Last updated

Faculty of Food Engineering and Biotechnology Faculty of Food Engineering and Biotechnology 4.jpg
Faculty of Food Engineering and Biotechnology

Biotechnology is a multidisciplinary field that involves the integration of natural sciences and engineering sciences in order to achieve the application of organisms and parts thereof for products and services. [1]


The term biotechnology was first used by Károly Ereky in 1919 [2] to refer to the production of products from raw materials with the aid of living organisms. The core principle of biotechnology involves harnessing biological systems and organisms, such as bacteria, yeast, and plants, to perform specific tasks or produce valuable substances.

Biotechnology had a significant impact on many areas of society, from medicine to agriculture to environmental science. One of the key techniques used in biotechnology is genetic engineering, which allows scientists to modify the genetic makeup of organisms to achieve desired outcomes. This can involve inserting genes from one organism into another, and consequently, create new traits or modifying existing ones. [3]

Other important techniques used in biotechnology include tissue culture, which allows researchers to grow cells and tissues in the lab for research and medical purposes, and fermentation, which is used to produce a wide range of products such as beer, wine, and cheese.

The applications of biotechnology are diverse and have led to the development of essential products like life-saving drugs, biofuels, genetically modified crops, and innovative materials. [4] It has also been used to address environmental challenges, such as developing biodegradable plastics and using microorganisms to clean up contaminated sites.

Biotechnology is a rapidly evolving field with significant potential to address pressing global challenges and improve the quality of life for people around the world; however, despite its numerous benefits, it also poses ethical and societal challenges, such as questions around genetic modification and intellectual property rights. As a result, there is ongoing debate and regulation surrounding the use and application of biotechnology in various industries and fields. [5]


The concept of biotechnology encompasses a wide range of procedures for modifying living organisms for human purposes, going back to domestication of animals, cultivation of the plants, and "improvements" to these through breeding programs that employ artificial selection and hybridization. Modern usage also includes genetic engineering, as well as cell and tissue culture technologies. The American Chemical Society defines biotechnology as the application of biological organisms, systems, or processes by various industries to learning about the science of life and the improvement of the value of materials and organisms, such as pharmaceuticals, crops, and livestock. [6] As per the European Federation of Biotechnology, biotechnology is the integration of natural science and organisms, cells, parts thereof, and molecular analogues for products and services. [7] Biotechnology is based on the basic biological sciences (e.g., molecular biology, biochemistry, cell biology, embryology, genetics, microbiology) and conversely provides methods to support and perform basic research in biology.

Biotechnology is the research and development in the laboratory using bioinformatics for exploration, extraction, exploitation, and production from any living organisms and any source of biomass by means of biochemical engineering where high value-added products could be planned (reproduced by biosynthesis, for example), forecasted, formulated, developed, manufactured, and marketed for the purpose of sustainable operations (for the return from bottomless initial investment on R & D) and gaining durable patents rights (for exclusives rights for sales, and prior to this to receive national and international approval from the results on animal experiment and human experiment, especially on the pharmaceutical branch of biotechnology to prevent any undetected side-effects or safety concerns by using the products). [8] [9] [10] The utilization of biological processes, organisms or systems to produce products that are anticipated to improve human lives is termed biotechnology. [11]

By contrast, bioengineering is generally thought of as a related field that more heavily emphasizes higher systems approaches (not necessarily the altering or using of biological materials directly) for interfacing with and utilizing living things. Bioengineering is the application of the principles of engineering and natural sciences to tissues, cells, and molecules. This can be considered as the use of knowledge from working with and manipulating biology to achieve a result that can improve functions in plants and animals. [12] Relatedly, biomedical engineering is an overlapping field that often draws upon and applies biotechnology (by various definitions), especially in certain sub-fields of biomedical or chemical engineering such as tissue engineering, biopharmaceutical engineering, and genetic engineering.


Brewing was an early application of biotechnology. The Brewer designed and engraved in the Sixteenth. Century by J Amman.png
Brewing was an early application of biotechnology.

Although not normally what first comes to mind, many forms of human-derived agriculture clearly fit the broad definition of "utilizing a biotechnological system to make products". Indeed, the cultivation of plants may be viewed as the earliest biotechnological enterprise.

Agriculture has been theorized to have become the dominant way of producing food since the Neolithic Revolution. Through early biotechnology, the earliest farmers selected and bred the best-suited crops (e.g., those with the highest yields) to produce enough food to support a growing population. As crops and fields became increasingly large and difficult to maintain, it was discovered that specific organisms and their by-products could effectively fertilize, restore nitrogen, and control pests. Throughout the history of agriculture, farmers have inadvertently altered the genetics of their crops through introducing them to new environments and breeding them with other plants — one of the first forms of biotechnology.[ clarification needed ]

These processes also were included in early fermentation of beer. [13] These processes were introduced in early Mesopotamia, Egypt, China and India, and still use the same basic biological methods. In brewing, malted grains (containing enzymes) convert starch from grains into sugar and then adding specific yeasts to produce beer. In this process, carbohydrates in the grains broke down into alcohols, such as ethanol. Later, other cultures produced the process of lactic acid fermentation, which produced other preserved foods, such as soy sauce. Fermentation was also used in this time period to produce leavened bread. Although the process of fermentation was not fully understood until Louis Pasteur's work in 1857, it is still the first use of biotechnology to convert a food source into another form.

Before the time of Charles Darwin's work and life, animal and plant scientists had already used selective breeding. Darwin added to that body of work with his scientific observations about the ability of science to change species. These accounts contributed to Darwin's theory of natural selection. [14]

For thousands of years, humans have used selective breeding to improve the production of crops and livestock to use them for food. In selective breeding, organisms with desirable characteristics are mated to produce offspring with the same characteristics. For example, this technique was used with corn to produce the largest and sweetest crops. [15]

In the early twentieth century scientists gained a greater understanding of microbiology and explored ways of manufacturing specific products. In 1917, Chaim Weizmann first used a pure microbiological culture in an industrial process, that of manufacturing corn starch using Clostridium acetobutylicum, to produce acetone, which the United Kingdom desperately needed to manufacture explosives during World War I. [16]

Biotechnology has also led to the development of antibiotics. In 1928, Alexander Fleming discovered the mold Penicillium . His work led to the purification of the antibiotic compound formed by the mold by Howard Florey, Ernst Boris Chain and Norman Heatley – to form what we today know as penicillin. In 1940, penicillin became available for medicinal use to treat bacterial infections in humans. [15]

The field of modern biotechnology is generally thought of as having been born in 1971 when Paul Berg's (Stanford) experiments in gene splicing had early success. Herbert W. Boyer (Univ. Calif. at San Francisco) and Stanley N. Cohen (Stanford) significantly advanced the new technology in 1972 by transferring genetic material into a bacterium, such that the imported material would be reproduced. The commercial viability of a biotechnology industry was significantly expanded on June 16, 1980, when the United States Supreme Court ruled that a genetically modified microorganism could be patented in the case of Diamond v. Chakrabarty . [17] Indian-born Ananda Chakrabarty, working for General Electric, had modified a bacterium (of the genus Pseudomonas ) capable of breaking down crude oil, which he proposed to use in treating oil spills. (Chakrabarty's work did not involve gene manipulation but rather the transfer of entire organelles between strains of the Pseudomonas bacterium).

