Public Acceptance of Genetically Modified Crops

SUBMITTED BY:
SAURABH PANDEY
PALB-3252
SUBMITTED TO:
PROF. DAYAL DOSS
DEPARTMENT OF PLANT
BIOTECHNOLOGY UAS GKVK
BANGALORE
INFORMATION CONTENT
Feb 4, 2015
DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)
INTRODUCTION
What is GM crops?
GM stands for genetically modified.

A plant that has had its DNA altered through genetic
engineering is said to be genetically modified.
Also referred as Biotech crops.
Who produces the GM crops?
2008- Monsanto produced more than 90% of GM crops
worldwide.
Syngenta, Bayer CropScience, Dow and BASF
make the rest.
Feb 4, 2015
Who produces the GM crops?
2008- Monsanto produced more than 90% of GM crops

worldwide.
Syngenta, Bayer CropScience, Dow and BASF make the rest.
Feb 4, 2015
1980 to 1996
1983 genetically modified tobacco resistant to an antibiotic
1985 first GM crop trials
1993 US Food and Drug Administration allows companies to
market GM seed
1994 Flavr Savr tomato, is approved in the US
1996Herbicide-tolerant GM soya bean available in US
Feb 4, 2015
Feb 4, 2015
PUBLIC CONCERNS
Is GM technology safe for plants, animals and humans?
Is GM technology the solution to world hunger?
Is it ethical to alter the genetic make up of a plant?
Does GM technology prove to be a safer, more
environmentally friendly technology that reduces use of

harmful chemicals, soil erosion, and fuel consumption?
Feb 4, 2015
ISSUES OF CONCERN(HUMAN HEALTH RISKS

AND ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY CONCERNS)
Potential impact on human health including allergens, transfer of
antibiotic resistance markers and outcrossing.

The movement of genes from GM plants into conventional crops or
related species in the wild (referred to as outcrossing), as well as the
mixing of crops derived from conventional seeds with those grown using
GM seeds, may have an indirect effect on food safety and food security.
It has been found that genes inserted into GM food survive digestive
processes and are transferred into the human gut.
l Potential impact on environment, including transfer of transgenes
through cross-pollination, unknown effects on other organisms (e.g., soil
microbes), and loss of flora and fauna biodiversity.
Feb 4, 2015
Feb 4, 2015
Attitudes to GM foods:
Feb 4, 2015
10
Whether GM food should be opposed:
More than half of the public were not sure whether GM food should be
promoted or not.
For benefit v/s risk:
42% of the sample thought the risks of GM food outweighed the
benefits
23% that they are same
20% that benefits outweigh the risks
The majority ,85% of the public sampled , thought that we do not know
enough about the potential long term effects of GM food on their health.
They were also concerned about the potential negative impact on the
environment of GM crops.
A substantial no. Thought that there could be a range of future benefits,
for the environment, consumers, and developing countries.
Feb 4, 2015
11
In USA there are issues, these seems greatest about cloning
animals and the safety of GM foods.

Most people dont want the technology stopped; rather they want
robust regulation in place to ensure safety and that moral and
ethical points are covered under regulations.
In both set of surveys the biggest issue along with food safety is
trust. Many peoples see the introduction of GM plants as being the
prime example of the big corporation dominating the rights of
individual.
A 2013 poll byThe New York Timesshowed that 93% of Americans
wanted GMO labeling.
Feb 4, 2015
12
13
Feb 4, 2015
14
The global hectarage of biotech crops have increased more than 100-fold
from 1.7 million hectares in 1996 to over 175 million hectares in 2013 this
makes biotech crops the fastest adopted crop technology in recent history.
This adoption rate speaks for itself in terms of its resilience and the benefits
it delivers to farmers and consumers.
Millions of risk-averse farmers, both large and small, world-wide,
have determined that the returns from planting biotech crops are
high, hence repeat planting is virtually 100% which is the acid-test
applied by farmers for judging the performance of any technology.
Feb 4, 2015
15
In the 18 year period 1996 to 2013, millions of farmers in
~30 countries worldwide, adopted biotech crops at

