Thursday, September 30, 2010

Some Issues in the Bt brinjal

I must stress that I have not made and cannot make coherently brief comments on the very important Bt brinjal problem that will give a terse pertinent insight. This is not expected. It is required nevertheless at least from an academic point of view from an interested academic.

The new point I will try to stress on is the necessity for tasting the brinjal using knowledge from the gene-science of tasting that is recently available. The second is to try to examine the notion that Bt technology is safe because the toxin protein crystals are digested only in the alkaline medium of the insect and this should not be important in our acidic digestive medium.

There are too many ifs and buts and on-the-one-hand and on-the-other-hand aspects that prevent such a presentation. I have tried to make pertinent and relevant remarks that requires some (penance-like in a sense) study. Some of these points I have highlighted in bold, and some others which should be important to an interested expert (which I am afraid to highlight). I have made as serious a study that my background allows in the one week time that I gave myself, sensing an urgency, because of commercial pressures on the government.

I continue writing this blog from the previous blog (the numbering of figures commence from the previous one) more to inform myself about the Bt problem; hopefully, it is also to inform possible readers about the issues involved. I do not vouchsafe for the authenticity of my sources but I have cited most and some more of the literature available on the net readily available for reference.

Before we go into the whys and why-nots and the ifs and if-nots one requires knowing what the Bt about the brinjal bush is all about.

On pushing further than what I did in the previous blog one finds (see for instance, Bacillus anthracis, Bacillus cereus, and Bacillus thuringiensisOne Species on the Basis of Genetic Evidence, by Erlendur Helgason et al, Appl Environ Microbiol. 2000 June; 66, 2627, cited more than 450 times) that other bacterial strain that belongs to the Bt or Bc family that show wide phenotypes (the visible characteristics of an organism resulting from the interaction between its genetic makeup and the environment) and pathological effects (processes of a disease, observable either with the naked eye or by microscopy, or, at a molecular level, as inferred from biochemical tests) is Bacillus anthracis, which causes the acute fatal disease anthrax (a highly infectious, often fatal, bacterial disease of mammals, especially cattle and sheep, that is transmissible to humans and causes skin ulcers cutaneous anthrax or a form of pneumonia when inhaled pulmonary anthrax) and is a potential biological weapon due to its high toxicity (causing evacuation of the US Senate building when traces of anthrax was found in the mail in the amerithrax episode a week after 9/11).

Bacillus cereus is a probably ubiquitous soil bacterium and an opportunistic pathogen that is a common cause of food poisoning. Despite the recognition of Bacillus cereus as a food-borne pathogen over 50 years ago and the identification of several enterotoxin (any toxin produced by bacteria that causes the vomiting and diarrhea associated with food poisoning) genes, its virulence mechanisms have still not been fully elucidated. In contrast to the differences in phenotypes, Helgason et al show by multilocus enzyme electrophoresis and by sequence analysis of nine chromosomal genes that B. anthracis should be considered a lineage of B. cereus. This determination is not only a formal matter of taxonomy but may also have consequences with respect to virulence and the potential of horizontal gene transfer within the B. cereus group (that includes Bt!!).

This is no surprise to the academic kinds since it was known from at least 1994 (Carlson et al in Appl. Environ. Microbiology, 60, 1719; that Bacillus cereus and Bacillus thuringiensis should be regarded as one species. It has been known for some time, for instance, that enzyme systems for monounsaturated fatty acid synthesis in Bacillus thuringiensis and Bacillus anthracis prefer normal fatty acids instead of branched-chain fatty acids as substrates for binding that eventually cause the damage.

Most Bacillus thuringiensis strains were typeable like Bc thereby providing further evidence of the close-relatedness of Bacillus cereus and Bacillus thuringiensis. Recent phage (a virus that infects bacteria and may integrate into the genetic material of its host cell; bacteriophages are used as vectors in gene cloning and have other biotechnological uses) typing studies on finding the origin of food poisoning studies on Bc showed new morphotype (Phage 11) species with an isometric head and a very long contractile tail with long wavy tail fibers and was one of the largest viruses known. This need not be a disconnected point since it shows that changes are happening

There are further problems.

When one talks about Bt there are dozens and dozens of them multiplying and mutating all the time.

Bacillus thuringiensis and its strains have presently been classified into 84 serovars (a group of bacteria that share a characteristic set of antigens) making it the most diverse among the Bacillus cereus species. The taxonomic (the science of classifying plants, animals, and microorganisms into increasingly broader categories based on shared features. Traditionally, organisms were grouped by physical resemblances, but in recent times other criteria such as genetic matching have also been used) value of these serovars is currently not settled. As early as 1994, Nakamura had written “… Bacillus thuringiensis serovars canadensis and kenyae consisted of two DNA relatedness groups, each of which exhibited levels of intragroup relatedness of 80% or higher and levels of intergroup relatedness of 60 to 70%.

Bt serovars are not identical. Genetic engineering with this variation can hardly be expected to be controlled.

There are four major d-endotoxins (toxins produced within some bacteria that are released only when the bacteria disintegrate) crystal protein classes classified as Cry-I, CryII, CryIII and CryIV (what else?). CryI are for moths and butterflies (lepidopetra, red border box in Fig 3), CryIII are for beetles ((coleoptera, green border box in Fig 3), CryIV are for flies (diptera, blue border box in Fig 3, the figure with a yellow border is a high resolution picture of crystals on butterfly wings) and CryII for lepidoptera and diptera. There are subclasses of these d-endotoxins grouped as A, B, C, … and a, b, c, … (as simple as that).

The Bt brinjal end-game is to use mainly lepidopetra (moths and butterflies) crystal proteins Cry1ab and Cry1ac.

There are some obvious issues which we can briefly address and highlight.
Why Bt Brinjal?
What Bt Brinjal? With what taste?
What Environmental Effects?
Whose Liability?

Why Bt Brinjal?

