RSS Feed for the unit Gene manipulation in plants

Introduction

In recent years, scientists have made huge gains in their understanding of how genes can be altered and transferred from one organism to another – but that knowledge has been acquired amidst controversy and concern. The deep ethical concerns that have resulted from the emergence of genetic manipulation are explored in this unit. We begin with an examination of the basic structure and function of genes. A number of pioneering examples and techniques are explored, helping to explain why our present-day view of genetic manipulation can combine feelings of optimism and unease. Examples are drawn from both plants (notably GM crops) and animals (including Dolly the sheep), with a special emphasis on the implications of promising medical techniques such as gene therapy. Our hope is that by exploring the science ‘behind the headlines’, and its interactions with the equally complex social factors, we will acquire a clearer idea of both what is possible and what may be desirable.

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this unit you should be able to:

understand more about the science that underlies the development of genetically modified organisms and in particular how gene transfer is brought about;
know something of the potential benefits and uncertainties associated with gene transfer and the high levels of technical ingenuity involved;
be better able to understand the science that underpins the development of Golden Rice and understand why the usefulness of this product has proved so contentious.

1 Genetic manipulation of plants and GM crops: an introduction

In this unit we will consider the genetic manipulation of plants, and the production of GM crops. A great deal has been written about the science of GM crops and the controversial issues surrounding their introduction around the world. In the study time available, we will focus on a small number of selected issues.

In this unit you'll have the opportunity to learn more about the science that has been used to engineer a range of GM crops, and examine both the science and social concerns relating to the development of a nutritionally enhanced rice, known as ‘Golden Rice’.

Unit S250_2 Social issues and GM crops will explore in greater detail some of the social issues surrounding the development of GM crops. These issues have been selected for their intrinsic interest and for the light they throw on all four of the course themes. You will explore some of the underlying ethical issues, some of the problems that occur when GM issues are communicated within and outside the scientific community, and how the supposed risks attached to GM foods might be evaluated. You will consider how public concerns about GM crops might be sampled as a prelude to decision making, attempting to balance the different interests of experts, industry and the consumer.

You are likely to have your own feelings and opinions about the development of GM crops and food. We would like you to explore these feelings before you embark on the study of this unit, by taking five minutes to consider questions that were developed to assess the views of participants in a UK-based public debate called GM Nation? We will explore this public debate in some detail in unit S250_2 Social issues and GM crops. You may find it interesting to see if your opinions change as a result of studying the scientific and social issues.

Your own experience of the GM controversy is likely to have been shaped by events in the country where you live. However, GM technology in plants raises issues of global importance, approached and resolved in very different ways, that often mix local, national and global perspectives. In India for example, attitudes to GM have been shaped in part by concerns about the influence of foreign multinationals, as opposed to home-grown technologies. India's Government supports local research into high-protein potatoes, high-yield mustard and drought- and salt-tolerant rice. But it has banned the import of maize or soya flour from US aid agencies, after several Indian environmental organisations protested against the GM content of such products. In the US, there is a generally high level of acceptance and utilisation of GM foods and there is no requirement to label products derived from transgenic crops. Clearly, many factors outside science influence decision making, and these may well differ between countries. We will explore some of these issues, but initially, it is useful to have an overview of the position of GM crops globally.

Activity 1

You should allow 0 hour(s), 30 minute(s).

Click on the 'View document' link below to open and print out a copy of the survey that accompanied the GM Nation? debate. Do not spend a great deal of time considering the answers – the idea is to get a quick snapshot the debate.

View document

Part (b) – 30 minutes

The idea of this part of the activity is to gain an overview of what types of GM crops are being grown around the world. GM crops were first grown commercially in 1995 and the data here are for the year 2004. Begin by examining Figure 1, and Table 1.

Figure 1: World map showing the countries growing GM crops commercially in 2004. The map includes, for each country, the area sown with GM crops and the major crops grown.

Table 1:The take-up of GM crops in 2004.

Crop	Herbicide tolerance	Insect resistance	Herbicide tolerance and insect resistance combined	Total
soybean	48.4	–	–	48.4
maize	4.3	11.2	3.8	19.3
cotton	1.5	4.5	3.0	9.0
canola (oilseed rape)	4.3	–	–	4.3
total	58.5	15.7	6.8	81.0

Note: this table gives the area (in millions of hectares) given over to the cultivation of each type of GM crop: herbicide-tolerant, insect-resistant, and with both attributes combined. No other GM crops were grown on a significant scale.

Using the data in Figure 1 and Table 1, try to get an overview of which GM crops are grown and where:

(i) Which countries form the top five in terms of total area of GM crops, and what percentage of the area sown with GM crops is grown in these countries?

(ii) Given that a reasonable estimate of total area of cultivated land in 2004 would be approximately 1400 million hectares, what percentage of the world's cultivated land is used to grow GM crops?

(iii) In 2003 it was estimated that 47.3 million hectares were sown with GM crops in developed countries, with 20.4 million hectares in the developing countries. Find the areas sown in 2004 and calculate the percentage increase in each case. Comment on any differences you observe.

(iv) Use your answers to (i)–(iii) to write a few sentences (no more than 100 words) summarising the position of GM crops in global agriculture in the year 2004. It is important that you write down your thoughts at this stage, because you will be asked to look back at your ideas when you tackle later activities.

Now read the discussion

Discussion

Seventeen countries grew GM crops, and four types of crops were grown. Were you surprised to learn that in 2004, after nine years of commercial cultivation, there were only four types of GM crop grown globally in significant amounts? These crops were modified to show either herbicide tolerance, insect resistance, or both these traits. (We will examine in Sections 2 and 3 how the traits are introduced and how they work.)

(i) The top five GM crop-growing countries are, in order, the USA, Argentina, Canada, Brazil and China. It is significant that three of these five are in the developing world. These countries had a total area of 77.9 million hectares of GM crops, forming 96% of the 81.0 million hectares sown globally.

(ii) These 81.0 million hectares used to grow GM crops covered just under 6% of the world's cultivated land. Nevertheless, this is a very large area, over three times the land area of the UK.

(iii) In 2004, 53.4 million hectares in developed countries were used to grow GM crops, compared to 27.6 million hectares in developing countries. Significantly, these represent annual increases of 13% and 35% respectively. It appears that GM crops are being taken up in developing countries far more quickly than in developed ones. (This is explored further in Section 3.)

(iv) I would summarise the global position of GM crops in 2004 as follows:

The area of land sown with GM crops has grown extremely quickly in the nine years since they were first grown commercially, in 2004 forming 6% of the global area of cultivated land. However, take-up has been limited to 17 countries, and five of these cultivate over 96% of the area sown. The types of GM crops grown were also limited; in 2004 only four different GM crops were grown, modified to show herbicide tolerance or insect resistance or both traits.

Preamble

2 Genetic modification of plant cells

Preamble

Your answers to Activity 1 will have revealed that the initial development of commercial GM crops has focused on the introduction of two traits: herbicide tolerance and insect resistance. However, many other traits have been introduced into crops that have yet to be grown commercially on any scale. These traits include characteristics such as resistance to viral, bacterial and fungal infections, stress tolerance (for example to high levels of salt in the soil), changes to flower pigmentation, and modification of plant nutritional content. You will explore the current global state of play in an activity at the end of this unit, and it may be revealing to discover which, if any, of these traits have become commercially significant since this topic was written (2006).

At this point we will begin to explore how these transformations are carried out. Techniques that have been developed to modify E. coli cells to produce insulin can be built on, but transformation of plant cells provides unique challenges, as they are much more resistant to accepting foreign genetic material. Luckily, a naturally occurring soil bacterium, Agrobacterium tumefaciens, has evolved that overcome these challenges.

