They are building on the accumulated success of generations of farmers and indigenous people. Biotech companies claim that they 'invented' their genetically engineered plants or new pharmaceuticals. In reality, they are fine-tuning and modifying plants that were developed by anonymous farmers and improved by the more recent contributions of institutional breeders. To claim exclusive monopoly control of these plants or genes, or traits is unjust and immoral. Biopiracy is a highly emotive term. Knowledge and materials in the public domain may be freely used by anyone to make further advances: and such advances may properly be protected by IPRs, but only for a limited time.
In those rare cases where it turns out that IP claims are based on indigenous knowledge or germplasm, such claims can be challenged and revoked — further evidence that the IP system is working effectively. Without strong IPRs, the world as a whole loses the wider dissemination of a useful technique, because no one will risk the necessary investment in the absence of IP protection. Real biopiracy is a serious and readily identifiable problem; it refers to the unauthorized use, multiplication or copying of privately owned innovations that are protected by patent or plant breeders' rights.
When farmers reuse patented seed without permission or payment of royalties, for example, that is piracy. To insure a level playing field, we need aggressive enforcement and compliance of the TRIPs agreement in all countries. In September , RiceTec Inc. Basmati rice has been grown in the Punjab region of India and Pakistan for centuries. Farmers in this region have selected and maintained basmati rice varieties that are recognized worldwide for their fragrant aroma and distinct taste. Right or wrong, the basmati patent has launched a firestorm of controversy.
RiceTec is capitalizing on the genius of South Asian farmers; germplasm is being pirated, as well as the basmati name. RiceTec's US patent applies to breeding crosses involving 22 basmati varieties from Pakistan and India. The patent claims the invention of 'novel rice lines with plants that are semi-dwarf in stature, substantially photoperiod-insensitive and high-yielding, and that produce rice grains having characteristics similar or superior to those of good quality basmati rice grains produced in India and Pakistan.
Specifically, the patent applies to breeding crosses involving 22 farmer-bred basmati varieties from Pakistan and India. These varieties were initially collected in the Indian subcontinent and deposited among other places in a US genebank. Not only does the patent claim genetic material that was developed by South Asian farmers, it also usurps the 'basmati' name — which is geographically specific to varieties grown in parts of India and Pakistan, just as 'champagne' is unique to France.
The patent therefore jeopardizes the livelihoods of thousands of Indian and Pakistani farmers who grow basmati for export. The whole flap is based on a misunderstanding. RiceTec's US patent protects the company's seeds and breeding methods in the US alone, it does not patent or trademark the name 'basmati'. The company has no claims on basmati rice anywhere in Asia.
There is a misconception that RiceTec's patent would prevent Indian farmers from exporting their product. This is not true. Basmati is a generic term. Just as durum refers to a class of wheat, basmati refers to a class of rice. The germplasm used for breeding RiceTec's basmati rice came partly from publicly-operated gene banks in the US.
The specific lines are identified in the patent and they are available to anyone for breeding purposes. The germplasm did not come from India; the basmati varieties claimed in this patent were developed using classical breeding over a period of 10 years. Even if the germplasm originated from India, the company simply used the varieties to create a novel product.
This is not biopiracy; this is clearly an invention under US patent law! RiceTec's basmati varieties are truly novel; for the first time it's possible to cultivate high-quality, high-yielding basmati in the western hemisphere. The Crucible Group notes that many of the issues now being hotly debated over plant genetic resources may be reappearing in the emerging debate over the management of human genetic resources. Many of the issues that have challenged the plant genetic resources community over the past two decades, including the need for intergovernmental involvement with respect to the collection, storage, exchange, benefit-sharing and IP aspects of plant germplasm, also arise with regard to human genetic diversity — albeit with more profound moral and ethical considerations.
Controversy over the collection and patenting of human genetic material is not new. In the Human Genome Diversity Project, an informal consortium of universities and scientists in North America and Europe, proposed to collect human DNA samples from hundreds of so-called 'endangered' indigenous communities around the world. Many indigenous peoples' organizations protested vigorously, asking: Will profits be made from the genes of poor people whose physical survival is in question? Who will have access to stored DNA samples, and where will these collections be located? What benefits, if any, will accrue to the indigenous peoples from whom DNA samples will be taken?
