Colorado State University, The Institute for Genomic Research, Perlegen Sciences, Inc. and the International Rice Research Institute are joining forces to unlock the genetic secrets of rice, information that could improve rice crops and help address hunger and malnutrition for millions of people.

Rice is the world's top food crop and the principal source of nourishment for nearly half the world's population, particularly people in the poorest but fastest growing nations.

The study will focus on the genetic basis underlying important agricultural traits such as the nutritional value and disease resistance of 21 diverse lines, or varieties, of rice, by identifying and comparing differences in DNA sequences. This information will accelerate development of hardier, more productive types of rice. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Cooperative State Research, Education and Extension Service - National Research Initiative competitive grants plant genome program provided $715,000 for the U.S. group's contribution to the collaboration. Additional funding for international collaboration will be provided by other sources.

"This collaboration will produce a powerful resource to investigate the patterns of molecular variation across the rice genome, assess evolutionary forces shaping rice and discover genes controlling important traits such as disease resistance, drought tolerance and nutritional value," said Jan Leach, the lead U.S. researcher on the study and a professor of bioagricultural sciences and pest management at Colorado State University. "In the long term, this information will be used to improve rice, and it will also help scientists better understand how to improve other crop plants."

As populations boom in countries with limited availability of productive land, the need for additional information about agriculture and crops that can improve production and nutritional values have become key in preventing hunger and malnutrition. Much of the information scientists need may reside in the genomes of wild species of rice.

DNA sequence variation accounts for many differences between individual plants and different varieties of the same plant, such as how the plant develops, how much a crop plant yields, the nutritional value and how well the plant tolerates stresses such as drought or exposure to diseases. Much of the variation in genomes is represented by single nucleotide polymorphisms, known as SNPs, which are changes at single base positions in DNA.

This collaboration will identify SNPs from across the whole genome of 21 rice strains using methodologies developed by Perlegen Sciences. Wild species of rice are a rich resource of diverse traits, and analysis of their genomic variations may provide valuable information regarding phenotypic variation between different rice strains.

SNPs are a marker of genetic variation between individuals of a species, and they allow scientists to identify regions of genetic variation that may be linked to traits. By identifying differences in SNPs among major rice varieties, the study will help uncover the genetic basis behind important agricultural traits.

"In addition to their importance in understanding genome evolution, studying the SNPs of rice is valuable for several reasons," Leach said. "First, it reveals DNA variation among different varieties of rice, which provides information for developing better varieties. It also provides the ultimate anchor to relate the study of rice and other crops."

The International Rice Research Institute is a non-profit agricultural research and training center that was established to improve the wellbeing of present and future generations of rice farmers and consumers, particularly those with low incomes. It helps farmers in developing countries produce more food on limited land, using less water, labor and chemicals. The institute has helped to develop about 1,000 modern varieties of rice, which has increased the availability of rice to populations in need and reduced the price.

Perlegen will perform the microarray experiments. Perlegen uses microarray technology to quickly assess DNA variations and compare whole genomes in an effort to identify those variations associated with human diseases and to explain and predict the efficacy and adverse effects of prescription drugs.

"Rice is an important crop for world agriculture and an excellent candidate for DNA variation study," said Kelly Frazer, vice president of genomic biology at Perlegen. "The combination of the methodologies and experience our company can provide and the initial genomic research that has been conducted by the International Rice Research Institute will give scientists the opportunity to improve the quality of one of the most critical human food sources in the world."

© 1997-2001 Colorado State University

Spider silk is at least five times stronger than steel, two times more elastic than nylon, waterproof, and stretchable - qualities that may make it important for the textile and construction industries.

This has led scientists to try to synthesize it in the laboratory, or to isolate the genes for spider silk and transfer them to animal cells for mass production. The former method has hitherto been unsuccessful; the latter method is expensive, and the quantity produced by animal cells is limited. In order to overcome these factors, scientists are now turning to “Transgenic Plants for Spider Silk-Like Protein Production.”

In an article in the latest issue of the Information Systems for Biotechnology Newsletter, P. S. Janaki Krishna looks at recent research on the feasibility of plant based silk-like protein (SLP) production.

One such project was reported by Jianjun Yang and co-authors, of Du Pont de Nemours & Co, USA. Scientists introduced the DP1B gene into Arabidopsis plants by an Agrobacterium-mediated floral transformation method. DP1B is a synthetic gene for spider dragline silk protein, which can be spun to form silk fiber.

After growing and evaluating transgenic plants, researchers found that: 1) transgenic plants engineered with mechanisms targeting DP1B production to the cell's endoplasmic reticulum (ER) were able to accumulate SLP in their seeds to a level greater than 15% of total soluble protein; 2) DP1B was heritable after one or two cycles of sexual reproduction; and 3) accumulation levels of the DP1B fusion protein were stable. The next step may now be to search for an industrially important crop which can support large-scale, plant-based production of DP1B SLP.

