The setting-up of this website was financially
supported by the European
Union within the European Commission’s Sixth Framework Programme from
1 January 2005 until 28 February 2007.
The European Commission and other EU agencies are not responsible for the content.
|
See what’s what.
Please note that the GMO Compass Database currently is being expanded and updated. Please check back for new entries.
|
|
 |
News Messages |
| 30 November 2006 | | Hungary enacts restrcitive GM crop law | | On 27 November 2006, the Hungarian parliament passed a new act on genetically modified crops. The legislation severely restricts the cultivation of GMOs and is considered to be a pre-emptive action in case the European Commission forces Hungary to lift its ban on the GM maize line MON810. All government parties and the opposition supported the new Act.
Under the law, an isolation distance of 400 metres will be required between GM and non-GM cultivations. All landowners and landusers within this zone must agree in writing to the GM cultivation.
Critics believe that this decision will make it nearly impossible to grow GM crops in Hungary. Supporters, however, point out that the large success of Hungarian agriculture is largely due to the ability to label all products "GM free". |
| 30 November 2006 | | US Department of Agriculture deregulates GM rice LL601 | | On 24 November 2006, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) approved the genetically modified rice LL601 for deregulation. The authority assessed the rice, which has been troubling the international trade since September, to be "as safe as its traditionally bred counterparts".
According to the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), LL601 is similar to the GM rice lines LL06 and LL62, which APHIS deregulated in 1999. All three produce a protein called LibertyLink, which makes the plant tolerant to a certain herbicide. This protein has been scientifically reviewed and approved for use in several countries around the world.
Initially, Bayer CropScience did not intend to apply for deregulation, as the development of LL601 ended after field trials in 2001. Only the related transformation events LL06 and LL62 have been continued but never commercialised. After LL601 had contaminated conventional long-grain rice, Bayer applied for deregulation in the USA. |
| 29 November 2006 | | US company has developed new GM technology | | Creating genetically modified plants has always been a long and expensive process, accompanied by uncertainties. On November 16, the US biotech firm Cibus LLC presented a new technology called directed mutagenesis – a method commonly applied to bacteria but never before successfully performed on plants.
Cibus calls the new technology RTDS – Rapid Trait Development System. Its major advantage over today's methods for genetic modification of plants is the fact that it does not rely on the transformation of the plant with a foreign gene. Instead, it uses plant enzymes to induce changes in the DNA, and is a process which could also occur naturally. However, in the case of RTDS, these mutations are not random – they are directed to create a wanted trait.
The company hopes that this technology will be more acceptable to environmental and consumer organisations, since it eliminates many of the uncertainties associated with GMOs. So far, the development has been focused on sorghum, a crop with little importance in agricultural biotechnology. However, Cibus researchers have successfully applied the technology to canola and rice. The company expects to enter the market of herbicide-resistant oilseed rape next year and the rice market in 2008. |
| 27 November 2006 | | Scientist develop edible GM cotton | | US researchers have created a genetically modified cotton which produces seeds without gossypol. Gossypol, an insecticide which is naturally present in the seeds, is powerfully toxic to humans and is the reason why cotton seeds are only used for animal feed.
Cotton seeds contain many valuable proteins. Plants produce 1.5 kilogrammes of seeds per kilogramme of fibre. Annually, 44 million tonnes of seeds are by-products of cotton grown for the production of cloth. Without gossypol, the seed could be used to feed half a billion people, reports Keerti Rathore of Texas A&M University in the journal "Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences".
For 50 years, researchers have tried to develop gossypol-free cotton - however, whenever they succeeded in removing the toxin, harvests were devastated by insect pests. The only notable success was the confirmation that cotton seeds could be made into an appetising meal for humans. Now, the team led by Keerti Rathore has used genetic engineering to prevent only the seeds from producing gossypol, leaving the rest of the plant protected against insects.
The researchers consider the genetic modification "stable and inheritable". If they succeed in creating acceptance of cotton not only for clothing, but also as a genetically modified food, GM cotton could be a new source of nutrition in many poor regions. Additionally, cotton farmers could generate additional income without increasing acreage. |
| 27 November 2006 | | GM Potatoes: Soon to be approved for cultivation in the EU | | For the first time since 1998, a genetically modified plant may be approved for cultivation in the EU. A draft document from Stavros Dimas, Commissioner for the Environment, has been submitted to the European Commission: this document proposes that the cultivation of the GM potato EH92-527-1, which possesses a modified starch composition, will be allowed under certain conditions.
The Swedish company Amyloge HB, now part of BASF Plant Science, developed the potato, which is marketed as Amflora and produces only amylopectin starch in its tubers. Compared with conventional potato starch composed of amylopectin and amylose, pure amylopectin is more easily applied in certain industrial processes, eg paper making.
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) GMO panel conducted a safety evaluation and submitted a favourable opinion which forms the basis of the European Commission (EC) decision. The EC has requested that commercialisation of this GM potato is accompanied by post market monitoring by BASF in order to detect unanticipated adverse environmental effects which may arise. A decision upon possible applications of the plant as food or feed will be undertaken in a separate approval procedure. |
| 27 November 2006 | | GMO-Safety.eu: Information portal brings transparency to biosafety research | | Does genetically modified maize have an impact on beneficial insects? How does genetically modified oilseed rape affect pollen-collecting bees? How can transgenic pollen and seeds be prevented from spreading in the environment? These are just some of the questions being investigated in biological safety research worldwide. Answers and research findings, which are otherwise usually made public only at scientific conferences and congresses, are accessible to the public at www.gmo-safety.eu.