Indigenous peoples' organizations vocally denounced the patent as a threat to human dignity and a violation of human rights. The controversy, generated by scores of indigenous peoples' organizations, together with civil society organizations and governments, eventually caused the US government to 'disclaim' the Hagahai patent in October Commercial trade in human tissue is accelerating. Scientists, in both the public and private sector, are collecting human DNA samples from rural and urban communities across the globe.
Of particular interest to genetic researchers are populations that are genetically homogeneous, or those that exhibit a genetic predisposition to an inherited disease. After pinpointing the location of so-called 'disease genes' genomic companies and their pharmaceutical partners hope to develop commercial products such as diagnostic tests and therapies that are based on proprietary human genes.
That quest has taken gene prospectors to remote locations such as Tristan da Cunha in search of asthma genes, to Kosrae in Micronesia in search of obesity genes, and to Tibet in pursuit of high-altitude genes, just to name a few. The company says that its studies could lead to new diagnostic tests and drugs for inherited diseases — which would be made available free to Icelanders if the research leads to a new therapy.
A vocal minority of Iceland's scientific and medical community, including the Icelandic Medical Association, the Association of Icelanders for Ethical Science and the Icelandic Mental Health Alliance oppose implementation of the law and are advising doctors and their patients to refuse participation in the collection of DNA samples.
- Woodworking Shopnotes 085 - Cutting Diagram!
- Principles and Practices of Plant Genomics, Volume 1: Genome Mapping by Chittaranjan Kole.
- An Introduction to Invariants and Moduli.
- Downtiming the Nightside.
For example, the law allows only for individuals to opt out of the database, but does not require any other form of consent. Although the database is supposed to be confidential and anonymous, critics charge that personal information can be deciphered and that computer security measures proposed by the company are not adequate to insure confidentiality. The Crucible Group notes that human genetic material is being collected worldwide in the absence of intergovernmental oversight, and without consistent regulations concerning the collection, exchange and use of human genetic diversity and the protection of human subjects.
The Group recommends that all aspects of the conservation and utilization of human genetic diversity be governed, monitored and reviewed by governmental or intergovernmental agencies, as appropriate, with the full, informed consent and participation of all human subjects involved, especially indigenous peoples. By the close of the 20th century, humankind had acquired the power to transform the processes of all living species, including its own.
The potential benefits of these powers can be exciting and the perils ominous. Consider, for example, the recent announcement that scientists have successfully produced cultures of embryonic stem cells. The very same week, the UK's Sunday Times reported that scientists can theoretically engineer deadly biological organisms to produce 'ethno-bombs' that are capable of targeting human victims by ethnic origin. Given the dizzying pace of technological advancements in genetics and biology, it is not surprising that society is grappling ever more urgently with the social, ethical and legal implications of humankind's ability to decipher and control the genetic blueprint of life.
Opinions differ sharply on the implications of new biotechnologies, but nearly everyone agrees that advances in technology are taking place at a rate far faster than social policies can be devised to guide them, or legal systems can evolve to address them. There is growing recognition worldwide that the development of scientific knowledge must be accompanied by public debate on societal choices and the informed participation of citizens.
What is good for society, what is equitable, and what is safe? These are among the questions that are fueling debate on the applications of biotechnology to health, agriculture and human development. At the intergovernmental level, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNESCO created the International Bioethics Committee in as the world's only international body to study the implications of human genome research and genetic engineering.
Since , a growing number of countries have established national bioethics advisory committees to examine bioethics and to provide guidance to national governments. The Crucible Group recognizes and appreciates the vital contribution of ethical debates. There is concern, however, that the appointment of expert panels and commissions devoted to bioethics should not become a substitute for broad public debate and participation in the review and assessment of new technologies.
