Abstract:If the world is to feed 9 billion people by 2050,it will need to use every technology available.Needless to say,GM crops are only one of many approaches needed to achieve global food security,but they certainly can play a positive role.Counteracting some of the current myths about GM crops,one can state unequivocally that current GM crops are safe for both humans and animals.Current GM crops that are herbicide tolerant or insect resistant can,under the right circumstances,benefit either small- or large-scale agriculture,both of which contribute to food security.Breeding and GM technology can synergize when genes for traits such as drought tolerance,improved nitrogen use efficiency,disease resistance,and/or improved nutritional content are expressed in superior germplasm developed through breeding.Looking to the future,the developing world needs to move beyond the stage of endless field trials and to develop harmonized regulatory regimes that will facilitate deregulation of events that have shown proven benefits in trials.New technologies such as genome editing offer great promise to carry out safe and precise changes to specific regions of the genome and should require much less regulatory oversight.

Abstract:Many issues need to be dealt with for future plant breeding.In this paper,I briefly discussed issues related to the concept of food security from the perspective of total demand both in quantity and quality and production sustainability.We are now facing great challenges in both demand and sustainability.Food production needs to be greatly increased in the coming decades to cope with the population explosion,while the environmental sustainability requires reduction of input including chemical fertilizers,pesticides,water,labor and other resources.Increased awareness of the relation between nutrition and health also requires crop products to better meet the need of human population by producing more nutritious food.The goals and directions of plant breeding have to evolve accordingly to address all these needs.To this end,I briefly reviewed the recent progress in plant genomic research and technology development and discussed how these advances can be applied to breeding programs to address food security issues.

Abstract:This paper summarises the economic and key environmental impacts that crop biotechnology has had on global agriculture.The analysis shows that there have been very significant net economic benefits at the farm level amounting to $18.8 billion in 2012 and $116.6 billion for the seventeen year period 1996-2012 (in nominal terms).These economic gains have been divided roughly 50% each to farmers in developed and developing countries.GM technology have also made important contributions to increasing global production levels of the four main crops,having added 122 million tonnes and 230 million tonnes respectively,to the global production of soybeans and maize since the introduction of the technology in the mid 1990s.In terms of key environmental impacts,the adoption of the technology has reduced pesticide spraying by 503 million kg (-8.8%) and,as a result,decreased the environmental impact associated with herbicide and insecticide use on these crops (as measured by the indicator the Environmental Impact Quotient (EIQ)) by 18.7%.The technology has also facilitated a significant reduction in the release of greenhouse gas emissions from this cropping area,which,in 2012,was equivalent to removing 11.88 million cars from the roads.

Abstract:More than 30 years after the development and testing of transgenic techniques that mimicked the horizontal transfer of genes that is widespread in nature,these techniques were being used to produce a wide variety of medicines,virtually all beer and cheese consumed in the world,and were planted (in 2013) by approximately 18 million farmers on 175 million hectares in 27 countries. Hundreds of millions of people and billions of farm animals have been consuming these plants and products derived from them for nearly 20 years without a single verified case of harm encountered anywhere.Against this background,it is difficult to understand the resistance to cultivating such crops that persists in some regions.Concerning the relationship between GM crops and biodiversity,one may first note that agriculture itself is a major enemy of biodiversity,having spread to occupy about a third of the world’s land surface over the past 12 000 years as the human population has grown from an initial 1 million people to more than 7.2 billion at present.The more efficiently agriculture is carried out on cultivated lands and the more productive and sustainable it is there,the less harm to biodiversity generally.Naturally-occurring hybridization between related species is a prominent feature of plant evolution,and has resulted in the genetic enrichment of crops as human beings have selected them for improved characteristics.It has also affected the genetic characteristics of the wild and weedy relatives of many crops,and in a few cases increased their weediness.These phenomena are neither enhanced nor retarded when transgenes are involved,but should be studied and dealt with agronomically on a case-by-case basis.

Abstract:In 2013,the US led production of biotech crops globally with 70.1 million hectares which amounts to about 40% of total global acreage (175 million hectares),with an average adoption rate of approximately 90% across its principal biotech crops.The vast majority of biotech products approved to date in the US are in the area of agronomic traits,most specifically biotic stress management.The principal focus in the immediate future will remain on agronomic traits especially the area of pest control but with an increasing interest in abiotic stress tolerance which is gaining prominence as external pressures from climate change to land use change.Agricultural biotechnology already has helped farmers around the world boost their productivity and grow crops in more ecologically healthy fields while allowing much more efficient use of resources.This technology allows reduced tillage,which cuts down on greenhouse gas emissions,water runoff,soil erosion and fuel consumption.Improved pest control increases yields on existing acreage and reduces the pressure to convert forests and wildlands into farmland.In addition to environmental benefits the potential for improved nutrition,reduced postharvest losses and increased food safety may remain unfulfilled if barriers such as disproportionate and non-risk-based regulatory regimens; effective disinformation campaigns and lack of resources prevail.

