DOCSLIB.ORG

Bayer Cropscience Overall Communications Goals

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bayer Cropscience Overall Communications Goals • Evolution of GM crop development – from the 1990s to today; • Future challenges: • Pipeline products; • Next generation GMOs and impacts on seed testing ISTA meeting, Montevideo, 2015 Dr. Ray Shillito, Bayer CropScience, USA Page 1 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 From the 1990s 1970’s to today; Page 2 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Three key elements led to the first developments in Ag. Biotech Agrobacterium tumefaciens Plant Tissue Culture Molecular Biology and Biochemistry Page 3 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 The Initial Development of Plant Biotechnology occurred in the 70’s and 80’s in both the EU and USA. Page 4 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Critical Technologies 1869 - DNA 1972 – Discovery of restriction enzymes discovered – DNA cloning 1953 1994 – Agro transformation - Structure of of Monocots DNA solved Moratorium – 1974 -75 1928 1975 - Southern blotting – demonstration of 1976 1984 – Oligomer biosynthesis bacterial – DNA Sequencing transformation 1987 – Gene Gun 1983 PCR invented Agrobacterium- transformation using disarmed vectors Transformation without Agrobacterium Page 5 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Some of the Technologies with Direct Impact Selectable markers Tissue culture Protoplasts/PEG/electroporation Agrobacterium tumefaciens Biolistics Whiskers PCR Agrobacterium in monocots Codon optimization A188 (3 way sweet corn cross) Antisense / RNAi Bt proteins Cre/Lox etc. Page 6 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 The view from 1996 was like this.. Page 7 Key US Regulatory Approvals of Biotech Products 1992 – FlavrSavr Tomato FDA 1994 – Bt176, (EPA), 1995 (USDA, FDA) 1994 – Bromoxynil cotton 1994 – RR soybean (USDA), 1995 (FDA) 1995 - NewLeaf Potato, USDA, EPA, FDA 1995 – T25 LL Corn 1995 – RR Canola 1995 – Mon810 (USDA, EPA), 1996 (FDA) 1996 – Papaya, Bt11 1998 – InVigor Canola (1996 in Canada) 1998 – RR Sugarbeet (FDA), 2005 (USDA) 1999 – LL62 Rice Page 8 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Biotech Products and Cultivation in Europe – Key Events 1997 Bt 176 Approved for cultivation 1998 Mon810 and T25 Approved for cultivation Food safety issues as a driver: 1996 - First case of Mad cow disease in Europe 1999 - Dioxin contamination (animal feed) scandal hits Belgium 1999 - Coke products withdrawn in Belgium due to bad CO2 EU Moratorium on approvals – 1998 - 2004 2010 Amflora potato approved for cultivation Page 9 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Products that have come and Gone Although Approved – Consumers may never see a product – or not for long Demand for the FLAVR SAVR tomato was high and remained high, but the product was never profitable (because it wasn’t in the right varieties and was difficult to get to market) Page 10 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Page 11 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Page 13 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Global Area (Million Hectares) of Biotech Crops, 2014: by Country Diversity of Biotech Products Others Major Biotech Crops 1% Maize Canola Soybean 9% Cotton Cotton Canola 14% Soybean Other Biotech Crops 50% Sugar beat Alfalfa Maize Papaya 30% Eggplant Squash Potato Melon Sugarcane Wheat Clara Rubenstein, Pioneer, a DuPont Company Global Adoption Rates (%) for Principal Biotech Crops (Million Hectares, Million Acres), 2014 Value (USD Value (USD Country Country million) million) USA 12,000 Morocco 140 China 9,950 Switzerland 140 France 2,800 Bulgaria 120 Brazil 2,625 Chile 120 Canada 2,120 Nigeria 120 India 2,000 Serbia 120 Japan 1,350 Slovakia 110 Seed Germany 1,170 New Zealand 100 Argentina 990 Uruguay 96 testing is Italy 767 Ireland 80 important Turkey 750 Paraguay 80 Spain 660 Portugal 80 Netherlands 590 Algeria 70 6 of the top 10 Russian Federation 500 Kenya 60 United Kingdom 450 Iran 55 commercial South Africa 428 Israel 50 markets for Australia 400 Tunisia 45 seed are Republic of Korea 400 Bolivia 40 Mexic o 350 Colombia 40 growing Czech Republic 305 Slovenia 40 Biotech crops Hungary 300 Peru 30 China, Taiwan 300 Zimbabwe 30 Poland 280 Malawi 26 Sweden 250 Libya 25 Romania 220 Saudi Arabia 20 Denmark 218 Zambia 20 Data from: Greece 200 Philippines 18 Belgium 185 Ecuador 15 ISF 2014 Finland 160 Tanzania 15 ISAAA 2014 Austria 145 Uganda 10 Egypt 140 Dominican Republic 7 Total USD 44,925 million (2013 figures) The commercial world seed market is assessed at approx. USD 45 billion Page 18 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Pipeline