Why indeed? This question comes to everybody’s mind when they first hear of Bt brinjal. Couldn’t they find something else? From a strategy point of view this could be the most important question that requires the most time to deliberate upon by denying permission several times.

There has been no evaluation of whether there is actually any ground level requirement for Bt brinjal at all given the Indian mind-set and given the known protests and resistances of several farmers’ groups.

Brinjal is one of our more traditional vegetables. However, it does not contribute in any significant way to our food requirements

It is not related to solving problems associated with a food shortage, impending or not. “Hunger in the future will probably be due to production limitations,… inappropriate solutions that are not sustainable … would not address the major causes of shortage..” (N. P. Stoner, Global Science Policy leader , Biotechnology, Dow Agrosciences, Indianapolis). Do we require an external expert to point out what seems to be obvious?

Bt crops do not show considerable increase in yield as compared to other competitive practices. One should seriously examine the statement Only about 3 to 4 percent of the 28 percent increase in corn yield over the past 13 years comes from the Bt trait. Purported benefits of genetically engineered crops are determined against a limited set of current agricultural practices that do not adequately represent the range of available technologies. … organic farmers typically produce yields comparable to …Bt corn crops produce yields comparable to best industrial methods. (D. Gurian Sherman, Union of concerned scientists, non-profit science-based organization started in 1969 at MIT)

Speaking with a purely devious mind (which happens to be the first requirement in anything that is not straight) one may imagine that Bt brinjal is a test-case as well as an opportunity to gauge the Indian mind set, especially the regulatory ones, as well as to test the pliability of scientists and bureaucrats to bend to multinational wishes.

The Bt brinjal has all the important unsolved questions that is plaguing the industry in terms of permissions. Monsanto and their Indian clones would like India to join Paraguay and Argentina as the only nation to have more than half their cultivated land in the GM-fold. India, with its lax rules, chalta hai attitudes, elastic legal system, malleable leadership, deficient in national identity is looked upon as a country of opportunity for those who have exhausted their opportunities elsewhere. This is the time, to make hay when Bt "sun” of biotechnology is rising in India? Once the humble brinjal is pushed through by not framing rules there would be other bio-technologies that would be slipped in.

As recently as 22nd sept 2010 Mahyco announced that it is undertaking partnerships with public institutions and private companies to introduce more than 200 products in the crop market, including wheat, rice, cotton, sorghum, pearl millet, mustard and several vegetables such as chilli, okra, brinjal, tomato, cauliflower, bottle gourd, bitter gourd.

It hurts to ask the obvious. Why did they invest in so much if they were not sure about the policy on GM food?

What is particularly worrying is that “important” proponents of Bt brinjal such as C. Kameshwara Rao (executive secretary of a Bangalore-based Foundation for Biotechnology Awareness and Education whose source of funding is not known to me) writes to the minster “Should we not recognize the toil of our own outstanding Agriculture Universities and a private partner who is equally committed? … Why should we ever think that they will compromise on the environmental and health safety of the nation? There is no reason for the government to delay the release of Bt brinjal. In a couple of years one would know its success or otherwise in the field and farmers would provide the answer.” The mind-boiling fallacy is that if the farmers are to find the answer in one or two years what is the “scientist” doing that they cannot wait for a year or two. More importantly, why don’t the scientists themselves request Rao not to support them?

It is the same Kameswara Rao who warns “… that even if Bt brinjal cannot be grown legally, farmers may start cultivating it anyway, as has happened with Bt cotton …

What Bt Brinjal? What taste?

We are quite happy with our brinjal. The Bt brinjal targets the shoot and borer insects. There are some of us who prefer buying brinjal with borer holes as we are satisfied that the particular brinjal does not have pesticide. They are genuinely organic. Except for the fact that we would be eating a living being if we accidentally eat the insect in some form, we usually just cut the brinjal, preferably without hurting the borer, throw away the small infected part and eat the rest of the brinjal. I personally don’t know of the known scientifically verified effects (good or bad) in such accidental brinjal insect consumption.

At the present time, the number of brinjals with borer holes are virtually absent except those of the small farmer. It is mainly our present plastic or in-organic western-oriented populace (WOPs) who don’t like the sight of creepy crawleys and would like to HIT or ZAP them with insecticides that prefer the borer-free vegetables. They like their brinjals zapped and hibred and virtually tasteless.

It is known that in earlier agricultural practice various vegetable crops are rotated so that the insect community which prefers a particular vegetable is not stabilized. Further, it seems that the various varieties of brinjal are best adapted to the particular soil. Local varieties of brinjal (with their own toxins) should actually be preferred so as to minimize the use of pesticides rather than market driven varieties which are easy meat for the insects.

A recent article on the brinjal by Bhat and Vasanthi (Asian Agri-History, 12, 169 ( 2008)) ( which I found on the net does a fairly competent job on the antiquity, cultivation and use of Brinjal in India. They stress the point that natural brinjal itself has been regarded as poisonous. The varieties of brinjal available in India seems to be due to several factors which could have been influenced by the cooking quality and the ingredients added for the preferences defined by the local cuisine. Brinjal has also been associated with poisonous substances and the selection and breeding of brinjals could have been to reduce such poisons just as the selection of various spices for seasoning in the final stages, or other additives (say, turmeric or yogurt) in the medium of cooking could have been as a result of selection by generation of breeding and feeding.

It is important to note the word of caution from M S Swaminathan when he writes that one should “… collect, catalogue and conserve the existing genetic variability in brinjal. Such a collection must be carefully preserved, before we permit the extinction of the gifts of thousands of years of natural evolution and human selection.” More importantly, he suggested that we “… undertake a careful study of the chronic effects of Bt brinjal on health. This is analogous to the studies carried out on the impact of tobacco smoking on the incidence of lung cancer …”. I could not agree with him more.

The unstated implications of Swaminathan’s comments are that he is not sure whether the Bt lobby is not hiding something the way the tobacco lobby did.

