A new genetic technology that could one day allow farmers to activate or deactivate traits in agricultural crops such as wheat and canola generated a lot of debate but little consensus at the Western Canada Crop Production Show in Saskatoon last week.
GURTs, or genetic use restriction technologies, are still in the developmental phase and may not be commercially available for years.
The technology, which acts like a genetic switch, would enable producers and seed companies to control certain traits by applying chemicals that activate or suppress specific genetic characteristics in a plant.
Read Also
Stacking Canada up on gene editing livestock
Canada may want to gauge how Argentina and other countries have approached gene editing in livestock and what that has meant for local innovation.
For example, a GURT system could be used to produce plants with unique oil profiles or nutritional components, thereby making the crop suitable for specialized food, industrial or biofuel applications.
GURTs could also be used to grow plants that produce sterile seeds, giving bioscience companies greater control over their intellectual property.
During a panel discussion at the annual meeting of the Saskatchewan Seed Growers Association, a variety of concerns were expressed by farmers, seed growers, producer organizations and bioscience companies.
And not surprisingly, much of the debate surrounding the new technology centered on one key question: who stands to benefit if the technology is introduced?
Marvin Shauf, a farmer and representative of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, said there is little doubt that the introduction of GURTs could benefit some stakeholders in the agricultural community.
But he urged bioscience companies and federal plant regulators to take a cautious approach with the technology and ensure that foreign markets for Canadian crops are not jeopardized.
“When it comes to the introduction of new technologies in general, (the CFA’s) position is to take a balanced approach,” Shauf said.
“But a really big question and probably one of the more controversial issues pertaining to this type of technology is does the international marketplace accept this technology?”
Using genetically modified wheat as an example, Shauf said the introduction of GM crops could affect overseas buyers and undermine Canada’s position in the global marketplace.
He also expressed concerns about genetic outcrossing and commingling of GURT-based crops with conventional crops, particularly in bulk handling systems.
“Who are the beneficiaries of these new technologies? What are the producer risks?” Shauf said.
Denise Dewar, representing Crop Life Canada, agreed that care must be taken to ensure that farmers benefit from the introduction of new technologies.
Asked if bioscience companies could ensure that GURTs will benefit farmers economically, Dewar said there were no guarantees.
“What I can guarantee though, is that if a product sucks in the marketplace, a farmer is not going to buy it a second time. So, it behooves the bioscience industry to bring forward products and technologies that are going to be of value to the farmer and that the marketplace is going to accept.”
Dewar said the introduction of GM canola illustrates how new technologies can benefit producers.
“Canadian farmers have voted with their seeders (on GM canola),” she said.
“They have bought this technology and they continue to buy (it).”
Dewar also urged federal regulators to prepare for the commercialization of GURTs and she stressed the need for Ottawa to eliminate regulatory hurdles that discourage investment and innovation in agriculture.
“Canada used to be a go-to place for innovation, (but) we’re not anymore,” she said.
“We’re letting other countries get ahead of us … and we need to make it more attractive for (big companies) to do business here.”
