Exercise 12

Recombinant DNA Technology

Reaction Paper
Name: Lennon Blaise dC. Davalos Date Submitted: November 28, 2016
Laboratory Section: A-6L Lab Instructor: Prof. Rodriguez

Reaction Paper:
The study conducted by Paine et al. (2005) concerns itself with the use of Recombinant
DNA Technology or genetic engineering to compensate the lack of carotene in the diet of Asian
peoples by improving the nutritional value of the said demographics staple food, rice, through
increased pro-vitamin content.
Genetic engineering may very well be the best known application of molecular genetics.
The principles and discoveries which have push forth this field in to what it is today would be;
the discovery of a method of separating DNA molecules from different sources and combining
them together, this is done through the use of restriction endonuclease which cut within base
sequences to isolate the desired gene within the DNA. The process of insertion however, lies
solely on DNA ligase. Another principle would be a suitable gene carrier (vector) that can
replicate the foreign DNA and itself, usually these vectors would be in the form of
bacteriophages, plasmids and bacteria. Availability of a functional host cell for the said vector is
also necessary, much of the work on genetic engineering has been done with E. coli. Lastly
would be the discovery of an effective method of selecting a recipient cell and their
multiplication, these cells will usually show the characteristics determined by the introduced
gene (Ramirez, Mendioro & Laude, 2013).
Through the implementation of these principles a general or standard method of genetic
engineering would be as follows;
Restriction endonucleases cut the desired gene or segment. This process known as
restriction enzyme digestion is also done with the vector to make room for the desired segment.
DNA ligase would then combine or insert the fragment with the vector to form chimeric DNA.
This will then be introduced to a functional host, if it incorporates itself to the host cell then the
genomic DNA of the host cell would be transformed and the changes within would be
permanent. Transform cells would then be selected (Mendioro, Laude, Mandoza & Ramirez,
2013).
As for the experiment of Paine et al. (2005) it still follows the same basic principles and
steps but with different species. They hypothesized that the gene, daffodil gene encoding
phytoene synthase (psy), for the Golden Rice 1 variety which codes for beta-carotene content is
also the limiting step for beta-carotene accumulation. They tested different psy genes from
different plants and used Erwinia uredovora as the vector.
Figure 1. A diagram of the standard procedures in genetic engineering.
Figure 2. A diagram of the steps in plant Recombinant DNA Technology from Cummings with
modifications on the utilized species to appropriate with the study of Paine et al (2005).
After systematic testing of multiple plant psy, maize psy among carrot, pepper and
tomato psy, yielded positive results with an observed increase of 23 fold (maximum 37
micrograms/grams) carotenoid content on the synthesized Golden Rice 2 compared with the
commercially available Golden Rice 1 variety which utilizes daffodil psy.
Other applications of Recombinant DNA Technology would be the human insulin
production using Escherichia coli. Genetically engineered E. coli made it an efficient producer of
larger quantities of insulin making it more available. Alongside with the synthesis of Golden
Rice other plant modifications would be the introduction of the toxic gene of the Bacillus
thuriengensis bacterium which made certain plants such as corn, tobacco, cotton and other crops
capable of producing insecticide. Improved qualities or phenotypes of livestock have also been
done with the advent of genetic engineering (Mendioro et al., 2013).
Although the advancements of this field is undoubtedly rapid it still has a long way to go
and it does not show signs of smooth sailing from here on out. Mendioro et al. (2013) notes that
genetic engineering has raised certain issues such as biosafety and environmental concerns as
well as ecological risks of released organisms. The National Biosafety Framework (NBF) has
been established to ensure that these concerns are dealt with. Several studies have been
conducted and published to ensure the public that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are
safe for consumption and pose little to no threat to the environment for a complete list of
published articles on the subject of health issues, Joanna Wendel and Jon Entine compiled over
2000 global studies which affirms safety. As for environmental issues, multiple studies have also
been conducted and compiled by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech
Applications showing that reduced pesticide spraying is a result of genetic engineering which
then leads to lower greenhouse gas emissions and show no negative indications of its effect on
diversity.
With the worlds current population and its increasing trend I believe that GMOs are the
future of food production. To compensate for the lack of space for growing crops genetic
engineering will usher in an efficient way to feed the Earths ever increasing population.
Nowadays people are afraid to consume these GMOs through fear of acquiring diseases on the
long run but most if not all news concerning the negative effect of GMOs are mostly fake and
written by people to serve their own agenda. Science knows no allegiance, no bias, and it should
not be used as a tool for propaganda.
 References
Klug, W.S., and Cummings, M.R. (2004). Essentials of Genetics. 5th ed. Benjamin Cummings
Mendioro, M.S., Laude, R.P., Diaz, M.G.Q., Mendoza, J.C., Ramirez, D.A. (2013). Genetics
a Laboratory Manual. 13th revision. San Pablo City, Laguna: 7 Lakes Printing press.
Paine, J.A., Shipton, C.A., Chaggar, S., Howells, R.M., Kennedy, M.J., Vernon, G., Wright, S.Y,
Hinchliffe, E., Adams, J.L., Silverstone, A.L, Drake, R. (2005). Improving the nutritional
value of Golden Rice through increased pro-vitamin A content. Nature Publishing group
Retrieved from http://www.nature.com/naturebiotechnology
Pocket K no. 4: GM Crops and the Environment. (2016). Retrieved November 25, 2016 from
http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/pocketk/4/
Ramirez, D.A., Mendioro, M.S., Laude, R.P. (2013). Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology.
Lectures in Genetics. 10th ed. San Pablo City, Laguna: 7 Lakes Printing press. 242 p.
Wendel, J., and Entine, S. (2013). With 2000+ global studies affirming safety, GM foods among
most analyzed subjects in Science. Retrieved November 25, 2016 from
https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2013/10/08/with-2000-global-studies-confirming
safety-gm-foods-among-most-analyzed-subject-in-science/