The MOSFET (metal–oxide–semiconductor field-effect transistor) was invented by Mohamed M. Atalla and Dawon Kahng in 1959. [18] Two years later, Leland C. Clark and Champ Lyons invented the first biosensor in 1962. [19] [20] Biosensor MOSFETs were later developed, and they have since been widely used to measure physical, chemical, biological and environmental parameters. [21] The first BioFET was the ion-sensitive field-effect transistor (ISFET), invented by Piet Bergveld in 1970. [22] [23] It is a special type of MOSFET, [21] where the metal gate is replaced by an ion-sensitive membrane, electrolyte solution and reference electrode. [24] The ISFET is widely used in biomedical applications, such as the detection of DNA hybridization, biomarker detection from blood, antibody detection, glucose measurement, pH sensing, and genetic technology. [24]

By the mid-1980s, other BioFETs had been developed, including the gas sensor FET (GASFET), pressure sensor FET (PRESSFET), chemical field-effect transistor (ChemFET), reference ISFET (REFET), enzyme-modified FET (ENFET) and immunologically modified FET (IMFET). [21] By the early 2000s, BioFETs such as the DNA field-effect transistor (DNAFET), gene-modified FET (GenFET) and cell-potential BioFET (CPFET) had been developed. [24]

A factor influencing the biotechnology sector's success is improved intellectual property rights legislation—and enforcement—worldwide, as well as strengthened demand for medical and pharmaceutical products to cope with an ageing, and ailing, U.S. population. [25]

Rising demand for biofuels is expected to be good news for the biotechnology sector, with the Department of Energy estimating ethanol usage could reduce U.S. petroleum-derived fuel consumption by up to 30% by 2030. The biotechnology sector has allowed the U.S. farming industry to rapidly increase its supply of corn and soybeans—the main inputs into biofuels—by developing genetically modified seeds that resist pests and drought. By increasing farm productivity, biotechnology boosts biofuel production. [26]


Biotechnology has applications in four major industrial areas, including health care (medical), crop production and agriculture, non-food (industrial) uses of crops and other products (e.g., biodegradable plastics, vegetable oil, biofuels), and environmental uses.

For example, one application of biotechnology is the directed use of microorganisms for the manufacture of organic products (examples include beer and milk products). Another example is using naturally present bacteria by the mining industry in bioleaching. Biotechnology is also used to recycle, treat waste, clean up sites contaminated by industrial activities (bioremediation), and also to produce biological weapons.

A series of derived terms have been coined to identify several branches of biotechnology, for example:


In medicine, modern biotechnology has many applications in areas such as pharmaceutical drug discoveries and production, pharmacogenomics, and genetic testing (or genetic screening). In 2021, nearly 40% of the total company value of pharmaceutical biotech companies worldwide were active in Oncology with Neurology and Rare Diseases being the other two big applications. [37]

DNA microarray chip - some can do as many as a million blood tests at once. Microarray2.gif
DNA microarray chip – some can do as many as a million blood tests at once.

Pharmacogenomics (a combination of pharmacology and genomics) is the technology that analyses how genetic makeup affects an individual's response to drugs. [38] Researchers in the field investigate the influence of genetic variation on drug responses in patients by correlating gene expression or single-nucleotide polymorphisms with a drug's efficacy or toxicity. [39] The purpose of pharmacogenomics is to develop rational means to optimize drug therapy, with respect to the patients' genotype, to ensure maximum efficacy with minimal adverse effects. [40] Such approaches promise the advent of "personalized medicine"; in which drugs and drug combinations are optimized for each individual's unique genetic makeup. [41] [42]

Computer-generated image of insulin hexamers highlighting the threefold symmetry, the zinc ions holding it together, and the histidine residues involved in zinc binding InsulinHexamer.jpg
Computer-generated image of insulin hexamers highlighting the threefold symmetry, the zinc ions holding it together, and the histidine residues involved in zinc binding

Biotechnology has contributed to the discovery and manufacturing of traditional small molecule pharmaceutical drugs as well as drugs that are the product of biotechnology – biopharmaceutics. Modern biotechnology can be used to manufacture existing medicines relatively easily and cheaply. The first genetically engineered products were medicines designed to treat human diseases. To cite one example, in 1978 Genentech developed synthetic humanized insulin by joining its gene with a plasmid vector inserted into the bacterium Escherichia coli . Insulin, widely used for the treatment of diabetes, was previously extracted from the pancreas of abattoir animals (cattle or pigs). The genetically engineered bacteria are able to produce large quantities of synthetic human insulin at relatively low cost. [43] [44] Biotechnology has also enabled emerging therapeutics like gene therapy. The application of biotechnology to basic science (for example through the Human Genome Project) has also dramatically improved our understanding of biology and as our scientific knowledge of normal and disease biology has increased, our ability to develop new medicines to treat previously untreatable diseases has increased as well. [44]

Genetic testing allows the genetic diagnosis of vulnerabilities to inherited diseases, and can also be used to determine a child's parentage (genetic mother and father) or in general a person's ancestry. In addition to studying chromosomes to the level of individual genes, genetic testing in a broader sense includes biochemical tests for the possible presence of genetic diseases, or mutant forms of genes associated with increased risk of developing genetic disorders. Genetic testing identifies changes in chromosomes, genes, or proteins. [45] Most of the time, testing is used to find changes that are associated with inherited disorders. The results of a genetic test can confirm or rule out a suspected genetic condition or help determine a person's chance of developing or passing on a genetic disorder. As of 2011 several hundred genetic tests were in use. [46] [47] Since genetic testing may open up ethical or psychological problems, genetic testing is often accompanied by genetic counseling.


Genetically modified crops ("GM crops", or "biotech crops") are plants used in agriculture, the DNA of which has been modified with genetic engineering techniques. In most cases, the main aim is to introduce a new trait that does not occur naturally in the species. Biotechnology firms can contribute to future food security by improving the nutrition and viability of urban agriculture. Furthermore, the protection of intellectual property rights encourages private sector investment in agrobiotechnology.

Examples in food crops include resistance to certain pests, [48] diseases, [49] stressful environmental conditions, [50] resistance to chemical treatments (e.g. resistance to a herbicide [51] ), reduction of spoilage, [52] or improving the nutrient profile of the crop. [53] Examples in non-food crops include production of pharmaceutical agents, [54] biofuels, [55] and other industrially useful goods, [56] as well as for bioremediation. [57] [58]

Farmers have widely adopted GM technology. Between 1996 and 2011, the total surface area of land cultivated with GM crops had increased by a factor of 94, from 17,000 square kilometers (4,200,000 acres) to 1,600,000 km2 (395 million acres). [59] 10% of the world's crop lands were planted with GM crops in 2010. [59] As of 2011, 11 different transgenic crops were grown commercially on 395 million acres (160 million hectares) in 29 countries such as the US, Brazil, Argentina, India, Canada, China, Paraguay, Pakistan, South Africa, Uruguay, Bolivia, Australia, Philippines, Myanmar, Burkina Faso, Mexico and Spain. [59]

Genetically modified foods are foods produced from organisms that have had specific changes introduced into their DNA with the methods of genetic engineering. These techniques have allowed for the introduction of new crop traits as well as a far greater control over a food's genetic structure than previously afforded by methods such as selective breeding and mutation breeding. [60] Commercial sale of genetically modified foods began in 1994, when Calgene first marketed its Flavr Savr delayed ripening tomato. [61] To date most genetic modification of foods have primarily focused on cash crops in high demand by farmers such as soybean, corn, canola, and cotton seed oil. These have been engineered for resistance to pathogens and herbicides and better nutrient profiles. GM livestock have also been experimentally developed; in November 2013 none were available on the market, [62] but in 2015 the FDA approved the first GM salmon for commercial production and consumption. [63]

There is a scientific consensus [64] [65] [66] [67] that currently available food derived from GM crops poses no greater risk to human health than conventional food, [68] [69] [70] [71] [72] but that each GM food needs to be tested on a case-by-case basis before introduction. [73] [74] [75] Nonetheless, members of the public are much less likely than scientists to perceive GM foods as safe. [76] [77] [78] [79] The legal and regulatory status of GM foods varies by country, with some nations banning or restricting them, and others permitting them with widely differing degrees of regulation. [80] [81] [82] [83]

GM crops also provide a number of ecological benefits, if not used in excess. [84] Insect-resistant crops have proven to lower pesticide usage, therefore reducing the environmental impact of pesticides as a whole. [85] However, opponents have objected to GM crops per se on several grounds, including environmental concerns, whether food produced from GM crops is safe, whether GM crops are needed to address the world's food needs, and economic concerns raised by the fact these organisms are subject to intellectual property law.

