DOCSLIB.ORG

Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2016

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2016 ISAAA Briefs brief 52 Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2016 Up to ~18 million farmers in 26 countries planted 185.1 million hectares (457.4 million acres) in 2016, an increase of 3% or 5.4 million hectares (13.1 million acres) from 2015. No. 52 – 2016 Note to ReadeRS: Over the last 21 years, ISAAA has devoted considerable effort usage of these words in different regions of the world, with to consolidate all the available data on officially approved biotech crops being used exclusively in this text because biotech crop adoption globally; it is important to note that of its growing usage worldwide. Similarly, the words corn, the database does not include plantings of biotech crops that used in North America, and maize, used more commonly are not officially approved. The database draws on a large elsewhere in the world, are synonymous, with maize being number of sources of approved biotech crops from both the used consistently in this Brief, except for common names like public and private sectors in many countries throughout the corn rootworm where global usage dictates the use of the world. The range of crops is those defined as food, feed and word corn. All $ dollar values in this Brief are US dollars unless fiber crops in the FAO database, which totaled ~10 billion otherwise noted. Some of the listed references may not be metric tons of production in 2010 (http://www.geohive.com. cited in the text – for convenience they have been included Charts/ag_crops.aspx). Data sources vary by country and because they are considered useful reading material and were include, where available, government statistics, independent used as preparatory documents for this Brief. Global totals of surveys, and estimates from commodity groups, seed millions of hectares planted with biotech crops have in some associations and other groups, plus a range of proprietary cases been rounded off to the nearest million and similarly, databases. In the interest of uniformity, continuity, and subtotals to the nearest 100,000 hectares, using both < and comparability, wherever possible, ISAAA utilizes the same > characters; hence in some cases this leads to insignificant published data source annually; for example, for Brazil, the approximations, and there may be minor variances in August biotech reports of Celeres are used; similarly, for some figures, totals, and percentage estimates that do not the US, the USDA/NASS crop acreage reports published always add up exactly to 100% due to rounding off. It is also on 30 June annually are used. Published ISAAA estimates important to note that countries in the Southern Hemisphere are, wherever possible, based on more than one source of plant their crops in the last quarter of the calendar year. The information and thus are usually not attributable to one biotech crop areas reported in this publication are planted, specific source. Multiple sources of information for the not necessarily harvested hectarage, in the year stated. Thus, same data point greatly facilitate assessment, verification, for example, the 2016 information for Argentina, Brazil, and validation of specific estimates. The “proprietary” ISAAA Australia, South Africa, and Uruguay is hectares usually database on biotech crops is unique from two points of view; planted in the last quarter of 2016 and harvested in the first, it provides a global perspective; second, it has used the first quarter of 2017, or later, with some countries like the same basic methodology, improved continuously for the last Philippines planting crops in more than one season per year. 20 years and hence provides continuity from the genesis Thus, for countries of the Southern hemisphere, such as Brazil of the commercialization of biotech crops in 1996, to the and Argentina the estimates are projections, and thus are present. The database has gained acceptance internationally always subject to change due to weather, which may increase as a reliable benchmark of the global status of biotech food, or decrease actual planted area before the end of the planting feed and fiber crops and is widely cited in the scientific season when this Brief went to press. For Brazil, the winter literature and the international press. Whereas individual maize crop (safrinha) planted at the end of December 2016 data points make-up the data base, the most valuable and more