Read Paper

TRANSGENIC PLANTS FOR SPIDER SILK-LIKE PROTEIN PRODUCTION
P. S. Janaki Krishna

Spiders and insects have been able to spin silk for at least 380 million years. It has been estimated that the strength of spider silk is at least five times as strong as steel, twice as elastic as nylon, waterproof, and stretchable. Scientists have long envied the strength and elasticity of spider’s silk but have been unable to synthesize it. The dragline silk of the Golden Orb-weaving Spider is the most studied in scientific research. Dragline silk is the fiber from which spiders make the scaffolding of their webs. Of late, demonstrations of cloning and expression of silk fibroin protein, including spider dragline silk, represent an exciting scientific opportunity and technological challenge.

Spider silk is a natural polypeptide, polymeric protein and is in the scleroprotein group, which also includes collagen (in ligaments) and keratin (in nails and hair). Spider silk genes encode proteins composed of iterated peptide motifs, and the consensus sequences are multiply repeated throughout the silk proteins. Patterns of ‘Ala-rich’ blocks and ‘Gly-rich’ amorphous blocks provide both strength and elasticity, and such biomaterials might therefore be valuable for industrial and medical purposes.

Although spider silk was initially produced in animal cells, mass production from animal cells is expensive and the quantity produced is limited, mainly due to the requirement for large fermenters, sterile conditions, and expensive media. In order to overcome these factors, plants (tobacco, potato, Arabidopsis, and soy somatic cells) have been evaluated for the production of spider silk proteins. These studies demonstrated the feasibility of plant based silk-like protein (SLP) production. However, high yield and low production costs remain a challenge.

Jianjun Yang and co-authors, from Central Research Development and Crop Genetics Research, Du Pont de Nemours & Co, USA, report high yield recombinant SLP production through protein targeting in transgenic Arabidopsis. The researchers used a synthetic DP1B gene for producing SLP, achieving variable accumulation levels through protein targeting into a special cellular components.1 DP1B is a synthetic analogue of spider dragline silk protein, which can be spun to form silk fiber. An average DP1B accumulation level in plant cells below 1.5% of total soluble protein has been previously reported. However, Yang et al. showed that ER and vacuole targeting in seeds and apoplast, and ER targeting in leaves, can dramatically increase SLP accumulation. Many transgenic plants engineered with the ER targeting mechanism were able to accumulate DP1B SLP in their seeds to a level greater than 15% of total soluble protein.

A high yield of SLP was achieved by utilizing DP1B-8P, which is a plant-optimized, synthetic 8-mer DP1B gene that encodes a 64-kD DP1B SLP. Targeting of SLP to the designated cellular components was enabled by adding a 21-amino acid sporamin signal peptide, 16-amino acid sporamin propeptide, and 4-amino acid ER retention peptide to appropriate positions on the DP1B molecule. To express the resultant DP1Ba, DP1Be, and DP1Bv fusion proteins in Arabidopsis, expression plasmids pGYV501, pGYV502, and pGYV503 were introduced into Arabidopsis thaliana by an Agrobacterium-mediated floral transformation method. Healthy T1 transgenic plants were grown in soil and T2 seeds were harvested from individual T1 plants to represent independent transformation events. Later, T2 seeds were germinated on selective plates to obtain the next generation. All T2 transgenic seedlings originating from the same parents were grown together in soil. T3 seeds were collected from these plants and pooled together to represent independent transformation events. Standard molecular assays were performed to confirm transgene expression in the independent transformation events. DP1B production yield was calculated based on DP1B content and relative to total soluble protein content in the extract.

The transformation was confirmed by PCR amplification of sporamin signal peptide coding sequences from the genomic DNA. Leaf protein extract made from a pGY401 Arabidopsis plant was used to show control levels of unmodified, cytosol-accumulated 64-kD DP1B. The results of immunoblot assay showed that in leaf tissues of Arabidopsis, apoplast and ER targeting are suitable approaches for DP1B production, but the vacuole targeting is not. Results also showed that accumulation of the unmodified DP1B in leaf tissues of pGY401 plants ranged from 0.01% to 1.7% of total soluble protein (TSP), with an average yield of 0.3%, while DP1Ba accumulation in leaf tissue of pGYV501 plants was from 2.1% to 8.5% TSP, with an average yield of 4%. DP1Be accumulation in leaf tissues of pGYV502 plants was from 0.3% to 6.7% TSP with an average yield of 1.5%. Vacuole targeting did not result in accumulation of correctly-sized DP1Bv molecules. This comparison of accumulation levels between the non targeted and targeted DP1Bs revealed that DP1B productivity in leaf tissues was increased 13-fold by targeting to apoplast and 5-fold by targeting to ER lumen. Apoplast targeting is the best approach.