2.1 Crown gall disease: genetic engineering in nature

2 Genetic modification of plant cells

2.1 Crown gall disease: genetic engineering in nature

A. tumefaciens causes crown gall disease in a wide range of dicotyledonous plants. (Dicotyledonous plants, are also known as dicots, have broad leaves with branching veins. An example would be a broad leaved tree like an oak. Narrow leaved plants with parallel grains such as grasses are known as monocotyledonous plant or monocots.) The infection normally occurs at the site of a wound in the plant. The disease gains its name from the large tumour-like swellings, or galls, that occur on the stem, branches or roots of the plant. (Tumour induction is specific to these plants and is unrelated to gene-induced tumour formation in animals.) The galls often occur at the crown of the plant, the point where the main roots join the stem (Figure 2). During an infection, the bacterium transfers part of its DNA into the plant's cells. The DNA becomes integrated into the plant's genome, causing the production of galls and changes in cell metabolism.

Figure 2: A crown gall on the trunk of an eastern red cedar, Juniperus virginiana. Unusually, in this instance the bacterium has infected a monocot. (The soil has been removed from the roots.)

A. tumefaciens can be modified to allow foreign genes to be incorporated into the genome of plant cells. In order to understand the processes involved, it is important to understand how ‘natural’ infection occurs.

Most of the genes involved in crown gall disease are not borne on the chromosome of A. tumefaciens but on a plasmid, termed the Ti (tumour-inducing) plasmid. A plasmid is a circle of DNA separate from the chromosome, capable of replicating independently in the cell and of being transferred from one bacterial cell to another.

The Ti plasmid is large, between 200 and 800 kb in size. However, a relatively small (12–24 kb) region of the Ti plasmid, called the transfer DNA (T-DNA), is integrated into a host plant chromosome during the infection process. This region is indicated in Figures 3 and 4; it contains the genes coding for both gall formation and for the synthesis of opines. Opines are modified amino acids. They are synthesised by plant cells within the crown gall and provide a source of carbon (and sometimes nitrogen) for A. tumefaciens, but cannot be used by the plant itself. Essentially, the bacteria hijack the biochemical machinery of the plant cells, using them to generate a food source that only it can utilise. You may notice in Figure 4 that the genes encoding bacterial enzymes used in opine catabolism (i.e. its breakdown) are also present in the Ti plasmid, but they are located outside the T-region.

The genes responsible for the transfer of the T-DNA into the host are also located outside the T-DNA region itself. These genes make up the virulence region and they encode proteins that facilitate the transfer of the T-DNA, and its integration into the plant cell's genome.

An overview of the events in crown gall formation is given in Figure 3.

Figure 3: How A. tumefaciens genetically transforms plants. A. tumefaciens contains a tumour-inducing (Ti) plasmid, which contains both virulence (vir) genes and a transfer-DNA (T-DNA) region. The bacterium attaches to a plant cell, and the T-DNA and Vir proteins are transferred to the plant through a transport channel. Inside the plant cell, the Vir proteins promote the integration of the T-DNA into the plant genome.

Figure 4: An enlarged representation of the Ti plasmid. The T-DNA has left and right borders at its extremities and includes genes that produce tumours and opines. Outside the T-DNA is the virulence region. This is a cluster of genes that encode proteins that facilitate the transfer of the T-DNA into the host. The origin of DNA replication (ORI) is a sequence specific to A. tumefaciens at which DNA copying starts, allowing the plasmid to be copied within the bacterium. Three positions, A, B and C, are marked for use in the question in Section 2.2.

2.2 Using A. tumefaciens to genetically modify plant cells

2 Genetic modification of plant cells

2.2 Using A. tumefaciens to genetically modify plant cells

Genetic engineers have capitalised on the fact that part of the DNA from the Ti plasmid of A. tumefaciens is integrated into the plant genome during the infection process. Ti plasmids can be isolated and a foreign gene spliced in at an appropriate point, making it possible to transfer the novel gene into the plant.

In Figure 4, three positions on the Ti plasmid are marked by letters A, B and C. Which would be the best place to insert the foreign gene?

Now read the answer

Position B is evidently no use since this part of the plasmid is not transferred during infection. Position A looks attractive but although the genes in this region facilitate the gene transfer they are not themselves transferred. This leaves position C; only the T-DNA is integrated into the plant genome, so the foreign gene would need to be inserted somewhere in this region.

The principle underlying the use of the Ti plasmid as a vector for plant transformation is that any gene placed between the left and right border sequences (i.e. within the T-DNA region, see Figure 4) will be transferred into the infected plant cell. However the Ti plasmid is rather large and, as such, difficult to manipulate. Special procedures have been devised that allow the use of a much smaller ‘artificial’ Ti plasmids. We will describe one such procedure, the binary vector system.

An artificial Ti plasmid (Figure 5a) is generated that contains the gene we wish to transfer and a plant selectable marker gene (such as one for resistance to the antibiotic kanamycin) between the left and right borders from the T-DNA region. We will return to the role of the kanamycin resistance gene below, but what you need to know here is that its purpose is to allow us to detect whether plant cells have taken up the foreign gene.

The commonly accepted definition of an antibiotic is that it is a chemical which kills or inhibits the growth of bacteria. You are probably familiar with the use of antibiotics to treat bacterial infections. A more precise definition would be that antibiotics are substances produced naturally by various organisms (usually bacteria, fungi or plants) in order to limit the growth of, or kill other organisms. The organisms affected are usually, but not always, bacteria. Some antibiotics, like kanamycin, are toxic to plant cells; other antibiotics, like streptomycin are not. In fact streptomycin is used to minimise losses from certain bacterial diseases of apples and pears.

Figure 5: The production of transgenic plants using A. tumefaciens. (a) The artificial Ti plasmid. The T-DNA region will be transferred to the plant cell, and contains the foreign gene and a plant selectable marker gene. The marker gene will allow the identification of plant cells that have taken up the foreign gene. (b) The artificial Ti plasmid is generated in E. coli, and then transferred to A. tumefaciens containing a helper vector. This second plasmid contains the vir region which encodes the proteins that facilitate DNA transfer from the bacterium into plant cells. (c) The T-DNA section is transferred from this modified A. tumefaciens into the plant cell's genome.

It is important that the artificial Ti plasmid contains origins of replication so that it can be copied both in A. tumefaciens and in E. coli. Most of the manipulations required to modify the Ti plasmid are carried out in E. coli as indicated in Figure 5.

What features of a normal Ti plasmid (Figure 4) are missing from the artificial Ti plasmid (Figure 5a)?

Now read the answer

The tumour-producing genes, the virulence region and the genes coding for opine synthesis and catabolism.

Which of these features is essential to allow transfer and integration of the genes in the T-DNA region?

Now read the answer

Only the virulence region is necessary. The tumour-producing genes and the genes related to opine synthesis and catabolism are not required. We do not want the modified plants to produce galls, or for the transgenic plants to synthesise opines – it would utilise valuable resources.

So, having constructed the artificial Ti plasmid, we now need a technique that allows the features of the virulence region to be present in the A. tumefaciens. Using the binary vector system, this problem is solved by including the virulence region (vir) in a second plasmid. This is called a disarmed Ti plasmid (see Figure 5b) because the entire T-region has been removed. This is often referred to as a helper vector and we will use this simpler term.

The artificial Ti plasmid is transferred from E. coli to A. tumefaciens containing a helper vector (Figure 5b) via a process known as conjugation - a term used to describe direct transfer of genetic material from one bacterium to another.

The modified A. tumefaciens containing both the artificial Ti plasmid and the helper vector is then used to infect the target plant cells. On infection, the virulence genes are activated and the DNA between the left- and right-hand borders of the artificial Ti plasmid is transferred to a plant chromosome. The full process is summarised in Figure 5.

2.3 From infected cells to transgenic plants

2 Genetic modification of plant cells

2.3 From infected cells to transgenic plants

Unlike the ‘natural’ infection process, where only the cells at the site of the crown gall are affected by the inserted T-DNA, scientists wanted to introduce new genes into all the cells of the plant. Fortunately, most plant cells are totipotent, which means that any cell from any part of the plant is capable of dividing into cells that can form any or all of the plant's tissues. This means that, using appropriate growth hormones and other tissue culture techniques, a single infected plant cell can be induced to divide and form an entire, new, fertile plant.

