Genetically modified organism

Overview
A genetically modified organism (GMO) is an organism whose genetic material has been altered using the genetic engineering techniques generally known as recombinant DNA technology. With recombinant DNA technology, DNA molecules from different sources are combined in vitro into one molecule to create a new gene. This modified DNA is then transferred into an organism causing the expression of modified or novel traits. The product is also known as an Genetically Engineered Organism or GEO.

The term "GMO" has historically been defined as organisms whose genetic makeup has been altered by conventional cross breeding or by "mutagenesis" breeding, as these methods predate the discovery of the recombinant DNA techniques. However, this term is now interchangeable with Genetically Engineered Organism.

History
The general principle of producing a GMO is to add genetic material into an organism's genome to generate new traits - Genetic engineering - was made possible through a series of scientific advances including the discovery of DNA and the creation of the first recombinant bacteria in 1973, i.e., E .coli expressing a salmonella gene. This led to concerns in the scientific community about potential risks from genetic engineering which have been thoroughly discussed at the Asilomar Conference in Pacific Grove, California. The recommendations laid out from this meeting were that government oversight of recombinant DNA research should be established until the technology was deemed safe. Herbert Boyer then founded the first company to use recombinant DNA technology, Genentech, and in 1978 the company announced the creation of an E. coli strain producing the human protein insulin.

In 1986, field tests of a bacterium genetically engineered to protect plants from frost damage (ice-minus bacteria) at a small biotechnology company called Advanced Genetic Sciences of Oakland, California, were repeatedly delayed by opponents of biotechnology. In the same year, a proposed field test of a microbe genetically engineered for a pest resistance protein by Monsanto was dropped.

Uses of GMOs
Examples of GMOs are highly diverse, and include transgenic (genetically modified by recombinant DNA methods) animals such as mice, fish, transgenic plants, or various microbes, such as fungi and bacteria. The generation and use of GMOs has many reasons, chief among them are their use in research that addresses fundamental or applied questions in biology or medicine, for the production of pharmaceuticals and industrial enzymes, and for direct, and often controversial, applications aimed at improving human health (e.g., gene therapy) or agriculture (e.g., golden rice). The term "genetically modified organism" does not always imply, but can include, targeted insertions of genes from one into another species. For example, a gene from a jellyfish, encoding a fluorescent protein called GFP, can be physically linked and thus co-expressed with mammalian genes to identify the location of the protein encoded by the GFP-tagged gene in the mammalian cell. These and other methods are useful and indispensable tools for biologists in many areas of research, including those that study the mechanisms of human and other diseases or fundamental biological processes in eukaryotic or prokaryotic cells.

Transgenic animals
Transgenic animals are used as experimental models to perform phenotypic tests with genes whose function is unknown or to generate animals that are susceptible to certain compounds or stresses for testing in biomedical research. Other applications include the production of human hormones, such as insulin.

Frequently used in genetic research are transgenic fruit flies (Drosophila melanogaster) as genetic models to study the effects of genetic changes on development. Flies are often preferred over other animals for ethical reasons and ease of culture, and also because the fly genome is somewhat simpler than that of vertebrates.

Transgenic plants
Transgenic plants have been developed for various purposes: resistance to pests, herbicides or harsh environmental conditions; improved shelflife; increased nutritional value - and many more. Since the first commercial cultivation of GM plants in 1996, GM plant events tolerant to the herbicides glufosinate or glyphosate and events producing the Bt toxin, an insecticide, have dominated the market. Recently, a new generation of GM plants promising benefits for consumers and industry purposes is becoming ready to enter the markets.

Since GM plants are grown on open fields, they are often associated with environmental risks. Therefore, most countries require biosafety studies prior to the approval of a new GM plant event, usually followed by a monitoring programme to detect environmental impacts.

Especially in Europe, the coexistence of GM plants with conventional and organic crops has raised many concerns. Since there is separate legislation for GM crops and a high demand from consumers for the freedom of choice between GM and non-GM foods, measures are required to separate GM, conventional and organic plants and derived food and feed. European research programmes such as Co-Extra, Transcontainer and SIGMEA are investigating appropriate tools and rules. On the field level, these are biological containment methods, isolation distances and pollen barriers. Further down the food chain, documentation and detection methods shall ensure the coexistence.

Government support for and ban of GMOs
The use of GMOs has sparked significant controversy in many areas. Some groups or individuals see the generation and use of GMO as intolerable meddling with biological states or processes that have naturally evolved over long periods of time, while others are concerned about the limitations of modern science to fully comprehend all of the potential negative ramifications of genetic manipulation.

While some groups advocate the complete prohibition of GMOs, others call for mandatory labeling of genetically modified food or other products. Other controversies include the definition of patent and property pertaining to products of genetic engineering and the possibility of unforeseen local and global effects as a result of transgenic organisms proliferating. The basic ethical issues involved in genetic research are discussed in the article on genetic engineering.