There is no doubt that brinjal as medicinal properties especially with respect to type 2 diabetes. I have benefited from it personally. The uncooked wilder varieties (paneerful for vegetable cheese rennet or sundakkai for more kozhumbu) seems to be the more efficient.

In the minister’s report, Dr. G. Sivaraman, of the National Siddha Pharmacopia Committee, of the Government of India gave actual figures from the Minister|s report on the variation in Bt brinjal that could affect the way the ayurvedic practitioner would approach plant synergy. For instance, the test analysis showed nearly 40% changes between wild an Bt brinjal in methanol extracts of solanine (increases in Bt brinjal) and solamargine (decreases in Bt brinjal). Such changes are brought about by stress in the plant, they say, and which I believe. The ratio of solasonine to solamargine which is nearly unity in the wild brinjals is nearly doubled in the Bt brinjal. These alkaloids show effectiveness in anticancer treatments as per a Korean study. They act synergetically so that a change in their ratio could have large changes in their effectiveness, say in medicine or in the ayurvedic formulations as well.

This is a perfectly valid and important point. It is strange that the latest EEC-II report recorded such changes but did not comment on it.

As far as my food is concerned, the very important testing of changes due to different cooking procedures were not carried out. Dr. Sivaraman draws attention, for instance, to the seasoning methods that are traditionally used for nullifying toxic effects during processing or cooking.

Changes in taste of the brinjal to a given individual are an indicator of changes in chemistry to which the individual is sensitive.

The Indian food research institute, CFTRI, does not seem to be in a position to perform taste panel tests of brinjal. The EEC-II has dismissed this requirement as they claim it is not based on food safety but consumer choice. This is surprising as it is through the taste that the safe varieties of brinjal have evolved through selective breeding.

I suppose one should start a brinjal taster programme just as one does with coffee tasting, and wine tasting and tea tasting. This is vital since we are dealing with crucial tests that are pertinent to the safe health of a nation that cannot be allowed to be judged by Western standards for the Indian nation.

The science of tasting has evolved considerably ever since Japanese scientist wished to automate cooking procedure by examining taste sensors. The basic premise in these studies is that “… the ability to taste was important to ensure acquisition of nutrients and to avoid toxic substances.

Quite contrary to the EEC-II opinion tasting is not just a matter of consumer choice but consumer safety.

The science of tasting involves G-proteins (guanine nucleotide binding proteins) which are involved in sending chemical signals outside and also in responding to signals that require changes inside the cell. The trans-membrane receptors involving G-proteins are the G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). A good article to read is in Physiol Behav. 2006, 88, 215 on Diverse tastes: Genetics of sweet and bitter perception, by Reed Tanaka and McDaniel. They note that “… taste receptors have naturally occurring alleles that can be evaluated in a cell-based assay system (i.e., heterologous expression systems), and these alleles can also be used to predict how the receptor function will change using computer modeling, and then the DNA sequence can be compared across species to determine the origins in taste differences.” They then go on to state that “Both bitter and sweet compounds bind to G-protein coupled receptors GPCRs. However, in the case of sweet and umami (savoury) receptors the family is small, with only three known genes but in the case of bitter receptors the number is large, with perhaps as many as 30 to 50 genes.

Why do our bitter taste receptors have such a large variety of genes? It seems that subtle changes in bitterness could indicate major changes in toxicity. Breeding by tasting is the most sensible thing to do and should be compulsory for any GMO food crops. In the last few years there has been extensive progress in finding the variety of such receptor genes. Associating this variety with changes in the environment and thereby studying the suitability of GM crops should be a priority for MEF.

What Environmental Concerns?

One of the well known major concerns in biotechnology is the question of gene flow which is what it implies… flow of genes from one population to another. This point is important when one worries whether such a gene flow would affect some of the other varieties of brinjal including those that grows wildly in India. India is a center of domestication or genetic diversity for brinjal and there should be concern regarding gene flow. Suman Sahai writes to the minister on this valid point:- Farmers have been working for thousands of years to domesticate wild plants like the Solanacae family, to make them safe for eating. Much of this exercise involved breeding out the toxins…Genetic engineering …produce a toxin … This seems to be a process working to reverse several thousand year of efforts.. There are apprehensions that not only new toxins could develop but that old toxin that were removed by the technology would also re-appear.

Doug Gurian-Sherman, of the Union for concerned scientists and author of “Real Scoop” which gives regular analysis on environmental issues in general writes on the possible environmental impact of Bt brinjal in India on the environment, the following;-
Several wild relatives of brinjal are found in India and have been shown to be sexually compatible with brinjal. And it appears that at least one wild relative grows in or near brinjal fields. Further, methods to prevent gene flow from crops to wild relatives currently do not exist (there are some methods that can slow this process in some crops). Gene flow from Bt brinjal to wild relatives, would therefore be certain. Whether Bt gene becomes a permanent part of the environment in India would then depend on the properties of the gene in the wild plant – something that cannot be predicted qithout performing tests. No such tests have been performed according to the tests available to me. He further adds that because of a wild weedy relative sugar beets in California, seed production of GE sugar beets is not allowed in California, which is not a center of domestication or genetic diversity for any crop.

The issue of toxicity is usually quantified by the event of death and not by the quality of living. That should be ridiculous but it is not.
One of the problems about examining the toxicity of various bio-products is the lethal concentration (LC). How much will you require to achieve 50 % death (LC50). Mixed protein fractions from various subspecies of Bt sometimes gave greater activity than expected from the individual fractions. Effects of such synergistic interactions are difficult to reproduce because of several factors such as large variation in toxicity probably due to lack of proper control experiments; there is also the dependence on the bio-assay conditions of the host; e.g., solubility of the crystals, larval age, diet, natural variations in insect populations.

The problem of reproducibility is dismissed as an inherent and therefore intractable problem. It is not treated as variety in synergicity.

