[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [SANET-MG] synthetic genes and peptides



Hello Dale,
In the case of the peptide D4E1, it is loosely based on a cecropin B from a moth. However, it is greatly "enhanced" and more toxic.The peptide is unique and synthetic, it has not been found in nature at all.Like the synthetic pesticides it should be thoroughly tested before it is released. Such tests should include chronic cancer tests, etc. the same regime that applies to chemical pesticides. However, I am not optimistic that the SAPs from EPA will do the right thing, history seems to say that they will do the wrong thing! Turning to marker assisted selection (MAS) I agree that it is something that organic agriculture can embrace because the crop genes are selected not altered. Nevertheless,for some important QTL R.A.Fisher will prevail leaving selection in the hands of patient breeders.
sincerely, joe cummins
Dale Wilson wrote:
Hi Joe,


Cecropin peptides have begun to be tested as spray applications,
has  there been thought about the use of such toxins in organic
agriculture?

Anti-microbial peptides provide the first line of defense against microbial predators in organisms in both the vegetal and animal kingdoms. The peptides are involved in innate immunity. The
peptides are 15 to 40 amino acids in length, most are hydrophobic
and cationic. They provide protection from bacteria, fungi and
viruses, they mainly act at the cell membrane
of cellular pathogens...


Interesting stuff!  Probably such peptides (along with the phenolic
armamentarium) mediate normal resistance mechanisms in crop plants, and
are used unkowingly by conventional breeders.  When you think about it,
it is amazing how plants and insects can resist microbial pressure.  We
tend to learn about the vertebrate immune system in school, but what
about all the organisms that have no antibodies, no macrophages?

It seems like, from the organic agriculture perspective, the issue is
whether an intervention is "artificial."  My point has always been that
there is no clear metaphysical criterion by which to draw that line
(except, perhaps, that all agriculture is arguably artifical).  I would
guess that organic agriculture practitioners would object to ANY
transgenic intervention, but accept ANY breeding based on conventional
methods, including marker-assisted selection.

As marker maps increase in density and biological understanding
increases, I expect that "conventional" (i.e. nontransgenic) breeding
will become more and more powerful via marker-assisted selection, and
perhaps cheaper.  That is probably a big win for everyone.

Dale


		
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
********************************************************
To unsubscribe from SANET-MG:
1- Visit http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html to unsubscribe or;
2- Send a message to <listserv@sare.org> from the address subscribed to the list. Type "unsubscribe sanet-mg" in the body of the message.

Visit the SANET-MG archives at: http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html
For more information on grants and other resources available through the SARE program, please visit http://www.sare.org.

********************************************************
To unsubscribe from SANET-MG:
1- Visit http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html to unsubscribe or;
2- Send a message to <listserv@sare.org> from the address subscribed to the list. Type "unsubscribe sanet-mg" in the body of the message.

Visit the SANET-MG archives at: http://lists.sare.org/archives/sanet-mg.html
For more information on grants and other resources available through the SARE program, please visit http://www.sare.org.