In 2004, Mendocino County, California became the first county in the United States to ban the production of GMOs. The measure passed with a 57% majority. In 2005, a standing committee of the government of Prince Edward Island in Canada began work to assess a proposal to ban the production of GMOs in the province. PEI has already banned GM potatoes, which account for most of its crop. In California, Trinity and Marin counties have also imposed bans on GM crops, while ordinances to do so were unsuccessful in Butte, San Luis Obispo, Humboldt, and Sonoma counties. Supervisors in the agriculturally-rich counties of Fresno, Kern, Kings, Solano, Sutter, and Tulare have passed resolutions supporting the practice.

Currently, there is little international consensus regarding the acceptability and effective role of modified "complete" organisms such as plants or animals. A great deal of the modern research that is illuminating complex biochemical processes and disease mechanisms makes vast use of genetic engineering.

The practice of genetic modification as a scientific technique is not restricted in the United States. Individual genetically modified crops (such as soybeans) are studied before being brought to market, but generally only by the companies providing the modification. This "test by those being tested" practice is common in the United States, where many in the FDA are ex-employees of Monsanto, the largest gene-manipulation firm. Most countries in Europe, Japan, Mexico (among others) have taken the opposite position, stating that genetic modification has not been proven safe, and therefore that they will not accept genetically modified food from the United States or any other country without assessing their safety themselves. This issue has been brought before the World Trade Organization, which determined that not allowing GMOs into the country creates an unnecessary obstacle to international trade. Consequently, genetic modification within agriculture is an issue of some strong debate in the United States, the European Union, and some other countries.

Crosspollination concerns
Some critics have raised the concern that conventionally bred crop plants can be cross-pollinated (bred) from the pollen of modified plants. Pollen can be dispersed over large areas by wind, animals, and insects. Recent research with creeping bentgrass has lent support to the concern when modified genes were found in normal grass up to 21 km (13 miles) away from the source, and also within close relatives of the same genus (Agrostis). GM proponents point out that outcrossing, as this process is known, is not new. The same thing happens with any new open-pollinated crop variety—newly introduced traits can potentially cross out into neighbouring crop plants of the same species and, in some cases, to closely related wild relatives. Defenders of GM technology point out that each GM crop is assessed on a case by case basis to determine if there is any risk associated with the outcrossing of the GM trait into wild plant populations. The fact that a GM plant may outcross with a related wild relative is not, in itself, a risk unless such an occurrence has consequences. If, for example, a herbicide resistance trait was to cross into a wild relative of a crop plant it can be predicted that this would not have any consequences except in areas where herbicides are sprayed, such as a farm. In such a setting the farmer can manage this risk by rotating herbicides.

The European Union funds research programmes such as Co-Extra, that investigate options and technologies on the coexistence of GM and conventional farming. This also includes research on biological containment strategies and other measures, that prevent outcrossing and enable the implementation of coexistence.

If patented genes are outcrossed, even accidentally, to other commercial fields and a person deliberately selects the outcrossed plants for subsequent planting then the patent holder has the right to control the use of those crops. This was supported in Canadian law in the case of Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Schmeiser.

'Terminator' and 'Traitor'
An often cited controversy is a hypothetical "Technology Protection" technology dubbed 'Terminator'. This yet-to-be-commercialised technology would allow the production of first generation crops that would not generate seeds in the second generation because the plants yield sterile seeds. The patent for this so-called "terminator" gene technology is owned by Delta and Pine Land and the United States Department of Agriculture. Delta and Pine Land was bought by Monsanto in August 2006. Similarly, the hypothetical Trait-specific Genetic Use Restriction Technology, also known as 'Traitor' or 'T-gut', requires yearly application of a chemical to genetically-modified crops to reactivate engineered traits. This technology is intended both to limit the spread of genetically engineered plants, and to require farmers to pay yearly to reactivate the genetically engineered traits of their crops. Traitor is under development by companies including Monsanto and AstraZeneca.

In addition to the commercial protection of proprietary technology in selfpollinating crops such as soybean (a generally contentious issue) another purpose of the terminator gene is to prevent the escape of genetically modified traits from crosspollinating crops into wild-type species by sterilizing any resultant hybrids. The terminator gene technology created a backlash amongst those who felt the technology would prevent re-use of seed by farmers growing such terminator varieties in the developing world and was ostensibly a means to exercise patent claims. Use of the terminator technology would also prevent "volunteers", or crops that grow from unharvested seed, a major concern that arose during the Starlink debacle.There are technologies evolving which contain the transgene by biological means and still can provide fertile seeds using fertility restorer functions. Such methods are being developed by several EU research programmes, among them Transcontainer and Co-Extra.

