Genetic modification technology and reproductive cloning methods

Genetically Modified Organisms Technology

GMO Gentically Modified Organisms

A Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) is any organism that has had its genetic makeup altered by humans Ahmed, 2002.

The organism could be an animal, plant, or microorganism. The changing of the genetic code could involve subtracting, adding, or altering. All these changes could be from the same species or different species, which would give the organism characteristics that it does not have normally. GMO technology is widely used for scientific research and in the production of foods and goods. A GMO results from the laboratory process of extracting genes from the DNA of a species and forcing the genes into an unrelated plant or animal's genes. The foreign genes come from viruses, bacteria, animals, insects, or even humans. GMOs allow for the production of organisms with desired biological traits or favor the expression of some desired traits. Conventional crop farming, livestock production, and pet breeding have involved the practice of select breeding in order to produce offspring's with desirable traits. Genetic modification employs technology to produce organism that have their genomes altered in a precise manner at the molecular level. This process involves the introduction of genes from unrelated species, which would not be possible using conventional breeding.

The scientific methods used in the production of GMOs are reproductive cloning and recombinant DNA technology. In order to reproduce offspring with the same genetics as the parent one would use reproductive cloning technology. This involves the transfer of the entire donor's nucleus into the host egg's enucleated cytoplasm. Dolly was the first animal to be born using this technology in 1996. Recombinant DNA technology involves inserting one or more individual genes of a particular organism into the DNA of another. The two organisms are not necessarily from the same species.

Reproductive cloning

According to Bowring (2004)

Reproductive cloning is the deliberate production of organisms with the same genetic as the parent. In this case, each of the genetically produced organisms would be a clone of the original. The most common techniques used for cloning is Somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT). This involves transferring the nucleus of a body cell to an egg, which has its nucleus removed. This would produce a clonal embryo that needs electricity or chemical triggers in order for it to begin developing. Placing the cloned embryo in the uterus of a female, where it comes to term, thus creating a clone. The clone will have identical genes as those of the original animal. For implanting the cloned embryo, one can use a real or an artificial uterus.

Reproductive cloning is more difficult than it sounds. The process has a low rate of success, and in the case of the cloned sheep, the scientists confirmed that they had to try around 227 times. The attempts required demonstrate that this process is highly impractical. The nucleus extracted from the donor may not reproduce after it is inserted it the donor egg. Even after the insertion, the process requires triggering in order for reproduction to occur. The egg needs to reproduce enough times for consideration as an embryo fit for implantation into a female. The female implanted with the embryo is not necessarily the donor, and the chances that the embryo will reach its term are low. The born animal might be deformed, which renders the whole process a failure and the scientists have to start all over again. There is significant progress in reproductive cloning, but scientists have had trouble trying to clone dogs and monkeys. They have faced numerous challenges like getting a female to carry the embryo and growing the embryo without losing chromosomes. These challenges make the use reproductive cloning a less viable means of GMO production.

SCNT involves removing the entire nucleus of an organism from a somatic cell, followed by inserting the nucleus into an egg that has had its nucleus removed. This process has undergone significant changes and refinement. There are procedures developed that aid in preventing damages to the egg during extraction and insertion. Using SCNT for reproductive cloning is very harmful since the embryo fetuses rarely survive gestation. Some of the fetuses are born with birth defects.

Recombinant DNA technology

This technology involves joining DNA molecules of two different species. The DNA molecules are inserted into the host organism in order to produce a new genetic combination that is of value to agriculture, science, industry, and medicine. The gene is the focus of all genetics. Therefore, laboratory genetics fundamental goal is isolation, characterization, and manipulation of genes Pasternak ()

. Isolating a DNA sample from a collection of cells is relatively easy, but the difficult part is finding the specific gene within the DNA sample. Recombinant DNA technology has allowed scientists to isolate a gene or a DNA segment, which enables the researchers to establish its nucleotide sequence, mutate it in specific ways, reinsert the modified sequence, and study its transcripts. In order to produce many copies form a single fragment of DNA, scientists are using cloning. The procedure allows for the insertion of a DNA fragment into a DNA molecule, then allowing the molecule to replicate inside the living cell. The replicating molecule is a DNA vector and the commonly used vectors are viruses, plasmids, and yeast cells.

The laboratory process employed in the creation of recombinant DNA is molecular cloning. This involves the replication of the DNA in a living cell. The chosen vectors will determine the overall use for the cells created. Recombinant DNA has influenced the generation of better crops. The crops are heat and drought resistant. This was possible due to DNA insertion from crops that do well in these areas. The result is better yield for farmers in arid areas. The prevention and cure of sickle cell anemia has benefitted from this technology. Other areas include insulin production, plants with the capability to produce their own insecticides, and production of clotting factors.

There are three main methods for making recombinant DNA: Non-Bacterial Transformation, Transformation, and phage introduction. Transformation involves first selecting the DNA piece for insertion into a vector. The DNA piece is cut using a restriction enzyme. The DNA insert is ligated with a DNA ligase. For the identification of the recombinant molecules, the insert will contain a selectable marker. The scientists will use an antibiotic marker in order to kill the host cells without the vector when exposed to certain antibiotics. The host cells that contain the vector will survive as they are resistant to the antibiotic. Transformation is the process of inserting the host cell with a vector. The different selectable markers can be for color changes, antibiotic, or other characteristics. The markers will distinguish untransformed hosts from transformed hosts.