Products Page 19 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Challenges for Agri-Businesses Limited arable Safeguard and increase yields from constant land area land coupled à with rising better resource management (targeted use of crop protection, irrigation technology and fertilizers) demand à increase yields through innovative technologies (hybridization, plant biotechnology) Expand agricultural production in marginal areas à new crops with greater tolerance of drought and extreme temperatures Climate change Increase tolerance of plants to climatic variability à develop new varieties using state - of - the - art technologies à improve plant health and nutrient uptake Research and innovation are the key to mastering the challenges of the New Ag Economy Page 20 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Industry investing in multiple modes of action, 1996-2020 (as of 2014) WEED CONTROL ABOVE GROUND PESTS BELOW GROUND PESTS CORN ü Glufosinate-tolerance ü Caterpillar protection Gen1 ü Rootworm protection Gen1 ü Glyphosate-tolerance ü Caterpillar protection Gen2 ü Rootworm protection Gen2 ü Imidazolinone-tolerance ü Caterpillar protection Gen3 ü Rootworm protection Gen3 ü 2,4-D tolerance q Caterpillar protection Gen4 q Rootworm protection Gen1 q FOP tolerance SOYBEANS ü Glufosinate-tolerance ü Caterpillar protection Gen1 q Soybean cyst nematode ü Glyphosate-tolerance ü Caterpillar protection Gen2 protection ü Sulfonylurea-tolerance q Stink bug protection q Dicamba tolerance q Glufosinate-tolerance Gen2 q HPPD tolerance q PPO tolerance COTTON ü Glufosinate-tolerance ü Bollworm protection Gen1 ü Root knot nematode ü Glyphosate-tolerance ü Bollworm protection Gen2 protection Gen1 q 2,4-D tolerance ü Bollworm protection Gen3 q Reniform nematode q Dicamba tolerance q Bollworm protection Gen4 protection q HPPD tolerance q Lygus protection q Root knot nematode protection Gen2 ü Commercial offering q Future or potential offering Page 22 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Page 23 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Page 24 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Page 25 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Page 26 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Page 27 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Page 28 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 There are a lot of Events/Products! Crop Commer JRC Possible Approved Approved cial Projected Commercial historically for historically Events Commercial products in cultivation (inc for food (inc in 2008 Events in 2014 stacks) stacks) 2015 Soybean 1 17 ~10 28 28 Maize 9 24 ~71 91 131 Canola 4 10 ~11 25 32 Cotton 12 27 ~30 46 43 Rice 0 15 2 7 5 Potatoes 0 8 0 31 41 Other 7 23 ~11 35 33 Crops Flowers - - 22 22 0 Total Source:33 JRC Report, 2009124 / ISAAA ~157 285 312 ISAAA plus OECD database has 222 unique event entries The wealth of new events has implications for ISTA members OECD (2013) ENV/JM/MONO(2013)19 Since it may be impossible to entirely eliminate LLP in seed, in some cases thresholds have been set to assure an acceptable and predictable supply of seeds. This has been in response to several instances where the LLP was detected at such a low level that it was technically below the level of quantification using validated protocols for testing. In these situations, testing at different stages in the seed distribution system led to conflicting results regarding the presence of LLP in seed. Recognizing the inability to entirely eliminate LLP, thresholds have also been adopted by some importing countries to avoid the reduced availability of seeds in cases where it was known that the unauthorized plant had been authorized at least in one other country. The International community is discussing the issue of LLP in seeds The International Statement on Low Level Presence 12. Recognize that LLP of unapproved seed in commercial channels is also a challenge to seed trade and that it also requires collaborative efforts to address. Further collaborative efforts on seed through this initiative should be informed by the work being currently undertaken by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in this area List of countries endorsing the International Statement on Low Level Presence (2012) Australia, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Mexico, Paraguay, Philippines, Russia, United States, Uruguay, Vietnam. Detection of unknowns is difficult Knut Heller, Genetically Engineered Food – Methods and Detection, 2nd Edition, Wiley, 2006 GM testing – which events? • New events originating from major biotechnology providers • New events arising from other sources • “Other