DOCSLIB.ORG

Seed Biotechnology Center ACADEMIC DIRECTOR’S MESSAGE

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Seed Biotechnology Center ACADEMIC DIRECTOR’S MESSAGE 2008 ANNUAL REPORT Seed Biotechnology Center ACADEMIC DIRECTOR’S MESSAGE he UC Davis Seed Biotechnology Center (SBC) has past decade. At UC Davis this is enabled by the Ralph M. enjoyed a steady increase in activities and personnel Parsons Foundation Plant Transformation Center established Tsince its inception 10 years ago, all made possible by the with funds originally solicited by the SBC. continuing partnership between the University of California We also worked with the seed industry to raise funds for offices and the seed industry. In particular, generous funding from and laboratories for the SBC, resulting in our location in the the California Seed Advisory Board has enabled the SBC to Plant Reproductive Biology building. In addition to the SBC, employ staff to compound that support from diverse sources. this building houses a vibrant group of plant researchers and It is not possible to review all the accomplishments of the last students, as well as the Public Intellectual Property Resource decade in this short essay, but a brief overview will illustrate for Agriculture (PIPRA). These fund-raising campaigns the impact of this ongoing collaboration. spearheaded by the SBC have paid remarkable dividends. Kent J. Bradford When the concept of the SBC was initiated, genetically hrough the efforts of Allen Van Deynze, SBC Director Come help us engineered crops had just been introduced commercially Tof Research, the SBC has become a leader in the 1 in cotton and corn, and their rapid acceptance by growers celebrate 10 development of molecular markers in numerous crops, led to expectations of similar developments in other crops. including cotton, tomato, potato, lettuce, pepper, and years of research However, reluctance of the public to accept such crops, carrots. The identification and mapping of these markers is particularly in Europe, and the development of a separate at our Seed greatly facilitating breeding efforts in these crops. The SBC regulatory system specifically for these crops largely stymied is centrally involved in the Chile-California Partnership for Biotechnology further commercialization in additional species. Nonetheless, the 21st Century, a program that will enhance crop variety Symposium at UC research using recombinant DNA methods has advanced our development through collaborative research and education knowledge of plant genetics and biology remarkably in the programs. Davis in May. ON THE COVER: Chilean President Michelle Bachelet and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger toast during a luncheon at the UC Davis Chancellor’s Residence on June 12, 2008, after signing agreements creating the Chile-California Partnership to support plant breeding and wine and grape research. See story on Page 14. Photo by Karin Higgins/UC Davis A Successful First Decade: Collaboration Was Key pressing need for trained plant scientists and breeders was crops. In particular, a Specialty Crops Regulatory Assistance program has A emphasized at the American Seed Research Summit organized in been developed, modeled after the IR-4 program for agricultural chemicals, cooperation with the American Seed Trade Association, the American to aid specialty crop developers through the regulatory process. The SBC Seed Research Foundation and the National Council of Commercial Plant has worked with the California Seed Association to provide scientific input Breeders. The SBC played a key role in organizing this summit and in and to educate legislators and the public about the significance of seeds and preparing a white paper to publicize its conclusions. variety improvement to agriculture. Due to the success of these programs and partnerships, the SBC is expanding its staff and taking on new projects, The SBC has taken the initiative in educating the next generation of plant guided by stakeholder feedback. breeders by establishing the Plant Breeding Academy (PBA). This program graduated 15 breeders in 2008 and another 23, including participants o celebrate 10 years of research, service and partnership, the SBC is from nine foreign countries, are currently in the second PBA class. Our Torganizing a symposium on “Seed Biotechnologies: Filling the Gap continuing education courses for seed professionals have served over 1,500 between the Public and Private Sectors” May 11-12, 2009, at UC Davis. We participants since March 2000. have invited outstanding international scientists to participate, as well as 2 In 2007, the SBC organized an international symposium on “Translational leading researchers from the University of California. We invite you to this Seed Biology: From Model Systems to Crop Improvement” that brought discussion of the latest developments in molecular and transgenic breeding, outstanding seed scientists to California to discuss application of new commercialization of new varieties, technology transfer, and educational discoveries for seed improvement. programs