Which country dominates transgenics

Acevedo-Garcia, J. Plant Biotechnol. Adenle, A. Status of development, regulation and adoption of GM agriculture in Africa: Views and positions of stakeholder groups. Food Policy 43, — Google Scholar. Agaba, J. Ithaca, NY: Alliance Science.

Ahuja, V. Regulation of emerging gene technologies in India. BMC Proc. Aldemita, R. Trends in global approvals of biotech crops GM Crops Food 6, — The new seed law of Venezuela. Arora, L. Plant Sci. Atanassova, A. Plant breeding innovation: a global regulatory perspective. Cereal Chem. Aven, T. Risk assessment and risk management: review of recent advances on their foundation. Babar, U. Transgenic crops for the agricultural improvement in Pakistan: a perspective of environmental stresses and the current status of genetically modified crops.

GM Crops Food 11, 1— Bado, S. Blakeney, M. Blakeney and K. Siddique Singapore: Springer , — Borge, O. Proposal for relaxation of Norwegian regulations for deliberate release of genetically modified organisms GMO , with applicability also for EU legislation.

Branford, S. Peru: a year ban on GMOs. Bratlie, S. A novel governance framework for GMO. EMBO Rep. Brookes, G. The global income and production effects of genetically modified GM crops GM Crops Food 4, 74— Callebaut, S. New developments in modern biotechnology: A survey and analysis of the regulatory status of plants produced through New Breeding techniques. Cao, C. New York: Columbia University Press. CFIA Event Plants with novel traits.

Chandrasekhar, A. Government approves GMO ban extension. Chen, B. Cibus Canada Inc. Marketed Products. Cohen, J. To feed its 1. Science , — Cremer, J.

China moves toward commercialization of GMO corn and soy. CSPM Dondanville, T. Dowd-Uribe, B. Dror, Y. Values and the Law. Antioch Rev. ECJ Eckerstorfer, M. Plants developed by new genetic modification techniques - comparison of existing regulatory frameworks in the EU and Non-EU countries.

ENGL Detection of food and feed plant products obtained by new mutagenesis techniques. Eriksson, D. Options to reform the european union legislation on gmos: scope and definitions.

Trends Biotechnol. A comparison of the EU regulatory approach to directed mutagenesis with that of other jurisdictions, consequences for international trade and potential steps forward. New Phytol. European Commission EC study on new genomic techniques. FAO New Food Balances. Fernandes, V. India: Smart Indian Agriculture. FOEF Biotechnology: In brief.

Fritsche, S. A new zealand perspective on the application and regulation of gene editing. Gakpo, J. Egypt poised to again lead Africa in ag biotech innovation. Burkina Faso renews commitment to GM crops with Bt cowpea. Galata Bickell, E. The framing effect of the media in the regulation of GMOs: a case study of Russia.

Gatica-Arias, A. The regulatory current status of plant breeding technologies in some latin american and the caribbean countries. Plant Cell. Tissue Organ Cult. Gebretsadik, K. Challenges and opportunities of genetically modified crops production; future perspectives in ethiopia, review.

Open Agric. Global Agriculture. Venezuela passes new seed law banning genetically modified crops. Government of Canada Novel Feeds. Mattilsynet Health Canada. Herrera, F. The history of agroecology in venezuela: a complex and multifocal process. Food Syst. Holme, I. Induced genetic variation in crop plants by random or targeted mutagenesis: convergence and differences. Hudson, M. Indigenous perspectives and gene editing in aotearoa new zealand.

Huesing, J. Global adoption of genetically modified GM crops: challenges for the public sector. Food Chem. Hundleby, P. Food Energy Secur. Biotech Country Facts and Trends: China. GM Approval Database. Isaac, N. African Union mulls harmonized biosafety system framework. Seed statistics. Ishii, T. A future scenario of the global regulatory landscape regarding genome-edited crops. GM Crop. Food 8, 44— Jin, Y. Getting an Imported GM crop approved in china. Jorasch, P. Will the EU stay out of step with science and the rest of the world on plant breeding innovation?

Plant Cell Rep. Kargbo, A. Development, adoption and commercialization of GM crops: a needed commodity in nigeria. African J. Kelly, L. Clarifying the regulation of genome editing in australia: situation for food. In addition to maize, research and development led by the African Agricultural Technology Foundation AATF is ongoing to improve other staple crops in Africa, including cowpea and rice.

