Having problems with message search?
Agnet April 21/04 -- II
Biotechnology expert focuses on the risks of not adopting GM in the EU
New study pushes GM crops to conserve water
Is that plant a tortoise or a hare? Answer predicts its response to environmental change
Altered rice still headed to market
After 17 years, the cicadas are coming
Regulations amending the wild animal and plant trade regulations
how to subscribe
Biotechnology expert focuses on the risks of not adopting GM in the EU
April 21, 2004
Cordis
http://dbs.cordis.lu/news/en/home.html
Dr Clive James, chair of the international service for the acquisition of agri-biotech applications (ISAAA) and a leading proponent of agricultural biotechnology for the developing world, was in Brussels on 20 April to present his views on the current global status and future prospects of genetically modified (GM) crops.
Speaking to journalists, he began by outlining the challenge facing the agriculture sector. According to Dr James, estimates show that global food production will need to be doubled by 2050 to meet the needs of a predicted world population of nine billion people. What's more, he added, this doubling of production will have to be achieved using the same amount of land as is currently available, as the area of cultivatable land per capita in 2050 will have fallen to 0.15 hectares, from today's figure of 0.25 hectares.
'No single approach will provide the solution,' said Dr James. 'Conventional crop improvement alone will not double food production by 2050, and similarly, biotechnology is not a panacea - GM is not the silver bullet that will solve all of the problems.'
However, Dr James expressed his firm belief that any successful strategy to meet the growing global demand for food would have to make use of multiple approaches, integrating both conventional and GM crops in order to optimise productivity. The challenge, as he sees it, is how to accommodate diverse opinions on GM technology within a global strategy, especially given the sceptical stance of many in Europe.
Dr James accepted that concerns surrounding GM crops, such as food safety, their environmental impact and the issue of who owns the technology, are currently hampering acceptance in Europe, but he argued that these issues represent only one side of the argument.
'What many people in Europe must ask themselves is 'what are the risks of not adopting GM?' said Dr James. He offered the example of a brain drain of scientific talent from Europe to other parts of the world, resulting in Europe not being at the cutting edge of the technology. Dr James described the current status of biotechnology as the tip of the iceberg, adding: 'What people must realise is that if Europe chooses to reject GM technology, it will be turning its back on the whole iceberg, not simply the tip.'
However, Dr James was positive about the future prospects for GM technology in Europe, saying that he chooses to view the region as 'a glass half full, not half empty'. New EU labelling and traceability requirements, which came in to force on 18 April, will open up new developments in Europe and lead to the reestablishment of GM product approvals, he hopes.
The introduction of practical coexistence measures should open the way for the cultivation of GM crops in Europe within the next five years, said Dr James, and he described the limited cultivation of GM maize in Spain as 'encouraging'.
When asked what benefits GM crops offer to consumers in Europe, Dr James accepted that the advantages for ordinary citizens are less evident than those for farmers, for example. However, he argued that the technology would lead to lower cost products, and that European consumers may be better persuaded by 'quality trait' GM varieties currently under development, such as a type of soya bean that can lower cholesterol levels in the body.
Ultimately, though, it is the potential benefits that GM crops can deliver in the developing world, and especially to the 870 million people currently suffering from malnutrition, that Dr James considers the decisive argument in favour of the technology. 'The problem may be that hunger is a difficult concept for consumers in the EU and US to relate to,' he concluded.
To find out more about the ISAAA, please consult the following web address:
http://www.isaaa.org/
New study pushes GM crops to conserve water
April 21, 2004
USAgNet
http://www.wisconsinagconnection.com/story-national.cfm?Id=429&yr=2004
Via AgBioView at www.agbioworld.org
A new report released at a UN development summit in New York Tuesday warns that food production and agriculture are causing the rapid depletion of water resources across the world, advocating the cultivation of drought resistant and genetically modified crops to combat the crisis. "Food and agriculture are by far the largest consumers of water. They require 1,000 times more than we use to drink and 100 times more than we use to meet basic personal needs," cautions the report titled "Water - More Nutrition Per Drop," initiated by the Swedish government. Focusing on the estimated 840 million undernourished people across the world, the report warns that if measures are not taken to increase food production while subsequently using less water, the international community will face great difficulties in meeting the UN Millennium Development Goal of halving the number of undernourished people in the world by 2015.
Agriculture accounts for an alarming 70 to 90 percent of available freshwater supplies in developing countries, according to senior scientist Malin Falkenmark of the Stockholm International Water Institute, which collaborated on the report. Falkenmark adds that astonishingly huge volumes of water are transformed into vapor during food production. The report explains that with globalization and an increase in purchasing power, consumers are becoming more selective about their food, driving an increasing demand for meat and dairy products that involve water-intensive production procedures.
Stressing that the conservation of water should be a combined global effort, the report advocates the cultivation and export of crops in regions where they can give the best yield with the least amount of water.
