scholarly journals Small RNA Based Genetic Engineering for Plant Viral Resistance: Application in Crop Protection

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annum Khalid ◽  
Qingling Zhang ◽  
Muhammad Yasir ◽  
Feng Li
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Engineering ◽  
Small Rna ◽  
Crop Protection ◽  
Viral Resistance

Plant viruses: A tool-box for genetic engineering and crop protection

BioEssays ◽  
1989 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 179-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Michael ◽  
A. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Engineering ◽  
Crop Protection ◽  
Plant Viruses

Genetic engineering of CHO cells for viral resistance to minute virus of mice

2016 ◽  
Vol 114 (3) ◽  
pp. 576-588 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joaquina X. Mascarenhas ◽  
Nikolay Korokhov ◽  
Lisa Burger ◽  
Ademola Kassim ◽  
Jason Tuter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Engineering ◽  
Cho Cells ◽  
Viral Resistance ◽  
Minute Virus Of Mice ◽  
Minute Virus

Genetic Engineering of Cultivated Rice for Viral Resistance

2020 ◽  
pp. 79-92
Author(s):  
Devarajan Thangadurai ◽  
Ravichandra Hospet ◽  
Jeyabalan Sangeetha ◽  
Steffi Simmi Maxim ◽  
Saher Islam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Engineering ◽  
Viral Resistance ◽  
Cultivated Rice

Impact of genetic engineering on crop protection

1984 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 399-408 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luca Comai ◽  
David M. Stalker
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Engineering ◽  
Crop Protection

scholarly journals Genetic engineering at the heart of agroecology

2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lambertus AP Lotz ◽  
Clemens CM van de Wiel ◽  
Marinus JM Smulders
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Engineering ◽  
Late Blight ◽  
Cultural Values ◽  
Crop Protection ◽  
Informed Choice ◽  
Scientific Discipline ◽  
Genetically Engineered ◽  
Pests And Diseases ◽  
Norms And Values ◽  
Conventional Systems

We discuss whether genetic engineering and agroecology are compatible. For this, we investigated three cases of genetically engineered crops and considered agroecology as scientific discipline as well as a social movement. One case was the use of cisgenic modifications to make potato durably resistant to late blight, the second was the use of CRISPR/Cas to make rice resistant to bacterial blight and as a third case, we evaluated experiences with cultivating transgenic Bt crops. These cases demonstrated that genetic engineering offers opportunities to grow crops in novel integrated pest management (IPM) systems with, as direct benefit, a decrease in the use of chemical crop protection agents, and as indirect effect that the role of predators and biological control agents can become more important than in present conventional systems based on pesticides. We used a framework based on four concerns (both cons and pros) that were gathered from an extensive societal interaction organized around the Dutch research project DuRPh, which produced a proof-of-concept of a cisgenic late blight-resistant potato. We concluded that genetic engineering and agroecology certainly have synergy in the context of agroecology as science, when applied to making crops less vulnerable to pests and diseases and when combined with cultivation using IPM. By contrast, within the movement context, genetically engineered varieties may be welcomed if they include traits that contribute to successful IPM schemes and are socially benign. Whether they would actually be deemed desirable or acceptable will, however, vary depending on the norms and values of the social movements. We propose that some concerns may be reconcilable in a dialogue. Deontological arguments such as naturalness are more difficult to reconcile, as they relate to deeply felt ethical or cultural values. A step forward would be when also for these arguments everyone can make an informed choice and when these choices can coexist in a respectful manner.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document