intensively through January and February 2017, is information is the trends of adoption over time, for example classified as a 2016 crop in this Brief, consistent with a policy the increasing dominance of developing countries which is which uses the first date of planting to determine the crop clearly evident. year. All biotech crop hectare estimates in this Brief, and all ISAAA publications, are only counted once, irrespective of how Note that the words rapeseed, canola, and Argentine canola many traits are incorporated in the crops. Country figures are used synonymously, as well as transgenic, genetically were sourced from The Economist, supplemented by data modified crops, GM crops, and biotech crops, reflecting the from World Bank, FAO and UNCTAD, when necessary. ISAAA Briefs brief 52 Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2016 No. 52 – 2016 ISAAA prepares this Brief and supports its free distribution to developing countries. The objective is to provide information and knowledge to the scientific community and society on biotech/GM crops to facilitate a more informed and transparent discussion regarding their potential role in contributing to global food, feed, fiber and fuel security, and a more sustainable agriculture. ISAAA takes full responsibility for the views expressed in this publication and for any errors of omission or misinterpretation. Published by: The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA). Copyright: ISAAA 2016. All rights reserved. Whereas ISAAA encourages the global sharing of information in Brief 52, no part of this publication may be reproduced in any form or by any means, electronically, mechanically, by photocopying, recording or otherwise without the permission of the copyright owners. Reproduction of this publication, or parts thereof, for educational and non-commercial purposes is encouraged with due acknowledgment, subsequent to permission being granted by ISAAA. Citation: ISAAA. 2016. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2016. ISAAA Brief No. 52. ISAAA: Ithaca, NY. This 2016 ISAAA Brief is an extension of the 20 Volumes of Annual Briefs (1996 to 2015) on global status of biotech/GM crops authored by Clive James, Founder & Emeritus Chairman of ISAAA. iSBN: 978-1-892456-66-4 Publication orders: Full Brief 52 and the Executive Summary are downloadable free of charge from the ISAAA website (http://www.isaaa.org). Please contact the ISAAA SEAsiaCenter to acquire a hard copy of the full version of Brief 52. ISAAA SEAsiaCenter c/o IRRI DAPO Box 7777 Metro Manila, Philippines info on iSaaa: For information about ISAAA, please contact the Center nearest you: ISAAA AmeriCenter ISAAA AfriCenter ISAAA SEAsiaCenter 105 Leland Lab PO Box 70, ILRI Campus c/o IRRI Cornell University Old Naivasha Road DAPO Box 7777 Ithaca NY 14853, U.S.A. Uthiru, Nairobi 00605 Metro Manila Kenya Philippines electronically: or email to [email protected] For Executive Summaries of all ISAAA Briefs, please visit http://www.isaaa.org table of Contents List of Tables and Figures ii Czech Republic 78 Introduction 1 Need for EU to Change Stance 79 Global Area of Biotech Crops in 2016 2 on Biotech Crops Distribution of Biotech Crops in 2 United Kingdom’s Exit (BREXIT) 80 Industrial and Developing from the EU Could Open Countries GM Opportunities Distribution of Biotech Crops, by 4 Benefits of Biotech Crops 81 Country Future Prospects of Biotech 81 Economic Benefits of Biotech Crops 7 Crops in the EU Country Chapters Africa 81 United States of America 8 Sudan 81 Brazil 16 Progress with Biotech Crops 83 Argentina 19 Research in Other African Canada 24 Countries India 28 Biosafety Policy Developments 84 Paraguay 33 Technology Demand 87 Pakistan 36 Partnerships Emerging in 87 China 41 Africa South Africa 45 Policy Pronouncements 87 Uruguay 49 Distribution of Biotech Crops, by Crop 89 Latin American Countries 50 Biotech soybean 89 Bolivia 50 Biotech maize 89 Mexico 51 Biotech cotton 91 Colombia 54 Biotech canola 91 Honduras 55 Biotech alfalfa 92 Chile 56 Other biotech crops 92 Costa Rica 57 Distribution of Biotech Crops, by Trait 92 Future Prospects for Latin 58 The Global Value of the Biotech Crop 94 America Market Asia and the Pacific 58 Trends in Biotech Crop Approvals 95 Australia 58 1992-2016 Philippines 61 Benefits of Biotech/Genetically 96 Myanmar 65 Modified Crops Vietnam 67 Future of Biotech Crops: A Game 106 Bangladesh 69 Changer Future Prospects of Biotech 73 Biotech/GM Crop Regulation 109 Crops in