to meet the manpower gap in the seed industry. More details can be found at sbc.ucdavis.edu. This symposium’s themes illustrate SBC’s n the biotechnology regulatory arena, the SBC has participated in both collaborative activities over the past 10 years, and we look forward to national and international efforts to develop science-based and pragmatic I celebrating them with you and aiming even higher for the next decade. regulatory systems for the commercialization of genetically engineered RESEARCH he SBC is dedicated to achieving research the United States. The SBC is continuing to Cotton breakthroughs that advance the science work with Larry Teuber (UC Davis), Shannon Tof seed technology and plant breeding. Mueller (UC Cooperative Extension), James Gene Flow We focus on applied research that will enable Hagler (USDA/ARS, Maricopa, AZ) and Forage Studies the seed and plant biotechnology industries to Genetics International to determine gene flow incorporate new discoveries for agricultural between commercial-scale seed fields of alfalfa. alifornia and consumer benefits. The SBC expended In 2008, seed samples taken in 2006 and 2007 Cgrew 275,000 $1.3 million in extramural research support in from conventional fields at 1 mile, 3 miles and 5 acres of cotton 2008 and secured grant funds extending until miles from a commercial seed field of Roundup in 2008, 155,000 2012. These projects range from single crop Ready (RR) alfalfa were tested for gene flow acres (56%) of investigations in the San Joaquin Valley to multi- using resistance to the herbicide as a marker. By which was Pima. crop initiatives with collaborators around the crushing a pool of seeds sampled and testing We previously world. We would like to give special recognition with commercial test strips specific to the protein conducted studies of gene flow in Acala cotton, to the UC Discovery conferring the RR trait, we estimated the percent and understanding gene flow in Pima cotton is Program and our gene flow in each sample. Preliminary data critical to maintaining genetic purity for specific 3 collaborators for their on 2006 samples are consistent with previous seed markets. In collaboration with Robert continued generous plot-scale studies and herbicide resistance Hutmacher (UC Cooperative Extension), the support of our assays. Gene flow decreased with distance from SBC is studying gene flow in Pima cotton and research agenda. the source field ranging from 0.09% at 1 mile between Pima and Acala cotton. In 2008, the to 0.008% at 2.75 miles. No gene flow was SBC completed a two-year study by conducting Alfalfa detected at 3 and 5 miles. The results of this herbicide bioassays on seed samples collected in study have helped growers and seed certification 2006 and 2007 from commercial, conventional alifornia grows agencies refine isolation distances between seed Pima cotton fields at distances from 10 feet to 1 Capproximately production fields to maintain genetic purity. mile from herbicide-resistant fields. Seed samples 30% of the alfalfa Funding for this research is from the USDA were also assayed from a small-scale field seed produced in National Research Initiative. experiment conducted at the Kearney Research Achieving Breakthroughs in Seed Technology, Plant Breeding and Extension Center to supplement commercial is being confirmed in the field. A series of field samplings. The positive seed samples lines selected for drought resistance are being were confirmed using test strips specific for the evaluated. The physiological characteristics herbicide resistance protein. The proportion combined with local climate data will help of seeds with herbicide resistance is a direct predict the potential invasiveness of switchgrass measure of gene flow. Gene flow in Pima cotton and determine the best regions for production. is 1/10 to 1/5 that of Acala cotton (published in Funding for this research is from the UC 2005 by the SBC) at a given distance. This work Discovery Program and Ceres, Inc. was funded by the California Crop Improvement Association and Cotton Incorporated. Switchgrass Tomato and Potato Sampling Nucleotide Diversity in Cotton witchgrass has been identified as a Solanaceae Spromising source for ethanol production Coordinated he SBC is dramatically expanding its due to its capacity to produce large amounts of Agricultural Project 4 Tresearch in cotton genomics. The SBC is biomass annually. It is native to the U.S. prairies, working with David Stelly (Texas A&M), Chris he SBC is working but not to California. The SBC is continuing Towne, Foo Cheung (J. Craig Venter Institute), Twith David to work with Joe DiTomaso,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Global Event for Biotechnology Returns to Chicago
