Food Tech Group Assignment

7/24/2019 Food Tech Group Assignment

1/21

1.0 INTRODUCTION TO GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD

1.1 Genetically Modified Food (GMF

World Health Organisation defined Genetically Modified Foods (GMFs) as the foods that

produced from or using Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). Genetically modified

organisms (GMOs) referred as organisms such as animals, plants or microorganisms in

which the genetic material (D!) has "een artificially manipulated or altered in a way

that does not occur naturally "y mating and#or natural recom"ination. $he process which

in%ol%es la"oratory wor&s in%ol%es the &nowledge of modern "iotechnology, recom"inant

D! technology or genetic engineering. $his technology allows selected indi%idual genes

to "e transferred from one organism into another, also "etween nonrelated species.

1.! "#$%o&e of GMF&

Genetically Modified Foods are de%eloped and mar&eted as there is demand and some

percei%ed ad%antage to the food producer and also the consumer. GMF intended to

product a food product with a lower price "ut with greater "enefit such as in the terms of

dura"ility or nutritional %alue or "oth. GMF crops could decrease the cost of production

and ha%e positi%e effects on the en%ironment in "oth de%eloped and de%eloping countries.

$he ad%ancement of GMF also greatly contri"uted in agricultural industry. 'ome "enefits

of genetic engineering in agriculture especially in plants are

i. ncreased crop yields

ii. *educed costs for food or drug production

iii. *educed need for pesticides

i%. +nhanced nutrient composition and food uality

%. *esistance to pests and disease

%i. Greater food security and medical "enefits to the world-s growing population.

%ii. De%eloping crops that mature faster and tolerate etreme en%ironmental condition,

allowing plants to grow in conditions where they might not otherwise flourish

! num"er of animals ha%e also "een genetically engineered to increase yield and decrease

suscepti"ility to disease. For eample

i. /attle ha%e "een enhanced to ehi"it resistance to mad cow disease. (0nited 'tates

Department of +nergy, 1223).

ii. 'almon ha%e "een engineered to grow larger and mature faster.

1.' Metod of GMF& "$od#ction

1 | F o o d Te c h n o l o g y ( B N N 4 0 3 0 4 )


2/21

GMFs are made through a process &nown as genetic engineering. Genes of interest are

transferred from one organism to another. $wo primary methods currently eist for

introducing transgenes into plant genomes.

i. $he first in%ol%es a de%ice called a 4gene gun.5 $he D! to "e introduced into the

plant cells is coated onto tiny particles. $hese particles are then physically shot

onto plant cells. 'ome of the D! comes off and is incorporated into the D! of

the recipient plant.

ii. $he second method uses a "acterium to introduce the gene(s) of interest into the

plant D!.

Fi)#$e 1* +ce,atic dia)$a, of o- GMF a$e ,ade

1. E/a,%le of GMF A%%lication

'ome eample of GMF application are summari6e in $a"le 7 "elow

Tale 1* E/a,%le& of GMO& Reltin) f$o, A)$ic#lt#$al iotecnolo)y (Ada%ted f$o,

"illi%&2 T.2 !003

Genetically O$)ani&,& Genetic Alte$ed



3/21

Confe$$ed T$ait

In&ect $e&i&tance /orn Bacillus thuringiensis(8t) is a naturally9occurring soil

"orne "acterium that is found worldwide. $here are

se%eral strains of 8t, each with differing /ry proteins.

:roteins ha%e "een found with insecticidal acti%ity

against the +uropean corn "orer (/ry7!", /ry7!c,

/ry;/). Most of the 8t corn hy"rids, targeted against

+uropean corn "orer, produce only the /ry7!"

protein< a few produce the /ry7!c protein or the

/ry;/ protein. Modifying a corn plant to produce its

own 8t protein o%ercomes these pro"lems. :lants

produce the protein in tissues where lar%ae feed.

Finally, the protein is present whene%er newly9hatched

lar%ae try to feed, so the timing of 8t application is not

a pro"lem. $he result is an efficient and consistent

"uilt9in system to deli%er 8t proteins to the target pest.

4e$icide

tole$ance

'oy"ean Glyphosate her"icide &ills plants "y "loc&ing the

+:':' en6yme, an en6yme in%ol%ed in the

"iosynthesis of aromatic amino acids, %itamins and

many secondary plant meta"olites. $here are se%eral

ways "y which crops can "e modified to "e

glyphosate9tolerant. One strategy is to incorporate a

soil "acterium gene, Agrobacterium tumefaciens,

strain /:= that produces a glyphosate9tolerant form of

+:':'. !nother way is to incorporate a different soil

"acterium gene that produces a glyphosate degrading

en6yme.

