They have been called Monster plants, Frankenseeds
or Frankenplants. Scientists have inserted “antifreeze”
protein genes from flounder into tomatoes to protect the fruit from frost
damage, chicken
genes have been inserted into potatoes to increase disease resistance, firefly genes have been
injected into corn plants.
These are plants created in laboratories that never could have been developed
by the traditional means of plant breeding.
or Frankenplants. Scientists have inserted “antifreeze”
protein genes from flounder into tomatoes to protect the fruit from frost
damage, chicken
genes have been inserted into potatoes to increase disease resistance, firefly genes have been
injected into corn plants.
These are plants created in laboratories that never could have been developed
by the traditional means of plant breeding.
Plants that have been genetically
engineered to resist herbicides and insects, resist freezing temperatures,
produce pharmaceutical drugs and to convert nitrogen directly from the soil and
developed by large multinational companies at tremendous cost are now being
grown in the hopes of much larger profits. Biotechnologies of this type have
evolved so quickly that the scientific community has split in the controversy
and the rapid advancement of this science has left the general public and many
scientists behind in ignorance and Universities scrambling for position.
engineered to resist herbicides and insects, resist freezing temperatures,
produce pharmaceutical drugs and to convert nitrogen directly from the soil and
developed by large multinational companies at tremendous cost are now being
grown in the hopes of much larger profits. Biotechnologies of this type have
evolved so quickly that the scientific community has split in the controversy
and the rapid advancement of this science has left the general public and many
scientists behind in ignorance and Universities scrambling for position.
The last two articles discussed
how the disease crown gall was used, in the very early days of genetic
engineering, to insert genetic information into plants. This ultimately led to
technologies like the “gene gun” and how genes, like the one that produces the
toxin from Bacillus thuriengensis
(Bt), could be inserted so that crops could be protected from insects.
how the disease crown gall was used, in the very early days of genetic
engineering, to insert genetic information into plants. This ultimately led to
technologies like the “gene gun” and how genes, like the one that produces the
toxin from Bacillus thuriengensis
(Bt), could be inserted so that crops could be protected from insects.
These two articles made it sound
like biotechnology may lead to a scientifically founded Garden of Eden. To be
fair, in Part III, a few of the arguments against this technology follows.
like biotechnology may lead to a scientifically founded Garden of Eden. To be
fair, in Part III, a few of the arguments against this technology follows.
Genetic engineering is an imperfect science and not enough is known
about what will happen in the long run. Many times researchers who insert
genes, creating new organisms, operate with a scatter-gun approach, not knowing
where the gene will end up over time or what effects it will have in the long
run. Science knows very little about what a gene might trigger or interrupt
depending on where it is inserted into the new host plant or animal.
about what will happen in the long run. Many times researchers who insert
genes, creating new organisms, operate with a scatter-gun approach, not knowing
where the gene will end up over time or what effects it will have in the long
run. Science knows very little about what a gene might trigger or interrupt
depending on where it is inserted into the new host plant or animal.
Though often thought of as being
precise by laypeople, inserting genes is a rather crude technology, lacking precision
and predictability. The “new” gene can end up somewhere or doing
something unexpected. For example, when genes for the color red were placed
into petunias, this gene not only changed the color of the flower petals but
also, unexpectedly, decreased the plant’s fertility and changed the growth of
its roots and leaves. Salmon, which were genetically engineered to produce a
growth hormone, not only grew bigger than expected and too fast but also turned
green. These were unpredictable, scientifically termed pleiotropic, effects.
precise by laypeople, inserting genes is a rather crude technology, lacking precision
and predictability. The “new” gene can end up somewhere or doing
something unexpected. For example, when genes for the color red were placed
into petunias, this gene not only changed the color of the flower petals but
also, unexpectedly, decreased the plant’s fertility and changed the growth of
its roots and leaves. Salmon, which were genetically engineered to produce a
growth hormone, not only grew bigger than expected and too fast but also turned
green. These were unpredictable, scientifically termed pleiotropic, effects.
How do we know that a genetically
engineered food plant will not produce new toxins and allergenic substances?