Losses of Biodiversity
In agriculture and animal husbandry, green revolution popularized the use of conventional hybridization to increase yield many folds by creating "High yielding varieties". Often the handful of breeds of plants and animals hybridized originated in developed countries and were further hybridized with local verities, in the rest of the developing world, to create high yield strains resistant to local climate and diseases. Local governments and industry since have been pushing hybridization with such zeal that several of the wild and indigenous breeds evolved locally over thousands of years having high resistance to local extremes in climate and immunity to diseases etc. have already become extinct or are in grave danger of becoming so in the near future. Due to complete disuse because of un-profitability and uncontrolled crosspollination and crossbreeding (genetic pollution) formerly huge gene pools of various wild and indigenous breeds have collapsed causing widespread genetic erosion and genetic pollution resulting in great loss in genetic diversity and biodiversity as a whole.

Concerns have been raised that Genetically Modified Organisms may contribute to genetic pollution because artificially created and genetically engineered plants and animals in laboratories, which could never have evolved in nature even with conventional hybridization, can interbreed with naturally evolved wild varieties. Genetically Modified (GM) crops today have become a common source for genetic pollution, not only of wild varieties but also of other domesticated varieties derived from conventional hybridization.

It is being said that genetic erosion coupled with genetic pollution is destroying that needed unique genetic base thereby creating an unforeseen hidden crisis which will result in a severe threat to our food security for the future when diverse genetic material will cease to exist to be able to further improve or hybridize weakening food crops and livestock against more resistant diseases and climatic changes.

General references

 * Anderson, K. and Lee Ann Jackson. 2005. Some Implications of GM Food Technology Policies for Sub-Saharan Africa.  Journal of African Economies 14(3):385-410; doi:10.1093/jae/eji013


 * Heong, KL, YH Chen, DE Johnson, GC Jahn, M Hossain, RS Hamilton. 2005. Debate Over a GM Rice Trial in China.  Letters. Science, Vol 310, Issue 5746, 231-233, 14 October 2005.


 * Huang, J., Ruifa Hu, Scott Rozelle, Carl Pray.  2005.  Insect-Resistant GM Rice in Farmers' Fields: Assessing Productivity and Health Effects in China.  Science (29 April 2005) Vol. 308. no. 5722, pp. 688 – 690.  DOI: 10.1126/science.1108972


 * [5] Plague (1978) aka M3: The Gemini Strain, discussion of actors, plot, and critique of the Canadian genetically-modified organism escape thriller

General

 * FAO-BiotechNews — News and events about GMOs from the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
 * [http://webforum.af.czu.cz/list.php?1 GMO Webforum University Prague
 * Everything you wanted to know about GM organisms — Provided by New Scientist.
 * Genetically Modified Organisms - Information about GMOS and GE
 * Eppendorf Biochip Systems Detection method for GMO in food and feed by using GMO-microarray
 * Nature 2.0 beta | Legislation, Politics, Science and Spin Behind Genetically Modified Foods
 * Food Security and Ag-Biotech News — for balanced news
 * Devlin RH, Sundstrom LF, Muir WM. 2006. Interface of biotechnology and ecology for environmental risk assessments of transgenic fish. Trends in Biotechnology 24:89-97 - A scientific article on the advances and problems in making reliable risk-assessment of transgenic fish.
 * Bernard Stiegler, "Take Care" — A philosophical approach to the question of GMOs and their relation to human agricultural history.
 * GMO Safety - Information about research projects on the biological safety of genetically modified plants.
 * International Conference on "GM Crops and Foods" (20/21 November in Frankfurt/Germany)
 * The Italian Biosafety Clearing-House The Italian hub on biosafety and GMOs
 * Seeds of Deception Seeds of Deception
 * Seeds of doubt: North American farmers' experiences of GM crops Seeds of doubt: North American farmers' experiences of GM crops
 * GMO Portal A high school student's commentary on GM issues as well as links for further reading on GM issues
 * GMO Portal A high school student's commentary on GM issues as well as links for further reading on GM issues

Transgenic animals

 * Transgenic Fly Virtual Lab - Howard Hughes Medical Institute BioInteractive
 * Transgenic Animal Database
 * Mouse Genome Informatics (informatics.jax.org)
 * ArkDB (theArkDB.org)
 * The Rat Genome Database
 * Mouse Embryo Banking System
 * Mammalian Genetics Unit Harwell: Mouse models for human disease
 * Transgenic Animals
 * Disease Animal Models - BSRC Alexander Fleming
 * Transgenic Animal Models - Biomedcode

Transgenic plants

 * GMO-Compass: Information on genetically modified organisms
 * Co-Extra: Research on co-existence and traceability of GM and non-GM supply chains
 * Transcontainer: Research on biological containment systems for genetically modified plants

Organisme modificat genèticament Geneticky modifikovaný organismus Genetisk modificeret organisme Gentechnisch veränderter Organismus Organismo modificado genéticamente Genetike modifita organismo fa:تراریخته Organisme génétiquement modifié Organismo geneticamente modificate Organismo geneticamente modificato Organisma diubah genetik 遺伝子組み換え作物 Organizm zmodyfikowany genetycznie Organismo geneticamente modificado Генетически модифицированный организм Geenimuunneltu organismi GMO GMO Генетично модифіковані організми