herbicides – GMO SAFETY

THE CONTROVERSY WITH TRANSGENIC CORN CONTINUES

President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s controversial ban on transgenic corn has Mexico and the United States on the brink of confrontation. The measure, approved at the end of 2020, can cause great economic losses for both countries, and is viewed with suspicion by farmers on both sides of the border.

The decree against transgenic corn, that is, genetically modified, is intended to supposedly protect the population against agrochemicals, as well as preserve native corn. While environmental organizations have congratulated the measure, it could have big repercussions not only for the increase in production costs, but also for relations between the United States and Mexico.

Although Mexico grows its own white corn (destined for human consumption), the Aztec country is the main importer of US corn, especially yellow corn destined for animal fodder to cover at least three quarters. In 2021, it bought 16.8 million tons from the US. However, if the measure only includes corn for human consumption, what is the controversy?

THE UNITED STATES COULD TAKE ACTION AGAINST MEXICO

The problem is that the legislation is vague, and it is not clear whether or not it will affect imports from the United States. President López Obrador held a meeting with US Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack and is expected to send a proposal to clarify the matter.

However, the secretary assured that if an agreement is not reached, the US could explore going to trade consultations under the Treaty between Mexico, the United States and Canada (TMEC), since it perceives a violation of the treaty. Among the consequences that this could bring is the imposition of tariffs on Mexican exports, in the event of ruling against it.

Although Mexico is willing to soften the measure, environmental organizations ask the government not to give in to pressure from the White House. For their part, in the United States they assure that this prohibition does not comply with the requirement that health regulations be made under relevant scientific principles.

ARE GMO FOODS DANGEROUS OR NOT?

Generally speaking, there is no convincing scientific evidence that GM foods are harmful to human health. The vast majority of scientific studies suggest that genetically modified foods are safe, and organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) do not oppose them.

However, some people have concerns about the potential long-term effects of consuming GM foods, especially in terms of allergies and antibiotic resistance xxx gratuit. In addition, some groups argue that GM crops can have negative effects on the environment and biodiversity, such as increased resistance to pesticides, cross-pollination between species, or negatively impact soil quality.

According to the National Agricultural Council of Mexico, the use of transgenic corn has not registered any negative effect. For now, the economic consequences of a ban are more certain.

Among them is an increase in the price of non-transgenic corn by almost 50%, according to a study by the consultancy World Perspectives. Likewise, the production of meat and chicken would also be affected by the increase in the cost of fodder, which would lead to more inflation in Mexico.

For its part, the United States could lose up to 3,560 million in the first year alone, while it would affect thousands of jobs and the economy of the grain-producing states, especially Iowa. Even so, associations such as Greenpeace consider that this could encourage the creation of a market for non-transgenic corn.

The Longest GMO Research: The Results Are In

The results of the longest GMO research have been released to the public last week and the findings are astonishing. The general public were left in the dark for years regarding the GMO crops and their influence on the economy of a country. A team of economists led by Francesco Ciliberti from The University of Virginia started collecting the data in 1998 and started analyzing it after fourteen years. They focused on the use of pesticides among farmers who are cultivating soy beans and maize, and looked at it from the economic aspect. The released findings mostly focus on the use of pesticides that include herbicides and insecticides and the final results are quite interesting.

The team and the research

Francesco Ciliberti managed to assemble a team of respectable economists who do have years of experience with data analysis. The majority of the team members come from respectable universities from all around the United States. They started their research back in 1998, selecting 10,000 US farmers who were growing soy beans and maize.

Have in mind that every past research that touched upon this topic usually covered only two or three years, so this study is definitely the largest (so far). Soy beans and maize are the most commonly cultivated crops in the world so it comes as no surprise that they decided to focus on the farmers who were growing those plants. The team selected the candidates and followed their journey from planting the first crop in 1998, to making a decision to grow GMO crops, and everything that followed, including the usage of pesticides and insecticides during each year.

GMO soy beans are modified in order to hold out against various weeds that ruin the crops, while genetically modified maize is resistant to pests. After planting the genetically modified crops, farmers did report the decrease in usage of herbicides and insecticides. They simply did not need it in the first couple of years of cultivating the genetically crops. However, the situation did change after a couple of years.

The results

Planting and growing GMO crops do have a significant impact on the economy due to the fact that the crops in question are more resistant to the outside factors and they generally give more produce at the end of each harvest. Additionally, farmers spend far less money on pesticides since they are not needed in this situation.

However, this research discovered that after some time, genetically modified plants do change the environment around them and even though they don’t require specific herbicides or insecticides, they do give in to other weeds or pests. For instance, weeds that grow around genetically modified soy develop immunity and farmers usually start using large amounts of herbicides in order to keep the situation under control.