What has changed in molecular sciences in the past five years, and how does that influence the way society thinks about, uses and values biodiversity? Biological knowledge continues to expand rapidly. The industrialization of a gene-based strategy to predict, understand and manipulate biological organisms for commercial agriculture and human health is being hailed as the engine that will drive economic development in the 21st century. In the words of one industry spokesman: 'Automation has allowed us to put biological discovery on an assembly line.
More difficult to answer are questions such as: Who will have access to the technology, and who will determine priorities for using the information? Some members of the Crucible Group are concerned that high-profile technology projects risk overshadowing more basic priorities for human health and agriculture.
This chapter briefly introduces some of the recent breakthroughs in molecular science and technology relating to plants and livestock, as well as humans, in the field of agriculture and human health. This is by no means an exhaustive survey, but an attempt to identify landmark scientific and technological breakthroughs primarily in molecular science. It is important to note that, in many cases, the same technologies i. Members of the Crucible Group wish to emphasize that breakthroughs in science and technology are not confined to high-tech laboratories or white-coated scientists.
Technologies to develop, utilize and conserve genetic resources are derived not only from formal sector institutions, but also from local ecosystems, local knowledge and traditional practices. A sheep named 'Dolly' tops the list of recent scientific breakthroughs. Mammalian cloning became a riveting reality in February when the Scotland-based Roslin Institute unveiled Dolly — a lamb cloned from a single cell of an adult sheep.
Within days of the announcement, 'cloning' became a global household word, and scientists and historians began to rewrite outdated text books. Dolly's public profile is so high that the Roslin Institute recently applied for trademark protection of her name and image.
Before the Roslin Institute announced Dolly's birth, patent applications were filed on the technique used to clone her. PPL Therapeutics, one of the Roslin Institute's for-profit pharmaceutical partners, saw its stock value jump overnight. But the Dolly-related patent claims proved controversial because the applications filed by the Roslin Institute at the World Intellectual Property Organization WIPO were not limited to a technique for cloning farm animals — they included all mammals — and did not exclude humans.
If national patent offices around the world grant patents on the technique to clone Dolly, would they be implicitly accepting techniques to clone human beings, or even the morality of those techniques themselves? If so, are major social issues being determined in national patent offices in the absence of informed public debate?
It is important to note that a patent has nothing to do with the ability to commercialize or market a new technology; it is a right to prevent others from using or selling the technology without authorization. In July scientists under the direction of Ryuzo Yanagimachi at the University of Hawaii provided the first scientific report confirming that the technical feat of cloning from adult mammalian cells could be replicated, putting to rest growing speculation that Dolly was nothing more than a laboratory fluke or a fake.
The Hawaiian team has also filed for patents on the novel aspects of its cloning technique. In April Genzyme Transgenics announced the arrival of three cloned, transgenic goats, one of which is engineered to produce a human protein in its milk. While ethicists and policymakers continue to struggle with the unsettling implications of mammalian cloning, the technique has advanced — over a period of two years — from stunning front page news to what Time magazine has labeled 'almost a mundane laboratory practice'.
The FAO has concluded that somatic cloning technology offers a potentially valuable tool to save domestic animal breeds in danger of extinction. In late FAO elaborated a protocol to collect and store samples of animal tissue in the expectation that cryopreservation of somatic tissues will eventually enable scientists to recreate endangered breeds. In the final days of the spectre of human cloning made headline news when a South Korean physician reportedly conducted the first-ever human-cloning experiment.
The experiment was terminated because a Korean code of conduct forbids the insertion of a cloned human embryo into a womb. In reaction to news of the Korean experiment on human cloning, Dr Mary Lake Polan of Stanford University told the Wall Street Journal, If there is a market for it, and it is technically possible, then someone will do it' In the US, federal laws prohibit government funding of research on human embryos, but independent scientists are not restricted from human cloning experiments.
In December a scientific advisory committee in the UK proposed that the government allow human cloning for medical research but not to produce babies. However, in mid researchers revealed that DNA in Dolly's cells are typical of a much older animal, a finding that could have implications for the commercial-scale production of cloned animals and their use in transplantation medicine.