Non-Bacterial Transformation is similar to Transformation, but the main difference is that non-bacterial does not use bacteria for the host. The cell being transformed is injected directly with the DNA into its nucleus in microinjection. In biolistics, high velocity micro projectiles bombard the host cells. Phage introduction is a transfection process equivalent to transformation, except in this method phage is used not bacteria. Recombinant DNA is a challenging field of research, but it does hold a promising future. Recombinant DNA technologies will in the future play vital roles in the prevention of genetic diseases, producing less toxic pharmaceuticals, and producing targeted medicines. The technology will influence livestock and agriculture research, which will assist them in finding ways for optimizing genetic codes of animals and plants.

Influence of the media

Genetic engineering been a new technology many people are not aware of it. The media has a significant role of informing and forming people's perception of the technology. In cases where public knowledge is limited, people rely on the media to gather information. In genetic engineering, the media has contributed greatly to the public opinion. People did not have any opinions prior to the publication of stories in the media. If the media publications are negative, people will form negative opinions in regards to the subject. If a country needs to successfully adopt the technology, media publications need to demonstrate the potential benefits of the technology. Several studies have indicated that the public opinion in regards to GMOs is based on the media publications.

GMOs are negatively perceived in Europe mainly because the media published negative stories of the technology Lusk et al., 2004.

Discussions of biotechnology were confined to scientists and smaller circles, which led to people viewing the technology in a negative way. The media publicized cases of mad cow disease, Bt corn and asbestos. In all the publications, the media demonstrated the negative aspects only, which impacted the public's opinion of the technology. The people also lost trust of authority as they viewed people in authority as withholding and lying about GMOs. The extensive media coverage of GMOs increased the risk perception of people. A number of associations and societies cropped up in the fight against GMOs. A lot of panic and hype was created amongst the masses. This was done via mass dissemination of warnings, petitions, and alerts Burton, Rigby, Young, & James, 2001.

Word against GMOs was spread using the internet, and there was more information against GMOs. This created a cult like following against GMOs. The European media started competing for public attention by reporting scandalous and shocking headlines regarding GMOs. Since views expressed by scientists are complex and the media took advantage of this to express and push for anti-GMO reports.

In the United States, concerns are limited. The number of publications in the media is limited, and this has led to fewer perceptions. There is no hype regarding GMOs and people do not perceive it as dangerous. U.S. citizens do not trust the media, and this has contributed to their low perception of GMO risks. Publications in the media would not have much effect to discourage people. Many people might have heard about GMOs in the media, but they did not form a conclusion based on the negative information published. U.S. citizens put their trust in regulatory bodies and majority formed opinion based on the information they received from these bodies. Genetically modified foods are accepted in the U.S. because of trust in government regulations, and scientific innovation.

In China, people have a positive perception of GE technology. The government exercises tight controls over the media. This has ensured that only positive information regarding GMOs is published in China. Research conducted by Curtis, McCluskey, and Wahl (2004)

indicated that only 9.3% of the people surveyed had a negative opinion concerning GMOs. This clearly demonstrates that the media does affect people's opinions. If the media publishes only positive stories, the people will form positive perceptions. The lack of knowledge in the technology made the Chinese to be more welcoming of the technology and lower their risk perception. Another case of media distrust is India, especially rural India. The villagers trust government information. This led to the positive perception of GMOs. The lack of information in some cases has led people to trust the media. In the case of Bt Brinjal, people relied on the media for information. GMOs are relatively new in India, and there is low awareness. Anything reported in the media will provide new information to the people and has the potential to affect their opinions.

The media is responsible for accurately reporting and presenting facts. Accurate reports in regards to GMOs will allow people to form their own opinions. This is much better than only providing negative information, which leads to biased opinions. Covering stories by anti-GMO groups will lead to biased information. Responsible journalism is vital, and both sides of the debate need the same airtime. Reporting the debate in an objective and calm manner will lead to acceptance by the people of the technology. Creating emotionally charged debates hides the facts and only presents limited information. Topics that the public has little or no information are sensitive, and the media needs to recognize this fact. If the media provides negative information chances are people will form negative opinions. If the media reported and published information in a balanced manner, people will have an opportunity to make informed decisions. The debate on GMOs is a healthy one, and it has increased people's awareness of the technology.

Conclusion

GMOs have the potential to improve farmer's yields. Scientists have developed crops that are resistant to natural weather increases the potential of improving food security in developing countries. Producing animals that have genetics viable for better production and resistant to diseases reduces the expenses of treatment. GMOs have both positive and negative effects, but the positive effects outnumber the negative. There is potential to improve peoples' lives using GMOs. Treating diseases like hepatitis B has only been possible due to GMOs. If used improperly GMOs can result in adverse outcomes. A farmer growing non-GMO crops would lose his/her crop if their neighbor is growing GMO crops. Natural mixing of the crops would result in adverse conditions, as the superior crops would ruin the inferior crops. The public has differing opinion in regards to the technology, and the media has contributed in some cases to this opinions. Providing information to the people is vital for the success of the technology. Failure to provide accurate information leads to biased opinions as seen in the case of Europe. Culture also plays a key role in influencing people's opinions. If people's culture is conservative and dismissive, the people will not embrace new technology. They will view the technology as interfering with their norms and beliefs. Religion also contributed to the high risk perceptions. Religious leaders have argued against cloning humans or experimenting with human beings. The leaders have demonstrated that scientists are playing God and that goes against their beliefs.