5ita,in en$ic,ent *ice Golden rice is a %ariety of rice

(Oryza sativa) produced

through genetic engineering to

"iosynthesi6e "eta9carotene, a

precursor of %itamin !, in the

edi"le parts of rice. $he

research was conducted with

the goal of producing a



4/21

fortified food to "e grown and

consumed in areas with a

shortage of dietary %itamin !.

! &ey "rea&through was the

disco%ery that a single

phytoene desaturase gene

("acterial /rtl) can "e used to

produce lycopene from

phytoene in GM tomato, rather

than ha%ing to introduce the

multiple carotene desaturases

that are normally used "y

higher plants. >ycopene is

then cycli6ed to "eta9carotene

"y the endogenous cyclase in

Golden *ice.Golden rice was

created "y transforming rice

with only two "eta9carotene

"iosynthesis genes

i. psy (phytoene

synthase) from daffodil

(Narcissus

pseudonarcissus)

ii. crtl (carotene

desaturase) from the

soil "acteriumErwiniauredovora

Fa&te$ ,at#$ation 'almon ! type 7 growth hormone gene in?ected into fertili6ed

fish eggs results in @.1A retention of the %ector at one

year of age, as well as significantly increased growth

rates. $he GM eggs hatched two days earlier than the

non9GM cohort (= %ersus @ days). GM salmon had

reached a si6e more typical of two9year9old non9GM

salmon raised in the hatchery. $he one9year9old GM



5/21

fish had also passed from the parr to smolt stage of

de%elopment, while this transformation too& two years

for the non9GM salmon. $he GM salmon "ecame

seually mature at two years of age, whereas the non9

GM salmon reuired three years to reach this stage of

de%elopment.

1.6 Deate on GMF

$here are a num"er of ethical concerns o%er genetically modified (GM) foods and these ha%e

all affected pu"lic support of the products. $he issues ha%e also triggered contro%ersy and

regulations around GM foods and any company that produces these crops or products.

/oncerns range from the en%ironment to ris&s to our food we" or issues concerning disease,

allergies and contamination.

7.B.7 8enefits $he !cceptance of GMF

i. +conomical

Farmers were con%inced that they stand to ma&e enormous profits from growing GM

crops. nitially, the GM crops are %erycostly "ut money can "e sa%ed on other

ependiture such as on pesticides. $o produce the GM crops, modern "iotechnology is

used which reuires highly s&illed people and sophisticated and epensi%e

euipment. >arge companies need considera"le in%estments in la"oratories, euipment

and human resources, hence the reason why GM crops are more epensi%e for farmers

than traditional crops. Howe%er GM crops are a far "etter option as it ta&es a shorter

time to produce the desired product, it is precise and there are no unwanted genes.

ii. Her"icide9resistant crops

GM crops can "e produced to "e her"icide resistant. $his means that farmers could

spray these crops with her"icide and &ill the weeds, without affecting other the crops.

$his can reduce the amount of her"icide used which su"seuently reduces the costs for

farmers and consumers. 8iotechnology companies are e%en eperimenting with crops

that can "e genetically modified to "e drought and salt9tolerant, or less reliant on

fertili6er, opening up new areas to "e farmed and leading to increased producti%ity.



6/21

iii. 8etter uality foods

!nimals that genetically modified can "e leaner, grow faster, and need less food. $hey

could also "e modified to ha%e special characteristics, such as greater mil& production,

high nutritional content of %itamins, lower cholesterol le%el and suita"le for people

with certain allergies. $hese modifications contri"ute to the impro%ement of

producti%ity for farmers and ultimately lower costs for the consumer. Modified crops

could perhaps pre%ent out"rea&s such as foot and mouth disease, which has de%astated

many farmers and local economies.

1.6.! Ri&7&* Te Re8ection of GMF

$he ma?or concerns of those who oppose GM foods focused on the

i. +n%ironmental damage

$he pro"lem with GM crops is that effect in the ecosystem is still un&nown. $he

genetic structure of any li%ing organism is comple and GM crop tests focus on short9

term effects. ot all the effects of introducing a foreign gene into the intricate genetic

structure of an organism are tested. $here is always the possi"ility that GM crops

might not "e a"le to "e destroyed once they spread into the natural ecosystem. n

+urope, for eample, a strain of sugar "eet that was genetically modified to "e

resistant to a particular her"icide has accidently assimilated the genes to resist another.

$his was disco%ered when farmers attempted to destroy the crop in 8ritain, France and

etherlands, where it was "eing tested, and 2.BA of the crop sur%i%ed.

ii. >ac& of "iodi%ersity

When a GMF is first introduced, the seeds are usually deri%ed from a single strain. f

this crop "ecomes greatly popular, it will result with multiple farmers planting one and

only one strain or %ariety of the crop, lea%ing all of the new crops eposed to disease.

