Federal Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau on Wednesday announced updated guidance from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency that sets gene-edited seeds on the same regulatory level as conventionally-bred seed varieties.

Taken with last year’s related updates by the federal health department to Canada’s Novel Food Regulations, CFIA’s new opinion opens the door for gene-edited seeds’ unregulated use in Canadian fields.

Grower groups whose members have waited years for gene-edited seed to come to Canada lined up Wednesday to hail CFIA’s decision as a potential watershed moment for the domestic ag industry.

But advocates for Canadian organic growers, whose buyers consider gene-edited to also be genetically modified, say the decision will leave the organic sector dependent on seed and biotech firms’ willingness to disclose their handiwork.

Risks not ‘unique or identifiable’

In its updated directive, CFIA said it’s the “scientific opinion of (the agency) that gene-editing technologies do not present any unique or specifically identifiable environmental or human health safety concerns as compared to other technologies of plant development.”

With that in mind, CFIA said it “does not foresee an outcome of conventional breeding where an authorization for environmental release would be required, other than in the case of herbicide-tolerant plants.”

In other words, a company wanting to release a plant with novel traits (PNT) will still need to apply for, and receive, CFIA authorization before that plant is released into the environment — that is, if the PNT still has any DNA from foreign organisms, and/or a new commercially-viable herbicide tolerance trait.

That would also apply to any gene-edited PNT in which any foreign DNA used to encode “gene-editing machinery” — such as in the CRISPR process — remains in the final product and hasn’t been removed through rounds of breeding and selection.

In cases where a plant isn’t a PNT, CFIA said, a plant’s proponents are “expected to fully participate in mechanisms that provide transparency about non-novel products” — such as the Health Canada Transparency Initiative and the Canadian Variety Transparency Database.

It also “remains the proponent’s responsibility to notify the CFIA if the plant could have significant negative environmental impacts and be considered a PNT.”

CFIA said its decision follows consultations with plant breeding, industry and regulatory experts and stakeholders, as well as a public consultation that ran from May through September 2021.

In its release Wednesday, the federal ag department noted the U.S., Japan, Australia, Argentina and Brazil have already “clarified the pathway” for gene-edited products, while New Zealand, the U.K. and the European Union (EU) “are in the process of doing so.”

‘Trusted and safe’

Canada’s competitiveness in world ag markets — and its crops’ resilience against environmental and climate stresses — were common themes among the groups hailing CFIA’s decision Wednesday.

“The CFIA’s updated guidance helps Canada stay competitive on the global stage,” Krista Thomas, vice-president of seed innovation for the Canada Grains Council, said in a separate release.

“Many of our trading partners have already adopted similar science-based policies, and farmers outside of Canada have been growing gene edited crops since 2015. When we let the science be the core of regulatory decision making, we know that the end result can be trusted and is safe.”

Keith Currie, president of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, said in the government’s release that CFIA’s new guidance “will ultimately help Canadian farmers access new plant varieties that are more resilient to pests and extreme weather events and support our food security and sustainability objectives.”

Greg Sears of the Alberta Wheat Commission said seeds gene-edited for efficient use of resources give farmers “another opportunity to manage inputs more effectively, while sustaining ecosystems and reducing greenhouse gas” — an important development after another year in which Alberta growers “seeded the most expensive crop in recent history.”

Canola Council of Canada president Jim Everson said the guidance will also “encourage new and additional research and development investment in Canada.”

Soy Canada, in a separate statement, noted the country’s soy industry has “excelled at meeting diverse customer needs” including organic, non-genetically modified, genetically modified and identity-preserved soybeans — and meeting any such specific needs “remains an important priority for the industry.”

“Our customers know that we excel at providing a diverse range of products,” Soy Canada’s executive director Brian Innes said in a release. “We’re committed to continue providing customers what they want once we commercialize soybeans created using gene editing.”

‘Shocking’

Other groups, however, don’t expect the new guidance will assure buyers looking for non-GMO or organic crops from Canadian growers.