Abstract:Thirty-eight GM crop events are currently approved for commercial use in Brazil, where their intrinsic characteristics include herbicide, insect and virus resistance.The Brazilian Biosafety Law establishes guidelines for the safe use of genetic engineering technologies in research and product development for the market.The Law created a structure with collegiate and governmental agencies for the establishment of biosafety guidelines, risk assessment, official inspections.It created the National Biosafety Council (CNBS), and restructured the National Biosafety Technical Commission (CTNBio).The CTNBio is responsible for establishing the biosafety guidelines and to issue the Biosafety Quality Certificate (CQB) for all institutions working with GMO.The Brazilian Biosafety Law considers an infringement of the legislation any action or omission that violates the norms provided by it.Many sanctions can be applied where the Registration and Inspection agencies (OERF) define criteria, fine amounts, and collect it for the federal government.Other important Brazilian legislation regarding GMO use in Brazil is the Law n° 8 078 which establishes the right to information for all consumers in the country.Through thisLaw, Brazilian Ministry of Justice defined a labeling system whereby foods and food ingredients for human consumption or animal feed containing or produced with more than 1% GMO must contain information on its label and a symbol (a yellow triangle with a T in the middle) indicating it.It is undeniable that there was a rapid increase in the utilization of genetic engineering technologies in the Brazilian agriculture after the new Biosafety Law.The unification of laws, rules and guidelines by all agencies involved in the Biosafety legislation framework allowed, undoubtedly, the rescue of the confidence by investors, researchers, private/public institutions, and by all other stakeholders involved in the Brazilian agribusiness.

Abstract:Regulatory approvals for genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in the European Union differentiate between alternative uses and remain particularly controversial in the case of cultivation.While some Member States cultivate GM crops others have banned them.One of the suggested solutions includes nationalizing the approval process,which—depending on its implementation—might offer a solution over the current deadlock situation.Irrespectively,the increased use of new GMOs in many parts of the world,along with a mired regulatory approval process for imports of GMOs in the European Union,promise an increasing incidence of regulatory asynchronicity and structural trade disruptions.Reforms are needed that go beyond the current debate of nationalizing the approval process.The implications of asynchronous approval processes for international trade may also affect other countries and could require a solution at an international level.

Abstract:Regulatory approval for commercial cultivation of biotech cotton in India was granted in 2002.The 2014 cotton growing season saw that approx.95% of acreage planted to cotton was either a single gene or two gene product of cotton.Adoption of Bollgard and BollgardII cotton in India lead to a sea change in the cotton sector,leading to benefits at the farm,farmer and national level.While this has been a big success,India has not commercialized any crop since the commercial release of the GM cotton and this paper will discuss some of the current challenges,the regulatory system and the readiness of the researchers to bring out new products,subject to government approvals.

Abstract:In sub-Saharan Africa,nearly 70% of the population live in rural areas,and they depend on agriculture for their livelihood.However,the adoption of sustainable agricultural technology has been slower than in other parts of the world.In addition,the low agricultural productivity of sub-Saharan Africa makes the region a net importer of food.Agricultural biotechnology can be used as a tool for increasing agricultural productivity,while also offering significant opportunities for attaining food security and poverty alleviation.So far,only South Africa,Burkina Faso and Sudan are planting genetically modified (GM) crops at a commercial scale.Many African countries have developed,or are in the process of developing,regulatory frameworks for modern biotechnology application,and close to 9 countries are conducting confined field tests of GM crops with farmer-preferred and consumer-oriented traits.This paper reviews the status of GM crop adoption in sub-Saharan Africa,with a focus on the research,development and use of GM crops.Two countries from each regional block of Southern Africa (South Africa and Malawi),East Africa (Kenya and Uganda),and West Africa (Ghana and Burkina Faso)-are reviewed.Regulations governing the use of GM crops and adoption issues,and recommendations on the way forward-are made for each of these six countries.