Asia and the Supportive of Innovation Pacific Conclusion and Closing Comments 113 The European Union (EU 28) 73 Acknowledgments 116 Spain 74 References 117 Portugal 76 Appendices 121 Slovakia 77 i List of Tables and Figures taBleS Table 1. Global Area of Biotech Crops, the First 21 Years, 1996 to 2016 Table 2. Global Area of Biotech Crops, 2015 and 2016: Industrial and Developing Countries (Million Hectares) Table 3. Global Area of Biotech Crops in 2015 and 2016: by Country (Million Hectares) Table 4. Biotech Crop Hectarage in the USA, 2016 Table 5. Biotech Crop Hectarage in Brazil, 2016 Table 6. Biotech Crop Hectarage in Argentina, 2016 Table 7. Economic Benefits of Biotech Crops in Argentina (Billion US$) and Percentage Table 8. Biotech Crop Hectarage in Canada, 2016 Table 9. Seed Yield (Kg/ha) of Biotech Mustard Hybrid DMH-11 During BRL-I in 2010-11 and 2011-12 Table 10. Status of Biosafety Research Trials of Biotech Crops in India, 2016 Table 11. Biotech Crop Area in Paraguay, 2016 Table 12.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Overview of Arctic Apples
    An Overview of Arctic Apples: Basic Facts and Characteristics Kenong Xu Department of Horticulture Cornell University, New York State Agricultural Experiment Station Geneva, NY pple fruits turn brown quickly after being sliced or bitten. How Are the Activities of PPOs Reduced in Arctic Apples? Although this is a natural phenomenon, browning has One of the commonly used methods in reducing the activity been considered as an undesirable trait that often discour- of a specific enzyme in living cells is to suppress the expression of A ages consumption mRNA from the gene targeted. There are several means scientists “Arctic Golden Delicious and Artic Granny and causes unnec- can use to achieve specific gene expression suppression. OSF took an Smith Apples, which are genetically essary waste. To approach called co-suppression, a technique that allows specifically address the long modified varieties that do not brown suppressing mRNA from one or more target genes depending upon standing issue of the DNA sequences. One required element for this technique, obvi- when cut, will be available for commercial fruit browning in ously, is DNA sequence information for gene(s) targeted. Another planting once deregulated. This article apple, Okanagan element is that a second copy (partial or complete) of the target describes the relevant scientific Specialty Fruits gene(s) is transformed into cells and expressed at high levels. Such background and facts about these apples (OSF), a Canadi- high level expression of the transgene will trigger a process called so that growers can make an informed an firm located in RNA interference (RNAi) that will chop mRNA from both the target British Columbia decision on whether or not to grow Arctic gene and the transgene into small pieces to kill the mRNA, leading that is funded by to co-suppression of their mRNA.
    [Show full text]
  • Apple, Reaktion Books
    apple Reaktion’s Botanical series is the first of its kind, integrating horticultural and botanical writing with a broader account of the cultural and social impact of trees, plants and flowers. Already published Apple Marcia Reiss Bamboo Susanne Lucas Cannabis Chris Duvall Geranium Kasia Boddy Grasses Stephen A. Harris Lily Marcia Reiss Oak Peter Young Pine Laura Mason Willow Alison Syme |ew Fred Hageneder APPLE Y Marcia Reiss reaktion books Published by reaktion books ltd 33 Great Sutton Street London ec1v 0dx, uk www.reaktionbooks.co.uk First published 2015 Copyright © Marcia Reiss 2015 All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the publishers Printed and bound in China by 1010 Printing International Ltd A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library isbn 978 1 78023 340 6 Contents Y Introduction: Backyard Apples 7 one Out of the Wild: An Ode and a Lament 15 two A Rose is a Rose is a Rose . is an Apple 19 three The Search for Sweetness 43 four Cider Chronicles 59 five The American Apple 77 six Apple Adulation 101 seven Good Apples 123 eight Bad Apples 137 nine Misplaced Apples 157 ten The Politics of Pomology 169 eleven Apples Today and Tomorrow 185 Apple Varieties 203 Timeline 230 References 234 Select Bibliography 245 Associations and Websites 246 Acknowledgements 248 Photo Acknowledgements 250 Index 252 Introduction: Backyard Apples Y hree old apple trees, the survivors of an unknown orchard, still grow around my mid-nineteenth-century home in ∏ upstate New York.