In a joint release Wednesday, several such groups said CFIA’s guidance means gene-edited crops that have no foreign DNA — and any foods produced from those crops — “will not go through any government approval process at Health Canada or the CFIA, but can be released onto the market by companies without any safety data submitted to the government.”

Given that organic standards allow only for conventionally-bred crops and not for gene-edited or genetically modified plants, the result will be “unknown (genetically modified) foods and seeds on the market that have not been subject to any independent safety assessment,” they said.

Lucy Sharratt, co-ordinator of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network, called CFIA’s guidance “a shocking abdication of responsibility by our regulators” that “asks Canadian farmers and consumers to trust unseen corporate science.”

Allowing gene-edited seed to enter Canadian agriculture unchallenged could “ultimately destroy the systems that farmers and many food companies have set up to deliver non-GM choices to consumers,” National Farmers Union president Jenn Pfenning said in the same release.

“This decision needs to be reversed, or over time, it will eliminate our ability to offer reliable non-GM food choices, including organic food.”

Garry Johnson, president of SaskOrganics, said “not ensuring full disclosure of all GM seeds through a mandatory public registry, will make it challenging for organic farmers to meet the requirements of the Canadian Organic Standards.”

‘Informed decisions’

In her release Wednesday, Bibeau said that “in light of discussions with the government-industry committee, we will protect the integrity of organic certification.”

Her announcement Wednesday included plans for creation of a “government-industry steering committee on plant breeding innovations transparency, to facilitate ongoing discussions as gene-edited products are introduced in the marketplace.”

Bibeau also said an expansion of the Seeds Canada Canadian Variety Transparency Database will provide transparency around individual seed varieties — and new federal oversight of that database “will ensure (its) completeness and robustness.”

Bibeau also committed Ottawa to “again provide funding to support the review of Canada’s organic standards.” Those standards, updated every five years, are next due for renewal in 2025.

CFA’s Currie, in the government’s release, said those commitments “will help ensure farmers can continue to make informed decisions on what they produce.” — Glacier FarmMedia Network

The post Gene-edited crops clear CFIA’s regulatory bar appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Researchers said on Thursday they planted seeds of a diminutive flowering weed called Arabidopsis thaliana in 12 small thimble-sized containers each bearing a gram of moon soil, more properly called lunar regolith, and watched as they sprouted and grew. Lunar regolith, with its sharp particles and lack of organic material, differs greatly from Earth soil, so it was unknown whether seeds would germinate.

“When we first saw that abundance of green sprouts cast over all of the samples, it took our breath away,” said horticultural sciences professor Anna-Lisa Paul, director of the University of Florida Interdisciplinary Center for Biotechnology Research and co-leader of the study published in the journal Communications Biology.

“Plants can grow in lunar regolith. That one simple statement is huge and opens the door to future exploration using resources in place on the moon and likely Mars,” Paul said.

Every seed germinated and there were no outward differences at the early stages of growth between those sown in the regolith — composed mostly of crushed basalt rocks — and seeds sown for comparative reasons in volcanic ash from Earth with similar mineral composition and particle size.

The regolith seeds, perhaps unsurprisingly, did less well than the comparison plants. They were slower to grow and generally littler, had more stunted roots and were more apt to exhibit stress-related traits such as smaller leaves and deep reddish black colouration not typical of healthy growth. They also showed gene activity indicative of stress, similar to plant reactions to salt, metal and oxidation.

“Even though plants could grow in the regolith, they had to work hard metabolically to do so,” Paul said.

To the researchers, the fact that they grew at all was remarkable. Study co-leader Rob Ferl, a University of Florida assistant vice-president for research, said he felt “joy at watching life do something that had never been done before.”

“Seeing plants grow is an achievement in that it says that we can go to the moon and grow our food, clean our air and recycle our water using plants the way we use them here on Earth. It is also a revelation in that it says that terrestrial life is not limited to Earth,” Ferl added.

Arabidopsis, also called thale cress, is widely used in scientific research, including previous experiments in orbit, owing to its speedy life cycle and a deep understanding of its genetics.