In order to produce genetically modified plants, A. tumefaciens carrying the artificial Ti plasmid and helper vector are incubated with plant fragments (explants) for 48 hours. The explants could be leaf discs or cotyledon (seed leaf) slices or root segments. They have a cut surface and the wounded cells produced by the cut are the sites of DNA transfer from A. tumefaciens. The explants are then placed on culture plates containing nutrient medium, kanamycin and a growth regulator to stimulate the division of the cells to produce new plants.

What is the purpose of the kanamycin?

Now read the answer

Kanamycin is used to selectively kill plant cells that have not been transformed.

Remember that genetically modified plant cells contain the kanamycin resistance gene, which we introduced as a plant selectable marker gene (Section 2.2 and Figure 5a). This means that modified plant cells can produce an enzyme that breaks down the otherwise toxic kanamycin. Untransformed cells cannot produce the enzyme and are killed.

New tissue develops at the site of wounding on the explants. New shoots that develop from this tissue are separated from the explant and induced to root. The plantlets that develop can be tested for the appropriate phenotype. If the results are positive, the plantlets are allowed to develop into mature plants.

The modified plants initially produced are crossed with established high-yielding varieties, using conventional plant breeding methods. The offspring are repeatedly crossed with the established varieties until a true-breeding transgenic line is produced.

Box 1: The gene gun – biolistics

Transformation via A. tumefaciens has been successfully practiced for many years and is now the main route used to create transgenic dicots. However, until relatively recently, this gene transfer method was thought to be of little use with monocots. This was a problem, because so many of the world's staple crops, like rice and wheat, are monocots. Alternative methods for transformation of plant cells have been developed, and microprojectile bombardment, sometimes referred to as biolistics (ballistics using biological components) is probably the most important. In this technique, a particle gun (or gene gun) literally shoots genes into plant cells. The DNA to be delivered is attached to tiny gold or tungsten balls (1–2 μm in diameter). These are put onto a disk which is placed inside the gene gun. A blast of high pressure gas propels the disk forwards at roughly the same speed as a bullet leaving a rifle. A screen stops the disk and the tiny gold or tungsten balls are launched towards the target cells. The balls penetrate the cell membrane and release the DNA-carrying particles. In a minority of cases, the DNA particles will then be successfully integrated into the host cell's DNA.

3.1 Insect resistance

3 Common traits introduced by GM

3.1 Insect resistance

We will now look briefly at the science underlying the traits introduced into commercial crops, which you explored in Activity 1; a useful place to start is by considering how the property of resistance to insects is acquired by crops.

Insect damage causes huge losses of agricultural crops each year. For example, without control measures it is estimated that over 35% of current global cotton production would be lost. Insect control by conventional means is big business, and the sale of insecticides generates many billions of dollars of revenue for multinational companies. Unfortunately, insects develop resistance to insecticides over time, and this can force farmers to use ever increasing amounts to achieve control. This increases the costs to the farmers, and deposits ever larger amounts of toxic chemicals into the environment.

If plants could be genetically engineered to produce their own insecticides, the costs and hazards of insecticide spraying might be reduced or removed altogether. A number of strategies to genetically modify plants in this way have been developed, but the only crops that have been grown commercially at the time of writing (2006) have been the so-called Bt crops. These have been modified so as to produce an insecticide derived from Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt for short), another common soil bacterium.

When growing conditions are not optimal, Bacillus thuringiensis forms spores that contain protein crystals toxic to insects. Bt comprises a large number of subspecies and each one produces its own particular toxin. So, for example, Bacillus thuringiensis subspecies kurstaki produces a toxin that kills the larvae of Lepidoptera (i.e. moths and butterflies) and a toxin from the subspecies israelensis is effective against Diptera such as mosquitoes and blackflies.

Spore preparations derived from Bacillus thuringiensis have been used by organic farmers as an insecticide for several decades. When the target insect ingests the Bt spore, the protein crystal dissociates into several identical subunits. These subunits are a protoxin, i.e. a precursor of the active toxin. Under the alkaline conditions of the insect's gut, digestive enzymes (proteases) unique to the insect break down the protoxin to release the active toxin. The toxin molecules insert themselves into the membrane of the gut epithelial cells, setting in motion a series of processes that eventually stop all the cell's metabolic activity. The insect stops feeding, becomes dehydrated and eventually dies. The protoxin requires both alkaline pH and specific proteases before it can be converted to its active form. It is considered unlikely that humans or farm animals would be affected by the protoxin, as initial digestion in mammals occurs under acidic conditions. In addition, there are no binding sites for the toxin on the surface of mammalian intestinal cells.

These properties of Bt spores do make them a particularly appropriate form of insecticide, but there are a number of limitations. The spores are not toxic on contact – they must be eaten by insects during the feeding stage of their development, i.e. when they are larvae. Spraying has to be carried out when most of the insect population are at this stage in the life cycle. In order to encourage insects to eat the spores, they have to be mixed with appropriate insect attractants. Another limitation is that once boring insects have penetrated into the stems or roots of the plants, any spraying will be ineffective, as the spores remain on the surface of the plant.

What would be the advantages of modifying a plant in order to produce the Bt toxin?

Now read the answer

The toxin would be present in the plant throughout the growing season, protecting the plant at all times. If the toxin is expressed in all cells, the insects will be affected irrespective of whether they are feeding on the surface or have bored into a root or stem.

Several crops have been modified so as to be insect-resistant by incorporation of Bt genes. These include tobacco, tomato, potato, cotton and maize. The insertion of the Bt gene directly into the genome of the crop allows the plants to produce Bt protoxin in their own cells. In most instances, the transfer of the Bt gene into crops has been mediated by A. tumefaciens, but microprojectile bombardment (Box 1) has also been used.

However, initial attempts to introduce the gene into a variety of crops did not produce plants with an effective defence against insect attack. Initially, the levels of the protoxin produced in the plant cells were too low to be effective. The problem was that the protoxin genes were not well expressed in plant cells. A number of strategies were adopted to increase the levels of expression, including the following.

A shortened version of the gene was used, producing a smaller, but equally toxic, protein. This seemed to make it easier for the plant cell's biochemical machinery to produce the protoxin, and increased levels of expression a little.
A particularly powerful promoter sequence was incorporated into the plant genome, alongside the shortened gene. This increased the levels of expression such that an enhanced insecticidal effect was observed.
A synthetic version of the gene was produced, containing the DNA triplets more commonly used in plants rather than those found in bacteria. This resulted in approximately 100 times more expression of the protoxin in the plant cells, and provided the plants with significant protection against insect attack.

Theoretically, producing Bt crops, which express high levels of the Bt protoxin in their cells, should confer constant insect resistance, and therefore remove the need for application of any insecticide dusts or sprays. In practice, the system is not completely effective, and the number of insecticide applications is reduced rather than eliminated altogether.

3.2 Herbicide tolerance

3 Common traits introduced by GM

3.2 Herbicide tolerance

As you discovered from Activity 1, herbicide tolerance is the trait most commonly incorporated into commercial GM plants. A crop can be made tolerant to herbicide by inserting a gene that causes plants to become unresponsive to the toxic chemical. Before considering how the genetic manipulation can be achieved, it is useful to understand a little about how herbicides act.

Many herbicides work by inhibiting a key plant enzyme necessary for growth (if you're not exactly sure what this means, see Box 2, below). The herbicide glyphosate (also known as Roundup^™) is the world's largest-selling herbicide. It is a broad-spectrum herbicide which can kill a wide variety of monocot and dicot weeds. It is particularly effective because it is transported downwards in plants and so has the advantage of killing the roots of perennial weeds.