Characterization of seed-specific DP1B fusion proteins showed accumulation of unmodified DP1B in pGY411 seeds ranging from 1% to 1.4% TSP with an average yield of 1.2%. The accumulation of the ER-targeting DP1Be in pGYV512 seeds ranged from 1.8% to 18% TSP (avg. 9.4%), and the vacuole-targeting DP1Bv in pGYV513 seeds ranged from 4.8% to 8.2% TSP (avg. 6.5%). Thus a comparison between the targeted and non-targeted DP1Bs suggested that the ER and vacuole targeting significantly enhanced DP1B productivity in seeds by 7.8- and 5.4-fold, and at the highest levels, up to 15-fold increase was observed in ER targeting.

Importantly, DP1B transgenic plants were heritable after one and two cycles of sexual reproduction, as confirmed by transgene insertion and expression studies in T2 leaves or T3 seeds, and the accumulation level of DP1B fusion protein was stable. Thus this research demonstrates the highest level of DP1B accumulation among all protein targeting strategies. It was concluded that combining seed-specific synthesis and ER targeting is the best method of production. Though Arabidopsis is not a good candidate for commercial production, the approach may be tried in an industrially important crop that supports the large-scale plant based production of DP1B SLP.

The group was brought together by Rogers Publishing Limited's Healthcare and Financial Services Group, publishers of The Medical Post and Pharmacy Post. This was the second such gathering on the NPS hosted by Rogers, the first being held in March in Ottawa. Both events were moderated by Ottawa physician Dr. Barry Dworkin.

Work on the NPS was launched by the federal and provincial health ministers nearly two years ago and although a report is due in June, little is known about what will be presented. The New Zealand model has been put forward as a potential one for Canada to follow. The group assembled by Rogers concluded with agreement on a call for the NPS "to clearly state its goals, objectives and planning strategies" and to consult healthcare professionals, pharmacists and patient advocates.

Participants were told that while New Zealand has achieved stability in its pharmaceutical costs, it has done so at a considerable price, including increased costs elsewhere in the healthcare system, in worse health outcomes for patients, and great frustration for physicians, who in many cases are unable to prescribe the best possible medicines.

New Zealand created its Pharmaceutical Management Agency, or Pharmac, in 1993, and launched its current zealous cost-containment programs in 1997, said Alex Sundakov, a leading New Zealand economist who last August produced a study of the impact of the Pharmac policies.

New Zealand drug spending as a percentage of total healthcare spending used to be above the OECD average, he said, but it is now about half, at 8 percent, compared to 17 percent in Canada. The main features of the New Zealand policy include a firm cap on the budget for pharmaceutical spending, having an all-encompassing public system with practically no private market, and a strong reliance on sole sourcing, whereby companies bid to supply the sole drug available in a particular class, the winner being the one offering the lowest price.

"Where I see rot spreading and affecting integrity," Sundakov said, "is in the effect of the system on the doctor-patient relationship." Doctors are uncomfortable discussing unfunded drugs, so ignore them. Also, because pharmaceutical companies are doing practically no marketing or education activities, New Zealand doctors "increasingly don't know what they don't know about new medications. This is seen by Pharmac as a great victory, but as an economist it makes no sense to me."

Patients forced to change medicines

Dr. Stewart Mann, Associate Professor of Cardiovascular Medicine at the Wellington School of Medicine and Health Sciences, discussed the impact of Pharmac making only one drug available in each therapeutic area and of patients have to make "overnight" changes to their medication when contracts are switched from one sole supplier to another. He asked a provocative question: "If we were doing this as a clinical trial, would we ever get ethics approval?"

He also questioned the underpinning of the sole-supplier policy, which is based on the idea that one drug in a particular class can serve all, or at least most, patients. "Assumptions about class effect may not be justified," he said, "because studies on bioequivalence are done on healthy patients, not necessarily reflecting experience in the real world with sick patients on multiple medications."

Dr. Ken Whyte of the Respiratory Medicine Service, Auckland City Hospital, discussed the challenges and frustrations of lack of access to new medicines which might be seen as expensive but are more cost-effective in the long run. He also described the problems asthma sufferers have had in getting access to newer medications. Long-acting beta antagonists (LABAs) were not funded at all for several years after they were well established elsewhere, and eventually approved but only by special authority with very restrictive criteria. "There are big problems with restrictive criteria," he said, "Pharmac has saved a lot of money, but they have also denied a lot of patients treatment. It is a good example of a good idea gone wrong and needs to be rebuilt."

OTTAWA - Researchers working for the Canadian and U.S. militaries, including some in Edmonton, are making progress in developing genetically modified plants that could help people avoid death and injury from landmines.

The researchers at the University of Alberta, Duke University in North Carolina and other schools are trying to develop plants that will alert people to the presence of landmines by changing colour if their roots detect compounds, such as TNT, used in mines.

"I think we're about two or three years from something that might be practical in the field," Prof. Michael Deyholos at the U of A said in an interview.

"We're a lot closer than we were."

Deyholos and others, working for the last two years, have faced a three-part problem.

They have had to develop a receptor gene that can detect TNT and be spliced into a plant's roots.