    WINTER/SPRING 2010 Special BIO International Convention Edition Global Event for Biotechnology Returns to Chicago Essays from BIO, ADM, Abbott and Baxter Updates on Nanotechnology Overviews of Astellas and Lilly Highlights from Illinois Technology Parks and Midwest Research Universities Network Guidance on Patents and Payers James Greenwood President and CEO Biotechnology Industry Organization WINTER/SPRING 2010 Contents BioLogical Quarterly SM Responding to Challenges, Capitalizing on Opportunities Editorial Advisory Committee 4 Kris Lutt, iBIO Chairman of the Board Steven E. Ducommun Partner 6 Meeting Agriculture’s Challenges, Sustainably K & L Gates LLP Dr. Robert Fraley, Chief Technology Officer, Monsanto Company William Fitzsimmons Senior VP 12 Global Expertise at the Nanoscale Research & Development Jed Weiner, Editor, BioLogical Quarterly Astellas Pharma US, Inc. Dr. Alicia Löffler 20 Patient-Focused Medical Innovation Executive Director & Bart Peterson, Senior Vice President, Eli Lilly and Company Associate VP for Commercialization Northwestern University 26 Astellas, Moving Forward Kris Lutt Seigo Kashii, President & CEO, Astellas Pharma US, Inc. Advisor, Office of the Chairman Archer Daniels Midland Company 30 Research Institutions in the Midwest: Powerful & Diverse Allen J. Dines and Marc Oettinger, Midwest Research University Network Terrence J. Noetzel Global Lead Client Service Partner Deloitte Consulting LLP 36 Leading the Charge for Education Reform David Miller, iBIO Institute President & CEO Dr. Norbert Riedel Corporate
    [Show full text]
  • County of Santa Cruz
    County of Santa Cruz HEALTH SERVICES AGENCY POST OFFICE BOX 962, 1080 EMELINE AVENUE SANTA CRUZ, CA 95061-0962 (831) 454-4000 FAX: (831) 454-4488 TDD: (831) 454-4123 PUBLIC HEALTH DIVISION Genetic Engineering (GE) A Report from the GE Subcommittee of The Public Health Commission May, 2006 Contributing Members Laurie Howard 1st District * Richard Nutter 4th District Katherine 1st District * Arty Mangan 5th District Sweet Ken Kimes 2nd District * Wesley Van Camp 5th District Steve 2nd District * David Moeller Agricultural Bontadelli Commissioner Phil Howard 3rd District * Matt Farrell Public Health Commission Lisa Bunin 3rd District * Poki Namkung Health Service Agency Thomas Rider 4th District * Laura Tourte Ex-Officio (non-voting) UC Cooperative Extension 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The intent of the Genetic Engineering (GE) Subcommittee of the Public Health Commission is to provide information and recommendations to the Board of Supervisors regarding the issues of growing Genetically Engineered or Genetically Modified (GE or GM) crops in Santa Cruz County. Although “genetic modification” and “genetic engineering” are sometimes used interchangeably, this task force strictly limited its research and recommendations to genetically engineered (GE) food crops. Genetic engineering refers to only recombinant deoxyribonucleaic acid (rDNA) methods that allow a gene from one species to be inserted, and subsequently expressed, in a food crop or other food product. Recombinant DNA technology combines genes from different organisms in ways that would not otherwise occur in nature, or through traditional plant breeding. An example of a GE crop currently on the market is a corn variety which contains the pesticide Bacillus thurengiensis (Bt). Because the Bt toxin is contained in every cell of the plant, pests die when they eat the plant.
    [Show full text]
  • Livingston Tomato Report 2016 NM Livingston THESIS PRINT MASTER
    The Livingston Tomato Report 2016: The philosophical environmentalist’s guide to Justice in the Global Food System “A Major Paper submitted to the Faculty of Environmental Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Environmental Studies, York University, North York, Ontario, Canada.” Author: Supervisor: _______________________ ______________________ Neil M. Livingston Martin J. Bunch Date: 30 November 2015 Date: 30 November 2015 © 2016 Neil Marcellus Livingston The Livingston Tomato Report 2016: The philosophical environmentalist’s guide to Justice in the Global Food System “Everyone should have a fresh tomato to eat: A critical assessment of this proposition in the Costa Rican and Canadian cases.” Abstract This research paper sets the groundwork for an explanation of the global food system using complexity science as the theoretical framework to recount the story of the tomato (Solanum lycopersicum), its origin (Solanum pimpinellifolium), its role in popular culture how the tomato enters and exits the global food system and our digestive systems. By arguing in defense of the right of every person to eat a healthy tomato this study focuses upon the benefits and risks of herbicides, specifically N-(phosphonomethyl) glycine. I approach solutions from an environmental justice standpoint. I focus on the role of access to information as a leverage point. Methodologically, a detailed media survey led to the creation of a database that produced a timeline. Critical analysis of this timeline, actors and institutions allowed for focus on specific touchstones by which to ground my account. A review of the literature including environmental novels frames this timeline starting in the mid-to late 1800’s, through the age of industrialization incorporating the aftermath of Breton-Woods to 1971, Nixon, the Club of Rome, the year of my birth and Neil Armstrong walking on the moon.