Glyphosate inhibits EPSP synthase, an enzyme that is involved in the shikimic acid pathway (see Figure 6). The enzyme catalyses the conversion of 3-phosphoshikimate to the compound EPSP. (If you are interested, this stands for 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate, but this level of detail doesn't really concern us here!). EPSP is converted, via a series of biochemical reactions, into essential aromatic amino acids like phenylalanine, tyrosine and tryptophan. Glyphosate acts by binding with EPSP synthase, and in doing so, prevents the enzyme from catalysing the reaction. If the shikimic acid pathway is blocked in this way, the plant is deprived of these essential amino acids and cannot make the proteins it requires. The plant weakens and eventually dies.

Figure 6: Plants produce a number of amino acids via the shikimic acid pathway. Shikimate, a substance derived from the simple 4-carbon sugar erythrose, is converted via a sequence of steps into chorismate, which is the precursor of several essential aromatic amino acids. The herbicide glyphosate prevents the production of chorismate by inhibiting EPSP synthase. If you find following this sequence difficult, the information in Box 2 should help.

Box 2: Reading biochemical pathways

You may have come across biochemical pathways in your earlier studies. A key feature of all biochemical processes is that they take place in stages. Substances are made or broken down by an orderly sequence of linked chemical reactions called a metabolic pathway. Each chemical reaction in the pathway is catalysed by an enzyme. If the enzyme is not present, the rate of the reaction will usually be negligible. The precise mechanisms of these individual reactions form a fascinating area of study, but for our current purposes you do not need to have anything more than an outline.

To illustrate how these metabolic pathways are represented, we will look at an imaginary sequence of reactions, in which a substance A is converted into substance E by a sequence of four reactions:

Note that it is usual to represent the chemical transformation with a simple arrow, and to write the name of the enzyme catalysing the transformation beside the arrow. Such sequences usually focus on the most important chemical substances involved, and the less interesting participants are not included in the scheme. For example, many reactions will involve the gain or loss of phosphate groups or water molecules, but these are often omitted.

If for some reason, we wanted to block this pathway, we might try to prevent the action of one or more of these enzymes, a process known as inhibition. If, for example, we were able to effectively inhibit enzyme 2 in our sequence, we could slow or stop the conversion of substance B into substance C. This might cause the build up of substance B, and also prevent the production of our end product, substance E. The disruption of pathways in this way often severely damages an organism, and can kill it.

If crops can be made resistant to glyphosate, then the herbicide can be applied during the active growing phase without fear of damage to the crop. In the early 1980s, the biotechnology company Monsanto set about introducing glyphosate tolerance using a strategy that could be termed ‘overproduction’. Petunia plants were selected that were expressing high levels of the enzyme EPSP synthase. The mRNA corresponding to the EPSP synthase gene was isolated and cDNA prepared. The cDNA was incorporated in an appropriate Ti plasmid, and the ‘gene’ was then used to produce transgenic plants using A. tumefaciens mediation. These showed 40- to 80-fold enhanced levels of EPSP synthase. The idea was that when glyphosate was applied, a proportion of the EPSP synthase would be inhibited, but sufficient quantities of enzyme would be produced to allow the shikimic acid pathway to function normally. Although the modified plants did show increased tolerance to glyphosate, the level was insufficient for commercial use and many of the plants showed growth retardation following glyphosate application.

Towards the middle of the 1980s, a different approach was explored. The idea was to discover an organism whose EPSP synthase had a reduced affinity for glyphosate but still had normal enzyme activity, so that the shikimic acid pathway could still operate normally. Although glyphosate is very effective in killing plants, some bacteria are able to tolerate it and these bacteria were potential sources of a gene coding for a glyphosate-tolerant EPSP synthase. One such gene was introduced into maize, using microprojectile bombardment (biolistic) transformation (Box 1). The novel EPSP synthase gene allowed the transgenic plants to continue producing aromatic amino acids in the presence of glyphosate, and conferred high levels of tolerance to the herbicide.

Introduction

4 Golden Rice: a case study

Introduction

In the previous section, you explored the science related to the development of the two traits found in the early commercial GM crops. Their production has been driven by commercial imperatives, and some of the widespread criticism of these crops has reflected a suspicion that they meet the needs of the multinationals’ shareholders, rather than those of wider society.

As biotechnological techniques have become more sophisticated, new types of crop have become possible, and in this section we will explore the early stages of the development of one such ‘second generation’ GM crop, Golden Rice. The development of this crop differs both in the level of technological challenge, and in the type of ethical issues that arise. The rice has been modified to contain a precursor of vitamin A – a vital constituent missing from the diet of millions of impoverished people in developing countries.

4.1 Vitamin A deficiency

4 Golden Rice: a case study

4.1 Vitamin A deficiency

Vitamin A, more properly known as retinol, is an important chemical intermediate in a number of biochemical processes in mammals. It is involved in vision, and is found in the rod cells of the retina of the eye. These cells are particularly important in seeing at low light levels, and night blindness is a symptom of vitamin A deficiency (VAD). Vitamin A is also involved in the proper functioning of the immune system. Children suffering from VAD are prone to serious infections, and often die from relatively minor illnesses, like diarrhoea or measles. The World Health Organisation in 2003 estimated that between 100 and 140 million children worldwide were vitamin A deficient, of whom between 250 000 and 500 000 become blind each year. Of these, half died within 12 months of losing their sight.

Many plants and bacteria can produce vitamin A from simpler molecules, but mammals cannot. Humans can either ingest vitamin A directly, or produce it by the chemical cleavage of one of a group of molecules called carotenoids. Carotenoid molecules contain 40 carbon atoms, and mammals can chemically cleave a number of them to produce either one or two molecules of the 20-carbon retinol. A number of related carotenoid molecules are found in the human diet. The ones that can be converted into vitamin A are referred to as the provitamin A carotenoids. The commonest of these is β-carotene (see Table 2).

Table 2: Estimates of the retinol provided by common dietary carotenoids using the Retinol Equivalent (RE) and Retinol Activity Equivalent (RAE) scales. (See text for explanation.)

	Colour	Mass (μg) equivalent to activity of 1 μg of retinol (RE scale)	Mass (μg) equivalent to activity of 1 μg of retinol (RAE scale)
Provitamin A carotenoids
-carotene	orange	12	24
β-carotene	orange	6	12
β-cryptoxanthin	orange	12	24
Other common dietary carotenoids
lutein	red	n/a	n/a
zeaxanthin	yellow	n/a	n/a
lycopene	red	n/a	n/a

The bioconversion of provitamin A carotenoids into retinol is not efficient, and different provitamin A carotenoids provide different amounts of retinol when processed by the human system. Various methods have been used to gain a rough idea of how much retinol a carotenoid will produce. Until very recently, the concept of a Retinol Equivalent (RE) has been widely used. This is a measure of the mass of a given carotenoid that will be converted to 1 μg of retinol in the human body. You can see from Table 2 that according to this system, it takes 6 μg of β-carotene to produce 1 μg of retinol. In recent years a number of nutritionists have argued that RE values overestimate the level of retinol produced by a factor of two. They propose a new scale, and use the term Retinol Activity Equivalent (RAE). Some institutions, like the WHO, still use REs, but this may change over the life of this unit.

Whether REs or RAEs are used, estimates of dietary requirements can only be very approximate, as the precise value will depend on the source of the food, how it is prepared, and other aspects of the diet. In particular, in order to absorb the retinol, a certain level of fat is required in the diet. The efficiency with which different individuals metabolise the provitamin A carotenoids will also differ.

Nevertheless, the concept of retinol equivalents is useful to help measure the amount of vitamin A in the diet.

According to the WHO, a woman aged 25–50 should consume a recommended dietary allowance (RDA) of 800 μg Retinol Equivalents (REs) each day. If it were the sole source of retinol in her diet, what mass of β-carotene would a woman have to consume each day to meet this requirement?

Now read the answer

Using REs, the table above indicates that 6 μg of β-carotene is roughly equivalent to 1 μg of retinol, so the RDA in terms of β-carotene is 6 × 800 μg = 4800 μg of β-carotene.