Abstract:The development of Golden Rice to date has taken longer than anticipated.It has been proven to have the potential to assist in the alleviation of an important public health problem,vitamin A deficiency,affecting millions.Complying with the highly precautionary,and now proven unnecessary,UN Cartagena Protocol for Biosafety has impeded scientific progress and scientific collaboration,particularly by delaying the selection of phenotypes grown in the open field.So far therefore,Golden Rice has not been able to assist in combatting vitamin A deficiency,identified by the UN as an important public health target for 25 years,and which continues to cause preventable deaths and blindness.However,the inventor’s original vision of the donation of the technology to assist the resource poor who want to benefit from it remains firm and achievable,subject to continuing philanthropic and public sector funding.

Abstract:This review of the safety assessment of genetically modified (GM) crops is focused primarily on the process and progress in the United States (US). It reviews the development of the safety evaluation process from the Asilomar conference in 1975 considering issues relevant to recombinant DNA technology,to discussions between the US government,academic and industrial scientists between 1984 and 1994 when the first GM crops were being field tested and evaluated commercial release for food and feed production. International guidelines were also reviewed for consistency with the US system. The overall process includes consideration of information relating to history of safe or unsafe human and exposure to the gene source and expressed proteins. The primary considerations of safety for dietary proteins are whether or not some consumers are sensitized and have IgE antibodies against the protein encoded by the transgene or whether the transgene represents a risk of eliciting celiac disease. The process considers potential toxic effects of expressed proteins as well as potential impacts on human and animal nutrition. The process in the US is consistent with Codex Alimentarius recommendations. It follows a science based process based on justifiable hypotheses. To date there is no evidence that GM crops approved in the US have harmed human or animal consumers. The evaluation takes into account genetic and environmental variation in products produced by plant varieties and is intended to maintain the standard that foods developed from GM plants are intended to be as safe as non-GM genetically similar varieties.

Abstract:Genetic engineering is one of the most powerful 21st-century technologies,and its use is driving the new “green revolution” in agriculture.In global terms,the use of genetically modified (GM) crops has increased rapidly and steadily since the first commercialization in the United States in 1996.Although there are great potential benefits from the use of GM crops,the potential risks to the environment have been the subject of concern and debate.GM crop safety has become one of the major issues faced by governments in many countries.With over 20 years of nationwide oversight of agricultural biotechnology,China has developed a comprehensive regulatory framework for regulating environmental safety of GMOs and related products.Taking insect-resistant Bt crops as an example,the regulatory framework typically includes considerations of environmental and agronomic benefits,potential for evolution of resistance to insecticidal genes in target pests,effects on non-target organisms and other potential environmental impacts.To facilitate regulatory decision-making and guarantee the safety of GM events before commercialization,biosafety regulation from laboratory research to approval for use of a novel GM plant event is divided into five stages,namely:1) laboratory research,2) pilot testing,during which small-scale biosafety tests are conducted within a contained system or under controlled condition,3) environmental release field testing,during which medium-scale biosafety tests are conducted under natural conditions with appropriate safety control measures,4) pre-production testing,during which large-scale biosafety tests are conducted prior to application for a GMO biosafety certificate,and 5) application for biosafety certificates.During the stage of laboratory research on GMOs,appropriate measures have to be adopted for guaranteeing safety under the supervision of an agricultural GMO safety leading group affiliated to the institute or university.When the laboratory research has been completed and a GM plant event is ready to enter the risk assessment period,the developers have to apply for a permit from the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) for moving to the next stage.When applying for a permit to move risk assessments from one developmental stage to the next,the applicants have to submit required data to the MOA.When all the required safety tests after pre-production testing are finished,the developers can apply for a biosafety certificate to the GM event from the MOA.However,only insect-resistant Bt cotton and virus-resistant papaya have been widely grown in China to date.

