Feed-a-Gene project is launched

Feed-a-Gene is a project coordinated by INRA (France) that aims to adapt monogastric livestock production systems – pigs, poultry and rabbits – to improve their overall efficiency and reduce their environmental impact. The project will develop new and alternative feed resources and feed technologies, will identify and select animals better adapted to fluctuating conditions, and will develop feeding techniques for optimizing the potential of the feed and the animal.
Feed-a-Gene involves an international consortium of 23 public and private partners from Europe and China. The project is planned to last for five years, and has been allocated a budget of €9 million. It is funded under the EU Framework Programme for Research and Innovation Horizon 2020.
The global demand for animal products continues to increase, notably because of strong demographic growth and higher purchasing power. According to FAO, there are currently no viable alternatives to intensive livestock production that can meet this growing demand. Monogastric species – pigs and poultry – are the main sources of animal products. However, competition between food, feed, and fuel and environmental issues – phosphate and nitrate concentration in water – caused by monogastric livestock production must be addressed and new solutions to increase the efficiency and sustainability of livestock production systems must be developed.
Feed-a-Gene aims to:

• Unlock the potential of existing feeds and identifying new and alternative feed sources
• Use precision livestock production, including precision feeding for better adapting the nutrient supply to animal requirements.
• Identify new genetic markers and use genetic diversity to breed more efficient and robust animals better adapted to fluctuating environmental conditions, and capable to use feed resources that are not or less in competition with other usages.

Objectives include:

• Develop new and alternative feeds and feed technologies to make better use of local feed resources, green biomass and by-products of the food and biofuel industry.
• Develop methods for the real-time characterization of the nutritional value of feeds to better use and adapt diets to animal requirements.
• Develop new traits of feed efficiency and robustness allowing identification of individual variability to select animals more adapted to changes in feed and environmental conditions. » Develop biological models of livestock functioning to better understand and predict nutrient and energy utilization of animals along their productive trajectory.
• Develop new management systems for precision feeding and precision farming combining data and knowledge from the feed, the animal, and the environment using innovative monitoring systems, feeders, and decision support tools.
• Evaluate the overall sustainability of new management systems developed by the project.
• Demonstrate the innovative technologies developed by the project in collaboration with partners from the feed industry, breeding companies, equipment manufacturers, and farmers’ organizations to promote the practical implementation of project results.
• Disseminate new technologies that will increase animal production efficiency, whilst maintaining product quality and animal welfare and enhance EU food security.

Feed-a-Gene partners include:

• DuPont (Denmark)
• Wageningen UR (Netherlands)
• Exafan (Spain)
• Newcastle University (United Kingdom)
• Claitec (Spain)
• INCO (Spain)
• IRTA (Spain)
• Gran Suino italiano (Italy)
• ACTA (France)
• IFIP (France)
• ITAVI (France)
• IPG/Topigs (Netherlands)
• Terres Inovia (France)
• Cobb (United Kingdom)
• AFZ (France)
• Hamlet Protein (Denmark)
• INRA Transfert (France)
• Bühler (Switzerland)

Website and social media

• www.feed-a-gene.eu
• www.facebook.com/feedagene
• twitter.com/FeedaGene
• www.linkedin.com/grp/home?gid=8359616