Biotechnology has several applications in the realm of food security. Crops like Golden rice are engineered to have higher nutritional content, and there is potential for food products with longer shelf lives. [86] Though not a form of agricultural biotechnology, vaccines can help prevent diseases found in animal agriculture. Additionally, agricultural biotechnology can expedite breeding processes in order to yield faster results and provide greater quantities of food. [87] Transgenic biofortification in cereals has been considered as a promising method to combat malnutrition in India and other countries. [88]


Industrial biotechnology (known mainly in Europe as white biotechnology) is the application of biotechnology for industrial purposes, including industrial fermentation. It includes the practice of using cells such as microorganisms, or components of cells like enzymes, to generate industrially useful products in sectors such as chemicals, food and feed, detergents, paper and pulp, textiles and biofuels. [89] In the current decades, significant progress has been done in creating genetically modified organisms (GMOs) that enhance the diversity of applications and economical viability of industrial biotechnology. By using renewable raw materials to produce a variety of chemicals and fuels, industrial biotechnology is actively advancing towards lowering greenhouse gas emissions and moving away from a petrochemical-based economy. [90]

Synthetic biology is considered one of the essential cornerstones in industrial biotechnology due to its financial and sustainable contribution to the manufacturing sector. Jointly biotechnology and synthetic biology play a crucial role in generating cost-effective products with nature-friendly features by using bio-based production instead of fossil-based. [91] Synthetic biology can be used to engineer model microorganisms, such as Escherichia coli , by genome editing tools to enhance their ability to produce bio-based products, such as bioproduction of medicines and biofuels. [92] For instance, E. coli and Saccharomyces cerevisiae in a consortium could be used as industrial microbes to produce precursors of the chemotherapeutic agent paclitaxel by applying the metabolic engineering in a co-culture approach to exploit the benefits from the two microbes. [93]

Another example of synthetic biology applications in industrial biotechnology is the re-engineering of the metabolic pathways of E. coli by CRISPR and CRISPRi systems toward the production of a chemical known as 1,4-butanediol, which is used in fiber manufacturing. In order to produce 1,4-butanediol, the authors alter the metabolic regulation of the Escherichia coli by CRISPR to induce point mutation in the gltA gene, knockout of the sad gene, and knock-in six genes (cat1, sucD, 4hbd, cat2, bld, and bdh). Whereas CRISPRi system used to knockdown the three competing genes (gabD, ybgC, and tesB) that affect the biosynthesis pathway of 1,4-butanediol. Consequently, the yield of 1,4-butanediol significantly increased from 0.9 to 1.8 g/L. [94]


Environmental biotechnology includes various disciplines that play an essential role in reducing environmental waste and providing environmentally safe processes, such as biofiltration and biodegradation. [95] [96] The environment can be affected by biotechnologies, both positively and adversely. Vallero and others have argued that the difference between beneficial biotechnology (e.g., bioremediation is to clean up an oil spill or hazard chemical leak) versus the adverse effects stemming from biotechnological enterprises (e.g., flow of genetic material from transgenic organisms into wild strains) can be seen as applications and implications, respectively. [97] Cleaning up environmental wastes is an example of an application of environmental biotechnology; whereas loss of biodiversity or loss of containment of a harmful microbe are examples of environmental implications of biotechnology.

Many cities have installed CityTrees, which use biotechnology to filter pollutants from urban atmospheres. [98]


The regulation of genetic engineering concerns approaches taken by governments to assess and manage the risks associated with the use of genetic engineering technology, and the development and release of genetically modified organisms (GMO), including genetically modified crops and genetically modified fish. There are differences in the regulation of GMOs between countries, with some of the most marked differences occurring between the US and Europe. [99] Regulation varies in a given country depending on the intended use of the products of the genetic engineering. For example, a crop not intended for food use is generally not reviewed by authorities responsible for food safety. [100] The European Union differentiates between approval for cultivation within the EU and approval for import and processing. While only a few GMOs have been approved for cultivation in the EU a number of GMOs have been approved for import and processing. [101] The cultivation of GMOs has triggered a debate about the coexistence of GM and non-GM crops. Depending on the coexistence regulations, incentives for the cultivation of GM crops differ. [102]

Database for the GMOs used in the EU

The EUginius (European GMO Initiative for a Unified Database System) database is intended to help companies, interested private users and competent authorities to find precise information on the presence, detection and identification of GMOs used in the European Union. The information is provided in English.


In 1988, after prompting from the United States Congress, the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (National Institutes of Health) (NIGMS) instituted a funding mechanism for biotechnology training. Universities nationwide compete for these funds to establish Biotechnology Training Programs (BTPs). Each successful application is generally funded for five years then must be competitively renewed. Graduate students in turn compete for acceptance into a BTP; if accepted, then stipend, tuition and health insurance support are provided for two or three years during the course of their PhD thesis work. Nineteen institutions offer NIGMS supported BTPs. [103] Biotechnology training is also offered at the undergraduate level and in community colleges.

