IPR in Agriculture with Special Reference to India

This is a comment by SKT  Nasar on the opinion by Howard D. Grimes et alia (2011) on ‘Food Security Needs Sound IP’ published in The ScienceDaily On-line

So long as agriculture continues to be practised on land and partly in water, it shall remain a sensitive issue for socio-politico-economy of world’s peoples. There is as yet no factory-based mass scale industrial system of agricultural production that draws raw inputs from freely available natural resources and specific advantage of agro-ecosystems.

Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) regime originated initially for trade-related industrial production systems which agriculture is considered to be not. That is why global application of IPR to agriculture took long and circuitous paths through decades. IPR in agriculture and other biology-based technologies faces controversies till date.

The opinion by Howard D. Grimes et alia (2011) on ‘Food Security Needs Sound IP’ skips ground realities in India and similarly situated countries.  The primary contention of Howard D. Grimes et alia is that protection of IPR needs improvement to help promote transfer of sustainable agricultural technologies remodelled into inexpensive tools accessible to ‘world’s poorest populations’ and that such technologies are ‘most likely to be developed by the industrialised countries’. Their contention is unacceptable. 

Attention is drawn here to just two among many international instruments: World Trade Organisation (WTO) and Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

India became a member of the WTO on 1 January 1995. It also brought to reality in an updated form the failed attempt in 1948 to create an International Trade Organization (ITO). WTO is concerned with all trade-related aspects among and between countries. Member countries are required to frame laws for equity in transborder trade. One major aspect of WTO is Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). In conformity with WTO, TRIPS and Agreement on Agriculture (AoA), a number of acts have been promulgated in India. Several of existing laws have been amended or extended in scope and application. A few of such laws are Indian Patents Act, Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act, Geographical Indication Act, Seed Act etc.  

The CBD is another international legally binding treaty with three principal goals: conservation of biological diversity (biodiversity), sustainable use of its components and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from genetic resources. India is a party to the United Nations CBD signed at the Earth Summit, Rio de Janeiro on 5 June 1992. The BD Act 2002 is in existence in India as Law. Rules (BD Rules 2009) under this law have been implemented.

Global IPR regime initiated by WTO-TRIPS-AoA should be considered together with CBD in the Indian context. Government of India, on the recommendations of the National Biodiversity Authority, framed rules in 2009 for ground level implementation of the provisions of BD Act. An important feature is elaboration of Traditional Knowledge (TK).  These rules are called the ‘Rules for Protection, Conservation and Effective Management of Traditional Knowledge Relating to Biological Diversity’. TK has been defined under these rules as:

“the collective knowledge of a traditional community including of a group of families, on a particular subject or a skill and passed down from generation to generation, either orally or in written form, relating to properties, uses and characteristics of plant and animal genetic resources; agricultural and healthcare practices, food preservation and processing techniques and devices developed from traditional materials; cultural expressions, products and practices such as weaving patterns, colors, dyes, pottery, painting, poetry, folklore, dance and music; and all other products or processes discovered through a community process including by a member of the community individually but for the common use of the community”. Despite the enormous volume of TK-based products, their production systems have not been categorised as industry simply because these belong to the unorganised sector and benefits thereof are public good freely accessible to all. Unknown or unrecorded individuals and communities are TK inventors which is why IPR system disregarded TK as patentable. This simple fact illustrates that IPR is basically meant to channel profit to inventors and their mentors but not to all as the common property. Normal patent laws tend to provide time-bound ownership to individual inventors and for inventions demonstrating novelty and capability of industrial application. Agrodiversity-suited agricultural practices, location-specific biodiversity and community-based TK, on the other hand, have collective ownership held in perpetuity from generation to generation, are incremental, informal and occur over time. India and the international community, following long and tortuous debates, finally accepted to recognise and protect TK by suitable laws. Since common laws were inadequate, a sui generis (i.e. unique unto itself) IPR law was considered indispensable to protect TK. The question was how to make appropriate laws for TK protection. India provides for collective rights of communities over TK, location-specific or community-specific innovative products, forest management and biodiversity through separate laws.  These rights must be used for the common good of all. Other uses for commercial, scientific and research purposes may be allowed only with prior informed consent (PIC) to be obtained from the traditional community. Misappropriation of TK (in any form of appropriation, monopolisation, including claims of private ownership and/or intellectual property rights etc.) which deprive the concerned traditional community from using, conserving and protecting TK is not permissible. TK and biological resources must be utilised for equitable access and benefit sharing (ABS). Under BD Act, local BD Management Committees (BMC) of the panchayat level is responsible for creating and updating local-level BD Registers. India has already put on the web the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL). Such digital database enables Indian citizens and Patent Offices around the world to search and examine any TK to prevent grant of erroneous patents and to deter biopiracy. It is conceded here that, regrettably, Indian laws driven by commitments to WTO and CBD are not implemented as these ought to have been. The reasons for this lacuna are lack of awareness by scientists and other stakeholders in agriculture and absence of the required infrastructure. 

