Transgenic plants and biosafety: science, misconceptions and public perceptions

One usually thinks of plant biology as a non-controversial topic, but the concerns raised over the biosafety of genetically modified (GM) plants have reached disproportionate levels relative to the actual risks. While the technology of changing the genome of plants has been gradually refined and increasingly implemented, the commercialization of GM crops has exploded. Today's commercialized transgenic plants have been produced using Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation or gene gun-mediated transformation. Recently, incremental improvements of biotechnologies, such as the use of green fluorescent protein (GFP) as a selectable marker, have been developed. Non-transformation genetic modification technologies such as chimeraplasty will be increasingly used to more precisely modify germplasm. In spite of the increasing knowledge about genetic modification of plants, concerns over ecological and food biosafety have escalated beyond scientific rationality. While several risks associated with GM crops and foods have been identified, the popular press, spurred by colorful protest groups, has left the general public with a sense of imminent danger. Reviewed here are the risks that are currently under research. Ecological biosafety research has identified potential risks associated with certain crop/transgene combinations, such as intra- and interspecific transgene flow, persistence and the consequences of transgenes in unintended hosts. Resistance management strategies for insect resistance transgenes and non-target effects of these genes have also been studied. Food biosafety research has focused on transgenic product toxicity and allergenicity. However, an estimated 3.5 x 10(12) transgenic plants have been grown in the U.S. in the past 12 years, with over two trillion being grown in 1999 and 2000 alone. These large numbers and the absence of any negative reports of compromised biosafety indicate that genetic modification by biotechnology poses no immediate or significant risks and that resulting food products from GM crops are as safe as foods from conventional varieties. We are increasingly convinced that scientists have a duty to conduct objective research and to effectively communicate the results--especially those pertaining to the relative risks and potential benefits--to scientists first and then to the public. All stakeholders in the technology need more effective dialogues to better understand risks and benefits of adopting or not adopting agricultural biotechnologies.     

Attitudes in China about Crops and Foods Developed by Biotechnology

Transgenic Bt cotton has been planted in China since 1997 and, in 2009, biosafety certificates for the commercial production of Bt rice and phytase corn were issued by the Chinese government. The public attitude in China toward agricultural biotechnology and genetically modified (GM) crops and foods has received considerable attention worldwide. We investigated the attitudes of consumers, Bt cotton farmers and scientists in China regarding GM crops and foods and the factors influencing their attitudes. Data were collected using interview surveys of consumer households, farmer households and scientists. A discrete choice approach was used to elicit the purchase intentions of the respondents. Two separate probit models were developed to examine the effect of various factors on the choices of the respondents. Bt cotton farmers had a very positive attitude because Bt cotton provided them with significant economic benefits. Chinese consumers from developed regions had a higher acceptance and willingness to pay for GM foods than consumers in other regions. The positive attitude toward GM foods by the scientific community will help to promote biotechnology in China in the future. Our survey emphasized that educational efforts made by government officials, the media and scientists can facilitate the acceptance of GM technology in China. Further educational efforts will be critical for influencing consumer attitudes and decisions of government agencies in the future. More effective educational efforts by government agencies and public media concerning the scientific facts and safety of GM foods would enhance the acceptance of GM crops in China.     

The impact of genetically modified crops on soil microbial communities.

Genetically modified (GM) plants represent a potential benefit for environmentally friendly agriculture and human health. Though, poor knowledge is available on potential hazards posed by unintended modifications occurring during genetic manipulation. The increasing amount of reports on ecological risks and benefits of GM plants stresses the need for experimental works aimed at evaluating the impact of GM crops on natural and agro-ecosystems. Major environmental risks associated with GM crops include their potential impact on non-target soil microorganisms playing a fundamental role in crop residues degradation and in biogeochemical cycles. Recent works assessed the effects of GM crops on soil microbial communities on the basis of case-by-case studies, using multimodal experimental approaches involving different target and non-target organisms. Experimental evidences discussed in this review confirm that a precautionary approach should be adopted, by taking into account the risks associated with the unpredictability of transformation events, of their pleiotropic effects and of the fate of transgenes in natural and agro-ecosystems, weighing benefits against costs.     

The ecological risks of transgenic plants.