unprecedented rates.
The most compelling and credible testimony to biotech
crops is that during the 18 year period 1996 to 2013,
millions of farmers in ~30 countries worldwide, elected to
make more than 100 million independent decisions to plant
and replant an accumulated hectarage of more than 1.6
billion hectares. This is an area equivalent to >150% the
size of the total land mass.
Feb 4, 2015
16
Feb 4, 2015
17
Feb 4, 2015
18
Feb 4, 2015
19
Feb 4, 2015
20
Feb 4, 2015
21
Feb 4, 2015
22
Feb 4, 2015
23
Feb 4, 2015
24
Feb 4, 2015
25
Feb 4, 2015
26
18 million farmers benefit from

biotech crops 90% were small
In 2013, a record 18 million

farmers, compared with 17.3 million in
resource-poor
farmers.
2012, grew biotech crops remarkably, over 90%, or >16.5 million,

were risk-averse small, poor farmers in developing countries.
In China, 7.5 million small farmers benefited from biotech cotton
and in India there were 7.3 million beneficiary farmers.
The latest economic data available for the period 1996 to 2012
indicates that farmers in China gained US$15.3 billion and in India
US$14.6 billion.
Feb 4, 2015
27
In addition to economic gains, farmers benefited enormously
from at least a 50% reduction in the number of insecticide

applications,
thereby reducing farmer exposure to insecticides, and
importantly contributed to a more sustainable environment and
better quality of life.
Feb 4, 2015
28
LEAD BIOTECH DEVELOPING

COUNTRIES
Feb 4, 2015
29
Brazil, continues to be the engine of

biotech crop growth globally.
Brazil ranks second only to the USA in biotech crop hectarage
in the world with 40.3 million hectares (up from 36.6 million in
2012) and is emerging as a strong global leader in biotech
crops.
For the fifth consecutive year, Brazil was the engine of growth
globally in 2013, increasing its hectarage of biotech crops

more than any other country in the world a record 3.7 million
hectare increase, equivalent to an impressive year-over-year
increase of 10%.
Feb 4, 2015
30
Feb 4, 2015
31
Feb 4, 2015
32
ANTIBIOTIC-RESISTANCE GENES
In plant transformation antibiotic-resistance genes are used as selectable
markers because plant transformation is very low-frequency event.

These selective agents was already well established as a fundamental
tool of molecular biology and cloning, in particularly Escherichia coli.
However this has proved to be one of the hurdles to the widespread
acceptance of GM crops. How?
Case : In 1996 , Novartis sought approval for a maize variety that
carried an ampicillin-resistance gene.
The UK Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes(ACNFP)
blocked this approval for a considerable length of time, but eventually
the maize line was approved for cultivation in France.
Feb 4, 2015
33
However ,concerns about food safety and lack of market acceptance
meant that this GM maize was never cultivated widely.

Ampicillin is an antibiotic of the penicillin family that is widely used to
treat a variety of human infection.
The presence of a resistance gene in a GMO released in environment was
perhaps bound to raise fears about creating antibiotic-resistant bacteria,
and particularly human pathogens.
But this is not the case because:
First, the antibiotic-resistance genes used in creating GM crops were
originally isolated from bacteria and the resistance genes is often carried
on plasmids that can readily transferred from one strain to another.
Feb 4, 2015
34
But transfer of antibioticresistance genes from plants to bacteria(for
which there is no known mechanism) will not significantly alter the pool
of antibiotic-resistance genes in the environment.
The transfer of intact, functional, antibiotic-resistance genes to gut
flora from ingested plant material is also highly unlikely.
Even if resistance genes were transferred , no real selective advantage
would accrue and the resistant bacterium would be unlikely to survive.
Second, many of the antibiotic-resistance genes commonly found in
GM crops(such as nptII) confer resistance to antibiotics that are not
used to treat disease in humans, their use having been superseded by
less toxic and more-effective alternatives.
Feb 4, 2015
35
HERBICIDE RESISTANCE AND SUPERWEEDS