Once the TNT is detected, the plants must then be able to transmit the information to their leaves or shoots, much in the way hormones are transferred throughout the human body.

Then, more receptors are needed in the shoots or leaves to make them change colour.

Using a weed called an arabidopsis, the U of A team has solved part of the equation.

"We have had the arabidopsis roots change colour ... but we have not had the shoots change colour," Deyholos said.

Researchers at other facilities have made progress on other aspects of the project, and the goal is to have all the successful components put into one type of plant.

The seeds could be dropped from an airplane over a suspected minefield. After a few weeks of growth, soldiers and civilians could judge by the plants' colours whether the area is safe.

The plants could be a huge help to civilians who want to reclaim farmland after a war.

The United Nations estimates there are more than 110 million landmines buried around the world, with Angola alone having 10 million landmines and an amputee population of 70,000.

In a newly released research paper, Deyholos and his colleagues say landmine-detecting plants would be inexpensive and effective even in developing countries.

Deyholos is optimistic a way will be found to fill the gap between TNT-detecting roots and leaves.

"Plants naturally are able to send chemicals through their sap, so the roots can tell the leaves, 'We don't have a lot of water or we don't have a lot of nutrients, so you'd better slow down your growth.'

"So the framework is there, and now we're just looking at some different kinds of modifications we can make to those chemicals to make them work as artificial hormones."
Copyright © 2006, Canoe Inc

DUBLIN - Ireland, Europe's biggest per capita consumer of potatoes, has given the go-ahead for a German company to grow varieties of the crop that have been genetically modified to resist disease.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) gave its consent to BASF Plant Science GmbH on Friday to carry out field trials on potatoes that have been modified with improved resistance to late potato blight, the disease that caused the Irish potato famine.

"This consent is for field trials only and should not be confused with the placing of GM products on the market, which requires a separate consent and approval process at EU level," the EPA said in a statement.

"Potatoes (GM or non-GM) harvested from the field trials will not be used for food or feed purposes," it added.

One million people died and two million were forced to leave Ireland in the 1840s when potato blight caused widespread famine. Today, the Irish eat some 121 kg of potatoes per person every year, or nearly 1,000 potatoes for every man, woman and child.

Previous trials of GMO foods in Ireland have been disrupted by environmentalists who pulled up crops and damaged fields.

GM-free Ireland, an organisation campaigning against genetic food engineering, invited farmers, food producers, consumers, and politicians to an emergency meeting on Friday to decide what legal steps it could take to prevent the experiment.

Irish Green Party leader Trevor Sargent said the decision threatened the country's traditional GMO-free status which he said was a key selling point for the country's food exporters.

"Life is hard enough for farmers who are seeing less and less demand for potatoes and a growing preference for ready made meals," he said. "Farmers need this GM trial like a hole in the head."

Blight-resistant GMO potatoes were first developed in 2003 after scientists discovered a species of wild potato in Mexico that is naturally resistant to the disease, then inserted the gene into commercial strains.

The field trials will be carried out at one location at County Meath and the trial site will not exceed 1 hectare (2.5 acres) in size. The experiment will last for five years from 2006 to 2010 (inclusive), with monitoring continuing until 2014

The Environmental Protection Agency has approved controversial plans to grow genetically-modified potatoes in Co Meath.

The five-year trials by the German chemical firm BASF are due to take place in Arodstown, near the Teagasc research centre in Summerhill.

The potatoes will not be allowed on the market as this would require further consent and approval at EU level.

The EPA says the company will have to adhere to 10 conditions and the trials will be monitored by the agency on a continuing basis.

The EPA received dozens of submissions opposing the plan when BASF first applied for permission earlier this year.

Farmers also expressed concern about the GM potatoes contaminating their crops, while doctors said the health risks associated with GM food had still not been fully examined.

© Thomas Crosbie Media 2006.

The conditional permission granted for the import of genetically modified foods in the new foreign trade policy, unveiled by the commerce ministry in the first week of April, has created more problems than it sought to address on this controversial issue.

Such imports will need the approval of the environment ministry's genetic engineering approval committee (GEAC), after going through cumbersome procedures and conducting time-consuming tests, besides furnishing a whole lot of information. To confound matters further, the health ministry has come out with another notification under the Prevention of Food Adulteration (PFA) Act, making it mandatory to suitably label all products, whether imported or indigenous, that are either produced through genetic modification or contain any ingredient or additive made from GM crops.

Together, these two moves have created a good deal of avoidable confusion in the processed foods and edible oil sectors. The first to get hit by these half-baked decisions has been the import of soyabean oil. Of nearly 5 million tonnes of edible oils imported annually to cover the domestic shortfall in supply, about 2 million tonnes are usually soya oil, sourced from countries like Argentina, Brazil and the US—where much of the soyabean crop happens to be genetically modified. As such, it is very difficult to get totally GM-free soya oil in the market. Ironically, even if GM soya oil is imported under a false declaration that it has no genetically modified content, it would be almost impossible to establish such a misdeclaration. That is because oil does not contain any protein, notably DNA, which alone can show whether it contains any GM inheritance or not. In any case, the damage has already been done as the uncertainty created over these imports has sent domestic soyabean oil prices soaring, especially in the futures market, where circuit breakers have had to be imposed in some cases on May soya oil contracts.