Genomics — the science of identifying the entire set of genes of living organisms — is revolutionizing biological sciences and has become a driving force in mergers and divestments involving many of the world's largest corporations. As the efficiency of DNA sequencing technology accelerates, genomics milestones are being reached far ahead of schedule.
In , a commercial genomics company announced that it had sequenced the entire genome of a living organism, the bacterium Haemophilius influenzae, and that it had filed for broad patent claims on the medical uses of the organism's bacterial proteins. Although patents have not yet been issued, HGS's claims include the development of diagnostics, vaccines and antibiotics related to their proprietary genomics information.
By the end of , more than 50 microbial genome projects were underway worldwide. Advocates of the Human Genome Project describe it as 'more important than putting a man on the moon or splitting the atom'. It also involves arranging the molecular letters in a precise order and learning how to read them. The process of sequencing DNA is now faster and cheaper than anyone imagined possible five years ago. In the mids it would take a laboratory two months to sequence nucleotides.
It took 1 scientists ten years to decode a yeast genome using the first generation of high-tech gene sequencers. Using today's state-of-the-art computers scientists could complete the same job in one day. The Human Genome Project was conceived as an international, public sector initiative, a project too massive in scope and too expensive for any single country or company to undertake. With the advent of faster, cheaper sequencing technologies, the race to map the human genome now faces stiff competition from the private sector.
The company, a joint venture between Perkin-Elmer and the US-based Institute for Genomics Research TIGR claims that the sequencing capacity of the company's state-of-the-art equipment far exceeds the total sequencing capacity of all existing genomics laboratories in the world. Spurred by competition from the private sector, the Wellcome Trust of London, the world's largest medical philanthropic organization, announced in May that it would double the money it contributes to the UK-based Sanger Centre, enabling its biologists to sequence one-third of the human genome in partnership with the Human Genome Project.
Bolstered by international support, the Human Genome Project announced in September that it would move up by two years, to , its target date for completing the sequencing of the human genome. William Haseltine of Human Genome Sciences claims that by his company had already isolated 'greater than 95 percent of all human genes'. Many commercial ventures are concentrating on the 'gene-rich' regions of the human genome, ignoring the non-coding DNA. On 17 September HGS announced that patent applications published under the auspices of the Patent Cooperation Treaty include claims on a total of full-length human genes.
The furious pace of discovery in the field of genomics is reflected in the growing number of patent claims related to partial gene sequences or ESTs expressed sequence tags. In , there was a total of approximately EST sequences to be examined, and as of September , there were applications pending on over EST sequences. The patenting of partial gene sequences, or ESTs, is controversial.
How, they ask, can standard patent criteria novelty, non-obviousness and utility be met in a case where the function of a partial gene sequence the protein it encodes is not even known? Many view it as a distortion of the patent system to allow patents on information that can be decoded by computers and does not appear to involve an inventive step. There is concern that claims on partial gene sequences may preclude future patenting of a full-length gene that contains an already patented sequence.
In September it was reported that the UK and US governments were negotiating an Anglo-American agreement that seeks to release all publicly-funded research on human genes without claiming patents. In researchers at Case Western Reserve Medical School in Ohio US announced the creation of a promising new gene carrier: a human artificial chromosome HAC that behaves just like a natural one in cultured human cells. HACs provide potentially powerful tools for the analysis of chromosomal functions and also for the cloning of large DNA fragments.
They could someday be used to introduce large fragments of DNA into cells or whole animals in a stable form. Scientists are also experimenting with the stability and expression of artificial chromosomes in hamster, mouse and chicken cells. While the use of HACs in human gene therapy remains distant, there is speculation that, once perfected, artificial chromosomes could become a vector for delivering complex, custom-made genetic programs into human embryo cells.
Advances in the field of genomics are adding new words to the scientific vocabulary. The next step, dubbed 'pharmacogenomics', will use advanced genetic tools to compare how genetic information varies from individual to individual. Technology for the rapid screening of SNPs will someday make it possible to obtain a unique and precise genetic profile for each individual. But one commercial DNA chipmaker says that it is developing a technology that can screen SNPs in a patient's genome in several hours, for just a few hundred dollars.
