In This Issue:

	Australian Farmers' Group Backs GM Crops		GM Canola to Increase Australian Farmers' Production
	GM Terminology Proposed		African Scientists' Statement on GM Food Aid
	FAO Lists Biotech Benefits and Concerns		Announcements:
	Regulatory Delays Affect GM Benefits		9th SEAAFSRE Regional Conference
	Antibiotic-Free Golden Rice		BioVision Forum in France
	EU Plant Biotech Researches Decline

AUSTRALIAN FARMERS' GROUP BACKS GM CROPS

The National Farmers' Federation (NFF) issued a statement strongly supporting genetically modified (GM) crops. In its position paper, NFF recognizes the potential of biotechnology, including gene technology, "as a valuable tool within agricultural production system".

NFF says the potential benefits of GM crops must not be overlooked and that Australian farmers stand to gain significant benefits from the use of these crops. "GM crops have the potential to reduce pesticide and herbicide use, increase water efficiency, tolerate adverse growing conditions and improve production yields", the paper said. But while potential benefits of GM crops are recognized, NFF advocates that producers should also understand and assess potential risks associated with the technology and implement appropriate strategies to manage such risks.

NFF clearly opposes any measures imposing barriers to the commercial release of GM crops that are scientifically proven safe and assessed by industry as favorable. Barriers to the commercial release of GM crops "may ultimately impede the ability of Australian farmers to remain competitive within the global market in the longer term".

"Farmers must be afforded choice in the method of production that best meets their business needs and best allows them to meet the expectations of markets", the paper said. "Any biotechnology regulatory system should not place unreasonable costs or burdens upon researchers and technology developers, or potential users or consumers of the product of biotechnology". NFF asserts that overall framework for the management of GM crops must clearly define the relationship between legislative requirements and industry expectations or standards.

NFF believes that agricultural biotech should be a top priority for both public and private sector research in Australia and calls for the government to develop an operating environment that encourages research and development of the technology up to the point of commercialization.

Other positions on biotechnology of the NFF are:

• The commercial introduction of GM crops must be market driven, where there is clear commercial justification for the release of such varieties.

• Regulations and systems implemented to underpin the introduction of GM crops should ensure that production decision of one farmer should not unreasonably impinge upon the ability of another farmer to produce a commodity meeting the requirements and expectations of their chosen market.

• Factual and relevant information must be provided to farmers and the broader community to allow informed judgments to be made on the value of biotechnology. Results of field trials should be properly communicated to farmers.

• Maintain realistic and practical policy on food labeling that will allow consumers to make conscious decisions on the food they consume.

For more about NFF's Biotechnology Position Statement, visit http://www.nff.org.au/
pages/sub/biotechnology_position.pdf

GM TERMINOLOGY PROPOSED

Failure to establish explicit terminology to categorize various applications of gene technology in breeding have contributed to skepticism and rejection by many consumers. So says Kaare Nielsen of the Norwegian Institute for Gene Ecology.

In a paper published in Nature Biotechnology (March 2003, Vol. 21), Nielsen proposed categories for organisms currently designated as transgenic or genetically modified. These are intragenic (within genome), famigenic (species in the same family), linegenic (unrelated species), and xenogenic (laboratory-designed genes).

The categories are defined by their biological relevance, reflecting the level of genetic relatedness between the donor and the recipient organisms. This indicates the broad potential for the engineered trait to evolve spontaneously, the paper explained.

Nielsen says that "the extent to which transgenic organisms differ from traditionally bred organisms underlines much of the controversy surrounding the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The proposed terms, he avers, will hopefully permit a more precise communication of the sources of genetic variability used in gene technology-based breeding.

Visit http://www.nature.com/naturebiotechnology for the full paper.

FAO LISTS BIOTECH BENEFITS AND CONCERNS

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has released a feature on agricultural biotechnology saying that the field has both benefits and issues of concern.

"FAO recognizes that genetic engineering has the potential to help increase production and productivity in agriculture, forestry and fisheries," says FAO's Statement on Biotechnology. "It could lead to higher yields on marginal lands in countries that today cannot grow enough food to feed their
people." However, it "is also aware of the concern about the potential risks posed by certain aspects of biotechnology". These risks fall into two basic categories: the effects on human and animal health and the environmental consequences."

