Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Using accelerated genetics to improve food: biological and social realities
Professor Caitilyn Allen
UW-Madison Dep’t of Plant Pathology
FRI-IFSH Food waste and sustainability: strategies to improve food safety, food security, and nutrition
Overview
• What are Accelerated Genetics?
• How Are GM Foods Produced?
• What are the Biological Risks of GM Foods?
• Disconnect Between Real & Perceived Risks of GM Foods
• How GM Foods Improve Sustainability & Reduce Waste
• What’s Next? Undetectable gene editing with CRISPR
What are Accelerated Genetics?
Genetically Modified Organisms…. GMOs
What are Accelerated Genetics?
Genetically Modified Organisms….
Frankenfood!
How Are GM Foods Produced?
The hardest part: identify a trait to modify
• Higher yield?• Stress tolerance?• Improved nutritional quality?• Better processing traits?• Longer shelf life?
Find gene(s) encoding the trait & move them into a crop
Using a gene gun to move DNA encoding the desired trait into plant cells
Each cell can give rise to a whole new plant
A plant can be regenerated from one transformed cell
Every cell in the plant contains the new DNA
This plant is a GMO, or transgenic plant
Transgenic crops contain one or a few genes of known function
Big Positives:
• Technical process is very fast• Results are highly predictable
Big Negatives:
• Regulatory process is costly & slow (can exclude nonprofits)• Social acceptance: consumers are suspicious of GMOs
• Social acceptance: consumers are suspicious of GM foods
If GM foods are controversial, why not just improve crops with traditional breeding?
Traditional breeding has already changed many crop plants dramatically
Traditional breeding has already changed many crop plants dramatically
Traditional breeding has already changed many crop plants dramatically – not always for the better
- Breeding for color and shelf-life has reduced flavor (tomatoes, apples)
- Breeding for shipping tolerance has reduced nutrition (iron in spinach becomes nutritionally unavailable with increased oxalic acid)
If GM foods are controversial, why not just improve crops with traditional breeding?
• Traditional breeding is very slow (years to generations)
• Involves combining whole genomes of two parent plants
• Often introduces undesirable or unknown traits
Breeding using wild relatives can introduce:
• Disease resistance• Insect resistance• Better color, flavor• Hardiness (to cold, drought...)• Many other traits
Wild relatives can also introduce toxins or allergens
• Ex: Wild potato relatives contain toxic alkaloids
• Need years of backcrosses to remove these traits
• Impossible if species are not closely related
http://hila.webcentre.ca/research/teosinte/teosinte_hopi_blue.jpg
Transgenic technology can change traits very precisely:
• Adding 2 bacterial genes to increase Vitamin A in Golden Rice
• Deleting 1 apple gene to make fruits that don’t bruise or brown
History of GM Products in the US:
1982 FDA approves Humulin, human insulin synthesized by genetically engineered bacteria
1992 USDA approves Flavr Savr long shelf-life GM tomato
1995 EPA approves GM corn that makes BT organic insecticide
1996 Herbicide-tolerant “Round Up-Ready” crops introduced
2017 ~75% of the food in an average grocery store contains GMOs
Adoption of GM Crops in the US 1996-2018
USDA-ARS Economic Research Service (2018) Recent Trends in GE Crops
What are the Biological Risks of GM Foods?
What are the Biological Risks of GM Foods?
We have longitudinal population-wide data:
Number of adverse effects, illnesses, or deaths associated with the widespread human or animal consumption of GM food over the past 22 years:
What are the Biological Risks of GM Foods?
We have longitudinal population-wide data:
Number of adverse effects, illnesses, or deaths associated with the widespread human and animal consumption of GM food over the past 22 years:
- 0 -
Independent scientific analyses agree that current GMO crops are safe to eat:
• UN World Health Organization (WHO) • U.S. National Academy of Sciences• American Medical Association (AMA)• American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS)• The European Union• French Académie des Sciences • American Society for Cell Biology• Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities• Genetic Literacy Project (Non-profit, non-partisan)• And many others….
Disconnect Between Real & Perceived Risks of GM Foods
• Food is personal; food & farming have great cultural significance
• Fear or suspicion of eugenics, and of large corporations (Monsanto Effect)
• Suspicion of new or unfamiliar technologies; the unfamiliar seems riskier than the familiar
• Confirmation bias: I trust organic foods, so I distrust GM crops
With words:
July 2016
US Congress passes watered-down law requiring labeling of GM foods
July 2016
US Congress passes watered-down law requiring labeling of GM foods
With QR Code:
Anti-GM food groups object:
The counter-label:
What do you think, Prof. Allen?
Transgenic crop production is not inherently dangerous
In many ways, it’s just a faster and much more precise version of traditional crop breeding
Like most technologies, it can be applied in dangerous or dumb ways
Case-by-case regulation is needed
Anti-GM Food Attitudes Have Global Effects
Case Study #1 Bananas:
World’s 4th most important food crop
Less than 10% are grown for export; 90% are locally consumed
Sub-Saharan Africa grows 1/3 of the world’s bananas
Bananas supply 30-60% of daily calories in Uganda, Rwanda & Burundi
Bananas are also a major source of cash income
2001: a new banana disease appeared in Africa:
Banana Xanthomonas Wilt, or BXW
Impact of BXW
53% production loss
~$8 billion over past 10 years
Cooking banana prices up by 40% in Uganda
A dying banana plantation is a family catastrophe:
• Food insecurity
• Internal migration
• Kids leave school
An NGO, the IITA, made a BXW-resistant transgenic banana by adding two genes from sweet pepper
These plants were fullyresistant to BXW in the field
(Tripathi 2014 Nature Biotechnology)
GM (left) & control (right) bananas
Tripathi 2014 Nature Biotechnology
10 years after the first field tests, Ugandan farmers are still waiting for approval of disease-resistant transgenic banana plants
“If people are going to die of hunger today, then we cannot be talking about the future. If GM is going to provide a solution, then as Africans we need to embrace it.”-Arthur Kamenya, Ugandan banana farmer
Case Study #2: Papaya Trees resistant to Ringspot Virus (PRSV)
Case Study #2: Papaya Trees resistant to Ringspot Virus (PRSV)
- the worst papaya disease
- transmitted by aphid insects
PRSV appeared in Hawaii in 1992
Papaya yields fell 45% over the next 6 years
1998: Release of the genetically modified “Rainbow” papaya cultivar
- immune to PRSV because it silences the virus coat protein gene
Traditional vs. GM papaya
Papaya trees exposed to PRSVparent transgenic
Hawaiian papaya yields recovering after introduction of PRSV-resistant GM “Rainbow” trees
- 71% of Hawaiian papayas are now GM
- Significantly decreased pesticide use
- Consumers accept GM Papaya
What’s Next? - Gene editing with CRISPRNew technology changes just a few bits of DNA code: extremely precise
April 2018- USDA: “Crops created with gene editing are indistinguishable from products of crop breeding”
July 2018- EU court rules CRISPR plants must be regulated like conventional transgenic crops
Major problem for regulators: CRISPR is undetectable
The first major CRISPR crop?
Chocolate production employs 50 million people worldwide, generates >$100 billion
But…• 20-30% of all cacao pods are lost to disease
• Climate change will reduce cacao yields
M&M-Mars and U. California-Berkeley are using CRISPR to increase disease resistance & heat & drought tolerance of cacao trees
Will consumers accept this chocolate?
Thanks for your attention!