Fwd: GMW:_Mix-up_leaves_biotech_project_at_CSUS_withering_on_the_vine

[Guest guest]

GMW:_Mix-up_leaves_biotech_project_at_CSUS_withering_on_the_vine

" GM_WATCH "

Wed, 31 Dec 2003 14:55:02 GMT

 

GM WATCH daily

http://www.gmwatch.org

---

good article. quote: " not wanting to be party to a more serious biotech

accident, Ewing is putting the project on indefinite hold. "

---

Mix-up leaves biotech project at CSUS withering on the vine

By Edie Lau -- Bee Science Writer

Published 2:15 a.m. PST Wednesday, December 31, 2003

 

A project in genetically engineering crops to produce medicines began with

exuberant hopes at Sacramento State. Now all that remain are two disheveled

plants with one wrinkled red tomato.

 

After five years, the biologist who led the project, Nicholas Ewing, is giving

it up. The experiments didn't work. Ironically, the very tool he was trying to

employ -- biotechnology -- spoiled the studies.

 

The problem lay in the seeds. Ewing and his students tried to genetically

engineer seeds they thought were from an ordinary tomato. Trouble was, the seeds

were mislabeled; they arrived with genes already altered.

 

It was another case of agricultural biotechnology appearing to be out of

control.

 

" This is a significant thing, " Ewing said in an interview this week in his

office at California State University, Sacramento, where he is chairman of the

department of biological sciences.

 

" It illustrates that these (biotech) genes can be difficult to contain unless we

have practices in place to better detect them. "

 

Ewing was one of 34 people around the world who may have received the

misidentified seeds over the past seven years. The seeds came from the

University of California, Davis, C.M. Rick Tomato Genetics Resource Center -- a

repository of seeds from more than 3,600 varieties of wild and domesticated

tomatoes.

 

Like other such seed banks, the Rick Center is a sort of Library of Congress for

crops -- a place where the genetic diversity of important plants is catalogued

and preserved.

 

The Rick Center doesn't knowingly keep genetically engineered seed in its stock.

When officials recognized the error this fall, the embarrassed center issued a

recall and apology, followed in mid-December by a public announcement.

 

The seeds traveled widely: to Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, North America and

South America. Most recipients were scientists, though not all. A recipient in

England used the tomatoes in a display garden. The use by a recipient in

Ethiopia could not be determined.

 

UC Davis officials emphasized that the mistake in no way endangered the food

supply. The biotech gene, or " transgene, " in the tomato was approved for human

consumption by the U.S. government in 1994.

 

The transgene is designed to slow the fruit's decay. It is essentially the same

as that in the Flavr Savr tomato, the world's first genetically engineered

commercial crop, created by the Davis biotech company Calgene.

 

Since the consequences of the mistaken distribution so far appear to be minor --

nothing more serious than botched experiments in assorted labs -- Ewing looks

upon the incident as something of a useful warning.

 

" In a way, I think it was good it happened at this time in this way. It's

indicative of what can happen, and maybe, " he said, pausing, his normally lively

voice growing soft, " even what will happen. "

 

Ewing, who earned a doctorate in plant physiology at UC Davis in 1993, started

exploring making pharmaceuticals in crops in 1998. He was inspired by a student

who became intrigued by the idea of making inexpensive vaccines out of plants,

which could be especially beneficial in poor countries.

 

But now, not wanting to be party to a more serious biotech accident, Ewing is

putting the project on indefinite hold.

 

Students in his lab were just beginning to attempt to engineer into tomatoes the

components of an antibody derived from mouse cells, as well as a bacterial

protein that binds to antibodies.

 

In both cases, the products appear to be safe to eat, Ewing said, but he can't

say so positively.

 

" In light of this (seed accident), we thought, 'Let's back up on this,' " he

said. " ... I want to look more carefully at safety and the regulatory process. "

 

One idea Ewing has to better contain biotech genes is to require all engineered

organisms to possess a universal genetic signature, a DNA bar code of sorts,

that identifies them as transgenic.

 

Jim Rogers, a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which is

investigating the UC Davis seed accident, said the agency is receptive to

suggestions for improvement. " We're always interested in new ideas and new

techniques, " Rogers said.

 

The UC Davis seed mix-up is just the latest in a string of mishaps involving the

escape of genetically engineered genes.

 

In 2000, StarLink, a variety of transgenic corn approved only for animal feed,

was discovered widely in taco shells, corn chips and other human food, forcing a

massive recall. Traces of the StarLink protein reportedly remain in some corn

products today.

 

In 2001, researchers from UC Berkeley reported finding biotech genes in native

corn from the mountains of rural Oaxaca, Mexico, where growing genetically

engineered corn is illegal.

 

In 2002, a Texas biotech company, ProdiGene, was found to have contaminated

500,000 bushels of soybeans with corn engineered to make pig vaccine. The

soybeans had to be destroyed.

 

In all cases, no obvious harm was done to public health or the environment,

though there were economic repercussions and, perhaps, some erosion in

consumers' confidence.

 

The UC Davis gene escape differed from the others in one particularly notable

way: It brought more trouble to genetic engineers -- the people who typically

feel the most comfortable with the science -- than to anyone else.

 

" The consequences of the mix-up were a loss of time and money for our

laboratory, " Patricia Drevet, a researcher at Universit* Blaise Pascal in

France, said in an interview by e-mail. " ... All our experiments with those

materials failed. "

 

At CSUS, Ewing and his students were confounded because the seeds contained a

bacterial gene for antibiotic resistance, which is a tool genetic engineers use

to distinguish transformed plants from untransformed plants.

 

Usually only a small fraction of plants that are manipulated actually

incorporate the transgenes. Scientists treat all manipulated plants with

antibiotics, and those that survive -- those that are resistant to antibiotics

-- are the ones that have taken up the transgenes.

 

In Ewing's case, even the tomato plants that didn't take up his target gene

carried the antibiotic resistance gene. Later, when he and his students checked

the plants' DNA, they were perplexed: The gene they thought they'd introduced

wasn't there.

 

Figuring the mistake was theirs, they ordered a second batch of seeds from UC

Davis. " The last thing you want to do is blame somebody else, " Ewing said.

 

When the same thing happened again, Ewing realized something was wrong with the

seed. Just as he was set to call the seed bank, the seed bank called Ewing.

The mix-up had been detected through a similar experiment failure at a UC Davis

lab.

 

Since then, most of CSUS' misidentified tomato plants have been bagged up to be

destroyed. Soon, the last two standing plants will join the rest in an orange

plastic garbage bag marked " biohazard. "

 

About the Writer

The Bee's Edie Lau can be reached at (916) 321-1098 or elau

elau

 

 

-----------------------

SUBSCRIPTIONS

-----------------------

 

http://www.gmwatch.org/sub.asp

 

archive

http://www.gmwatch.org/archive.asp

 

directory

http://www.gmwatch.org

 

websites

http://www.ngin.org.uk

http://www.gmwatch.org

 

communications

ngin

 

donations to 'NGIN'

NGIN, 26 Pottergate, Norwich, NR2 1DX, UK

or e-mail for details: ngin

 

 

 

 

This message has been sent because you d to the GM Watch List.

http://www.gmwatch.org

 

---------------------------

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Find out what made the Top Searches of 2003