Thus Dr. J. Gowrishankar, Director Centre for DNA Finger Printing and Diagnostics, Nampally, Hyderabad, writes “It is inappropriate to quote insignificant observations out of context as many such observations seen at one time point do not persist at the next point or not observed in the other sex.”

In this context Jack Heinemann of the Centre for Integrated Research in Biosafety writes somewhat scathingly, I thought, “All scientific studies that form part of a safety evaluation must involve a comparator. The comparator must be appropriate and used consistently. The purpose of the comparator is to provide the standard baseline for all measurements, and be the single common element in all experiments using material grown in multiple locations and years. It is impossible to determine if either of these rules were followed in the dossier for Bt brinjal.

This is echoed by N. P. Stoner, Global Science Policy leader , Biotechnology, Dow Agrosciences, Indianapolis, who writes that “there is a fundamental flaw in not showing the use of an appropriate comparator.

Some of the more serious-looking protests are from ordinary non-professionals. Unfortunately it is not clear whether the anti Bt lobby may not be as manipulative as the pro Bt lobby. The pro Bt lobby includes the popular fiction writer, Jeffrey M. Smith, who is probably making his own commercial killing feeding public discomfort by propagating anti Bt stories. These stories include those of mass death of sheep by feeding on dry Bt-cotton crop by one (preliminary) report by one Ashish Gupta and others (which has been removed from the net). Another by one Carrie Swadener in the Journal of Pesticide Reform v.14, n.3 of 1994 which is cited by many from the anti Bt lobby. The report seems to have some substance. When I searched for Carrie Swadener I got directed to several porn sites including a friendly invitation from someone named Carrie “right in Pune” where I live.

There is little mention on the effect of domestic animals who graze on Bt crops. Reports such as “At least 1 820 sheep were reported dead after grazing on post-harvest Bt cotton crops; the symptoms and post-mortem findings strongly suggest they died from severe toxicity” are dismissed as being motivated or unsubstantiated. Details of such reports which has not yet been removed from the net is one,, by a Dr. Mae-Wan Ho titled The Bt trail of dead sheep, ill workers and dead villagers over three years. In this report human death in Phillipines due to exposure to Bt maize crops has been reported.

In western countries commercial concerns and public health efforts are present to increase fruit and vegetable intake by reducing the bitter tastes of the foods which are “healthy”. This is what they call consumer choice. 25% of American food production is geared towards junk food. I don’t know how many billion dollars waste is there. The Indian IT-dominated spending class must eat junk food to meet their work pressure or their pleasure wastes. Junk food removal should contribute greatly to pesticide reduction because it is the junk food lobby that require pesticides. Junk food-grains are not naturally evolved and are therefore pest-prone.

A little bitterness in healthy natural brinjals can only do them good. Diversity in bitter tastes is required to suit individual variations when taste dominates nutrition which in turn dominates health. It saves on the insecticide investment and eliminated Bt requirement.

Another point that requires being de-stressed and re-examined is the high alkalinity (high pH or high basicity) in the gut of insects where Bt crystal proteins are processed to provide the insecticidal effect. Human gut is acidic and so it is deemed safe towards such toxins.

This need not necessarily be so. It has to be remembered that the toxin binding takes place at membrane walls. Membrane walls have lipid molecule which have a long tail and a head-group which could be charged depending on the head-group (acid or base) and the basicity or acidity of the gut. In the un-damaged state the molecules are packed close together as in (a)of Scheme 1 when the inter-chain (tail-tail) attraction prevails. The head-group may be charged depending on the pH. The repulsion between like-charges (for instance) effectively increases the size of the head-group when there will be crowding, as shown in Scheme 1(b). This crowding or repulsion weakens the membrane wall as in Scheme 1(c). If the membrane wall is strong (tail-tail attractive interaction is strong) the head-group size will have to reduce by becoming uncharged irrespective of the nature (pH) of the medium. If the uncharged state is alkaline (say a basic amino group) the interface will be alkaline even when the bulk is acidic.

In bilayer membrane systems as in Scheme 1(d) and (e), the effect of charging and crowding, as in (d), may be accommodated by flip-over of some of the molecules. This, in turn will change an optimal or required ion-balance.

I don’t think this aspect has been examined in anz detail. In one my publications in Langmuir (published by the American Chemical Society) I have shown that this may be the case. For instance, titanyl oxalate is stable in acidic solution and is hydrolyzed in alkaline medium to titanium dioxide. When the surface of an acidic solution of titanyl oxalte is covered with a single molecular layer of long-chain hydrocarbon molecule with an amino head-group, titanium oxide is formed at the interface of the amine monolayer and the bulk acid.


A serious issue is the liability laws. One important point made by Suman Sahai in his letter to the minister is concerning liability. There is no liability law in the country … In case of adverse health impacts or adverse impacts on other non-Bt farms who would judge the damage and who would be liable to pay compensation … what would be the quantum of damage. Indeed, where is the government regulations in place?

One of the suggestions put forward to the minister, which I whole heartedly support, is that liability should be placed on Bt Brinjal patent owners … , Research and scientific bodies involved in the Biosafety studies of Bt brinjal calling it safe; The committees that give clearance – alleging safety. Policy makers permitting potentially hazardous products… I suppose Indian industry has already protected itself from such liabilities… It will nevertheless be important to test it in a court of law.

Germany is among the first European country to fix liability for possible damage on farmers who use GM seed. It requires the setting up of a public location register to record areas used for GMO cultivation. This law puts an onus on the farmers. In India farmers are coaxed, bluffed, bribed into buying

Dr. J. Gowrishankar, Director Centre for DNA Finger Printing and Diagnostics, Nampally, Hyderabad writes instead that EC II report was unnecessary entailing waste of time of its expert members and the burden of proof with regard to GMOs should be seen as innocent until proven guilty rather than the other way around. He also endorsed the view that it is “inappropriate to quote insignificant observations out of context as many such observations seen at one time point do not persist at the next point or not observed in the other sex.