References and notes

  1. "Biotechnology". IUPAC Goldbook. 2014. doi: 10.1351/goldbook.B00666 . Archived from the original on January 20, 2022. Retrieved February 14, 2022.
  2. Ereky, Karl. (June 8, 1919). Biotechnologie der Fleisch-, Fett-, und Milcherzeugung im landwirtschaftlichen Grossbetriebe: für naturwissenschaftlich gebildete Landwirte verfasst. P. Parey. Archived from the original on March 5, 2016. Retrieved March 16, 2022 via Hathi Trust.
  3. "Genetic Engineering". National Human Genome Research Institute, US National Institutes of Health. December 15, 2023. Retrieved December 18, 2023.
  4. Gupta, Varsha; Sengupta, Manjistha; Prakash, Jaya; Tripathy, Baishnab Charan (October 23, 2016). "An Introduction to Biotechnology". Basic and Applied Aspects of Biotechnology: 1–21. doi:10.1007/978-981-10-0875-7_1. ISBN   978-981-10-0873-3. PMC   7119977 .
  5. O'Mathúna, Dónal P. (April 1, 2007). "Bioethics and biotechnology". Cytotechnology. 53 (1–3): 113–119. doi:10.1007/s10616-007-9053-8. ISSN   0920-9069. PMC   2267612 . PMID   19003197.
  6. "Biotechnology". American Chemical Society. Archived from the original on November 7, 2012. Retrieved March 20, 2013.
  7. "BIOTECHNOLOGY-PRINCIPLES & PROCESSES" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on August 7, 2015. Retrieved December 29, 2014.
  8. What is biotechnology?. Europabio. Retrieved on March 20, 2013.
  9. Key Biotechnology Indicators (December 2011) Archived November 8, 2012, at the Wayback Machine .
  10. "Biotechnology policies" – Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. Archived August 31, 2012, at the Wayback Machine . Retrieved on March 20, 2013.
  11. Goli, Divakar; Bhatia, Saurabh (May 2018). History, scope and development of biotechnology. IOPscience. doi: 10.1088/978-0-7503-1299-8ch1 . ISBN   978-0-7503-1299-8.
  12. What Is Bioengineering? Archived January 23, 2013, at the Wayback Machine . Retrieved on March 20, 2013.
  13. See Arnold JP (2005). Origin and History of Beer and Brewing: From Prehistoric Times to the Beginning of Brewing Science and Technology. Cleveland, Ohio: BeerBooks. p. 34. ISBN   978-0-9662084-1-2. OCLC   71834130..
  14. Cole-Turner R (2003). "Biotechnology". Encyclopedia of Science and Religion. Archived from the original on October 25, 2009. Retrieved December 7, 2014.
  15. 1 2 Thieman WJ, Palladino MA (2008). Introduction to Biotechnology. Pearson/Benjamin Cummings. ISBN   978-0-321-49145-9.
  16. Springham D, Springham G, Moses V, Cape RE (1999). Biotechnology: The Science and the Business. CRC Press. p. 1. ISBN   978-90-5702-407-8.
  17. "Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303 (1980). No. 79-139 Archived June 28, 2011, at the Wayback Machine ." United States Supreme Court. June 16, 1980. Retrieved on May 4, 2007.
  18. "1960: Metal Oxide Semiconductor (MOS) Transistor Demonstrated". The Silicon Engine: A Timeline of Semiconductors in Computers. Computer History Museum. Archived from the original on October 27, 2019. Retrieved August 31, 2019.
  19. Park, Jeho; Nguyen, Hoang Hiep; Woubit, Abdela; Kim, Moonil (2014). "Applications of Field-Effect Transistor (FET)–Type Biosensors". Applied Science and Convergence Technology . 23 (2): 61–71. doi: 10.5757/ASCT.2014.23.2.61 . ISSN   2288-6559. S2CID   55557610.
  20. Clark, Leland C.; Lyons, Champ (1962). "Electrode Systems for Continuous Monitoring in Cardiovascular Surgery". Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 102 (1): 29–45. Bibcode:1962NYASA.102...29C. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1962.tb13623.x. ISSN   1749-6632. PMID   14021529. S2CID   33342483.
  21. 1 2 3 Bergveld, Piet (October 1985). "The impact of MOSFET-based sensors" (PDF). Sensors and Actuators. 8 (2): 109–127. Bibcode:1985SeAc....8..109B. doi:10.1016/0250-6874(85)87009-8. ISSN   0250-6874. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 9, 2022.
  22. Chris Toumazou; Pantelis Georgiou (December 2011). "40 years of ISFET technology:From neuronal sensing to DNA sequencing". Electronics Letters . Retrieved May 13, 2016.
  23. Bergveld, P. (January 1970). "Development of an Ion-Sensitive Solid-State Device for Neurophysiological Measurements". IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering . BME-17 (1): 70–71. doi:10.1109/TBME.1970.4502688. PMID   5441220.
  24. 1 2 3 Schöning, Michael J.; Poghossian, Arshak (September 10, 2002). "Recent advances in biologically sensitive field-effect transistors (BioFETs)" (PDF). Analyst. 127 (9): 1137–1151. Bibcode:2002Ana...127.1137S. doi:10.1039/B204444G. ISSN   1364-5528. PMID   12375833. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 9, 2022.
  25. VoIP Providers And Corn Farmers Can Expect To Have Bumper Years In 2008 And Beyond, According To The Latest Research Released By Business Information Analysts At IBISWorld. Los Angeles (March 19, 2008)
  26. "The Recession List - Top 10 Industries to Fly and Flop in 2008". March 19, 2008. Archived from the original on June 2, 2008. Retrieved May 19, 2008.
  27. Gerstein, M. "Bioinformatics Introduction Archived 2007-06-16 at the Wayback Machine ." Yale University. Retrieved on May 8, 2007.
  28. Siam, R. (2009). Biotechnology Research and Development in Academia: providing the foundation for Egypt's Biotechnology spectrum of colors. Sixteenth Annual American University in Cairo Research Conference, American University in Cairo, Cairo, Egypt. BMC Proceedings, 31–35.
  29. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Kafarski, P. (2012). Rainbow Code of Biotechnology Archived February 14, 2019, at the Wayback Machine . CHEMIK. Wroclaw University
  30. Biotech: true colours. (2009). TCE: The Chemical Engineer, (816), 26–31.
  31. Aldridge, S. (2009). The four colours of biotechnology: the biotechnology sector is occasionally described as a rainbow, with each sub sector having its own colour. But what do the different colours of biotechnology have to offer the pharmaceutical industry. Pharmaceutical Technology Europe, (1). 12.
  32. Frazzetto G (September 2003). "White biotechnology". EMBO Reports. 4 (9): 835–7. doi:10.1038/sj.embor.embor928. PMC   1326365 . PMID   12949582.
  33. Frazzetto, G. (2003). White biotechnology Archived November 11, 2018, at the Wayback Machine . March 21, 2017, de EMBOpress Sitio
  34. Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology Archived July 19, 2018, at the Wayback Machine , Volume 135 2013, Yellow Biotechnology I
  35. Santomartino R, Averesch NJ, Bhuiyan M, Cockell CS, Colangelo J, Gumulya Y, Lehner B, Lopez-Ayala I, McMahon S, Mohanty A, Santa Maria SR, Urbaniak C, Volger R, Yang J, Zea L (March 2023). "Toward sustainable space exploration: a roadmap for harnessing the power of microorganisms". Nature Communications. 14 (1): 1391. doi:10.1038/s41467-023-37070-2. PMC   10030976 . PMID   36944638.
  36. Edgar, J.D. (2004). The Colours of Biotechnology: Science, Development and Humankind. Electronic Journal of Biotechnology, (3), 01
  37. "Top Global Pharmaceutical Company Report" (PDF). The Pharma 1000. November 2021. Archived (PDF) from the original on March 15, 2022. Retrieved December 29, 2022.
  38. Ermak G. (2013) Modern Science & Future Medicine (second edition)
  39. Wang L (2010). "Pharmacogenomics: a systems approach". Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Systems Biology and Medicine. 2 (1): 3–22. doi:10.1002/wsbm.42. PMC   3894835 . PMID   20836007.
  40. Becquemont L (June 2009). "Pharmacogenomics of adverse drug reactions: practical applications and perspectives". Pharmacogenomics. 10 (6): 961–9. doi:10.2217/pgs.09.37. PMID   19530963.
  41. "Guidance for Industry Pharmacogenomic Data Submissions" (PDF). U.S. Food and Drug Administration. March 2005. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 9, 2022. Retrieved August 27, 2008.
  42. Squassina A, Manchia M, Manolopoulos VG, Artac M, Lappa-Manakou C, Karkabouna S, Mitropoulos K, Del Zompo M, Patrinos GP (August 2010). "Realities and expectations of pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine: impact of translating genetic knowledge into clinical practice". Pharmacogenomics. 11 (8): 1149–67. doi:10.2217/pgs.10.97. PMID   20712531.
  43. Bains W (1987). Genetic Engineering For Almost Everybody: What Does It Do? What Will It Do? . Penguin. p.  99. ISBN   978-0-14-013501-5.
  44. 1 2 U.S. Department of State International Information Programs, "Frequently Asked Questions About Biotechnology", USIS Online; available from Archived September 12, 2007, at the Wayback Machine , accessed September 13, 2007. Cf. Feldbaum C (February 2002). "Biotechnology. Some history should be repeated". Science. 295 (5557): 975. doi:10.1126/science.1069614. PMID   11834802. S2CID   32595222.
  45. "What is genetic testing? – Genetics Home Reference". May 30, 2011. Archived from the original on May 29, 2006. Retrieved June 7, 2011.
  46. "Genetic Testing: MedlinePlus". Archived from the original on June 8, 2011. Retrieved June 7, 2011.
  47. "Definitions of Genetic Testing". Definitions of Genetic Testing (Jorge Sequeiros and Bárbara Guimarães). EuroGentest Network of Excellence Project. September 11, 2008. Archived from the original on February 4, 2009. Retrieved August 10, 2008.
  48. Genetically Altered Potato Ok'd For Crops Archived July 31, 2022, at the Wayback Machine Lawrence Journal-World – May 6, 1995
  49. National Academy of Sciences (2001). Transgenic Plants and World Agriculture. Washington: National Academy Press.
  50. Paarlburg R (January 2011). "Drought Tolerant GMO Maize in Africa, Anticipating Regulatory Hurdles" (PDF). International Life Sciences Institute. Archived from the original (PDF) on December 22, 2014. Retrieved April 25, 2011.
  51. Carpenter J. & Gianessi L. (1999). Herbicide tolerant soybeans: Why growers are adopting Roundup Ready varieties Archived November 19, 2012, at the Wayback Machine . AgBioForum, 2(2), 65–72.
  52. Haroldsen VM, Paulino G, Chi-ham C, Bennett AB (2012). "Research and adoption of biotechnology strategies could improve California fruit and nut crops". California Agriculture. 66 (2): 62–69. doi: 10.3733/ca.v066n02p62 .
  53. About Golden Rice Archived November 2, 2012, at the Wayback Machine . Retrieved on March 20, 2013.
  54. Gali Weinreb and Koby Yeshayahou for Globes May 2, 2012. FDA approves Protalix Gaucher treatment Archived May 29, 2013, at the Wayback Machine
  55. Carrington, Damien (January 19, 2012) GM microbe breakthrough paves way for large-scale seaweed farming for biofuels Archived May 11, 2017, at the Wayback Machine The Guardian. Retrieved March 12, 2012
  56. van Beilen JB, Poirier Y (May 2008). "Production of renewable polymers from crop plants". The Plant Journal. 54 (4): 684–701. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-313X.2008.03431.x . PMID   18476872. S2CID   25954199.
  57. Strange, Amy (September 20, 2011) Scientists engineer plants to eat toxic pollution Archived September 13, 2011, at the Wayback Machine The Irish Times. Retrieved September 20, 2011
  58. Diaz E, ed. (2008). Microbial Biodegradation: Genomics and Molecular Biology . Caister Academic Press. ISBN   978-1-904455-17-2.
  59. 1 2 3 James C (2011). "ISAAA Brief 43, Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2011". ISAAA Briefs. Ithaca, New York: International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA). Archived from the original on February 10, 2012. Retrieved June 2, 2012.
  60. GM Science Review First Report Archived October 16, 2013, at the Wayback Machine , Prepared by the UK GM Science Review panel (July 2003). Chairman Professor Sir David King, Chief Scientific Advisor to the UK Government, P 9
  61. James C (1996). "Global Review of the Field Testing and Commercialization of Transgenic Plants: 1986 to 1995" (PDF). The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 9, 2022. Retrieved July 17, 2010.
  62. "Consumer Q&A". March 6, 2009. Archived from the original on January 10, 2013. Retrieved December 29, 2012.
  63. "AquAdvantage Salmon". FDA. Archived from the original on December 31, 2012. Retrieved July 20, 2018.
  64. Nicolia, Alessandro; Manzo, Alberto; Veronesi, Fabio; Rosellini, Daniele (2013). "An overview of the last 10 years of genetically engineered crop safety research" (PDF). Critical Reviews in Biotechnology. 34 (1): 77–88. doi:10.3109/07388551.2013.823595. PMID   24041244. S2CID   9836802. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 9, 2022. We have reviewed the scientific literature on GE crop safety for the last 10 years that catches the scientific consensus matured since GE plants became widely cultivated worldwide, and we can conclude that the scientific research conducted so far has not detected any significant hazard directly connected with the use of GM crops.