In fact, the implications of mandatory labelling of GM (and GM-derived) foods are even more far-reaching than the fairly simply matter of soya oil. Prima facie, it would seem like a good idea to most people that the consumer should be informed when something in the market is a GM product. But the sway of what has been announced by the government’s different ministries, in that these are applicable even to food additives, is so extensive that it would apply to almost all processed foods. The range here would be from wines and cheese to breads using GM yeast, and extending to traditional Indian milk products, including ghee, butter and sweets like barfi and rasagulla, if these are made from milk produced by cattle fed on GM cotton seeds and de-oiled cottonseed meal. Since GM cotton is now cultivated extensively in India, and its seeds are widely used as cattlefeed, it would be practically impossible to segregate those products requiring GM labelling from the rest.

It is also worth bearing in mind that if GM labelling is reduced to a meaningless routine—like the statutory health warning that has been on cigarette packets for decades—it would serve little purpose. Thus, the government needs to re-visit this complicated, yet significant, issue keeping in view all the problems that have cropped up. Especially because the decisions that have been taken so far are confined basically to the import and consumption of edible products and do not address the broader issue of import of non-food GMOs, including genetically modified living organisms (LMOs). What is clear is that this whole question needs to be viewed from the perspective of the Cartagena Protocol on the trans-boundary movement of GMOs. Only then will local practices on this subject conform to global norms, as required under international trade treaties.
Copyright Business Standard India

In strategy plan adopted in February 2006, the European Commission set out measures to further increase the supply of biofuels. The strategy includes a plan to assess the impact of increasing the amount of biofuel that can be blended in petrol and diesel, an an examination of the use of certificates to ensure that the raw materials are cultivated in a sustainable way.

Biofuel is any fuel that derives from organic materials, including corn, soybeans, flaxseed and rapeseed. The food and drink industry is competing for some of the same raw materials, such as rapeseed, either for food production or for feedstock.

In its position paper the CIAA says the increase in demand for agricultural products for biofuels could decrease supply and raise prices for the food and feed sectors.

"Given the link between the different users of biomass -- food, feed, energy, and other non-food products-- the monitoring proposed by the Commission of the impact of the biofuels strategy on markets and on availability of agricultural raw materials is clearly essential for the food industry," the CIAA stated.

The Commission must also be willing to act in case of serious market imbalance through market measures. The EU should also use the measures to increase the possible feedstock supply for all markets without disrupting the food sector, the CIAA recommends.

The organisation noted that its members are already facing price increases for rapeseed oil. According to Oil World, rapeseed oil prices recently were up to 45 per cent above the five-year average to 2000. Demand for rapeseed oil within the EU is forecast to increase by 26 per cent.

"This trend can be explained by different factors, notably the development of the biodiesel industry and the total shift of food demand from soy oil into rapeseed oil because of the GMO (genetically modified organisms) issue," the CIAA stated.

Meanwhile cereals prices are forecast to increase by up to 11 per cent by the year 2010 and oilseed prices by between five to 15 per cent, the document stated.

The CIAA also called on the Commission to promote a more balanced development of biodiesel and bioethanol production. The CIAA believes that a diversification of sources for the production of biofuels will lessen the pressure on a single raw material supply.

CIAA advised the Commission to promote diversification by reviewing the biodiesel standard, as it would allow the better use of oils other than rapeseed. Sunflower oil, palm oil or soybean oil could also be promoted as the raw ingredient for biofuel production.

The CIAA urged the Commission to review of the current legal framework regarding animal fats and by-products so as to promote the use of such ingredients for biofuels production.

More authorisations of new GM rapeseed varieties for import and processing in the EU would also help reduce the supply pressure on non-GM European rapeseed used for foods.

The CIAA also stressed the need for the Commission to ensure that the byproducts derived from biofuel production comply with EU food safety standards, as these are likely to end up in the feed and food chain.

In a strategy plan published in February the Commission plans to promote increasing the use of biofuels to eight per cent of the bloc's energy requirements by 2015.

In January, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) proposed changes to patent rules that would restrict the number of claims examined in a single application and limit inventors’ rights to file continuation applications.

The Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) opposes these rule changes because they would have a negative impact on biotechnology companies.

“BIO believes that the PTO’s proposed rule changes will stifle biotech innovation,” BIO President & CEO Jim Greenwood stated. “It can take decades to develop a patented biotechnology invention, in part because these inventions must go through a rigorous regulatory approval process. Strong patent protections are needed to allow biotech companies to attract the investment needed to survive the long process of bringing a product to market. The changes in the PTO’s proposed rule will discourage investors from investing money in biotech innovations.”