How will the nutritional value of genetically modified foods change or will it?
What will be the effects on the environment that comes in contact with these
plants and on the wildlife in the food chain? Remember DDT? Examples of
unexpected results from biotechnology:
engineered food plant will not produce new toxins and allergenic substances?
How will the nutritional value of genetically modified foods change or will it?
What will be the effects on the environment that comes in contact with these
plants and on the wildlife in the food chain? Remember DDT? Examples of
unexpected results from biotechnology:
·
An attempt to make potato plants resistant to
sap-sucking insects has made them more vulnerable to other kinds of insect pests.
An attempt to make potato plants resistant to
sap-sucking insects has made them more vulnerable to other kinds of insect pests.
·
Crops such as maize and cotton have already been
made resistant to chewing insects by adding a gene for Bt. But adding the Bt
gene has led to speculation that there will be an increased attack by insects
such as leafhoppers and aphids due to an unexpected drop in chemicals that deter
their feeding.
Crops such as maize and cotton have already been
made resistant to chewing insects by adding a gene for Bt. But adding the Bt
gene has led to speculation that there will be an increased attack by insects
such as leafhoppers and aphids due to an unexpected drop in chemicals that deter
their feeding.
·
The stems of a genetically altered,
herbicide-resistant soybean were found uncharacteristically to crack open in
hot climates.
The stems of a genetically altered,
herbicide-resistant soybean were found uncharacteristically to crack open in
hot climates.
All these questions are important
questions yet they remain unanswered until the biologically altered plant leaves
the test tube and enters the real world. The argument is that biotechnology
fostered by corporations tends to ignore caution in favor of profits.
questions yet they remain unanswered until the biologically altered plant leaves
the test tube and enters the real world. The argument is that biotechnology
fostered by corporations tends to ignore caution in favor of profits.
Genetically engineered organisms will disrupt our environment. Traditional
plant breeding was limited to plants or animals that were compatible
biologically which in turn limited the diversity of possible offspring. Breeding
through gene-splicing techniques will create life forms that have never before
existed, theoretically in billions of different possible combinations which can
result in billions of different possible outcomes, some predictable and others
not. As these new life forms escape or are introduced into the environment and
enter different habitats they may do so with no environmental checks and balances.
plant breeding was limited to plants or animals that were compatible
biologically which in turn limited the diversity of possible offspring. Breeding
through gene-splicing techniques will create life forms that have never before
existed, theoretically in billions of different possible combinations which can
result in billions of different possible outcomes, some predictable and others
not. As these new life forms escape or are introduced into the environment and
enter different habitats they may do so with no environmental checks and balances.
We can look at past scenarios
where biological organisms were released into new habitats with no checks and
balances to see what will happen. While many have adapted without severe
problems, a small percentage of them have not. These include the Kudzu vine,
gypsy moth, saltcedar, Dutch Elm disease, Chestnut blight, starlings and the
Mediterranean fruit fly to name a few. Whenever a genetically engineered
organism is released it must be remembered that it may cause a disruption to a
complex environment with pre-existing relationships that have developed over
long periods of evolutionary history.
where biological organisms were released into new habitats with no checks and
balances to see what will happen. While many have adapted without severe
problems, a small percentage of them have not. These include the Kudzu vine,
gypsy moth, saltcedar, Dutch Elm disease, Chestnut blight, starlings and the
Mediterranean fruit fly to name a few. Whenever a genetically engineered
organism is released it must be remembered that it may cause a disruption to a
complex environment with pre-existing relationships that have developed over
long periods of evolutionary history.
This has been characterized
sometimes as a type of environmental “pollution”. But because this pollution is
a “living pollution” these organisms will be more unpredictable than
nonbiological pollutants. Genetically engineered products reproduce. When
genetically engineered crops are grown for a specific purpose, they cannot be
easily isolated both from spreading into the wild and from cross-pollinating
with wild relatives.
sometimes as a type of environmental “pollution”. But because this pollution is
a “living pollution” these organisms will be more unpredictable than
nonbiological pollutants. Genetically engineered products reproduce. When
genetically engineered crops are grown for a specific purpose, they cannot be
easily isolated both from spreading into the wild and from cross-pollinating
with wild relatives.
