What is on my plate – Heirloom, Genetically edited, or Genetically Modified?

Heirlooms also called heirloom varieties or heritage plants are any plant cultivar or livestock breed that has been grown for a certain number of years and that breeds “true to type” from seeds, with each generation of the plant/livestock having the same combination of traits.

Gene editing ( a different technology) involves precise changes to an organism’s genome without introducing foreign DNA elements. Utilizing techniques like CRISPR/Cas, scientists can make accurate “cuts” in the DNA, resulting in new genetic variations. Unlike GMOs, these modifications are subtle and resemble natural mutations.

GMOs, known as genetically modified organisms, are living entities that have undergone artificial genetic alterations by introducing foreign DNA, which can originate from synthetic sources or other microorganisms.

While GMOs and gene-edited foods have been present for nearly three decades, ongoing research in this field continues to look for significant advancements (CRISPR in Agriculture, n.d).

From Innovative Genomic Institute | CRISPRpedia (2023)

These technologies are proposed to offer various benefits, including enhanced nutritional content in food, reduced food waste and pesticide, increase in food availability across the globe as well as increase in crop resistance to pesticides and climate-related challenges (Pixley et al., 2022).

However, some drawbacks and concerns of these innovative technologies are related to potential long-term health impacts and effects on biodiversity. It’s thought that GM crops might breed with other plants which can spread the modified genes across other plants creating different variations, affecting the ecosystems (Landry, 2015). There is the social and economic impact on food producers/farmers as they are restricted to buying high cost GM seeds for food production.

In addition, the introduction of the GM seed to complex natural environment tend to lead to loss in the desired impact as the seed adjust to the new environment. This is likened to the reduced sensitivity of pests to pesticides, causing pest control failure despite correct application. Research has shown that repeated use of the same or similar pesticides with the same mode of action can foster resistance. It’s not the individual pest but the population that evolves. When a pesticide is used, a minute fraction of the pest population survives due to genetic traits. Survivors pass resistance traits to their offspring. As resistant pests multiply, pesticide effectiveness diminishes. Applicators increase doses and frequency, but eventually, control dwindles. The population is deemed resistant when the once-effective pesticide loses potency. Resistant pest populations emerge through genetic inheritance, requiring diverse pest management strategies (Understanding resistance)

This will ultimately push us to create a more severe technology against pests, is only a matter of time before nature progress and the circle continues again with us creating more and more invasive techniques. There are concerns that the same applies to gene edited plant/livestock.

IS IT SAFE?

When considering food safety, a legitimate concern revolves around the possibility of generating new allergies – proteins in crops that trigger an immune response when consumed. Although numerous foods commonly found in our diets are already known to trigger allergies, there is no clear understanding on the continued increase in the number of people that are developing allergies for different food produce.

Researchers are actively working on gene editing methods to tackle this concern by aiming to eliminate proteins responsible for allergies and intolerances. A notable advancement in this area is the creation of gluten-free wheat (Yu, Freeland and Nadeau, 2016). The question remains whether we are complicating our challenges as most food produce that we witness increased allergy by greater population are those that have undergone genetic editing to improve specific desired outcomes; mostly yield. Some familiar examples include wheat, peanuts, soy, milk, and eggs.

Safety of food is also dependent on the volume of consumption as well as the method of preparation and storage. Certain everyday foods can be harmful if not consumed in moderation or properly prepared, such as rhubarb leaves, raw cassava, raw kidney beans, and raw cashews.

Concerns about safety, ethics, and the unknown long-term effects of consuming edited foods are some of the factors that contribute to public hesitancy. When asked about public opinion about GM food, approximately half of Americans (48%) express that they believe the health effects of genetically modified foods are no different from those of other foods. About 39% state that GM foods are worse for one’s health, while a smaller portion, one in ten (10%), believes that such foods are better for one’s health (Pew Research Center, 2016).

The extent to which people believe they consume GM foods is frequently considered an indicator of their familiarity with such foods. This argument posits that those who perceive themselves as not consuming GM foods may be largely unaware that a substantial portion of the current food supply today contains genetically modified ingredients, particularly products that utilize genetically modified corn or corn oil(Pew Research Center, 2016).

LEGISLATIONS

In 2016, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine released a report indicating scientific consensus on the safety of GM foods. Some example consideringthe enhancement of nutritional values – the Philippines is cultivating “golden rice,” a genetically modified organism (GMO) biofortified with Vitamin A which is a lacking nutrient of the region. Similarly, in the United Kingdom, Vitamin D biofortified tomatoes (GE) are being grown, and in Japan, GABA-enriched tomatoes (GE) are being developed.