NASA made available 12 grams — just a few teaspoons — of regolith collected during the Apollo 11, Apollo 12 and Apollo 17 missions. The researchers planted three or four seeds in a dozen containers moistened with a nutrient solution, then placed them in a laboratory at about 73 F (23 C) under LED lights giving off a pink hue.

The seeds sprouted within three days. After about a week of growth, the researchers removed all but one plant from each container. The one was left to grow until it was 20 days old, with its leaves then harvested to assess gene activity.

The researchers also determined that regolith that had experienced longer exposure to cosmic rays and solar wind on the lunar surface was less hospitable to growth.

Earth plants could help people establish outposts in places like the moon and Mars, as depicted in the 2015 film The Martian when an astronaut grew potatoes on the Red Planet. NASA’s Artemis program envisions people returning to the moon’s surface in the coming years.

“Plants are deeply embedded in the science of space exploration because of their life-support role, especially when we consider leaving the Earth for extended periods of time,” Ferl said.

— Reporting for Reuters by Will Dunham.

The post In one giant leap for Earth plants, seeds are grown in moon soil appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

As a result, some products could be sold to farmers without a USDA review — a move that comes despite concerns by consumer groups over biotech crops.

The final rule is the first major overhaul of USDA’s regulations over biotech plants, seeds and microbes since 1987, the agency said. Previously, USDA’s review system focused on genetically modified organisms, where a gene is added from another organism.

Existing regulations have not kept up with emerging technologies such as plant gene editing, which works like the find-and-replace function on a word processor: It finds a gene and then makes changes by amending or deleting it.

Scientists can edit genomes more precisely and rapidly, and altered agricultural products could get to market more quickly and cheaply, say biotech advocates.

If a company uses biotech to create a product that has traits that could have been achieved through traditional plant breeding, it would no longer have to go through a pre-market review through USDA, the agency said.

Such products typically require USDA to conduct a risk assessment of whether they can cause or spread plant diseases, among other vetting. Some of those products also are reviewed or regulated by the Food and Drug Administration, which has oversight over food safety, and the Environmental Protection Agency.

“If it’s a GMO, that’s basically what they’ve been looking at over and over again for the past 20 years, they’re saying they don’t need to look at new examples,” said Clint Nesbitt, senior director of science and regulatory affairs with Biotechnology Innovation Organization, an industry group that represents companies such as Bayer.

“If what you’ve done with gene editing could have been done with plant breeding, you’re good to go,” Nesbitt said.

The change, first proposed during the Obama administration, comes after U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order last summer directing federal agencies to streamline the review process for agricultural biotechnology including genetically modified livestock and seeds.

Consumers have pushed for years for greater transparency over what is in their food, fighting for GMO labeling on consumer products against pushback from farmers, biotech firms and food companies that argue such genetically engineered ingredients are safe.

Genetically modified crops were a sticking point between the United States and China during their trade war. Beijing took years to approve new strains of those crops, which U.S. companies and farmers have complained stalls trade by restricting the sales of new products.

— P.J. Huffstutter reports on agriculture and agribusiness for Reuters from Chicago; additional reporting by Tom Polansek in Chicago.

The post USDA limits review requirements of some biotech farm products appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“A variety of tree and shrub species can be found in Alberta’s urban and rural areas including ones that, in theory, should not be grown here at all due to our harsh climate conditions,” said Toso Bozic. “However, they are doing just fine on our farms, acreages, cities and towns, and provide great beauty and diversity alongside our native tree and shrub species.”

Having variety of trees and shrubs is a bulwark against disease outbreaks.

“If you have only a few species of trees or shrubs, an insect or disease outbreak will instantly have an impact and can kill them all at once,” said Bozic. “In a group of diverse trees and shrubs, the pest that damages one particular species will not affect the other species’ health and vigour, while another species’ beneficial insects or bacteria may control unwanted pests.”

It’s a similar story when it comes to drought, flooding, and sudden cold snaps.

“Each variety has its own way to adapt to those conditions, boosting the chance of its own survival as well as the survival of the whole ecosystem.”

Each tree and shrub also creates its own ecosystem, and collectively form a more complex forestry ecosystem. Having more diverse trees and shrubs will improve soil nutrients; create a different microclimate; and attract wildlife and beneficial insects, said Bozic.

