The US recently approved the genetically modified fruit, which has enhanced nutritional qualities.
An Egyptian worker gathers the crop at a maize field, the country’s first harvest of genetically modified maize in 2008.
Khaled Desouki/AFP via Getty Images
A regulatory approach will place an unnecessary burden on bio-innovators. This will discourage local investment for in-house R&D, as well as projects in the public sector.
Farmers test new practices to cope with climate impacts in Kenya.
Cecilia Schubert/Climate Smart Kenya/CCAFS/Flickr
Hardline positions could narrow the options available to farmers and conservation practitioners in a way that can be harmful to both.
Soybean plants on an Arkansas farm. Those at left show signs of damage from dicamba; others at right were planted later in the season.
Washington Post via Getty Images
Farmers are stuck in a chemical war against weeds, which have developed resistance to many widely used herbicides. Seed companies’ answer – using more varied herbicides – is causing new problems.
Most U.S.-grown soybeans are genetically modified, so products containing them may be required to carry the new ‘bioengineered’ label.
Johannes Eisele/AFP via Getty Images
GM proponents say the technology leads to better crop yields and may solve food shortages and reduce pests. Opponents say GM is a threat to the environment and humans. So where does the truth lie?
People are faced with a lot of misinformation about both GMOs and COVID.
Evan Clayburg
For anyone who has worked on crop improvement in Africa over the last three decades, the flood of misinformation around vaccines evokes an eerie sense of déjà vu.
The quest for a tasty decaf may change the way we think about GMOs.
(Shutterstock)
Genetically modified organisms can help address current agricultural challenges, but public opinion is against them. Maybe the search for delicious decaf coffee could lead to widespread acceptance.
Harvest from a confined field trial in Uganda shows a significantly higher yield (right) for the 3R Victoria potato, and without the use of fungicide.
CIP
A new biotech regulation allows companies to self-police and decide which crops should be regulated. The new rule is likely to amplify greater distrust of GM crops.
What determines whether a genetically modified vegetable or fruit is natural?
VICTOR HABBICK VISIONS/SCIENCE PHOTO LIBRARY
What criteria should be used to determine whether a food is natural? What if gene-editing techniques produce changes indistinguishable from those that evolve naturally? Is the food still natural?
Soybean farmers in Brazil sued Monsanto for a royalty collection system that they say violates their planting rights. A soybean harvest in Mato Grosso, Brazil, March 27, 2012.
AP Photo/Andre Penner, File)
Karine Eliane Peschard, Graduate Institute – Institut de hautes études internationales et du développement (IHEID)
Farmers worldwide say Monsanto’s policy of charging for every use of its genetically modified seeds violates their planting rights. But judges in these patent law cases aren’t so sure.
A government-commissioned report estimated that South Australia’s ban on genetically modified crops cost canola growers A$33 million since 2004.
Greenpeace/AAP Image
South Australia has lifted its moratorium on GM crops, while Tasmania has extended its ban. But the question should no longer be a simple binary of being “for” or “against” GM technology.
CRISPR/Cas9 gene-editing technology is being used in field from agriculture to medicine to food security and disease control.
TotallyMJ/Shutterstock.com
You may not agree with using the gene-editing tool, CRISPR, to alter the DNA of human babies. But what about using it to engineer plants? Or wipe out one of the world’s most dangerous creatures?