Is that plant a tortoise or a hare? Answer predicts its response to environmental change
April 21, 2004
University of Minnesota
MINNEAPOLIS / ST. PAUL—As the spring foliage grows, each plant, like an entrepreneur, builds its leaves according to an economic strategy. Some plants live like the proverbial hare, following a "live fast, die young" strategy; their leaves produce and consume energy quickly but soon "burn out" or fall victim to bad weather or hungry herbivores. Other leaves are more tortoiselike, taking a "live slowly and last long" approach. A new study has revealed the global continuum of leaf economics, documenting where 2,548 species growing at 175 sites fit along the "tortoise-hare" continuum. For the first time, scientists can equate plants in Amazonian rain forest, Minnesota prairie or Alaskan spruce woods using the same set of economic strategies. Moreover, a plant's position on the continuum predicts how it will likely respond to climate change and other factors. The work will be published in the April 22 issue of the journal Nature.
"This is the most comprehensive study of the physiology of natural vegetation ever done," said author Peter Reich, professor of forest resources at the University of Minnesota. "Leaves are little factories. As a factory, each can make money (energy) in a big hurry, but at the risk of running down its equipment fast. Or, a factory can have a slow and steady output. It's fundamental tradeoff for every leaf, and the strategy it follows determines how it reacts to change." Besides Reich, authors of the paper were Ian Wright (first author) and Mark Westoby of Macquarie University, Australia, Jeannine Cavender-Bares and Jacek Oleksyn from the University of Minnesota, and a long list of researchers from every inhabited continent.
It all began in 1985, when Reich was a postdoctoral fellow at Cornell University. He compared the rates different plants captured and stored energy through photosynthesis and the rates they used energy—a process called respiration. He noticed that two fast-growing "hare" plants—poplar trees and soybeans—were more susceptible to ozone pollution than slower-growing "tortoise" pine trees.
"It's because poplar trees exchanges gases faster than pine," said Reich. "Therefore, poplar takes in more ozone than pine. Soybeans, wheat and other crops are bred to grow fast, and they tend to be like poplars. This was an important predictor of how these trees and crops would respond to pollution. I wondered how they had come to have these traits in the first place and what the implications were for responses to changes in environment more broadly. So I began to physiologically compare plants whose leaves might have these contrasting economic strategies. I've carried portable photosynthesis sensors to more than 20 sites on four continents."
Twenty years later, Reich and his colleagues can say that plants like hares and tortoises are found in every ecosystem, and so plants from boreal forest, rainforest, desert and everywhere else can be compared. For example, "hares" like aspen and birch are better able to use resources when conditions get better. Therefore, if rainfall or nutrient levels increased, these trees would do well. But if conditions were to get drier or less fertile, the slower-growing "tortoises"—such as spruce, hemlock and other evergreens—would be favored, he said. Similarly, if there is little sunlight available in the understory of a forest, the "tortoises" can scale back their operations and live with it. In general, "hares" are good at "ramping up" when conditions improve, but tortoises are better at controlling their energy consumption when times get tough. Thus, the theory works well as a predictor of responses to increasing nitrogen pollution, added Reich.
The researchers also noted that leaves are built in accordance with their economic strategy. Leaves of fast-growing plants tend to be thin and flimsy and full of expensive nutrients like nitrogen and phosphorus. The thinner a leaf, the better the chance that a ray of sunlight will penetrate to the leaf's photosynthetic machinery—but the greater its chance of being blown or chomped off. And the expensive invesstments in nutrients only pay off when there is a lot of sunlight and conditions are generally good. In contrast, slow growth allows for thick, sturdy leaves that resist weather and herbivores and can pay off under challenging conditions.
Weeds usually fall into the hare category, said Reich. Their strategy is to grow fast and quickly release seeds, and they tend to grow in places where the vegetation is disturbed.
Data for the study were collected from the University of Minnesota's Cedar Creek Natural History Area, forests in Wisconsin and Minnesota, the New Mexican desert, the Appalachian Mountains, the Amazon Basin, the Australian Outback and numerous other places. The work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation and the U.S. Department of Energy.
Altered rice still headed to market
April 21, 2004
Sacramento Business Journal
Celia Lamb
Ventria Bioscience of Sacramento, turned down by regulators in its recent bid to start commercially producing its genetically altered rice in California, still, according to this story, plans to put its first product on the market in about two years. Even if that means moving operations to another state or country.
Ventria president and chief executive officer Scott Deeter, was quoted as saying, "The time frame is such that we can step back and say, 'OK, let's look at what works for us.' California's regulatory process is one of the challenges this state faces for biotechnology products."
The story says that warnings of moves to friendlier terrain are common when businesses face off with regulators and legislators, but Ventria's plans for its modified rice -- designed to produce proteins for therapeutic use -- have been the subject of international scrutiny and organized opposition that raise the stakes for the local biotech startup.