Other benefits include more genetic diversity and higher property values from attractive landscaping.

But when choosing species, you need to consider a number of factors, including soil type and moisture, shade or full sunlight, exposure, space, drought, and frost-free days. Characteristics such as size, shape, form, bark colour, flowering colour and patterns, and growth rate should also be considered.

Property owners may also consider the merits of native and introduced tree and shrub species, said Bozic.

“Native species are naturally adaptive to our environment, but many introduced species are also adaptive and very hardy here,” he said. “Some species may not thrive here but still survive in our climate.”

A little scouting of your area is a good way to get ideas about potential species.

“People love to see new and unusual trees and shrubs in their neighbourhood, farm, or community,” he said. “A quick look around your neighbours’ property, and the parks and boulevards of your cities and towns, may give you some ideas for what to plant,” says Bozic. “Be creative and experiment.”

For more information, go to www.agriculture.alberta.ca (search for ‘trees and plants’) or contact Bozic at 780-415-2681.

The post You’ve got more (landscaping) choices than you think appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Topping or cutting back herbaceous perennials can help prevent the overwintering of diseases and insects. Mulching will help to prevent plants from being forced from the ground (but apply mulch after the ground is frozen). Watering lightly after applying the mulch will help hold it in place.

To prevent root damage during the winter, it’s important to have a reserve of moisture in the root zone for all plants in the yard. Fill the soil profile with water in mid-October or just before the ground freezes.

Broadleaf herbicides for lawns applied on a warm day will control dandelions, chickweed, and clover. Mow the lawn as long as the grass continues to grow. To prevent damage to the crown of the grass, cut the lawn five to six centimetres long.

Alberta Yards & Gardens: What to Grow offers detailed information on growing ornamental trees and shrubs, small fruits and berries, flowers, vegetables, herbs and water plants. The book costs $15 and can be ordered online at agriculture.alberta.ca or by calling 780-427-0391.

The post Fall yard care pays dividends next year appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“Winter annuals are weeds that germinate in the fall or late fall, go through the winter in a rosette form, and go to seed quickly once spring comes,” said Harry Brook.

Common winter annuals include stinkweed, shepherd’s purse, scentless chamomile, narrow-leaved hawk’s beard, bluebur, stork’s-bill, ball mustard, peppergrass, downy brome, dog mustard, wormseed mustard, chickweed, flixweed, knawel, night-flowering catchfly, and common groundsel.

“They form a few leaves in the fall, and overwinter in that state,” said Brook. “These plants develop their own anti-freeze, preventing them from dying. It gives the plants an advantage the following spring as it will send up a seed stalk and go to seed before most other plants get started.”

Winter annuals also deplete soil moisture and nutrients in the fall and spring. A spring herbicide application is too often late as the plants are well established and may already be going to flower or seed.

Tillage is an effective control measure, but conservation and zero tillage, a late-fall application of herbicide is the best route. This should be done from late September to mid- or late October, depending on the fall and the problem weeds.

“A successful fall weed control program requires the right conditions,” said Brook. “Weed control, even after a frost, can still be very effective as long as the weeds have some green, actively growing plant material.”

Winter annuals are able to continue growing, even after the first frost, until the ground freezes, he added.

Most winter annuals can be controlled in the spring, except for narrow-leaved hawk’s beard, but control after they bolt is a lot more expensive and less effective.”

Herbicide options are very economical in the fall. Chemicals such as 2,4-D and MCPA provide good control and, at recommended rates, will be safe for most crops the subsequent spring, said Brook.

“It is important to know the problem winter annuals you have so you can pick the best herbicide for it. Glyphosate works well in mixtures, on many winter annuals but it may not be the best one depending on the weed.”

Other common herbicides used for winter annuals are dicamba, tribenuron-methyl and bromoxynil.

Problem perennial weeds such as Canada thistle, quackgrass, dandelion, and sow thistle are best controlled by a fall application of herbicide. Once again, the plants need some green leaf material and be actively growing. Dandelion seedlings are easy to control in the fall but, after overwintering, they become almost bulletproof.