Herbicide resistance can also be used as selectable marker confer
resistance to herbicides as an alternative to antibiotic-resistance

genes.
Gene transfer of herbicide-resistance genes, predominantly via crosspollination , to weedy relatives of GM crops could create super-weeds.
This problem is unlikely to occur if the herbicide resistance gene was
only used as selectable marker during regeneration from tissue
culture.
However, the creation of GM crops engineered specifically to express
herbicide-resistance trait to simplify the crop production, is more
problematic.
Feb 4, 2015
36
In 2005 , it was reported that atleast 15 weedy species, including
ryegrass, bindweed, and goosegrass, were either naturally resistant

to glyphosate or had developed resistance to it.
Practically every major crop species has weedy relatives that could
be cross-pollinated by a GM crop.
An example of this was noted in the UK after farm-scale trials. The
transfer of herbicide-resistance genes from GM oilseed rapeseed to a
distantly related plant, charlock, was found to have occurred.
In this case the herbicide was glufosinate ammonium. The issue is
exacerbated as charlock seed can survive for many years in the soil.
Feb 4, 2015
37
CHARLOCK PLANT
BELONGS TO
Brassicaceae FAMILY
Feb 4, 2015
38
The transfer of herbicide-resistance genes to weedy relatives may
result in the weed becoming resistant to one or more herbicides,

but it will still be susceptible to other chemicals.
Herbicide-resistance genes confer no selective advantage on
weeds that are not subject to treatment with the herbicide, and
therefore the trait is unlikely to spread throughout the population.
Also plant biotechnologists using other attractive alternative in
place of herbicide-resistance as selectable marker. For eg.
Engineering of chloroplast genome, because in most cases
chloroplast is inherited maternally, so negating the chance of gene
transfer by cross-pollination.
Feb 4, 2015
39
INSECT-RESISTANCE GENES
The wide range and type of genes used for developing insect resistance
raise questions about their safety for human consumption, given that
certain protease inhibitors and lectins are known to have toxic effects in
mammals.
One of the genes , the snowdrop lectin GNA(Galanthus nivalis agglutinin),
was the first such gene to attract considerable attention following the
suggestion that potatoes carrying transgene might be responsible for
changing the gut lining of rats.
A resolution of the issue is required, since the value of GNA has recently
demonstrated as a means of developing rice resistant to sap-sucking
insects, which are not susceptible to Bt toxins or plant proteases.
Feb 4, 2015
40
The environmental impact of Bt crops:
Build up of resistance in pest population,

Can be controlled by gene pyramiding(eg. Bollgard II
cry2Ab+cry1Ac) or high-dose/refuge approach.
A separate issue was brought to the fore by a report that
appeared in 1999 indicating that pollen from Bt maize might
be toxic to the larvae of the Monarch butterfly.
Feb 4, 2015
41
GENE CONTAINMENT
Preventing the transfer of foreign genes from GM crops to other
plants is a wider environmental issue.

A great variety of foreign genes are being introduced into GM
crops , but the environmental impact of these genes is currently
difficult to predict.
Gene transfer usually occurs through pollen, although GM crops, if a
wild relative has pollinated them , could also serve as female parent
for hybrid seeds.
The dispersal of seeds from GM crops among weedy relatives could
also produce mixed populations, with introgression of, for example
a herbicide-resistance gene resulting in herbicide-resistant weeds.
Feb 4, 2015
42
TECHNIQUES FOR GENE CONTAINMENT