events” • Stacked events • Need efficient screening, identification and quantification methods which o are easily adaptable to the ongoing developments and o which can be easily introduced to existing laboratory infrastructures and testing schemes ‘Detection’ of ‘stacks’ – not possible Each individual event in a GM stack has a DNA or protein- based detection method The inserted DNA of different events is usually located on different chromosomes or many millions of base-pairs apart on the same chromosome Event-specific PCR cannot bridge gaps greater than a few hundred base-pairs Therefore it is not possible with present technology to develop a molecular technique that ‘detects the stack’ cf: recent EU study on analysis of stacks Page 34 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 Next generation GMOs and impacts on seed testing Page 35 Evolution, Pipeline and Future of Biotech- 2015 New events are now arising from sources other than major biotech providers These come from small companies and/or government research.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Genetic Transformation Via Biolistic Gene Gun Method and Regeneration of Common Bean
    GENETIC TRANSFORMATION VIA BIOLISTIC GENE GUN METHOD AND REGENERATION OF COMMON BEAN E. A. Eissa Genetics Department, Faculty of Agriculture, Fayoum University, Fayoum, Egypt. ABSTRACT The objective of the present research was to utilize biotechnology to improve agronomical traits such as drought stress tolerance in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) as important recalcitrant crop species via a particle gun “GeneboosterTM” for the bombardment of plant tissues with DNA. The process involves the high velocity acceleration of microprojectiles carrying foreign DNA, penetration of the cell wall and membrane by microprojectiles, and delivery of the DNA into plant cells. The initial phase of the two common bean varieties “Fönix” and “Maxidor” focused on the development of a highly regenerable tissue culture procedure amenable to the particle gun physical method. The results showed that MS medium supplemented with 1 mg/l BA and 0.1 mg/l NAA were the optimal for shoot induction from meristematic ring of cotyledonary node explants in the both bean varieties. The author has developed a tissue culture protocol that enables the “meristematic ring” that develops below axillary shoots on nodal bean explants to produce shoot buds, and developed an electric-discharge particle acceleration procedure to produce transgenic plants in the two common bean varieties. The plasmid pFF19K, harboring the kanamycin resistance gene nptII as a selectable marker and pFF19-mtlD harboring the mtlD gene which confers mannitol (drought stress) tolerance were used for adapting transformation in the two common bean varieties. The results indicated that the successful delivery of plasmids DNA and efficient gene transfer into common bean meristematic tissues included 20 bar nitrogen pressure, 135 mm shooting distance, 1.1 µm diameter size of microprojectiles, and twice bombarding of the target tissues.
    [Show full text]
  • Direct Gene Transfer
    PLNT2530 Plant Biotechnology 2021 Unit 8b Direct Transformation with DNA Unless otherwise cited or referenced, all content of this presenataion is licensed under the Creative Commons License Attribution Share-Alike 2.5 Canada 1 Transformation by direct transfection of DNA into plants •It has long been observed that cells have mechanisms for incorporating free DNA into their chromosomes. •This seems to be an effect of the naturally-occurring DNA repair mechanisms. •Foreign DNA will often be integrated at random chromosomal sites •Therefore, if you can find a way to get DNA into the cell, you can probably transform the cell. 2 Gene Gun • Known as The "Gene Gun" method. • Also referred to as micro-projectile bombardment or biolistics (ballistics using biological components). • This technique is used for in vivo transformation and has been especially useful in transforming monocot species like corn and rice. 3 A Gene Gun shoots genes into plant cells. DNA is coated onto small particles of gold or tungsten approximately two microns in diameter. The particles are placed in a vacuum chamber and the plant tissue is placed below the chamber. The particles are propelled at high velocity using a short pulse of high pressure Helium gas into any target cell or tissue. 4 Two types of Gene Guns Fixed gun for cell culture Handheld gun for in-planta transformation 5 The real trick is to fire pellets with enough force to break into cell, but not so much as to go right through tissue. Must optimize distance, placement of tissue, dispersal of charge (don't want charge to all go in one place).