    [Show full text]
  • Field-Testing Engineered Organisms: Genetic and Ecological Issues
    New Developments in Biotechnology: Field-Testing Engineered Organisms: Genetic and Ecological Issues May 1988 NTIS order #PB88-214101 Recommended Citation: U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, New Developments in Biotechnology- Field-Testing Engineered Organisms: Genetic and Ecological Issues, OTA-BA-350 (Wash- ington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, May 1988). Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 88-600522 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402-9325 (order form can be found in the back of this report) Foreword Since the discovery of recombinant DNA technology in the early 1970s much atten- tion has focused on the potential benefits and risks presented by the new abilities of researchers to manipulate DNA. The importance of ecological issues was heightened in 1982 with the proposal by researchers to field test bacteria engineered to reduce crop losses due to frost damage. Additional pressures have come to bear as a result of developments in the economics of American agriculture and with foreign trade im- balances. In this special report OTA analyzes some of the scientific and public opinion issues surrounding the planned introduction of genetically engineered organisms into the environment. The assessment of New Developments in Biotechnology was requested by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce and the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. The first publication in the series was Ownership of Human Tissues and Cells, and the second was Public Perceptions of Biotechnology. Subsequent studies will examine U.S. investment in biotechnology and issues relevant to the patenting of plants, animals, and microorganisms.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetically Modified Pest-Protected Plants Science and Regulation
    Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. GENETICALLY MODIFIED PEST-PROTECTED PLANTS SCIENCE AND REGULATION Committee on Genetically Modified Pest-Protected Plants Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C. Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS • 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW • Washington, DC 20418 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Genetically modified pest-protected plants : science and regulation / Committee on Genetically Modified Pest-Protected Plants, Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources, National Research Council. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-309-06930-0 (casebound) 1. Transgenic plants—Risk assessment. 2. Plants—Disease and pest resistance—Genetic aspects. I. National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Genetically Modified Pest-Protected Plants. SB123.57 .G48 2000 631.5’233—dc21 00-009457 Genetically Modified Pest-Protected Plants: Science and Regulation is available from National Academy Press, 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW, Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu Copyright 2000 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America Copyright © National Academy of Sciences.
    [Show full text]
  • Can Gmos Help Feed a Hot and Hungry World? Not If Activists Succeed in Making the Genetic Modification of Food Politically Unsustainable
    July 22/29, 2014 The Nation. 23 Can GMOs Help Feed a Hot and Hungry World? Not if activists succeed in making the genetic modification of food politically unsustainable. by MADELINE OSTRANDER ILLUSTRATION BY TIM ROBINSON PHOTO CREDIT TK 24 The Nation. September 1/8, 2014 and so he and his researchers are scouring the world for varieties of fruits, vegetables and some basic staples— rice, millet, wheat, maize—that grow well without much water. Then, using a device called a “gene gun,” which duardo blumwald’s ge- inserts DNA on microscopic gold particles, or a soil netically modifi ed plantsE don’t look much like “Franken- bacterium capable of changing plant genes, they alter food.” Filling four modest greenhouses in a concrete lot or silence parts of the plant’s genome, adjusting how behind Blumwald’s laboratory at the University of Cali- and when the plant makes the hormones that let it know fornia, Davis, the tiny seedlings, spiky grasses, alfalfa, when to grow and when to wither. The researchers say and peanut and rice plants in plastic terracotta-colored the methods are more precise and much faster than de- pots look exactly like the ordinary varieties from which veloping new plant varieties by conventional breeding, he and his fellow researchers created them. Blumwald’s which can take decades. lab lies just ten miles from Monsanto’s 90,000-square- Because When I tour the rows of rice and peanuts with one foot vegetable seed building, a glassy edifi ce larger than of your of Blumwald’s assistants, a postdoctoral researcher from the hangar for a 747.
