Opportunities and challenges of GMO pot

Hue –Okayama International Master Program Crop production 1 Opportunities and challenges of GM crops Tran Phuong Dung I. Introduction Two months ago, three agri-biotechnology experts namely Dr. Marc Van Montagu, Mary- Del Chilton and Dr. Robert T. Fraley have been hailed as the 2013 World Food Prize (WFP) Laureates [8]. They are the pioneers in inventing transgenic plants through a natural tool called Agrobacterium tumefaciens. What do you think about this news? Their invention has become an effective tool to change the world or destroy the world – it is still a question without the final answer. In fact, since the first genetically modified (GM) plant was produced in 1982, using an antibiotic-resistant tobacco plant, the new era of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) (including plants and animals) has been opened and developed drastically which raised numerous never- ending controversies. People in favor GM technology suppose that GM crops could prevent famine and reduce poverty, improve environmental protection as well as create the super-crops against to climate change. Whereas, the anti-GM crops groups point out that GMOs in general and GM crops in particular have been causing many serious and unpredictable consequences of ecosystem, human health and social problems. In the scope of this assignment, I will discuss on the opportunities and challenges of GM crops and also express my viewpoint about GM crops. II. Contents 2.1 Global status of commercialized GM crops: According to ISAAA (International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications) Brief 44, 170.3 million hectares of biotech crops were grown globally in 2012, at an annual growth rate of 6%, up 10.3 million from 160 million hectares [2]. In the period 1996 to 2012, millions of farmers in ~30 countries worldwide, adopted biotech crops at unprecedented rates which made the 100-fold increase in biotech crop areas from 1.7 million hectares in 1996 to 170 million hectares in 2012 [2]. The table as below showed the areas of GM crops in 28 countries during 2012 (see table1). Most of 28 countries are developing ones which are mainly located in Americas, Asia and Africa. For example, the five lead developing countries in biotech crops are China and India in Asia, Brazil and Argentina in Latin America, and South Africa on the continent of Africa, collectively grew 78.2 million hectares (46% of global) and together represent ~40% of the global population of 7 billion [2]. Even some countries in Europe accepted GM crops comprising Spain, Portugal, Czech, Slovakia and Romania which planted 129,071 hectares of biotech Bt maize [2]. The top three GM crops are maize, soybean (for foods) and cotton (for industry). The Department of Agriculture’s National Agricultural Statistics Service of the USA said that, in 2010, as much as 86 percent of corn, up to 90 percent of all soybeans and nearly 93 percent of cotton were GM varieties [15]. The most commonly used traits were herbicide tolerance (63%) and pest resistance (15%), while 22% have both traits [13]. Future GM crops likely to be commercialized by 2015 include rice, eggplant, potatoes, and wheat. Drought resistant and nutritionally enhanced crops are also expected in the near future [2]. Hue –Okayama International Master Program Crop production 2 Table1. Global area of biotech Crops in 2012: by Country (Million hectares) ** [2] In contrast, most developed nations do not consider GMOs to be safe. In more than 60 countries around the world, including Australia, Japan, and all of the countries in the European Union, there are significant restrictions or outright bans on the production and sale of GMOs [14]. Moreover, there is a wave of protest not only from scientists but also from consumers as well as farmers. In 2012, The report, “GMO Myths and Truths, An evidence- based examination of the claims made for the safety and efficacy of genetically modified crops”, by Michael Antoniou, PhD, Claire Robinson, and John Fagan, PhD is published by Earth Open Source [1]. Through the report, scientists would like to give the true evidences of threats caused by GM crops in order to clear all illusion of GM crops brought by powerful PR technology. Besides, the protest against seed giant Monsanto in May, 2013 were held in 436 cities across 52 countries with the participation of millions of people [12] which is the obvious truth of GM crops disapproval. From the fact, it can be said that GM crops have been commercially available to farmers since 1996 and so far they have developed continuously over the world with the unprecedented rate, especially in developing countries. In other words, there is a trend that GM crops get to take over cultivated areas over the world. However, they still encounter the fierce protest of millions of people, especially in Europe. Should we pursue GM crops in the future? The answer can be found in the next part. 2.2. Opportunities and challenges of GM crops: Hue –Okayama International Master Program Crop production 3 Why can GM crops exist and develop dramatically up to now? The answer is only that GM crops have potential to