That is what one means by saying throwing caution to the genes?.

It is imperative that there should be compulsory labelling of a Bt crop field or a Bt product. One of the signs that could be used after suitable modification is given below.

This blog does not claim to make an extensive analysis. As mentioned earlier it is meant first of all to give some additional insights to the ordinary reader on what the problem means. It is intended finally to add a little more to the kind of problems the Indian mind should concern itself with --- which it must.

The CWG Syndrome in the Bt Brinjal: Part II. The Indian Trans-Academy Game

In Part I, I had semi-seriously discussed the criticism of the way the Common Wealth Games was being run. I called it the CWG syndrome which has implications of the functioning in a hierarchical society that could lead to self-defeating decisions that betrays society’s (country’s) interests.

In a hierarchical society like that of the monkeys (from which we, as humans, are not far away from although we may not know in which direction on the evolution line) the monkey king is not very stable on his throne. The people who bow most before the king are those that resent the king most. Their main interest is to dethrone.

Kalmadi had to be the monkey king to be dethroned.

The screeching anchors of our television stations got down to the lowest level of investigations that they seem to be at home with. They literally focused on the same filth and kept showing the same “horror” images without any comment on how general it is and what the redeeming features could have been.

As viewers, we are not shocked by that kind of filth that is mass-communicated on our TV stations. Instead, we look forward to more filth that will sock us more. Because it is pure gossip and malice, we accept whatever is said for our own time-pass malicious gossip.

A far more dangerous affair is the attitude of Indian media (and our indifference) on the responsibility of Indian Scientists to the Bt brinjal problem. The outcome of this problem involves important decision-making processes of the science academies of India. Messing up on this one will affect the way we would like to live.

Here there may not be evidence for a monkey king as yet. But the monkey culture, with the CWG syndrome, could prevail.

This blog and the one following this is aimed at showing an interest in the problem and at expressing a studied opinion of a serious kind.

What stirred up my interest is the notice I got recently from one science academy --- the only one which mistakenly made me a member --- which has been founded by an Indian Nobel Scientist of whom I am proud of.

The notice I got by email was about an “Inter-academy report on GM crops” in which they present “… a report on GM crops … at the request of Shri Jairam Ramesh, Minister of Environment & Forests and Dr. K. Kasturirangan, Member of Planning Commission. The way the document has been prepared is detailed in the report itself. The report also contains an appraisal of the issue and a set of recommendations. We hope that this document would be useful to decision makers.” The report was written after “… a brain storming meeting was held at INSA on June 1, which was attended by a cross section of Fellows and nominees of the Academies. “ It was not a brainstorming involving only specialists on GM crops!

For a very happy and welcome change, the involved union minister, Jairam Ramesh, has shown more than his share of enthusiasm in trying to frame a government policy. If anything he can only be said to have been over sincere and gullible in trusting the Indian scientist’s word in a matter which is indeed very complex.

He did meet a range of people (Fig 1, taken from the report which is on the net) who were evidently not back scratchers, except for some obvious front-benchers. In the top centre inset of Fig 1 (click to expand) the minister and the obvious intellectual are sitting with a posture indicating that they are paying close attention. The person on the minister’s right has thick gold rings on his right hand, clutches a ready mobile with his right hand and has a wary look that matches that of a powerful personal assistant to somebody or something far more powerful.

Simply going by a head count of the people seemingly opposed to the scheme the Bt brinjal scheme should have folded up. But because the hierarchical society is in place, the voice of the upper monkey class will prevail because of their short-lived crocodile concerns for the poor.

The CWG had definite deadlines to meet. It is easy to focus and communicate on the goings-on by the way anticipated deadlines have been met or not and the way international standards have not been met or been met. There is no complex scientific or management issues involved in the CWG games.

The Bt brinjal problem is a far more serious one. One is afraid that the CWG syndrome of mismanagement of objectives and covering-up of filth would have far more serious consequences when extended to our food and agriculture.

For one, Sharad Pawar is now the minister of food and agriculture. He makes the decisions. He has made up his mind. “After the environment ministry’s approval, the agriculture ministry will have no hesitation to extend its support. So far such a clearance for Bt Brinjal from the environment ministry is awaited.” What Pawar forgets is that as an agricultural minister he must decide what the outcome of an agricultural policy on a particular crop has on other food crops. He has to worry about it more than the environment ministry. Further, he has to worry about the way the Bt brinjal policy impacts the attitudes of other countries in buying our farm products because of their own environmental concerns.

Pawar had some basis for his confidence in getting an approval from the environment ministry. Their scheme for consideration has only provisions for approval (Fig 2, click to expand) even though the double-headed arrows have sufficient ambiguity. The all-important nodal point in the scheme is the GEAC (Genetic Engineering Approvals Committee) which is again pre-disposed towards approvals. However, GEAC decided to pass the buck onto the Government (capital G as in God) since the “… decision of the GEAC has very important policy implication at the national level…” The GEAC happens to be located in the ministry of Environment and Forests (MEF), so that the concerned minister (Jairam Ramesh) had to take it up even if it is not clear how a GEAC in an MEF would have the required GE expertise to make a decision unless it is fed by a pre-disposed GE lobby with approval written all over it.

The GEAC report may be compared with a UNEP-ILO-WHO report more than a decade earlier (1999) on Microbial Pest Control Agent, BACILLUS THURINGIENSIS. That was what it should have been, just a report. This report was prepared by Task group members and observers from Departments of Biology, Structure and Function, Institute of Terrestrial Ecology, Département des Biotechnologies, Microbiological Institute, Department of Veterinary Pathobiology, Chemical and Agricultural Products, Animal Health Products, and Centre for Pesticide Safety from various countries. It started in 1993 and the report was published in 1999. There is no ‘A’ for approval in this report!

This is why, perhaps, the MEF wanted a trans-academy report preferably without a pre-determined ‘A-for-approval on it.

