Development & Aid, Environment, Headlines, Latin America & the Caribbean

ENVIRONMENT-BRAZIL: Beans May Neutralise Transgenic Debate

Mario Osava

RIO DE JANEIRO, May 6 2004 (IPS) - The heated debate about genetically modified organisms in Brazil just might escape the dead end it had entered with the transgenic soybean controversy, that is, if all goes well with a genetically modified version of a kidney-type bean that is currently undergoing field tests.

It is the first time that such a broad and meticulous study is being conducted of a genetically modified (GM) crop, and includes analysis of soils and microogranisms to determine whether they suffer changes as a result of the presence of altered beans.

This approach is a novelty in the world. “Europe is still debating how to conduct an evaluation” of the environmental impacts of the new technology, Norma Gouvea Rumjanek, biochemist at the agro-biology centre of the state-run Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation, EMBRAPA, told IPS.

Beginning this week, she has been collecting soil samples at the EMBRAPA rice and bean experimental fields in Santo Antonio de Goias, in western Brazil, where three weeks ago researchers planted 1,500 conventional and transgenic bean plants in order to compare their development and effects on the environment.

The new bean has been genetically modified to be resistant to golden mosaic, the disease that takes the heaviest toll on Brazil’s bean crop. A gene from the disease-causing virus itself has been introduced into the bean “with a modification intended to fool the virus,” says Francisco Aragao, a coordinator of the transgenic bean project.

The gene produces a protein that does not function for the virus, but the virus “thinks that it is indeed its protein,” and in incorporating it is rendered harmless, Aragao, EMBRAPA expert in genetic and biotechnology resources, explained to IPS.

This technology can also be applied to the tomato, which suffers the same disease as the bean. “And now that we learned how to genetically modify the bean, which is more complex than soybean, we hope to also add a gene to make it more resistant against drought,” Aragao said.

But now the bean that is resistant to golden mosaic must pass the field tests for biosafety, and to determine whether it repeats in the field the characteristics that were recorded under laboratory conditions.

Soil analysis during the cultivation of the crop will indicate whether the genetic modification has any effect on the microorganisms and other species – like worms and insects – that are important for the nutrition and health of the plants and the soil, said biochemist Rumjanek.

No effects on these living organisms in the soil are expected, but if they do occur it is because there is an unwanted alteration in the bean plant.

The introduced gene is well known – that is not the problem – but in the genetic modification process “there isn’t control over where the gene is inserted,” she admitted.

The scientists will also study whether the beans maintain their metabolism, particularly their ability to absorb and fix nitrogen from the air. That is a characteristic also present in soybeans. It is important to maintain nitrogen levels as a means of saving on fertiliser.

These analyses, entrusted to the agro-biology centre, form part of a broader effort by the EMBRAPA system, which is made up of 40 research units distributed throughout the country, to evaluate and ensure the biosafety of transgenic products. Some 600 researchers were involved in the overall project.

There are numerous genetic engineering projects under way involving Brazil’s leading crops. Some of the achievements have been limited to the laboratory, but so far the country’s environmental authorities have authorised field studies only for transgenic bean and papaya varieties.

However, the precautions taken in the field experiments and the assessments of those two cases did not quell the criticisms from those who reject all genetically modified products due to potential threats to the environment and human health.

The question cannot be restricted to its “biological aspects, effects on soil, insects microorganisms and pollen,” says David Hathaway, a consultant to non-governmental organisations involved in the transgenics debate.

“It is essential to consider two other dimensions: the alternatives like organic farming and the socio-economic impacts,” he told IPS.

Before approving the golden mosaic-resistant bean for commercial use, alternatives that are economically viable and with lesser environmental impact should be considered, such as using biological controls to eradicate the white fly, which transmits the virus, or other forms of developing resistance against the disease – or even finding ways to live with it, Hathaway said.

Furthermore, he said, this form of biotechnology usually involves the payment of patent rights and reliance on genes and technologies from abroad, with their added costs and strict conditions, such as the ban on farmers producing their own seeds from the plants grown from patented transgenic seeds, he added.

The critic of genetically modified crops nevertheless recognised the broad and detailed testing effort being carried out in the case of the transgenic bean as “an advance, though insufficient.”

The researchers hope to get past the confrontational attitudes that the debate has produced. The transgenic soybean developed by the U.S. multinational Monsanto is today “more of a legal question” than an environmental or health issue, said EMBRAPA biochemist Rumjanek.

She was referring to the widespread illegal planting of genetically modified soybeans in southern Brazil, which was later authorised by exceptional legislation in 2003. Soybeans are a leading Brazilian export, and the vast majority of the crop produced in the south is from genetically modified seed, much of which has been smuggled in from Paraguay or Argentina.

But the kidney-type bean is a product widely consumed in Brazil, especially amongst the poorer segments of society, and genetic modification of that crop only emerged after it became evident that traditional means of improvement – such as cross breeding – did not improve resistance against golden mosaic disease, said Aragao.

After unsuccessful experiments with 45,000 units of different beans, both wild and domesticated, genetic engineering emerged as an essential tool for improving this crop, said the EMBRAPA biotech expert.