Cowpea also known as field pea or black-eyed pea , according to CGIAR , is a protein -rich grain that is vital for the nutrition and livelihoods of millions of people in sub-Saharan Africa and serves as a food source for livestock. Rice consumption in Africa has increased over the years, with rice becoming a major staple crop on the continent.

Low yields experienced by some farmers may be caused by high soil salinity, insufficient water, and lack of nitrogen fertilizer. Scientists are also using genetic engineering to enhance the nutritional value of some staple crops in order to address malnutrition in many developing country populations. Read more about this potentially life-saving application in our section: Improving Nutrition in the Developing World.

In addition, although not a cultivator of biotech food crops, Japan has been growing the biotech blue rose since In India , virtually all cotton grown in the country is genetically modified. Since , the adoption rate of insect-resistant cotton has increased to 94 percent with over 7 million farmers planting the crop across the country.

Although the leading cotton producer globally, India has not yet grown GM crops for food. Research in this area is ongoing, however, with the government conducting field trials for GM chickpeas, rice, and tomatoes. A similar verdict has been reached for an eggplant GM event. Despite this regulatory approval, the government still remains indecisive on if it will clear these commodities for commercial production.

India does import significant quantities of GM soy oil and canola oil for human consumption. Pakistan is another notable cotton producer, with 95 percent of its GM cotton varieties. In , over seven million acres of GM cotton were cultivated, which is a slight decrease from due to water shortages, pest infestation, and uncertainty regarding approvals. Pakistan exports its cotton to other Asian countries, including India, Indonesia, Thailand and Taiwan. Like India, Pakistan has yet to adopt GM food crops for cultivation but is conducting experimental and field trial research on a number of biotech crops, including maize, wheat, rice, sugarcane, brassicas, chickpea, potato and ground nut, as well as tobacco.

Support for GM food crop variety commercialization is being garnered among the Pakistani farming communities, especially after successes in the maize field trials. Pakistan is a major importer of GM soy and canola oil in addition to importing GM cotton.

While China continues to be a major importer of biotech crops globally, the Chinese government is focused on increasing its domestic product pipeline and crop production.

Since , China has approved 73 biotech events for food, feed and processing. In , China cultivated 7. In , the State Council of China announced a 5 Year Plant to commercial new strains of Bt corn and cotton as well as herbicide-tolerant soy. However, none of those products were available for farmer purchase by Australia ranks 13 th globally in biotech crops production, growing GM cotton and canola on 1. Since its original plantings in , farmer adoption of biotech cotton has grown to 98 percent.

Adoption for GM canola is at 31 percent. Australia has approved biotech events. Research and field trials are being conducted on several plant varieties, including bananas, barley, canola, cotton, grapes, Indian mustard, maize, papaya, perennial ryegrass, pineapple, safflower, sugarcane, tall fescue, torenia, wheat, and white clover. Biotech crop production in Australia might see and increase soon, as the State Government of South Australia has been working to finalize a bill to lift their GMO production ban for the mainland of South Australia.

Over , Filipino farmers grew 2. In , Myanmar grew over , acres of insect-resistant cotton, with the adoption rate at 86 percent. Vietnam is in its fifth year of cultivating genetically modified maize. Vietnam has approved 22 biotech events, and imports GMO maize, soy, cotton, canola and alfalfa.

Each year the ISAAA produces a briefing giving details of the commercial growing of GM crops globally - these figures are used extensively by media and industry.

A table produced from these figures can be found at the bottom of this page. Criticisms have been made about these reports because;. The benefit of the expression of this protein by corn plants is a reduction in the amount of insecticide that farmers must apply to their crops. Unfortunately, seeds containing genes for recombinant proteins can cause unintentional spread of recombinant genes or exposure of non-target organisms to new toxic compounds in the environment.

The now-famous Bt corn controversy started with a laboratory study by Losey et al. The report by Losey et al. Debate ensued when scientists from other laboratories disputed the study, citing the extremely high concentration of pollen used in the laboratory study as unrealistic, and concluding that migratory patterns of monarchs do not place them in the vicinity of corn during the time it sheds pollen.

For the next two years, six teams of researchers from government, academia, and industry investigated the issue and concluded that the risk of Bt corn to monarchs was "very low" Sears et al.

Environmental Protection Agency to approve Bt corn for an additional seven years. Another concern associated with GMOs is that private companies will claim ownership of the organisms they create and not share them at a reasonable cost with the public. If these claims are correct, it is argued that use of genetically modified crops will hurt the economy and environment, because monoculture practices by large-scale farm production centers who can afford the costly seeds will dominate over the diversity contributed by small farmers who can't afford the technology.