Figure 7: Carrots aren't just orange. (1)‘Normal’ (i.e. orange) carrots, in which the main pigment is β-carotene, with some -carotene. (2) Yellow carrots; the main pigments are xanthophylls like zeaxanthin. (3) Red carrots; main pigment lycopene. (4) White carrot, with no pigments. (5) Purple carrots; here the pigments are not carotenoid compounds but a class of compounds called anthocyanins. Allegedly these carrots all taste the same!

This quantity of β-carotene could be found in approximately 40 g of raw carrots (Figure 7). If the estimate was calculated using RAEs, the figure would be 80 g of raw carrots.

The carotenoids form an important part of a balanced diet. A number of studies have suggested that they may have anti-cancer properties, perhaps resulting from their ability to act as antioxidants.

Vitamin A itself occurs in animal products, particularly in meat, liver, eggs and milk. Carotenoid compounds are found in a variety of vegetables and fruit. We have seen that β-carotene is found in carrots. Lycopene is found in relatively high concentrations in tomatoes.

What sort of diet will minimise vitamin A deficiency (VAD)?

Now read the answer

Given the wide variety of foods that contain vitamin A and carotenes, any reasonably varied diet that contains sufficient fat will provide adequate sources of vitamin A.

VAD is a disease of poverty, found where people are unable to afford an appropriate diet. It is prevalent in countries where rice is a staple, particularly in South Asia. The rice plant itself does contain carotenes: they are found in both the leaves and the husks. Rice that has not been milled, brown rice, can therefore be an important source of both dietary fibre and carotenes.

However, white rice is often considered more palatable, and in many countries cultural issues surround the type of rice that is eaten. Unprocessed brown rice is seen as fit only for the lowest in society. Another factor is that milled rice is more easily stored. The husk contains a high proportion of oils which can degrade, causing the rice to become rancid if it is stored for a long time.

A strategy for ridding the world of VAD?

In July 2000, Time magazine announced that a potential solution to VAD had been found – ‘Golden Rice’ (Figure 8). This was a variety of rice that had been genetically modified to introduce β-carotene into the endosperm (part of the grain of the rice). The name arises from the fact that the otherwise white grains of rice are given a golden colour by the presence of carotenoid compounds.

The announcement came at the height of the global controversy over genetically modified crops. The previous year had seen thousands of anti-globalisation and anti-GM protesters gather outside the meeting of the World Trade Organisation in Seattle. Crops had been destroyed both in the UK and abroad. In India, peasant and trades union activists targeted the crops and offices of the company they saw as the major villain in the ‘Cremate Monsanto’ campaign. The share prices of the biotechnology companies suffered, and at one point the respected Deutsche Bank had advised against investments in companies involved in GM crops, declaring ‘GMOs are dead’.

Figure 8: Time magazine announces the development of Golden Rice. Note that even at this early stage a dispute was raging about the benefits, or otherwise of this technology.

Many of the proponents of GM crops hoped that Golden Rice would prove more politically acceptable than the earlier, more obviously commercial crops. Here, potentially, was a technological solution for what people across the political spectrum could agree is an urgent humanitarian problem. We will explore further some of the debates about this new crop later in the unit, but first we will examine the science involved.

4.2 The science behind Golden Rice

4 Golden Rice: a case study

4.2 The science behind Golden Rice

Modifying crops to produce the Bt toxin (Section 3.1) was, in some ways, relatively simple. The toxin is a single protein and can therefore be produced as a result of the insertion of a single gene into the plant's genome. Similarly, introducing herbicide tolerance (Section 3.2) typically involves modifying the action of a single enzyme, and therefore modification again involves the insertion of a single gene.

β-carotene is not a protein. It is a hydrocarbon, i.e. a compound containing only hydrogen and carbon atoms.

Is β-carotene coded for by a gene?

Now read the answer

Not directly; genes generally code for proteins. However, β-carotene is produced by a series of biochemical reactions, each of which is catalysed by a specific enzyme. Each of these enzymes (which are proteins) will be coded for by a specific gene.

The series of reactions that produces β-carotene in plants begins with the compound isopentenyl diphosphate (abbreviated as IPP). A common intermediate in many of the biochemical pathways from IPP, geranylgeranyl diphosphate (GGPP), is present in rice endosperm, but conversion to β-carotene was expected to require a four-stage process, involving four separate enzymes (Figure 9).

Figure 9: Carotenoid biosynthesis in plants. Carotenoids are produced in a series of interlinked steps within plastids, a type of organelle found in plant cells (not to be confused with plasmids which we met earlier). They are derived from a common precursor, isopentenyl diphosphate (IPP). The first step in the carotenoid pathway is the combination of two molecules of geranylgeranyl diphosphate (GGPP) to produce phytoene. (The symbol ‘ζ’ in ζ-carotene is the Greek letter ‘zeta’.)

Given that GGPP is already present in the cells of the rice endosperm, how many genes have to be introduced to allow its conversion into β-carotene?

Now read the answer

The process involves four stages, each catalysed by its own enzyme. In order to produce these four enzymes, four genes would have to be introduced.

The development of β-carotene-enriched rice was first proposed in 1992, by German and Swiss scientists, Peter Beyer and Ingo Potrykus respectively. At the time, the work seemed almost ludicrously ambitious. To attempt to introduce a single protein via insertion of a single gene was difficult enough, but to introduce four at once was surely too difficult. Potrykus had approached Nestlé, one of the world's largest food corporations, to fund the work, but was turned down. Eventually, he persuaded the Rockefeller Foundation, a charitable institution, to provide the funding to start the work.

Potrykus’ team planned to introduce each gene separately into individual rice plants, and then perform conventional crossing experiments in an attempt to produce a plant with all four enzymes active in the endosperm. Their method of choice was to use microprojectile bombardment (Box 1) on cells from immature rice embryos. The initial results were encouraging, and introduction of phytoene synthase was unproblematic. Phytoene was shown to accumulate in the endosperm, and the plants were healthy and fertile. However, repeated attempts to introduce the second enzyme in the sequence, phytoene desaturase, failed to produce healthy plants.

The project appeared to have reached a dead end, but a new member of the project team came up with some radical new ideas. Xudong Ye had just finished his doctoral research in a related area, and was eager to continue his studies with Potrykus. Unfortunately his time with the group was limited, and he could devote only one year to the work, as he planned to go to America. In order to have any prospect of success within the timescale, and after discussion with his colleagues, he proposed restarting the work, using a new approach. His plan was:

To introduce the genes using Agrobacterium-mediated transformation.
To insert a bacterial gene encoding an enzyme that would convert phytoene directly to lycopene, in effect performing two steps of the sequence in a single transformation.
To introduce the genes for all three enzymes that were needed at once.

The proposed simplified pathway is summarised in Figure 10.

Figure 10: Proposed simplified route to β-carotene. What was proposed was that β-carotene would be produced in the rice endosperm by a three-step sequence: (1) GGPP would be converted to phytoene in the normal way, catalysed by phytoene synthase produced by a gene from a daffodil. (2) Phytoene would be converted directly to lycopene, catalysed by bacterial phytoene desaturase. (3) Lycopene would be converted to β-carotene, catalysed by lycopene β-cyclase, again produced by a daffodil gene.

Introducing sequences for three enzymes would be easier than introducing four, but despite using the generally more effective Agrobacterium-mediated Ti plasmid method, this would still be attempting to do a great deal of transformation all at once.

Why do you think that Potrykus and his co-workers initially used the less effective biolistic transformation method?

Now read the answer

Rice is a monocot, and you may recall that, until relatively recently, the A. tumefaciens method was restricted for use with dicots (Box 1).

The necessary genes had to be isolated, cloned and spliced into the T-DNA of a Ti plasmid, using the techniques we have discussed in Section 2. Remember that each gene sequence requires a promoter as well as the gene itself.

What is the role of a promoter sequence?

Now read the answer

The promoter ‘turns on’ the gene, i.e. it causes the cell's machinery to start transcribing the sequence of DNA.

