by
Anastasia Bodnar on 31 March 2010
Usually, when we think about biotechnology, it’s in the context of agriculture, and occasionally in the context of medicine, but biotechnology is useful for a lot more. It can be used to study complex cellular and developmental processes with results that can be stunningly beautiful, and sometimes silly.
Margaret Clarke researches the soil amoeba Dictyostelium discoideum using biotechnology. Dr. Clarke is officially retired, but as a dedicated scientist, she’s continuing her work. She visited Iowa State yesterday and today.
In particular, Dr. Clarke studies phagocytosis – literally “cell eating”. These amoeba are single celled organisms that eat bacteria (and just about any bacteria-sized particle that might be nutritious). Phagocytosis is the process of forming a cup that engulfs the prey, drawing the prey into the phagocyte, and digesting the prey.
Her work has important applications in human medicine, as the phagocytosis process takes place in special phagocytic cells that are part of the immune system of humans and other animals. Learning how phagocytosis works in amoeba can help us to understand how it works in the immune system.
Continue reading…
by
Joe Ballenger on 29 March 2010
In Polydnaviruses: Nature’s GMOs, I wrote about how wasps use viruses to disable the immune defenses of their hosts. Braconid and ichneumonid wasps use a system that genetically modifies their hosts in order to shut their immune systems down.
So how does this all work?
A good system to use to describe how polydnavirus proteins work is the ankyrin/vankyrin pathways. It’s easy to visualize how they function and many other functions (Toll, Phenoloxidase silencing, etc) work in an indentical manner.
Continue reading…
by
David Tribe on 27 March 2010
As I’ve mentioned before, I’m an Australian. But us Ozzies get to meet a lot of Americans.
American author of Seeds of Deception and public speaker Jeffrey Smith’s of Fairfield Iowa, first came to the attention of Australians when he was rolled out by the anti-GM activists to try and prevent Australian farmers being given the freedom of choice on crop technology in late 2007. Fortunately this effort by the anti-technology lobby groups was unsuccessful.
At most meetings organized by these activists that I have attended since that time — and there have been quite a few — stacks of his more recent book Genetic Roulette book were available for purchase, and I snapped up one early on.
A brief perusal of the articles revealed the book was highly biased. Nowhere in the book was there a mention of any of the major good outcomes from GM technology—such as decreased risk of cancer from mycotoxins in moldy corm (see this link for Chassy and Tribe’s efforts on this important topic at Academics Review). On the topics that I was most familiar such as antibiotic resistance in bacteria, Genetic Roulette was deeply misleading and factually wrong.
I decided late 2007 to investigate its claims thoroughly, little knowing how huge the task would be because as it turned out every one of the 65 claims in it — better called myths– was distorted, misleading, plain wrong, or based on misrepresentation or misreading of the sources it quoted.
Continue reading…
by
Anastasia Bodnar on 20 March 2010
One of the best parts of the Maize Genetics Meeting is the opportunity to have discussions with scientists working in a variety of fields from academia, industry, and NGOs. Conversation this afternoon veered towards intellectual property (IP) and biotechnology for a bit. It’s a contentious subject for a lot of reasons, but some new ideas I’d never thought of before came up today. I don’t have a background in IP, so please feel free share your thoughts and ideas in the comments!
Continue reading…
by
Anastasia Bodnar on 19 March 2010
That headline catches your eye, doesn’t it?
We’ve seen such claims made in popular media such as the March 2010 Fury as EU approves GM potato: Critics claim plant could spread antibiotic-resistant diseases to humans in the Independent: “Opponents fear bacteria inside the guts of animals fed the GM potato – which can cause human diseases – may develop resistance to antibiotics.” Groups that actively work against deregulation of genetically engineered crops have been making such claims for years.
We’ve also seen these claims in peer-reviewed journals (although, far less frequently than in non-peer reviewed media and reports). For example, in the February 2009 issue of Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, the review Health Risks of Genetically Modified Foods: “An area of concern focuses on the possibility that antibiotic resistance genes used as markers in transgenic crops may be horizontally transferred to pathogenic gut bacteria, thereby reducing the effectiveness of antimicrobial therapy.”
Are antibiotic marker genes in genetically engineered crops really a risk to human health? Many people have raised this question and there seems to be a lot of confusion about the issue. It’s time to look into the risks and reasons more deeply.
Continue reading…
Recent Comments