Biotechnologies have been utilized "ante litteram" for thousands of years to produce food and drink and genetic engineering techniques have been widely applied to produce many compounds for human use, from insulin to other medicines. The debate on genetically modified (GM) organisms broke out all over the world only when GM crops were released into the field. Plant ecologists, microbiologists and population geneticists carried out experiments aimed at evaluating the environmental impact of GM crops. The most significant findings concern: the spread of transgenes through GM pollen diffusion and its environmental impact after hybridisation with closely related wild species or subspecies; horizontal gene transfer from transgenic plants to soil microbes; the impact of insecticide proteins released into the soil by transformed plants on non-target microbial soil communities. Recent developments in genetic engineering produced a technology, dubbed "Terminator", which protects patented genes introduced in transgenic plants by killing the seeds in the second generation. This genetic construct, which interferes so heavily with fundamental life processes, is considered dangerous and should be ex-ante evaluated taking into account the data on "unexpected events", as here discussed, instead of relying on the "safe until proven otherwise" claim. Awareness that scientists, biotechnologists and genetic engineers cannot answer the fundamental question "how likely is that transgenes will be transferred from cultivated plants into the natural environment?" should foster long-term studies on the ecological risks and benefits of transgenic crops.     

Removing politics from innovations that improve food security

Genetically modified (GM) organisms and crops have been a feature of food production for over 30 years. Despite extensive science-based risk assessment, the public and many politicians remain concerned with the genetic manipulation of crops, particularly food crops. Many governments have addressed public concern through biosafety legislation and regulatory frameworks that identify and regulate risks to ensure human health and environmental safety. These domestic regulatory frameworks align to international scientific risk assessment methodologies on a case-by-case basis. Regulatory agencies in 70 countries around the world have conducted in excess of 4400 risk assessments, all reaching the same conclusion: GM crops and foods that have been assessed provide no greater risk to human health or the environment than non-GM crops and foods. Yet, while the science regarding the safety of GM crops and food appears conclusive and societal benefits have been globally demonstrated, the use of innovative products have only contributed minimal improvements to global food security. Regrettably, politically-motivated regulatory barriers are currently being implemented with the next genomic innovation, genome editing, the implications of which are also discussed in this article. A decade of reduced global food insecurity was witnessed from 2005 to 2015, but regrettably, the figure has subsequently risen. Why is this the case? Reasons have been attributed to climate variability, biotic and abiotic stresses, lack of access to innovative technologies and political interference in decision making processes. This commentary highlights how political interference in the regulatory approval process of GM crops is adversely affecting the adoption of innovative, yield enhancing crop varieties, thereby limiting food security opportunities in food insecure economies.

     

Genetically modified soybeans and food allergies

Allergenic reactions to proteins expressed in GM crops has been one of the prominent concerns among biotechnology critics and a concern of regulatory agencies. Soybeans like many plants have intrinsic allergens that present problems for sensitive people. Current GM crops, including soybean, have not been shown to add any additional allergenic risk beyond the intrinsic risks already present. Biotechnology can be used to characterize and eliminate allergens naturally present in crops. Biotechnology has been used to remove a major allergen in soybean demonstrating that genetic modification can be used to reduce allergenicity of food and feed. This provides a model for further use of GM approaches to eliminate allergens.     

Genetically Modified Crops and Food Security

The role of genetically modified (GM) crops for food security is the subject of public controversy. GM crops could contribute to food production increases and higher food availability. There may also be impacts on food quality and nutrient composition. Finally, growing GM crops may influence farmers’ income and thus their economic access to food. Smallholder farmers make up a large proportion of the undernourished people worldwide. Our study focuses on this latter aspect and provides the first ex post analysis of food security impacts of GM crops at the micro level. We use comprehensive panel data collected over several years from farm households in India, where insect-resistant GM cotton has been widely adopted. Controlling for other factors, the adoption of GM cotton has significantly improved calorie consumption and dietary quality, resulting from increased family incomes. This technology has reduced food insecurity by 15–20% among cotton-producing households. GM crops alone will not solve the hunger problem, but they can be an important component in a broader food security strategy.     

