Are we ready for back-to-nature crop breeding?

Palmgren, Michael G.; Edenbrandt, Anna Kristina; Vedel, Suzanne Elizabeth; Andersen, Martin Marchman; Landes, Xavier; Østerberg, Jeppe Thulin; Falhof, Janus; Olsen, Lene Irene; Christensen, Søren Brøgger; Sandøe, Peter; Gamborg, Christian; Kappel, Klemens; Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark; Pagh, Peter

doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2014.11.003

Cited by 199 publications

(140 citation statements)

References 71 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

130

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is clear that scientists are aware of public concerns [49,56,57,59]. However, opinions of scientists on increasing the acceptability of these technologies for the public vary.…”

Section: Continuous Developments and The Need For Clear Evaluation Crmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concepts and Strategies of Organic Plant Breeding in Light of Novel Breeding Techniques

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In this paper, we describe the development of a set of guiding principles for the evaluation of breeding techniques by the organic sector over time. The worldwide standards of organic agriculture (OA) do not allow genetic engineering (GE) or any products derived from genetic engineering. The standards in OA are an expression of the underlying principles of health, ecology, fairness and care. The derived norms are process and not product oriented. As breeding is considered part of the process in agriculture, GE is not a neutral tool for the organic sector. The incompatibility between OA and GE is analyzed, including the "novel breeding techniques". Instead, alternative breeding approaches are pursued based on the norms and values of organic agriculture not only on the technical level but also on the social and organizational level by including other value chain players and consumers. The status and future perspectives of the alternative directions for organic breeding are described and discussed.

show abstract

“…It is clear that scientists are aware of public concerns [49,56,57,59]. However, opinions of scientists on increasing the acceptability of these technologies for the public vary.…”

Section: Continuous Developments and The Need For Clear Evaluation Crmentioning

confidence: 99%

Concepts and Strategies of Organic Plant Breeding in Light of Novel Breeding Techniques

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The new generation of genome editing technologies could empower local initiatives and responsive creation of varieties that may result in a more pragmatic way of using genetic technologies. As suggested recently and maybe counterintuitively (SCNAT 2013; Kahane et al 2013;Jacobsen et al 2013;Andersen et al 2015;Palmgren et al 2015;Jacobsen et al 2015), the potential of modern plant breeding might be best exploited if associated with low-input systems such as organic or agro-ecological farming.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Genetically modified crops in Switzerland: implications for agrosystem sustainability evidenced by multi-criteria model

Wohlfender-Bühler

Feusthuber

Wager

et al. 2016

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In Switzerland, genetically modified (GM) crops have been banned in 2005 and have never been used in agriculture. The relevance and sustainability of genetically modified crops for agrosystems have been assessed following a mandate from the Swiss Parliament defined by the Federal Act on Agriculture (187d al.1). For that, an ex ante study based on a multi-criteria decision analysis model that summarises literature and the opinion of experts has been done.The impacts of genetically modified crops on both environmental and socio-economical sustainability in Switzerland have been assessed. Here, we review four model crops for Swiss agriculture: maize, sugar beet, potato and apple. Each crop was compared for both conventional and genetically modified farming systems that contain a specific trait, namely insecticide production (Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt)), herbicide tolerance (HT), fungal resistance (FR), or bacterial resistance (BR). Results show that six out of seven scenarios showed a lower socio-economical sustainability for genetically modified compared to the conventional systems, whereas a slight improvement in the environmental component, mostly resources use, was observed in all scenarios. In conclusion, our work indicates that only carefully tailored and designed genetically modified crops would meet the high standard of requirements of Swiss agrosystems. Our model has thus allowed a quick diagnostic on the impact of genetically modified cultivation on sustainability.

show abstract

“…Thus the cultivated crops in general lack genetic diversity. Natural as well as intentional hybridization and mutations caused the gain or loss of thousands of gene functions in cultivars and germplasm collections, thus a plethora of biotic stress resistance genes (R) are available for plant resistance improvement Palmgren et al, 2015). Several R ERR genes have been pyramided in potato against late blight but the resistance is not durable, and the pathogen overcomes resistance by producing new effectors (Jacobsen, 2013).…”

Section: Gene (R) Pyramiding Based On Genome Editingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Plant Innate Immune Response: Qualitative and Quantitative Resistance

Kushalappa

Yogendra

Karre

2016

Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences

156

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant diseases, caused by microbes, threaten world food, feed, and bioproduct security. Plant resistance has not been effectively deployed to improve resistance in plants for lack of understanding of biochemical mechanisms and genetic bedrock of resistance. With the advent of genome sequencing, the forward and reverse genetic approaches have enabled deciphering the riddle of resistance. Invading pathogens produce elicitors and effectors that are recognized by the host membrane-localized receptors, which in turn induce a cascade of downstream regulatory and resistance metabolite and protein biosynthetic genes (R) to produce resistance metabolites and proteins, which reduce pathogen advancement through their antimicrobial and cell wall enforcement properties. The resistance in plants to pathogen attack is expressed as reduced susceptibility, ranging from high susceptibility to hypersensitive response, the shades of gray. The hypersensitive response or cell death is considered as qualitative resistance, while the remainder of the reduced susceptibility is considered as quantitative resistance. The resistance is due to additive effects of several resistance metabolites and proteins, which are produced through a network of several hierarchies of plant R genes. Plants recognize the pathogen elicitors or receptors and then induce downstream genes to eventually produce resistance metabolites and proteins that suppress the pathogen advancement in plant. These resistance genes (R), against qualitative and quantitative resistance, can be identified in germplasm collections and replaced in commercial cultivars, if nonfunctional, based on genome editing to improve plant resistance.

show abstract

Are we ready for back-to-nature crop breeding?

Cited by 199 publications

References 71 publications

Concepts and Strategies of Organic Plant Breeding in Light of Novel Breeding Techniques

Concepts and Strategies of Organic Plant Breeding in Light of Novel Breeding Techniques

Genetically modified crops in Switzerland: implications for agrosystem sustainability evidenced by multi-criteria model

Plant Innate Immune Response: Qualitative and Quantitative Resistance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About