April 23, 2002
Genetic variability fuels crop
improvement and has sustained crop evolution and adaptation for
thousands of years. It is a vital resource for humanity´s future
survival given that increases in crop production will most
likely come from higher yields per unit area rather than from
new crop lands. Intensive plant breeding using scientific
methods during much of the 20th century has led to significant
gains in productivity for most major world crops. However, the
cost of these achievements has been narrower genetic variability
within the elite gene pool, increased genetic uniformity and
vulnerability in crops, and erosion of native genetic resources
(Lee, 1998).(ref. 2978)
Levi Mansur*
EJB Electronic Journal of
Biotechnology
Genetic variability fuels crop
improvement and has sustained crop evolution and adaptation for
thousands of years. It is a vital resource for humanity´s future
survival given that increases in crop production will most
likely come from higher yields per unit area rather than from
new crop lands. Intensive plant breeding using scientific
methods during much of the 20th century has led to significant
gains in productivity for most major world crops. However, the
cost of these achievements has been narrower genetic variability
within the elite gene pool, increased genetic uniformity and
vulnerability in crops, and erosion of native genetic resources
(Lee, 1998). The consequences of narrow genetic pools have been
disastrous in the past. Examples abound: the infamous Irish
famine of 1850 caused by a genetically uniform potato crop
susceptible to blight; the famine triggered in India in 1943 by
the brown spot disease of rice. More recently the Southern corn
blight that struck the United States corn industry in 1970
caused over a billion dollars worth of damage (Horsfall, 1972).
Future consequences will be harsh unless steps are taken to
reverse the dangerous trend in genetic erosion of our main
sources of food. Furthermore, it is suspected that reduced
genetic variability in most major crops is responsible for the
decrease in genetic gain for yield (Lee, 1998). Among the
important causes for this narrow genetic base is that crop
species have undergone genetic bottlenecks during the
domestication and breeding processes (Tanksley and McCouch,
1997). In the past it has been difficult to use exotic germplasm
because useful genes are often linked to genes controlling
undesirable traits and there were no tools to go after specific
genes or genomic regions. The development of densely populated
genetic linkage maps, marker assisted selection, expressed
sequence tags, chromosome walking and gene cloning, have changed
the scenario and it is now
possible to transfer specific genes or loci to cultivated
plants.
In developed countries, like the
United States, major efforts are underway to use these tools to
mine, capture and transfer useful genes from exotic germplasm to
crop plants (Tanskely and Nelson, 1996; Tanksley and McCouch,
1997). Also the completion of the Arabidopsis genome sequencing
project will result in a number of new techniques (Sommerville
and Dangi, 2000) that will enhance our understanding of genomes
and, therefore, our ability to exploit exotic genetic resources.
Not surprisingly increased research and gene discovery will
correspondingly increase the value of exotic
germplasm, meaning land races and wild ancestors of cultivated
plants.
These are worthy goals but who will reap the benefits of
increased utilization of exotic genetic resources? Everybody
should benefit. Thus, the issues at stake are participation in
gene discovery,
ownership, and access. Countries rich in genetic resources are
usually poorer in technological and scientific infrastructure
(Africa and Latin America) and the opposite is true for the
developed countries.
Given this state of affairs, germplasm-rich developing countries
must be prepared to become full partners as their genetic
resources are explored for useful and commercially important
genes.
How can a fair distribution of the benefits of gene discovery in
exotic germplasm be accomplished? There is no easy answer but
some of the options are listed below.
A. International Treaties: After seven years of difficult
negotiations under the auspices of FAO, an International Treaty
on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture was
developed. A compromise deal was finally struck in November 2001
on the rules of the game for sharing, conserving and using the
world's crop genetic resources. However, critics argue that this
treaty left central issues unresolved and open to interpretation
(Grain, 2001). The major problems with the treaty are:
1. Its core provisions on access and benefit sharing only apply
to a short and specific list of crops leaving many others on
hold.
2. It allows patenting of the seeds and other genetic materials
so long as they are modified in some way. This could mean
restricted access unless those entitled to the germplasm get
involved, and are either beneficiaries of the patents or have
free and unrestricted access to the patents derived from their
genetic materials.
3. The Treaty does not clearly establish rights for farmers and
local communities to freely use, exchange and further develop
the seeds they manage (and in many cases have helped develop).
Legal and contractual restrictions imposed by corporations and
intellectual property rights undermine the rights of those who
have played a key role in the evolution and maintenance of
germplasm resources. It
leaves the responsibility for implementing these rights to
national governments; therefore it is important for scientists
in developing countries to raise the consciousness of
legislators and governments officials with respect to germplasm
resources. Access by foreigners to these resources must be
allowed and even encouraged provided that participation in gene
discovery, access and ownership is granted. Given the current
realities, genetic materials freely transferred to foreign
entities in exchange for nothing must come to an end. According
to the Treaty, benefits arising from commercial use of the
genetic material covered by the Treaty must be shared. Companies
that market products derived from such material are required to
pay into a common fund. But the critical questions of how much,
in what
form, and under what conditions have not been settled (Grain,
2001). B. South-South International collaborations are needed in
order to carry out gene-discovery research for which a critical
mass of
scientists, funding, and research capabilities are necessary.
Often the capabilities of a single developing country are not
enough to compete with large corporations making it necessary to
establish symbiotic research collaborations using already
established networks, such as FAO´s REDBIO
(http://www.rlc.fao.org/redes/redbio/html/home.htm), capable of
coordinating and focusing the efforts of many laboratories.
C. Fellow scientists in developing countries must become more
proactive. It is important for scientists to become familiar
with and use intellectual property protection laws to their
country’s advantage,
lobby for legislation that forbids the export of precious
genetic materials with just compensation, and develop strategic
alliances with foreign universities and corporations for
research and development.
National germplasm collections must be maintained and the
intellectual property rights of indigenous people must be
recognized and defended. Indigenous people have important
knowledge about genetic resources and should be involved in
research projects. Also, environmental degradation must be
stopped for the sake of preserving genetic resources. These are
difficult and complex propositions, however, a small Latin
country has already shown the way. Costa Rica´s pioneering
Instituto Nacional de
Biodiversidad (INBIo) is one model by which many of these
goals can be reached. The institute promotes participatory
research, educational biodiversity activities and looks for
strategic collaborations with companies to obtain a fair
retribution for genetic resources (http://www.inbio.ac.cr).
References
GRAIN Publications. A dissapointing compromise. Seedling,
December 2001, vol. 18, no. 4.
HORSFALL, T.G. Genetic vulnerability of major crops. National
Academy of Sciences, 1972, Washingtong D.C.
LEE, Michael. Genome projects and gene pools: New germplasm for
plant breeding?. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
of the United States of America, 1998, vol. 95, p. 2001-2004.
SOMMERVILLE, C. and DANGI, J. Plant Biology in 2010. Science,
2000, vol. 15, p. 2077-2079.
TANKSLEY, S.D. and MCCOUCH, S.R. Seed banks and molecular maps:
unlocking genetic potential from the wild. Science, 1997, vol.
277, p. 1063-1066.
TANKSLEY, S.D. and NELSON, J.C. Advanced backcross QTL
analysis: a method for the simultaneous discovery and transfer
of valuable QTLs from unadapted germplasm into elite breeding
lines. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 1996, vol. 92, p.
191-203.
*
Levi Mansur
Facultad de Agronomía
Universidad Católica de Valparaíso
Casilla 4-D Quillota V Región Chile
Tel: 56 33 274539
Fax: 56 33 274570
E-mail: Levi@entelchile.net
|