    The literature about Biodiversity and the GE food/feed consumption has sometimes resulted in animated debate regarding the suitability of the experimental designs, the choice of the statistical methods or the public accessibility of data. Such debate, even if positive and part of the natural process of review by the scientific community, has frequently been distorted by the media and often used politically and inappropriately in anti-GE crops campaigns.
  65. "State of Food and Agriculture 2003–2004. Agricultural Biotechnology: Meeting the Needs of the Poor. Health and environmental impacts of transgenic crops". Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Archived from the original on January 9, 2019. Retrieved August 30, 2019. Currently available transgenic crops and foods derived from them have been judged safe to eat and the methods used to test their safety have been deemed appropriate. These conclusions represent the consensus of the scientific evidence surveyed by the ICSU (2003) and they are consistent with the views of the World Health Organization (WHO, 2002). These foods have been assessed for increased risks to human health by several national regulatory authorities (inter alia, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, China, the United Kingdom and the United States) using their national food safety procedures (ICSU). To date no verifiable untoward toxic or nutritionally deleterious effects resulting from the consumption of foods derived from genetically modified crops have been discovered anywhere in the world (GM Science Review Panel). Many millions of people have consumed foods derived from GM plants – mainly maize, soybean and oilseed rape – without any observed adverse effects (ICSU).
  66. Ronald, Pamela (May 1, 2011). "Plant Genetics, Sustainable Agriculture and Global Food Security". Genetics. 188 (1): 11–20. doi:10.1534/genetics.111.128553. PMC   3120150 . PMID   21546547. There is broad scientific consensus that genetically engineered crops currently on the market are safe to eat. After 14 years of cultivation and a cumulative total of 2 billion acres planted, no adverse health or environmental effects have resulted from commercialization of genetically engineered crops (Board on Agriculture and Natural Resources, Committee on Environmental Impacts Associated with Commercialization of Transgenic Plants, National Research Council and Division on Earth and Life Studies 2002). Both the U.S. National Research Council and the Joint Research Centre (the European Union's scientific and technical research laboratory and an integral part of the European Commission) have concluded that there is a comprehensive body of knowledge that adequately addresses the food safety issue of genetically engineered crops (Committee on Identifying and Assessing Unintended Effects of Genetically Engineered Foods on Human Health and National Research Council 2004; European Commission Joint Research Centre 2008). These and other recent reports conclude that the processes of genetic engineering and conventional breeding are no different in terms of unintended consequences to human health and the environment (European Commission Directorate-General for Research and Innovation 2010).
  67. But see also:

    Domingo, José L.; Bordonaba, Jordi Giné (2011). "A literature review on the safety assessment of genetically modified plants" (PDF). Environment International. 37 (4): 734–742. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2011.01.003. PMID   21296423. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 9, 2022. In spite of this, the number of studies specifically focused on safety assessment of GM plants is still limited. However, it is important to remark that for the first time, a certain equilibrium in the number of research groups suggesting, on the basis of their studies, that a number of varieties of GM products (mainly maize and soybeans) are as safe and nutritious as the respective conventional non-GM plant, and those raising still serious concerns, was observed. Moreover, it is worth mentioning that most of the studies demonstrating that GM foods are as nutritional and safe as those obtained by conventional breeding, have been performed by biotechnology companies or associates, which are also responsible of commercializing these GM plants. Anyhow, this represents a notable advance in comparison with the lack of studies published in recent years in scientific journals by those companies.