    [Show full text]
  • Inside the Biotech Lab: How to Genetically Engineer a Plant? Biotechnology Is One of the Most Controversial Fields of Science and Technology
    Inside the Biotech Lab: How to Genetically Engineer a Plant? Biotechnology is one of the most controversial fields of science and technology. Some people think that it is a highly complicated field of science, with questions raised against how things are done by scientists in the lab and what their real intentions are in developing genetically modified organisms (GMOs).The fear of the unknown sometimes becomes an excuse to exercise the precautionary principle, which could block the progress of biotech innovations. This booklet seeks to dispel fears about biotechnology by showing images of what actually happens inside the biotech laboratory. The process of developing a genetically engineered (GE) plant is explained using simple terms and images. The images in this booklet with ISAAA icon are available in a photo database for public use. Journalists and other media practitioners are encouraged to use the photos to better represent biotechnology in their articles and replace fear- mongering images that are widespread in the media, especially online. Genetic engineering enables direct transfer of gene/s between closely or distantly related organisms. Though How to modifications may also be done by removing DNA sequences to switch on/off of genes, this booklet focuses genetically on gene insertion. The two most common processes used in plant genetic transformation are particle bombardment and Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation. engineer These methods require a gene of interest that codes for a specific favorable trait (such as insect resistance, herbicide tolerance, and drought tolerance, to name a few) and a a plant? target plant that needs the trait. 1 Gene cloning Cutting out the gene of interest from the DNA would have been easy if we’re dealing with something made of paper, but we’re not.
    [Show full text]
  • Combatting Monsanto
    Picture: Grassroots International Combatting Monsanto Grassroots resistance to the corporate power of agribusiness in the era of the ‘green economy’ and a changing climate La Via Campesina, Friends of the Earth International, Combat Monsanto Technical data name: “Combatting Monsanto Grassroots resistance to the corporate power of agribusiness in the era of the ‘green economy’ and a changing climate” author: Joseph Zacune ([email protected]) with contributions from activists around the world editing: Ronnie Hall ([email protected]) design and layout: Nicolás Medina – REDES-FoE Uruguay March 2012 Combatting Monsanto Grassroots resistance to the corporate power of agribusiness in the era of the ‘green economy’ and a changing climate INDEX Executive summary / 2 Company profile - Monsanto / 3 Opposition to Monsanto in Europe / 5 A decade of French resistance to GMOs / 6 Spanish movements against GM crops / 9 German farmers’ movement for GM-free regions / 10 Organising a movement for food sovereignty in Europe / 10 Monsanto, Quit India! / 11 Bt brinjal and biopiracy / 11 Bt cotton dominates cotton sector / 12 Spiralling debt still triggering suicides / 12 Stopping Monsanto’s new public-private partnerships / 13 Resistance to Monsanto in Latin America / 14 Brazilian peasant farmers’ movement against agribusiness / 14 Ten-year moratorium on GM in Peru / 15 Landmark ruling on toxic soy in Argentina / 15 Haitians oppose seed aid / 16 Guatemalan networks warn of new biosafety proposals / 17 Battle-lines drawn in the United States / 17 Stopping the
    [Show full text]
  • General Court of the European Union PRESS RELEASE No 160/13 Luxembourg, 13 December 2013
    General Court of the European Union PRESS RELEASE No 160/13 Luxembourg, 13 December 2013 Judgment in Case T-240/10 Press and Information Hungary v Commission The General Court has annulled the Commission’s decisions concerning authorisation to place on the market the genetically modified potato Amflora The Commission infringed the procedural rules of the systems for authorising GMOs in the European Union In the territory of the European Union, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) may be released into the environment or placed on the market only if consent has been given, subject to specific conditions and granted with a view to specified uses, after a scientific assessment of the risks. The authorisation system consists of