Different countries have taken varied stances on how to regulate genetically edited foods.In Australia, gene-edited foods are allowed to be cultivated without any regulatory restrictions or mandatory labelling. The Gene Technology Act 2000 deregulated these products in 2019, permitting their cultivation without specific oversight.

In New Zealand, the Environmental Protection Authority continues to uphold regulatory restrictions on both gene-edited foods and GMOs.

While in the UK on the 20th of January 2022, the government published an article regarding the new legislation that allows scientists across England to use new technologies, for research and development on plant-based variation which requires a longer time of breeding. All scientists conducting research with genetic technologies will have to report the data of their trials to Defra (Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs). For now, all genetically modified plants and organisms and any food product derived can not be commercialised without authorisation according to current rules.

The new regulations explain that they are set to help and support farmers and landowners, rewarding them for actions and practices which benefit the environment and support sustainable food production.

Here are some different case studies: Extracted from “New powers granted to research gene editing in plants, GOV.UK”

Prof. Mark Stevens, Head of Science at the British Beet Research Organisations

The UK sugar beet industry would highly appreciate any techniques or approaches that can expedite the identification and development of commercially viable virus-resistant varieties for Virus yellows. Currently, Virus Yellows poses a significant challenge as it comprises a complex of three viruses, making it a difficult breeding objective

In the first-ever gene-edited wheat trial in Europe, scientists at Rothamsted Research are investigating a modified wheat variety. This wheat has been gene-edited to exhibit reduced levels of the amino acid asparagine. The purpose of this genetic modification is to potentially mitigate the formation of asparagine, a compound that may contribute to cancer risk when certain products, such as potatoes, cereals, or coffee, are subjected to heating

Professor Graham Moore, John Innes Centre

Tomato growers in the UK often resort to spraying fungicides on their crops to combat powdery mildew disease. However, thanks to the efforts of researchers at The Sainsbury Laboratory, a breakthrough has been made in the form of a new mildew-resistant variant named Tomelo. Using gene editing techniques, this variant was developed, presenting a promising solution to significantly decrease the reliance on chemical inputs for farmers and help protect the environment. The creation of Tomelo took less than 10 months, and its incorporation into locally adapted tomato varieties can be done swiftly, highlighting the efficiency and precision of genetic technologies in the breeding process.

Professor Nick Talbot FRS, Executive Director of The Sainsbury Laboratory in Norwich

Bananas, the fourth largest food crop worldwide, are facing growing vulnerability to diseases, leading to heavy dependence on expensive chemical pesticides. A particularly concerning threat is the emergence of a new variant of Panama disease known as TR4, which poses a significant risk to global banana production due to the lack of effective control measures. However, there is hope on the horizon as Tropic Biosciences has successfully utilized precise gene editing techniques to create disease-resistant banana plants specifically targeting TR4. These new resistant plants offer a seamless replacement for the current banana varieties used in production globally.

What does the future hold for the food on our plates? Most of the challenges highlighted can be addressed by adopting more sustainable farming practices that promote integrated pest management as well as eating a variety of food produce thereby improving the nutritional content of our meals.

Gene editing is a great contribution to science that could be utilised to deliver great outcomes in a controlled environment. When gene-edited seeds/breeds are introduced to our complex environment, more research and analysis will be needed to demonstrate the continued value and ensure the outcome is consistently positive to the wider society and environment.

Reference list

CRISPR in Agriculture (no date) Innovative Genomics Institute (IGI). Available at: https://innovativegenomics.org/crisprpedia/crispr-in-agriculture/# (Accessed: 10 August 2023).

Landry, H. (2015) Challenging Evolution: How GMOs Can Influence Genetic Diversity, Science in the News. Harvard University. Available at: https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2015/challenging-evolution-how-gmos-can-influence-genetic-diversity/.

New powers granted to research gene editing in plants (no date) GOV.UK. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-powers-granted-to-research-gene-editing-in-plants.

Pew Research Center (2016) 3. Public opinion about genetically modified foods and trust in scientists connected with these foods, Pew Research Center Science & Society. Pew Research Center Science & Society. Available at: https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2016/12/01/public-opinion-about-genetically-modified-foods-and-trust-in-scientists-connected-with-these-foods/.

Pixley, K.V. et al. (2022) ‘Genome-edited crops for improved food security of smallholder farmers’, Nature Genetics [Preprint]. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-022-01046-7.

Understanding Resistance – Pesticide Environmental Stewardship (no date) pesticidestewardship.org. Available at: https://pesticidestewardship.org/resistance/understanding-resistance/#:~:text=Resistance%20is%20defined%20as%20a.

Yu, W., Freeland, D.M.H. and Nadeau, K.C. (2016) ‘Food allergy: immune mechanisms, diagnosis and immunotherapy’, Nature Reviews Immunology, 16(12), pp. 751–765. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1038/nri.2016.111.

‌