Precise genetic profiling could allow drug companies to customize prescription medicines, and to know, in advance, if an individual's genetic make-up would cause an adverse reaction to a particular drug. The prospect of genetic profiling also raises far-reaching ethical and legal issues relating to the potential misuse of genetic information, i.
Jim Niedel, executive director of research at Glaxo Wellcome, describes the genomics era as the beginning of the third generation of drug research. According to Niedel, the first generation, which started about years ago, was based on chemistry and serendipity. The second, beginning in the s, was based on biology and empiricism. The third generation depends on skilled professionals using genetics, robotics and informatics.
The newest, state-of-the-art equipment for 'high-throughput screening' that is, automated testing of a large number of chemicals against disease targets is capable of preparing samples for up to screening tests per day, the equivalent of a month's worth of manually-prepared samples. After screening provides a promising drug candidate, combinatorial chemistry is the next step. With robotic assistance, chemists can compose thousands of variations on the original chemical — producing a family of molecules related to the original candidate.
The process has the potential to vastly accelerate drug discovery. For example, a laboratory at Glaxo Wellcome took just one month in to sift chemical processes for the best way to build a class of drugs for respiratory, neurological and viral disorders. The new era of drug discovery requires the technical capacity to digest massive quantities of data. The pharmaceutical company SmithKline Beecham had only two bioinformaticians four years ago, yet nowadays the company employs 70 of them.
New methods for identifying, quantifying and controlling the active components of plants also provides new opportunities for the development of herbal medicines. A biotechnology company in the United States is developing a new technology that aims to develop clinically tested and regulated prescription and nonprescription drugs derived from herbal medicines. The company, PharmaPrint, creates a 'fingerprint' of the herb that can be used to identify the quantity and bioactivity of each active component in an herbal medicine.
Many people assume that traditional herbal remedies are non-patentable because the knowledge exists in the public domain. John's wort, saw palmetto, valerian, milk thistle, agnus castus, and ginkgo biloba. Scientists are using advanced genomics as a means of identifying, mapping and understanding the expression of crop genes, and their link to agronomically important traits.
The goal is not only to construct genetic maps of plant species, but also to link the genetic structure of the plant with its protein activity. Since , virtually every major seed company has invested in plant genomics research. Driven by the increased efficiency of genomics technology and fierce competition among major agrobiotechnology firms, investments in crop genomics accelerated dramatically in see Table 2.
The exclusive deal is not limited to a single crop or geographic location, instead it covers all crop plants in all countries. The company says it will be the world's biggest crop gene mapping project. The California-based institute will employ about scientists. The developers of the technology refer to it as a 'technology protection system' or 'genetic use restriction technology' GURT.
It is popularly known as the 'Terminator'. Developers of terminator-type technologies indicate that it will be at least four years before seeds incorporating the 'suicide trait' are available for commercial sale. GURT or Terminator is not a single technique being developed by a single company. Inducible promoter systems enable plant genes or traits to be genetically triggered by the application of an external chemical catalyst.
In the future, farmers would theoretically be able to activate or deactivate genetic traits such as germination or insect resistance by applying a prescribed chemical to their seed. Critics warn that the development of these technologies will dramatically increase farmers' dependence on agrochemical companies and their proprietary inputs.
Virtually all major seed and agrochemical corporations are conducting research and development of GURTs. If commercially viable, genetic seed sterilization could, some believe, have far-reaching and negative implications for farmers and food security. A substantial number of civil society organizations warn that GURTs threaten food security and agricultural biodiversity, especially for the poor, because if widely adopted this technology could restrict farmer expertise in selecting seed and breeding locally adapted varieties. Proponents of the gene protection technology claim that, if the private sector is able to protect its research investment, it will spur investment in plant breeding for many of the world's most important crops.
Proponents believe that the gene protection method, if it can be made to work effectively, offers a new tool for controlling involuntary outcrossing, which will ultimately protect crop integrity and preserve global biodiversity. Advocates also point out that farmers will always be free to choose whether or not to buy gene-protected seeds — and will not do so unless such seeds offer them a clear advantage over fertile seed that will compensate for their higher cost.