1. Chloroplast transformation
Advantage- Maternally inherited: high level of transgene expression

Disadvantage-Expressed protein may not be processed properly
eg. Cheng et al.(2008) successfully transferred into the cabbage chloroplast
genome aadA and cry1Ab genes.
2. Male sterility
Advantage- No pollen formed
Disadvantage-Crops must be propagated by pollination from a non-GM
crop or by other means: male sterile plant could serve as female parent.
eg. Male sterile transgenics have been produced in tobacco, lettuce, cauliflower,
cotton tomato, corn etc.
Feb 4, 2015
43
3. Terminator technology
Advantages-Seeds are sterile: inducible
Disadvantage-Silencing of transgene results in viable seeds and introgression;
terminator transgenes and desirable trait must remained linked.
eg. In cotton and soybean crops by Delta and Pine Land Co.
4. Apomixis(seeds produced without fertilization)
Advantages-Can be used to fix the heterosis
Disadvantage- Complex trait, not usual in crop plants, a plant may not be 100%
apomictic.
5. Cleistogamy(Fertilization occurs within unopened flowers)
Advantages-Self-pollination prevents outcrossing
Disadvantage- Complex trait, not usual in crop plants, introgression still occurs.
Feb 4, 2015
44
6.Transgenic mitigation
Advantage-Introduced trait is advantageous or neutral for the
GM crop but deleterious for weeds.
Disadvantage-Does not prevent gene transfer; may cause
extinction of weedy relatives, thus reducing biodiversity.
example; preventing seed-pod shatter , which is deleterious
to weeds,but can actually be an advantage in crops.
Feb 4, 2015
45
BIG BUSINESS
The threat of terminator technology being introduced led to protests
in many parts of the world, and was seen as yet another example of
big business imposing its wishes on farmers and consumers alike.
Terminator technology has the potential to make GM crops safer by
reducing gene transfer to weedy relatives.
The publicity has, however, focused on its potential use to prevent
farmers from saving a portion of their grain for use as seed in
subsequent years, thus tying them to an expensive source of fresh
seed each year.
Concerns that terminator technology had already been introduced
led to GM cotton crops being burnt in India amid wide-scale unrest.
Feb 4, 2015
46
Plant biotechnology companies are interested in genetically
engineering apomixis into crop plants because it can be used

to considerably speed up the development of new varieties.
The advantage to farmers is that seed, even from highperformance hybrids, can be saved and reused, without the
loss of desirable characteristics.
The advantage of apomixis, removing farmers from
dependence on expensive seed, is, of course, one of the
potential hurdles to its development, as seed companies can
not protect their investment.
Feb 4, 2015
47
FOOD SAFETY
CONCERNS ABOUT GM FOOD SAFETY
The surveys of public feeling highlight the central issue as being the
influence of biotech crops on health, rather than effects on
environment or food security.
Will these so called franken-foods make me ill? Will I be allergic to
them?
This is the natural position to take and one that is really no different
to that which we all have for all types of the food.
The Pusztai affair also affect the public confidence in GM crops. One of
the contributory factors to the public reaction to the Pusztai report
was undoubtedly the loss of public confidence in food safety following
the bovine spongiform encephalopathy(BSE) outbreaks.
Feb 4, 2015
48
Further issues have hit media that have not necessarily been
presented in a balanced way.

In 2004, the population of a village in the Philippines was reported to
have been struck down by a serious allergic reaction to Bt corn that
caused a range of symptoms. A debate developed to the validity of
this claim, some suggesting the villagers were being manipulated by
the anti-GM lobby and that cause of the sickness was a virus.
Other examples of concern in the media have been the contamination
of human food in 2000 with StarLink maize (Bt insect-resistant variety)
that had been licensed only for animal feed and not for human
consumption because of the possibility of allergic reactions.
Feb 4, 2015
49
Recently there has been a scare over non-transgenic rice
being contaminated with GM rice from trial crops. This has

happened in Chinese and US crops that were being imported
into the EU.
It is important to remember there is no evidence that GM
foods are any less safe than non-GM foods.
Feb 4, 2015
50
Feb 4, 2015
51
1.The Monarch butterfly affair

A paper in Nature by scientists at Cornell university, showing that the
larvae of Monarch butterflies fed on milkweed leaves covered in

pollen from Bt maize did not grow as well as those on control leaves.
Monarch larvae feed only on milkweed leaves, which are commonly
found in cultivated areas and other habitats, so even though they are
lepidopterans and therefore susceptible to the cry proteins produced
in Bt maize, there should be no direct risk from them eating the
maize plant.
However , there is the potential for them to come into contact with
pollen from GM maize, and this paper reported an attempt to test the
toxicity of GM maize pollen to the larvae.
Feb 4, 2015
52
The method was to dust the pollen from Bt maize on to milkweed in a
laboratory and feed these to Monarch caterpillers.

