Title: Analysis of Primary Biotechnology Literature
1Analysis of Primary Biotechnology Literature
Biotechnology Education Forum NDSU Extension
Inservice Training Bismarck, ND March 1, 2002
Phil McClean Department of Plant Science North
Dakota State University
2Concerns for Biotech Products Ecological Balance
Will Be Altered
- Other organisms will be affected
- Monarch butterfly
- Maize Bt pollen falls on neighboring milkweed
- Milkweed a monarch butterfly food source
- Does the pollen affect the butterfly
- Losey et al. (1999) Nature 399214
- Yes!!
- Sears et al. (2001) PNAS 9811937
- No!!
3Concerns for Biotech Products Inadvertent Gene
Transfer
- Wild relatives receive transgene from biotech
crops - Important genetic diversity will be lost
- Has it been observed?
- Quist Chapela (2001) Nature 414541
- Yes!!
- Has it been challenged?
- Christou (2002) Transgenic Research 11iii
- Yes!!
4Lets Review the Primary Literature
Transgenic DNA Introgressed Into
Traditional Maize Landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico
David Quist and Ignacio Chapela
Nature 414541-543 November 29, 2001
5What does the title tell us?
6What does the title tell us?
Transgenes were found in landraces
7What does the title tell us?
Transgenes were found in landraces
What does this imply?
8What does the title tell us?
Transgenes were found in landraces
What does this imply?
Biotech crops have contaminated nature
9Paragraph 1 What was analyzed?
10Paragraph 1 What was analyzed?
- Bulk seed from corn cobs from landraces
- Fields isolated from roads
- Six samples (A1-A3 and B1-B3)
- Store sample (K1)
- Controls
- Peruvian sample (P1)
- Oaxacan sample from 1971 (H1)
- Monsanto Yieldgard maize (Bt1)
- Monsanto Roundup-Ready maize (RR1)
11Paragraph 1 How were samples analyzed?
12Paragraph 1 How were samples analyzed?
- DNA isolated from flour
- Scored for presence of 35S promoter
- Why???
- Widely used transgene contruct element
- Polymerase chain reaction technique
- Presence of product
- transgene promoter DNA is in sample
13Paragraph 2 What are the results?
14Paragraph 2 What are the results?
- Amplification observed in 5/7 samples
- Weak, but present
- Low copy gave low signal
- Store sample gave strong signal
- Bt1 and RR1 gave strong signal
- Historical and Peruvian samples negative
- Positive control amplification observed in all
samples
15Paragraph 2 Supporting evidence?
16Paragraph 2 Supporting evidence?
- Independent confirmation by Mexican govt
- Oaxaca and one other state
- Samples near authors site also positive at low
levels - Mexican experiment analyzed individual kernels
- Strong signal than pooled samples authors used
17Paragraph 3 Confirming Experiment?
18Paragraph 3 Confirming Experiment?
- Weak signal amplified with internal primers
- New fragment sequenced
- Sequence equal Monsanto 35S promoter sequence
19Paragraph 4 Other genes present?
20Paragraph 4 Other genes present?
- Samples asssayed for other transgenes
- NOS terminator sequence
- A3, B2 and K1
- Bt toxin gene (cryIAb)
- B3
- Conclusion
- Multiple transgenes found in the Mexican
landraces
21Paragraph 5 Clues to transgene origin?
22Paragraph 5 Clues to transgene origin?
- Samples assayed for genomic location of transgene
- Procedure Inverse PCR
- Scores transgene and neighboring maize DNA
- Four samples contain known flanking genes
- A2, A3, B3, K1
- Transgene located in same position as Novartis
Bt11 - Samples A3, K1
- Conclusion
- GMOs to landraces introgression occurring
- Despite GMO planting in Mexico (1998-now)
23The Challenge to Quist Chapela
- Chistou (2002)
- Fundamental flaws (experimental design) in
research - Results can be explained by
- Contaminated samples
- Flawed iPCR interpretation
- Cross pollination not supported by results
- Better experiment
- Grow plant samples out and
- Score phenotype (Bt or Glyphosate tolerant)
- Score genotype (screening individual plants)
24Whats Next??
- Funding becomes available
- Detailed experiments
- New results or interpretation
- Whats at stake?
- Integrity of biotech approaches to crop
improvement