In the words of one industry advocate, traditional farming practices such as seed-saving can put resource-poor farmers at a distinct disadvantage: 'The centuries old practice of farmer saved seed is really a gross disadvantage to third world farmers who inadvertently become locked into obsolete varieties because of their taking the 'easy road' and not planting newer, more productive varieties. In May, the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity COP IV recommended that the precautionary principle be applied to the use of new technology for the control of plant gene expression.
India's agriculture minister Som Pal told the Indian parliament in August that he had banned the import of seeds containing the terminator gene because of the potential harm to Indian agriculture. At its annual meeting in October the CGIAR adopted a policy stating that it would not incorporate into its breeding materials any genetic systems designed to prevent seed germination. In February a spokesman for Zeneca declared: '[The company] is not developing any system that would stop farmers growing second-generation seed, nor do we have any intention of doing so.
In June the president of the Rockefeller Foundation advised the biotechnology industry to 'disavow' the use of the terminator technology to produce seed sterility. In April the Monsanto Company announced that 'concerns about gene protection technologies should be heard and carefully considered before any decisions are made to commercialize them'. Members of the Crucible Group do not agree on whether or not terminator technology could or even should be banned.
It would be unfair to exclude a technology as a whole from patent protection, just because it may be abused for immoral purposes or may have negative side effects. Apart from that, the GURT technology can obviously be used for purposes that are perfectly moral — even beneficial — and do not violate the ordre public. Furthermore, to deny farmers the opportunity to make their own choice is restrictive paternalism, even if with good intentions.
The technology is intrinsically immoral and has been developed for no other purpose than to prevent farmers from replanting seeds. Given that the technology may even affect farmers who never used the terminator 'seeds, the technology should be banned. It is a positive sign that two major agrochemical corporations have made a commitment not to commercialize sterile seed technologies.
However, we can't depend on the goodwill and charity of corporations that may be acquired by another company next month. In order to discourage the development of similar technologies, governments should also ensure that their patent laws do not set any incentive to develop similar technologies.
The monopoly control afforded by terminator technology goes far beyond patents and threatens national sovereignty. A patent is a time-limited, legal monopoly granted by a government in exchange for societal benefits. In the case of the Terminator, the biological monopoly is not time-limited, and is not necessarily approved by national governments. Shapiro made a public commitment not to commercialize sterile seed technologies. While the social and economic implications of this technology for the food security of rural communities in developing countries have yet to be studied, some public and private institutions have made commitments not to commercialize or use sterile seed technology.
Irrespective of the social and economic impacts, the Crucible Group recommends that the technology not be used in released varieties where its primary purpose is to prevent seed-saving among resource-poor farmers in developing countries. Apomixis is a natural, asexual type of reproduction in which plant embryos grow from egg cells without being fertilized by pollen. Apomixis offers a means of cloning plants through seed. The progeny are genetically identical to the mother plant. Apomictic seed is genetically uniform from generation to generation unlike normal sexual hybrids or open-pollinated varieties.
In contrast to the gene technology protection systems terminator technology described above, which are designed to prevent farmers from saving second generation seed, apomixis technology has the potential to dramatically expand and de-centralize plant breeding opportunities, especially for resource-poor farmers. In theory, apomictic hybrid seed could offer tremendous benefits to resource-poor farmers because desirable traits could be maintained indefinitely, with no loss of hybrid vigour, and farmers would be able to save their hybrid seed for replanting year after year.
Apomixis technology could offer fast, flexible and low-cost plant breeding strategies that would be responsive to locally-targeted crop breeding needs. Apomixis occurs naturally in many plant species and wild relatives of some crops. The challenge is to introduce the trait for apomixis into sexually propagated crops such as rice, wheat, millet, sorghum, etc. Plant breeders and molecular biologists have successfully transferred the genes that confer apomixis from a wild grass species, Tripsacum dactyloides, to maize.
Maize is the first sexual species successfully transformed into an apomictic form. Who is working on apomixis? Many public and private agricultural researchers in both developing and industrialized countries are conducting research on apomixis, and over two dozen patents have been issued related to apomixis technology. Virtually all major life sciences corporations multinational seed and agrochemical corporations have an interest in apomixis research, particularly because of its potential to reduce the cost of hybrid breeding programs.