Genetically modified crops: success, safety assessment, and public concern

With the emergence of transgenic technologies, new ways to improve the agronomic performance of crops for food, feed, and processing applications have been devised. In addition, ability to express foreign genes using transgenic technologies has opened up options for producing large quantities of commercially important industrial or pharmaceutical products in plants. Despite this high adoption rate and future promises, there is a multitude of concerns about the impact of genetically modified (GM) crops on the environment. Potential contamination of the environment and food chains has prompted detailed consideration of how such crops and the molecules that they produce can be effectively isolated and contained. One of the reasonable steps after creating a transgenic plant is to evaluate its potential benefits and risks to the environment and these should be compared to those generated by traditional agricultural practices. The precautionary approach in risk management of GM plants may make it necessary to monitor significant wild and weed populations that might be affected by transgene escape. Effective risk assessment and monitoring mechanisms are the basic prerequisites of any legal framework to adequately address the risks and watch out for new risks. Several agencies in different countries monitor the release of GM organisms or frame guidelines for the appropriate application of recombinant organisms in agro-industries so as to assure the safe use of recombinant organisms and to achieve sound overall development. We feel that it is important to establish an internationally harmonized framework for the safe handling of recombinant DNA organisms within a few years.This is IMTECH Communication No. 038/2005.     

Exploitation of molecular profiling techniques for GM food safety assessment

Several strategies have been developed to identify unintended alterations in the composition of genetically modified (GM) food crops that may occur as a result of the genetic modification process. These include comparative chemical analysis of single compounds in GM food crops and their conventional non-GM counterparts, and profiling methods such as DNA/RNA microarray technologies, proteomics and metabolite profiling. The potential of profiling methods is obvious, but further exploration of specificity, sensitivity and validation is needed. Moreover, the successful application of profiling techniques to the safety evaluation of GM foods will require linked databases to be built that contain information on variations in profiles associated with differences in developmental stages and environmental conditions.     

Analyzing consumers' preferences towards GM food in southern Spain

In Europe, since the 1990s, food safety crises have heightened public concerns about and distrust towards the agro-food sector, making consumers wary of genetically modified (GM) foods. The application of gene technology to agricultural production has become a highly controversial scientific, political and social issue due to the uncertainty about the potential risks and benefits from GM food consumption. In this regard, public views influence consumers' demands and hence determine the future of this technology's development. Biotechnology proponents attribute the current consumer resistance to GM foods to the lack of tangible benefits for the consumers with higher functional properties. Thus, this paper estimates consumers' preferences regarding GM foods by simulating a market for GM functional cornflakes in southern Spain using the conjoint analysis method. Additionally, market segmentation was performed using a cluster analysis and the consumers' profile differences for each segment were identified. The main results indicate that consumers prefer the GM-free food; nonetheless, the market segmentation distinguishes a potential market niche for GM foods and indicates that businesses can develop strategies to target these segments. Therefore, the marketing strategies implemented in southern Spain should be focused on the health functional claims of second generation GM food.     

Genetically modified crops and small-scale farmers: main opportunities and challenges

Although some important features of genetically modified (GM) crops such as insect resistance, herbicide tolerance, and drought tolerance might seem to be beneficial for small-scale farmers, the adoption of GM technology by smallholders is still slight. Identifying pros and cons of using this technology is important to understand the impacts of GM crops on these farmers. This article reviews the main opportunities and challenges of GM crops for small-scale farmers in developing countries. The most significant advantages of GM crops include being independent to farm size, environment protection, improvement of occupational health issues, and the potential of bio-fortified crops to reduce malnutrition. Challenges faced by small-scale farmers for adoption of GM crops comprise availability and accessibility of GM crop seeds, seed dissemination and price, and the lack of adequate information. In addition, R&D and production costs in using GM crops make it difficult for these farmers to adopt the use of these crops. Moreover, intellectual property right regulations may deprive resource poor farmers from the advantages of GM technology. Finally, concerns on socio-economic and environment safety issues are also addressed in this paper.     

OBPC Symposium: maize 2004 &; beyond—Can agricultural biotechnology contribute to global food security?

Summary Bioengineering approaches provide unprecedented opportunities for reducing poverty, food insecurity, child malnutrition, and natural resource degradation. Genetic engineering offers outstanding potential to increase the efficiency of crop improvement. Thus agricultural biotechnology could enhance global food production and availability in a sustainable way. Small farmers in developing countries are faced with many problems and constraints which biotechnology may assist. Yet, there are varying levels of opposition to the use of this technology in most countries and it is especially intense in Europe. While there is certain public apprehension with the use of bioengineering in food improvement, the primary hurdles facing this technology are the stringent and burdensome regulatory requirements for commercialization, opposition from the special interest groups, apprehension by the food industry especially with the whole foods, and trade barriers including rigid policies on traceability and labeling. Bioengineered crops such as soybean, maize, cotton, and canola with a few traits have already made a remarkable impaet on food production and environmental quality. But, in the developing world, bioengineering of crops such as bananas, cassava, yams, sweet potatoes, sorghum, rice, maize, wheat, millet, and legumes, along with livestock, can elearly contribute to global food security. However, the integration of biotechnology into agricultural research in developing countries faces many challenges which must be addressed: financial, technical, political, environmental, activism, intellectual-property, biosafety, and trade-related issues. To ensure that developing countries can harness the benefit of this technology with minimal problems, concerted efforts must be pursued to create an awareness of its potential benefits and to address the concerns related to its use through dialog among the various stakeholders: policy makers, scientists, trade groups, food industry, consumer organizations, farmer groups, media, and non-governmental organizations. Biotechnology holds great promise as a new tool in the scientific toolkit for generating applied agricultural technologies; however, per se it is not a panacea for the worlds problems of hunger and poverty.     

