What the GMO technology bringing about
Masaharu
Kawata
(Division
of Biological Science, School of Science, Nagoya University)
Amounting facts and fears about the dangers of technology are
now challenging the myth that GMO can feed the expected population explosion of
the future world. The article
entitled "Evidence of the Magnitude and Consequences of the Roundup Ready
Soybean Yield Drag from University Based Varietal Trials in 1998" was published
by Dr. Charles Benbrook July 1999 in USA.
It summarizes yield performance tests carried out in over forty places in
eight states in the USA (Illinois,
Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Ohio, South Dakota, Wisconsin) in 1998 on
herbicide tolerant soybeans developed by Monsanto, the biggest GMO company in
the world.
The
researchers of the eight state universities compared yields of many strains of
Roundup Ready Soybeans and their sister strains not bio-engineered in various
geological conditions. This is the most impartial data available to date. The results were unexpected and
surprising . Almost all data showed
that the yields of Round up Ready strains are about six percent on average less
than those of the original conventional sister strain. The herbicide tolerant gene from soil
bacteria inserted into the genome of soybean results in a disadvantage to
farmers and consumers. Only the Monsanto would get profit from the genetically
modified crops because farmers have to buy expensive seeds and the herbicide
together. In fact, about 60 % of
the Soybean planted in USA in 1999 was Roundup Ready, and 54% of the herbicides
used in USA in 1999 contained glyphosate, the active ingredient of the Roundup
herbicide of Monsanto Co. This market domination by Monsanto arose in 1996 when
they began to put the genetically engineered crops on the market.
Consumers also suffer from the Roundup Ready Soybean, because
the regulatory standard of the residues of glyphosate in soybean was elevated
suddenly to 20 ppm from the former 6 ppm this April in Japan due to political pressure
by the US government and Monsanto.
The US would not able to export these Soybeans if the regulatory
standards of foreign countries were
not changed.
Our
fears became realized when Dr. L.Hardel and Dr.M.Eriksson of Sweden reported a
study showing that the herbicide glyphosate can cause a cancer, Non-Hodgkin's
lymphoma, in the Journal of the American Cancer Society (Cancer, vol85, p1353,
March 1999). This dangerous
liberalization of the regulatory standards will affect not only Japan, but all
countries which import American soybeans.
The
report by Dr. Benbrook gives a warning on the future of US agriculture that the
amount of agrochemical usage is increasing in the USA by adopting Roundup Ready
Soybean in opposition to the argument by Monsanto and scientists promoting GMO. The extensive use of a single herbicide
like Roundup in the field would facilitate the appearance of tolerant weeds,
which in consequence would make farmers lose the means of suitable weed
management in the USA. These worrying
symptoms have already been caused in Canada in 1999. Mr. Tony Huether, a farmer of Alberta, Canada, planted three
kinds of herbicide resistant canola species containing Roundup Ready in 1997 in
his field. After two years, a
doubly resistant weed appeared, and after three years super-weeds, tolerant to
all three herbicides, emerged (reported by Mary MacArther, Camrose bureau,
February 10, 2000). The
possibility was discussed two years ago by American scientist Dr. Joy Bergelson
as gene flow from bio-engineered crops to weeds by pollination (Nature,
September 3 1998).
No good
yields of Roundup Ready Soybean and Bt corn that carry insecticidal genes
have been reported by other research in the USA in
these two years. The GMO may not only
not help to increase future food supply, but also impose serious impacts on the
environment and conventional agriculture.
The most
radical and important problem of the genetic engineering of plants lies in the
technical difficulty of determining the location for foreign gene insertion in
the host genome. To this day no means,
whether using Agrobacterium T-DNA, chemical or electrical poring of the cell
membrane, can locate the exact insertion site. The random insertion of a foreign gene will affect
various domestic gene activities, as inactivation of structural genes,
promoters or enhancer sequences, causing metabolic influences in the host
cell. The yield drag of the RR
soybeans may be an example of the effect, an agronomist of Nebraska University
Roger Elmore says (IANR News Service, University of Nebraska) after his
two-year study. Another example of
metabolic change by inserting a glyphosate tolerant gene into a conventional
soybean strain is increased heat sensitivity of the RR soybean (W.K. Vencil et
al, Brighton Conference of British Crop Protection Council, 20 November
1999). The stem cracked almost 100
% when the soil temperature rose to more than 45℃. One result may be the
over-production of Lignin in the RR soybean compared with the
conventional strain by the insertion of a foreign gene. Then the RR strain may not be suitable
for growing in hot areas like countries in the south.