two different procedures which are applied depending on the intended use of the GMOs. The aim of the first procedure, whose rules are laid down by Directive 2001/18/EC1, is to authorise GMOs with a view to their deliberate release into the environment. Within the framework of that procedure, it is in principle for the Member State with which an undertaking has lodged an application for this purpose to issue consent. However, the other Member States, and also the Commission, may raise objections vis-à-vis the intended consent decision. The second authorisation procedure, set up by Regulation 1829/20032, concerns genetically modified food and feed. In that case, the application for consent is assessed at EU level. Where, in the context of the first procedure, an objection has been raised or, in the context of the second procedure, an application for consent has been submitted, the final decision on the authorisation is taken by the Commission or by the Council on the basis of the scientific opinions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 7 Heliosr Gene Gun–Mediated Transfection of the Inner
    Chapter 7 HeliosR Gene Gun–Mediated Transfection of the Inner Ear Sensory Epithelium Inna A. Belyantseva Abstract Helios R Gene Gun–mediated transfection is a biolistic method for mechanical delivery of exogenous DNA into cells in vitro or in vivo. The technique is based on bombardment of a targeted cellular surface by micron- or submicron-sized DNA-coated gold particles that are accelerated by a pressure pulse of compressed helium gas. The main advantage of Helios R Gene Gun–mediated transfections is that it functions well on various cell types, including terminally differentiated cells that are difficult to transfect, such as neurons or inner ear sensory hair cells, and cells in internal cellular layers, such as neurons in organotypic brain slices. The successful delivery of mRNA, siRNA, or DNA of practically any size can be achieved using biolistic transfection. This chapter provides a detailed description and critical evaluation of the methodology used to transfect cDNA expression constructs, including green fluorescent protein (GFP) tagged full-length cDNAs of myosin XVa, whirlin, and β-actin, into cultured inner ear sensory epithelia using the Bio-Rad Helios R Gene Gun. Key words: Biolistic, transfection, Gene Gun, culture, ear, hair cell, stereocilia, myosin, whirlin, actin, immunofluorescence, GFP. 1. Introduction Mammalian inner ear sensory epithelia of hearing and balance end-organs (organ of Corti and vestibular epithelia, respectively) are tiny delicate tissues embedded in a bony labyrinth of the tem- poral bone and are not readily accessible for non-traumatic, non- surgical interventions. Using explanted (cultured) rodent inner ear neurosensory epithelium, one can study the development and function of these sensory cells (1, 2) as well as investigate the effects of epitope-tagged cDNA constructs that are trans- fected into particular cell types of the inner ear of mice and Bernd Sokolowski (ed.), Auditory and Vestibular Research: Methods and Protocols, vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Engineering and Sustainable Crop Disease Management: Opportunities for Case-By-Case Decision-Making
    sustainability Review Genetic Engineering and Sustainable Crop Disease Management: Opportunities for Case-by-Case Decision-Making Paul Vincelli Department of Plant Pathology, 207 Plant Science Building, College of Agriculture, Food and Environment, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40546, USA; [email protected] Academic Editor: Sean Clark Received: 22 March 2016; Accepted: 13 May 2016; Published: 20 May 2016 Abstract: Genetic engineering (GE) offers an expanding array of strategies for enhancing disease resistance of crop plants in sustainable ways, including the potential for reduced pesticide usage. Certain GE applications involve transgenesis, in some cases creating a metabolic pathway novel to the GE crop. In other cases, only cisgenessis is employed. In yet other cases, engineered genetic changes can be so minimal as to be indistinguishable from natural mutations. Thus, GE crops vary substantially and should be evaluated for risks, benefits, and social considerations on a case-by-case basis. Deployment of GE traits should be with an eye towards long-term sustainability; several options are discussed. Selected risks and concerns of GE are also considered, along with genome editing, a technology that greatly expands the capacity of molecular biologists to make more precise and targeted genetic edits. While GE is merely a suite of tools to supplement other breeding techniques, if wisely used, certain GE tools and applications can contribute to sustainability goals. Keywords: biotechnology; GMO (genetically modified organism) 1. Introduction and Background Disease management practices can contribute to sustainability by protecting crop yields, maintaining and improving profitability for crop producers, reducing losses along the distribution chain, and reducing the negative environmental impacts of diseases and their management.