Indian agriculture is a gigantic producing-consuming market. It is faced with unprecedented challenges. The global developments in cutting edge technologies in conjunction with open market economy encourage the national potentials to gain a comparative advantage. With WTO and CBD related commitments to an altering World Order, Indian agriculture calls for commensurate action to national benefit. Agriculture has grown larger than mere cropping of organisms. India needs manpower to steer the agriculture sector through international disputes, trade intrigues and local-level litigation. People’s Biodiversity Registers and documentation of innovations of all kinds and at all levels should become indispensable through mass awareness and action. 

An improved protection of IPRs recommended by Howard D. Grimes et alia shall fail to provide the public good that ‘the world’s poorest populations’ actually need. IPRs in all its forms, shades and extensions, including Community and Farmers’ Rights, must be concurrently considered en bloc to create common public good. Only then shall IPRs benefit world’s agriculture.

SKT Nasar

Kolkata, India

sktnasar@hotmail.com

Protection of Traditional knowledge in India

By

Sunil Prasad and SKT Nasar 

Department of Biotechnology

Bengal College of Engineering and Technology, Durgapur

A write up for the IPR Workshop Proceedings.

IPR Workshop was held at Bengal College of Engineering and Technology, Durgapur

and

organised by WBCS&T and Department of Biotechnology on 30 March 2011

Introduction 

Human communities have generated, refined and relayed knowledge, technology, inventions and skills from generation to generation. The age-old production of wine, vinegar, organic manures, biofertilisers, traditional medicines, drugs, cosmetics, food additives, agricultural implements and distillation apparatuses for perfume making are acknowledged instances. Farmers have selected, bred, used and maintained varieties and types of crop plants, domesticated animals and fish since the beginning of organised human settlements. Selection of microbes for fermentation for homestead cheese production, yeast for pre-cooking fermentation and bacterial strains for curd making are common examples. Vast populations depend on traditional medicines, including ayurveda and unani remedies, for healthcare needs. 

Such traditional knowledge (TK) is an important component of cultural identity, food-nutrition security, medical need and livelihood of millions of people in India. Legal protection against exploitation of TK is minimal under common laws. The need for separate laws for protecting TK became essential.

TK versus industry

Despite the enormous volume of TK-based products, their production systems have not been categorised as industry simply because these belong to the unorganised sector. Unknown individuals or communities are the inventors of unrecorded TK and invention which is why Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) system disregarded TK as being patentable. Normal patent laws tend to provide time-bound ownership to individual inventors and for inventions demonstrating novelty and capability of industrial application. TK, on the other hand, has collective ownership, is held in perpetuity from generation to generation and is incremental, informal and occurs over time. 

India and the international community, following long and tortuous debates, finally accepted to recognise and protect TK by suitable laws. Since common laws were inadequate, a sui generis (i.e. unique unto itself) IPR law was considered indispensable to protect TK. The question was how to make appropriate laws for TK protection.

Country laws and international instruments

Legislatures enact laws for the welfare of the people. Laws in India are made within the Constitutional framework by the legislature – Parliament and State Assemblies. Such laws are known as Acts divided into sections.  Every Act authorises the government to frame rules consistent with connected laws. Acts and rules are announced through Gazette Notifications to be in effect. Designated executives issue orders.

Many a time, legislations are prompted by international commitments made by India in different fora notwithstanding anything contrary to Constitutional provisions. International fora are also referred to as international instruments. 

WTO and CBD

Attention is drawn here to just two among many such international instruments: World Trade Organisation (WTO) and Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD).

India became a member of the WTO on 1 January 1995. It also brought to reality — in an updated form — the failed attempt in 1948 to create an International Trade Organization (ITO). 

WTO is concerned with all trade related aspects among and between countries. It requires member countries to frame laws for equity in transborder trade. One major aspect of WTO is Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS).

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is another international legally binding treaty with three main goals: conservation of biological diversity (or biodiversity); sustainable use of its components; and fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from genetic resources. 

Biological resources as a global asset are vital to economic and social development. India is a party to the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity signed at the Earth Summit, Rio de Janeiro on 5 June 1992 when the Convention was opened for signature at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. 

Indian laws based on international commitments

India amended its Patent Act 1970 and enacted the Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers’ Rights Act 2001 in conformity with TRIPS. The Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration & Protection) Act, 1999 came into force in 2003 with the Geographical Indications (Registrations & Protections) rules were notified earlier in 2002.          

The Biological Diversity (BD) Act 2002 was made to provide for conservation of biological diversity, sustainable use of its components and fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the use of biological resources, knowledge and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

Traditional Knowledge (TK) 

Biological Diversity Agreement of CBD specifically provides that every member country “-- will respect, preserve and maintain, the innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities that entail traditional life styles which are pertinent for the preservation and sustainable use of biological diversity and will promote its broadest application, with the approval and participation of those who posses said knowledge, innovations and practices, and will encourage that benefits derived from the use of that knowledge, innovations and practices be shared fairly.”