Using apomixis to produce hybrid seeds, companies could drastically cut costs associated with maintaining inbred lines, including land and labour-intensive practices such as detasseling to prevent cross-pollination. For seed companies, hybrid technology is a form of built-in proprietary protection. However, apomixis technology could undermine the proprietary protection afforded by traditional hybrids because farmers would be able to save and sow apomictic hybrids. As a result, seed companies are interested in combining new developments in genetic seed sterilization with apomixis. If commercial seed firms can successfully combine the benefits of apomixis the ability to mass-produce low-cost clones with genetic seed sterilization this will eliminate the ability of farmers to save and re-use seed from apomictic varieties.
However, it remains to be seen if this is technically feasible. There is concern that mass production of low-cost clonal varieties could promote genetic uniformity and crop monoculture.
Principles and Practices of Plant Genomics: Volume 1: Genome Mapping - PDF Free Download
The introduction of genetically uniform cultivars could unintentionally reduce genetic diversity in agriculture, if widely introduced in areas where farmers grow traditional crop varieties. Proponents of apomixis respond to these concerns by pointing out that apomixis will also permit the rapid development of new, resistant varieties on a more regular basis. The simplicity and low cost of apomictic breeding would encourage the introduction of a wider range of varieties that could be uniquely suited to a particular micro-environment, and thus encourage genetic diversity in farm communities.
Who will benefit from apomixis? Apomixis technology has the potential to profoundly influence farming systems and revolutionize plant breeding worldwide. Kohavi, R. Kuhn, M. Caret: Classification and Regression Training. R Package Version 5. Kukar, M. Transductive machine learning for reliable medical diagnostics.
Kumar, A. Plant Genome 9. Lander, E. Mapping mendelian factors underlying quantitative traits using RFLP linkage maps. Lee, M. A consensus linkage map of oil palm and a major QTL for stem height. Li, Y. Establishing glucose- and ABA-regulated transcription networks in Arabidopsis by microarray analysis and promoter classification using a Relevance Vector Machine.
Lincoln, S. Systematic detection of errors in genetic linkage data. Genomics 14, — Liu, D. Construction and analysis of high-density linkage map using high-throughput sequencing data. Liu, H. An ultra-high-density map as a community resource for discerning the genetic basis of quantitative traits in maize.
Liu, J. Neural network for setting target corn yields. ASAE 44, — A high density linkage map facilitates QTL mapping of flowering time in Brassica rapa. Plant J. Liu, L. Liu, Z. Construction of a high-density, high-quality genetic map of cultivated lotus Nelumbo nucifera using next-generation sequencing.
Loh, W. Fifty years of classification and regression trees. Lorieux, M. MapDisto: fast and efficient computation of genetic linkage maps. Maccaferri, M. A high-density, SNP-based consensus map of tetraploid wheat as a bridge to integrate durum and bread wheat genomics and breeding. Maenhout, S. Prediction of maize single-cross hybrid performance: support vector machine regression versus best linear prediction.
Plant Biotechnology, Volume 1: Principles, Techniques, and Applications
Mahlein, A. Plant disease detection by imaging sensors — parallels and specific demands for precision agriculture and plant phenotyping. Plant Dis. Marchini, J. Genotype imputation for genome-wide association studies. Margarido, G. OneMap: software for genetic mapping in outcrossing species.
Hereditas , 78— Marinkovic, B. Mester, D. Constructing large-scale genetic maps using an evolutionary strategy algorithm. Fast and accurate construction of ultra-dense consensus genetic maps using evolution strategy optimization. Meuwissen, T. Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide dense marker maps. Mishra, S. Applications of machine learning techniques in agricultural crop production: a review paper.
