The gene of interest comes from the fern Pteris vittata, a plant that is 100 to 1000 times more resistant to arsenic than other species of plants. Jody Banks and David Salt, professors at Purdue University, determined the resistant genes by using yeast functional complementation. Essentially, they introduced thousands of different genes from the fern (since the fern’s genome was not sequenced) into yeast, which was not resistant to arsenic, and then exposed the yeast to arsenic. Yeast that survived had taken up the genes necessary for arsenic tolerance.

To validate the results found via yeast functional complementation, the researchers knocked out the resistance genes in fern plants and then exposed the plant to arsenic. With knocked out genes, the plant was unable to survive. The genes that Banks and Salt discovered are not present in flowering plants, but careful genetic modification of flowering plants could lead to arsenic resistance in flowering species (e.g. crop plants) as well.

Since the activity of the genes leads to the absorption of arsenic from the soil, plants with these genes could remove arsenic from polluted lands. After the fern absorbs the arsenic, it relocates the arsenic to vacuoles in its fronds, where the arsenic can do little to damage the plant or its surroundings.

Discussion Question: Do you think that arsenic-tolerance genes can be expressed similarly in flowering plants? What would be the advantage?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100608183044.htm

Journal Article: http://www.plantcell.org/cgi/content/abstract/tpc.109.069773v1

The two “psychedelic” genes that the scientists discovered not only influence the color of the leaves, but they also work together to move carbon throughout the plant. Carbohydrate transport is crucial in plants as it allows the proper distribution of nutrients from the roots to the flowers, meaning that these two genes are significant in plant growth and development. Careful manipulation of this pathway could yield great results in corn and other crops. Manipulating the pathway can bring about an increased efficiency in the production of biofuels by increasing corn biomass, while alteration in the pathways of other plants could lead to a multitude of benefits, such as drought-resistant plants or greater food production.

Discussion Question: What benefits (or consequences) can you foresee from the manipulation of “psychedelic” genes?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100607142215.htm

Journal Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100607142215.htm

At Purdue, they understand that soy serves a number of purposes that will only increase in the years to come. For this reason, they have put quite a bit of research and effort into finding ways to hone and improve the types of soybeans produced, and the way in which this is done.

Assistant professor of agronomy at Purdue University recently discovered the soybean gene that controls plant stem growth post-flowering. After a long pursuit to find a way to create new, more diverse types of soybeans, it seems that this discovery may be the critical find that many have anticipated.

The findings of this study show that manipulation of the Dt1 gene in soybean plants will allow farmers to grow both indeterminate and determine soybean plants, where previously they could plant indeterminate in the North and determinate in the South.

The details and further ramifications of the study are reported in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.

Discussion question: What are limitations on soybeans now? How might this discovery change the face of the American soybean industry?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100427142144.htm
Journal Article: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/04/20/1000088107

Fortunately enough for the billion-plus South Asians around the world in addition to countless other lentil lovers out there, a recent study conducted by Agricultural Research Service (ARS) scientists has discovered a new variety of lentils that has proven to be a richer source of protein, fiber, minerals, and vitamins than its predecessors.

This new form of lentil, known as Essex, was developed by George Vandemark and Fred Muehlbauer of the ARS and was chosen for public release from a pool of potential varieties due to its unparalleled yield.

In addition to this obvious benefit, it was also found that Essex has protein levels anywhere from 20 to 30 percent higher than other currently popular varieties of lentils.  Furthermore, a host of experiments have shown that Essex enjoys a symbiotic relationship with Rhizobium bacteria that have been found to be extremely efficient nitrogen fixers. How soon will this variety be available to the public, you may wonder? According to the research team at the ARS, Essex may be available for sale to growers as early as 2011. Here’s to biotechnology!

Discussion Question: share your thoughts on biotechnology and genetic engineering. Are you completely for the idea, or are you wary of potentially harmful side effects of this quickly developing technology.

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100316112454.htm

Scientific Article: http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/

Plants posses “pattern recognition receptors” (PRR’s) at part of their innate immune response system. PRR’s recognize the essential molecules in pathogens and aid the plant in destroying the invader. Until now, little research has been done in determining all the different PRR’s present among plants. Recently, however, Dr. Cyril Zipfel and his team at the Sainsbury Laboratory in Norwich, UK identified one specific PRR and used it to successfully confer broad-spectrum bacterial resistance in plants.

