Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Transgenesis vs selective breeding
An essay about selective breeding
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Transgenesis vs selective breeding
Selective Breeding vs. Transgenesis
Intro:
The following report is going to compare two different types of human manipulation; selective breeding and transgenesis and the biological implications of each. I will be focusing on drought resistant crops and in particular drought resistant corn as scientists have provided evidence that drought will be increasing in the future due to global warming and over 30% of current land used for agriculture in the world will be no longer usable. At some point a future drought will affect New Zealand. Therefore New Zealand farmers will need to begin growing drought resistant crops by use of either selective breeding or transgenesis so that we are prepared for the future.
Selective breeding:
Humans have been manipulating genetic transfer by using selective breeding for thousands of years. For example, the original carrot in the pre 900s was small, purple and did not contain carotene while the carrot we know today is orange, thick, juicy and a result of thousands of years of selective breeding for the most desirable traits. Another example of artificial selection that is fairly modern is the selection of cows for the fattiest milk. In the 1890s the introduction of the Babcock test allowed farmers to measure the fat content in their cows milk; this allowed farmers to select for cows that produced the fattiest milk and have them breed. Testing showed that the fat content of cow milk increased from 3-4% to 4.5-5.1% in the 2000s. Farmers realised that the production records were more important than appearance or pedigree. A more modern technique of selective breeding is the use of marker assisted selection (MAS). MAS is a method of screening an organism to see if a desirable trait is present...
... middle of paper ...
...scovery-of-feral-gm-wheat/
5. http://arstechnica.com/science/2013/10/what-science-tells-us-about-the-safety-of-genetically-modified-foods/
6. http://www.bbc.co.uk/learningzone/clips/norman-borlaug-and-selective-breeding-of-wheat/12908.html
7. http://cls.casa.colostate.edu/transgeniccrops/faqpopup.html
8. http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0029730
9. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lg9-HTtgFOk
10. http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/pages/monsanto-statement-on-usda-gm-wheat.aspx
11. http://www.monsanto.com/gmwheat/pages/default.aspx
12. http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/grocery_shopping/crops/22.genetically_modified_wheat.html
13. http://web.mit.edu/demoscience/Monsanto/impact.html
14. http://web.mit.edu/demoscience/Monsanto/players.html#reportsonge
15. http://organic-center.org/news/gmo-wheat-discovery-dangers-and-implications/
Modern biotechnology was born at the hands of American scientists Herb Boyer and Stain Cohen, when they developed “recombinant deoxyribonucleotide, (rDNA), [1] for medicinal purposes. Subsequently, biotechnologists started genetically engineering agricultural plants using this technology. A single gene responsible for a certain trait, from one organism (usually a bacterium) is selected altered and then ‘spliced” into the DNA of a plant to create an agricultural crop consisting of that...
Whilst some refer to transgenic organisms as, “Frankenfoods”, the proponents see this as the second Agricultural Revolution. Biochemists cite the classical example of a transgenic banana which could produce vaccines as a means to continue their research. Undoubtedly if such a banana did exist it could potentially provide millions if not billions of people access to vaccinations. The chair of the Food and Agribusiness Institute at Santa Clara University states, “Bioengineering is just a more refined process [of selective breeding], which will probably result in more productive animals and plants at a lower cost than traditional breeding methods.” This “more refined process” has served to create corn, which is resistant to pests such as corn borers; tomatoes, which can resist cold temperatures and have increased traveling durability; and arguably the most important, cattle which is resistant to mad cow disease. Aside from the clearly visible genetic advantages provided by transgenic organisms, proponents further cite the colossal economic impact of GMOs. PG Economics issued a report which reveals the net economic benefit at the farm level in 2011 was $19.8 billion, and over a 16 year period from 1996 to 2011 the global farm income gain was $98.2 billion. This 16 year period coincides with the adoption of transgenic cropping systems.
The progression of modern science and technology has often challenged old, time-worn notions. Nowhere does this seem truer than in biology and medicine, as these fields have changed drastically in recent decades and also relate so closely to the actual substance of how people live. One such development is what is called xenotrans-plantation or the transplantation of organs or cells across species—particularly notable when from a non-human species into a human. The very fact that the procedure is possible is telling as regards the inherently ephemeral nature of the distinction of humans from other animals. It may be useful to first outline how xenotransplantation works, however.
Experts say, “Unless you consume only certified organic foods […] you’ve almost certainly eaten foods containing ingredients whose genes have been tweaked […].” (Anonymous, 2013, p.4). This assertion proves that people is eating food with Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO’s), nevertheless they disown the consequences of its intake. The opinions in the scientific society are divided, however recent experiments let predict the possible effects that GM Food production and consumption generates in a global scale. Genetically Modified Foods should be banned because it generates a negative impact on humans’ health, affects the environment and harms the third world nations.
One of the most controversial topics discussed in the world of medicine pertained to the topic of genetic engineering. Some doctors saw it as tool of world destruction, however many of them seeing it as a chance of potential cures and treatments. Charles Darwin first introduced this idea. In his first publication, The Origin of Species, he introduced the idea of survival of the fittest. He stated that evolutionary change was only possible due to the genetic variation between each generation, including the combination of different characteristics. In other words, he wrote that only those who had desirable characteristics, in terms of survival, would be able to pass down their genes. If two bred and possessed desirable characteristics, then the desirable characteristic would strengthen, modifying the genes. Darwin’s theories have been the base of many medical breakthroughs that contributed to genetic engineering. The idea soon influenced medicine, the idea of strengthening the healthy cells and isolating them from the unhealthy ones. The simple idea Darwin discovered had changed medicine as a whole. Today, doctors and scientists are able to manipulate genes in order to create new treatments and cures. Today, Darwin’s discovery changed and saved millions of lives around the world. Despite the fact that genetic engineering can have a negative impact on society, it was an important discovery due to the advancement in conventional medicine.