    [Show full text]
  • Draft Plant Pest Risk Similarity Assessment
    Preliminary Extended Determination1 of Nonregulated Status for Okanagan Specialty Fruits Non-Browning Arctic® Apple PG451 In response to a request from Okanagan Specialty Fruits Inc. (hereinafter referred to as OSF) to extend a determination of nonregulated status to Okanagan non-browning Arctic® apple event PG451 (PG451 apple) with non-browning phenotype via suppression of four genes for polyphenol oxidase (Extension No. 20-213-01.ext), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has determined, based on similarity to its antecedent organisms, that PG451 apple and progeny derived from it are unlikely to pose a greater plant pest risk than the unmodified organism from which it was derived, and are no longer to be considered regulated under APHIS' Biotechnology Regulations in 7 CFR 3402. This extension request is based upon APHIS’ determination of nonregulated status of the OSF antecedent organisms: Arctic® Golden (Event GD743) and Arctic® Granny (Event GS784), with non-browning phenotype. OSF antecedent GD743 and GS784 described in petition number 10-161-01p received a determination of non-regulated status on February 18, 2015. APHIS-approved permits or acknowledged notifications that were previously required for environmental release, interstate movement, or importation will no longer be required for PG451 apple and its progeny. Importation of PG451, other propagative material, and bulk or table stock, will still be subject to APHIS foreign quarantine notices at 7 CFR part 319 and the Federal Seed Act regulations at 7 CFR parts 201 and 361. The same genetic construct GEN-03, used to transform the OSF antecedents GD743 and GS784 with non-browning characteristics was also used to transform and generate PG451 apple.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) Annual Environmental Scan
    Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) Annual Environmental Scan DECEMBER 2016 AgriGrowth Tasmania Department of Primary Industries, Parks, Water and Environment (DPIPWE) GMO Annual Environmental Scan 2016 Contents DEFINITIONS .............................................................................................. 4 SUMMARY .................................................................................................... 5 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 6 Background ...................................................................................................................................... 6 Terms of Reference ....................................................................................................................... 7 Consultation Process ..................................................................................................................... 7 FINDINGS ..................................................................................................... 9 Overview of GMOs globally......................................................................................................... 9 Emerging Issue – New Breeding Techniques ......................................................................... 12 SECTION UPDATES ................................................................................ 15 Section 1: Development of new generation GMOs that provide health or other benefits……… .............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Contributions of Biotechnology to Meeting Future Food and Environmental Security Needs
    The EuroBiotech Journal REVIEW © 2018 European Biotechnology Thematic Network Association Food & Feed Biotechnology Contributions of biotechnology to meeting future food and environmental security needs Kevan M.A. Gartland* and Jill S. Gartland Abstract Biotechnology, including genetic modifications, can play a vital role in helping to meet future food and environmental security needs for our growing population. The nature and use of biotechnology crops are described and related to aspects of food security. Biotechnological applications for food and animal feed are described, together with trends on global adoption of these crops. The benefits of biotechnology crops through increased yield, reduced pesticide use and decreased environmental dama- ge are discussed. Examples of biotechnology crops which do not involve genetic modification are also described. Applications