Some works compiled by Wendel and Entine in an excel file containing numerous studies can be
found in their site;

Ankilam E,Heinze P,Kay S,Van den Eede G,Popping B 2002 Validation studies and proficiency testing

Dale PJ,Clarke B,Fontes EMG 2002 Potential for the environmental impact of transgenic crops

Gaugitsch H 2002 Experience with environmental issues in GM crop production and the likely future scenarios

Helmut G 2002 Experience with environmental issues in GM crop production and the likely future scenarios

Htzel MJ 2002 Industry scientists look for benefits, not risks

Huang J,Rozelle S,Pray C,Wang Q 2002 Plant biotechnology in China

Keith T A 2002 Safety assessment of genetically modified crops

Lack G 2002 Clinical risk assessment of GM foods

Lessick M,Keithley J,Swanson B,Lemon B 2002 Genetically modified foods: a taste of the future

Some works compiled by the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech
Applications include;

1. China urges further protection of arable land, March 23, 2004.

http://english.people.com.cn/200403/23/eng20040332_138213.shtml.
2. Brooks, G and P Barfoot. 2015. Global Impact of Biotech Crops: Environmental Effects,
1996-2013, PG Economics Ltd, UK. p 1-196.

3. Sankula, S and E Blumenthal. 2004. Impacts on US agriculture of biotechnology-derived

crops planted in 2003 an update of eleven case studies. National Center for Food and
Agriculture Policy, Washington, DC, October

4. Pray, CE, J Huang, R Hu and S Rozelle. 2002. Five years of Bt cotton in China the
benefits continue. The Plant Journal, 31(4):423-430

5. Hossain, F, CE Pray, Y Lu, J Huang and R Hu. 2004. Genetically modified cotton and
farmers health in China. International Journal of Occupational and Environmental
Health, 10: 296-303

6. Fawcett, R and D Towery. 2002. Conservation tillage and plant biotechnology: how new
technologies can improve the environment by reducing the need to plow. Conservation
Tillage Information Center, West Lafayette, Indiana.
http://ctic.purdue.edu/CTIC/BiotechPaper.pdf

7. Carpenter, J, A Felsot, T Goode, M Hammig, D Onstad and S Sankula. 2002.

Comparative environmental impacts of biotechnology-derived and traditional soybean,
corn and cotton crops. Council for Agricultural Science and Technology, Ames, Iowa,
June.

8. Canola Council of Canada. 2001. An agronomic and economic assessment of transgenic

canola. Canola Council of Canada: 1-95. http://www.canola-
council.org/production/gmo1.html

9. US National Research Council. 1989. Field testing genetically modified organisms:

framework for decisions. Committee on Scientific Evaluation of the Introduction of
Genetically Modified Microorganisms and Plants into the Environment. National
Academy Press, Washington, DC

10. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. 1992. Safety considerations
for biotechnology. OECD, Paris, 50 pp.

11. Government of Canada. 1994. Assessment criteria for determining environmental safety
of plants with novel traits. Dir. 9408, Dec. 16, 1994. Plant Products Division, Plant
Industry Directorate, Agriculture and Agri-food Canada.

12. Crawley, MJ, SL Brown, RS Hails, DD Kohn and M Rees. 2001. Biotechnology:
transgenic crops in natural habitats. Nature, 409:682-683.

13. US Environmental Protection Agency. 2002. Bt biopesticides registration action

document preliminary risks and benefits sections Bacillus thuringiensis plant-
pesticides.http://wwwepa.gov.scipoly/sap
14. Sear, M, RL Helmich, DE Stanley-Horn, KS Obenhauser, JM Pleasants, HR Matilla, BD
Siegfried and GP Dively. 2001. Impact of Bt corn pollen on monarch butterfly. PNAS
98(21):11937-11942

15. Yorobe, JM, CB Quicoy, EP Alcantara and BR Sumayao. 2006. Impact assessment of Bt
corn in the Philippines. The Philippine Agricultural Scientist 89(3): 258-267.

16. Ammann, K. 2004. The impact of agricultural biotechnology on biodiversity. Botanic

Gardens, University of Bern

17. Council for Biotechnology Information. 2004.