FAO lists several potential benefits of crop biotech for agricultural productivity. These include better resistance to stress, more nutritious staple foods, more productive farm animals for the environment, and more food from less land. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs), according to FAO might reduce the environmental impact of food production and industrial processes, and help rehabilitate damaged or less-fertile land.

Among the potential benefits for human health are investigation of diseases with genetic fingerprinting, vaccines and medicines, and identification of allergenic genes.

FAO likewise mentions potential negative effects on the environment that have been raised. Some of these are that genes can end up in unexpected places or mutate; "sleeper" genes could be accidentally switched on and active genes could become "silent"; interaction with wild and native populations; and impact on birds, insects and soil biota.

The United Nations agency also cites potential negative effects on human health and potential socio-economic effects. The latter includes loss of farmers' access to plant material, and the impact of "terminator" technologies.

For more information on FAO, visit their website at http://www.fao.org/biotech/index.asp

REGULATORY DELAYS AFFECT GM BENEFITS

Ingo Potrykus, inventor of the vitamin A-enriched Golden Rice, says that although production of the rice is solved, regulatory delays would prevent Asians from benefiting from the technology. He says that it would take about 3-4 years for the Golden Rice to make it through the regulatory procedures.

The chair of the International Humanitarian Board for Golden Rice adds that he is working with regulatory agencies of the Asian countries who want to distribute Golden Rice to try and coordinate a harmonized regulatory approach to the approval process. "My task is to find a unified approach," he says. Governments have indicated their financial support for making Golden Rice available to farmers, but this depends on overcoming the regulatory obstacles.

Meanwhile, the fate of agri-biotech in Australia and New Zealand "is clearly in the hands of regulators in relation to the release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs)," says the authors of a new report.

Researchers Kelvin Hopper and Lundal Thorburn wrote the 2002 BioIndustry Review - Australia and New Zealand and came out with the following challenges for agri-biotechnology:

• Public acceptance/awareness of GMOs, supported by broader understanding of what GMOs are;

• Development of public and political understanding that biotechnology is much broader than GMOs and can be used beneficially in many agricultural areas; and

• Development of commercial business models that enable agbiotech firms to have freedom to operate within the existing IP framework.

Email khopper@aoris.com.au for additional information.

ANTIBIOTIC-FREE GOLDEN RICE

A research team led by Swapan Datta of the International Rice Research Institute has developed vitamin A-enriched rice without using an antibiotic resistance marker. It expresses pro-vitamin A and could help address the major problems associated with vitamin A deficiency in Southeast Asia.

The team used a cestrum yellow leaf curling virus promoter (CMP) to drive expression of the pmi (phophomannose isomerase) gene, which was then used to select transgenic plants.

The public still has negative perceptions on the use of antibiotic resistance genes in transgenic plants. "Use of any non-antibiotic gene as a selectable marker may sound better for public acceptance of GM-foods," says Datta.
The team was able to achieve useful levels of carotenoid in the rice grains which are practical for enhancing vitamin A levels in human diet.

Introduction of the GM rice, according to the team, may still take 4-6 years before it reaches the farmers' fields.

The paper, "Bioengineered 'golden' indica rice cultivars with ß-carotene metabolism in the endosperm with hygromycin and mannose selection systems" appears in the Plant Biotechnology Journal 1(2).

EU PLANT BIOTECH RESEARCHES DECLINE

The Joint Research Centre (JRC) states that recent findings show that researches on plant biotechnology in the European Union (EU) has dropped by 76% since 1998. This decline in the number of researches conducted is due to the 1999 decision of the EU Council of Environment Ministers to block any new commercial release of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Another factor is the widespread and outright tendency of the European public to reject GMOs.

As a result, the JRC report shows that European small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) scale down their researches, while large firms continue their research and commercialization of innovative agri-biotech products in other countries. Moreover, R&D projects in agricultural biotechnology is cancelled within the EU due to three factors, namely: the unclear legal situation in the EU; the low consumer acceptance of GM food; and the uncertain future markets for GMOs. The report also stipulates that in this context of uncertainties, many GMOs may request authorization in the EU for import and processing only.