of biotechnology to drought and salt tolerance, and biofortification in which micronutrient content is enhanced are discussed. Emergent technologies such as RNA spraying technology, use of genome editing in agriculture and future targets for improved food and environmental security are considered. Keywords: food supply, environmental security, biotechnology crops, biofortification, ‘Golden’ crops, micronutrients, regula- tion of gene expression, human health & nutrition Introduction Life Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian There can be little doubt that global climate change will increase the frequency and se- University, Glasgow G4 0BA, Scotland verity of extreme weather events. These include floods, drought, smogs and increased *Corresponding author: K.M.A Gartland temperatures, with a rise of at least 2 oC forecast by 2050 and the need for greater climate E-mail: [email protected] justice (1). Climate change is having adverse effects on agriculture, rendering food sup- DOI: 10.2478/ebtj-2018-0002 ply less secure for many in developing countries.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Introductions N.E
    South Dakota State University Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange South Dakota State University Agricultural Bulletins Experiment Station 5-1-1927 Plant Introductions N.E. Hansen Follow this and additional works at: http://openprairie.sdstate.edu/agexperimentsta_bulletins Recommended Citation Hansen, N.E., "Plant Introductions" (1927). Bulletins. Paper 224. http://openprairie.sdstate.edu/agexperimentsta_bulletins/224 This Bulletin is brought to you for free and open access by the South Dakota State University Agricultural Experiment Station at Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Bulletins by an authorized administrator of Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. INDEX Pa1re Paire Adno Apple --------------------------- 8 Kahinta Plum ----------------------- 23 Alexis Crabapple ---------------------- 8 Kamdesa S. C. Hybrid _________________ 28 Amdo Rose -------------------------- 50 Kana Gooseberry --------------------- 44 Amur Crabapple --------------------- 8 Kanega Gooseberry ------------------- 44 Anoka Apple ------------------------ 9 Kapoza Gooseberry ------------------ 44 Arika.ra Grape ----------------------- 39 Kataga Gooseberry ------------------ 44 Assiniboin Plum --------------------- 20 Kawanka Gooseberry ----------------- 44 Atkan Grape ------------------------
    [Show full text]
  • Imagerunners 8860450330
    Online Prelims Thematic TEST - 10 ( InsightsIAS Mock Test Series for UPSC Preliminary Exam 2020 ) 1 ‘RNA interference (RNAi)’ technology is being used to suppress desired genes. Which of the following is/are examples of such an application? 1. Decaffeinated Coffee 2. Nicotine free tobacco 3. Hypoallergenic crops Select the correct answer using the code given below. A. 1 only B. 2 and 3 C. 1 and 3 D. 1, 2 and 3 Your Answer : Correct Answer : D Answer Justification : Justification: RNA interference (RNAi) is a biological process in which RNA molecules inhibit gene expression or translation. Since the discovery of RNAi and its regulatory potentials, it has become evident that RNAi has immense potential in suppression of desired genes (gene silencing). Numerous studies have demonstrated that RNAi can provide a more specific approach to inhibit tumor growth by targeting cancer-related genes (i.e., oncogene). RNAi has resulted in the invention of novel crops such as nicotine-free tobacco, decaffeinated coffee, nutrient fortified vegetation, and hypoallergenic crops (allergen free crops). The genetically-engineered Arctic apples received FDA approval in 2015. While it was known that plants expressing virus-specific proteins showed enhanced tolerance or resistance to viral infection, it was not expected that plants carrying only short, non-coding regions of viralIMAGERUNNERS RNA sequences would 8860450330show similar levels of protection. Researchers believed that viral RNA produced by transgenes could also inhibit viral replication. The reverse experiment, in which short sequences of plant genes were introduced into viruses, showed that the targeted gene was suppressed in an infected plant. This phenomenon was labeled “virus-induced gene silencing” (VIGS), and the set of such phenomena were collectively called post transcriptional gene silencing.