The internet portal provides up-to-date, clear information about the research projects funded by the German Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) on the biological safety of genetically modified plants. Over recent years it has become the central information hub for everything to do with biological safety research in Germany. Now the website is also available in English.
At www.gmo-safety.eu interested laymen, journalists and politicians can find out what effect the modification of plant DNA has on the ecological interaction between plants and their environment. The primary focus of the site is on crops - maize, oilseed rape, potatoes and grain. Other topics include the development of more accurate tools for plant genetic engineering and concepts for post-market monitoring. A comprehensive database provides clear information about current and completed research projects, their aims and results. The research information is supplemented by background reports, interviews and insights into the day-to-day work of researchers. The site also presents major international studies on the environmental safety of GM plants. |
| 22 November 2006 | | EU: Renewal of approval for existing GM products | | The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has published draft guidelines for the renewal of approval for genetically modified plants and derived food and feed. Primarily, these guidelines would affect twenty-six GM products which, based on previous regulations, are approved in the EU and which currently may be marketed as "existing products".
New GM regulations came into effect in the EU in April 2004. At this time, the majority of products which had been already approved were then "notified" – meaning, effectively, that these were checked for compliance with the new regulations, e.g. in regard to labelling requirements. For sixteen of these products, however, April 2007 will mark the end of their current market approval.
Companies with affected products may re-apply for the approval of these products under the current guidelines. EFSA is proposing that such re-applications shall contain biosafety information which has been gathered since the original application as well as an updated version of the first application. Toxicity, as well as with presence of allergens must be addressed and, in the case of intended cultivation of a GM plant, recent information on environmental safety should be included.
Applications for the renewal of approval will be submitted to the EU Commission, with EFSA responsible for the evaluation of all relevant documents and the biosafety assessments.
The public consultation for submitting comments on the proposed EFSA guidance document ends on 4 December 2006. |
| 09 November 2006 | | Swiss literature study finds no significant environmental impact of GM crops | | GM cropping systems must be compared with the existing alternative: conventional farming. In a large literature study by Swiss Agroscope Reckenholz-Tänikon Research Station (ART), covering ten years of research, the conclusion was made that GM crops are at least similarly safe for the environment.
Analyses of Bt crops found no significant impact on insects, birds, and soil microflora. According to the study, neither laboratory nor field research showed that the Bt toxin could damage non-target organisms. Although individual population shifts in soil bacteria were recorded, these shifts remained most likely within the normal limits for different crop varieties.
For herbicide-tolerant (HT) crops, ART concluded that gene flow is unlikely - and that HT crops hardly can survive outside cultivated fields. Appearances of herbicide-tolerant, wild relatives have been registered only in areas where one complementary herbicide was used exclusively, causing immense pressure on wild plant populations. In regions where at least both complementary herbicides (glufosinate and glyphosate) were applied, farmers had no trouble with herbicide-tolerant weeds.
Some publications mention that the reduced number of weeds and insects in GM fields could mean less feed for birds. Yet, according to ART, GM cropping systems allow different management strategies: for example, since less ploughing is required, more crop residues may be left on the field which, in turn, actually may increase the available feed for birds.
The literature study was ordered by the Swiss Expert Committee for Biosafety (SECB). Many results were taken from large-scale field studies, since the major GM-producing countries have no monitoring requirements and few results from commercial cultivations were available. On the evaluation of findings, disagreement among committee members may be explained by another observation: the determination of whether a GM crop is harmful to the environment depends on the level of its impact, as well as on how much of this impact is perceived as a risk. Since no common evaluation criteria have been set, the impact of GM crops remains a subject of debate in the scientific community. |
| 02 November 2006 | | Coexistence: Britain's organic farmers see "all the risk and no benefit" | | Organic farmers in the UK agree that coexistence regulations are necessary, since GM cultivations seem inevitable. A few days before the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) closed a round of public consultation on coexistence, organic farmers stated their fears in an open discussion.
Although generally optimistic that – given the right protocols – coexistence will be possible, the farmers do not consider the current proposals to be sufficient.
Stressing that limiting seed contamination is an important factor for coexistence, Lawrence Woodward, director of the Elm Farm Research Centre, called for Defra to lower the upper limit for GM content in organic seed from 0.5 to 0.1 percent. Oliver Dowding, chairman of the organic committee of the National Farmers Union, feels uneasy with the whole concept of coexistence. He cited the worry which most organic farmers have in mind these days: "I can see a greater risk from co-existence, because of the impact on my market, and I'm not prepared to take any risk at the moment, because I can see all the risk and no benefit for me."
Defra is now evaluating the feedback it received during the public consultation on coexistence. UK officials have pointed out that no commercial cultivation of GMOs will be permitted before coexistence regulations have been established. |
|
|
XML News Feed
| Merge the latest news messages from GMO-Compass in shortened form onto your news reader or web log. | | GMO-Compass news feeds use XML formatting and require RSS 2.0 (really simple syndication). This standard format allows diverse applications to easily exchange and integrate data from the internet. |
|
October 2006