    [Show full text]
  • Bratspies, Hunger and Equity in an Era of Genetic Engineering, 7 U.C
    UC Irvine Law Review Volume 7 Article 3 Issue 2 Food Equity 6-2017 Hunger and Equity in an Era of Genetic Engineering Rebecca M. Bratspies CUNY School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.uci.edu/ucilr Recommended Citation Rebecca M. Bratspies, Hunger and Equity in an Era of Genetic Engineering, 7 U.C. Irvine L. Rev. 195 (2017). Available at: https://scholarship.law.uci.edu/ucilr/vol7/iss2/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UCI Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in UC Irvine Law Review by an authorized editor of UCI Law Scholarly Commons. Final to Printer_Bratspies (Do Not Delete) 12/12/2017 9:03 PM Hunger and Equity in an Era of Genetic Engineering Rebecca M. Bratspies* I. The Equity Crisis in Food Production and Distribution ...................................... 199 A. What Is Food Security? .............................................................................. 199 B. Will More Food Help? ............................................................................... 204 C. What the Past Teaches Us ......................................................................... 207 D. What Does Climate Change Do to Food Production? ..................... 209 II. Enter Genetically Engineered Crops ...................................................................... 212 A. What Are Genetically Modified Organisms? ........................................ 217 B. Can Genetically Engineered Crops Solve Food Insecurity? ............
    [Show full text]
  • Concentration of Market Power in the Eu Seed Market
    1 CONCENTRATION OF MARKET POWER IN THE EU SEED MARKET AUTHOR: IVAN MAMMANA STUDY COMMISSIONED BY THE GREENS/EFA GROUP IN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT Concentration of market power in the EU seed market 3 INTRODUCTION 3 CONCENTRATION OF This study sheds light upon the increasing concentration of the EU seed market. It uses industry data to show that the mantra of the seed lobby and giant seed companies, that the EU market is healthy MARKET POWER IN and diversifi ed and there are some 7000 mainly small and medium enterprises (SMEs), is misleading. Notably, in the absence of freely available data and independently verifi able statistics, the European Commission is forced to rely upon industry statistics and further promotes the industry myth. This THE EU SEED MARKET allows the corporations to dominate the narrative and manipulate the arguments to the general public on what is in their best interest. The European Commission has been accused of drafting the seed marketing law 1 to benefi t the big seed lobby, who in turn claim they are not a big lobby but a multitude of some 7000 medium and small players. The DG SANCO of the European Commission routinely contradicts itself when its representatives state quote industry fi gures that there is no concentration in the EU market(s), while in their own impact assessment for the Seed marketing regulation they state that 95% of the vegetable seed sector is controlled by a mere 5 companies. In the case of maize, just 5 seed companies control around 75% of the EU market share.
    [Show full text]
  • Visualizing Consolidation in the Global Seed Industry: 1996–2008
    Sustainability 2009, 1, 1266-1287; doi:10.3390/su1041266 OPEN ACCESS sustainability ISSN 2071-1050 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability Article Visualizing Consolidation in the Global Seed Industry: 1996–2008 Philip H. Howard Department of Community, Agriculture, Recreation and Resource Studies, Michigan State University, 316 Natural Resources, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-573-355-8431; Fax: +1-517-353-8994. Received: 28 October 2009 / Accepted: 4 December 2009 / Published: 8 December 2009 Abstract: The commercial seed industry has undergone tremendous consolidation in the last 40 years as transnational corporations entered this agricultural sector, and acquired or merged with competing firms. This trend is associated with impacts that constrain the opportunities for renewable agriculture, such as reductions in seed lines and a declining prevalence of seed saving. To better characterize the current structure of the industry, ownership changes from 1996 to 2008 are represented visually with information graphics. Since the commercialization of transgenic crops in the mid-1990s, the sale of seeds has become dominated globally by Monsanto, DuPont and Syngenta. In addition, the largest firms are increasingly networked through agreements to cross-license transgenic seed traits. Keywords: seed industry; consolidation; concentration; oligopoly; information graphics 1. Introduction In the last 40 years, the commercial seed industry has transformed dramatically. It has shifted from a competitive sector of agribusiness, composed primarily of small, family-owned firms, to an industry dominated by a small number of transnational pharmaceutical/chemical corporations [1]. These corporations entered the industry by acquiring numerous smaller seed companies, and merging with large competitors.