The
second problem of this technology is changes to and instability of the
nucleotide sequence, rearrangement of the inserted DNA sequence in the host
genome during gene engineering. It may cause unexpected results such as the
production of allergy proteins or other toxic substances. In this regard, Monsanto announced on 13
May 2000 that they found two rogue DNA fragments in the Roundup Ready Soybean
genome in addition to the CP4EPSPS gene that they insisted was the only gene
inserted into the soybean gene since 1992 when the process was approved in the USA. The DNA fragments are contained in all
strains of Roundup Ready Soybeans that Monsanto has ever distributed, but
"no actual harmful effects have been reported" according to Monsanto. However, this statement itself demonstrates
the uncertainty of gene engineering.
In England reported concern has been a 50% increase in the incidence of
soybean allergies in the past year, and the increased imports of the GM soybeans
is suspected (Dairy Express, 12 March 1999).
Uncertainty
may also come from recombination between prokaryotic and eukaryotic genes that does
not normally occur in nature. The
genetic code translation systems differ a little between organisms. Then, some amino acids in the product
proteins may be altered from the presumed DNA sequence of original
organism. Such a case was reported
for human insulin-like growth hormone produced in Echerichia coli, in which the
original Arginine code in human protein was translated into Lysine in E.coli
cell (R. Seetharam et al, BBRC., vol. 155,p518, 1988). This experiment was reported by
researchers of Monsanto Institute.
The
third problem of GMO technology may be the presence of an unnecessary gene of
antibiotic resistant trait from E.coli plasmid in the inserting vehicle
plasmid. This is required for
multiplication of the foreign gene in E.coli, and for selection of the
recombined plant cells from many untransformed residual cells which are killed
by antibiotics in the test tube before planting in the field. This technique is necessary to facilitate the efficiency of the process
but is entirely unnecessary to the
transformed plant and dangerous to the humans and animals that consume the
product. The corn or potatoes we
have to eat everyday then carry the antibiotic resistance gene and its
products. Such food is antibiotic tolerant. It may cause serious effects when we need antibiotics to
cure disease. A German
entomologist, Professor H.H.Kaatz found herbicide tolerant enterobacterium and
yeast in the digestive tract of honeybees that were fed pollen of herbicide
tolerant canola (The Guardian May 29, 2000). This suggests that the enterobacterium of human and
livestock can develop antibiotic tolerant or herbicide- resistant properties by
eating GMO foods.
The environmental
impacts of genetically engineered plants have been demonstrated by many such
examples during these three years.
Most impressive study was reported by the researchers of Cornel
University, USA, last year, who found lethal effects of Bt corn pollen
(carrying an insecticidal gene) on larvae of non-targeted butterfly, Monarch
which is a very common insect in Northern USA (Nature, vol399, p214, 20 May
2000). Some other groups also confirmed these facts. This unexpected effect will decrease the biological
diversity in future, considering the vast planting areas of such crops in the
world. Another interesting study
is that of Dr. Joy Bergelson (Nature, September 3 1998). She had created two kind of mutant
plants of Arabidopsis thaliana, frequently used for plant genetics. One is a chemically
induced mutant, resistant to the herbicide chlorsulphuron in which an enzyme
acetolactate synthase (Csr1-1) is mutated. She then isolated the gene and
inserted it in the wild strain by genetic engineering. Two bio-engineered
strains were isolated, both of which are herbicide resistant like the original
mutant. These herbicide tolerant
strains were planted together with the sensitive wild strain in a field. Abnormal fertility was observed when
she collected and analyzed the herbicide resistant seeds (100000 pieces) from the
wild plant. The pollinated seeds by mutant and transgenic males were
compared. The male genes came from
chemically induced mutant fathers (0.3 %) and transgenic fathers (5.98%). Usually the Arabidopsis thaliana
is self-pollinating. However the experiment clearly shows that the transgenic
plant dramatically increased its outcrossing rates, 20 times that of the
induced mutant. This fact itself
means that genetic engineering is radically different from the natural mutation
or natural gene exchange (homologous recombination) that has long been used in
breeding plants and animals. In
addition, this warns that a gene flow from transgenic crops will occur to
weeds, by which the potential usefulness of agrochemicals might be lost.
The
genetic engineering of crops interfere with evolution by jumping the walls between
biological species. Nature does
not ordinarily permit the mixing of genes from very different species, genus or
families. However genetic
engineering easily recombines easily their genes. Both the Roundup Ready gene and Bt gene (insecticidal gene)
are dissected from soil bacteria and inserted into bean and corn plants. The gene escape from these crops will
change the genetic composition of weeds and similar genus of wild plants. A reverse example was found when an antibiotic- resistant gene was
transferred from a sugar beet plant to soil bacteria.
Biological diversity changes are now occurring due to
artificial technology and human requirements, not by the process of natural
selection that developed the biological world on earth. We do
not know yet what problems artificial gene exchange by gene technology will
bring about.