The academies of science and engineering are now sustained by people who shine best in borrowed protocols. One of these protocols is to advise the government as quickly (and, consequently, as vaguely) as they can. No wonder there is a multiplication of academies in our version of the monkey culture! There are six varieties of national academies of science and engineering. It could be a world record for any country. Knowing our record on population control, this should not surprise us at all.

There is all the marks of disinterestedness in the trans-academy report perhaps because the dadas (big daddies) in the field seemed to be already committed favourably to the Bt-ology that they had submitted earlier to the minister. The A(pproval)-disease persisted. These dadas were probably annoyed that they had to go through the justification process again.

Out of the ~ 60,000 words in the INTER-ACADEMY REPORT ON GM CROPS there was less than 9000 words on Bt Brinjal specifically and hardly any commitment to issues at hand. The report could have been written almost by anybody with an ability to download from the net. The first lines of the paragraphs in the section on Bt brinjal are
Brinjal (Solanum melongena L.), commonly known as eggplant, aubergine or guinea squash, is an important vegetable crop of tropical and temperate parts of the world. … (900 words)
Brinjal has been cultivated for the last 4,000 years in India. … (500 words)
Brinjal cultivars as well as modern varieties have been shown to be susceptible to a variety of stress conditions, which limits crop productivity significantly. … According to a study by Indian Chemical Industry (2007), brinjal is the second largest vegetable crop after Chillies that is sprayed with insecticide. (1700 words)
Early efforts were made at IARI to develop transgenic brinjal expressing insecticidal protein (Cry1Ab) of Bt way back in mid 1990s … . Multi-location research trials and Large scale trials (2004-2008) conducted by Mahyco, … insecticide requirement for Bt brinjal hybrids was on average 80% less than that for the non-Bt counterpart, which translated into a 42% reduction in total insecticide usage. ... (1500 words)
Thus, in brinjal cultivation, there is an urgent need to reduce dependence on pesticides … (1200 word)
Bt brinjal being a transgenic food crop requires environmental clearance under Rules 8 … (1200 words)
Bt brinjal ‘Event EE-1’ has been subjected to a rigorous biosafety regulatory process … (~ 600 words)
Two expert committees, Expert Committees I and II … confirm the safety and utility of Bt brinjal, especially considering the fact that his gene has been in use globally for over 15 years (~ 1100 words)

There is nothing in the trans-academy or report that improves (except for the inclusion of Bt brinjal) upon the UNEP-ILO-WHO report written a decade earlier.

Compared to the effort of the CWG in planning and organizing (not executing) the games, there has been so little evidence for a professional pride that comes from completing a job well done in this trans-academy report.

I try to distance myself from Indian Scientists, especially those of an administrative bent of mind. To our mutual benefits, I am sure. I cannot understand why a good scientist should take time out of his science to become an administrator, the necessary politics of which they should really know little about. However, as one listed in (not belonging to the) “scientist” community of India, I am more than a little concerned about the adverse impact such an insensistively (sorry, Mr. Chips, the word 'insensitively' is not even in Webster) written report could have on future generations.

The “trans-academy” scientists have now the infection arising from bacteria of the Bt kind and are showing all signs of the CWG syndrome --- a coordinated drive to patch-work and push before deadlines set by the tenure of a minister, and the profit schemes of multinationals. This makes them purposefully oblivious of sincere concerns of the diminishing tribe of ordinary people who speak their mind as they see it.

I am writing this blog and the next one with the intention of making comments that I think should be made. I am no expert.

I have exercised caution and have tried to make in it as apolitical statements as one can consciously. After writing the major part of the blog, the newspapers inform me that Jairam Ramesh (Jai Ram, thank you Ram) has rubbished the trans-academy report. This is an welcome Ram Ram in this Ayodhya times.

I have garnered little bits of information from the internet more than the trivial kind that decision making ministers such as Sharad Pawar or corporate honchos such as Kiran Shah Majumdar usually cite while announcing their decisions. This is presented in the next blog

The basic information that I can produce now is the following.

Bt is an acronym for the bacteria bacillus thuringiensis.

Now! Do we know what it is all about?

The first points are simple, but fundamental and is easily found in the net. The most important point about Bt that could allow us not to show concern is that it is found naturally in soil that has been farmed successfully over thousands of years. It has also been used as sprays as "microbial insecticide" before Bt GMO food became known. Indeed it is used to coat seed for preservation against insecticides for long times.

Bt produces intracellular protein crystals toxic to a wide number of insect larvae. Its toxicity depends on it breaking down of the crystal protein on digestion. Insects have alkaline stomach digestive juices while mammals like us have acidic juices so that one assumes that the Bt toxins would not affect humans of the normal healthy otherwise un-medicated kind.

So! Why is this concern now?

For a novice in the area, the possible problems associated with the use of Bacillus thurigiensis in genetically modified foods are many. One would have liked to have seen some definite laws and rules which allow one to judge inputs and outcomes like stoichiometry in chemistry or equations of motion in physics. Unfortunately there are so many ifs and buts in biotechnology that one can only say “maybe” or “hopefully” after giving the matter deep consideration from a non-financial angle.

I have tried to give some of the points that could cause concern, They, I think, require definite responses from experts of the academic kind. They could have been asked by self-appointed experts of the genuine kind. My description in this and the next blog is not exhaustive nor is it expected to be given my background. It is any case another Bt acronym, BTN (better than nothing). Its also a bit BTTAR (better than trans academy report) but then that’s trivial.