However, a recent meta-analysis of 15 studies reveals that, on average, two-thirds of the benefits of first-generation genetically modified crops are shared downstream, whereas only one-third accrues upstream Demont et al. These benefit shares are exhibited in both industrial and developing countries. Therefore, the argument that private companies will not share ownership of GMOs is not supported by evidence from first-generation genetically modified crops. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, public acceptance trends in Europe and Asia are mixed depending on the country and current mood at the time of the survey Hoban, Attitudes toward cloning, biotechnology, and genetically modified products differ depending upon people's level of education and interpretations of what each of these terms mean.

Support varies for different types of biotechnology; however, it is consistently lower when animals are mentioned. Furthermore, even if the technologies are shared fairly, there are people who would still resist consumable GMOs, even with thorough testing for safety, because of personal or religious beliefs. The ethical issues surrounding GMOs include debate over our right to "play God," as well as the introduction of foreign material into foods that are abstained from for religious reasons.

Some people believe that tampering with nature is intrinsically wrong, and others maintain that inserting plant genes in animals, or vice versa, is immoral. When it comes to genetically modified foods, those who feel strongly that the development of GMOs is against nature or religion have called for clear labeling rules so they can make informed selections when choosing which items to purchase.

Respect for consumer choice and assumed risk is as important as having safeguards to prevent mixing of genetically modified products with non-genetically modified foods. In order to determine the requirements for such safeguards, there must be a definitive assessment of what constitutes a GMO and universal agreement on how products should be labeled.

These issues are increasingly important to consider as the number of GMOs continues to increase due to improved laboratory techniques and tools for sequencing whole genomes, better processes for cloning and transferring genes, and improved understanding of gene expression systems. Thus, legislative practices that regulate this research have to keep pace. Prior to permitting commercial use of GMOs, governments perform risk assessments to determine the possible consequences of their use, but difficulties in estimating the impact of commercial GMO use makes regulation of these organisms a challenge.

In , the first debate over the risks to humans of exposure to GMOs began when a common intestinal microorganism, E.

Initially, safety issues were a concern to individuals working in laboratories with GMOs, as well as nearby residents. However, later debate arose over concerns that recombinant organisms might be used as weapons. The growing debate, initially restricted to scientists, eventually spread to the public, and in , the National Institutes of Health NIH established the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee to begin to address some of these issues. In the s, when deliberate releases of GMOs to the environment were beginning to occur, the U.

Adherence to the guidelines provided by the NIH was voluntary for industry. Also during the s, the use of transgenic plants was becoming a valuable endeavor for production of new pharmaceuticals, and individual companies, institutions, and whole countries were beginning to view biotechnology as a lucrative means of making money Devos et al.

Worldwide commercialization of biotech products sparked new debate over the patentability of living organisms, the adverse effects of exposure to recombinant proteins, confidentiality issues, the morality and credibility of scientists, the role of government in regulating science, and other issues. In the U. This document recommended that risk assessments be performed on a case-by-case basis. Since then, the case-by-case approach to risk assessment for genetically modified products has been widely accepted; however, the U.

Although in the past, thorough regulation was lacking in many countries, governments worldwide are now meeting the demands of the public and implementing stricter testing and labeling requirements for genetically modified crops. Proponents of the use of GMOs believe that, with adequate research, these organisms can be safely commercialized.

There are many experimental variations for expression and control of engineered genes that can be applied to minimize potential risks. Some of these practices are already necessary as a result of new legislation, such as avoiding superfluous DNA transfer vector sequences and replacing selectable marker genes commonly used in the lab antibiotic resistance with innocuous plant-derived markers Ma et al.

Issues such as the risk of vaccine-expressing plants being mixed in with normal foodstuffs might be overcome by having built-in identification factors, such as pigmentation, that facilitate monitoring and separation of genetically modified products from non-GMOs. Other built-in control techniques include having inducible promoters e. GMOs benefit mankind when used for purposes such as increasing the availability and quality of food and medical care, and contributing to a cleaner environment.

If used wisely, they could result in an improved economy without doing more harm than good, and they could also make the most of their potential to alleviate hunger and disease worldwide. However, the full potential of GMOs cannot be realized without due diligence and thorough attention to the risks associated with each new GMO on a case-by-case basis.

Barta, A. The expression of a nopaline synthase-human growth hormone chimaeric gene in transformed tobacco and sunflower callus tissue. Plant Molecular Biology 6 , — Beyer, P.