The team isolated a Brassica-specific PRR that recognizes bacteria and transformed it into tomato and Nicotania benthaminia plants.  When the transformed plants were tested under the influence of various pathogens, their resistance was significantly better than plants without the PRR gene. This transformation was crucial because it was conducted among plants from different families, showing the potential for conferring resistance to economically significant pathogens in the agricultural industry.

This study may lead to the recognition of other PRR’s and decrease in pesticide and fungicide use, with a potential to improve agricultural yields considerably. As an implication of this study, scientists have already started testing the transformation on plants such as apples, potatoes, and bananas.

Discussion question: What could be a potential negative impact of having all the same PRR’s among all plants?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100314150912.htm
Journal Article: http://www.nature.com/nbt/journal/v28/n4/abs/nbt.1613.html#/

A study from the National Research Council reports that many U.S. farmers growing genetically engineered (GE) crops experience substantial economic benefits,  including lower production costs, fewer pest problems, reduced use of pesticides, and higher crop yields.  This one of a kind report discloses new information on how GE crops actually affect all U.S. farmers, including farmers growing conventional or organic crops.

Nearly 14 years after the introduction of genetically engineered crops, more than 80 percent of current soybeans, corn, and cotton in the United States are genetically modified.  Most of these engineered crops have been selected to possess resistance to the herbicide glyphosate, in addition to producing a bacterium called Bacillus thurgiensis (Bt), which kills susceptible insect pests upon ingestion.

So what practices should farmers implement to ensure that these particular modifications do not negatively affect the environment?

According to the published study, farmers should adopt stronger management practices in order to sustain these modifications as benefits rather than adversities.  First, farmers growing herbicide-resistant crops should include a mix of herbicides instead of exclusively relying on glyphosate to eradicate weeds within crop areas.  This suggestion supersedes information stating that after the introduction of glyphosate resistant plant at least nine species of weeds in the U.S. have evolved a resistance to the widely used glyphosate.

While genetically engineered crops may negatively affect some aspects of the environment, they may actually have caused improvements in water quality.  Because insecticide use has declined since the introduction of GE crops, the insecticides lingering in the soil and waterways have declined as well.  Farmers growing these herbicide resistance plants also experience a decline in the need to till the soil for weeds; thus improving soil quality and water filtration, while reducing erosion.

Discussion Question: What other types of genetic modification to crops can you identify?  (For example: are there other specific types of resistance or toxin production?)

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100413112058.htm
Scientific Abstract: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12804#toc

While the rest of the class talked about how genetic engineering for animals or humans can lead to a slippery slope of limited biodiversity, I found myself writing about how genetically engineering plants saves money, provides food for the poor and makes agriculture a much more efficient system. I wish I had read the article we are going to talk about before my essay, since it speaks directly of genetic research ailing efficiency in choosing crops.

Grapes are one of the most lucrative crops. However, it takes at least three years for a seed to mature into a fruit-bearing plant.  Providing land, fertilizers, and water for three years is expensive. Imagine spending three years growing something and then realizing they are not the type of grapes you thought they were! This can lead to poor yield, and a heavy monetary loss.

With this in mind, a group of scientists lead by Gan-Yuan Zhong from the ARS Grape Genetics Research Unit in Geneva, New York, conducted a study to identify genetic markers for grape cultivars quickly and inexpensively. These genetic markers are supposed to indicate the desired phenotypes (visible traits we would like to have) in crops that can be used for selection.

The researchers began by looking for large scale polymorphisms that are similar across different breeds of grapes. They discovered a lot of single nucleotide polymorphisms, also known as SNPs that can be used to differentiate between the pinot noir and wild types, for example, or even distinguish between different wild type grapes.

Scientists expect this study will pave the way for developing methods to select other crops as well, allowing for lower cost crops and higher yields.

Discussion Question: What are single nucleotide polymorphisms?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/03/100323105954.htm
Research Article: http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0008219

As it turns out, the answer to the question concerning the source of the pollen may actually be “all of the above.”  According to an article by Claire Williams published in the American Journal of Botany, pine pollen can travel up to 1,800 miles over a short time period.

Through collection of loblolly pine pollen blown from the outer banks of North Carolina to the barrier islands, Williams unveiled that pine pollen traveling as far as 2,000 feet in the air and 25 miles off shore maintained viability and can still germinate.  Because loblolly pine provides more than 15 percent of the world’s timber, the findings of this study could have profound implications on the approval of transgenic pine tree growth.