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetic Transformation of Metroxylon Sagu (Rottb.) Cultures Via Agrobacterium-Mediated and Particle Bombardment
    Hindawi Publishing Corporation BioMed Research International Volume 2014, Article ID 348140, 9 pages http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/348140 Research Article Genetic Transformation of Metroxylon sagu (Rottb.) Cultures via Agrobacterium-Mediated and Particle Bombardment Evra Raunie Ibrahim,1 Md. Anowar Hossain,2,3 and Hairul Azman Roslan2 1 CRAUNResearchSdn.Bhd.,93055Kuching,Sarawak,Malaysia 2 Genetic Engineering Laboratory, Department of Molecular Biology, Faculty of Resource Science and Technology, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak, 94300 Kota Samarahan, Sarawak, Malaysia 3 Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Rajshahi, Rajshahi 6205, Bangladesh Correspondence should be addressed to Hairul Azman Roslan; [email protected] Received 14 July 2014; Revised 27 August 2014; Accepted 27 August 2014; Published 11 September 2014 Academic Editor: Rodomiro Ortiz Copyright © 2014 Evra Raunie Ibrahim et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Sago palm (Metroxylon sagu) is a perennial plant native to Southeast Asia and exploited mainly for the starch content in its trunk. Genetic improvement of sago palm is extremely slow when compared to other annual starch crops. Urgent attention is needed to improve the sago palm planting material and can be achieved through nonconventional methods. We have previously developed a tissue culture method for sago palm, which is used to provide the planting materials and to develop a genetic transformation procedure. Here, we report the genetic transformation of sago embryonic callus derived from suspension culture using Agrobacterium tumefaciens and gene gun systems.
    [Show full text]
  • 11:115:321 (44K PDF)
    Ethical Issues in Biochemical Research Spring 2021 11:115:321:01 George Pieczenik, Ph.D., Professor Spring 2021 Day M,W Time 2:15-3:35 Online: GoToMeeting and Zoom 3 credits, meeting twice a week for 80 minutes Course Description This course will address ethical issues in biochemistry, with some focus on genetics and molecular biology. The course will consist of lectures by the professor, as well as student presentations on selected topics. Issues to be covered will include the ethics of recombinant DNA technology, of genetically modified plants and animals, of stem cell use, scientific patents, and of creating DNA databases. Other topics will include the political use of genetics and evolutionary paradigms, and the use of fraudulent data and “pseudo science”, and how these tools can be used to sway public opinion. Important issues facing scientists and students currently will also be discussed, such as plagiarism . data manipulation and consequences of the biotechnology revolution. Course Requirements 1. Class Attendance & Participation: Students are expected to attend class online and to participate actively. There will be spot quizzes. Unexcused absences (>3) will result in failure. (10%) Online class attendance will be through GoToMyMeeting and/or Zoom. Classes will be recorded and deposited to Dropbox for students who can not make the class synchronously. 2. Essays on assigned topics: Students will present two power point topics assigned or requested. for presentation to the class. (70%) 3. Final exam; A final take home 2 hour exam. (20%) Optional reading list from which to prepare paper The Main text is Edwin Black's - America's War on the Weak Publisher: Four Walls Eight Windows; (September 2003) ISBN: 1568582587 Rosalind Franklin: The Dark Lady of DNA by Brenda Maddox , Harper Collins 2002, UK The Fraud of Abderhalden’s Enzymes by Ute Deichmann and Benno Muller-Hill, Nature vol 393.
