Megan Messer Dr.

Dianne Fair Genetics 7 February 2012 GMOs in Agriculture As of 2010, 370 million acres of genetically engineered crops were planted around the world, which demonstrates that genetically engineered crops are revolutionizing the way that the world conducts agriculture. Genetically engineered crops are plants that have been altered artificially in some way to exhibit a desirable trait such as herbicide resistance and pesticide or micronutrient production. Genetically engineered crops are more commonly known as genetically modified organisms, or GMOs. The worlds acceptance of GMOs ranges from an admiration and appreciation of their benefits to an extreme hatred and fear because of a perception that they are not naturally occurring. This fear is apparent in Europe where food containing GMOs is often named Frankenfood. Conversely, many consumers in America are not even aware of the fact that GMOs are in their food. In addition to different levels of awareness and acceptance, the introduction of GMOs has also stirred up many economic, health, legal, and ethics issues surrounding their use. Genetic engineering requires the use of recombinant DNA technology, which is the artificial union of genes from more than one source. Bacterial cells are often used in recombinant DNA technology because they have the ability to accept DNA fragments called plasmids from their external environment through a process called transformation. Once inside the host cell, plasmids incorporate themselves into the hosts genome by using restriction enzymes that

identify a specific sequence on a DNA strand and then cuts through it, which creates a space in which it can join with the hosts DNA. Then the two different DNA strands can line up using complementary base pairs through a process called annealing that utilizes DNA ligase enzymes to seal the strands together. This process can occur naturally in the environment or synthetically in the laboratory using commercially available restriction and ligase enzymes to introduce genes for desired traits into plants or other organisms. A bacterium commonly used in this process is Rhizobium radiobacter, which produces a plasmid that naturally creates crown gall tumors. Scientists introduce plasmids with new traits such as herbicide resistance to the commonly used herbicide glycophosate so that herbicide can be used to kill weeds while sparing the crops. Once the bacterium contains the plasmid, it can then infect plant cells and confer the glycophosate resistance. Using recombinant DNA technology, scientists have also altered corn by inserting a gene from Bacillus thuringiensis that codes for a substance that has pesticide effects against common pests like the European corn corer and the southwestern corn borer, thus allowing corn to produce its own pesticide. The use of this altered corn, called Bt corn, increases corn crop yields and profits due to the protective effects of the pesticide, and is a good example of the economic impacts of using GMOs. An estimated economic benefits study calculated that farmers who used Bt corn were increasing their profits by $13.59 per acre of corn planted. The fact that the companies who engineer the genetically altered corn seed charge technology fees must also be considered. Generally, the use of Bt corn produces more crops than would be possible using traditional corn due to the protective pesticide effect, which increases a farmers profits regardless of his initial investment into the technology fee associated with using the altered corn. Farmers who use Bt corn also save money since they do not need to use pesticides. The fact that

the use of Bt corn reduces the use of pesticides is often quoted as a benefit to the environment. Conversely, the fact that Bt corn is so successful in producing yields means that many farmers are opting to use the GMO because if they do not use it, they will not be able to keep up with the competition. This gives the GMO patent holder an extreme monopoly, which discourages the small farmer who may not be able to afford the technology fee. Since Bt corn and other genetically modified plants produce their own pesticides, many researchers and consumers are concerned about the effect that these pesticides may have when ingested by animals or humans. There is a lack of conclusive research on the effects of genetically modified plants on humans, especially with long term use. A recent review on the safety of genetically modified corn, soy, and rice cited many studies that concluded that the modified plant was just as safe to eat as the traditional plant and did not have significant adverse health effects. However, it should be noted that some hepatorenal toxicity was reported, and all of the studies used rats as the test subject. There is concern about the effect of pesticides in genetically modified plants on animals that eat feed containing genetically modified plants, specifically on their reproductive health. A review of the literature available on the reproductive effects of feed containing GMOs concludes that they have no significant effect on the animals. Consumers and researchers are also concerned about the potential allergenic response to novel proteins in GMOs. Biotechnology companies do test for allergenicity, but the allergen response is complex and not completely understood. Much recent research explores possible improvements to methods of allergenicity testing for GMOs, so perhaps improvements will soon be made. People are also concerned about the possible environmental effects GMOs might have. Genes expand to other populations nearby through a process known as gene flow, often through

