GMO - go or no go?

Perspectives for genetically modified cereals in Europe

Workshop on pre-breeding, Helsinki, 17-18 February, 2011

By Rasmus L. Hjortshøj, Sejet Planteforædling, DK

Gen

etic

s/Se

ed

DNA-markers

”fast-track methods”

GMO-breeding

Conventional breeding

”Genomics”

High yield

Broad effective resistance

Quality

feedbreadmalt

Genetic ressources

Well adapted agronomic traits

Stability in cultivation

Trials

”Enviromental traits”?

Too

lbox

foodenergy

Collaboration

Marketing

Own ”outside”

breeders exemption

Variety-listing/

PVP protection

Biotech

Genebank

competitor

Cereal valuechain

VariationSelectionDH‐methodsDNA‐markersResistanceQuality

Environment related traits?Drug production?

New traits?

Breeding

Rep

rese

ntat

ive

Variety identity

DUS testVCU valueNameIP:Plant-Variety-Protection (PVP)Patents

Seed managementField inspectionGermination testEtc….Va

riety

listin

g/IP

-pro

tect

ion

Cer

tifie

d se

ed Concept-farmingContract-farmingBulkproduction

Qua

lity

man

agem

entl/

trac

ebili

ty

Primary consumption

Qua

lity

man

ágem

ent/t

race

bilit

y

ExportFodderMaltFlour

MeatDairyEggBeerBread

Seed dressing Chemical protection + fertilizer

Primary productionPurity/Seed certification

End-use

Qua

lity

man

agem

ent/t

race

bilit

y

The cost of developing a GM variety!

Kilde: ”Plantekongres 2010”

”Traits” for a successfull GMO?Input-traits-agronomy-resistance

Output-traits- end-use (protein & oil content, biofuel etc.

Monogenic(/”simple”)

Polygenic(/”advanced”)

Round-Up Ready®

BT- resistance

Water use efficiency (WUE)

Nitrogen fixation

Essential aminoacids

HCN10®

Secondary metabolites (drugs)

Flavr Savr®

”1’ generation” ”2. generation”

Amflora®

MIR604®MS8xRF3®

OXY-235® X17-2®

Delayed riping melons

Virus resistance

Colour- DianthusSenescence delay - Dianthus

High oleic acid

Drought resistant maize

”Traits” for a successfull GMO?Input-traits = cost/benefit directly on farmer-agronomy-resistance

Output-traits = cost/benefit on consumer AND farmer- end-use (protein & oil content, biofuel etc.

Monogenic(/”simple”)

Polygenic(/”advanced”)

Round-Up Ready®

BT- resistance

Water use efficiency (WUE)

Nitrogen fixation

Essential aminoacids

MIR604®

Secondary metabolites (drugs)

Flavr Savr®

Niche markets

Global market

Amflora®

HCN10®

MS8xRF3®

X17-2®OXY-235®

Delayed riping melons

ZW20®

Senescence delay - DianthusColour- Dianthus

Drought resistant maize

3 cornerstones in the GM debate

• In order for GM‐cereals to be of optimum benefit for as well society, as farmers and breeders (at least) 3 issues have to be considered:

‐ Biology; relevant, manageable, add value.

‐ Regulation; presence of GM in seed, co‐existence with organic farming etc.

‐ IP; patent versus PVP, utility etc…

Regulation• Co‐existence with organic farming?• Zero‐tolerance for GM in seed.• Zero tolerance for (EU) non‐authorized GM in fodder.• Labelling.• COMPAC solution. Will it make insurance impossible for 

small/medium companies = monopolizing GM technique?

IP• Breeders exemption not part of patent law.

• ex. 2 patented GM traits in variety makes ¾ of a cross unusable for conventional breeding.

• How to ensure return of investment? 

Conclusion 

• GM increases chance of solving drought, salinity, climate change etc.

• So far no evidence of GM being dangerous to humans.

• GM increases market areas for cereals. 

• GM’s offer possiblity to protect investment.

= GM will be part of the future.

= But GM is not the only, nor necessarily the best, solution!

http://californiaagriculture.ucanr.org

BSPB maj 2010

GM- breeding: resistance towards cornborerConventional/biotech breeding; resistance against Orange Midge

GM-breeding; increased phytase activity in the wheat kernel

Remember ‐ the GM‐debate will not disappear! 

Thank you for your attention!Rasmus L. Hjortshøj