It has already been shown that
cross-pollination with “normal plants” can take place almost a mile away from
the genetically engineered plantings. Three mile buffers are now being
recommended in some countries. If we accept the concept that the environments
and habitats have their own corrective mechanisms that allow them to “heal”,
then radical changes to these environments from genetically modified organisms
will require stronger corrective measures if it can be healed at all.
cross-pollination with “normal plants” can take place almost a mile away from
the genetically engineered plantings. Three mile buffers are now being
recommended in some countries. If we accept the concept that the environments
and habitats have their own corrective mechanisms that allow them to “heal”,
then radical changes to these environments from genetically modified organisms
will require stronger corrective measures if it can be healed at all.
Ordinary pests could become “Super-pests”. Much of the
current effort in profit-centered, agricultural biotechnology is centered on
the creation of herbicide-tolerant, pest-resistant and virus-resistant plants.
The idea is to sell farmers patented seeds in the hope of increasing a
company’s share of both the seed and pesticide markets. The chemical companies
hope to convince farmers that the new pest-tolerant crops will allow for a more
efficient eradication of pests. In the case of herbicides, farmers will be able
to spray at any time during the growing season, killing weeds without killing
their crops.
current effort in profit-centered, agricultural biotechnology is centered on
the creation of herbicide-tolerant, pest-resistant and virus-resistant plants.
The idea is to sell farmers patented seeds in the hope of increasing a
company’s share of both the seed and pesticide markets. The chemical companies
hope to convince farmers that the new pest-tolerant crops will allow for a more
efficient eradication of pests. In the case of herbicides, farmers will be able
to spray at any time during the growing season, killing weeds without killing
their crops.
Plants engineered to be pest
resistant could become so invasive they are a weed problem themselves, or they
could spread their resistance to wild weeds making them more invasive. A growing
number of ecologists are concerned with “gene flow” which is the
transfer of genes to weeds by way of cross-pollination. Researchers are
concerned that manufactured genes for herbicide tolerance, and pest and viral
resistance, might escape and create weeds that are resistant to herbicides,
pests and viruses.
resistant could become so invasive they are a weed problem themselves, or they
could spread their resistance to wild weeds making them more invasive. A growing
number of ecologists are concerned with “gene flow” which is the
transfer of genes to weeds by way of cross-pollination. Researchers are
concerned that manufactured genes for herbicide tolerance, and pest and viral
resistance, might escape and create weeds that are resistant to herbicides,
pests and viruses.
A Danish research team documented
the transfer of a gene from a genetically modified crop to a weed surrounding
the crop. This was unexpected among biotechnologists since they had dismissed
this possibility even though critics had warned for years prior that it could
happen.
the transfer of a gene from a genetically modified crop to a weed surrounding
the crop. This was unexpected among biotechnologists since they had dismissed
this possibility even though critics had warned for years prior that it could
happen.
Another fear is that
insecticide-producing plants might create “super bugs” resistant to
the effects of the new pesticide-producing genetic crops and that virus-resistant
transgenic crops pose the equally dangerous possibility of creating new viruses
that have never before existed in nature.
insecticide-producing plants might create “super bugs” resistant to
the effects of the new pesticide-producing genetic crops and that virus-resistant
transgenic crops pose the equally dangerous possibility of creating new viruses
that have never before existed in nature.
Putting the crowning touches on
ecologists’ fears was the refusal by the insurance companies to insure against
catastrophic environmental damage caused by genetically engineered organisms
released into the environment.
ecologists’ fears was the refusal by the insurance companies to insure against
catastrophic environmental damage caused by genetically engineered organisms
released into the environment.
Regardless of the criticism,
bioengineered plants are here to stay. The question will remain how this new
technology will be handled responsibly.
bioengineered plants are here to stay. The question will remain how this new
technology will be handled responsibly.
This article was previously published by the author in Southwest Trees and Turf