With pollen that maintains the ability to germinate over long distances of travel, preventing the spread of transgenic pine traits to wild pine species would become nearly impossible.  For instance, a transgenic loblolly pine tree may have specifically engineered traits for drought tolerance and disease resistance; thus, upon travel of their pollen to a location of wild pines, the pollen will cross-pollinate with the wild species, making the wild tree now have traits for drought tolerance and disease resistance as well.

Although this study may mean bad news for transgenic pines, the viability of “far-flung” pollen may actually be advantageous for forests experiencing climate change.  With higher wind speeds and more frequent storms expected with human-induced climate change, pollen will travel greater distances from their source; therefore, the genes needed to adapt to warmer temperatures will have a better chance of integrating with populations lacking the genes.

Discussion Question: Considering that plants other than pine trees use wind pollination for reproducing, will this study prevent genetic modification of other populous plant species?  Can you name of any other plant species that might not be approved for genetic modification for fear of cross-pollination with wild species?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/04/100405091943.htm
Paper Abstract: http://www.amjbot.org/cgi/content/abstract/ajb.0900255v1?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=long+distance+pine+pollen&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&resourcetype=HWCIT

A proposition has been made to replace current native pine trees in plantation forests with a genetically modified form of eucalyptus trees. The original strain of these trees has become wildly successful in dominating the Australian timber industry and the hope is that this change will revolutionize the production speed of the American timber industry. This change is being fueled by a couple of the largest industry corporations namely, International Paper Co. and MeadWestvaco Corp.

There are some immediate fears that may prevent these corporations from making a speedy transition into these GM forests. Those are fears of introducing a large number of strong GM invasive species into America’s forests. It is possible that these trees may slowly overtake their native neighbors and leave us with only these GM trees as the bulk of our forest composition. However, the companies have taken this into consideration and as a solution are consulting with ArborGen LLC, a biotechnical engineering company. ArborGen has assured the industry companies that their plants will be genetically modified to be incapable of reproduction, freeze resistant and very efficient. However, doubts remain as to whether or not this inhibited reproduction system is ready to be responsibly implemented in the large scale.

There are many questions about how such a strong species can be completely sterilized 100% of the time, as well as other concerns regarding the land that will be consumed in the creation of these forests. However, the push for GM forestation is one that the industry sees as necessary if America’s timber industry is to compete with those of South America and Australia who have already made the switch to these sorts of forest plantations. In the coming months, the continuing debate over this issue will shed some light on the future of GM agriculture on American soil.

Discussion question: How might the corporate interests in this change create a monopoly in the industry?

Article link: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=eucalyptus-genetically-modified-pine-tree-southwest-forest&page=4

The main sources of omega-3 fatty acids are fish such as salmon, herring, and sardines and fish oil capsules. However, there are concerns about these sources as well: they are unusable for vegetarians and the high mercury content in fish prevents a lot of people, especially women, from obtaining the advantages of omega-3-fatty acids.

Luckily, Dr. William Harris, professor of medicine at Sanford School of Medicine, chief of cardiovascular health research, has discovered alternative sources for heart-healthy omega-3 fatty acids.

His research used biotechnology to promote the conversion of ALA (another type of omega-3 fatty acid) to SDA within the soybean plant. While the human body is inefficient in converting ALA to SDA, it is easily able to convert SDA to the more accessible omega 3-fatty acid EPA. Thus, by forcing the soybean plant to make SDA it becomes a more effective dietary source of omega 3-fatty acids.

Three groups of double blind study participants tested the effectiveness of the modified soybeans. The control group only received normal soybean oil, one group received EPA and normal soybean oil, and the last group received the SDA modified soybeans and normal soybean oil.

At the end of the study, the researchers determined that individuals who took SDA modified soybeans had as much EPA level increases as those who took EPA modified soybeans, an indication that SDA was quickly converted to EPA. ALA modified soybeans had little effect on EPA levels in the blood. SDA and EPA also helped to reduce triglycerides up to 30% in the blood, significant from control.

This study may have significance for millions of people, since atherosclerosis is the number one cause of deaths in the U.S. As a bonus, soybeans are readily available everywhere and are much cheaper to consume than seafood.

Discussion Question: Are there other natural sources of omega-3 fatty acids in the plant world? What plants do you think can be modified like the soybeans?

News Article: http://health.usnews.com/articles
Interview: http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1115777383567