The larvae fed on Bt pollen-covered leaves ate less and grew more slowly
than controls on leaves dusted with non-GM pollen, or with no pollen.
The paper sparked off considerable public concerns, given that Monarch
butterfly is the one of North Americas most colourful and familiar natives.
As a consequence a major research collaborations between six groups in
the USA and Canada was funded to research the question of Bt pollen
toxicity in more detail and to investigate the likelihood of exposure of
Monarch caterpillars to Bt maize pollen under natural conditions.
Feb 4, 2015
53
There was a significant difference between the levels of expression of Bt
in pollen from event Bt176 and other events containing the same cry1Ab
gene.(1.1 to 7.1 g/g in Bt176, compared with 0.09 g/g in the other two
events).
Because the pollen-specific promoter used to regulate the expression of
one of the cry1Ab constructs in Bt176.
Pollen from Bt176 had an LD50(the median lethal dose) of the order of
100-400 grains/cm when tested on Monarch butterfly larvae, whereas other
two events showed no effect at concentrations of over 1600 grains/cm.
Since Bt176 is no longer available in US maize varieties , the overall conclusion
is that the risk to Monarch butterfly populations from current Bt maize varieties
is low.
Feb 4, 2015
54
2.THE PUSZTAI AFFAIR

In the mid-late 1990s ,tins of GM tomatoes and processed foods
containing GM soya were clearly lebelled and freely available on

the shelves of UK supermarkets.
Within the space of a year , most supermarkets had followed an
apparently huge public swing in public opinion against GM foods,
and had removed all genetically manipulated products from their
shelves.
One of the most influential factors for the swing was the
announcement on television by Dr. Pusztai of the Rowett Institute ,
Aberdeen, Scotland, in 1998, that GM potatoes caused intestinal
changes when fed to rats.
Feb 4, 2015
55
There was considerable confusion about the nature of his initials claims,
which were not immediately published in the peer-reviewed literature.

In the storm of publicity that followed , Dr. Pusztai was removed from his
job. The Royal Society reviewed the unpublished work at the Rowett
Institute, and published a report stating that the work was flawed.
However, this did little to allay public concerns about food safety and the
reliability of scientific advice in the aftermath of the bovine spongiform
encephalopathy(BSE) crisis in UK.
By the time the work was subsequently published as a research letter in
the Lancet in 1999, UK public concerns about GM food and the
environmental impact of GM crops had reached a peak, and the
supermarket shelves were being cleared of gm products.
Feb 4, 2015
56
The report itself concluded that feeding transgenic potatoes carrying the
snowdrop GNA gene to rats resulted in cell proliferation of the gastric

mucosa. This effect could be attributed to the presence of GNA , since GNA
added to normal potatoes had the same effect.
It was suggested that the viral origin of CaMV 35S promoter could, in some
way , be responsible for this transformational related toxicity.
In addition to The Royal Society report, a no. of critiques of the study have
been published, pointing the problems of of experimental design,
technique, and amount of data.
However , to date there have been no convincing reports of a change in
toxicity of plant material as a direct result of the act of genetic
transformation, or of the integration of the CaMV 35S promoter.
Feb 4, 2015
57
Nevertheless, the Pusztai affair catalysed a reappraisal of the
adequacy of food safety testing and regulations regarding GM