Indian J. Mohan, M. Genome mapping, molecular markers and marker-assisted selection in crop plants. Moumouni, K. Construction of a genetic map for pearl millet, Pennisetum glaucum L. Oliveira, R. Ornella, L. Venkateswarlu, A. Shanker, C. Shanker, and M. Maheswari Dordrecht: Springer , — Ott, J. Genetic linkage analysis in the age of whole-genome sequencing. Pantazi, X. Wheat yield prediction using machine learning and advanced sensing techniques.
Paran, I. Recombinant inbred lines for genetic mapping in tomato. Paterson, A. Comparative genomics of plant chromosomes. Plant Cell 12, — Peleg, Z. Perez-Lara, E. Pompanon, F. Genotyping errors: causes, consequences and solutions. Rastas, P. Construction of ultradense linkage maps with lep-MAP2: stickleback F 2 recombinant crosses as an example. Genome Biol. Bioinformatics 29, — Reddy, U. High-resolution genetic map for understanding the effect of genome-wide recombination rate on nucleotide diversity in watermelon.
G 3 4, — Ren, X. SNP-based high density genetic map and mapping of btwd1 dwarfing gene in barley. Ren, Y. A high resolution genetic map anchoring scaffolds of the sequenced watermelon genome. Ronin, Y. Matsuoka and S. Takumi Yokohama: Springer. Building reliable genetic maps: different mapping strategies may result in different maps. Schwender, H. Imputing missing genotypes with weighted k nearest neighbors. Health A 75, — Seetan, R. Semagn, K. Principles, requirements and prospects of genetic mapping in plants. Shaik, R. Machine learning approaches distinguish multiple stress conditions using stress-responsive genes and identify candidate genes for broad resistance in rice.
Plant Physiol. Shekoofa, A. Determining the most important physiological and agronomic traits contributing to maize grain yield through machine learning algorithms: a new avenue in intelligent agriculture. Singh, A. Machine learning for high-throughput stress phenotyping in plants. Trends Plant Sci. Sobel, E. Detection and integration of genotyping errors in statistical genetics.
Sommer, C. Machine learning in cell biology — teaching computers to recognize phenotypes. Cell Sci.
Stam, P. Construction of integrated genetic-linkage maps by means of a new computer package: JoinMap. Sun, Z. Sybenga, J. Recombination and chiasmata: few but intriguing discrepancies. Genome 39, — Talukder, Z. Tan, Y. A novel method for estimating linkage maps. Tanksley, S. High density molecular linkage maps of the tomato and potato genomes. Taylor, B. Teuscher, F. The map expansion obtained with recombinant inbred strains and intermated recombinant inbred populations for finite generation designs.
Tong, C. A hidden Markov model approach to multilocus linkage analysis in a full-sib family. Tree Genet. Genomes 6, — Truong, S. Resolution of genetic map expansion caused by excess heterozygosity in plant recombinant inbred populations. Tyrka, M. Unterseer, S. A powerful tool for genome analysis in maize: development and evaluation of the high density k SNP genotyping array. Construction of a 10,marker ultradense genetic recombination map of potato: providing a framework for accelerated gene isolation and a genomewide physical map. SMOOTH: a statistical method for successful removal of genotyping errors from high-density genetic linkage data.
Vapnik, V. The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory. New York, NY: Springer. Vengadessan, V.
Original Research ARTICLE
Construction of genetic linkage map and QTL analysis of sink-size traits in pearl millet Pennisetum glaucum. ISRN Genetics Vision, T. Selective mapping: a strategy for optimizing the construction of high-density linkage maps. Vuylsteke, M. Wahabzada, M. Plant phenotyping using probabilistic topic models: uncovering the hyperspectral language of plants.
Wang, S. Go to British Wildlife. Conservation Land Management. Go to Conservation Land Management. Publisher: Science Publishers. Click to have a closer look. Select version. About this book Customer reviews Related titles. Images Additional images. About this book The Genome of an organism is depicted by genetic linkage mapping and physical mapping.
Customer Reviews Review this book. Current promotions. Bestsellers in Genetics. More Info. The Tangled Tree.
- Womens Reading in Britain, 1750–1835: A Dangerous Recreation.
- Genome Editing: Applications in Agriculture - Genome Editing.
- Genetic marker - Wikipedia.