“The PTO claims the rule changes are needed to address concerns about patent quality and to reduce the large number of backlogged patent cases. BIO believes that the proposed rules will not only lead to an increase in the number of application filings but also do nothing to address the quality concerns of the PTO. BIO recommends that the PTO hold public hearings and post advance notices of proposed rules before making such sweeping changes to patent rules,” Greenwood continued.

In comments to the PTO’s proposed rule filed yesterday, BIO recommended alternative means for reducing the backlog of patent applications, including an accelerated/deferred examination system, changes in the PTO examiner production system, increased examiner education, and improved cooperation with other patent offices.

ITHACA, NY - The National Agricultural Biotechnology Council (NABC) will hold its 18th annual meeting at Cornell University, on the Ithaca and Geneva campuses, June 12-14.

The meeting, entitled "Agricultural Biotechnology: Economic Development through New Products, Partnerships and Workforce Development," will address the role universities, and state and federal governments play in developing and moving research into the marketplace.

"As land grant universities seek new ways to fulfill their mission of serving society in the 21st century, they are increasingly using modern science and biotechnology, which has led to new products, economic development and job creation-main economic development themes of governments throughout the world," says Anthony Shelton, Cornell entomology professor and chairman of the NABC 18 organizing committee. "How we bridge these themes to our evolving land grant mission is a central focus of NABC 18."

The meeting revolves around four sessions: NABC member institutions' success stories, the function and role of university-based research parks in economic development, an up-close look at a local research park, and bridging the gap from lab to commercial product. It features 19 speakers, ranging from the president of the China Agricultural University to consultants and developers of products in the Netherlands, India, Brazil, Germany and Canada, to the director of an agricultural technology park, as well as many others.

NABC is a not-for-profit consortium of 36 leading agricultural research and teaching governmental agencies/institutions/universities in the U.S. and Canada. It has been hosting annual public meetings about the safe, ethical and efficacious development of agricultural biotechnology products since its formation in 1988, and is committed to providing all stakeholders the opportunity to speak, listen and learn about issues surrounding agricultural biotechnology.

A fee of $300 will apply for early bird registrants until May 10, after which the fee will increase to $350. Student registration is $200 until May 10, then $250.

A University of Saskatchewan research team has discovered what it calls a "super gene" that makes crops more resistant to heat, cold and drought. lt also gets plants growing faster.

Now, plant sciences Prof. Larry Gusta and his team are wooing biotech companies to use the gene in the development of newly resilient crops, which could help farmers frustrated by drought and wacky weather.

"In a way, it is a super gene, and that's why there's several arge companies interested in licensing (it)," Gusta said.

Gusta and collaborator Albert Robertson, who is also a farmer, found a gene called Rob-5 is responsible for keeping a hardy perennial plant called brome grass tolerant to drought, heat and freezing.

When researchers treated grass cells in a dish with a hormone called abscisic acid, they found it was the Rob-5 gene that sprang into action, spurring the creation of protein to help protect the plant from harsh conditions.

Once they figured out which gene was esponsible, the team created so-called transgenic crops of canola, flax and potatoes by inserting the brome grass Rob-5 gene into those plants' genes.

When they planted the crops in fields across Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, they got a 25 to 30 per cent increase in crop yield -- and it was a dry year, Gusta added.

In laboratory chambers where they grew the crops under controlled conditions, researchers found the transgenic canola and flax had increased frost tolerance by two to four degrees Celsius, and potatoes bad another one degree leeway before they froze.

"lt's huge. lt's a huge deal," Gusta said, adding a temperature change of a few degrees can mean the difference between harvesting a crop or no crop at all for a farmer.

Other tests showed the plants were also more heat tolerant -- an important attribute for Saskatchewan crops that sometimes get baked on hot summer days.

"Two or three days with temperatures around 30 degrees and the flowers blast in canola and flax and you lose them," Gusta said.

The results are especially promising because few groups who are engineering such genes to make crops more resilient have good results from the field and the lab, Gusta said.

As a bonus, the gene got plants sprouting from seed more quickly, improving the yield and preventing the seed from rotting.

The university has a patent pending on the gene, and a large, unnamed biotech firm is in the process of inking a deal with the university to develop potential seeds for sale, Gusta said.

If it makes it to market, the product could be of huge help to farmers desperate for water who rely on pricey irrigation operations, Gusta said.

"If we could cut down water use. . . it would mean millions and millions of dollars in savings to the people who have to irrigate," he said.

The university sought a patent for the Rob-5 gene through its industry liaison office -- a university group that scours research findings for potentially marketable discoveries Doug Gill, the liaison office's managing director, said although he can't divulge specifics, the university is dose to signing a deal with a major corporation to market a product using Gusta's discovery.

The deal will mean the company should pay a licensing fee to be split 50-50 between the university and the researchers. If the product goes to market, the university can also expect to earn royalties, he said.