GMO labeling misleading, costly for consumers

By Richard Felts, Guest Commentary
Activists pushing for mandated labeling of genetically modified (GM) foods are really pushing a disingenuous political agenda that will be both confusing and costly for consumers.
For years, these activists have tried to insinuate there might be something risky about GM foods. However, the scientific consensus — built around countless studies and 7 trillion meals consumed — has remained solid that GM foods are as safe as any other foods.
With the science settled, those pushing for mandatory GM labeling now say they just want consumers to have access to information. In a recent Roll Call op-ed, Scott Faber of the Environmental Working Group said the issue of GM labeling “is about more than the right to know what we’re buying and eating. It’s also about consumer confusion.”
That’s a distortion of the issue. This is not about the right to know. The fact is that Faber and the other anti-GM activists support measures that would exempt approximately two thirds of food products on the market from being labeled. How will this provide the consumer with any useful information?
GM critics ignore the fact that existing food labeling policies already provide information about which foods have genetically modified ingredients and which do not. Food labeled USDA Certified Organic does not contain genetically modified ingredients. For consumers who choose to avoid GM food, this label provides them a reliable alternative.
Instead of educating consumers about the simple option that already exists, GM labeling proponents have been pushing states to pass initiatives requiring that food with GM ingredients also be specially labeled. Not only would this be duplicative, these initiatives routinely contain multiple exemptions and loopholes that would muddle — not clarify — consumer choices.
Under a GM labeling law passed in Vermont, vegetable soup would be labeled “genetically modified” while vegetable beef soup would not because meat is exempt under the law. Vermont also exempted dietary supplements despite the fact that many herbal supplements contain GM ingredients.
Activists in California pushed an initiative that would have required GM labels on a packaged pizza purchased in a supermarket, but not on a pizza purchased from a restaurant. Fruit juice would have required a label, but alcohol containing the same GM ingredients would have been exempt.
In Oregon, activists pushed a GM labeling initiative that would have exempted two-thirds of the food and beverages purchased by consumers. This included meat and dairy products that come from animals raised on genetically engineered food, which conflicts with existing labeling standards for “organic” products.
If activists really cared about a consumer’s “right to know,” they would not be drafting, endorsing and advertising in favor of a patchwork of state regulations that would leave consumers in the dark about what they are buying. Studies have also shown these state labeling measures would raise the average consumer’s grocery bill $400 to $500 a year.
Consumers will not be served by individual states taking different approaches to food labeling. The best way to protect the consumer’s right to know is by reaffirming the FDA’s role as our national authority on food safety and labeling.
This is the approach taken by the Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act, bipartisan legislation introduced in the last Congress by Representatives Mike Pompeo, R-Kansas, and G.K. Butterfield, D-N.C., which is expected to be reintroduced in the coming session.
The right to know is about ensuring consumers have access to clear and consistent information, not creating a confusing maze of different state-based standards.

Richard Felts is the president of Kansas Farm Bureau

China approval gives Syngenta incentive to settle lawsuits

• 

  freeimages.com/kstiffler

  China’s approval for imports of Syngenta Viptera corn increases the likelihood that the company will settle lawsuits.

  From WATTAgNet:
  China’s approval for imports of Syngenta Viptera corn increases the likelihood that the company will pay settlements to more than 100 farmers and exporters, including Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland, who are suing Syngenta for damages resulting from China’s rejections of shipments of U.S. corn, according to a Reuters report.
  Lawyers for Syngenta told Reuters that the decision by China’s Ministry of Agriculture to approve the corn ends uncertainty about the MIR 162 strain’s status and gives the company new price references to calculate potential losses from the rejections.
  China’s approval of MIR 162 gives Syngenta an incentive to settle the lawsuits because the end of the unapproved status makes it easier to calculate potential damages, Syngenta’s lawyers say. However, Syngenta has previously said the lawsuits are without merit and that it has not put aside funds to cover any potential claims.
  During the past year, U.S. corn exports to China have been halted, as more than 1.2 million metric tons of U.S. crop shipments have been rejected due to the co-mingling of the unapproved corn strain.
  Cargill, ADM and dozens of farmers have sued Syngenta, claiming hundreds of millions of dollars in 

Syngenta lawsuits consolidated in Kansas court

• 

  freeimages.com

  Lawsuits over Syngenta’s Viptera corn have been consolidated as a multidistrict litigation.