One requires a slightly higher level of knowledge to make comments on the Trans-Academy report. At a somewhat minimally higher level (computer-generated meanings or quotations in brackets are given in italics) Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) is a facultative (in biology it means “able to live or take place under a range of external conditions”) anaerobic (not requiring oxygen for metabolism), Gram-positive (describes bacteria that retain the color of a gentian violet stain of crystal violet when subjected to Gram's method of classifying bacteria; Gram-positive bacteria have only one membrane layer instead of the usual two in Gram-negative bacteria) bacterium that forms characteristic protein inclusions adjacent to the endospore (the inner layer of the wall of a spore). Bt is a member of the group Bacillus cereus (Bc) from which it is genetically indistinguishable except for the genes coding for insecticidal toxins (poison produced by a living organism that accumulates in the body and causes it harm) that is present on plasmids (small circles of DNA that replicates itself independently of chromosomal DNA, especially in the cells of bacteria. Plasmids often contain genes for drug resistance and are used in genetic engineering, since they can be transmitted between bacteria of the same and different species) in the former.


In a review in 1998 by Schnepf et al it was stated “We are not aware of any critical experiments directed towards understanding bacterial toxin gene expression within the gut of a susceptible pest.” Later in 2008 in an article on Rules of Engagement: Interspecies Interactions that Regulate Microbial Communities by Little et al it is written in the abstract “little is known about their structure and function, and predictive modeling is limited by a dearth of comprehensive ecological principles that describe microbial community processes.

From the above uncertainties it could seem Bt technology is a case of fools rushing in (in generation time scales) where angels fear to tread. There seems to be little evidence to the contrary.

The genomic data so far available does not reveal “ … the genetic relationships of the species themselves …” even if there “… is a very clear division of the virulence (the quality of being extremely poisonous, infectious, or damaging, or the extent to which a disease or toxin possesses this quality) characteristics and the known virulence genes.” It has also been pointed out that “… genomic relationship between the B. thuringiensis strains is not necessarily defined only by their toxic specificity, but by a series of attributes, such as cry gene content, crystal morphology, and plasmid pattern.” Distinguishing unequivocally between the various phenetic (a system of biological classification based on overall similarities between organisms) and genetic traits is a problem that persists.

No assessment of Bt (Bacillus thuringeinsis) can be considered complete unless unequivocal answers are obtained for some niggling doubts as in some of the above questions have been conveniently answered, The literature has its doubts. The MEF need not feel embarrassed if they have their own doubts and are unconvinced.

So! Why should there not be a concern now?!!

The chief well known concern is that for the first time, there will be mass use of a trans-genic (A transgenic species is an organism that has had part of another organism's DNA transferred into it using recombinant DNA technology.) manipulation when a section of this insecticide will be transplanted into the seed of a plant that we eat. That is also not too much of an unmanageable thing.

Perhaps a little more detail about the way the Bt bacteria acts could provide some more food for introspection and revision. The Bt bacteria, like other bacteria form spores (dormant resistant forms taken by some bacteria in response to adverse conditions) during the dormant stage of the bacterial life cycle especially when it is under environmental stress. Unlike many other bacteria, the spores of Bt are accompanied by protein crystals which are the toxic components of Bt. When the insect’s guts are infested by Bt, the crystal dissolves in the guts. The high pH and reducing environment in the insect midgut helps in dissolving the crystal into prototoxin subunits of ~130,000-Da (Dalton ~ the weight of one hydrogen atom). The prototoxin is then digested by pancreatic (from pancreas : a large elongated glandular organ lying near the stomach. It secretes juices into the small intestine and the hormones insulin, glucagon, and somatostatin into the bloodstream) trypsin-like proteases (enzymes that break down proteins and peptides by catalyzing the hydrolysis of peptide bonds) to form the activated toxin which is half the size of the prototoxin and is resistant to further trypsin digestion. This trypsin-resistant core binds to specific receptors on the insect midgut (the central section of the digestive tract in which the processes of digestion and absorption take place) and forms a pore by the lysis (destruction of cells by disruption of the bounding membrane, allowing the cell contents to escape) of epithelial (describes tissue that forms a thin protective layer on exposed bodily surfaces and forms the lining of internal cavities, ducts, and organs) cells in the midgut. These membranes maintain the gut’s ion balance. Because of this midgut disruption the ion balance is destroyed; the insect is paralyzed and soon dies. This is the direct action.The Bacillus thuringiensis germinate and grow in the midgut of the dead insect. When the direct action fails, the Bt continues with its vegetative growth, when spores germinate to make more spores. This infects the whole body and kills the insect.

There is a line in the UNEP-ILO-WHO report which says “However, it should be noted that vegetative Bt has the potential for the production of Bc-like toxins, the significance of which as a cause of human disease is not known.”

Sticking to the point of crystallization under stress it should be mentioned that the Nobel prize for chemistry on the crystal structure of ribonuclease was partly possible because large crystals are obtained from organisms (bacteria) living in extremely hot or saline conditions. Living organisms seem to crystallize under stress. In the case of the Bt bacteria the crystals yield the poisonous insecticidal toxins.

The production of crystals is not so for some insects such as butterflies themselves. For them crystals add to their colours. I knew about it first from the laboratory in Bologna headed by Carlo Taliani. The laboratory was taking its first steps then in nano-structured materials for photonics and butterfly wings were being studied in Fabio Biscarini’s group. Butterfly wings have nano structures with sizes close to the wavelength of light; they act as diffraction gratings allowing light with a single color to be reflected depending on the crystal size. A Yale team found “… that the outer membranes of the butterfly wing scale cells grow and fold into the interior of the cells. The membranes then form a double gyroid — or two, mirror-image networks shaped by the outer and inner cell membranes. … Chitin is then deposited in the outer gyroid to create a single solid crystal. The cell then dies, leaving behind the crystal nanostructures on the butterfly wing.

Butterfly crystals is certainly little more to be cherished than the Bt protein crystals, which serve their own purpose in a larger ecosystem of the Gaya kind.