This fact alone has a huge impact on the economy and the farming methods since farmers have to spend more money on various chemicals in order to battle this unexpected situation that can arise after years of growing genetically modified crops. On the other hand, insects are not reacting in the same way to genetically modified crops probably because they breed with other insects who do not live in the same.

The team was surprised by their findings regarding the increased usage of herbicides and the impact it has on the economy. The patterns were quite clear so dealing with this problem should definitely be the next goal of GMO researchers who develop the crops in order to reduce the weed resistance and keep the balance.

Canola and GM Canola plant

Introduction

Canola refers to a rapeseed and s scientifically referred to as Brassica napus. This is an oilseed plant that is cultivated for the production of high-quality oil that is used in many foods such as Margarine as well as cooking oil. Additionally, it is canola that is used as a seed meal because it contains high quality and quantity of fiber that is left after processing. T is the high protein content that makes Canola cultivated thus promoting its value as a stock feed. Canola plant has been grown in the Southern grain belt regions of Australia since the late 1960s. However, recently in the year 2010 and 2011, over 450 thousand tons of Canola was produced with a gross value of over 300 million US dollars. It is also important to note that Canola possesses beneficial effects on wheat by significant reduction of soil-borne diseases. This only happens when the plant is integrated as part of the crop rotation crops. This is because the wheat that is produced after canola has an increase of yield by over 20 % as compared to planting wheat following wheat.

GM Canola

Two genetically engineered canola varieties have been developed so far in Australia. These include the Roundup Ready canola and InVigor canola. The Roundup canola variety was produced by the Monsanto Company while the InVigor canola variety was introduced by the Bayer CropSciences Company. For purposes of effectiveness, each one of these varieties has been engineered to confer tolerance to specific herbicides. This is under a defined crop management system.
Roundup Ready GM Canola confers tolerance to glyphosate while the InVigor GM canola demonstrates tolerance to herbicide glufosinate. The company trials of growing these plants in the US have shown that GM canola that is produced through a specified crop management system proves to have a superior control over weeds as compared to current plant practices. Additionally, there is evidence that the amount of yield for these genetically engineered canola plants have increased and thus boosting the management savings that is earned from its growth. The herbicides that are utilized in controlling weeds for these crops have been shown to be favorable to the environment as opposed to the herbicides that are used on the traditional/conventional canola that is a bit harsh.

This means that the control of weeds particularly derived from canola Brassicaceae family that are characterized by broad leaves through the application of herbicides during the planting season plays a role in determining the quality and the quantity of the grain that is produced. This is based on the fact that weeds often compete with the canola plant for space and nutrients in the soil as well as other factors such as moisture and sunlight. Because of these reasons, there is a possibility that the yield that is lost due to weed is significant in the canola crop. Additionally, there is increased chance that the cross contamination factors will pose a significant effect on the seeds during harvesting. These factors are taken under control by the growing of GM canola that is resistant to weeds by possessing herbicide resistant genes.

The growth of the GM canola for commercial purposes first took place in 2008 in Victoria and NSW as well as WA in 2010. The most important thing to bear in mind is the fact that Roundup Ready canola is the only GM canola that is available today. Because of this reason, its approval by the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR) has been done. Based on a study that was conducted in Victoria, there was evidence that over 190 farmers in the region planted over 36000 ha of land in 2010 for canola. This paved way for the growth and increase of GM canola that occupied an area of over 15000 ha alone in 2012. There was a high level of yield in the growth of GM canola as demonstrated through the satisfaction that the farmers had. This is because of improved control of weeds as opposed to the conventional varieties of canola.

According to scientists, there is evidence that GM canola express a purpose for processing oils for consumption by humans. This is because the GM canola plant is characterized by ease of growing as well as low price. It has been the efforts of the food companies since the 1970s to try and produce canola that is low in fats to reduce the levels of heart disease-related cases. To achieve this canola was the target plant. However, conventional canola plant has high levels of erucic acid that is poisonous to both animals and human beings. This is because of the high levels of erucic acid that causes lesions in the heart. GM Canola, which has low levels of erucic acid, gave a brilliant alternative while supplementing it with elevated levels of nutrients such as omega six fatty acids beneficial for human porno.

Conclusion
Since the introduction of the genetically engineered canola varieties that are resistant to such components as glyphosate, glufosinate, imidazolinones, as well as bromoxynil, a wide range of benefits, have been realized. These benefits include; a significant rise of GM canola that is resistant to herbicides in the market thus contributing to the rise of market shares by over 70 % in Canada compared to conventional canola. The adoption of this plant that is genetically modified has grown across the globe to regions where it thrives well. This is because of its ease in growing and maintenance on the farm, the decrease in the control of weeds due to its resistance as well as high yield that is realized. This has, in turn, promoted the significant increase in the amount of financial returns as a function of the high yield, decrease in cost of herbicides as well as reduced docking. Despite the difficulty the management of the GM canola varieties, practices such as crop rotation and its widespread adoption have been very much beneficial to the growers of the plant.

