Transgenic crops for the agricultural improvement in Pakistan: a perspective of environmental stresses and the current status of genetically modified crops

Abstract

Transgenic technologies have emerged as a powerful tool for crop improvement in terms of yield, quality, and quantity in many countries of the world. However, concerns also exist about the possible risks involved in transgenic crop cultivation. In this review, literature is analyzed to gauge the real intensity of the issues caused by environmental stresses in Pakistan. In addition, the research work on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) development and their performance is analyzed to serve as a guide for the scientists to help them select useful genes for crop transformation in Pakistan. The funding of GMOs research in Pakistan shows that it does not follow the global trend. We also present socioeconomic impact of GM crops and political dimensions in the seed sector and the policies of the government. We envisage that this review provides guidelines for public and private sectors as well as the policy makers in Pakistan and in other countries that face similar environmental threats posed by the changing climate.

Effect of transgenic cotton continuous cropping on soil bacterial community

“…The global production of genetically modified crops has grown profoundly from 1.7 million hectares in 1996 to 191.7 million hectares in 2018 (Babar et al 2019). The agriculture practices with commercial transgenic crops, such as cotton (a leading cash crop) and maize (Trivedi et al 2012), have brought enormous economic benefits worldwide (Guo et al 2018).…”

Fitness of Insect-resistant transgenic rice T1C-19 under four growing conditions combining land use and weed competition

“…Similar studies have found that the expression of the exogenous Bt protein in insect-resistant transgenic rice under salinity, P deficiency, K deficiency, and other adverse conditions, were significantly lower than under no-stress control conditions. 18 , 24 , 25 The negative correlation between Bt protein expression and stress has also been reported in insect–resistant transgenic cotton and maize. 26–30 Taken together, these findings indicated that environmental stress limited the expression of exogenous proteins in insect-resistant transgenic crops; however, these proteins were still expressed in varying degrees.…”

“…On July 20 (at tillering), August 5 (at jointing), September 5 (at heading), September 25 (at filling) and October 25 (at maturing), leaves and stems of five plants were sampled and mixed into one duplicate sample in each plot and five such duplicate pots from each treatment were stored at −80°C for determination of Cry1C* protein content by the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay kit (EnviroLogix Inc, Portland, ME, USA). The detailed analytical procedure was carried out according to Fu et al 18 …”

“…At maturing stage, selecting the 20 rice plants that measure the vegetative growth indices to analyze the following reproductive growth indices under four growth conditions: (1) effective number of panicles (2) spike length; (3) spike weight; (4) total grain number per plant; (5) filled grain number per plant; (6) filled grain weight per plant; (7) 1000-grain weight; and (8) seed setting rate. The detailed determination method is referred to Fu et al 18 …”

Selecting for useful properties of plants and fungi – Novel approaches, opportunities, and challenges

“…A recent report from the World Resources Institute concluded that “the case for using [genetic engineering] is compelling when the full range of potential gains and costs is taken into consideration” (Searchinger et al, 2019). Nonetheless, public perception of GM crops remains poor in many countries, with limited scientific understanding amongst many of the public and the perception that GM crops are “unnatural” and therefore unsafe (Babar et al., 2020; McFadden & Smyth, 2019; McPhetres, Rutjens, Weinstein, & Brisson, 2019). Interestingly, conventional breeding in sweet potato has selected for genes introduced to the species by Agrobacterium in the wild (Kyndt et al., 2015), similarly to the way GM is performed in the laboratory, and overall, the evidence clearly suggests that the risk to the environment of a new variety should be considered primarily in light of its phenotype and not in the methodological approach used to produce it (National Academies of Sciences Engineering Medicine, 2016).…”