In this case, the promoter needs to be one that is specific to the endosperm, so that the gene will be expressed in the endosperm and not in any other part of the plant. Further sequences are also required, including antibiotic resistance genes or other selection markers, sequences that allow some of the enzymes to be bound to a membrane within the cell, and sequences that produce proteins facilitating transport of the enzymes from the cytoplasm of the cell into specific organelles. The details of these sequences do not really concern us here, but it is important to appreciate that in order to introduce a gene for each enzyme, a whole series of sequences have to be introduced.

The team undertook two experiments, in each case using A. tumefaciens and the binary vector system described in Section 2.2. The technique involved the infection of immature rice embryos, rather than fragments of mature plants.

Experiment 1: The team produced A. tumefaciens with an artificial Ti plasmid containing the series of sequences necessary to introduce active phytoene synthase and the bacterial phytoene desaturase. They attempted to infect around 800 immature rice embryos, of which 50 were found to have taken up the sequences. These embryos would be expected to produce only the first two of the enzymes required, those needed to convert GGPP to lycopene.
Experiment 2: The team produced two types of modified A. tumefaciens. Type A contained all the sequences necessary for active phytoene synthase and the bacterial phytoene desaturase enzyme, as previously. Type B contained the series of sequences necessary to introduce the final enzyme in the biosynthesis, lycopene β-cyclase. 500 immature rice embryos were infected with both types of A. tumefaciens at once. Sixty embryos could be shown to have been infected by type A, but only 12 to have been infected by both types of A. tumefaciens.

The team was able to grow the 50 rice embryos from Experiment 1 and the 12 doubly infected embryos from Experiment 2 into mature rice plants. They allowed the plants to self-fertilise, and go on to produce a crop of rice (Figure 11).

Figure 11: Polished rice grains derived from Experiments 1 and 2. (a) Panel 1 shows unmodified rice, the control; panels 2, 3 and 4 show rice derived from three different plants from Experiment 1. (b) Panels 1 to 4 show rice derived from four different plants from Experiment 2. Note that at lower concentrations, β-carotene will give a yellow rather than an orange colouration.

Look again at Figure 9 and Figure 10. Assuming the enzymes are expressed and active in both cases, what intermediates from the β-carotene pathway would you expect to see produced in the rice grains from each experiment?

Now read the answer

From Experiment 1 we might expect to see increased levels of lycopene, compared to unmodified grains. In Experiment 2 we would expect to see increased levels of β-carotene.

As lycopene is red and carotene is yellow-orange, if significant amounts of the products were present we might expect Experiment 1 to produce red rice grains, while Experiment 2 would produce the expected ‘golden’ rice. In fact, both experiments produced grains that showed a more or less intense yellow colour (Figure 11). Both lines could be shown to contain β-carotene, along with lutein and zeaxanthin, which are also products of the carotene biosynthetic pathway.

We predicted that Experiment 1 might produce red rice. What has happened?

Now read the answer

The rice unexpectedly showed a yellow colouration, strongly suggesting that any (red) lycopene produced had been converted to yellow β-carotene. It appears that the rice grains are able to produce their own lycopene β-cyclase. It may be that at high concentrations of lycopene, the production of this enzyme is induced, or it may be that the enzyme is already present.

The fact that only two of the three genes had to be introduced was an unexpected bonus, and remember that initially the expectation was that four genes would be necessary. Subsequent work in a number of research teams has concentrated on introducing the genes for phytoene synthase and phytoene desaturase.

A great deal of work remained to be done before anyone could imagine the rice being grown for human consumption, but this genetically modified rice represented a huge technical breakthrough. Whatever your opinions about genetic manipulation, it is hard not to admire the ingenuity of the work.

4.3 Golden Rice in the public domain

4 Golden Rice: a case study

4.3 Golden Rice in the public domain

In January 2000, the successful experiments were announced in a paper published in the American journal Science. This, in itself, is significant. Generally, work on genetic manipulation would be published in one of a number of more specialist journals. Publication in a journal like Science indicates that this was important work, likely to be of interest to a wider audience. In its ‘Notes for Authors’, the journal states that ‘Priority is given to papers that reveal novel concepts of broad interest’. This rules out the majority of research work, and publication in Science is seen as a huge achievement in its own right.

Publication of a paper in a journal like Science tends to serve two purposes. First, it announces new results to a community of specialists within a particular area of science, in this case biotechnologists and crop scientists. Secondly, it promotes the work to a wider audience of scientists outside the specialism, including journalists, sociologists of science and interested members of the public.

To emphasise the importance of this work, the paper was accompanied by an extended editorial by Mary Guerinot (a member of the journal's editorial panel) explaining its significance. 1700 copies of the editorial were circulated to journalists across the world. It made clear the expectations of the work, and placed it firmly in the context of the debate over GM crops:

The road to better nutrition is not paved with gold and, hence, agribusiness has not centred its efforts on the nutritional value of food. The work that culminated in the production of golden rice was funded by grants from the Rockefeller Foundation, the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology and the European Community Biotech Program. Like the plant varieties that made the Green Revolution so successful, the rice engineered to produce provitamin A will be freely available to the farmers who need it most. One can only hope that this application of plant genetic engineering to ameliorate human misery without regard to short-term profit will restore this technology to political acceptability.

The ‘Green Revolution’ refers to the large increases in agricultural productivity resulting from the introduction of new varieties, fertilisers and irrigation techniques during the 1960s in the developing world.

Activity 2

You should allow 0 hour(s), 10 minute(s).

Read the above short extract carefully and try to summarise the key points Guerinot is making. Use no more than 50 words.

Now read the discussion

Discussion

I think she is making three key points:

Previous work on genetic modification has been shaped by the need of Western agrochemical multinationals to make a profit.
Public and charitable funding means this work may be made freely available to the most needy.
This breakthrough may help to persuade more people that GM crops are acceptable.

You may have also noticed that Guerinot implies that the Green Revolution was an unproblematic ‘good thing’. This is hotly disputed by those who have campaigned against GM, particularly those based in developing countries (see, for example, Extract 1, below).

The promotion of the work by Science and others did not go unnoticed. We have seen that news magazines like Time took up the story. Potrykus counted 30 TV broadcasts and 300 newspaper articles in the first year. The biotechnology industry saw the development of Golden Rice as a chance to capitalise on some good publicity. Monsanto and other biotechnology companies initiated a multimillion pound advertising campaign.

The campaigners against GM were also quick to respond. One of the most prominent amongst these was Vandana Shiva, an Indian ecological activist. Her article was widely reproduced on the Internet, an edited extract is reproduced here as Extract 1, which you should read now.

Extract 1 The ‘Golden Rice’ hoax -When public relations replaces science

by Dr Vandana Shiva

Golden rice has been heralded as the miracle cure for malnutrition and hunger of which 800 million members of the human community suffer.

Herbicide-resistant and toxin-producing genetically engineered plants can be objectionable because of their ecological and social costs. But who could possibly object to rice engineered to produce vitamin A, a deficiency found in nearly 3 million children, largely in the Third World?

Unfortunately, vitamin A rice is a hoax, and will bring further dispute to plant genetic engineering where public relations exercises seem to have replaced science in promotion of untested, unproven and unnecessary technology. The problem is that vitamin A rice will not remove vitamin A deficiency (VAD). It will seriously aggravate it.

It is a technology that fails in its promise. Currently, it is not even known how much vitamin A the genetically engineered rice will produce. The goal is 33.3 μg/100 g of rice.

Even if this goal is reached after a few years, it will be totally ineffective in removing VAD. Since the daily average requirement of vitamin A is 750 μg and one serving contains 30 g of rice, on a dry weight basis, vitamin A rice would only provide 9.9 μg, which is 1.32% of the required allowance.