    Krimsky, Sheldon (2015). "An Illusory Consensus behind GMO Health Assessment". Science, Technology, & Human Values. 40 (6): 883–914. doi:10.1177/0162243915598381. S2CID   40855100. I began this article with the testimonials from respected scientists that there is literally no scientific controversy over the health effects of GMOs. My investigation into the scientific literature tells another story.

    And contrast:

    Panchin, Alexander Y.; Tuzhikov, Alexander I. (January 14, 2016). "Published GMO studies find no evidence of harm when corrected for multiple comparisons". Critical Reviews in Biotechnology. 37 (2): 213–217. doi:10.3109/07388551.2015.1130684. ISSN   0738-8551. PMID   26767435. S2CID   11786594. Here, we show that a number of articles some of which have strongly and negatively influenced the public opinion on GM crops and even provoked political actions, such as GMO embargo, share common flaws in the statistical evaluation of the data. Having accounted for these flaws, we conclude that the data presented in these articles does not provide any substantial evidence of GMO harm.

    The presented articles suggesting possible harm of GMOs received high public attention. However, despite their claims, they actually weaken the evidence for the harm and lack of substantial equivalency of studied GMOs. We emphasize that with over 1783 published articles on GMOs over the last 10 years it is expected that some of them should have reported undesired differences between GMOs and conventional crops even if no such differences exist in reality.


    Yang, Y.T.; Chen, B. (2016). "Governing GMOs in the USA: science, law and public health". Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture. 96 (4): 1851–1855. Bibcode:2016JSFA...96.1851Y. doi:10.1002/jsfa.7523. PMID   26536836. It is therefore not surprising that efforts to require labeling and to ban GMOs have been a growing political issue in the USA (citing Domingo and Bordonaba, 2011). Overall, a broad scientific consensus holds that currently marketed GM food poses no greater risk than conventional food... Major national and international science and medical associations have stated that no adverse human health effects related to GMO food have been reported or substantiated in peer-reviewed literature to date.

    Despite various concerns, today, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the World Health Organization, and many independent international science organizations agree that GMOs are just as safe as other foods. Compared with conventional breeding techniques, genetic engineering is far more precise and, in most cases, less likely to create an unexpected outcome.
  68. "Statement by the AAAS Board of Directors On Labeling of Genetically Modified Foods" (PDF). American Association for the Advancement of Science. October 20, 2012. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 9, 2022. Retrieved August 30, 2019. The EU, for example, has invested more than €300 million in research on the biosafety of GMOs. Its recent report states: "The main conclusion to be drawn from the efforts of more than 130 research projects, covering a period of more than 25 years of research and involving more than 500 independent research groups, is that biotechnology, and in particular GMOs, are not per se more risky than e.g. conventional plant breeding technologies." The World Health Organization, the American Medical Association, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, the British Royal Society, and every other respected organization that has examined the evidence has come to the same conclusion: consuming foods containing ingredients derived from GM crops is no riskier than consuming the same foods containing ingredients from crop plants modified by conventional plant improvement techniques.

    Pinholster, Ginger (October 25, 2012). "AAAS Board of Directors: Legally Mandating GM Food Labels Could "Mislead and Falsely Alarm Consumers"" (PDF). American Association for the Advancement of Science. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 9, 2022. Retrieved August 30, 2019.
  69. European Commission. Directorate-General for Research (2010). A decade of EU-funded GMO research (2001–2010) (PDF). Directorate-General for Research and Innovation. Biotechnologies, Agriculture, Food. European Commission, European Union. doi:10.2777/97784. ISBN   978-92-79-16344-9. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 9, 2022. Retrieved August 30, 2019.
  70. "AMA Report on Genetically Modified Crops and Foods". American Medical Association. January 2001. Archived from the original on April 2, 2016. Retrieved August 30, 2019 via International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications. "Report 2 of the Council on Science and Public Health (A-12): Labeling of Bioengineered Foods" (PDF). American Medical Association. 2012. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 7, 2012. Retrieved August 30, 2019.
  71. "Restrictions on Genetically Modified Organisms: United States. Public and Scholarly Opinion". Library of Congress. June 30, 2015. Archived from the original on December 30, 2019. Retrieved August 30, 2019. Several scientific organizations in the US have issued studies or statements regarding the safety of GMOs indicating that there is no evidence that GMOs present unique safety risks compared to conventionally bred products. These include the National Research Council, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and the American Medical Association. Groups in the US opposed to GMOs include some environmental organizations, organic farming organizations, and consumer organizations. A substantial number of legal academics have criticized the US's approach to regulating GMOs.
  72. National Academies Of Sciences, Engineering; Division on Earth Life Studies; Board on Agriculture Natural Resources; Committee on Genetically Engineered Crops: Past Experience Future Prospects (2016). Genetically Engineered Crops: Experiences and Prospects. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (US). p. 149. doi:10.17226/23395. ISBN   978-0-309-43738-7. PMID   28230933. Archived from the original on November 16, 2021. Retrieved August 30, 2019. Overall finding on purported adverse effects on human health of foods derived from GE crops: On the basis of detailed examination of comparisons of currently commercialized GE with non-GE foods in compositional analysis, acute and chronic animal toxicity tests, long-term data on health of livestock fed GE foods, and human epidemiological data, the committee found no differences that implicate a higher risk to human health from GE foods than from their non-GE counterparts.
  73. "Frequently asked questions on genetically modified foods". World Health Organization. Archived from the original on November 4, 2020. Retrieved August 30, 2019. Different GM organisms include different genes inserted in different ways. This means that individual GM foods and their safety should be assessed on a case-by-case basis and that it is not possible to make general statements on the safety of all GM foods.

    GM foods currently available on the international market have passed safety assessments and are not likely to present risks for human health. In addition, no effects on human health have been shown as a result of the consumption of such foods by the general population in the countries where they have been approved. Continuous application of safety assessments based on the Codex Alimentarius principles and, where appropriate, adequate post market monitoring, should form the basis for ensuring the safety of GM foods.
  74. Haslberger, Alexander G. (2003). "Codex guidelines for GM foods include the analysis of unintended effects". Nature Biotechnology. 21 (7): 739–741. doi:10.1038/nbt0703-739. PMID   12833088. S2CID   2533628. These principles dictate a case-by-case premarket assessment that includes an evaluation of both direct and unintended effects.
  75. Some medical organizations, including the British Medical Association, advocate further caution based upon the precautionary principle:

    "Genetically modified foods and health: a second interim statement" (PDF). British Medical Association. March 2004. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 9, 2022. Retrieved August 30, 2019. In our view, the potential for GM foods to cause harmful health effects is very small and many of the concerns expressed apply with equal vigour to conventionally derived foods. However, safety concerns cannot, as yet, be dismissed completely on the basis of information currently available.

    When seeking to optimise the balance between benefits and risks, it is prudent to err on the side of caution and, above all, learn from accumulating knowledge and experience. Any new technology such as genetic modification must be examined for possible benefits and risks to human health and the environment. As with all novel foods, safety assessments in relation to GM foods must be made on a case-by-case basis.

    Members of the GM jury project were briefed on various aspects of genetic modification by a diverse group of acknowledged experts in the relevant subjects. The GM jury reached the conclusion that the sale of GM foods currently available should be halted and the moratorium on commercial growth of GM crops should be continued. These conclusions were based on the precautionary principle and lack of evidence of any benefit. The Jury expressed concern over the impact of GM crops on farming, the environment, food safety and other potential health effects.

