生物技术与生物安全

本文通过大量的实例介绍了国内外生物技术,特别是基因工程的进展。继而从伦理道德、对人类的健康和环境的影响等方面阐述了生物技术对人类生存安全可能带来的威胁。最后就生物安全的立法等问题提出了建设性意见。     

Sustainable Development and Norwegian Genetic Engineering Regulations: Applications, Impacts, and Challenges

The main purpose of The NorwegianGene Technology Act (1993) is to enforcecontainment of genetically modified organisms(GMOs) and control of GMO releases.Furthermore, the Act intends to ensure that``production and use of GMOs should take placein an ethically and socially justifiable way,in accordance with the principle of sustainabledevelopment and without detrimental effects tohealth and the environment.' Hence it isobvious that, for the Norwegian authorities,sustainable development is a normativeguideline when evaluating acceptableconsequences of GMO use and production. Inaccordance with this, we have investigated theextent to which the sustainability criteriawere decisive for the destiny of one approvedand one declined application of geneticallymodified plant release. The presentunderstanding of the ecological,socio-economical, and cultural consequences ofGMO use and release is fragmentary anduncertain. We consider the PrecautionaryPrinciple and the notion of equitabledistribution as key issues within thesustainable development framework, henceconstituting important foundations for ouranalyses. The Act is legitimizingsustainability criteria, but does not seem tosecure their conversion into concrete action.We envisage a more conscious implementation ofthe Norwegian Gene Technology Act.Sustainability concerns ecological, economical,and social values, and these can only beensured through long-term thinking, initiationof independent risk-associated research, andbroad involvement of all stakeholders in theevaluation of GMO issues and concerns.     

The variability of processes involved in transgene dispersal—case studies from Brassica and related genera

Background, aim, and scope

We strive to predict consequences of genetically modified plants (GMPs) being cultivated openly in the environment, as human and animal health, biodiversity, agricultural practise and farmers’ economy could be affected. Therefore, it is unfortunate that the risk assessment of GMPs is burdened by uncertainty. One of the reasons for the uncertainty is that the GMPs are interacting with the ecosystems at the release site thereby creating variability. This variability, e.g. in gene flow, makes consequence analysis difficult. The review illustrates the great uncertainty of results from gene-flow analysis.

Main features

Many independent experiments were performed on the individual processes in gene flow. The results comprise information both from laboratory, growth chambers and field trials, and they were generated using molecular or phenotypic markers and analysis of fitness parameters. Monitoring of the extent of spontaneous introgression in natural populations was also performed. Modelling was used as an additional tool to identify key parameters in gene flow.

Results

The GM plant may affect the environment directly or indirectly by dispersal of the transgene. Magnitude of the transgene dispersal will depend on the GM crop, the agricultural practise and the environment of the release site. From case-to-case these three factors provide a variability that is reflected in widely different likelihoods of transgene dispersal and fitness of introgressed plants. In the present review, this is illustrated through a bunch of examples mostly from our own research on oilseed rape, Brassica napus. In the Brassica cases, the variability affected all five main steps in the process of gene dispersal. The modelling performed suggests that in Brassica, differences in fitness among plant genome classes could be a dominant factor in the establishment and survival of introgressed populations.

Discussion

Up to now, experimental analyses have mainly focused on studying the many individual processes of gene flow. This can be criticised, as these experiments are normally carried out in widely different environments and with different genotypes, and thus providing bits and pieces difficult to assemble. Only few gene-flow studies have been performed in natural populations and over several plant generations, though this could give a more coherent and holistic view.

Conclusion

The variability inherent in the processes of gene flow in Brassica is apparent and remedies are wished for. One possibility is to expose the study species to additional experiments and monitoring, but this is costly and will likely not cover all possible scenarios. Another remedy is modelling gene flow. Modelling is a valuable tool in identifying key factors in the gene-flow process for which more knowledge is needed, and identifying parameters and processes which are relatively insensitive to change and therefore require less attention in future collections of data. But the interdependence between models and experimental data is extensive, as models depend on experimental data for their development or testing.

Recommendations

More and more transgenic varieties are being grown worldwide harbouring genes that might potentially affect the environment (e.g. drought tolerance, salt tolerance, disease tolerance, pharmaceutical genes). This calls for a thorough risk assessment. However, in Brassica, the limited and uncertain knowledge on gene flow is an obstacle to this. Modelling of gene flow should be optimised, and modelling outputs verified in targeted field studies and at the landscape level. Last but not least, it is important to remember that transgene flow in itself is not necessarily a thread, but it is the consequences of gene flow that may jeopardise the ecosystems and the agricultural production. This emphasises the importance of consequence analysis of genetically modified plants.     