Government of India, on the recommendations of the National Biodiversity Authority, framed rules in 2009 for ground level implementation of the provisions of BD Act. These rules are called the ‘Rules for Protection, Conservation and Effective Management of Traditional Knowledge Relating to Biological Diversity’.

Traditional Knowledge (TK) has been defined under these rules as:

“the collective knowledge of a traditional community including of a group of families, on a particular subject or a skill and passed down from generation to generation, either orally or in written form, relating to properties, uses and characteristics of plant and animal genetic resources; agricultural and healthcare practices, food preservation and processing techniques and devices developed from traditional materials; cultural expressions, products and practices such as weaving patterns, colors, dyes, pottery, painting, poetry, folklore, dance and music; and all other products or processes discovered through a community process including by a member of the community individually but for the common use of the community”. 

Recognition of collective rights

India provides for collective rights of communities over TK, location-specific or community-specific innovative products, forest management and biodiversity through separate laws. 

These rights must be used for the common good of all. Other uses for commercial, scientific and research purposes may be allowed only with prior informed consent (PIC) to be obtained from the traditional community.  

Misappropriation of TK (in any form of appropriation, monopolisation, including claims of private ownership and/or intellectual property rights etc.) which deprive the concerned traditional community from using, conserving and protecting TK is not permissible. TK and biological resources must be utilised for equitable access and benefit sharing (ABS).

TK and BD Registers

Communities and their government are required to maintain registers showing details of TK and biological diversity. 

Under BD Act, local BD Management Committees (BMC) of the panchayet level is responsible for creating and updating local-level BD Registers.

India has already put on the web the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL). This is an easily navigable computerised database of documented TK. Such digital database enables Indian citizens and Patent Offices around the world to search and examine any TK to prevent grant of erroneous patents and to deter biopiracy.

Government owned portals related to GI Act, Seed Act, PPV&FR Act, BD Act et cetera are of great help to those wishing to be updated on TK protection and related matters. The Innovation Foundation of India (IFI) web sites are also handy tools for understanding TK.

TK and Biotechnology

Biotechnology is divided into two major categories – the first generation non-rDNA biotechnology and the second generation rDNA biotechnology. As mentioned above, the first generation biotechnology is based fundamentally on TK. The two generations of biotechnologies are interdependent. For example, ‘gene hunt’ begins with biodiversity at the levels of extracellular DNA and that of higher organisms. Biotechnology has expanded in scope and has entered the era of nanobiotechnology.

Detailed knowledge about and the protection of TK blocks exploitation by unscrupulous commercial organisations within India and at the international scale. Biopiracy has taken different forms such as unauthorized use of just one gene or a cell or an organism, traditional techniques for utilisation of biodiversity, the granting of wrong patents, deliberate exploitative patents, granting patents without prior informed consent (PIC) etc. 

TK registers must, therefore, include molecular information on systems of biodiversity obtained through biotechnology tools and techniques.

Bioterrorism has gained current importance. This menace can be thwarted only by combining biotechnology and TK to enable quick and mass action by communities at the ground level.

Epilogue

Indian science and technology should take advantage of TK to launch new areas of research for the good of humanity. 

Technology institutions should include courses in TK and involve with the people to protect TK as a national heritage and treasure.

Here is one strategy for combating global warming!

Extracted from

TheScientist

Magazine of the Life Sciences

http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/57745/

Article by

By Carrie Arnold

Relief for parched plants

Heat and drought are wreaking havoc on the world's crops, but scientists are engineering plants that may be able to survive such harsh conditions   [Published 14th October 2010 02:47 PM GMT]