    The Royal Society review (2002) concluded that the risks to human health associated with the use of specific viral DNA sequences in GM plants are negligible, and while calling for caution in the introduction of potential allergens into food crops, stressed the absence of evidence that commercially available GM foods cause clinical allergic manifestations. The BMA shares the view that there is no robust evidence to prove that GM foods are unsafe but we endorse the call for further research and surveillance to provide convincing evidence of safety and benefit.
  76. Funk, Cary; Rainie, Lee (January 29, 2015). "Public and Scientists' Views on Science and Society". Pew Research Center. Archived from the original on January 9, 2019. Retrieved August 30, 2019. The largest differences between the public and the AAAS scientists are found in beliefs about the safety of eating genetically modified (GM) foods. Nearly nine-in-ten (88%) scientists say it is generally safe to eat GM foods compared with 37% of the general public, a difference of 51 percentage points.
  77. Marris, Claire (2001). "Public views on GMOs: deconstructing the myths". EMBO Reports. 2 (7): 545–548. doi:10.1093/embo-reports/kve142. PMC   1083956 . PMID   11463731.
  78. Final Report of the PABE research project (December 2001). "Public Perceptions of Agricultural Biotechnologies in Europe". Commission of European Communities. Archived from the original on May 25, 2017. Retrieved August 30, 2019.
  79. Scott, Sydney E.; Inbar, Yoel; Rozin, Paul (2016). "Evidence for Absolute Moral Opposition to Genetically Modified Food in the United States" (PDF). Perspectives on Psychological Science. 11 (3): 315–324. doi:10.1177/1745691615621275. PMID   27217243. S2CID   261060. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 9, 2022.
  80. "Restrictions on Genetically Modified Organisms". Library of Congress. June 9, 2015. Archived from the original on April 3, 2019. Retrieved August 30, 2019.
  81. Bashshur, Ramona (February 2013). "FDA and Regulation of GMOs". American Bar Association. Archived from the original on June 21, 2018. Retrieved August 30, 2019.
  82. Sifferlin, Alexandra (October 3, 2015). "Over Half of E.U. Countries Are Opting Out of GMOs". Time. Retrieved August 30, 2019.
  83. Lynch, Diahanna; Vogel, David (April 5, 2001). "The Regulation of GMOs in Europe and the United States: A Case-Study of Contemporary European Regulatory Politics". Council on Foreign Relations. Archived from the original on September 29, 2016. Retrieved August 30, 2019.
  84. Pollack A (April 13, 2010). "Study Says Overuse Threatens Gains From Modified Crops". The New York Times . Archived from the original on November 21, 2017. Retrieved February 24, 2017.
  85. Brookes, Graham; Barfoot, Peter (May 8, 2017). "Farm income and production impacts of using GM crop technology 1996–2015". GM Crops & Food. 8 (3): 156–193. doi:10.1080/21645698.2017.1317919. ISSN   2164-5698. PMC   5617554 . PMID   28481684.
  86. Tyczewska, Agata; Twardowski, Tomasz; Woźniak-Gientka, Ewa (January 2023). "Agricultural biotechnology for sustainable food security". Trends in Biotechnology. 41 (3): 331–341. doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2022.12.013. ISSN   0167-7799. PMC   9881846 . PMID   36710131. S2CID   256304868.
  87. Sairam, R. V.; Prakash, C. S. (July 2005). "OBPC Symposium: maize 2004 & beyond—Can agricultural biotechnology contribute to global food security?". In Vitro Cellular & Developmental Biology - Plant. 41 (4): 424–430. doi:10.1079/ivp2005663. ISSN   1054-5476. S2CID   25855065.
  88. Kumar, Pankaj; Kumar, Arun; Dhiman, Karuna; Srivastava, Dinesh Kumar (2021), "Recent Progress in Cereals Biofortification to Alleviate Malnutrition in India: An Overview", Agricultural Biotechnology: Latest Research and Trends, Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, pp. 253–280, doi:10.1007/978-981-16-2339-4_11, ISBN   978-981-16-2338-7, S2CID   245834290
  89. Industrial Biotechnology and Biomass Utilisation Archived April 5, 2013, at the Wayback Machine
  90. "Industrial biotechnology, A powerful, innovative technology to mitigate climate change". Archived from the original on January 2, 2014. Retrieved January 1, 2014.
  91. Clarke, Lionel; Kitney, Richard (February 28, 2020). "Developing synthetic biology for industrial biotechnology applications". Biochemical Society Transactions. 48 (1): 113–122. doi:10.1042/BST20190349. ISSN   0300-5127. PMC   7054743 . PMID   32077472.
  92. McCarty, Nicholas S.; Ledesma-Amaro, Rodrigo (February 2019). "Synthetic Biology Tools to Engineer Microbial Communities for Biotechnology". Trends in Biotechnology. 37 (2): 181–197. doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2018.11.002. ISSN   0167-7799. PMC   6340809 . PMID   30497870.
  93. Zhou, Kang; Qiao, Kangjian; Edgar, Steven; Stephanopoulos, Gregory (April 2015). "Distributing a metabolic pathway among a microbial consortium enhances production of natural products". Nature Biotechnology. 33 (4): 377–383. doi:10.1038/nbt.3095. ISSN   1087-0156. PMC   4867547 . PMID   25558867.
  94. Wu, Meng-Ying; Sung, Li-Yu; Li, Hung; Huang, Chun-Hung; Hu, Yu-Chen (December 15, 2017). "Combining CRISPR and CRISPRi Systems for Metabolic Engineering of E. coli and 1,4-BDO Biosynthesis". ACS Synthetic Biology. 6 (12): 2350–2361. doi:10.1021/acssynbio.7b00251. ISSN   2161-5063. PMID   28854333.
  95. Pakshirajan, Kannan; Rene, Eldon R.; Ramesh, Aiyagari (2014). "Biotechnology in environmental monitoring and pollution abatement". BioMed Research International. 2014: 235472. doi: 10.1155/2014/235472 . ISSN   2314-6141. PMC   4017724 . PMID   24864232.
  96. Danso, Dominik; Chow, Jennifer; Streit, Wolfgang R. (October 1, 2019). "Plastics: Environmental and Biotechnological Perspectives on Microbial Degradation". Applied and Environmental Microbiology. 85 (19). Bibcode:2019ApEnM..85E1095D. doi:10.1128/AEM.01095-19. ISSN   1098-5336. PMC   6752018 . PMID   31324632.
  97. Daniel A. Vallero, Environmental Biotechnology: A Biosystems Approach, Academic Press, Amsterdam, NV; ISBN   978-0-12-375089-1; 2010.
  98. "Debate on robot trees looks to clear the air: What are other countries doing?". The Echo. November 9, 2023. Retrieved January 17, 2024.
  99. Gaskell G, Bauer MW, Durant J, Allum NC (July 1999). "Worlds apart? The reception of genetically modified foods in Europe and the U.S". Science. 285 (5426): 384–7. doi:10.1126/science.285.5426.384. PMID   10411496. S2CID   5131870.
  100. "The History and Future of GM Potatoes". Potato Pro. March 10, 2010. Archived from the original on October 12, 2013. Retrieved January 1, 2014.
  101. Wesseler J, Kalaitzandonakes N (2011). "Present and Future EU GMO policy". In Oskam A, Meesters G, Silvis H (eds.). EU Policy for Agriculture, Food and Rural Areas (2nd ed.). Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers. pp. 23–332.
  102. Beckmann VC, Soregaroli J, Wesseler J (2011). "Coexistence of genetically modified (GM) and non-modified (non GM) crops: Are the two main property rights regimes equivalent with respect to the coexistence value?". In Carter C, Moschini G, Sheldon I (eds.). Genetically modified food and global welfare. Frontiers of Economics and Globalization Series. Vol. 10. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing. pp. 201–224.
  103. "Biotechnology Predoctoral Training Program". National Institute of General Medical Sciences. December 18, 2013. Archived from the original on October 28, 2014. Retrieved October 28, 2014.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified maize</span> Genetically modified crop