  From WATTAgNet:
  Lawsuits over Syngenta’s Viptera corn have been consolidated in United States District Court in Kansas as a multidistrict litigation.
  In the lawsuits, agricultural companies claim they have sustained economic losses as a result of the presence of the genetic trait MIR162 in the U.S. corn supply.
  “Corn farmers, grain elevator operators and corn exporters have all suffered significant economic damages as a result of Syngenta’s release, promotion and commercialization of a certain genetically engineered corn trait – MIR162 – into the United States corn production system,” the lawsuits say. China has not yet approved MIR162 corn seeds including Viptera and Duracade.
  According to official court documents, agricultural entities that have filed Syngenta corn lawsuits say the company allegedly made false claims in order to convince farmers to plant the genetically modified seed known as Agrisure Viptera prior to China’s approval of the product. Specifically, the company launched a “Plant with Confidence campaign”, according to court documents. Aimed at domestic corn farmers, the marketing campaign allegedly assured farmers that China’s decision to approve the corn was imminent, and that Viptera corn seed could be safely planted side by side with other seed, according to court documents.

Biotech giants, GM corn welcomed in Vietnam

• 

  freeimages.com/eschu1952

  Vietnam’s agriculture ministry approved the imports of four of Monsanto’s corn varieties in August.

  From WATTAgNet:
  Vietnam’s agriculture ministry approved the imports of four of Monsanto’s corn varieties in August, raising questions about the country’s partnership with the manufacturer of Agent Orange, the toxic defoliant used during the Vietnam War.
  The four varieties of genetically modified (GM) corn approved in the country are MON89034 and NK603 from DeKalb Vietnam, a subsidiary of Monsanto, and Syntenga’s GA21 and MIR162. Approval of MR162 is under consideration.
  Vietnamese government formulated a plan in 2006 to develop GM crops as part of a “major program for the development and application of biotechnology in agriculture and rural development.” The country is looking to harvest its first GM crops by 2015 and have 30-50 percent of the country’s farmland covered with genetically modified organisms by 2020.
  Officials in Vietnam appear to believe the introduction of GM crops is a logical way to improve yields and feed a growing population of 90 million people at a reasonable price. Monsanto and its supporters say GMOs are a promising solution to Vietnam’s food security concerns. Opponents are concerned, among other things, that the U.S. will try to impose restrictive intellectual property rules that could be damaging to developing countries.

Genetically modified cereals in UK agricultural industry focus of new study

The potential impacts on the UK agricultural industry of either adopting or not adopting genetically modified cereals and oilseeds is the subject of a new desk-based study commissioned by the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board's Home Grown Cereals Authority.
The six-month project will model a number of scenarios looking at the possible economic implications of both adoption and non-adoption of GM technologies on farm and throughout the supply chain, as well as the effects on land use and the environment. The study, An evidence-based review on the likely economic and environmental impact of genetically modified cereals and oilseeds for UK agriculture, will be conducted by the University of Reading with a team of six economists, statisticians and agricultural scientists.
The awarding of the project follows a call for proposals issued in November 2012 under HGCA’s Investing in Innovation research strategy.
Although a wealth of studies have been published both on the impacts of GM in countries such as the United States and on consumer attitudes to GM products, this is the first time a study of this kind has been explored within the context of the UK cereals and oilseeds industry.
Dr. Vicky Foster, senior HGCA research and knowledge transfer manager, said: “With limited approval of this technology in Europe there is little evidence available on what impact it could have for UK agriculture and nothing specifically for cereals and oilseeds.
“The topic of genetically modified food and feed continues to generate a high level of interest and debate. HGCA is reviewing the implications for UK growers, merchants and primary processors of adoption versus non-adoption of GM cereals and oilseeds in order to provide an evidence-based approach to the question of whether or not these technologies could be of benefit to the industry.”
The final report of the project will be published by HGCA in late 2012.

French genetically modified corn cancer research to be released

Research from the French University of Caen which linked genetically modified corn NK603 to cancer in laboratory rats will be made public, according to researcher Gilles-Eric Seralini, after the European Food Safety Authority makes public their own review which disputed the university's results.
The EFSA had been providing the information on request, but said that public interest has been so high it will make the review available on its website. Its conclusion was that the Seralini research failed to meet "acceptable scientific standards."