One week ago the state Department of Food and Agriculture rejected Ventria's application to grow 120 acres of its biotech rice in California, double what it grew last year. The rejection sends the application back to a California Rice Commission advisory board for public review. Ventria also lacks a U.S. Department of Agriculture permit it would need to grow the crop.
Deeter was further cited as saying he expects the company will receive approvals from both the state and federal agencies in time to plant a crop this year, but if not, waiting until next year wouldn't delay product development. Ventria, he said, can scale up its rice production more than 50-fold in one growing season.
The company may also consider growing its rice outside of California. Deeter said possibilities include Texas, Arkansas, Missouri, Illinois, Florida or even South America, which has a winter growing season.
After 17 years, the cicadas are coming
April 21, 2004
ARS News Service
Agricultural Research Service, USDA
After a 17-year wait, billions of large, noisy, winged, red-eyed insects known as periodical cicadas (Magicicada spp.) will soon emerge from the ground, occupying large swaths of the eastern United States. They'll overrun many yards, pelt windows, fly into people, clog storm drains and basically wreak buggy havoc.
But entomologist Michael Schauff of the Agricultural Research Service's (ARS) Systematic Entomology Laboratory in Beltsville, Md., has a message: Remain calm. Although cicadas may give many people the creeps, the bugs won't sting or bite, and they rarely damage plants. According to Schauff, the cicada explosion will start in early-to-mid May in parts of Virginia, West Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Delaware, New Jersey, western North Carolina, Kentucky, Georgia, Tennessee, Ohio, Indiana and southern Michigan. Other states may see them as well. This activity will peak between mid-May and mid-June, and the insects will die off about four weeks after first emerging. Schauff has good agricultural news as well: The cicadas pose little threat to crops, although small or newly planted hardwood or fruit trees and grape vines may need protection. That's because cicadas make small incisions near the tips of tree branches, where they lay eggs. The branch beyond the incisions often dies.
The 17-year cicada is known as Brood X (10), or the Big Brood. Other broods have different cycles, and are not as intensely populated. According to Schauff, the first sign of the cicada emergence will be little mounds or mud turrets that look like miniature volcanoes around the bases of trees. The insects emerge soon after. Six to 10 weeks after eggs have been laid, nymphs will emerge, fall to the ground, crawl into the soil and stay out of sight as they slowly develop in cells attached to plant roots, subsisting on tree sap over the next 17 years.
ARS is the U.S. Department of Agriculture's chief scientific research agency.
Regulations amending the wild animal and plant trade regulations
April 21, 2004
Canada Gazette Vol. 138, No. 8
The complete document of the following can be viewed from:
http://canadagazette.gc.ca/partII/2004/20040421/html/sor61-e.html
Wild animal and plant protection and regulation of international and Interprovincial trade act
P.C. 2004-329 March 30, 2004
Her Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of the Environment, pursuant to section 21 (see footnote a) of the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (see footnote b), hereby makes the annexed Regulations Amending the Wild Animal and Plant Trade Regulations.
Agnet is produced by the Food Safety Network at the University of Guelph and is sponsored by the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food, Plants Program at the University of Guelph, Agricultural Adaptation Council (CanAdapt Program), AGCare, Canadian Council of Grocery Distributors, ConAgra Foods Inc., Meat Livestock Australia, Pioneer Hi-Bred Limited (Canada), Monsanto Canada, National Pork Board, Syngenta Seeds, Inc. USA, JIFSAN, CropLife Canada, Canadian Animal Health Institute, Burger King Corporation, Southern Crop Protection Association, Ag-West Biotech Inc., Ontario Agri-Food Technologies, Syngenta Crop Protection, Feedlot Health Management Services, Institute of Environmental Science Research Limited , National Food Processors Association, Tactix Government Consulting, Inc., CanAmera Foods, Global Public Affairs, and Agri Business Group, Inc.
To subscribe to the html version of Agnet (subscription is free), send mail to:
listserv@...
leave subject line blank
in the body of the message type:
subscribe agnet-L firstname lastname
i.e. subscribe agnet-L Doug Powell
(replace agnet-L with agnettext to subscribe to the text version of agnet)
To unsubscribe to the html version of Agnet, send mail to:
listserv@...
leave subject line blank
in the body of the message type:
signoff agnet-L
(replace agnet-L with agnettext to unsubscribe to the text version of agnet)
For more information about the Agnet research program, please contact:
Dr. Douglas Powell
Associate Professor
dept. of plant agriculture
University of Guelph
Guelph, Ont.
N1G 2W1
tel: 519-824-4120 x54280
cell: 519-835-3015
fax: 519-763-8933
dpowell@...
http://www.foodsafetynetwork.ca
The Food Safety Network's bilingual toll-free line for obtaining food safety
information: 1-866-50-FSNET (1-866-503-7638)
archived at "http://131.104.232.9/agnet-archives.htm
Send Email