For eample, the *ain"ow papaya, the strain chosen to recei%e the transgene for

ringspot9%irus resistance turned out to "e %ulnera"le to the "lac&spot fungus. $he

pro"lem can "e a%oided "y "reeding the GM trait into se%eral %arieties using

con%entional methods. GMFs are not the only crops lac&ing "iodi%ersity, nor are lac&

of "iodi%ersity a new concern. $his would li&ely "e less of a pro"lem if more GMF

companies were a"le to enter into the mar&et pro%iding more %ariety of crops, or if the



7/21

GMF crops could "e allowed to hy"ridi6e with other strains. n other words, it-s a

pro"lem caused "y the restrictions on GMF crops.

!.0 CONTENT

!.1 Con&ide$ation of C#$$ent 4ealt Facto$& and Conce$n& 9en De:elo%in) Ne- Food

Genetically modified organisms (GMO5s) are a "road group of plants, animals, and "acteria

that are engineered for a wide %ariety of applications ranging from agricultural production to

scientific research. $he types of potential ha6ards posed "y GMO5s %ary according to the type

of organism "eing modified and its intended application. Most of the concern surrounding

GMO5s relates to their potential for negati%e effects on the en%ironment and human health.

8ecause GMO5s that could directly affect human health are primarily products that can enter

the human food supply, this we"site focuses on genetically modified food. $o date, the only

types of products that ha%e "een appro%ed for human consumption in the 0.'. are genetically

modified plants (FD! we"site).

!ll genetically modified foods that ha%e "een appro%ed are considered "y the

go%ernment to "e as safe as their traditional counterparts and are generally unregulated (FD!

we"site). Howe%er, there are se%eral types of potential health effects that could result from the

insertion of a no%el gene into an organism. Health effects of primary concern to safety

assessors are production of new allergens, increased toicity, decreased nutrition, and

anti"iotic resistance (8ernstein et al., 122C).

i. Food Alle$)yFood !llergy affects approimately BA of children and 1A of adults in the 0.'. and is

a significant pu"lic health threat .!llergic reactions in humans occur when a normally

harmless protein enters the "ody and stimulates an immune response .f the no%el

protein in a GM food comes from a source that is &nown to cause allergies in humans

or a source that has ne%er "een consumed as human food, the concern that the protein

could elicit an immune response in humans increases. !lthough no allergic reactions to

GM food "y consumers ha%e "een confirmed, in %itro e%idence suggesting that some



8/21

GM products could cause an allergic reaction has moti%ated "iotechnology companies

to discontinue their de%elopment.

ii. Inc$ea&ed To/icity

Most plants produce su"stances that are toic to humans. Most of the plants that

humans consume produce toins at le%els low enough that they do not produce any

ad%erse health effects. $here is concern that inserting an eotic gene into a plant could

cause it to produce toins at higher le%els that could "e dangerous to humans. $his

could happen through the process of inserting the gene into the plant. f other genes in

the plant "ecome damaged during the insertion process it could cause the plant to alter

its production of toins. !lternati%ely, the new gene could interfere with a meta"olicpathway causing a stressed plant to produce more toins in response. !lthough these

effects ha%e not "een o"ser%ed in GM plants, they ha%e "een o"ser%ed through

con%entional "reeding methods creating a safety concern for GM plants. For eample,

potatoes con%entionally "red for increased diseased resistance ha%e produced higher

le%els of glycoal&aloids.

iii. Dec$ea&ed N#t$itional 5al#e

! genetically modified plant could theoretically ha%e lower nutritional uality than its

traditional counterpart "y ma&ing nutrients una%aila"le or indigesti"le to humans. For

eample, phytate is a compound common in seeds and grains that "inds with minerals

and ma&es them una%aila"le to humans. !n inserted gene could cause a plant to

produce higher le%els of phytate decreasing the mineral nutritional %alue of the plant.

!nother eample comes from a study showing that a strain of genetically modified

soy"ean produced lower le%els of phytoestrogen compounds, "elie%ed to protect

against heart disease and cancer, than traditional soy"eans.

i:. Antiiotic $e&i&tance

n recent years health professionals ha%e "ecome alarmed "y the increasing num"er of

"acterial strains that are showing resistance to anti"iotics. 8acteria de%elop resistance

to anti"iotics "y creating anti"iotic resistance genes through natural mutation.