    [Show full text]
  • Genetically Engineered Trees the New Frontier of Biotechnology
    GENETICALLY ENGINEERED TREES THE NEW FRONTIER OF BIOTECHNOLOGY NOVEMBER 2013 CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY | GE TREES: THE NEW FRONTIER OF BIOTECHNOLOGY Editor and Executive Summary: DEBBIE BARKER Writers: DEBBIE BARKER, SAM COHEN, GEORGE KIMBRELL, SHARON PERRONE, AND ABIGAIL SEILER Contributing Writer: GABRIELA STEIER Copy Editing: SHARON PERRONE Additonal Copy Editors: SAM COHEN, ABIGAIL SEILER AND SARAH STEVENS Researchers: DEBBIE BARKER, SAM COHEN, GEORGE KIMBRELL, AND SHARON PERRONE Additional Research: ABIGAIL SEILER Science Consultant: MARTHA CROUCH Graphic Design: DANIELA SKLAN | HUMMINGBIRD DESIGN STUDIO Report Advisor: ANDREW KIMBRELL ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We are grateful to Ceres Trust for its generous support of this publication and other project initiatives. ABOUT US THE CENTER FOR FOOD SAFETY (CFS) is a national non-profit organization working to protect human health and the environment by challenging the use of harmful food production technologies and by promoting organic and other forms of sustainable agriculture. CFS uses groundbreaking legal and policy initiatives, market pressure, and grassroots campaigns to protect our food, our farms, and our environment. CFS is the leading organization fighting genetically engineered (GE) crops in the US, and our successful legal chal - lenges and campaigns have halted or curbed numerous GE crops. CFS’s US Supreme Court successes include playing an historic role in the landmark US Supreme Court Massachusetts v. EPA decision mandating that the EPA reg - ulate greenhouse gases. In addition, in
    [Show full text]
  • Arctic Apples
    Arctic Apples Arctic® Granny and Arctic® Golden apples Commented [JB1]: Arctic(R) Fuji apples are also fully approved in Canada What? Arctic® apples do not turn brown when bitten, cut, or bruised. How? A very small number of genes (four) are responsible for making an apple turn brown when cut. An enzyme called polyphenol oxidases (PPO) is responsible for this “oxidative” browning. In the Arctic® apple, the gene for browning is essentially switched off. Why? Besides making it easier to use in salads and fruit trays, or to use as a healthy snack, the nonbrowning trait can help reduce food waste from farm to table. As much as 40% of all apples grown are wasted, in part because of browning. (Read article: Tesco says almost 30,000 tonnes of food 'wasted' http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-24603008). Lowering the level of the PPO enzyme that causes browning may also boost nutrition in sliced apples, as these enzymes can reduce levels of certain nutrients, such as vitamin C or antioxidants. In the food service industry, regular apples can be treated with an antioxidant to prevent browning. However, the treatment is expensive and tends to create an unpleasant flavor. Arctic® apples don’t require this treatment. Original Research Okanagan Specialty Fruits (OSF), based in Summerland, BC, with research labs in Saskatoon, SK. Registration Canada 2017 - Arctic® apple required three separate assessments. Health Canada assessed the safety Commented [JB2]: Arctic Golden and Arctic Granny and nutrition of Arctic® apple for use as food, while the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) approved in 2015, Arctic Fuji approved in 2018 assessed the safety and nutrition of Arctic® apple for use as a livestock feed and suitability for release into the environment.
    [Show full text]
  • ISAAA Briefs Brief 53 Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops
    ISAAA Briefs brief 53 Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops in 2017: Biotech Crop Adoption Surges as Economic Benefits Accumulate in 22 Years Up to 17 million farmers in 24 countries planted 189.8 million hectares (469 million acres) in 2017, an increase of 3% or 4.7 million hectares (11.6 million acres) from 2016. No. 53 – 2017 Over the last 21 years, ISAAA has devoted considerable effort usage of these words in different regions of the world, with to consolidate all the available data on officially approved biotech crops being used exclusively in this text because biotech crop adoption globally; it is important to note that of its growing usage worldwide. Similarly, the words corn, the database does not include plantings of biotech crops that used in North America, and maize, used more commonly are not officially approved. The database draws on a large elsewhere in the world, are synonymous, with maize being number of sources of approved biotech crops from both the used consistently in this Brief, except for common names like public and private sectors in many countries throughout the corn rootworm where global usage dictates the use of the world. The range of crops is those defined as food, feed and word corn. All $ dollar values in this Brief are US dollars unless fiber crops in the FAO database, which totaled ~10 billion otherwise noted. Some of the listed references may not be metric tons of production in 2010 (http://www.geohive.com. cited in the text – for convenience they have been included Charts/ag_crops.aspx).