solve many global problems that everyone concerns. Is that the truth? I will discuss on each item. 2.2.1 GM crops contribute to cope with the environment problems:  Transgenic agriculture promises to limit the environmental releases of damaging agrochemicals by reducing the need for pesticides and herbicides. As we know, herbicide-tolerant crops include transgenes providing tolerance to the herbicides glyphosate or glufosinate ammonium. These herbicides are broad spectrum, meaning that they kill nearly all kinds of plants except those that have the tolerance gene. Thus, a farmer can apply a single herbicide to his fields of herbicide tolerant crops, and can use the herbicide effectively at most crop growth stages as needed. Integrating herbicide tolerance GM crops with no-tilling practice also prevent from soil erosion. A study by PG Economics in UK, found that herbicide-tolerant cotton saved 15.5 million kilograms of herbicide between 1996 and 2011, a 6.1% reduction from what would have been used on conventional cotton [6]. Or one report from the Canola Council of Canada revealed that farmers in Canada who used the engineered variety of canola spent less than 40% on herbicides compared with conventional growers [7]. In other hand, applying GM Bt crops which are toxic to a range of insects belonging to the orders Lepidoptera can decrease pesticide usage. Agnew and Baker (2001) have stated that Bt cotton has helped to reduce insecticide use in Arizona cotton to the lowest levels in the past 20 years. In a survey conducted in 1999 and 2000 in China, they reported that on average growers that used Bt cotton reduced pesticide use from 55 to 16 kg formulated product per hectare and the number of times the crop was sprayed from 20 to seven [5]. Nevertheless, recent studies showed an opposite results that over this nine-year period (1996-2004) in the USA, the adoption of GM soybean, corn, and cotton has led to the use of 122 million more lbs of pesticides than would have been applied if these GM crops had not been introduced. A small decrease in insecticide use attributable to insect-resistant corn and cotton (-16 million lbs) has been swamped by a much larger increase in herbicide use on herbicide-tolerant crops (+138 million lbs) (Benbrook, C. 2004) [3]. Also in the USA, more than 19-fold increase in glyphosate use on soybeans, the most widely planted Roundup Ready crop, from 1994 to 2006 [3]. In the similarity, the rise in using herbicides and pesticides can be found in other countries such as Brazil (700% increase in the use of agrochemicals over the last 40 years due to usage of GM soybean), Uruguay (twice increase in the use of herbicide between 2003 and 2007)… [3]. Why do we still use more pesticide and herbicide when applied GM crops compared to conventional crops? The most serious outcome of using herbicide-tolerant crops is that glyphosate- resistant weeds called superweeds are bred (See figure1.). They have now been found in 18 countries, with significant impacts in Brazil, Australia, Argentina and Paraguay [6]. Although, herbicide resistance is a problem for farmers regardless of whether they plant GM crops, the introduction of herbicide-tolerant crops combined the application of no-tilling, no- rotation and no-culture techniques may promote the spread of superweeds in terms of diversity and quantity. Shifts in weed communities and the spread of resistant weeds force farmers to increase herbicide application rates (especially glyphosate), spray more often and add new herbicides that work through an alternate mode of action into their spray programs. Figure1. THE RISE OF SUPERWEEDS [497] Hue –Okayama International Master Program Crop production 4 For GM Bt crops, they merely change the way in which insecticides are used [4]. It is true to say that GM Bt crops can control effectively primary pest but it easy to be attacked by secondary pests that are resistant to Bt toxin such as aphids, spider mites, and lygus bugs. Besides, resistant Bt pests also appear after the long time to utilize monoculture of GM Bt crops. Both of them force farmers to continue using and increasing the amount of insecticides as mentioned above.  GM crops mitigate climate change and reduce greenhouse gases GM crops advocates state the way GM crops helping mitigating climate change and reducing greenhouse gases: - Reduction in CO 2 emission due to decrease in fewer insecticide and herbicide sprays [2] - No-till practice applied in GM crops sequesters (stores) more carbon in the soil than ploughing, preventing the carbon from being released into the atmosphere as the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide [2]. - GM technology can insert precisely and quickly tolerant genes from wild species or unrelated species into commercial cultivars to create new cultivars which can adapt well to abiotic stresses causing by climate change such as high temperature, drought, flood, salinity soils… How many percentages of these statements are the truths? To begin with, it can be seen clearly that the first statement is not the truth. Many studies as well as reports as mentioned above illustrated that there is no decrease in using herbicide