Blazing heat and drought across Russia have withered much of the country's wheat crop, triggering a dramatic rise in food prices worldwide. But what if plants could survive long periods without water?
Groups of scientists around the world are working on engineering crops that can do just that. And with temperatures and drought frequency expected to continue to climb, and an increasing demand on dwindling fresh water supplies, the need for drought-resistant plants is more pressing than ever.
"The number one limiting factor on [crop] yield in the world is available water," said Mark Lawson, an agricultural scientist at Monsanto, in St. Louis, Mo. And in many countries around the world, "drought is essentially an annual occurrence."
But scientists are looking for ways to tweak plant physiology to enable crops to feed the world using significantly less water. Many research groups have focused on improving root systems, which function like miniature straws to slurp water. Healthier, more abundant roots mean a plant can take up water from the soil more efficiently. Other scientists have begun to identify the subtle genetic differences between domesticated crops and their more drought-resistant wild relatives in search of water-saving tricks.
Plant biologist Sean Cutler of the University of California, Riverside, for example, has focused on the plant hormone abscisic acid (ABA). When a plant's roots sense a shortage of water in the surrounding soil, they synthesize ABA, which tells the plant to close microscopic pores on their leaves through which moisture can escape. Although closing these microscopic pores, known as stomata, prevents water loss, it also blocks the entry of carbon dioxide, a critical component of photosynthesis. Without sufficient CO2, plants can't photosynthesize and crop yield drops.
By studying how ABA triggers stomata closing, Cutler hopes to harness the plant's ability to conserve water without negatively affecting photosynthesis. His goal is to create a molecule that selectively activates certain ABA pathways under drought conditions to maximize water conservation, as well as photosynthesis. Crop plants don't respond well to a lack of water, he said. "What we want to do is tinker with the physiology a bit so that we can get better yields when conditions aren't ideal."
Paleobotanist Robin Allaby, at the University of Warwick in the UK, thinks that looking at the wild ancestors of current crops may be one of the keys to creating more drought-resistant plants. Domesticated barley (Hordeum vulgare) produces six smaller grains on each stalk, compared to two slightly larger grains on the wild variety. The greater number of grains and their higher protein content give them tremendous advantage as a food source, but previous research has shown that six-grain barley plants need more water than two-grain domestic barley.
In Qasr Ibrim, an archaeological site in southern Egypt, Allaby found evidence that the domestic barley grown there reverted to the wild-type two grain, and he suspects the barley may have evolved rapidly in response to drought conditions. "When plants need to change," he said, "they can change very, very quickly. They're very evolvable." This swift evolutionary response to drought may give scientists genetic clues about how crops can better survive water stress.
One such drought-resistant technique comes in the form of an enzyme known as proton pyrophosphatase in Arabidopsis. Proton pyrophosphatases reside in plant organelle membranes and maintain the proper electrical charge in the organelle by moving protons across the membrane. In Arabidopsis, this enzyme helps the plant survive stress from drought and salty soil by sequestering toxic sodium ions accumulated from the water the plants drink and storing them in the vacuole, a plant cell's storage tank, where they cannot harm the cell.
Furthermore, Roberto Gaxiola of Arizona State University recently found that the enzyme also enlarges the root system, which aids in water absorption under drought conditions. Gaxiola suspects the enzyme may increase the plant's sensitivity to growth hormones known as auxins, leading to greater root growth. "[Arabidopsis] can get water more efficiently because they have an enhanced root system." These plants still can experience drought, he added -- they just experience it later.
Genetically modified corn that carries a single bacterial gene has also shown increased drought resistance. The agricultural giant Monsanto has focused on a type of transgenic corn carrying the cold shock protein B (CSPB) gene from Bacillus subtilis, a common soil bacterium. Plants under stress often have misfolded RNA and proteins. Lawson and his colleagues believe that the CSPB gene may mitigate some of that misfolding and help the plant cell run more efficiently, just as it does in Bacillus. This improves RNA translation and photosynthesis capability, which ultimately increases yield.
The impact of the CSPB transgenic corn, or any other drought-resistant crop, is hard to calculate, Lawson said. Still, "being able to mitigate the effects that drought has on crops would be an extremely important characteristic to get into farmers' hands."
Although their approaches may differ, these scientists believe that more than one pathway exists towards the final goal of improving drought tolerance in crops. Even seemingly small improvements may have large affects.
"If it's a severe drought, like what they have in Russia right now, and we could boost yields by 20 percent in [those] bad years," Cutler said, "that would be huge."
The reader could also vie related stories:

1. Where's the super food?  [September 2009]
2. Video: How roots grow  [9th September 2010]
3. Mendel upended?  [February 2008]

Read more: Relief for parched plants - The Scientist - Magazine of the Life Sciences http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/57745/#ixzz12QS4uU9e

Feral Communities of Transgenic Canola in the USA

NatureNews published online; opinion posted on 2010-09-04. Can be accessed at http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100806/full/news.2010.393.html .

The Sagers report1 on the establishment of feral communities of two GM herbicide resistant canola varieties (Monsanto's Roundup Ready glyphosate tolerant canola and Bayer Crop Science's Liberty herbicide gluphosinate resistant canola) in the USA is a confirmation of earlier reports from Japan2, Australia and China. Feral communities of cropped plants originating from agrosystems are so common a phenomenon that it does not evoke attention. This is especially so because agrotechnique-pampered domesticated plant species unlike invasive weeds fail to establish communities in highly competitive natural ecosystems.

GM canola has mimicked an invasive weed in its establishment as feral communities and creation of double herbicide resistant hybrids apparently through cross pollination. This is a matter of serious concern. The report also indicates that transgenes do indeed cross genomic barriers albeit intervarietal barriers in the presnt case.