Production of GMO Roundup Ready Soy plants

There is a broad range of methods that are employed in the process of producing GMOs. This often involves insertion of a gene of interest into living organisms depending on the species that you are working on. In plants mainly, two most common biotechnology-based techniques include; Agrobacterium-mediated transformation and bombardment of particles. According to the regulations given by FSANZ, it is a requirement that clear description of the method employed in genetically engineering plants is given.

Case study- Roundup Ready soy

This was produced using the particle bombardment method. This process of biotechnologically engineering soybeans involved; bombardment of the plant cells with microscopic particles of gold coated with DNA that contains the gene of interest. The gene of interest is the EPSPS gene that is derived from Agrobacterium. The aim of this is to introduce the novel gene of interest through the cell wall so that it integrates into the genetic material of the soy plant.

The new round up soy that is genetically engineered contains a new gene that codes for the EPSPS enzyme. The new plant cell controls the activity of all the genes through the use of regulatory sequences. These regulatory sequences do not code for any protein but rather plays a central role in the regulation of gene activity in the soy plant by either switching the genes on or switching them off. However, in the case of the roundup soy, plant cells often do not recognize the regulatory genes derived from bacterial cells. This means that when the regulatory sequences are introduced from the bacterium into the plant, the regulatory DNA has to be replaced with those that can be recognized by the plant. Thus, the EPSPS gene derived from Agrobacterium works in the soy plant through replacement with those that are recognized by the soy plant.

The figure above demonstrates the manner in which gene regulation takes place in the roundup soy. At the front of the bacterial EPSPS gene in the roundup, soy is the regulatory sequence that directs the plant to switch genes on or off. This is the CaMV 35S promoter sequence is derived from cauliflower mosaic virus. At the end of the EPSPS gene is another regulatory gene that directs the gene of interest to end. This is referred to as NOS 3’’ and is derived from nopaline synthase gene in bacteria but can function in plants.

Another regulatory sequence that is introduced into the soy plant is the chloroplast transit peptide gene that is derived from a petunia. The role of this gene is to direct the soy plant cell to transport the bacterial EPSPS gene into the chloroplast of the plant cell. This is because for the soy plant to demonstrate tolerance to roundup herbicides, the EPSPS enzyme has to be present in the chloroplast. This is because this is the location where the amino acids that make up the protein are produced. Once the EPSPS enzyme is in the chloroplast, the chloroplast transit peptide is eliminated for the gene of interest to function.

With this GMO soy plant, standard molecular biotechnological methods were employed in demonstrating that a single complete copy of the bacterial EPSPS gene was present and flanked by two DNA sequences found in the genome of the roundup ready soy plant. This is an indication that the right size and correct sequence of the gene of interest were genetically engineered into the soy plant to confer resistance to herbicides.

Additionally, the novel gene introduced into the roundup ready soy was assessed in the third and the sixth generation of soy plants using biotechnological approaches. This indicated that the new gene of interest was stable and had integrated itself well into the Soy genome. Again, the roundup ready feature of the soy plant was examined across a wide range of generations thus indicating its ability to be passed on from the parents to the offspring in a rational and predictable manner following the laws of heredity.

The issues that arise from the discovery and production of the GM roundup ready soy are mostly relevant to the potential transfer of the gene that confers antibiotic resistance from the GM soy foods to the gut of the bacteria. However, it is important to note that roundup ready GM soy does not contain the antibiotic resistance gene, but the only gene that could potentially be transferred to the human digestive system is the bacterial EPSPS gene. This gene does not have any impact on the people’s health since EPSPS gene in the GM soy plant functions in a similar manner as the one predominantly found in the bacterial gut. There is also no evidence that points at the ability of the new gene in GM soy having a potential to integrate into the DNA genome of humans and thus poses no known health hazard. Additionally, there is no sequence similarity to the gene to allergens and thus has no ability to cause allergenic reactions.

The genetically engineered soy is similar in structure as well as function to the naturally occurring soy plants while the EPSPS gene in plants and bacteria are also similar regarding the roles they play. However, the difference between the two soy varieties is based on the fact that the GM soy is more tolerant to herbicides as compared to the other naturally occurring type. According to scientific publications of GM soy, there is a single amino acid alteration in the EPSPS enzyme that confers its tolerance to glyphosate. On the other hand, the bacterial EPSPS enzyme is made up of over 400 amino acids. Additionally, bacterial EPSPS levels present in fresh edible soy constitutes less than 0.1 % of the total protein levels. According to research, the enzyme of interest in the GM soy has not been demonstrated to have any activity when eaten. This is because the enzyme is inactivated upon exposure to heat during food processing.

Tag: herbicides