Decision on planting genetically modified corn expected in Costa Rica

Costa Rica's National Biosafety Committee, an analysis group comprised of the Ministry of Environment and Energy as well as the National Academy of Sciences representative, may soon decide whether or not to allow planting genetically modified corn in that country.
In December 2012, members of the National Biosafety Committee asked for a delay in the ruling of whether or not to allow the planting of genetically modified corn, saying they were waiting on technical information. However, a local report has said the committee may decide in about seven days whether to allow planting of the genetically modified crops or further delay the ruling to continue studying the issue and request more information from the company seeking authorization.

Gene research studies how crops respond to drought

Kansas State University geneticists and colleagues have found that by applying a genetic-analysis method used to study and prioritize the genes in humans, they can study how food production plants respond to drought, heat and other factors — giving scientists a greater chance at improving crops' resistances to harsh weather and environments.
Researchers studied the corn genome using a relatively new method, called genome-wide associate studies, GWAS, which searches the entire genome for small, frequent variations that may influence the risk of a certain disease. This helps researchers pinpoint genes that are potentially problematic and may be the key in abnormal traits and diseases. "Conducting routine, full-scale, genome-wide studies in crop plants remains challenging due to cost and genome complexity," said Patrick Schnable, study senior author and professor of agronomy at Iowa State University. "What we tried to get out of this study is a broad view of which regions of crop genomes should be examined in detail."
Using the GWAS method for multiple analyses and complementary methods in identifying genetic variants, researchers were able to find that, on average, 79 percent of detectable genetic signals are concentrated at previously defined genes and their promoter regions. "We used to think that genes are the only search priority and there were just many other less important or useless DNA sequences," said Jianming Yu, associate professor of agronomy at Kansas State University and study senior author. "But now we are starting to see that these other regions harbor some important genetic codes in them. Canvassing without prioritizing can be cost prohibitive, however, and efficient GWAS in crops with complex genomes still need to be carried out by taking advantage of a combination of genome technologies available."

Argentina corn harvest delayed by flooding

Argentina is now expected to harvest the bulk of its corn crop in May and June due to excessive flooding, delaying a season that farmers say will already produce 20 percent less product than initially forecast, according to reports. The combination of a late harvest and less product will contribute to the ongoing high global food prices carrying over from the U.S. drought that left supplies down in the summer.
"May and June will be the peak harvesting months this season," said Martin Fraguio, executive director of Argentine corn industry chamber Maizar. "The total 2012–2013 harvest looks like it will be somewhere between 25 and 28 million metric tons." Genetically modified seeds will help offset the late planting some, say farmers, who are hoping for the ground to dry out enough for December planting. Only half of the 3.4 million hectares expected to be sown with the 2012–2013 corn in Argentina has been seeded so far, down 12 percent from the previous season.

When bad weather hits, farmers tend to switch from corn to soy, which is cheap to plant and more resistant to adverse weather conditions. However, the extent to which the soy crop will rise in the coming year won't be known for another month, say growers. "A lot of acreage will just stay flooded this year, so it won't go to corn or soybeans," said farmer Santiago del Solar.

Syngenta genetically modified corn showing rootworm vulnerability

Syngenta AG's genetically modified Agrisure corn may have "cross resistance" with Monsanto's YieldGard corn, making the crop vulnerable to the same rootworm no longer killed by Monsanto's toxin, according to researchers.
Cross-resistance may already be showing up in Nebraska cornfields, said Lance Meinke, an entomology professor at the University of Nebraska in Lincoln. Research there showed that rootworms have a low resistance to Monsanto corn, and Syngenta corn had similarly poor performance.
“This has been the most difficult insect to control in the Corn Belt in my lifetime,” said Dirk Benson, Syngenta’s head of trait projects. “We are very concerned about trait performance.” In a recent study, rootworms known to be resistant to the incecticidal protein Cry3Bb1, similar to the mCry3a protein produced by Syngenta corn, survived feeding on Syngenta’s corn and caused root damage at higher-than-expected rates. But the study is preliminary and some of it doesn’t support the possibility of cross-resistance, said Benson. “They have an indication of concern,” said Benson. “More study is needed.”