    [Show full text]
  • Lowdown on Gmos According to Science
    The Lowdown on GMOs According to Science Compiled by Fourat Janabi Copyright Fourat Janabi. 2013 SMASHWORDS EDITION All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced, scanned, or distributed in any printed or electronic form without the written permission of the author except for brief quotations used in articles and reviews. Table of Contents Opening Minds Amidst the Myths By Karl Haro Von Mogel PART I Introduction Who’s Afraid of GMOs? Alan McHughen PART II 21 Questions 21 Questions By Fourat Janabi Neal Carter Brian Scott Kevin Folta PART III Who, What, When, Where, and Why We’re All Wearing the Same Genes Anastasia Bodnar Science is Laughing at Us Julee K On What It’s Like Not To Know Squat About GMOs Mike Bendzela Using Technology to Reduce Our Farming Footprint Gabriel Carballal Do GMO Crops Have a Higher Yield? It Depends. Michael Simpson Gorillas and the Future of Crop Biotechnology Steve Savage GMO Opponents are the Climate Skeptics of the Left Keith Kloor Why GMO Myths are so Appealing and Powerful Cami Ryan Time to Call Out the Anti-GMO Conspiracy Theory Mark Lynas Why Organic Advocates Should Love GMOs Ramez Naam Random Thoughts on Biotech Fourat Janabi Opening Minds Amidst the Myths By Karl Haro Von Mogel Molecular Biologist In the fall of 1999, I took my first classes as a genetics student at UC Davis. While I was figuring out what I wanted to focus my life on, news of a disaster struck. A group of activists destroyed a research field and a weather station, protesting against genetically engineered (GE) crops.
    [Show full text]
  • Piante Da Frutto Transgeniche E Considerazioni Sulle Conseguenze Dei Divieti Imposti Alla Ricerca in Italia
    Review n. 25 – Italus Hortus 22 (1), 2015: 31-57 Piante da frutto transgeniche e considerazioni sulle conseguenze dei divieti imposti alla ricerca in Italia Eddo Rugini Dipartimento di Agricoltura, Foreste, Natura e Energia, Università della Tuscia, Viterbo Ricezione:19 dicembre 2015; Accettazione: 3 luglio 2015 Transgenic fruit trees and conse - sense at all when one consider that all the GEPs cur - quences of the prohibitions imposed rently on the market are based on plants created with on research in Italy technologies that are about 20 years old. Modern technology could placate all the criticism generated by the first generation of GEPs and be of great support Abstract. Genetic transformation allows us to get a to the problems and to traditional breeding techni - better understanding of gene function. This technique ques. In most cases, this technology will be used to could also greatly accelerate the development of improve specifically the plants’ weak traits, providing improved plants by access to the readily available an answer to farmers’ demands, while leaving untou - and enormous national germplasm gene bank which, ched all others traits – a work that is over two deca - however, still remains unappreciated today. The total des in the making. Thanks to government funding in veto imposed by the Italian government on the use of the period between 1985 and 2002, Italian scientists this technology is making Italian farmers and seed were able to produce a variety of transgenic plants companies dependent on foreign companies and una - and fruit trees using regeneration protocols based on ble to defend national gemplasm with an obvious efficient cells that were derived from mature cultivar impact on economy.
    [Show full text]