Doubts are rightly raised about the adequacy of GM regulatory procedures that evade provisions for monitoring the flow of transgenes or their parts to non-target genomes. A major flaw in GM biosafety monitoring mechanism is that assessments, if properly carried out, would take several years in most cases. Unfortunately, protocols for the emigration of transgenic plants via the contrivances of wind, flash floods, insects, birds and terrestrial animals are neither adequate nor transparent. GM biosafety mechanisms should include both the flight of transgenics to non-target ecosystems and the flow of transgenes to non-target genomes in a manner to be cost effective and universally reproducible on quick time basis.

Most regulatory mechanisms avoid the monitoring of subsoil residues of GM crops and their effects on rhizosphere biota and genomes of soil microorganism and on extracellular DNA. These aspects should be made essential components of GM biosafety assessment practice. Experimental formats for real time flow of transgenes are suggested here.

Subsoil metagenomic analysis is quick and common place for a moderately equipped laboratory 3, 4, 5 Transfer of large DNA by horizontal transfers across genomic barriers is well known. It would be easy for GM biosafety assessors to monitor relocation of transgenes or their parts to non-target DNA of the metagenome. Simple PCR runs of metagenomic DNA will reveal the presence or absence of the transgene under consideration. Presence of transgene DNA would ensure that transgene migration has indeed occurred.

Extracellular DNA (eDNA) is known to persist in soil environment for long 6, 7, 8. In all likelihood dead roots, mycorrhyzae, leaf litters, left over stubbs etc. will add to soil eDNA pools including the transgene or its part. Persisting eDNA containing the transgene or their parts may be recoursed to HGT to laterally move to other genomes at a later time. Tracing the presence of transgenes or parts thereof on eDNA would caution biosafety assessors about later possibilities of transgene flights from GM crop plants.

These new areas of researches should be publicly funded projects and must not be left to the will and wisdom of GM crop developers and lobbyists.

References

1. Natasha Gilbert 2010 GM crop escapes into the American wild: Transgenic canola found growing freely in North Dakota, Nature News, Published online 6 August 2010, Nature, doi:10.1038/news.2010.393.

2. Japan for Sustainability 2009 Japanese Consumer's Union Finds GM Canola Growing in Chiba Prefectur; International Society for Agricultural Meteorology December 23, 2009 09:47: http://www.agrometeorology.org/news/whats-new/japanese-consumers-union-finds-gm-canola-growing-in-chiba-prefectur; accessed on 4 September 2010.

3. Abulencia, C. B., Wyborski, D. L., Garcia, J. A., Podar, M., Chen, W., Chang, S. H. et al. (2006). Environmental whole-genome amplification to access microbial populations in contaminated sediments. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 725, 3291-3301.

4. Pushpender K. Sharma, Neena Capalash and Jagdeep Kaur 2007 An improved method for single step purification of metagenomic DNA; Molecular Biotechnology Volume 36, Number 1, 61-63.

5. Mei-Fong Pang, Noorlidah Abdullah, Choon-Weng Lee and Ching-Ching Ng 2008 Isolation of High Molecular Weight DNA from Forest Topsoil for Metagenomic Analysis; Asia Pacific Journal of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, Vol. 16 (2): 35-41.

6. Nielsen KM, Johnsen PJ, Bensasson D, Daffonchio D. 2007 Release and persistence of extracellular DNA in the environment; Environ Biosafety Res., 6:37-53.

7. Mitsuhiro Itaya and Shinya Kaneko 2010 Integration of stable extracellular DNA released from Escherichia coli into the Bacillus subtilis genome vector by culture mix method; Nucleic Acids Research 2010 38(8):2551-2557

8. Paul JH, Jeffrey WH, DeFlaun MF: Production of extracellular nucleic acids by genetically altered bacteria in aquatic-environment microcosms. Appl Environ Microbiol 1987, 55:1865-1869.

S.K.T. Nasar Ph. D. (IIT, Kharagpur)

Professor

Department of Biotechnology

Bengal College of Engineering and Technology

(Affiliated to West Bengal University of Technology)

Durgapur, West Bengal

Former Director of Research

Bidhan Chandra Krishi Viswavidyalaya

(i.e. Bidhan Chandra Agricultural University)

&

Honorary Vice-President

Maromi Human Resource Development Society (NGO)

Kolkata, West Bengal

skt.nasar@gmail.com

Genomic DNA Extraction is Play

Genomic DNA Extraction is Play


S.K.T. Nasar* & S. Farzaan D. Nasar**

Abstract

Application of molecular biology and biotechnology in agriculture has not spread across board because experimental protocols and related infrastructure are much too costly. Low-funded research laboratories and teaching institutions thus lack access to the tools of New Biology. One way to reverse the trend is by reducing costs of experiments without any compromise with quality. This presentation is a first step to that end.
Here we show an inexpensive protocol for the extraction of genomic DNA from living organisms that can be play for kids as well as professional molecular biologists.

The Background Story

We are grand father-grand son duo emotionally intertwined like the two complementary strands of a DNA duplex. Unlike the weak H bonds in the biomolecule, our attachment is due to divine bonds strengthened by a friendship extraordinaire.