Even taking the 100 g figure of daily consumption of rice used in the technology transfer paper would only provide 4.4% of the RDA. This is a recipe for creating hunger and malnutrition, not solving it. Besides creating vitamin A deficiency, vitamin A rice will also create deficiency in other micronutrients and nutrients. Raw milled rice has a low content of fat (0.5 g/100 g). Since fat is necessary for vitamin A uptake, this will aggravate vitamin A deficiency. It also has only 6.8 g/100 g of protein, which means less carrier molecules. It has only 0.7 g/100 g of iron, which plays a vital role in the conversion of β-carotene to vitamin A.

A far more efficient route to removing vitamin A deficiency is biodiversity conservation and propagation of naturally vitamin A rich plants in agriculture and diets. In spite of the diversity of plants evolved and bred for their rich vitamin A content, a report of the major science academies of the world has stated:

Vitamin A deficiency causes half a million children to become partially or totally blind each year. Traditional breeding methods have been unsuccessful in producing crops containing a high vitamin A concentration, […] Golden Rice, may be a useful tool to help treat the problem of vitamin A deficiency in young children living in the tropics.

It appears as if the world's top scientists suffer a more severe form of blindness than children in poor countries. The statement that ‘traditional breeding has been unsuccessful in producing crops high in vitamin A’ is not true given the diversity of plants and crops that Third World farmers, especially women, have bred and used which are rich sources of vitamin A.

Women in Bengal use more than 200 varieties of field greens. Over 3 million people have benefited greatly from a food based project for removing VAD by increasing vitamin A availability through home gardens. The higher the diversity crops the better the uptake of provitamin A.

The reason there is vitamin A deficiency in India, in spite of the rich biodiversity and indigenous knowledge base, is because the Green Revolution technologies wiped out biodiversity by converting mixed cropping systems to monocultures of wheat and rice and by spreading the use of herbicides which destroy field greens.

Genetically engineered vitamin A rice will aggravate this destruction since it is part of an industrial agriculture, intensive input package. It will also lead to major water scarcity since it is a water-intensive crop and displaces water-prudent sources of vitamin A.

Activity 3

You should allow 0 hour(s), 30 minute(s).

(a) Dr Shiva states that Potrykus and the other developers of Golden Rice aim to develop rice containing 33.3 μg of vitamin Aper 100 g of rice. In Potrykus's Science paper, the authors in fact say that their ‘goal is providing at least 2 μg/g provitamin A’. Can you see any discrepancy here? If so, can you explain how it has arisen?

(b) Summarise, in your own words, the main points of criticism in the extract. You should not exceed 100 words.

Now read the discussion

Discussion

(a) Potrykus’ goal is 2 μg of provitamin A per gram of rice, which is equivalent to 200 μg per 100 g. Shiva refers to 33.3 μg of vitamin A per 100 g of rice. The Science paper refers to provitamin A, whilst Shiva refers to vitamin A itself. Shiva has divided by a factor of 6, in order to take into account the idea of retinol equivalents. Given that Shiva's audience is not a scientific one, you might argue that this is perfectly justified.

(b) I think Shiva's main points might be summarised as:

She disputes whether the rice can provide enough provitamin A.
She argues that other dietary sources would provide an adequate supply, if diets could be changed.
She dismisses it as a technological quick fix, arguing that earlier technological solutions (e.g. the Green Revolution) made matters worse, not better.

4.4 The ongoing story

4 Golden Rice: a case study

4.4 The ongoing story

At the time of writing (2006), the Golden Rice tale is an unfinished story. Some of the developments of the last five years are summarised here.

One area of ongoing scientific dispute is the question of whether the enriched rice can contribute significantly to the alleviation of vitamin A deficiency. We have seen that Shiva estimated that at best 100 g of rice a day would provide 4.4% of the recommended daily allowance. More sophisticated theoretical models, published since that time, have taken into account differing levels of rice consumption amongst different sectors of the population in Asia. They have estimated that Golden Rice might provide between 1 and 15% of the RDA. These are theoretical studies; as yet, the rice has not been produced in sufficient quantities to test how much vitamin A it might provide when cooked and eaten. When expressed as a proportion of the RDA, the quantities of vitamin A supplied appear modest. However, when vulnerable people like children and nursing mothers are suffering from poor diets, even such modest increases might have a significant impact on health.

It remains a point of contention, however, whether the money spent on developing Golden Rice might not be better spent elsewhere. One alternative would be to integrate vitamin A supplementation with vaccination campaigns. Such campaigns have proved effective in reducing the effects of childhood VAD in Vietnam and the Philippines. We have seen that ecological campaigners like Shiva argue for educational campaigns to encourage the growth and consumption of green vegetables as a source of vitamin A.

Since the initial publication of the breakthrough, Potrykus and others have continued to work on the project. Recent results have seen the technology used on the more widely consumed Indica rice varieties rather than the short-grain Japonica variety used in the initial work. Like many other biotechnologists, they have also moved away from using antibiotic resistance markers, reflecting the concern that the resistance might be transferred to wild bacteria.

This is an interesting instance of the way that public concerns can influence the way that science is carried out. There is little direct evidence that such transfer of antibiotic resistance has taken place, but public concern over the issue has been widespread since the early days of genetic modification. The response of scientists has been to develop a range of other selection markers.

Potrykus and his co-workers have established a Golden Rice Humanitarian Board to facilitate the development of related research in developing countries. Whilst the invention of Golden Rice is registered as belonging to Potrykus and colleagues, many of the basic techniques they used are under patent. Various corporations from the agricultural biotechnology sector, who hold patents on some of the techniques used, have granted licences that allow ‘freedom-to-operate for humanitarian purposes’. This is agreed to mean that farmers and traders in developing countries can earn no more than $10 000 per annum from Golden Rice. Various projects are currently underway in the Philippines, Vietnam, India, China, Indonesia and South Africa, but as yet the rice has not been grown commercially.

Recently, a group of scientists working for Syngenta have produced what they call ‘Golden Rice 2’. Their work suggested that the relatively low levels of β-carotene produced in the original Golden Rice might be caused by low levels of phytoene. By testing a series of genes coding for phytoene synthase from several different species, they have found that an enzyme from maize gives levels of β-carotene that are up to 23 times greater.

This is where the story has reached in early 2006. You will have the opportunity to explore the story further in Activity 5.

Activity 4

You should allow 0 hour(s), 30 minute(s).

Throughout this unit you have explored issues where scientific and social controversies are intertwined. The themes of communication and ethical issues have featured particularly prominently in the Golden Rice case study. Write briefly (a maximum of 200 words) about the way the communication theme has arisen here. You should focus on the forms of communication involved, and what the communicators were trying to achieve.

Now read the discussion

Discussion

The Golden Rice case study involved various forms of communication. The scientists published in a prestigious peer-reviewed journal. The story appeared widely in the international media. Biotechnology firms published advertisements and activists used the Internet to make their case. Whilst scientific papers may have appeared neutral, in the other cases, the communication has been quite explicitly part of an ongoing political debate. Both sides of this debate were trying to affect the future prospects of GM crops as a whole. The supporters of GM crops see this case as useful evidence that genetic modification can have humanitarian benefits. The opponents dismiss Golden Rice as a ‘Trojan horse’, i.e. the introduction of an apparently benign GM product in order to ease the subsequent passage of more profitable crops. In their attempts to prove or disprove the usefulness of the rice, both sides of the debate have introduced quantification, in the form of Retinol Equivalents and Retinol Activity Equivalents, into their communications.

Activity 5

You should allow 0 hour(s), 45 minute(s).

You now have the option of going to the following web sites for an overview (at the time of writing early 2006) of developments in the Golden Rice story and of the contrasting views evident. These are of course just a small selection of what’s available but we did find them informative when we were following the debate.

The Golden Rice Project

Institute of Science in Society

BBC News

5 Summary

At the time of writing (2006) a relatively small number of types of GM crop have been grown globally, in a limited number of countries. The take-up of these crops has been relatively high in countries like the USA and Canada, but very much lower in Europe. However, there is a very rapid increase in the growth of GM crops in developing countries.