While nothing's inked yet, a typical agreement sees a company pay the university between 10 and 20 per cent ofthe profits, Gui said.

Thus far, the U of S has patented about 100 discoveries by university researchers and another 20 patents are pending. The university also picks up the fees for obtaining and maintaining patents. The bill for keeping up some worldwide patents sometimes runs into the hundreds of thousands of dollars, Gui said.

Still, he said the investment is worth it. Aithough it varies from year to year, the university earns between $750,000 and $1 .25 million annually from inventions it has marketed.

Gusta said the mystery company has already begun tests with his gene, and if all goes weil, more resilient seeds could be for sale within the next five years. Copyright © Argus der Presse AG 2004

ST. LOUIS - The National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) on April 28, 2006 announced that more than nine out of 10 growers are aware of and effectively complying with Insect Resistance Management (IRM) requirements as mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These findings are based on 2005 on-farm assessments along with an independent survey conducted on behalf of the Agriculture Biotechnology Stewardship Technical Committee (ABSTC).

Since 1999 Bt corn registrants - Dow AgroSciences, Monsanto, Pioneer Hi- Bred International, Inc., a subsidiary of DuPont, and Syngenta Seeds - have monitored adherence to the IRM requirements to help ensure that Bt corn borer technology remains effective against pests and is a tool readily available for all growers. This monitoring effort was expanded in 2002 with the development of the Compliance Assurance Program (CAP) which is designed to promote IRM awareness and assess implementation at the farm level.

2005 Survey Shows a Continued Positive Trend in Grower Refuge Management

The annual Bt corn borer IRM telephone survey, managed by an independent third party, shows the industry can have confidence that farmers are being good stewards and implementing refuge plans. In the 2005 survey 92 percent of U.S. Bt corn growers met or exceeded the minimum recommended refuge size. This level of adherence with the requirements is consistent with past results of 91 percent in 2004 and 86 percent in 2003. In a separate program of on- farm visits, more than 94 percent of producers assessed were found to be meeting the refuge requirements. Both large and small acreage growers are meeting refuge management requirements at similar levels.

The EPA-required Bt corn refuge obligates farmers to plant at least 20 percent refuge - that is, corn that does not contain a Bt gene for controlling corn borers. In certain cotton areas of the South, growers are required to plant at least a 50 percent refuge.

All areas of the country require that the refuge is planted within one- half mile of the Bt corn. In 2005 96 percent of growers adhered to this refuge distance requirement, an improvement over past years of 93 percent in 2004 and 89 percent in 2003.

"In 2003 the National Corn Growers Association established its online Insect Resistance Management Learning Center as a way to educate producers on the importance of IRM practices," said Martin Barbre, NCGA Biotechnology Working Group chairman. "We are pleased to see increased IRM implementation by producers, which helps ensure the Bt technology remains an available tool."

Industry Commitment to IRM Management

Growers reported the NCGA and seed companies marketing Bt hybrids are the leading sources for IRM information. Most growers surveyed recall receiving an average of four pieces of IRM literature and more than three-fourths of those surveyed noted having had an individual conversation with a seed company representative or seed dealer regarding these requirements.

U.S. Bt corn adopters have voiced their commitment to manage Bt crop technologies as 92 percent were clearly aware of the IRM and refuge requirements, and support them as an important part of preserving Bt technology for the future.

"The Biotech Working Group has engaged the technology providers and worked with the EPA to make sure NCGA is providing the correct information to its producers," Barbre said. "NCGA also works closely with its state organizations to provide information on insect resistance management. Through our online learning program, agriculture publications and printed materials, we work diligently to improve producer implementation of IRM requirements."

An element of the on-farm assessment program that reinforces how seriously Bt technology providers regard resistance management is the potential penalties for non-compliance. Failure to properly plant and manage refuges in two crop seasons can lead to a grower's inability to access technology for use on their farm in the third year.

Farmers visited in 2004 and found to be out of compliance came back into compliance in 2005, and have maintained access to corn borer protected Bt corn for this growing season.

For the small set of growers found to be non-compliant in 2005, Bt providers responded in accordance with the uniform industry standards developed to bring growers back into compliance. These standards outlined in the CAP include letters and additional IRM educational materials sent to growers as well as on-farm compliance assessments. Growers who repeatedly fail to adhere to IRM requirements risk losing access to the technology.

NCGA urges all producers to comply with IRM requirements in 2006

With the planting season starting across the United States, it is critical that growers and seed providers continue to focus on the effective implementation of IRM requirements. For assistance in managing Bt corn and refuge areas, growers are encouraged to seek information online at http://www.ncga.com/biotechnology/insectMgmtPlan/index.asp, or from their seed representative.

The Agricultural Biotechnology Stewardship Technical Committee (ABSTC) includes Bt corn registrants Dow AgroSciences; Monsanto; Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc., a subsidiary of DuPont, and Syngenta Seeds, Inc. The committee is working with the EPA to enforce IRM compliance. The National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) and the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO), along with various seed companies and universities, all support the Committee's IRM compliance efforts. For additional information on biotechnology, go to http://www.ncga.com/.

