Chapter 5 Genetic Analysis of Apomixis - cimmyt

Ge••1i< Eo,i.....iog of A,....I. io s...aI Cr.,.: ACrlliuol As........' of Iloo Aponolxl. WoolotY 239apomixis for crop improvement. Theseapomixis patents raised concerns about the useof apomixis technology. The RuralAdvancement Foundation International(RAFI), a nongovernmental organization,recently expressed the concern that apomixisIPR could wind up in the hands of only a fewdominate global agrobusiness players, and thatfarmers in both developed and developingcountries might become totally dependent ontheir seed products. Other concerns are thatgenetic diversity could significantly declineand that developing countries will not haveaccess to this technology because they will beunable to afford the required rights andlicenses (RAFI 1998). The latter concern isshared by leading apomixis researchers andwas formalized in 1998 in the BellagioApomixis Declaration (for full text, see http:/ /billie.harvard.edu/apomixis). Signatories tothe declaration were interested in how todevelop novel approaches for generating theenabling technology, and how to patent andlicense it. Currently, patents related to apomixisenabling technology are dispersed amongmany parties (Table 14.2). Furthermore, it isexpected that the number of patents willgreatly swell as numerous public and privateresearch institutions continue investigatingdifferent aspects of apomictic and amphimicticreproduction pathways using different speciesand approaches (see e.g., Bicknell and Bicknell1999).Another negative impact stemming fromapomixis patents is that communication ofresearch results to the scientific community iseither delayed until patents have been filed orthey are Simply not communicated at all. AWidespread phenomenon in today'sbiomedical research is that while IPR isgrowing rapidly, scarce resources are poorlyutilized because too many patent owners areblocking one another. Paradoxically, more IPRmay lead to fewer useful products for theimprovement of human health (Heller andEisenberg 1998). In regards to apomixis, it isunlikely that the situation will change in thenear future because it is still pOSSible to file verybroad apomixis patents.The question of whether farmers in developingcountries will get access to disclosed apomixistechnology remains unanswered. One canhope that many of the relevant patents will besecured by public organizations such as theConsultative Group on InternationalAgricultural Research (CGIAR) and otherpublic institutions (see Hoisington et al. 1999),thus giving interested parties in developingcountries the possibility of acquiring freeaccess to this powerful technology. Certainly,the public image of the big agrobusinessplayers would benefit from freely licensing thetechnology to CGIAR institutions or directlyhelping farmers in developing countries usethis technology. The bulk of profits, after all,will be earned in the more developedcountries. Introducing the apomixis trait intolocal varieties would give farmers indeveloping countries access to powerful andproductive hybrid technology (Hoisington etal. 1999). To some extent, these farmers shouldhave the right to save seed for subsequentreplanting, thus allowing them to significantlyincrease their crop yield and personal income.Risk Assessment StudiesRisk assessment research and studies relate tothe use and or release of genetically modifiedorganisms (GMOs) into the environment. Sincethe first release of genetically m·odified plants(GMPs) some twelve years ago, many shorttermstudies have been conducted (de Vries1998). Short- and long-term risk assessmentstudies are also needed to evaluate theenvironmental implications ofnovel apomicticcrops. One key issue for investigation iswhether the apomixis trait can move to thelandraces and wild ancestors of food crop