Keith, The postings interesting; especially the
writings of Professor Emeritus Joe Cummins. See
earlier work at:
http://www.mindfully.org/GE/Plant-Pesticides-Joe-Cummins.htm
Last week, I took the liberty to contact Professor
Cummins to ask permission to quote his work on my JTF
posting titles "Overview of GMO Risks - CaMV35S
promotor...".
He's excellent. I've been in touch with him previously, a few years
ago. Since then I've followed his work at the Institute of Science in
Society:
http://www.i-sis.org.uk
... and at SANET, where he's a regular contributor - the Sustainable
Agriculture Network Discussion Group:
http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html
I've done quite a lot of cross-posting between the Biofuel list and
SANET, there's a lot of common ground. I think quite a few people
belong to both lists now.
He give me permission and also impressed with JTF
website. He encouraged all of us to continue studying
the issues and risks of GMO plants and GMO germplasm.
I plan to give an informal PowerPoint at my local
library.
Good for you!
I think I now understand after reading many
of the articles and research posted on various public
domains.
Well, it doesn't end. Something worth saying though, that I've
pointed out here before, is that GM still is a very promising
technology, but not in the hands of the likes of Monsanto, as is very
obvious. With their slant on things and their history, we don't need
any more Brave New Worlds brought to us by the Monsanto's and Dow's
of this world any more than we need a 21st Century sponsored by Big
Oil. It's to be hoped that the fully justifiable public outcry
against Monsanto's antics with GMOs aren't going to permanently
discredit the technology in the public eye and put it out of bounds.
I think the same applied to nanotech.
This publication by ETC with the Dag Hammarskjold Foundation, on the
technological challenges of the 21st Century, sets the scene well.
It's very good, covers GE, nanotech and more:
ETC Century: Erosion, Technological Transformation, and Corporate
Concentration in the 21st Century
http://etcgroup.org/article.asp?newsid=159
Best wishes
Keith
--- Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The Institute of Science in Society
>
> Science Society Sustainability
> http://www.i-sis.org.uk
>
> ISIS Press Release 20/01/05
>
> GM Cotton that People Forgot
>
> GM cotton has aroused relatively little resistance
> outside the Third
> World for the simple reason that it is wrongly
> perceived to be a
> non-food crop. <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Prof. Joe
> Cummins and
> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Dr. Mae-Wan Ho report
>
> A longer, <http://www.i-
> sis.org.uk/full/GMCTPFFull.php>fully referenced
> version is posted on
> ISIS members' website. <http://www.i-
> sis.org.uk/membership.php>Details here.
>
> GM cotton a triple-threat
>
> Cotton is a triple-treat (or threat) crop because it
> produces fibre,
> food and feed. Fibre is recovered from the flower
> bolls, while the
> seeds are pressed to yield oil for the kitchen and
> cake for animal
> feed. Monsanto Corporation has been a major source
> of genetically
> modified (GM) cotton lines.
>
> Bollgard cotton
>
> A line called Bollgard was first marketed in the
> United States in
> 1995, followed in later years by Canada, Australia,
> China, Argentina,
> Japan, Mexico, South Africa, India and the
> Philippines. In 2002, an
> enhanced line called Bollgard II was approved in the
> United States,
> Canada, Australia, Japan and the Philippines.
>
> Bollgard II was made from Bollgard simply by
> inserting into the plant
> cells a gene cassette containing a Bacillus
> thuringiensis (Bt) toxin,
> Cry2Ab, different from the one in the original
> Bollgard, Cry1Ac. From
> the transformed cells, a line containing the two
> different Bt toxin
> genes were selected. Two toxin genes were more than
> twice as
> effective in pest control than the original Bollgard
> and
> theoretically, far less likely to allow insect
> resistant mutants to
> evolve.
>
> The Bt toxin genes, unlinked, are reported to be
> driven by different
> versions of the cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) 35S
> promoter: that of
> crylAc has a duplicated enhancer, while that of
> cry2Ab has the
> enhancer and also the leader sequence from petunia
> heat shock 70 gene
> as an extra booster. CrylAc is accompanied by the
> kanamycin
> resistance marker gene, nptII, while cry2Ab is
> accompanied by the
> marker gene uidA that produces a staining reaction.