    [Show full text]
  • Organic Farming Dwarfs GM Crop Production in Europe
    for the people | for the planet | for the future Organic farming dwarfs GM crop production in Europe February 2012 The area dedicated to growing genetically modified (GM) crops in the European Union remains insignificant when compared with conventional and organic farming. In 2011, GM crops were grown on 0.1% of arable land in Europe, compared with nearly 4% for organic. Nineteen member states cultivated no GM crops at all. The EU has 110,849,000 hectares of arable land (excluding permanent crops as vineyards), of which only 114,525 hectares were planted with GM crops in 2011. Table 1: GMO cultivation in European countries, 2008-2011 Country and crops 2008(ha) 2009(ha) 2010(ha) 2011(ha) Cultivation of Maize Mon810 Spain (1) 79,269 76,057 67,726 97,346 Portugal (2) 4,856 5,202 4,869 7,723 Czech Republic (3) 8,380 6,480 4,830 5,090 Poland (4) 3,000 3,000 3000 3,000 Slovakia (5) 1,931 875 1,248 760 Romania (6) 6,130 3,244 823 588 Germany (7) 3,173 0 0 0 Cultivation of potato Amflora Sweden (8) 0 0 103 16 Germany (9) 0 0 15 2 106,739 94,858 82,614 114,525 The main exception to this picture of GM crop rejection in Europe is Spain where 97,346 hectares of Monsanto’s maize were planted in 2011. The increase was mainly caused by the general expansion of the area cultivated with maize from 311,900 (21.7% GM) to 368,300 (26.4% GM) hectares.
    [Show full text]
  • Guide to Biotechnology 2008
    guide to biotechnology 2008 research & development health bioethics innovate industrial & environmental food & agriculture biodefense Biotechnology Industry Organization 1201 Maryland Avenue, SW imagine Suite 900 Washington, DC 20024 intellectual property 202.962.9200 (phone) 202.488.6301 (fax) bio.org inform bio.org The Guide to Biotechnology is compiled by the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) Editors Roxanna Guilford-Blake Debbie Strickland Contributors BIO Staff table of Contents Biotechnology: A Collection of Technologies 1 Regenerative Medicine ................................................. 36 What Is Biotechnology? .................................................. 1 Vaccines ....................................................................... 37 Cells and Biological Molecules ........................................ 1 Plant-Made Pharmaceuticals ........................................ 37 Therapeutic Development Overview .............................. 38 Biotechnology Industry Facts 2 Market Capitalization, 1994–2006 .................................. 3 Agricultural Production Applications 41 U.S. Biotech Industry Statistics: 1995–2006 ................... 3 Crop Biotechnology ...................................................... 41 U.S. Public Companies by Region, 2006 ........................ 4 Forest Biotechnology .................................................... 44 Total Financing, 1998–2007 (in billions of U.S. dollars) .... 4 Animal Biotechnology ................................................... 45 Biotech
    [Show full text]
  • Vegetable Biotechnology
    UC Davis, Vegetable Research and Information Center Biotechnology (Publication pending) VEGETABLE BIOTECHNOLOGY Vegetable Research and Information Center Vegetable Biotechnology Applications of Biotechnology in Vegetable Breeding, Production, Marketing, and Consumption Department of Vegetable Crops, University of California, Davis, CA 95616 Tel. 530-752-1249 Fax: 530-752-9659 email: [email protected] http://vric.ucdavis.edu Authors: Trevor V. Suslow and Kent J. Bradford Bioengineered Products Reach The Marketplace Revolutionary discoveries in biology in the 1970’s and 1980’s fueled predictions of dramatic changes in agriculture and stimulated entrepreneurial excitement and investment. Driven by continuing advances in knowledge, technology, and commercial experience, these predictions are now being realized in the marketplace. Beginning in 1994, the first wave of products from biotechnological applications to vegetables were introduced in pilot test markets. Vine-ripe tomatoes with extended shelf life, processing tomatoes with superior quality and deep red color, squash with novel virus resistance, and potatoes genetically modified to produce an insect-killing protein are examples of the traits introduced into commercial vegetable varieties with the tools of biotechnology These first products, such as the Flavr Savr® tomato which promised superior vine-ripened flavor, received both public visibility and regulatory scrutiny. Less visible to the public is the astounding behind-the-scenes impact of biotechnology in vegetable breeding, production, processing, and marketing. While not replacing traditional crop breeding and horticultural expertise, biotechnology has dramatically expanded the tools available for the genetic improvement and production of vegetables. The revolutionary (evolutionary in terms of biological sciences as a whole) advances that have resulted from public and private investments in basic and applied research are now entering commercial application, to the benefit of both producers and consumers.
    [Show full text]