LANSING - The Michigan Senate signed off on legislation Thursday that aims to block local regulation of genetically modified crops.

The bill, which heads to Gov. Jennifer Granholm, would pre-empt local governments in Michigan from adopting ordinances that regulate or ban the planting of seeds, including genetically modified organisms, or GMOs.

But it includes an exception allowing for local regulation if the bipartisan state Commission of Agriculture agrees the seeds will hurt the environment or public health.

If a local government tried to ban the planting of seeds, the state Agriculture Department also would have to hold a public hearing and issue an opinion on whether environmental or public health effects will occur.

The Senate voted 24-12 to sign off on changes to the bill made by the House earlier this week.

Five California counties and cities have restricted farmers from growing genetically modified crops since 2004. Fourteen states have since passed laws barring similar measures.

Republicans have said federal regulators are better equipped to regulate GMOs than are local counties or townships, and have argued that landowners should have the right to plant what scientists have determined is safe, free from local interference.

But some Democrats have said GMOs threaten public health because its long-term effects are unknown.
Copyright © 1994-2005 South Bend Tribune

Conclusion

The role that biotechnology plays in agriculture in the United States and globally depends on a number of factors and uncertainties. As the USDA Advisory Committee on Biotechnology and 21st Century Agriculture report indicates, "agricultural biotechnology sits at the crossroads of other debates on the future of American and world agriculture, on international trade rela- tions, on biological diversity and the development of international instruments related to its preservation and exploitation, on the role of the multinational corporations, and on how best to build public confidence in rapidly evolving emerging technologies in general".

One thing seems certain, however: the ultimate contribution of agricultural biotechnology will depend on our ability to identify and measure its potential benefits and its risks as well as their distribution.

Jorge Fernandez-Cornejo and Margriet Caswell,
USDA Economic Information Bulletin No. (EIB-11) 36pp, April 2006. Full report at http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib11/eib11.pdf
© 2005 AgBioWorld.

The global biotech industry trade show, which wrapped up last week in Chicago, featured the world's largest genetically modified indoor cornfield, compliments of Monsanto. lt attracted celebrity speakers, including former President Bill Clinton, former NBA star Magic Johnson and actor Bernie Mac.

And it hammered home the message that biotechnology, which essentially looks for innovative ways to manipulate nature, can save our overpopulated world from disease, starvation and pollution.

Here's a look at what BIO 2006 didn't include in its massive 470-page program. Maybe next year?

A breakfast plenary featuring Canadian farmer Percy Schmeiser.

Monsanto sued Schmeiser for patent infringement after genetically modified canola seeds mysteriously cropped up in his fields. Schmeiser argued the GM seeds arrived and rooted by accident, most likely blowing in from neighboring fields.

Eventually, the Supreme Court of Canada found the 75-year-old guilty of violating the patent rights ofthe powerful multinational corporation. But Schmeiser, now a leading biotech critic, didn't have to pay Monsanto because he did not profit from the canola. "Once you introduce genetically modified organisms (GMOs), there's no falling back," Schmeiser said last week during the rival Bi0ETHICS 2006 conference at Columbia College, an event held to raise awareness of the dangers of genetically modified foods. "You can't contain or coexist with GMOs. You can't control wind, movement by animals. They destroy natural crops.

Schmeiser also criticized Monsanto's patented "terminator seeds," which are engineered to die every year. Farmers become siaves to Monsanto because they are forced to buy new seeds on an annual basis, the antithesis of sustainable development, Schmeiser said.

A debate over whether genetically modified food should be labeled. By some estimates, 70 percent of the food on grocery store shelves may contain biotech ingredients, but only 25 percent of Americans think they've eaten genetically modified food. Wake up!

Biotech ingredients most often are found in cornstarch and soybean oil, but milk is bioengineered if the cows have been given recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH)— made only by Monsanto — to increase milk output. On the market since 1994, rBGH milk is added to cream, cheese, yogurts and baked goods.

The Food and Drug Administration, which doesn't require GMO labeling, says artificial growth hormones are safe, but they're banned in Europe and Canada. The concern is over studies that have shown injections of rBGH can increase another hormone called insulin-like growth factor-1 or IGF-1 in cow's milk. High rates of IGF-1 are Iinked with increased rates of colon, breast and prostate cancer. Europe, Japan, China, Australia and New Zealand require the labeling of foods that contain genetically engineered ingredients. lndustry maintains that labeling would unnecessarily scare people away from GMO food, which is considered safe, even though no long-term studies have been done. But labeling is important because it means people would have a choice. The only real way to avoid GMO food is to buy organic or grow your own, provided you're not downwind from a Monsanto field.

Given that organic products now can be found at Wal-Mart, it's safe to say consumers want a choice.
Copyright © Argus der Presse AG 2004.