the exchange of gametes such as pollen. With plants, it is difficult to contain the flow of genetic information due to the long distances wind can carry pollen during outcrossing. The concern is that some GMOs could be potentially invasive on an ecosystem and be uncontrollable due to herbicide resistant traits. Likewise, a transgene, or artificially transferred gene, might be introduced to a relative species making it also uncontrollable. Another way GMOs could influence the ecosystem is through selection for herbicide resistant weeds or pesticide resistant corn borers. However, all of these speculations have not yet been scientifically proven. Plants have also been modified to produce micronutrients that are commonly deficient in developing countries such as vitamin A fortified Golden Rice. Every year, half a million people develop blindness due to a simple vitamin A deficiency. Starches such as rice are the main food source in developing countries, so scientists derived the idea to influence rices genes to express vitamin A. After researching from 1992-1999, they discovered that rice has substrates that can be converted to beta carotene but lacks the enzymes necessary to complete conversion. By introducing 3 genes that code for enzymes, the molecules that are present in rice are able to be transformed into beta carotene. The companies who developed Golden Rice decided to forgo charging technology fees and have given free licenses to nations who need the technology desperately including Bangladesh, China, India, Indonesia, Nepal, the Philippines, Vietnam, and South America. Although epidemiological data on the impact of Golden Rice has not been released yet, it is estimated that 40,000 Indian lives are saved every year from the technology, largely due to the fact that Golden Rice technology is much cheaper than the traditional treatment of providing vitamin A by supplement capsules. Research is also underway for other ways to induce micronutrient formation in foods.

The advent of patents on GMOs has sparked much debate. The purpose of patents in our society is to promote efforts to improve products by protecting a persons right to profit off of his ideas. Research for engineering GMOs is extremely expensive, and if researchers and investors did not earn profits, then nothing would drive their efforts. Much of the controversy is over species wide patents in which an entire species potential genetic modifications are patented even before they are manifested. For example, in 1992, Agrecetus patented all transgenic cotton products, regardless of which engineering technique is used, will have to be commercially licensed through us before they can enter the marketplace. Agrecetus also claimed control of all genetically modified soybeans when it filed a patent on a soybean seed that will yield upon cultivation a soybean plant comprising in its genome a foreign gene effective to cause the expression of a foreign gene product in the cells of the soybean plant. Patents have even been granted on a genus wide basis, notably Calgenes patent on all genetically modified forms of Brassica, which include broccoli, cauliflower, canola, and cabbage. Many people do not agree with these companies taking credit for these organisms DNA because even though they may have engineered the organisms DNA to to exhibit a desired characteristic, they did not invent their existence. Clearly, the discovery of GMOs is bringing much wonderful scientific advancement to the world. Farmers are able to grow crops more efficiently than ever before to feed our growing population, and scientists are even engineering crops to provide essential micronutrients that are commonly deficient on a wide scale. However, the induction of GMOs into agriculture did not come without challenges, as the world must decide how to use the technology without harming the health of consumers and act appropriately in legal, economical and ethical matters. It is beyond the worlds wildest imaginations that scientists now have the technology to influence the

characteristics of a living being. As such, it will likely take time for the world to process all of the changes GMOs bring and then think of the best possible solutions to the question of patents on life forms, delegation of profits, and other issues, as well as identify any possible long term effects on human and animal health.

WORKS CITED Domingo, Jose, and Jordi Borbonaba. "A literature review on the safety assessment of genetically modified plants." Environment International. 37. (2011): 734-742. Web. 7 Feb. 2013. Klug, William. Concepts of Genetics. 10th. San Francisco: Pearson, 2012. Print. Ladics, G, L Knippels, A Penninks, et al. "Review of animal models designed to predict the potential allergenicity of novel proteins in genetically modified crops." Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. 56. (2010): 212-224. Print. Mayer, Jorge. "Golden Rice, Golden Crops, Golden Prospects." Review of Columbian Biotechnology. 9.1 (2007): 22-34. Web. 7 Feb. 2013. Warner, Keith. "Are Life Patents Ethical? Conflict Between Catholic Social Teaching And Agricultural Biotechnolog'ys Patent Regime." Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics. 14. (2001): 301-319. Web. 7 Feb. 2013. Wu, Felicia. "Explaining Public Resistance to Genetically Modified Corn: An Analysis of the Distribution of Benefits and Risks." Risk Analysis. 24.3 (2004): 715-726. Web. 7 Feb. 2013. Ye, Xudong, Salim Al-Babili, Andreas Klote, et al. "Engineering the Provitamin A (b-Carotene) Biosynthetic Pathway into(Carotenoid-Free) Rice Endosperm." Science Magazine. 227. (2000): 303-305. Web. 7 Feb. 2013. Zhang, W, and F Shi. "Do genetically modified crops affect animal reproduction? A review of the ongoing debate." Animal. 5. (2011): 1048-1059. Web. 7 Feb. 2013.