Genetic engineering of crops as potential source of genetic hazard in the human diet.

The benefits of genetic engineering of crop plants to improve the reliability and quality of the world food supply have been contrasted with public concerns raised about the food safety of the resulting products. Debates have concentrated on the possible unforeseen risks associated with the accumulation of new metabolites in crop plants that may contribute to toxins, allergens and genetic hazards in the human diet. This review examines the various molecular and biochemical mechanisms by which new hazards may appear in foods as a direct consequence of genetic engineering in crop plants. Such hazards may arise from the expression products of the inserted genes, secondary or pleiotropic effects of transgene expression, and random insertional mutagenic effects resulting from transgene integration into plant genomes. However, when traditional plant breeding is evaluated in the same context, these mechanisms are no different from those that have been widely accepted from the past use of new cultivars in agriculture. The risks associated with the introduction of new genes via genetic engineering must be considered alongside the common breeding practice of introgressing large fragments of chromatin from related wild species into crop cultivars. The large proportion of such introgressed DNA involves genes of unknown function linked to the trait of interest such as pest or disease resistance. In this context, the potential risks of introducing new food hazards from the applications of genetic engineering are no different from the risks that might be anticipated from genetic manipulation of crops via traditional breeding. In many respects, the precise manner in which genetic engineering can control the nature and expression of the transferred DNA offers greater confidence for producing the desired outcome compared with traditional breeding.     

Risk assessment strategies for transgenic plants

Advances in recombinant DNA technology have created advantages for the development of plants with high agro-economical values. Since the production of transgenic plants, some issues concerning the safe use of these plants and their products have been under debate throughout the world. In this respect, the potential risks and benefits of transgenic plants need to be evaluated objectively. Risk assessment of transgenic crops is a basic prerequisite for monitoring the possible risks that could arise upon the release and use of transgenic plants. To get a meaningful tool for decision making, risk assessment needs to be carried out in a scientific sound and transparent manner. There are specific governmental regulations in many countries for the safety assessment of genetically modified (GM) crops. Furthermore, there are some international agreements, which regulate the cultivation and commercialization of transgenic plants and their derivatives. Internationally accepted risk assessment strategies have been performed to evaluate the safe use of a large variety of GM crops. The main objectives of these regulations and risk assessment strategies are focused to protect human/animal health and the environment.     

Global capture of crop biotechnology in developing world over a decade

There is an urgent need for the advancement of agricultural technology (e.g. crop biotechnology or genetic modification (GM) technology), particularly, to address food security problem, to fight against hunger and poverty crisis and to ensure sustainable agricultural production in developing countries. Over the past decade, the adoption of GM technology on a commercial basis has increased steadily around the world with a significant impact in terms of socio-economic, environment and human health benefits. However, GM technology is still surrounded by controversial debates with several factors hindering the adoption of GM crops. This paper reviews current literatures on commercial production of GM crops, and assesses the benefits and constraints associated with adoption of GM crops in developing countries in the last 15 years. This article provides policy implication towards advancing the development and adoption of GM technology in developing countries and concludes with summary of key points discussed.     