The report entitled "Review of GMOs Under Research and Development and in the Pipeline in Europe," was prepared by Karine Lheureux, Monique Libeau-Dulos, Hans Nilsagard, Emilio Rodriquez Cerezo of the JRC-IPTS, EC; Klaus Menrad and Martina Menrad of Fraunhofer ISI, Germany; and Daniel Vorgrimler of the University of Stuttgart-Hohenheim.

The aim of the report is to outline which GM plants are most likely to request authorization for marketing (to be grown or to be imported) in the EU in the next decade. The focus of the report is on cultivated GM plants used for seed, food, feed, industrial purposes, and medicine.

Other major findings of the report are:

• Other factors such as changes in the regulatory framework, acceptance of GMOs by consumers, and market opportunities might significantly influence the pipeline proposed for new commercial GM varieties.

• In the next decade, the range and quality of genetic modifications in crops and the numbers of new products likely to seek regulatory approval will be greater.

• The European Commission is studying mechanisms for the co-existence of GM and non-GM crops. The crops most likely to request authorization for marketing in Europe are: maize, oilseed rape, potatoes, tomatoes, sugar beet, and cotton.

See the full report at http://www.jrc.es/gmoreview.pdf.

GM CANOLA TO INCREASE AUSTRALIAN FARMERS' PRODUCTION

By using genetically modified (GM) canola, Australian farmers can produce up to A$135 million (US$81 million) more canola and wheat. This was according to a report compiled by the Melbourne University's School of Agriculture and Food Systems. The author of the report, Robert Norton, states that an extra 200,000 hectares of canola, would be grown if a genetically altered variety was available. Canola is Australia's third largest crop.

Norton also reports that canola yields would increase up to 9%, with production as high as 295,000 tons annually. Likewise, wheat production can also increase up to 20% or 64,000 tons a year, as canola is often used as a rotation crop with wheat. In addition to this, GM canola would also lessen the use of triazine, a dangerous chemical, by 640 tons per year.

The author further stated that "the scenarios suggest significant economic and environmental advantages from the introduction of new GM herbicide-tolerant canola varieties. Increased production can also be achieved through better integrated weed management and soil conservation practices. Farmers would also be able to sow their crops earlier and have better control over weeds such as wild radish and wild mustard."

If approved, GM canola would be the first genetically altered food crop approved for use in Australia. GM cotton and carnations are also currently grown.

For more details about the report email rnorton@unimelb.edu.au.

AFRICAN SCIENTISTS' STATEMENT ON GM FOOD AID

"The rejection of GM food by some African countries is not based on scientific data evidence of harm to human beings, animals or the environment", says the statement issued by African scientists clarifying their stand on GM food aid in Southern Africa.

This statement was issued to clarify the matter from a scientific perspective since the numerous debates on the severe famine facing Southern African countries that have been featured in the international media have not featured the position of African scientists in this critical issue.

African scientists assert that Southern African governments may not have consulted local scientists and communities and that their decisions to refuse GM food aid have been influenced by the anti-GM lobby groups. "It is unethical and inhuman to play politics with the lives of people under the pretext that the food aid is unsafe because it is GM food", says the statement.

To date, the famine in South Africa has been threatening the lives of 13 million people and over 300,000 are facing near-death due to starvation and the various governments' decisions to refuse the food aid primarily because it is GM.

The statement concludes with the African scientists' stand for "the proper introduction of GM crops based on international protocols, and the responsible deployment of GM crops in Africa under the Global International Biosafety Protocol and National Biosafety Regulations and Guidelines."

The full statement can be downloaded from the A Harvest Biotechnology Foundation International (AHBFI) website at http://www.ahbfi.org/biotech/newscenter.asp.

ANNOUNCEMENTS:

9th SEAAFSRE REGIONAL CONFERENCE

The 9th regional conference of the Southern and Eastern African Association for Farming Systems Research-Extension (SEAAFSRE) will be held on September 29 to October 3, 2003. Abstracts in line with the conference theme, "Moving beyond doing good research and extension to making a difference to the lives of resource-constrained farmers and the rural poor," are currently invited for submission to: jeff.mutimba@africaonline.co.ug. For further information concerning the symposium, email fopio@naro-ug.org.

BIOVISION FORUM IN FRANCE

BioVision - the World Life Sciences Forum will take place in Lyon, France from April 8 to 11, 2003. To complement BioVision, Biosquare, the first bio business convention will also take place. For more information, visit: http://www.lifescienceinra.com.