8iotechnologists use anti"iotic resistance genes as selecta"le mar&ers when inserting

new genes into plants. n the early stages of the process scientists do not &now if the

target plant will incorporate the new gene into its genome. 8y attaching the desired

gene to an anti"iotic resistance gene the new GM plant can "e tested "y growing it in a



9/21

solution containing the corresponding anti"iotic. f the plant sur%i%es scientists &now

that it has ta&en up the anti"iotic resistance gene along with the desired gene. $here is

concern that "acteria li%ing in the guts of humans and animals could pic& up an

anti"iotic resistance gene from a GM plant "efore the D! "ecomes completely

digested. t is not clear what sort of ris& the possi"ility of conferring anti"iotic

resistance to "acteria presents. o one has e%er o"ser%ed "acteria incorporating new

D! from the digesti%e system under controlled la"oratory conditions. $he two types

of anti"iotic resistance genes used "y "iotechnologists are ones that already eist in

"acteria in nature so the process would not introduce new anti"iotic resistance to

"acteria. e%er the less it is a concern and the FD! is encouraging "iotechnologists to

phase out the practice of using anti"iotic resistance genes.

:. Gene t$an&fe$.

Gene transfer from GM foods to cells of the "ody or to "acteria in the gastrointestinal

tract would cause concern if the transferred genetic material "adly affects human

health. $his condition related to anti"iotic resistance genes that used as mar&ers when

creating GMOs, were to "e transferred. +%en though the possi"ility of transfer is low,

the use of gene transfer technology that does not in%ol%e anti"iotic resistance genes is

encouraged.

:i. O#tc$o&&in).

Outcrossing referred to the migration of genes from GM plants into con%entional crops

or related species in the wild as well as the miing of crops deri%ed from con%entional

seeds with GM crops. $his may cause an indirect effect on food safety and food

security. 'ome cases that ha%e "een reported where GM crops permitted for animal

feed or industrial use were traced at low le%els in the products proposed for human

consumption. 'ome countries ha%e appro%ed strategies to reduce miing, including a

clear separation of the fields within which GM crops and con%entional crops are

grown.



10/21

Fi)#$e !* G$o-in) E:idence of 4a$, f$o, GMO

Fi)#$e '* G$o-in) E:idence of 4a$, f$o, GMO



11/21

!.! Can)in) of Con,e$ Life&tyle on Food "$od#ct De:elo%,ent

Food product de%elopment needs to "e "ased on consumers5 needs and wishes to "e

successful. Factors that ha%e "ecome rele%ant in respect to changing in consumer lifestyles inthe world and their impacts upon worldwide food product de%elopment are presented

discussed li&e9

/ultural influences

!ging and health issues

8usy lifestyles

Food safety and ethical issues

+n%ironmental issues

i. C#lt#$al Infl#ence&

/ulture has "een defined "y Hofstede and Hofstede (122B) as the collecti%e programming

of the mind that distinguishes the mem"ers of one group or category of people from

anotherE. Harrison and Huntington also added to the culture definition that the ideas that

distinguish one group of people from another must "e socially inherited and customarytd, 0J (7;;@), pp. 7BBN7@3.

3. ' Henson, 8 $raill (7;;C). /onsumer perceptions of food safety and their impact on

food choice. G.G 8irch, G /amp"ell9:latt (+ds.), Food safetyKthe challenge ahead,

ntercept, !ndo%er , pp. C;NBB

. +.8 Moseley (7;;;). $he safety and social acceptance of no%el foods. nternational

ournal of Food Micro"iology, B2, pp. 1BNC7

;. / *o"iston (7;;3). Genetically modified foods and consumer choice. $rends in Food

'cience $echnology, , pp. =N

72. H $ent (7;;;). *esearch on food safety in the 17st century. Food /ontrol, 72, pp. 1C;N

1=7

77. WHO (127=). Freuently as&ed uestions on genetically modified foods.

71. >e, Fernande6 and Ga"riel 9 Genetically Modified Food, $he $raproc&, ol. C, May

122=, pp C3 N =2.

7C. 8.M Maghari and !. M. !rde&ni. Genetically Modified Foods and 'ocial /oncerns.

!%icenna Med 8iotech 1277< C(C) 72;9773

7=. !6adi, H. and :. Ho. 1272. Genetically Modified and Organic /rops in De%eloping

/ountries ! *e%iew of Options for Food 'ecurity.E 8iotechnology !d%ances 17@2N

7@.

7B. 8en"roo&, /. M. 1271. mpacts of Genetically +ngineered /rops on :esticide use in

the 0.'.K$he First 'iteen Iears.E +n%ironmental 'ciences +urope 1=1=.

16.:hillips, $. (122) Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) $ransgenic crops and

recom"inant D! technology. ature +ducation 7(7)17C

http://www.who.int/nutrition/topics/ageing/en/index.htmlhttp://www.who.int/nutrition/topics/ageing/en/index.html

Documents

Food Tech Group Assignment