An article by Schnepf et al on Bacillus thuringiensis and Its Pesticidal Crystal Proteins in Microbiol Mol Biol Rev. 1998 that has been cited more than 1300 times has statements such as “… mutations in different … regions, sometimes involving the same type of amino acid residue, can have a different effect on binding. … same mutation in a toxin can have quite different results on different insects.
… a lack of correlation between receptor binding affinity and insecticidal activity—are now known
… while … the affinity of Cry1Ab was not directly related to toxin activity, they did observe a direct correlation between the irreversible binding rate and toxicity.
Different toxins may have the same amino acid sequence in the loops of domain II (e.g., Cry1Ab and Cry1Ac) yet bind to different receptors”.

Such statements should have alerted the scientific academies to dangers of genetic manipulations and (at least, in my opinion) extreme caution should have been advised. According to a report by Prof. Gilles-Eric Séralini (commissioned by GreenPeace India) of Committee for Independent Research and Information on Genetic Engineering (CRIIGEN), France, crystal protein for Bt brinjal is a chimeric transgene that is modified to produce a chimeric insecticide toxin containing Cry1ab and Cry1Ac sequences. Earlier, it has always been referred to as Cry1Ac (a protein) in every regulatory document. This chimeric toxin was not used for toxicity tests on target and non-target insects but an improper Cry1Ac toxin was used because this control was easier.

I think Séralini’s point is perfectly valid.

Professor Padmanabhan (a scientist I regard highly) writes in response that the chimeric transgene is 99.4% identical to cry1Ac gene and the 0.6% difference is due to replacement of one amino-acid in the entire sequence. Padmnabhan further adds a personal note by saying that “... every parameter assessed from gene flow in non-target organisms to duration of the animal experimentation studies has been questioned, revealing a mind set to oppose anyway.”

Seralini asserts as a response to this defence about the chimeric transgene in capital that THIS TOXIN IS NOT EXACTLY CRY1Ac AND SHOULD BE REASSESSED PROPERLY, THIS IS CRUCIAL. I will agree with Seralini’s statement that “… only one amino-acid change in a protein may have a folding and a pathological incidence, like in pathogenic prion or several genetic diseases.” The activity of a protein is determined, I learn, more by the nature of the folded state that is very sensitively dependent on the actual sequence and not in the similarity of the sequence.

As Seralini says (in a bad translation of his French, I am sure) : “We are not in an approximate proof of a research but in common life potentially feeding billions of humans and animals!!”. I am sure we know what Seralini actually said.

Pushpa Bhargava would say on the same point “… they said, there is a 99.4% homology to Cry 1 Ac, so they are calling it Cry 1 Ac, only 1 amino acid is different. Now if it is 99.4% homology then 6 amino acids have to be different. It doesn't need too much knowledge of biochemistry to understand that.” Bhargava would add “So they are telling lie after lie everywhere.”

Objectivity is lost in such subjective innuendos. Scientific subterfuge of the CWG kind is revealed. Pawar adds to such malice-mongering by criticizing the critics of Bt brinjal with “India imports 40 per cent of its edible oil requirement and that is largely produced through genetically-modified soyabean. It’s quite ironical that when NGOs from the edible oil producing countries are quiet on this issue, they are providing feed to the NGOs in the country against Bt Brinjal.

The point to note here is that if Bt Brinjal is in cold storage, why is Bt soya oil not? Instead the Government (read Pawar) has lifted all restrictions such as GM certification for import of soya oil from Brazil and Argentina where there is no restriction on the use of the GM seeds. Where was the Minister for Environment and Forests? It is not sufficient to say that “… oil extracted from GM soya seeds does not contain traces of proteins which are harmful to human beings.

Once we go through the above, the possible ill effects of the CWG syndrome on our life itself start bothering me.

We don’t have to know who said: “Who can believe that a new genetically engineered fruit producing an uncharacterized insecticide may be given to millions without being tested more than three months on rats?

Only a monkey king would be allowed to give such a fruit?.

Will we as scientists act responsibly and make a good and competent world class statement that is clean at every nook and corner? Or will we , like the CWG, be monkeys (only from a monkey culture point of view without any disrespect intended either to the monkeys or their descendants) comfortable in the hierarchical culture that will throw a blame on some monkey king?

The trans-academy report has all the signature of doing so. Jairam Ramesh deserves a little better.

The Bt problem is a complex one in which many parameters are involved. There are many things that we require worrying about, even if we may think we have other future happier lives. The damage that may be caused could end the way we like to live forever. We can safely come to this conclusion going by the way we have handled global warming (including taking credit for Pachuri’s Nobel), dengue epidemic, city planning and so on.

With Bt brinjal in the air we can’t look at a brinjal in the eye anymore.

Intensive versus Extensive Knowledge

It does not mean that being an expert in a small aspect, even if it is a fundamentally important aspect, implies that one can apply this intensive expertise correctly to more complex extensive systems.

One may say, like Weisskopf did “… intensive research goes for the fundamental laws, extensive research goes for the explanation of phenomena in terms of known fundamental laws.” To this Nobel Laureate extraordinaire, P. W. Anderson, puts the rejoinder (in More than Matter, Science, 177, 393, before his Nobel Prize) “… The ability to reduce everything to simple fundamental laws does not imply the ability to start from those laws and reconstruct the universe. In fact, the more the elementary particle physicists tell us about the nature of the fundamental laws, the less relevance they seem to have to the very real problems of the rest of science, much less to those of society.

Anderson was cautioning against the intensive-extensive reductionist approach. It is perhaps pertinent in the context of living systems that he starts this article with “The workings of our minds and bodies, and of all the animate or inanimate matter of which we have any detailed knowledge, are assumed to be controlled by the same set of fundamental laws, which except under certain extreme conditions we feel we know pretty well.” The difficulty is that we acknowledge this part as scientists but hesitate to acknowledge exceptions; this is so especially if one is a professional scientist or environmentalist.

The title of a report containing the words "trans-academy report" sounds as if it is a learned report written by experts with good intensive knowledge.

The minister finds it not so, as any interested person should find.

When one is considering the Bt problem, one should not camouflage the social concerns by putting on a mask of high-sounding technical cacophony in place of extensive knowledge.