    [Show full text]
  • Goldman, Sachs & Co. J.P. Morgan & Co. Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc
    35,000,000 Shares Common Stock This is an initial public offering of shares of common stock of Monsanto Company. All of the shares of common stock are being sold by Monsanto. Prior to this offering, there has been no public market for the common stock. The common stock has been approved for listing, subject to official notice of issuance, on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol ‘‘MON.’’ See ‘‘Risk Factors’’ beginning on page 10 to read about factors you should consider before buying shares of the common stock. Neither the Securities and Exchange Commission nor any other regulatory body has approved or disapproved of these securities or passed upon the adequacy or accuracy of this prospectus. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense. Per Share Total Initial public offering price ....................................... $20.00 $700,000,000 Underwriting discount .......................................... $ 1.00 $ 35,000,000 Proceeds to Monsanto ......................................... $19.00 $665,000,000 To the extent that the underwriters sell more than 35,000,000 shares of common stock, the underwriters have the option to purchase up to an additional 5,250,000 shares from Monsanto at the initial public offering price less the underwriting discount. The underwriters expect to deliver the shares in New York, New York on October 23, 2000. Goldman, Sachs & Co. Salomon Smith Barney J.P. Morgan & Co. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Bear, Stearns & Co. Inc. Merrill Lynch & Co. Prospectus dated October 17, 2000. 39019 Monsanto IFC IBC 10/17/2000 4:09 PM Page 2 Monsanto is a leading global provider of technology-based solutions and agricultural products that improve farm productivity and food quality.
    [Show full text]
  • Bayer–Monsanto: the Challenges of a Mega Merger
    Wiboon Kittilaksanawong and Gabrielle Gaté wrote this case solely to provide material for class discussion. The authors do not intend to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of a managerial situation. The authors may have disguised certain names and other identifying information to protect confidentiality. This publication may not be transmitted, photocopied, digitized, or otherwise reproduced in any form or by any means without the permission of the copyright holder. Reproduction of this material is not covered under authorization by any reproduction rights organization. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, contact Ivey Publishing, Ivey Business School, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada, N6G 0N1; (t) 519.661.3208; (e) [email protected]; www.iveycases.com. Copyright © 2017, Richard Ivey School of Business Foundation Version: 2017-12-15 The agriculture industry is at the heart of one of the greatest challenges of our time: how to feed an additional 3 billion people in the world by 2050 in an environmentally sustainable way.2 Liam Condon, member of the board of management and head of the Crop Science Division at Bayer AG Genetic engineering has never been about saving the world; it’s about controlling the world.3 Vandana Shiva, Indian scholar, environmental activist, and anti-globalization author In September 2016, Werner Baumann, chief executive officer (CEO) of German multinational Bayer AG (Bayer), and Hugh Grant, chairman and CEO of U.S.-based Monsanto Company (Monsanto), signed a merger agreement to create the world’s largest integrated pesticides and seeds company.4 The combined entity would benefit from Monsanto’s leadership in seeds and traits and from Bayer’s crop protection products across a wide range of indications in key regions worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Filed: 07/19/17 Page: 1 of 99 Pageid #: 1
    Case: 4:17-cv-02031 Doc. #: 1 Filed: 07/19/17 Page: 1 of 99 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI EASTERN DIVISION SMOKEY ALLEY FARM PARTNERSHIP; ) AMORE FARMS; JTM FARMS; ) KENNETH LORETTA GARRETT QUALLS ) FARM PARTNERSHIP; QUALLS LAND CO.; ) MICHAEL BAIONI; and MCLEMORE ) FARMS LLC ) Plaintiffs, ) ) Case No.: 4:17-cv-2031 v. ) ) Judge: T/B/D MONSANTO COMPANY, ) BASF CORPORATION, BASF SE, ) JURY TRIAL DEMANDED BASF CROP PROTECTION, ) E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY, ) PIONEER HI-BRED INTERNATIONAL INC., ) and DUPONT PIONEER ) ) Defendants. ) __________________________________________) CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Plaintiffs Smokey Alley Farm Partnership, Amore Farms, JTM Farm, Kenneth Loretta Garrett Qualls Farm Partnership, Qualls Land Co., Michael Baioni and McLemore Farms LLC (together, “Plaintiffs”), by their undersigned attorneys, on their own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated, upon personal knowledge as to themselves and their own acts, and upon information and belief as to all other matters, bring this action against Monsanto Company (“Monsanto”); BASF Corporation and BASF Crop Protection (together, “BASF”); and E.I. DuPont De Nemours and Company, Pioneer Hi-Bred International Inc. (“Pioneer) and DuPont Pioneer (“DuPont Pioneer”) (all three together, “DuPont”), and allege as follows: 1 Case: 4:17-cv-02031 Doc. #: 1 Filed: 07/19/17 Page: 2 of 99 PageID #: 2 NATURE OF THE CASE 1. This is not an anti-GMO lawsuit; it’s a lawsuit about corporate greed, a rush to market, and the resulting fallout. 2. With a global population expected to exceed nine billion by 2050, food production must grow 70% to feed the world.
    [Show full text]