Abstract:Since 1997 when transgenic Bt cotton was approved for commercial production in China,the area planted with Bt cotton has dramatically increased.In 2012,the total area planted with Bt cotton reached 3.59 million hectares,representing 80% of the total cotton area.The growing of Bt cotton in China for 17 years has brought great benefits to farmers and the environment.Many insect pests,especially cotton bollworms,can cause serious economic damage to cotton.Before the introduction of Bt cotton,Chinese cotton farmers applied large quantities of chemical insecticides for cotton bollworm control,causing serious ecological problems of insecticide resistance,pest resurgence,and environmental pollution.Long-term field surveys showed that with the increasing adoption of Bt cotton,cotton bollworm populations have not only been effectively suppressed in cotton,but also greatly reduced in other non-Bt host crops such as maize,soybean and peanut in the same planting area.The Bt proteins expressed by GM cotton are very specific to the target pest,and has no direct toxicity to non-target organisms,such as the natural enemies of insect pests.Thus,due to the dramatic decrease of insecticide applications on cotton,the population abundances of generalist predators such as ladybirds,lacewings and spiders in cotton fields have gradually increased,providing better natural control for non-target pests such as aphids.In addition,generalist predators usually have great dispersal ability,and increased predator abundance in Bt cotton ultimately promoted biological control services in the whole agroecosystem.However,with the reduction of insecticide application on Bt crops,populations of secondary pests that are not sensitive to Bt proteins may increase.For example,following the start of production of Bt cotton in China,mirid bugs that had been regarded as secondary pests on cotton during last century have progressively increased their population levels and acquired pest status in cotton.This outcome demonstrates that it is not possible to solve all insect pest control problems by using insect-resistant GM crops,but such crops can be involved in an integrated pest management strategy for insect pest management.From an economic perspective,it is estimated that on average at the farm level,Bt cotton increases yield by 10%,reduces insecticide use by 60%,with positive implications for both the environment and the farmer’s health.Papaya is an important fruit crop that is widely consumed as fresh fruit in China.However,it is severely affected by the disease caused by papaya ringspot virus (PRSV).To control this disease and protect papaya industry,PRSV-resistant GM papaya was produced in 1990s in the USA,and it was first commercialized in Hawaii in 1998.In China,a PRSV-resistant GM papaya that was developed by South China Agricultural University was first approved for commercial planting in Guangdong Province in 2006.The percentage adoption of GM papaya in Guangdong increased from 70% in 2007 when it was first commercially planted to 95% in 2012.In addition,GM papaya was grown for the first time on Hainan Island,where 40% of 5 000 hectares of papaya grown was GM.Thus,the total area of GM papaya grown in China reached 6 275 hectares in the whole country.The planting of disease-resistant papaya has provided efficient protection against papaya ringspot virus.As a consequence,chemical application to this crop has been significantly reduced,with the results that the farmer’s income has been enhanced and the environment has been improved.

Abstract:Genetically modified (GM) crops have been widely planted worldwide and contribute greatly to food security and environment sustainability. Although China is one of the major countries planting GM crops, recent progress is slow. In the past 20 years, Chinese government has maintained a positive attitude towards the GM organisms and provided the most supportive policies on agricultural biotechnology researches, however, public opinions have becoming perceivably against GMOs with presumptive concerns on human health, economic benefits and environment. Poor communications between scientists and the public, weak GMO governance among different departments, hesitation to advanced technology, variable and non-evidence based voices from media, as well as global anti-GMO organizations, are among the important aspects in this conflict. Possible solutions to solve the conflict are discussed.