> CrylAc confers
> resistance to lepidopteran-insects in general, and
> cotton bollworm,
> tobacco budworm, and pink bollworm, in particular.
> Upon ingestion of
> this protein by susceptible insects, feeding is
> inhibited, eventually
> resulting in death.
>
> The Bt toxin genes are both synthetic versions of
> the natural genes
> in the soil bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis var.
> kurstaki, with
> coding sequences modified to improve expression in
> plants. The
> synthetic genes have not been subject to evolution
> and their
> recombinational and other properties relevant to
> safety are unknown
> and untested.
>
> Thus, Bolgard II has two separate transgene
> insertions with some
> regions of DNA homology (similarity). Such regions
> could act as
> recombination signals for somatic or meiotic
> recombination, leading
> to drastic chromosome rearrangements. The claim to
> genetic stability
> reported in the governmental reviews is simply the
> finding that the
> insertions segregate according to Mendelian ratios
> in a few crosses
> and does not consider molecular and chromosomal
> instability
> associated with inter- and intra-chromosomal
> recombination at sites
> of DNA homology. Signs of instability and other
> failures have been
> observed in the field (see "<http://www.i-
> sis.org.uk/AAGMC.php>Australia adopts GM cotton" and
>
> "<http://www.i-sis.org.uk/GMCFATW.php>GM cotton
> fiascos around the
> world", this series).
>
> Seed distribution is controlled by the licenses of
> the patentee, and
> seed lines can, and should be screened at that point
> for
> translations, duplications or deficiencies resulting
> from intra- and
> inter chromosomal recombination.
>
> Furthermore, in evaluating safety to humans and the
> environment, the
> toxin proteins are frequently isolated from liquid
> culture of the
> bacteria to avoid having to carry out the more
> expensive isolation of
> the toxins from cotton plants. As the toxin
> transgenes are synthetic
> approximations of the natural genes and the toxin
> proteins are not
> identical, the test results with bacterial proteins
> do not truly
> represent the impact of the toxins from the
> transgenic cotton plants.
>
> Some feeding studies indicated that Bollgard II
> cotton controlled
> insect pests more effectively. One research group
> predicted that the
> need for supplemental insecticides would be reduced
> or eliminated for
> lepidopteran pests. Another research group
> indicated, however, that
> insect-resistance to Bollgard II could best be
> controlled with an
> overspray of chemical insecticide. Further studies
> showed that
> resistance to the two Cry toxins seemed to evolve
> simultaneously,
> raising considerable doubt over the efficacy of gene
> stacking in
> delaying insect resistance. Studies reported by
> researchers from
> Monsanto Corporation showed that the Cry1Ac toxin
> and the Cry2Ab
> toxin were produced in equivalent amounts in
> Bollgard II, but that
> Cry2Ab was the larger contributor to insect
> toxicity, and they
> suggested a relatively simple resistance monitoring
> policy. It seems
> likely that chemical pesticides will be needed to
> combat insect
> resistance arising in Bollgard II after all (see
> "<http://www.i-
> sis.org.uk/AAGMC.php>Australia adopts GM cotton",
> this series).
>
> The regulation of Bollgard II has been ‘fast and
> loose'. Bollgard II
> was supposed to address the major concern of
> resistance management,
> but research is already indicating that gene
> stacking is not a
> panacea and that chemical pesticide overspray will
> be required to
> cope with developing resistance.
>
> Round up Ready Cotton
>
> Roundup Ready cotton, like Bollgard I and II, is
> also used for fibre,
> food and feed. Roundup Ready (rr cotton) was first
> marketed in the
> United States in 1995, and in later years, in
> Canada, Japan,
> Argentina, South Africa, Australia, the Philippines
> and in 2004, in
> China.
>
> The herbicide tolerant cotton marketed as rr cotton
> was
=== message truncated ===
_______________________________________________
Biofuel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel
Biofuel at Journey to Forever:
http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html
Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable):
http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