foods.
Feb 4, 2015
58
3.TERMINATOR GENE
TECHNOLOGY/TECHNOLOGY PROTECTION
Involves
three genes
SYSTEM(TPS)
Ribosome inactivating protein (RIP)gene encodes the production of
Ribosome inactivating protein or saporin. which if expressed, does not allow
protein synthesis to take place.
Cre (Recombinase gene) and the
Lox gene
The TPS genes are regulated by the Late Embryogenesis Abundant (LEA)
promoter.
Genes under the control of this promoter are
only transcribed (activated) during late embryogenesis when seeds are
developing.
Feb 4, 2015
59
Astra Zeneca were issued US Patent 5,808,034 in September
1998 to cover their own terminator-type technology.

It is the technology developed by the US Department of
Agriculture(USDA) and the Delta and Pine Land Co.(a cotton
and soybean breeder) that has attracted most publicity.
Most of this publicity, the vast majority of which was
unfavourable to say the least, stemmed from the involvement
of Monsanto in the saga following their attempts to acquire
Delta and Pine Land Co. and rights to the technology.
Feb 4, 2015
60
Terminator technology is described in US Patent 5,723,765(control of
plant gene expression) issued on 3rd march 1998, to the USDAs

Agricultural Research Service(ARS) and Delta and Pine Land Co.
The patent covers technology that was referred to as the Technology
Protection System(TPS). Three genes two from bacteria and one from
plant are introduced into self-pollinating plants in TPS.
The key to TPS technology is treatment of the seeds ,before sale,
with a compound (the inducer) that activates a molecular switch ,
which initiates a chain of events , culminating with the introduced
plant gene being activated shortly before the seed matures fully.
Feb 4, 2015
61
TPS was developed to protect the interests of seed companies and, it is claimed, to
protect the environment by preventing gene spread.

The seed companys investment in developing and breeding new crops would be
protected by preventing farmers from saving seed from one year to the next, thereby
avoiding paying for seed (or selling seed illegally).
Following widespread public concern and adverse publicity , the then chairman of
Monsanto, Robert B. Shapiro, wrote to the president the Rockefeller Foundation, Gordon
Conway, in 1999 informing him that Monsanto had no intention of marketing seeds
containing Terminator Technology.
In ,2000 United Nations convention on Biological Diversity recommended that
governments not approve Terminator for field tests or commercial use.This created what
is now known as an international moratorium, it was upheld and strengthened in March
2006.
Feb 4, 2015
62
Feb 4, 2015
63
Indian controversies
In India, genetically modified cotton yields
inMaharashtra,Karnataka, andTamil Nadu resulted in an

average 42% increase in yield in 2002, the first year of
commercial GMO cotton planting.
There was, however, a severe drought inAndhra Pradesh that
year, and the parental cotton plant used in the genetically
engineered variant was not suited to extreme dryness, so the
state saw no increase in yield. Drought-resistant variants were
developed and, with the substantially reduced losses to insect
predation, by 2011 88% of Indian cotton was genetically
modified.
Feb 4, 2015
64
Though disputed,the economic and environmental benefits of
genetically modified cotton in India to the individual farmer have

been documented.
A study from 2002 through 2008 on the economic impacts ofBt
cottonin India, published in the journalPNASin 2012, showed that
Bt cotton increased yields, profits, and living standards of
smallholder farmers.
However, recently cotton bollworm has been developing resistance
to Bt cotton. Consequently, in 2012 the state of Maharashtra
banned Bt cotton and ordered a socio-economic study of its use by
independent institutes.
Feb 4, 2015
65
Feb 4, 2015
66
Indian regulators cleared theBt brinjal, a genetically modified

eggplant, for commercialisation in October 2009. After
opposition by some scientists, farmers and environmental
groups, a moratorium was imposed on its release in February
2010 "for as long as it is needed to establish public trust and
confidence".
On 1 January 2013, a law came into effect that required all