and pesticide for GM crops; GM crops only change the way farmers use herbicide and pesticide. The second statement is supportive point for GM Roundup Ready crops (GM herbicide-tolerant crops) promotion. Actually, farmers grow GM Roundup Ready crops, Monsanto recommends that they don’t need to till up, ploughing or crop rotation because GM crops can control weeds effectively. Furthermore, Monsanto is lobbying for GM Roundup Ready crop cultivation to be made eligible for carbon credits under the United Nations’ Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) (One organization to promote technologies that mitigate climate change) [4]. The truth is quite otherwise that no-till fields sequester no more carbon than ploughed fields when carbon sequestration at soil depths greater than 30 cm is taken into Hue –Okayama International Master Program Crop production 5 account. While the depth of ploughed fields range around 30 cm. Thus, the benefit from no tillage is the fault. The third statement is not wrong but it is so subjective. In fact, tolerant traits to abiotic stresses are normally controlled by multi-genes, in other words these traits are quantitative traits. Hence, insertion of only one or two genes into cultivars by using GM technology will not result in the tolerant traits as expectation. GM technology can shorten time to select and breed, nonetheless, the efficiency and the precise need to be put under serious consideration. In addition, the fact shows that the majority of GM crops are focused on herbicide tolerance and pest resistance, not on climate change mitigation. One more thing to suppress this statement is that almost varieties which can adapt well to climate change conditions base on conventional breeding methods or MAS (marker assisted selection) methods. The introduction of GM crops into developing countries where are the germplasm resources centers transgresses landrace accessions containing many tolerant genes. It contributes significantly to biodiversity loss.  GM crops create potential risks on ecosystems: People in favor GM crops demonstrate GM crops bring benefits to environment whereas the protesters argue that GM crops have many potential risks on ecosystems. These risks can be listed: - Gene flow: In 2000, David Quist (a microbial ecologist at the University of California) discovered that the locally produced maize in Mexico contained a segment of the DNA used to spur expression of transgenes in Monsanto’s glyphosate-tolerant and insect-resistant maize [6]. Mexico doesn’t approve GM crops cultivation, so that a hypothesis is put that the local maize probably cross-bred with these GM varieties, thereby picking up the transgenic DNA [6]. Absolutely, only this case cannot become the evidence supporting the hypothesis. Since then many studies has been conducted and they show the mixed results. In 2003–04, Allison Snow, a plant ecologist at Ohio State University in Columbus, sampled 870 plants taken from 125 fields in Oaxaca and found no transgenic sequences in maize seeds [6]. But in 2009, a study led by Elena Alvarez-Buylla found the same result as Quist did in 2000. In another study, Alvarez-Buylla and her co-authors found evidence of transgenes in a small percentage of seeds from 1,765 households across Mexico [6]. Besides, the spread of superweeds recently is considered as the result of gene flow between GM crops and weeds which have relation to crops. The ability of plants to breed between and among species allows for the movement of genes among crops and between crops and wild relatives which cannot be controlled actively, hence it may cause to threats on genetic diversity as well as crop diversity. - Unintended harm to non-target organisms Bt insecticide-producing GM crops harm non-target insect populations, including butterflies, beneficial pest predators and pollinators. Actually, a 1999 laboratory study published in Nature showed that pollen from Bt corn, a variety of GM corn, resulted in high mortality rates among monarch butterfly caterpillars [11]. Many people concerned about the negative impacts of GM crops on the microorganism communities in soil. To date, there is no obvious proof to prove this concern. Nevertheless, several researches indicated that the decomposition rate of GM Hue –Okayama International Master Program Crop production 6 crop residues was slower than conventional crop residues which means that maybe, the structure of soil microorganism communities between them is different. 