geneticists from 14 countries who spent nine years decoding the tomato genome with the hopes of breeding better, tastier fruits.
Specifically, the scientists sequenced the genomes of both Heinz 1706, a variety used to make ketchup, and the tomato’s closest wild relative, Solanum pimpinellifolium, which is grown in Peru, according to The New York Times.
The researchers reported that tomatoes possess some 35,000 genes arranged on 12 chromosomes. "For any characteristic of the tomato, whether it's taste, natural pest resistance or nutritional content, we've captured virtually all those genes," James Giovannoni, a scientist at the Boyce Thompson Institute for Plant Research, told Phys.org

Genomics to improve farming

By Ijaz Ahmad Rao

Biotechnology is having an increasingly important impact on various sectors and disciplines. Combined with genomics, proteomics and metabolomics, biotechnology can greatly aid our ability to confront the challenges of production, management, and sustainability of agriculture and economic development.

It can enhance crops yield and quality, develop stress-tolerant crop varieties, improve nutritional content of foods and neutralise effect of food contaminants, and find new ways to face threats to bio-security.

These issues were discussed at a recent international symposium on “Genomics, Proteomics, Metabolomics: Recent Trends in Biotechnology” held by the Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics (MMG), University of The Punjab, in collaboration with the Higher Education Commission, National Biotechnology Commission, Core Group in Biological Sciences.

More than 190 delegates, some from Europe, participated in the symposium whose main objective was to provide new ways to use animal, plants and microbes, in order to improve quality of environment and economic sustainability of a country, to commercialise indigenous technologies and to help bridge the gap between global scientific communities in terms of existing and expanding frontiers of genomics, proteomics and metabolomics.

Environmental and political considerations have created a growing demand for plants-derived bio-fuels like ethanol and bio-diesel. It is appropriate that Pakistan should support research efforts in genomics and proteomics. It has enormous potential in agricultural both in cropping and livestock sectors. There is a need to fill actual productivity and potential productivity gap by adopting appropriate strategies and modern technologies to meet such problems as low resource use efficiency in agriculture, land degradation, water-logging and salinity, low organic matter, and low level of technology.

Despite continued progress in genetic improvement, optimal levels of crop productivity or desirable nutritional balance has not yet been achieved. Seed metabolism must be modified substantially to produce food-feed as well as industrial and medical products to satisfy future evolving societal demands. Such modifications need integration seamlessly into the complex but poorly understood processes of seed metabolism and development. Genomics offer new opportunities to address seed performance and productivity, to develop nutritionally desirable seeds, and to achieve industrial and pharmaceutical applications.

Collaborations between genomic researchers and plant breeders are crucial to enhance crops yield. With the help of tools of modern biotechnology and methods of genomics and proteomics, our future challenges of food, feed and energy sectors can be addressed. This new knowledge will change the future of breeding for improved strains of all domesticated species of crops, livestock, fish, and trees either through transgenomics or genomics-based conventional breeding.

“The first plant genome that has been completely sequenced is a small model species, Arabidopsis thaliana. The genomic sequencing of economically important crops is also being undertaken”. The most advanced are the several public and private gene sequencing projects on rice, all of which are now in the public domain. A maize genome-sequencing project is also in progress. Rice, maize and other cereals share a large number of common genes.

Several other genome sequencing projects of at least 130 different plant species are in progress. The plant genetic resources are the vital components of plant biodiversity, precious heritage of mankind, therefore they need to be collected and conserved before they are lost for ever.

There are about 6,000 plant species in Pakistan; out of these only 1,010 species are identified as having medicinal value. Pakistan Agriculture Research Council (PARC) established a “gene bank” at the Institute of Agricultural Biotechnology and Genetic Resources (IABGR) and the National Agricultural Research Center (NARC), which contains more than 30,000 genes and DNA of different plant species. The germplasm of major cereals, minor cereals, food legumes, oilseeds, vegetables, fruits, fiber crops, fodder and forages and medicinal plants are available from this ‘gene bank” for scientists and researcher for the development of new varieties. More recently PARC has established with NARC a new institute the National Institute for Genomics and Advance Biotechnology (NIGAB); which will conduct research on structural and functional genomic of both plants and animals.

In Pakistan, there are hundreds of scientists working at more than 29 centres conducting biotech research in different areas. These institutions have, to their credit, a number of major achievements in modern biotechnology. A few of them have developed plant expression vectors for the introduction of foreign genes into crops like Bt pesticidal genes used in cotton and rice against bollworm, rice leaf-folder, top leaf bore in sugarcane.

The use of new techniques for understanding and modifying the genetically modified organisms (GMO) has led to understanding the role of proteins through proteomics and metabolomics in order to have better knowledge of multi proteins expressed in a particular plant in specific environmental condition. These developments have been accompanied by public concerns as to the power of the new technologies and the safety and ethics of their use for improving human health, agriculture and the environment.

Scientists are trying to explore how genetics and environmental factors work together to cause human diseases which can be helpful in the prevention and treatment of many illnesses and as well as individualise the therapeutical strategies. There are extensive efforts under way to identify the genetic and environmental basis of common diseases like cancer, asthma and diabetes. The present challenge is how emerging scientific discoveries, such as those in the rapidly evolving fields of genomics, proteomics and metabolomics, amongst others, can be translated into safe applications leading to new varieties of crops, drugs and products.
Courtesy: The DAWN

 

Source: http://www.pakissan.com/english/advisory/biotechnology/genomics.to.improve.farming.shtml