The technique most commonly used to introduce new genetic material into dicots has involved the use of a modified soil bacterium, Agrobacterium tumefaciens. This naturally occurring bacterium contains a large Ti plasmid which consists of the genes required to facilitate the transfer of DNA to plant cells, alongside the T-DNA region, which is the region actually transferred and incorporated into the plant cell's chromosomes. Novel genes can be spliced into the T-DNA region, and the machinery of the Agrobacterium used to transfer them into plant cells. Difficulties in modifying the Agrobacterium itself mean that scientists usually create and clone a modified Ti plasmid in E. coli, and then transfer this into A. tumefaciens. Modified plant cells can be induced, under the right stimuli, to produce entire genetically modified plants.

Commercially grown GM crops currently all display either herbicide tolerance or insect resistance, or both traits combined. Bt crops are insect-resistant crops that have been genetically modified to produce the Bt protoxin, a protein toxic to certain insects. The protein is derived from another soil bacterium, Bacillus thuringiensis, and the modification involves the transfer of a single gene coding for the protoxin. Herbicide-tolerant plants have been modified to show greater tolerance for glyphosate. This herbicide acts by inhibiting a key plant enzyme, EPSP synthase, involved in the production of certain amino acids. The modification again involves the transfer of a single gene – in this case, one derived from bacteria – for a novel version of EPSP synthase which is active in the presence of glyphosate.

A GM crop currently under development is Golden Rice, which has been modified to produce β-carotene. It is suggested that this rice can play a role in alleviating vitamin A deficiency in developing countries. Golden Rice was produced by Agrobacterium-mediated transfer of several genes into immature rice embryos, which later developed into fertile plants. The process was more complex than the production of either Bt or glyphosate-tolerant crops, in that it involved the transfer of more genes. The potential of Golden Rice to alleviate vitamin A deficiency has been the subject of controversy. Those who oppose GM crops argue that it is not an appropriate or practical solution, and dispute whether the rice can provide enough vitamin A.

Question 1

Genetic modification using Agrobacterium tumefaciens often involves the use of a binary vector system – using two different plasmids. (a) What are the roles of the two plasmids? (b) Which parts of the plasmids are incorporated into the plant's genome?

Now read the discussion

Discussion

(a) The two plasmids are the artificial Ti plasmid and the disarmed Ti plasmid or helper vector:

The artificial Ti plasmid carries the foreign DNA that is to be transferred, a selectable marker sequence (these are both inserted between the left and right border sequences, and form the artificial T-DNA sequence) and origins of replication (ORIs) which allow it to be replicated in both A. tumefaciens and E. coli. This plasmid incorporates the genes that are to be transferred into the plant cell.
The disarmed Ti plasmid (helper vector) contains the virulence region and an ORI that allows replication in A. tumefaciens. The virulence region codes for the proteins that are necessary to effect transfer of the T-DNA sequence, i.e. this plasmid facilitates transfer of T-DNA into the plant cell and its integration into the nuclear genome.

(b) Only the T-DNA sequence is actually incorporated into the plant cell's genome, i.e. the foreign DNA, the selectable marker sequence, and anything else between the left and right border of the T-DNA sequence.

Question 2

(a) In what way is the protein produced by Bacillus thuringiensis toxic to insects? (b) Why isn't this protein toxic to humans and farm animals?

Now read the discussion

Discussion

(a) The protein produced by Bacillus thuringiensis is a protoxin – when converted into its active form it becomes incorporated into the membranes of the cells lining the insect's gut. A chain of processes is initiated that cause the cells to die. The insect can no longer absorb food or water, and quickly dies from dehydration.

(b) The protoxin is converted into the active toxin only in alkaline conditions and in the presence of specific proteases. Humans and other vertebrates lack these specific proteases. In humans, the protoxin is likely to be destroyed by other proteases and the acid conditions in the stomach.

Question 3

(a) How does the herbicide glyphosate kill plants? (b) Describe two methods that have been used to attempt to genetically engineer plants to tolerate the effects of glyphosate.

Now read the discussion

Discussion

(a) Glyphosate inhibits the enzyme EPSP synthase and prevents the synthesis of aromatic amino acids via the shikimic acid pathway. Without these amino acids, the plants die.

(b) The two methods attempted to genetically modify plants to tolerate glyphosate were to engineer the plants so that they produced:

massive amounts of normal EPSP synthase.
normal amounts of an EPSP synthase that remains active in the presence of glyphosate.

Question 4

In what ways do the science and social issues surrounding Golden Rice differ from those surrounding glyphosate-tolerant and Bt crops?

Now read the discussion

Discussion

Golden Rice differed scientifically in that its production was more complex – it involved the introduction of more than one new gene. The social issues surrounding it were different too. Glyphosate-tolerant and Bt crops obviously benefited large multinationals, but Golden Rice appeared to address an urgent humanitarian need -vitamin A deficiency in developing countries.

Do this

Now you have completed this unit, you might like to:

Post a message to the unit forum.
Review or add to your Learning Journal.
Rate this unit.

Try this

References

Bauer, M. W. and Gaskell, G. (2002) Biotechnology: The Making of a Global Controversy, Cambridge University Press.

Bowring, F. (2003) Science, Seeds and Cyborgs, Verso, London.

Campbell, S. (2004) A genetically modified survey, Spiked [www.spiked-online.com/articles/0000000CA661.htm (accessed May 2007)].

Economic and Social Research Council (1999) The Politics of GM food: Risk, Science and Public Trust, ESRC.

Irwin, A. (2004) Are we too risk averse? – no, Risk and Biomedicine Debate: Fearing the Unknown, sponsored by The Wellcome Trust [www.spiked-online.com/articles/0000000CA375.htm (accessed May 2007)].

Levinson, R. and Reiss, M. (eds) (2003) Key Issues in Bioethics: A Guide for Teachers, RoutledgeFalmer, London.

McHughen, A. (2000) A Consumer’s Guide to GM Food, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Millstone, E., Brunner, E. and Mayer, S. (1999) Beyond substantial equivalence, Nature, 401, pp. 525–526.

Nuffield Council on Bioethics (1999) Genetically Modified Crops: The Ethical and Social Issues, Nuffield Council on Bioethics, London.

Pringle, P. (2003) Food Inc: Mendel to Monsanto – The Promises and Perils of the Biotech Harvest, Simon and Schuster, New York.

Potrykus, I. (2000) The Golden Rice Tale [http://www.agbioworld.org/ at http://www.agbioworld.org/biotech-info/topics/goldenrice/tale.html (accessed May 2007)].

Shiva, V. (2000) The ‘Golden Rice’ Hoax – When Public Relations Replace Science, Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, India.

Woolfson, A. (2004) An Intelligent Person’s Guide to Genetics, Duckworth Overlook, London.

Ye, X., Al-Babili, S., Klöti, A. et al. (2000) Engineering the provitamin A (β-carotene) biosynthetic pathway into (carotenoid-free) rice endosperm, Science, 287, pp. 303–305.

Acknowledgements

The content acknowledged below is Proprietary (see terms and conditions) and is used under licence.

Grateful acknowledgement is made to the following sources for permission to reproduce material in this unit:

Text

Shiva, V. (2000) ‘The Golden Rice hoax: When public relations replaces science’, Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, India;

Figures

Figure 1: James, C. (2004) Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops, International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA);

Figure 2: Edward L. Barnard, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Forestry Images;

Figure 4: Glick, B.R. (1998) Molecular Biotechnology, American Society for Microbiology;

Figures 7: Photos used with permission of P.W. Simon, USDA, ARS;

Figure 8: Time Life Pictures/Getty Images;

Figure 11: Ye, X. et al. (2000) ‘ Engineering the provitamin A (β-carotene) biosynthetic pathway into (carotenoid-free) rice endosperm’, Science, 287, 14 January 2000, copyright © 2000 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science;

Unit Image

Edward L. Barnard, Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Forestry Images;

Related educational resources

Mon, 08 Sep 2008 11:43:03 GMT

This is a list of all the Related educational resources for the unit S250_1_1.0 - Gene manipulation in plants