Farzaan**, an eight-year old grandson of the 65-year old senior author* is a regular viewer of ‘Backyard Science’ television shows. Some months ago he taunted his grand father, a university teacher of plant molecular cytogenetics to train him perform molecular biology experiments in their home in Kolkata, India.

The kid had jeered at his friend-grandpa: “You bore me incessantly with your books and bla-bla about ‘jeans’ (genes), ‘Diana’ (DNA), ‘Rana’ (RNA). C’mon, shut up and play with me now*.

Grandpa couldn’t figure out the course of action; he didn’t want to distance himself with either Farzaan or DNA. Could DNA be a kid’s play, the Professor wondered! The oldie knew to perform experiments only in well-equipped labs! He was neither trained nor did he ever train his students for molecular experiments outside standard laboratories.

It was a virtually impossible challenge for the professional molecular cytogeneticist* until he stumbled upon ‘The MacGyver Project: Genomic DNA Extraction and Gel Electrophoresis Experiments Using Everyday Materials’1 through a Google search of Do-It-Yourself (DIY) sites. “Oh, no that cannot be true”, was an instant professional’s reaction.

He hesitantly tried the procedure and, it did happen. Wow, it could be play! He then, successfully extracted genomic DNA from a leaf of betel (Piper betle L.) known as paan chewed by many Indians including himself. Once successful with the protocol of Yas Shirazu et alia (2009)1, the present authors began playing the DNA game. Both were happy with the novel eduplay.

They found the MacGyver1 extraction procedure to be the most handy and amenable to home-kitchen experiments among several inexpensive protocols available online.

A bulb of onion (Allium cepa L.) is a preferred material for demonstration of genomic DNA extraction in most protocols. The duo thought of doing something different. They used onion flower-bunch known as inflorescence instead and obtained a substantial yield of DNA.

Protocol

The experimental details are essentially and fundamentally similar to many other procedures already out there. However, items available at home and indigenous materials available in the local Indian market were used.

Procedure

All items i.e. material, brass mortar-pestle, Aquaguard®-filtered drinking water, Vim® liquid dish washing soap, isopropanol or ethanol, homoeopathic vials etc, were pre-chilled in the icebox of a refrigerator.

Onion inflorescences attached to long stalks were purchased from a local vegetable vendor. The spathe (leafy wrap around the inflorescence) was removed. Flowers were, then, scraped from the tip of the stalk and put in a brass pestle for grinding.

One teaspoonful of water and a pinch of Tata® iodised table salt were added to flowers. The flower tissue was crushed by grinding and pulverised to make a viscous solution.

Two drops of Vim® detergent were added. The mixture was stirred gently with plastic ice-cream spoon for a few minutes.

The mixture was carefully poured in to a homoeopathic vial. Isopropanol, the rubbing alcohol, was slowly poured in the vial with an injection syringe to avoid disturbing the tissue suspension. Bubbles started rising almost immediately and in about ten minutes the DNA-cloud was seen between the mucky stratum of tissue-salt-soap mixture below and the clear alcohol layer above. DNA did not float as expected.

Absolute ethyl alcohol was added in place of isopropyl alcohol in our repeat experiments taking due care that all other steps remained unaltered.

A fascinating result was obtained (Fig. 1). Three vials represent the stages of precipitation and floatation of DNA.

Fig. 1 Stages of precipitation and floatation of Genomic DNA of Onion Flower

Epilogue

The duo embarked upon a series of genomic DNA extraction experiments with whatever uncooked live eatables they could lay hands on. The two generations, separated by 55 years, enjoyed every bit of what they did. It was another matter that each experiment left the home kitchen messier and the ladies angrier. It was play!

Good times didn’t last for long. Farzaan** shifted to Morrisville, USA. SKTN* took up teaching assignment at Bengal College of Engineering and Technology at Durgapur, West Bengal, India.

The two friends’ physical separation by continents, however, has not dampened but, in fact, boosted their eagerness. Both are now among the growing crowd of scientists committed to wiping out the psychological fear of Molecular Biology from the minds of all interested persons in homes, students in schools, young freshers in colleges and enterprising researchers in small-time developing laboratories anywhere in the world.

P. S.

The senior author* has since standardized the protocol and has shown (to-be-published work) that genomic DNA as obtained shows exact banding ( Fig. 2) when electrophoresed alongside DNA obtained by standard ‘professional’ protocols and is of equal PCR quality.

Fig.2 Genomic DNA from goat liver and from plant sp. after electrophoresis

He is aware of the ethical debates about DIY Molecular Biology by anyone interested anywhere. He, however, firmly believes that the outreach of Molecular Biology to outside of costly laboratories, as is the case with agricultural technology and information technology, shall attract billions of minds to understanding and application of New Biology to the well being of global citizens at low costs. He is including the inexpensive procedure in course curriculum and research project work of his current Biotechnology students.