Hybrid regimes of knowledge? Challenges for constructing scientific evidence in the context of the GMO-debate

Background, aim, and scope

Over the last two decades, there has been a remarkable shift of attention to the scientific and political fundamentals of the precautionary principle. The application of this principle has become a main strategy of coping with the different forms and problems related to non-knowledge. Thus, societies are increasingly confronted with the challenging and hitherto unresolved problem of political and technological decision-making under conditions of diverging framings of non-knowledge. At present, there seems to be no generally accepted scientific or institutional approach. This is why the fundamental question of how different scientific actors define and construct evidence is not answered yet. Hence, this paper is based on the consideration that the conflicts in risk policy concerning genetically modified organisms (GMO) depend on the unresolved conflicts about the diverging scientific strategies and structures of evidence-making between the epistemic cultures involved. Thus, this study investigates two questions: (1) do the epistemic strategies of evidence-making differ systematically with the scientific actors involved in the GMO-debate? (2) What consequences emerge considering institutionalized procedures of decision-making?

Main features

This article is based on a secondary analysis of findings and perspectives reported in the literature and on the methods of qualitative social empirical research, i.e., interviews with experts. A total number of 34 interviews were conducted to explore the different strategies of handling non-knowledge and constructing evidence. Actors from science, administration, business and NGOs were interviewed. In this way, typical epistemic cultures can be described. An epistemic culture is the constellation of methodological strategies, theoretical assumptions and practical-experimental settings which define in every speciality the ways how we know what we know.

Results

There are two main results. Firstly, it was worked out that the epistemic cultures involved in the GMO-debate use rather distinct strategies to define non-knowledge and to classify evidence. There are three types of constructing evidence, which correspond to different types of epistemic cultures. Secondly, the findings imply that the intensity of the conflicts in risk policy fields like the GMO-debate is due to a lack of knowledge politics. Usually, knowledge politics is restricted to the design of institutional procedures to compile knowledge provided by experts. The institutional setting of risk analysis and risk management is based on the premise of strict separation between knowledge and power. However, inadmissible mixing-up of knowledge and power is observable.

Discussion

It seems that non-knowledge leads to an epistemic no man’s land, and, hence, hybrid regimes of knowledge emerge. These regimes are hybrid with respect to the unclear and not explicitly reflected strategies of evidence-making. By lacking of knowledge politics, this situation opens up ‘windows of opportunity’ for actors with special interests in risk policy fields like the GMO-debate. Therefore, there is a difference between the visible institutionalized structures of risk policies and the rather invisible hybrid regimes of knowledge. Structure and scope of expertise have to be reflected and new instruments of knowledge politics have to be designed.

Conclusions

Different epistemic cultures can be qualified by describing their particular strategies of evidence-making. To solve the conflicts between these strategies, a meta-expertise is needed. Besides the institutionalized settings of knowledge politics, the underlying hybrid regimes of knowledge have to be identified.

Recommendations and perspectives

The concept of epistemic cultures and their strategies of evidence-making should be investigated more explicitly with respect to other risk policy fields The analysis of hybrid regimes of knowledge should be deepened by looking at the complex interactions between institutional, discursive and practical rules affecting risk assessment.

     

Hazard mitigation or mitigation hazard?