Since the birth of agriculture farmers across the world have been altering the genetic makeup of the crops they grow. Ancient farmers chose only the best looking plants and
The main focus of the article is not to completely oppose genetic manipulation of crops but to point out the adverse health effects these crops can possibly have on both humans and environment. The article cites
One’s behavior, health, disorder, and characteristics, all depend on he’s genetic code. Genetic engineering, also known has genetic modification, can have various methods, but commonly consists of alternating the DNA in an organism’s genome (Winter). Several instances of alternating the DNA in an organism comprises of changing one base pair of the organism’s DNA, removing a region of the DNA, and gene cloning (Winter). Scientist use genetic engineering to enhance and modify the characteristics of an organism (Knapton). For example, aside from the experimental purposes, the cross between Bison and beef combined each of their best quality to make one enhanced outcome. Due to the cross, the Beefalo has increased efficiency and taste, meaning they can input costs and improve profits. Other examples of genetic engineering include GMO (Genetically Modified Organism) foods, such as fruits and vegetables. Genetic engineering, although used on animals and food for decades, only recently surfaced with concrete evidence towards working on human DNA. This groundbreaking knowledge can provide new medical advances, completely altering the emblematic
The term GM foods or GMO (genetically-modified organisms) is most commonly used to refer to crop plants created for human or animal consumption using the latest molecular biology techniques (Whitman, 2000). These plants have been modified in the laboratory to offer desired traits such as increased resistance to herbicides or improved nutritional content. Also, genetic engineering techniques have been applied to create plants with the exact desired trait very rapidly and accurately. For example, this is done by the geneticist isolating the gene responsible for drought tolerance and inserts it into another plant. The new genetically-modified plant will now have gained drought tolerance as well.
For centuries, man has found ways to manipulate nature and to select crops for more desirable traits. If society were to stumble across a technology that would further advance these selections, it could quite possibly and significantly reduce the number of starving and malnourished people in the world while at the same time benefit the producers. “The UN Food and Agriculture Organization estimate that farmers will have to produce 70% more food by 2050 to meet the needs of the world's expected 9-billion-strong population. That amounts to one billion tons more wheat, rice and other cereals.” Less than one per cent of the American population is responsible for growing and harvesting all of the food for this country alone. The demand overseas for American produce varies depending upon the product, but overall exceeds the supply. On the forefront of this worldwide embittering battle to end world hunger and provide cost-effective medicine, society has stumbled across the answer known as biotechnology and genetically engineered organisms. In the end, we shall see that the benefits outweigh the negatives.
Genetic engineering has also opened the doors for humans to choose the different various traits they wish their offspring to feature by unnaturally selecting them. The unnatural selection of humans may have begun as a result of a new type of discrimination due to genetic screening (Cummins 4).
The most wonderful activity a human being can experience is new flavors and foods. For example, the first time a person tastes a delicious juicy piece of prime rib or a delightful hamburger with cheese and ham, his world is never the same. However, since the beginning of the twentieth century, the production of food has been supplemented by science. This has triggered an angry dispute between the people who support the advances of biotechnology and people who love nature. In order to understand the controversy, we have to know the meaning of genetically modified foods. With new technological advances, scientists can modify seeds from a conventional seed to a high tech seed with shorter maturation times and resistance to dryness, cold and heat. This is possible with the implementation of new genes into the DNA of the conventional seed. Once these "transgenes" are transferred, they can create plants with better characteristics (Harris 164-165). The farmers love it not only because it guarantees a good production, but the cost is also reduced. On the other hand, organizations such as Greenpeace and Friends of Earth have campaigned against GMO (“Riesgos”) because they think that they are negatively affecting the earth (Gerdes 26). Both the advocates and the opponents of genetically modified foods have excellent arguments.
According to scientists, genetically engineering crops contributes to their quality. Crops that have been genetically modified to have a particular trait can decrease the amount of herbicides needed for growing that crop. Additionally, genetically modified (GM) crops can help third world countries, where malnutrition is common. For example, to help diminish nutrient deficiencies in developing countries, “plans were underway to develop a golden rice that also has increased iron content”(Whitman 2). In addition, GM crops can be modified to be able to “withstand the environmental challenges of drought, disease, and insect infestation” (Swenson 1). Growing GM crops can also result in fruits and vegetables that stay fresh for a prolonged period of time and taste better.
What are the principle, ethical issues and experimental procedures used in genetic engineering and cloning? Should Cloning be allowed to continue?
Scientists and the general population favor genetic engineering because of the effects it has for the future generation; the advanced technology has helped our society to freely perform any improvements. Genetic engineering is currently an effective yet dangerous way to make this statement tangible. Though it may sound easy and harmless to change one’s genetic code, the conflicts do not only involve the scientific possibilities but also the human morals and ethics. When the scientists first used mice to practice this experiment, they “improved learning and memory” but showed an “increased sensitivity to pain.” The experiment has proven that while the result are favorable, there is a low percentage of success rate. Therefore, scientists have concluded that the resources they currently own will not allow an approval from the society to continually code new genes. While coding a new set of genes for people may be a benefitting idea, some people oppose this idea.