Study insufficient to question safety of genetically modified corn

A recent study that called into question the safety of Monsanto's NK603 genetically modified corn did not provide sufficient evidence to reconsider existing safety approvals, according to France's government.
The study, conducted by researchers at the University of Caen, said rats that fed on the corn were at higher risk of suffering tumors, organ damage and premature death. In response, France's government requested the opinion of the National Agency for Sanitary Safety of Food, Environment and Labor, ANSES, and biotechnology advisory council HCB. Both agencies determined that the study did not demonstrate its findings conclusively.
"On this basis, there is therefore no need to go back on the authorizations issued for the NK603 maize and the Roundup weed killer," they said. The French government has, however, called for an overhaul of EU procedures for approving genetically modified varieties of corn and pesticides, and reaffirmed its ban on growing genetically modified crops.

European Food Safety Authority rejects study questioning Monsanto corn

The European Food Safety Authority has concluded that a recent paper raising concerns about the potential toxicity of Monsanto Co.'s genetically modified maize NK603 and of a herbicide containing glyphosate is of insufficient scientific quality to be considered as valid for risk assessment.
The authority's initial review found that the design, reporting and analysis of the study, as outlined in the paper, are inadequate. To enable the fullest understanding of the study the authority has invited authors Séralini et al. to share key additional information. “Some may be surprised that the EFSA’s statement focuses on the methodology of this study rather than its outcomes; however, this goes to the very heart of the matter," said Per Bergman, the director of scientific evaluation of regulated products and the one who led the authority's work. "When conducting a study it is crucial to ensure a proper framework is in place. Having clear objectives and the correct design and methodology create a solid base from which accurate data and valid conclusions can follow. Without these elements a study is unlikely to be reliable and valid.”
The preliminary review is the first step in a two-stage process. A second analysis will be delivered by the end of October, and will take into account any additional information from the study authors, who will be given an opportunity to supply study documentation and procedures to the European Food Safety Authority to ensure the broadest possible understanding of their work. It will also include an overview of Member State assessments of the paper and an analysis from the German authorities responsible for the assessment of glyphosate.

South Africa group calls for Monsanto modified corn ban

Monsanto Co.'s genetically modified NK603 corn is hazardous to the health and should be banned, according to South Africa's African Centre for Biosafety.
The centre has asked South African authorities to ban the corn's cultivation, import and export based on a French study that claims the corn can cause tumors, liver damage and kidney damage in laboratory rats. “We urge the South African government to take the necessary steps to protect its citizens,” said the centre in a letter to the minister of agriculture, forestry and fisheries.
But the study “does not meet minimum acceptable standards for this type of scientific research,” said Thomas Helscher, a spokesman for Monsanto. The methods used don’t conform to Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development standards, the source and quality of the corn are unclear and details on dietary intake absent, he said.
France has asked its national food-security agency to look into the study, and Russia's government has suspended sales of NK603 corn pending further information.

Russia suspends import of genetically modified corn on safety concerns

Russia has suspended the import of Monsanto Co.'s genetically modified NK 603 corn after a French study raised concerns that the product might have adverse long-term effects on rats, according to reports.
The suspension was requested by consumer watchdog Rospotrebnadzor, which asked scientists at Russia's Institute of Nutrition to review the study. However, the safety of NK 603 is "well established," said spokesman Tom Helscher. “Russia is a net exporter of grain so the actual impact of their temporary suspension, if any, is likely to be small,” he said. Russia has also asked the European Commission to comment on the situation, and France has asked its national food-security agency to examine the study.