Abstract:大约在20年以前，当GMO问题第一次受到媒体关注时，我还是一名反对生物技术的狂热分子。我认为基因改良（GM）是一种危险的技术，它会危害全世界的环境，并且剥夺农民的财产。于是我与其他人一同参与了有组织的反对甚至故意破坏转基因作物的活动——我个人破坏了不少GMO的田间试验，包括在英国干扰了有关转基因油菜、转基因甜菜和转基因玉米的试验。即使到了2008年的时候，我还给英国卫报写了一篇文章，论证GM“不会给世界带来丰收”。直到最近几年，我开始意识到这样的立场是完全错误的。许多事实证明，GMO作物使农民受益匪浅，并且能够改善环境，因为它能减少杀虫剂的使用，促进免耕农业的推广，从而改良土壤质量和减少碳排放。转基因技术的问题不在于它发展得太迅速，而在于它的潜力还不能充分地发挥出来——整个大陆，包括欧洲、非洲和亚洲的大部分地区，在没有任何科学依据的基础上，仍然存在着针对GM作物和种子的禁令。正如你能想象得到的，我经常被问起我是如何改变对GMO的看法的，人们尤其感兴趣的是究竟是什么使我突然意识到自己之前的认识是错误的。不过事实上并没有什么特别的东西，这种改变是随着我对科学的理解日益加深而逐渐产生的，特别是受到了我在气候变化领域所从事的科研工作的影响。当我发现国际科学界对GMO安全性的讨论就如同对气候变化这一事实同样强烈时，我没有更多选择的余地——继续反对GMO只会把我的智商和科学素养归入到与否认气候变化的人相同的层次上。尤其需要指出的是，通过20年的安全性研究和成千上万的文献报道，用美国科学促进会（AAAS）的话说，“科学研究很清楚地表明：应用现代生物技术手段对作物进行遗传改良是安全的”。因此，我曾经作为反GMO积极分子的行为，以及认为重组DNA会带来某种危险后果的想法，都被科学证明是错误的。除了改变自己的认识，我别无选择。在过去的一年里，我很荣幸能够直接与发展中国家的科学家和农业学家们共事，他们致力于保证那些拥有最少土地的、最贫困的农民也能够享受到生物技术的益处。受到盖茨基金会的资助，我与一个以肯尼亚为基础的技术推广民间组织——非洲农业技术基金会一起考察了撒哈拉以南的6个非洲国家，发现了不少关于GMO技术在改善人们的生活和生计上具有巨大潜力的例子。例如，在坦桑尼亚，我遇见了一些正在忍受饥饿的农民，他们的主要粮食作物木薯由于受到褐条病病毒的严重危害，其产业已经濒临消亡。这种病毒病还肆虐了乌干达和肯尼亚的木薯种植地区。针对这种病毒，慈善机构资助的科学家已经研发出了一种抗病毒的木薯，目前已在乌干达进行田间试验。当我去参观这个田间试验时，我惊呆了——那些GMO木薯比我在任何一个地方见到的都要健康得多。然而，反对GMO的组织和狂热分子却在散播虚假的信息和阴谋论，这些做法可能会导致农民没有机会种植这种改良的木薯品种。他们通过媒体或者广播散播谣言，声称GMO能引起人类不育和导致癌症的发生。很多这种公然散布恐惧和反科学的民间组织都是由西方资助的。作为康奈尔大学农业与生命科学学院的新任访问学者，我也正在与其他康奈尔学者以及孟加拉国的科学家们一起合作，他们正在将基因改良的抗虫茄子——就是所谓的Bt茄子——引入孟加拉国。这件事的风险非常大，因为反GMO的狂热分子已在印度和菲律宾成功阻止了Bt茄子的引入，不过孟加拉国的政府倒是立场坚定地支持Bt茄子的引进。Bt茄子现在在4个不同的地区（加济布尔、杰马勒布尔、巴布纳和朗布尔）由20个农民进行试验种植，由此带来的收益可能是巨大的：一般情况下，茄子在一个生长季中需要喷洒140次有毒的杀虫剂才能防止果梢蛀虫的危害。而Bt茄子对这种害虫具有很强的抗虫性，因此，农民可以大大减少杀虫剂的使用，并且农民与杀虫剂接触的机会也会随之减少，同时，消费者也可以大大减少食用杀虫剂残留的机会。农民不仅可以节约成本，而且还可以获得更好的收成。然而，反对者再一次致力于阻止Bt茄子的推广，这次他们仍然是使用制造毫无事实根据的健康威胁和散播所谓的“生物剽窃”言论，而完全无视这项技术的知识产权属于孟加拉国科学家的事实。甚至有蒙面的反对者去找Bt茄子的种植户，试图强迫他们谴责自己种植的作物并拍下视频。显然这个南亚首例GMO农作物能否成功推广的风险的确很高。从发展中国家的这些不同例子来看，显然基因改良技术能够给小农户带来非常大的收益——但是它的发展前景却因为持续不断的政治争议而始终不明朗。要打破这种僵局，需要那些热切渴望农业创新的发展中国家的科学家和农民发出更强有力的声音。这也是我的愿望。

Abstract:Genetically engineered (GE)crops have been produced and consumed by people for 20 years,starting in 1994.Adoption of GE crops by farmers was astonishingly rapid and in 2013,GE varieties of cotton,maize,soybean,canola,sugarbeet,and alfalfa were grown on 174 million hectares around the world.Fourteen countries grew more than 500 000 hectares each.Two phenotypes represent the overwhelming majority of the GE crops:herbicide tolerance and insect resistance.Penetration has now reached 90% levels in major producing countries.There are now more hectares of GE crops in developing countries than in developed ones.There are no figures on human consumption of GE crops and foods containing GE ingredients.By far the largest proportion (possibly 90%) of the major GE crops is undoubtedly used for animal feed.Minor GE crops such as papaya,squash and sweet maize are consumed directly.Ingredients such as oil,starch,high fructose sweetener,sucrose and lecithin that are made from GE crops are used extensively in the food industry.In US supermarkets up to 70% of the products available contain GE ingredients.Such products are also consumed by people in many countries,especially those were there is no GE labeling requirement.The activities of NGOs,often using misinformation about GE foods,continue to slow the acceptance of GE foods by the public and the commercial production of GE crops in many countries.Decisions by policy makers are unfortunately often based on political considerations rather than on scientific criteria.