Slashdot Mirror


Weird New Fruits Could Hit Aisles Soon Thanks To Gene Editing (theguardian.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Guardian: Smooth or hairy, pungent or tasteless, deep-hued or bright: new versions of old fruits could be hitting the produce aisles as plant experts embrace cutting-edge technology, scientists say. While researchers have previously produced plants with specific traits through traditional breeding techniques, experts say new technologies such as the gene-editing tool Crispr-Cas9 could be used to bring about changes far more rapidly and efficiently. Among the genes flagged in the new study in the journal Trends in Plant Science are those behind the production of a family of substances known as MYBs, which are among the proteins that control whether other genes are switched on or off.

"MYBs are great targets because they are central to several consumer traits or features like color, flavor [and] texture," said Andrew Allan, a co-author of the review from the University of Auckland whose own projects include working on red-fleshed apples and changing the color of kiwi fruits. "Russet skin in apple and pear [is linked to MYBs]. Hairs on peaches but not nectarines -- another type of MYB." Dr Richard Harrison, head of genetics, genomics and breeding at the horticultural organization NIAB EMR, who was not involved in the article, said tweaking MYB genes or the way such genes are themselves controlled was a fruitful approach. Gene-editing of MYB genes and other genes could bring a host of benefits, Harrison said, adding: "There is a large opportunity to improve the nutritional profile of fruits and vegetables in the future using gene-editing technology, as well as other techniques." Such techniques, he said, introduce the same sort of DNA changes as plant breeders have introduced by artificially selecting traits that cropped up through spontaneous DNA mutation -- but much faster.
Next week, the European Court of Justice will decide if or how plants that have been gene-edited will be regulated, and whether they will be treated like genetically modified plants. In April, the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced it will no longer regulate genetically altered plants, so long as the changes could have been produced through traditional plant-breeding techniques.

9 of 307 comments (clear)

  1. Thanks to gene editing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'll have more stuff to avoid at the grocery store. Thanks Science!

    1. Re:Thanks to gene editing by Gilgaron · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This isn't putting fruit fly genes in your grapes, this is editing the grape genome with intention rather than depending on blind luck. The other produce at the store you're eating was mutated with radiation, unless you're only eating heirloom varieties.

  2. Don't care if it is labelled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't care how badly they mutilate the fruits and veggies JUST SO LONG AS THEY ARE LABELLED AS GMO. Let the market sort it out. What are the corporations hiding that they would fight tooth and nail against labels? Don't people have a simple right to know what they are buying and eating?

    1. Re:Don't care if it is labelled by gravewax · · Score: 4, Insightful

      why? most of what you eat has been genetically modified by humans, either through selective breeding for animals or crops, very few things we eat today are in the state they existed when discovered. The only difference with this particular method is it is faster and less error prone. So really almost everything should be labelled as GMO.

    2. Re:Don't care if it is labelled by Aighearach · · Score: 2, Insightful

      For the reason of having choice, that's all you have to worry about. We're asking for information so we can choose, we're not inviting you to try to choose for us, or to tell us you disagree with our choices. We might also disagree with your choices.

    3. Re: Don't care if it is labelled by skoskav · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's what makes the labeling arbitrary. Labeling mutation breeding or hybridization is never brought up, which is arguably less predictable and safe, presumably because people would realize that everything they eat, including their favorite brands, has been substantially mutated from their "natural" state.

      Unjustifiably labeling GMO can sway uninformed people into incorrect assumptions, such as equating it to dangerous products and ingredients that are also labeled in many countries, like tobacco, alcohol and allergens.

  3. Re:Unlikely. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Tastes of fruit and vege have changed a lot over the decades. Thing is: consumers don't buy based on taste, they buy based on appearance and consistency. Hence rather than cool new fruit with mind-boggling flavours we get amazing looking tomatoes that bounce without bruising and taste like compressed cardboard and disappointment.

    My prediction: same with crispr. Not new fruit, just hardier, blander, more generic versions of what we have already.

  4. Re: Unlikely. by Ranbot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    No need to ban GMO. Just clearly label it. No one will buy it, and the frankenfarmers will go out of business.

    We should also label all irradiated food, and all those atomic farmers will go out of business! https://www.fda.gov/food/resou...

    Labels on foods without any scientific basis do nothing but scare ignorant people.

  5. Re: Unlikely. by bws111 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    People are opposed to labeling because it is pointless. OK, you want to know how your food is produced. Big deal. Why stop at whether or not it is GMO? I want to know what companies produced the tractors that were used in the production of my food. I demand a label! I want to know what nationalities of the people who handle the food are. Label it! I want to know what wages are paid to the workers in the fields. Label it! I want to know who sold the seeds to the farmer. Label it! I could come up with many more examples of stupid things people might 'want to know', each as pointless as knowing if it is GMO.