Reference

1. Yas Shirazu, Donna Lee, and Esther Abd-Elmessih (2009) The MacGyver Project: Genomic DNA Extraction and Gel Electrophoresis Experiments Using Everyday Materials. Accessed at http://www.scq.ubc.ca/the-macgyver-project-genomic-dna-extraction-and-gel-electrophoresis-experiments-using-everyday-materials/

*Correspondence: Professor, Department of Biotechnology, College of Engineering & Technology, Durgapur-713212, West Bengal, India.

Residence: 26 C Kalupara Lane, Dhakuria, Kolkata-700 031, West Bengal, India//skt.nasar@gmail.com

**Present address: Cedarfork Primary School, Morrisville, NC, USA// farzaan.nasar@gmail.com

Citation: Nasar & Nasar 2010 (29 Jan 2010) Blogger: Issues in Future Agriculture

Issues in Future Agriculture: Biotechnology Education: Future in India

Issues in Future Agriculture: Biotechnology Education: Future in India

Biotechnology Education: Future in India

Comment
By
S.K.T. Nasar
Vice-President, Maromi Human Resource Development Society, Kolkata
On
‘Are biotechnology degree courses relevant?’
(S.C. Lakhotia 2008 Current Science, Vol. 94, No. 10, 25 May 2008, 1244-1245)


This well-written, bold and timely opinion (1) invites all concerned with policy, implementation, education, R&D and future of biotechnology in India for a vigorous rethink. The opinari is largely acceptable but for its pessimism. The concluding suggestion that “It is high time that all school and undergraduate stand-alone teaching programmes in biotechnology/bioinformatics, etc. are stopped --” needs amendment.

Biotechnology, to use the simile of Swanson (2), can be likened to a river that “-- has its obscure and unpretentious beginning; its quiet stretches as well as its rapids; its period of drought as well as of fulness. It gathers momentum with the work of many investigators and as it is fed by other streams of thought; it is deepened and broadened by the concepts and generalizations that are gradually evolved. Along its course it may be tapped by other disciplines, and its waters made to irrigate large areas of experiment and practice. Eventually it ceases to become narrowly restricted in a channelized course, and its substance becomes part of a larger and more comprehensive body of thought –.”

Biotechnology concept originated noiselessly and remained unattended for the purposes of education, social development and business but got an unprecedented boost after the construction of plasmid pSC101 (3, 4). Businesses were attracted to biotechnology in the early eighties on the conclusion of Asilomar Conference (5) debates on recombinant DNA (rDNA) biosafety and after settlement of Diamond versus Chakrabarty suit (6). rDNA-based biotechnology took deeper roots at about this time. Unfettered developments in New Biology enormously expanded the scope of biotechnology. OECD (7), while biotechnology degree programmes began mushrooming, considered four main subfields of biotechnology - green biotechnology to do with agriculture, blue biotechnology concerned with aquatic uses, white biotechnology, also called grey biotechnology used in industry, and red biotechnology for medical purposes.

Kảroly (Karl) Ereky (8) coined the term “biotechnologie” (biotechnology) in 1919 which, to him, is an important engine for economic growth and social development through innovations in agriculture for higher food production.

Definition of biotechnology varies extensively. Many consider that biotechnology originated with the beginnings of domestication of life forms and organised agriculture while others trace the origins back to the advent of fermentation technology and the use of living organisms for extraction of medicines etc. Modern biochemists-turned-biotechnologists tend to restrict the definition based exclusively on rDNA, referred commonly by the media as ‘genetic engineering’. Nasar (9), in agreement with OECD (7), divides biotechnology into two broad categories: the "first generation non-rDNA" biotechnology and the "second generation rDNA" biotechnology. Over time, both non-rDNA and rDNA biotechnologies have enormously widened in knowledge, scope and application so much so that, at times, the distinction between the two categories is obliterated.

Biotechnology is a combination of biology and technology and, thereby, encompasses various societal needs. In view of neo-globalisation, biotechnology takes the centrestage in respects of research, education, intercontinental-to-domestic trade and business, community participation and national and global laws. The demand for biotechnologists is growing.

The last three decades have witnessed new discoveries in areas such as eDNA, biofilms, epigenetics, HGT, submolecular-to-supramolecular biology, subcellular-to-organ biology, production of designer cell, organ and organism, bioassay, bioaugmentation, biochip, biosensing, biodegrdation, bioremediation, synthetic biology, forensic science etc. that have revolutionised man’s world view. These discoveries, and much more to come in conjunction with revolutions in computer technology, automation, engineering, medicine, surgery, nanotechnology, astrobiology etc have altered the concept, scope and application of both non-rDNA and rDNA biotechnologies.