Are all GMOs the same? Consumer acceptance of cisgenic rice in India

India has more than 215 million food‐insecure people, many of whom are farmers. Genetically modified (GM) crops have the potential to alleviate this problem by increasing food supplies and strengthening farmer livelihoods. For this to occur, two factors are critical: (i) a change in the regulatory status of GM crops, and (ii) consumer acceptance of GM foods. There are generally two classifications of GM crops based on how they are bred: cisgenically bred, containing only DNA sequences from sexually compatible organisms; and transgenically bred, including DNA sequences from sexually incompatible organisms. Consumers may view cisgenic foods as more natural than those produced via transgenesis, thus influencing consumer acceptance. This premise was the catalyst for our study—would Indian consumers accept cisgenically bred rice and if so, how would they value cisgenics compared to conventionally bred rice, GM‐labelled rice and ‘no fungicide’ rice? In this willingness‐to‐pay study, respondents did not view cisgenic and GM rice differently. However, participants were willing‐to‐pay a premium for any aforementioned rice with a ‘no fungicide’ attribute, which cisgenics and GM could provide. Although not significantly different (P = 0.16), 76% and 73% of respondents stated a willingness‐to‐consume GM and cisgenic foods, respectively.     

Genes in food--why the furore?

Although unprecedented and perhaps unique in its irrationality, the recent furore over genetically modified (GM) food holds extremely important lessons for scientists. Some sections of the media undoubtedly bear a heavy responsibility for giving the expression 'GM' threatening connotations that are quite unwarranted. However, influential contributions to the hysteria have come from a surprising range of other sources, including some scientists. The research community has failed in its responsibility to society in three ways. Firstly, plant scientists did not appreciate that certain techniques (such as the use of antibiotic resistance genes as markers during plant transformation) would inevitably provoke public consternation. As a result, they took no steps to address such concerns. Secondly, researchers overlooked, minimized or in some cases simply dismissed the significance of public fears that they were 'interfering with Nature' or 'playing God'. Thirdly, plant breeders apparently saw no need to take pro-active measures with regard to the media and public in placing potential environmental and nutritional benefits of GM crops on the agenda in a positive fashion. Partly because of this failure, GM food is now firmly established in the public mind as wholly objectionable. One measure of how far we have travelled down that road is that it hardly matters any more whether objections are based on alleged environmental risks of cultivating GM crops or alleged toxicological hazards of eating them. 'Genetically modified organism', like 'radioactivity', has become an odious, generic shibboleth. Given that millions of people throughout the world are already benefiting from pharmaceuticals made by GM organisms, this is bizarre.     

MicroRNA-mediated gene regulation: potential applications for plant genetic engineering

Food security is one of the most important issues challenging the world today. Any strategies to solve this problem must include increasing crop yields and quality. MicroRNA-based genetic modification technology (miRNA-based GM tech) can be one of the most promising solutions that contribute to agricultural productivity directly by developing superior crop cultivars with enhanced biotic and abiotic stress tolerance and increased biomass yields. Indirectly, the technology may increase usage of marginal soils and decrease pesticide use, among other benefits. This review highlights the most recent progress of transgenic studies utilizing various miRNAs and their targets for plant trait modifications, and analyzes the potential of miRNA-mediated gene regulation for use in crop improvement. Strategies for manipulating miRNAs and their targets in transgenic plants including constitutive, stress-induced, or tissue-specific expression of miRNAs or their targets, RNA interference, expressing miRNA-resistant target genes, artificial target mimic and artificial miRNAs were discussed. We also discussed potential risks of utilizing miRNA-based GM tech. In general, miRNAs and their targets not only provide an invaluable source of novel transgenes, but also inspire the development of several new GM strategies, allowing advances in breeding novel crop cultivars with agronomically useful characteristics.     

The challenges facing scientists in the development of foods in Europe using biotechnology

The public's major concern over the introduction of genetic engineering into the food chain focuses on potential health risks. Proving that a food is safe is an impossible goal since there will always be a risk associated with eating food. Diets that are natural in every sense of the word pose risks but the general public believe that they are inherently less risky. The differences in risk between foods that are natural, as opposed to foods that are produced by the application of technology, are likely to be minute. Nor does it follow that they all lie in favour of `natural' food. The fact is that all foods pose a balance of risks and benefits but the scientific method has so far not been applied to its measurement. Only risk is emphasised and estimated, albeit with many conservative assumptions, often resulting in an emphasis on minute risk. Conventional plant products are not subject to the rigorous risk evaluations that apply to genetically modified plants. So the outcome is that the public only receive part of the information and this is the emphasis on risk of the `artificial' food. The only future for foods produced by biotechnology in Europe is if the public are persuaded of the real health benefits that will result from its application. Given the present state of nutritional knowledge, and the limited resources that are given to it, there are only a few clear examples of where nutritional improvement of plant food would bring really significant benefits. The paper highlights these with examples and indicates where further nutritional research will be required before other targets for improvement can be realised.