Genetically modified maize (corn) is a genetically modified crop. Specific maize strains have been genetically engineered to express agriculturally-desirable traits, including resistance to pests and to herbicides. Maize strains with both traits are now in use in multiple countries. GM maize has also caused controversy with respect to possible health effects, impact on other insects and impact on other plants via gene flow. One strain, called Starlink, was approved only for animal feed in the US but was found in food, leading to a series of recalls starting in 2000.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified organism</span> Organisms whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering methods

A genetically modified organism (GMO) is any organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques. The exact definition of a genetically modified organism and what constitutes genetic engineering varies, with the most common being an organism altered in a way that "does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination". A wide variety of organisms have been genetically modified (GM), including animals, plants, and microorganisms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetic engineering</span> Manipulation of an organisms genome

Genetic engineering, also called genetic modification or genetic manipulation, is the modification and manipulation of an organism's genes using technology. It is a set of technologies used to change the genetic makeup of cells, including the transfer of genes within and across species boundaries to produce improved or novel organisms.

Agricultural biotechnology, also known as agritech, is an area of agricultural science involving the use of scientific tools and techniques, including genetic engineering, molecular markers, molecular diagnostics, vaccines, and tissue culture, to modify living organisms: plants, animals, and microorganisms. Crop biotechnology is one aspect of agricultural biotechnology which has been greatly developed upon in recent times. Desired trait are exported from a particular species of Crop to an entirely different species. These transgene crops possess desirable characteristics in terms of flavor, color of flowers, growth rate, size of harvested products and resistance to diseases and pests.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified food</span> Foods produced from organisms that have had changes introduced into their DNA

Genetically modified foods, also known as genetically engineered foods, or bioengineered foods are foods produced from organisms that have had changes introduced into their DNA using various methods of genetic engineering. Genetic engineering techniques allow for the introduction of new traits as well as greater control over traits when compared to previous methods, such as selective breeding and mutation breeding.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified crops</span> Plants used in agriculture

Genetically modified crops are plants used in agriculture, the DNA of which has been modified using genetic engineering methods. Plant genomes can be engineered by physical methods or by use of Agrobacterium for the delivery of sequences hosted in T-DNA binary vectors. In most cases, the aim is to introduce a new trait to the plant which does not occur naturally in the species. Examples in food crops include resistance to certain pests, diseases, environmental conditions, reduction of spoilage, resistance to chemical treatments, or improving the nutrient profile of the crop. Examples in non-food crops include production of pharmaceutical agents, biofuels, and other industrially useful goods, as well as for bioremediation.

Since the advent of genetic engineering in the 1970s, concerns have been raised about the dangers of the technology. Laws, regulations, and treaties were created in the years following to contain genetically modified organisms and prevent their escape. Nevertheless, there are several examples of failure to keep GM crops separate from conventional ones.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified food controversies</span> Controversies over GMO food

Genetically modified food controversies are disputes over the use of foods and other goods derived from genetically modified crops instead of conventional crops, and other uses of genetic engineering in food production. The disputes involve consumers, farmers, biotechnology companies, governmental regulators, non-governmental organizations, and scientists. The key areas of controversy related to genetically modified food are whether such food should be labeled, the role of government regulators, the objectivity of scientific research and publication, the effect of genetically modified crops on health and the environment, the effect on pesticide resistance, the impact of such crops for farmers, and the role of the crops in feeding the world population. In addition, products derived from GMO organisms play a role in the production of ethanol fuels and pharmaceuticals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Plant genetics</span> Study of genes and heredity in plants

Plant genetics is the study of genes, genetic variation, and heredity specifically in plants. It is generally considered a field of biology and botany, but intersects frequently with many other life sciences and is strongly linked with the study of information systems. Plant genetics is similar in many ways to animal genetics but differs in a few key areas.

The United States is the largest grower of commercial crops that have been genetically engineered in the world, but not without domestic and international opposition.

Religious views on genetically modified foods have been mixed, although as yet, no genetically modified foods have been designated as unacceptable by religious authorities.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">The Non-GMO Project</span> Non-profit organization

The Non-GMO Project is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization focusing on genetically modified organisms. The organization began as an initiative of independent natural foods retailers in the U.S. and Canada, with the stated aim to label products produced in compliance with their Non-GMO Project Standard, which aims to prevent genetically modified foodstuffs from being present in retail food products. The organization is headquartered in Bellingham, Washington. The Non-GMO label began use in 2012 with Numi Organic Tea products.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified soybean</span> Soybean that has had DNA introduced into it using genetic engineering techniques

A genetically modified soybean is a soybean that has had DNA introduced into it using genetic engineering techniques. In 1996, the first genetically modified soybean was introduced to the U.S. by Monsanto. In 2014, 90.7 million hectares of GM soybeans were planted worldwide, making up 82% of the total soybeans cultivation area.

Genetically modified canola is a genetically modified crop. The first strain, Roundup Ready canola, was developed by Monsanto for tolerance to glyphosate, the active ingredient in the commonly used herbicide Roundup.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Regulation of genetic engineering</span>

The regulation of genetic engineering varies widely by country. Countries such as the United States, Canada, Lebanon and Egypt use substantial equivalence as the starting point when assessing safety, while many countries such as those in the European Union, Brazil and China authorize GMO cultivation on a case-by-case basis. Many countries allow the import of GM food with authorization, but either do not allow its cultivation or have provisions for cultivation, but no GM products are yet produced. Most countries that do not allow for GMO cultivation do permit research. Most (85%) of the world's GMO crops are grown in the Americas. One of the key issues concerning regulators is whether GM products should be labeled. Labeling of GMO products in the marketplace is required in 64 countries. Labeling can be mandatory up to a threshold GM content level or voluntary. A study investigating voluntary labeling in South Africa found that 31% of products labeled as GMO-free had a GM content above 1.0%. In Canada and the USA labeling of GM food is voluntary, while in Europe all food or feed which contains greater than 0.9% of approved GMOs must be labelled.

Genetic engineering in the European Union has varying degrees of regulation.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">March Against Monsanto</span> International protest movement

The March Against Monsanto was an international grassroots movement and protest against Monsanto, a producer of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and Roundup, a glyphosate-based herbicide. The movement was founded by Tami Canal in response to the failure of California Proposition 37, a ballot initiative which would have required labeling food products made from GMOs. Advocates support mandatory labeling laws for food made from GMOs.

GMO Answers is a front group launched by the agricultural biotechnology industry in July 2013 to participate in public debate around genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in crops in the U.S. food supply.

India and China are the two largest producers of genetically modified products in Asia. India currently only grows GM cotton, while China produces GM varieties of cotton, poplar, petunia, tomato, papaya and sweet pepper. Cost of enforcement of regulations in India are generally higher, possibly due to the greater influence farmers and small seed firms have on policy makers, while the enforcement of regulations was more effective in China. Other Asian countries that grew GM crops in 2011 were Pakistan, the Philippines and Myanmar. GM crops were approved for commercialisation in Bangladesh in 2013 and in Vietnam and Indonesia in 2014.

Genetic engineering in North America is any genetic engineering activities in North America