Newer paradigms in biotechnologies have opened innovative vistas in research, education, and production-value addition-consumption systems. Global trade and business are intricately linked with different forms of IPR regime, international protocols and instruments, and laws applicable to biologicals, environment and biotechnology.

Novel and worldwide job opportunities are becoming available in biotechnologies. The future will throw up new universal opportunities and challenges to the gen-next. India must cater to the world as it is and for the world as it will be. Both research and education should serve today’s needs and fulfill tomorrow’s obligations. India cannot afford to wait and watch.

It is in this context that research, teaching and application of biotechnology in the broadening sense are an imperative. The private sector took the lead in biotechnology business, investments, research and education. The public sector took off reluctantly but soon burst into activity to compete with the private sector enterprise. Curiously, most universities in the public sector took pride in their biotechnology endeavours in research and teaching for profit in the garb of ‘self financing’ the adventure. Here lay the downside of biotechnology development in India.

Public sector degree-awarding research-teaching institutions with the traditional departments such as of botany, zoology, and microbiology were loath to changing times. The faculty did not want to come out of their cozy niche and address new challenges. Curiously again, these departments introduced biotechnology in their syllabi at the cost of the new advances in their own subjects. The private sector had a wide-open field to operate. These institutions coordinated with biotechnology business ventures, reoriented their syllabi accordingly and, with the help of really effective placement cells, were able to find jobs for alumni. The public sector institutions lagged behind. As a consequence, the students of the public sector institutions put up a poker face and deservedly attracted the pessimism by Lakhotia (1).

Biotechnology failed aspirations in India for three major reasons; first, biotechnology is still considered by the academia as confined exclusively to rDNA biotechnology to the exclusion of new emerging areas such as mentioned above, second, lack of indispensable efforts to make available trained faculty for different facets of both rDNA and non-rDNA biotechnologies and, third, feeble investments in the infrastructure development. Biotechnology has a wide variety of career opportunities ranging from sales and marketing, to research and development, to manufacturing and quality control and assurance and more.

Nasar (9) holds that rDNA biotechnologies are the greatest gifts of the twentieth century to the humankind, but for the intellectual property rights restrictions on use by poor economies. The non-rDNA biotechnology is principally in the public domain and is, therefore, accessible to all. On the other hand, the rDNA biotechnology is basically and mostly in the IPR domain and, thereby, allows constricted accessibility to poor end-users in the developing and underdeveloped countries. Nasar (9) suggested a combination of both first and second-generation biotechnologies with emphasis on the former for research and development (R&D) and end use by developing and undeveloped economies.

The good news is that biotechnology laboratories have ‘mushroomed’ all around. Some may like, dislike, or even distaste the fact the beginning has been made. The task is to reorganise these institutions into skilled, forward looking and globally competitive organisations. India now has public-private sector institutions. Superior students are good in theory and need more practical training. Filling in this gap will raise standards. Each institution may be encouraged to undertake specialised approach to selected facet of biotechnology. Law colleges may provide specialised courses in areas pertaining to national and international laws, protocols and instruments concerning biology, biotechnology, biodiversity and the like. Universities may be cajoled to undertake studies in biotechnology management, business and futurology. Newer areas of biotechnologies will keep popping up at an ever-increasing faster rate. The National Policy on Biotechnology should continuously take into account such emerging areas and suggest strategic actions.

India can and should become a leader in biotechnology. That is a distinct possibility.

References
1. Lakhotia S.C. Current Science, Vol. 94, No. 10, 25 May 2008, 1244-1245.
2. Swanson C.P. In Cytology and Cytogenetics, Prentice Hall Inc., 1957, p.1.
3. Cohen, S.N., A.C.Y. Chang, H.W. Boyer and R.B. Helling, Construction of biologically functional bacterial plasmids in vitro. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., (USA), 70(11): 1973, 3240-3244.
4. Cohen SN and Chang AC. Revised interpretation of the origin of the pSC101 plasmid. J Bacteriol 1977 Nov; 132(2), 1977, 734-737.
5. Berg, P., Baltimore, D., Brenner, S., Roblin, R.O. III, Singer, M.F., "Summary statement of the Asilomar Conference on recombinant DNA molecules," Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA 72, 1975, pp. 1981-1984, also Science 188, 1975, p. 991.
6. United States Supreme Court June 16, DIAMOND v. CHAKRABARTY, 447 U.S. 303, 1980.
7. OECD, Recombinant DNA Safety Considerations. National Experts on Biotechnology. Paris, 1986. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/45/54/1943773.pdf (Accessed on 28 August 2008)
8. Ereky, K. Biotechnologie der Fleisch-, Fett- und Milcherzeugung im landwirtschaftlichen Grosbetriebe. Verlag Paul Parey, Berlin. 1919, 84p;
9. Nasar S.K.T 2007 FAO Forum Conf 14 (Water) - 5 March 2007 www.fao.org/Biotech/logs/C14/050307.htm (Accessed on 28 August 2008)