BACKGROUND, AIM AND SCOPE: Transgenic oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.; OSR) is estimated to be environmentally and economically problematic because volunteers and ferals occur frequently and because of its hybridisation potential with several wild and weedy species. A proposed mitigation strategy aims to reduce survival, in particular in conventional OSR crops, by coupling the transgenic target modification with a dwarfing gene to reduce competitive fitness. Our study allowed us to access potential ecological implications of this strategy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: On a large scale (>500 km(2)), we recorded phenological and population parameters of oilseed rape plants for several years in rural and urban areas of Northern Germany (Bremen and surroundings). The characterising parameter were analysed for differences between wild and cultivated plants. RESULTS: In rural areas, occurrences of feral and volunteer OSR together had an average density of 1.19 populations per square kilometre, in contrast to urban areas where we found 1.68 feral populations per square kilometre on average. Throughout the survey, the vegetation cover at the locations with feral OSR ranged from less than 10% to 100%. Our investigations gave clear empirical evidence that feral OSR was, on average, at least 41% smaller than cultivated OSR, independent of phenological state after onset of flowering. DISCUSSION: The findings can be interpreted as phenotypic adaptation of feral OSR plants. Therefore, it must be asked whether dwarfing could be interpreted as an improvement of pre-adaptation to feral environments. In most of the sites where feral plants occurred, germination and establishment were in locations with disturbed vegetation cover, allowing initial growth without competition. Unless feral establishment of genetically modified dwarfed traits are specifically studied, it would not be safe to assume that the mitigation strategy of dwarfing also reduces dispersal in feral environments. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: With respect to OSR, we argue that the proposed mitigation approach could increase escape and persistence of transgene varieties rather than reducing them. We conclude that the development of effective hazard mitigation measures in the risk evaluation of genetically modified organisms requires thorough theoretical and empirical ecological analyses rather than assumptions about abstract fitness categories that apply only in parts of the environment where the plant can occur.     

Does Autonomy Count in Favor of Labeling Genetically Modified Food?

In this paper I argue that consumerautonomy does not count in favor of thelabeling of genetically modified foods (GMfoods) more than for the labeling of non-GMfoods. Further, reasonable considerationssupport the view that it is non-GM foods ratherthan GM foods that should be labeled.     

Identifying key life-traits for the dynamics and gene flow in a weedy crop relative: Sensitivity analysis of the GeneSys simulation model for weed beet (Beta vulgaris ssp. vulgaris)

The benefits of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant (GMHT) sugar beet (Beta vulgaris) varieties stem from their presumed ability to improve weed control and reduce its cost, particularly targeting weed beet, a harmful annual weedy form of the genus Beta (i.e. B. vulgaris ssp. vulgaris) frequent in sugar beet fields. As weed beet is totally interfertile with sugar beet, it is thus likely to inherit the herbicide-tolerance transgene through pollen-mediated gene flow. Hence, the foreseeable advent of HT weed beet populations is a serious threat to the sustainability of GM sugar beet cropping systems. For studying and quantifying the long-term effects of cropping system components (crop succession and cultivation techniques) on weed beet population dynamics and gene flow, we developed a biophysical process-based model called GeneSys-Beet in a previous study. In the present paper, the model was employed to identify and rank the weed life-traits as function of their effect on weed beet densities and genotypes, using a global sensitivity analysis to model parameters. Monte Carlo simulations with simultaneous randomization of all life-trait parameters were carried out in three cropping systems contrasting for their risk for infestation by HT weed beets. Simulated weed plants and bolters (i.e. beet plants with flowering and seed-producing stems) were then analysed with regression models as a function of model parameters to rank processes and life-traits and quantify their effects. Key parameters were those determining the timing and success of growth, development, seed maturation and the physiological end of seed production. Timing parameters were usually more important than success parameters, showing for instance that optimal timing of weed management operations is more important than its exact efficacy. The ranking of life-traits though depended on the cropping system and, to a lesser extent, on the target variable (i.e. GM weeds vs. total weed population). For instance, post-emergence parameters were crucial in rotations with frequent sugar beet crops whereas pre-emergence parameters were most important when sugar beet was rare. In the rotations with frequent sugar beet and insufficient weed control, interactions between traits were small, indicating diverse populations with contrasted traits could prosper. Conversely, when sugar beet was rare and weed control optimal, traits had little impact individually, indicating that a small number of optimal combinations of traits would be successful. Based on the analysis of sugar beet parameters and genetic traits, advice for the future selection of sugar beet varieties was also given. In climatic conditions similar to those used here, the priority should be given to limiting the presence of hybrid seeds in seed lots rather than decreasing varietal sensitivity to vernalization.     

关于消费者对转基因农产品认知的调查

调查发现有不少声称调查前就对转基因农产品“知道一点”,但了解的程度却有很大差别,其实更多的人并不真正了解,在对待基因农产品的态度上表现出相当的规律性：虽然都比较关注对生产转基因农产品给农民带来的收入,但更多的是关注对生态环境和人体健康的影响,希望加强管理。不同年龄、婚姻状态、性别和不同收入水平的人对转基因农产品的认知程度和态度虽然有很大程度的相似性,但也有相当程度的不同。