packaged foods containing any genetically modified
organisms to be labelled as such. The Legal Metrology
(Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011 states that "every
package containing the genetically modified food shall bear
at the top of its principal display panel the letters 'GM.'
Feb 4, 2015
67
The rules apply to 19 products including biscuits, breads, cereals
and pulses, and a few others.The law faced criticism

fromconsumer rightsactivists as well as from the packaged-food
industry; both sides had major concerns that no logistical
framework or regulations had been established to guide
implementation and enforcement of the law.
On March 21, 2014, the Indian government revalidated 10 GMbased food crops and allowed field trials of GM food crops,
including wheat, rice, and maize
More recently, in India, an expert panel advising the Supreme
Court, recommended a 10-year moratorium of GM foods.
Feb 4, 2015
68
CONCLUSION
The following is the visionary counsel offered by Norman Borlaug on biotech
crops in 2005
Over the past decade, we have been witnessing the success of plant
biotechnology. This technology is helping farmers throughout the world
produce higher yield while reducing pesticide use and soil erosion. The
benefits and safety of biotechnology has been proven over the past decade
in countries with more than half the worlds population. What we need is
courage by the leaders of those countries where farmers still have no choice
but to use older and less effective methods. The Green Revolution and now
plant biotechnology are helping meet the demand for food production, while
preserving our environment for future generations.
Feb 4, 2015
69
The Impact of the 2013 World Food Prizes Recognition of
Biotechnologys Contribution to Food, Feed and Fiber Security:

Marc Van Montagu, Mary-Dell Chilton and Robert Fraley, who have
all made important contributions in their respective areas of crop
biotechnology.
Feb 4, 2015
70
REFERENCES
International service for acquisition of agri-biotech
applications(ISAAA), web link: www.isaaa.org

Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2013
by Clive James,
Losey, J. E., Rayor, L. S., and Carter, M.E.(1999) Transgenic
pollen harms monarch larvae. Nature 399, 214.
Horton, R. (1999) Genetically modified foods: absurd concern
or welcome dialogue? Lancet 354, 1314-1316
The StarLink case :issues for the future, web link:
http://pewagbiotech.org/resources/issuebriefs/starlink/starlink.pd
f
Feb 4, 2015
71
Rajya Sabha website : http://www.parliamentofindia.nic.in

Introduction to Plant Biotechnology By- H.S. Chawala
Wikipedia: www.wikipedia.com
Feb 4, 2015
72
THANK
YOU
Feb 4, 2015
73

Public Acceptance of Genetically Modified Crops

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Public Acceptance of Genetically Modified Crops

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

SUBMITTED BY:

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

GM stands for genetically modified.

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

Who produces the GM crops?

2008- Monsanto produced more than 90% of GM crops

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

environmentally friendly technology that reduces use of

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

ISSUES OF CONCERN(HUMAN HEALTH RISKS

antibiotic resistance markers and outcrossing.

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

Whether GM food should be opposed:

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

In USA there are issues, these seems greatest about cloning

animals and the safety of GM foods.

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

In the 18 year period 1996 to 2013, millions of farmers in

~30 countries worldwide, adopted biotech crops at

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

18 million farmers benefit from

In 2013, a record 18 million

2012, grew biotech crops remarkably, over 90%, or >16.5 million,

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

In addition to economic gains, farmers benefited enormously

from at least a 50% reduction in the number of insecticide

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

LEAD BIOTECH DEVELOPING

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

Brazil, continues to be the engine of

globally in 2013, increasing its hectarage of biotech crops

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

markers because plant transformation is very low-frequency event.

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

However ,concerns about food safety and lack of market acceptance

meant that this GM maize was never cultivated widely.

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

But transfer of antibioticresistance genes from plants to bacteria(for

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

HERBICIDE RESISTANCE AND SUPERWEEDS

resistance to herbicides as an alternative to antibiotic-resistance

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

In 2005 , it was reported that atleast 15 weedy species, including

ryegrass, bindweed, and goosegrass, were either naturally resistant

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)

DEPARTMENT OF PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY GKVK UAS(B)