2.2.2 GM crops contribute to food security One of key potential benefits that GM crops can bring is that GM crops promise to solve world hunger at a time when the population is expected to increase. This is because GM technology is supposed to increases crop yield, adaption ability as well as pest and diseases resistance which make GM crops can be got much more productivity per unit of area compared to conventional crops. The truth is GM crops cannot increase the yield. Perhaps, yield may decrease. The field trials results show that 50% of the drop in yield of soybean is due to the genetic disruptive effect of the GM transformation process. Similarly, field tests of Bt insecticide- producing maize hybrids present that they took longer to reach maturity and produced up to 12% lower yields than their non-GM counterpart [10]. A report, authored by 400 scientists and backed by 58 governments, stated that yields of GM crops were “highly variable” and in some cases, “yields declined” [4]. Most of GM crops concentrated on two traits including herbicide tolerance and pest resistance. Moreover, two major GM crops, soybean and maize act as feed source of livestock and biofuel for industry activities that have nothing to do with meeting the basic food needs of the poor and hungry. Feeding the world is the responsibility of not only GM crops but also of conventional crops. In fact, conventional crops can produce enough food to feed for the world’s population [4]. The new viewpoints in crop production such as low-input, sustainable, energy-saving practices or organic farming contribute significantly to improve the crop yield and productivity as well as save energy. In this competition of feeding the world, conventional crops is holding the upper hand. Last but not least, hunger is a social, political, and economic problem, which GM technology cannot address. This is because the root cause of hunger is not a lack of food, but a lack of access to food. Those are the reasons that make us doubt the role of feeding world of GM crops. 2.2.3 GM crops improve human health: Advocates believe that GM technology can easily transfer new genes which control quality traits into conventional crops in order to enhance the nutritive values in food products. GM crops which are supposed to be more nutritious than their non-GM counterparts include: - Golden rice: This GM crop is more beta-carotene which is applied in poor countries in the Global South, where vitamin A deficiency causes blindness, illness, and deaths. - Purple- cancer fighting tomato: The John Innes Centre (JIC) in the UK has developed a purple tomato engineered to contain high levels of anthocyanin antioxidants, which have anti-cancer properties [4]. - Edible plant vaccine: Edible vaccines are GM crops (banana, tomato…) that would provide extra added “immunity” from certain diseases [9]. The new generation of edible vaccines promises to provide vaccine with low cost, easy mass production and extraction, easy-to-store… This is such a good way to prevent human from infectious diseases. In fact, there are many failures related these kinds of GM crops when widespread applying. Currently, the commercial golden rice has been delayed due to many concerns related human health and economic benefits. There are only efficacy tests to see whether Hue –Okayama International Master Program Crop production 7 the human subjects assimilated sufficient beta-carotene and converted it to vitamin A but not the safety tests to see how safe of golden rice they are. Furthermore, golden rice varieties cannot adapt well to local conditions. One more thing is that this method is more expensive than the common methods using Vitamin A supplements. For purple-cancer fighting tomato, it is such a mistake. Actually, anthocyanin antioxidants can be found easily in numerous conventional vegetables and fruits such as raspberries, blackberries, blueberries, bilberries, blood oranges, red cabbage, red onions, and eggplant. In 2011 the JIC’s GM purple tomato became entirely redundant when Brazilian researchers announced that they had developed a non-GM purple tomato with high levels of anthocyanins and vitamin C [4]. In terms of edible vaccines, there are no evidences to prove side effect of edible vaccines. The most concerned issue is that how the vaccine dose can be controlled. More researches about edible vaccines are required. In some cases, GM foods have been found to be less nutritious than their non GM counterparts, due to unexpected effects of the genetic engineering process [4]. Examples include [4]:  GM soy had 12–14% lower levels of cancer fighting isoflavones than non-GM soy.  Canola (oilseed rape) engineered to contain vitamin A in its oil had much reduced vitamin E and an altered oil-fat composition, compared with the non-GM control.  Experimental GM rice varieties had unintended major nutritional disturbances compared with non-GM counterparts although, they were grown side-by-side in the same conditions. Even using CM crops which own herbicide tolerant and pest resistant traits increase the total amount of used herbicide and pesticide as mentioned in the part 2.1.1. As result, it affect to health of human. Although, regulators and industry claim that this is safe because Roundup has low toxicity. But various studies show that Roundup and glyphosate are not safe but pose serious health risks. Effects found in animal studies and test-tube studies on human cells include cell death and damage, damage to DNA, disruption of hormones, birth defects, and cancer [4]. 