Auto Draft

Herbicide resistance could confer an advantage on plants in the wild.

Credit to Xiao Yang
A common method of genetic modification used to make crops more resistant to herbicides has been shown to be superior over rice varieties that are weedy. This indicates that the modifications could be detrimental to the environment beyond farm.

ラウンドアップ A variety of varieties of crops have been created genetically to be resistant to the glyphosate. The herbicide, first known as Roundup and then introduced on the market in the year 1996 under the trade name Roundup. Farmers can get rid of weeds in their fields using glyphosate without harming their crops because of this resistance.

Glyphosate blocks an enzyme called EPSP synthase which is responsible for the creation of certain amino acid and various other molecules. It can also hinder the growth of plants. ラウンドアップ ラウンドアップ Genetic modification, such as the Roundup Ready crops manufactured by Monsanto in St. Louis, Missouri, involves inserting genes into a plant’s genetic code to boost EPSP production. The genes typically come from bacteria that are infected with plants.

This extra EPSP synthase allows plants to resist the effects of glyphosate. Biotechnology laboratories are looking to use genes from plants instead of bacteria to increase EPSP synthase. This is partly because the US law allows for approval by the regulatory authorities to allow organisms with transgenes to be recognized as acceptable.

Few studies have examined whether transgenes which confer glyphosate resistance can increase the competitiveness of plants for reproduction and even survival after they’re introduced to wild or weedy cousins through cross-pollination. Norman Ellstrand of the University of California, Riverside, explained that the standard assumption was that any transgene will confer disadvantage in nature if there was no pressure to select. ラウンドアップ ラウンドアップ This is because any extra machines would reduce the effectiveness of.

Lu Baorong from Fudan University in Shanghai is currently challenging this view. The study demonstrates that glyphosate resistance even when it is not applied to a weedy type of rice crop can give a significant health boost.

Lu and his associates modified cultivated rice varieties to increase the production of EPSP synthase. They also crossed the modified rice with a weedy-related. Their findings were published in NewPhytologist 1..

The team then allowed the breeding offspring from the cross to mix with one another, creating second-generation hybrids genetically identical to one another with the exception of the number of copies of gene encoding EPSP synthase. As expected, those who had more copies expressed higher amounts of the enzyme, and produced more amino acids tryptophan than their unmodified counterparts.

Researchers also found that transgenic plants had higher rates for photosynthesis as well as produced more flowers and produced 48-125percent less seeds per plant than non-transgenic hybrids. This was despite the fact that glyphosate was never present.

Lu says that making the weedy grain more competitive could increase the difficulties it causes for farmers across the world whose crops are affected by the pest.

Brian Ford-Lloyd (a UK plant geneticist) says that if the EPSP-synthase gene is introduced into wild rice species, then their genetic diversity which is so important to conserve could be at risk. The transgene would surpass the normal species. “This is an example of the extremely plausible detrimental consequences [of GM plantson our environment.”

The study also challenges the public perception that genetically modified crops that carry extra copies of their own genes are less dangerous than those containing the genes of microorganisms. Lu states, “Our study shows this is not necessarily true.”

Some researchers believe this finding requires a review of the future regulation of genetically modified crops. Ellstrand states that “some people now believe that biosafety regulations can be relaxed because we have the most comfort with genetic engineering over the last two decades.” This study isn’t proof that novel products are safe.