US scientists express concern over French GM corn study

A study by French researchers claiming ill effects on laboratory rats fed genetically modified corn and given water spiked with herbicide has been rejected by American scientists who have questioned the motives and methods of the authors.
The study was led by Gilles-Eric Seralini, whose book calling biotechnology into question has recently been re-issued. The study said that rats fed a steady diet of feed made from biotech corn developed tumors. In addition, the drinking water of the rats was continuously spiked with glyphosate, the active ingredient in many broad spectrum herbicide products. Glyphosate has a history of safe use in more than 130 countries around the world and favorable environmental characteristics. It binds tightly to most soils making it unlikely to move to groundwater and degrades over time in soil and natural waters, said the scientists.
The scientists also said that numerous studies attest to the fact that the particular stock of rats used in the study are prone to develop tumors before the age of two. The Seralini study ran for about two years. Seralini called the study the first long-term feeding study ever conducted, but according to Dr. Martina Newell-McGloughlin, director of the international biotechnology program at the University of California/Davis, the results of numerous long-term studies have been published with none of the results claimed by Seralini.
“The bottom line is, despite numerous studies in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, and substantial experience with humans and animals around the world consuming biotech crops for over 15 years, there has not been a single substantiated case of negative outcomes or a single documented health problem,” said Newell-McGloughlin.

Monsanto awarded $1 billion from DuPont for soybean patent infringement

A U.S. district court jury has awarded Monsanto Co. $1 billion in a patent-infringement case against The DuPont Co., which focused on whether DuPont infringed on Monsanto's patent for developing genetically modified soybean seeds that can withstand the weed killer Roundup.
The jury determined that a subsidiary of DuPont willfully violated Monsanto's patent on its Roundup Ready technology. DuPont said that it plans to appeal the decision and expects it to be overturned. Monsanto originally sued DuPont in 2009, claiming it was illegal for DuPont to use its technology without authorization in developing a line of soybean seeds called Optimum GAT. DuPont abandoned development and never sold any of the seeds.
DuPont has its own patent case pending against Monsanto.

Monsanto sees growth, net income up through May

Monsanto's net income rose to $937 million the three months ending May 31, an increase over the $692 million the company posted during the same time in 2011, according to Monsanto's latest report.
The company is expecting further growth due to a current drought in the U.S. Midwest, the worst the region has seen in a decade, because the conditions may demonstrate Monsanto's products' superior yields and performance. “Our genetics tend to do well in warm, dry conditions,” said CEO Hugh Grant. “It’s not something that you hope for, but we have an edge in that.” The company could also benefit from competitors losing stock due to the drought, where Monsanto can bring in seeds from Latin American stocks.
Monsanto will raise enough seed for a 96-million-acre corn crop, 2 million to 4 million acres more than expected in the company’s forecast for a “mid-teens” percentage rise in 2013 earnings, said Chief Financial Officer Pierre Courduroux.

Argentina corn still in consideration for China imports

China is interested in buying more corn from Argentina, but it's still unclear whether certain genetically modified strains of the grain will be allowed to enter the Chinese market, according to the Argentine Agriculture Ministry.
Argentina signed an export deal with China in early 2012, but the agreement didn't cover some of the types of corn produced. But traders say that as long as Argentine farmers are growing the same kinds of genetically modified corn as U.S. farmers do, the agreement should hold. China has approved 12 GMO corn strains for import into the country.
Argentina is forecast to export 13 million metric tons of 2011–2012 corn and 16 million metric tons of the 2012–2013 crop, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Chinese corn imports are forecast to increase to 7 million metric tons in 2012–2013, due largely to rising livestock and industrial consumption.

Germany supports zero-tolerance on unapproved GM content in food imports

Germany will continue to support a zero-tolerance policy on allowing any unapproved genetically modified content into human food imports, according to German Farming and Consumer Protection Minister Ilse Aigner. The country's government plans to oppose any move by the European Union to enact similar rules to those put in place regarding animal feed, which do allow trace amounts of unapproved genetically modified material in a bid to prevent import disruption when modified crops are introduced more quickly in other regions.
Aigner said changing the zero-tolerance policy would damage the rights of consumers to buy genetically-modified-free food if they wish and would reduce transparency of food labeling. Right now, modified crops can't be imported by the EW even in trace amounts until approved by the bloc's approvals process. Food industry lobbies in Germany and other EU countries are pressing for a change to the rules to help prevent trade disruption.