2.3. Should Vietnam pursue GM crops? GM crops have two sides: benefits and risks. Until now, we do not know clearly which side is more dominant. In the reality, almost companies in the USA who own the GM technology promote the dramatic development of GM crops as well as outline the myths of the power of GM crops in order to increase their profits and establish an exclusive market, not for solving to the global issues as they addressed. They try to find many ways to introduce GM crops into developing countries including Vietnam where agricultural areas are large but insufficient technologies. Under this pressure, Vietnam needs to establish the long-term strategy to cope to opportunities as well as challenges of GM crops. Vietnam needs to carry out more unbiased researches (not depending on lobbyist’s demand) on GM crops before giving final decision. In addition, the government should establish barriers to prevent GM food or GM seeds from importing illegally into our country. The most important thing here is that scientists and policy makers must have serious attitude as well as comprehensive view in approaching and analyzing the pros and cons of GM crops production. In my own opinion, Vietnam should not pursue GMOs in general and GM crops in particular. This is because in order to develop GM crops independently, it requires the high Hue –Okayama International Master Program Crop production 8 level of technology which is always the weak point of Vietnam. We have not enough techniques, technologies to assess the potential risks of GM crops or to own the GM technology. As result, we must depend on imported GM seeds which means depends on imported foods. This scenario is too terrible to a country of agriculture like Vietnam. Besides, Vietnam has several sustainable alternatives that could achieve the same goals with less risk such as low-input agriculture, organic farming and greenhouse farming…We should focus on improving the efficiency of the other models. III.Conclusion Each invention has both sides. Only invention which has benefits outweighing to risks will get the chance to exist and develop. GM technology is really great progress of human being because it helps human discover and control natural mechanisms happening in every organism. And GM crop is also a great application of GM technology. The problem here is that we inflate the importance as well as the power of GM crop and we hope GM crops can solve all agricultural challenges. Therefore, we would like to replace all conventional crops by GM crops. This is such a big mistake and ridiculous hype. To my way of thinking, GM crop should be considered at the same role as the conventional crops. Let them co-exist! And assessment of potential risks on human health, environment and society of GM crops should be focused on more and more. Simultaneously, new approaches to GM crops such as using new traits (drought tolerance, salinity…) for GM crops or new crops… are required. I hope in the not far future, GM crops can be found their own position and true role naturally and normally like many other inventions. References Hue –Okayama International Master Program Crop production 9 1. Claire Robinson, John Fagan, Michael Antoniou, 2012. Why genetically engineered food is dangerous: New report by genetic engineers 2. Clive James, 2012. Brief 44: Global status of Commercialized biotech/GM Crops: 2012. Executive summary of ISAAA 3. Friends of the earth international, 2009. Who benefits from GM crops? - Issue 116 4. Michael Antoniou, Claire Robinson, John Fagan. GMO myths and truths. Earth Open Source report, 2012 5. Natalie Ferry, Angharad M.R. Gatehouse. Environmental impact of genetically modified crops. 1 st ed. UK: CAB international; 2009 6. Natasha Gilbert. A hard look at GM crops. J. Nature 2013. 497:24-26 7. National science teacher association. Genetically Modified Crops. NSTA press; 2007 8. 2013 Laureates - http://www.worldfoodprize.org/en/laureates/2013_laureates/ 9. Edible vaccine – A great boon in medicinal science - http://www.pharmatutor.org/articles/edible-vaccine-a-great-boon-in-medicinal- science 10. GM CROPS – JUST THE SCIENCE: research documenting the limitations, risks, and alternatives - http://www.nongmoproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/GM-Crops- just-the-science.pdf 11. Monarchs and Bt corn: questions and answers - http://www.ipm.iastate.edu/ipm/icm/1999/6-14-1999/monarchbt.html 12. Millions march against GM crops - http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/may/26/millions-march-against- monsanto 13. GM crops: Top ten facts and figures - http://knowledge.allianz.com/environment/food_water/?500/gm-crops-facts-and- figures 14. GMO facts - http://www.nongmoproject.org/learn-more/ 15. The Threats From Genetically Modified Foods - http://www.motherearthnews.com/homesteading-and-livestock/genetically-modified- foods-zm0z12amzmat.aspx#axzz2dLNsG8AO The End . serious and unpredictable consequences of ecosystem, human health and social problems. In the scope of this assignment, I will discuss on the opportunities and challenges of GM crops and also. China and India in Asia, Brazil and Argentina in Latin America, and South Africa on the continent of Africa, collectively grew 78.2 million hectares (46% of global) and together represent ~40% of. Australia, Japan, and all of the countries in the European Union, there are significant restrictions or outright bans on the production and sale of GMOs [14]. Moreover, there is a wave of protest not