Whither the Flavr Savr tomato? Fruits of biotechnology struggle to emerge

California Agriculture magazine
April-June 2004

The first genetically engineered crop to be sold in supermarkets was the Flavr Savr tomato in 1994. But a decade later no biotech tomatoes are for sale in the United States, nor are virtually any other biotech horticultural crops. Why have genetically engineered field crops ­- such as soybeans, corn, canola and cotton -­ been wildly successful, each capturing large market shares, while biotech horticultural crops have all but disappeared?

Peer-reviewed articles published in the April-June 2004 issue of the University of California's California Agriculture journal explore the reasons why genetically engineered field (also called "agronomic") crops have succeeded in the U.S. market, while the commercialization of horticultural crops has virtually ground to a halt. Field testing of horticultural crops ­- including fruits, vegetables, nuts and ornamentals ­- has plummeted. In 1999, 374 field-test permits or notifications were filed for biotech horticultural crops; in 2003, the number was 94. By contrast, during the same period field permits for biotech cotton, corn and soybeans remained steady at about 500 annually.

The April-June 2004 California Agriculture (see table of contents below) can be downloaded at http://californiaagriculture.ucop.edu/pressroom.html. For a hard copy, e-mail pamela.kan-rice@ucop.edu.

"There are numerous examples of biotech horticultural crops that have performed well in the laboratory and in field tests, but have never been brought to market or were removed from the market after commercialization," says Kent Bradford, director of the Seed Biotechnology Center at UC Davis, and faculty co-chair of the 64-page California Agriculture issue. These include fungus-resistant strawberries, virus-resistant pumpkins and potatoes, and "trap crops" for tree fruits and nuts. Trap crops divert insect pests from the main crops.

The April-June 2004 California Agriculture delves into the myriad reasons for this phenomenon, including:

• Horticultural crops consist of numerous, diverse varieties (such as dozens of kinds of lettuce), which increases research and development costs. Agronomic crops, by contrast, often have fewer varieties that are planted over larger acreages.
• Too few acres of horticultural crops are planted to make the business model profitable for large life-sciences companies, as opposed to millions of acres planted in field crops.
• Each gene-insertion "event" ­- even in different varieties of the same crop ­- must receive separate regulatory approval from three U.S. government agencies, an expensive and time-consuming process.
• Commodity groups have been hesitant to pursue genetically engineered varieties, which they often believe may jeopardize sales of non-biotech varieties.
• Intellectual property rights for genetically engineered crops are owned by many different people and firms, and are difficult to acquire. Most basic research on biotech horticultural crops is conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and land-grant universities, which generally do not have the resources to gather and negotiate the necessary patents and other rights.

• A review of consumer-survey research to date finds that most consumers are ignorant about agricultural biotechnology, but those who know about it are evenly split for and against, with a small group being vehemently opposed. In surveys, most consumers say they would prefer that biotech foods be labeled.
• China is aggressively pursuing biotechnology research for its agriculture, including horticultural crops.
• A new national consortium of land-grant universities and government agencies, called the Public Intellectual Property Resource for Agriculture (PIPRA), seeks to address the intellectual property difficulties by pooling resources; the $1 million initiative will be headquartered at UC Davis.

RESEARCH ARTICLES

Horticultural biotechnology faces significant economic and market barriers (Alston)
High costs for R&D and regulatory approval ­- as well as market resistance, small acreages and diverse varieties -­ limit the scope for profitable investments in hort biotech.
*Transgenic produce slow to enter evolving global marketplace (Cook)
*Diversity of horticultural biotech crops contributes to market hurdles (Bradford, Alston)
 
Despite benefits, commercialization of transgenic horticultural crops lags (Clark, Klee, Dandekar)
Food crops are transformed for built-in pest control and delayed ripening, while flowers and ornamentals have improved colors, scents and life spans.
*Virus-resistant transgenic papaya helps save Hawaiian industry (Gonsalves)
*Biotechnology expands pest-management options for horticulture (Gianessi)
*Transgenic trap crops and rootstocks show potential (Driver, Castillón, Dandekar)
 
Consumer knowledge and acceptance of agricultural biotechnology vary (James)
Telephone surveys reveal limited awareness and knowledge of agricultural biotechnology and lack of consensus about whether it is good or bad.
*Words matter (Herrmann, Warland, Sterngold)
*Consumers purchase Bt sweet corn (James)
 
Regulatory challenges reduce opportunities for horticultural biotechnology (Redenbaugh, McHughen)
New transgenic varieties must meet a bevy of requirements, often raising costs so that development for horticultural crops is uneconomical.
*IR-4 Project targets specialty crops (Holm, Kunkel)
*China aggressively pursuing horticulture and plant biotechnology (Huang, Rozelle)
 
Public-private partnerships needed in horticultural research and development (Rausser, Ameden)
Consortia of horticulture companies and university researchers can aid biotech product development; partners must respect academic freedom.
 
Access to intellectual property is a major obstacle to developing transgenic horticultural crops (Graff et al.)
Biotech crop developers must compile intellectual property rights from myriad sources; a new group will improve IP access for public-sector research.
*Nonprofit institutions form intellectual-property resource for agriculture (Delmer)
 
California Agriculture is the University of California's peer-reviewed journal of research in agricultural, human and natural resources. For a free subscription, go to http://CaliforniaAgriculture.ucop.edu, call (510) 987-0044 or write to calag@ucop.edu.