Because herbicides such as 2,4-D, MCPA, and Dicamba have some residual effect, be careful with the following spring’s crop, said Brook.

“There will be little breakdown of the chemical over winter and there might be some carry-over effects on the succeeding crop. When using dicamba, tribenuron-methyl, 2,4-D or MCPA you might want to do a bioassay prior to seeding any non-cereal crop. A bioassay is simply taking some of the soil and trying to grow plants in it prior to actual seeding. If the plants die, don’t seed.”

The post Now’s the time to attack winter annual weeds appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

“I’ve heard it said that 80 to 90 per cent of successful weed elimination comes from a competitive crop,” said Matt Gosling, an agronomist in the Strathmore area. “This year we didn’t have a lot of competitive crops and I saw a lot of dirtier-than-normal fields.”

Canada thistle thrived in the dry weeks of May and June and winter annuals were also prevalent in fields across the province.

Pre-harvest glyphosate applications are favoured by many farmers for its two-for-one desiccation and weed control benefits, but it may not be the best way to control stubborn weeds this year.

“In most circumstances, we have good staging for spraying weeds now, but it makes me nervous that we have so many days before weeds go into dormancy,” said Gosling.

This year, applying herbicide after harvest may be the better option as it gives perennial and winter annual weeds less time to grow through the chemical application and survive the winter. A post-harvest application also offers more flexibility for tank mixing various herbicides with the glyphosate — an industry-recommended strategy for reducing herbicide-resistant weeds.

His customers have plenty of time to control weeds after harvest, said Gosling.

“We’re already into harvest a month earlier than normal so we’ve got maybe 50 days before long-term frost patterns set in. The most successful perennial weed control I’ve seen is in early October.”

An early harvest also gives farmers another weed control option that does not increase selection pressure for herbicide-resistant weeds such as wild oats. Winter cereals — while a “logistically challenging crop to get in” — provides the early-spring competition necessary to keep many weeds in check.

“Every time I’ve ever grown winter wheat, I can’t remember spraying for wild oats,” said Gosling. “Every time we don’t spray we buy ourselves one more year of resistance.”

Gosling actually recommended not spraying for wild oats in some of his clients’ spring-seeded crops this year. Where dry spring conditions made for tight budgets and very low wild oat presence, Gosling thought it was worth cutting out a year of herbicide tolerance selection pressure, even if it meant a few wild oats went to seed.

Wheatland County farmer Jay Schultz feels he isn’t sure whether skipping a spray is the right choice. He understands the principle behind decreasing selection pressure, but his goal is to “overall decrease (the) number of weeds for the long term.”

Schultz faces a challenge in a field of peas where lab tests confirmed Group 1- and Group 2-resistant wild oats this year. He sprayed the crop with glyphosate before harvest and since the wild oats were still green, he hopes the chemical they take up will reduce the vigour of the seed. After harvest he plans to pull out a heavy harrow with Valmar to spread granular wild oat herbicides like Treflan and Avadex which are from herbicide Groups 3 and 8.

Unlike the clichéd advice, “If it’s not broke don’t fix it,” Schultz’s mantra on herbicides is, “If something works, change it.”

He has read about farmers in Australia and the United Kingdom who are spending more than $100 per acre to control various herbicide-resistant weeds.

Along with diverse herbicides, Schultz hopes to mix up his crop rotation. He’s considering planting winter wheat in a couple of years and after that may look at various forage crops that local livestock owners could cut for feed or graze cattle on.

It takes extra planning and logistics to make this multi-pronged weed control strategy work, but for Schultz it’s worth it.

“We don’t want to abuse what we have.”

The post A bad year for crops has been a good one for weeds appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.

Scientists from the University of Lethbridge recently found that buffalo beans, a plant commonly found in pastures in the south, contain compounds that may be beneficial to people fighting cancer.

“We’ve always been interested in my lab in looking for new cancer drugs because we need better drugs to help patients,” said Roy Golsteyn, a cancer researcher at the university.

“It’s a pretty tough climate (in southern Alberta) and the growing conditions are not the easiest in the world, so plants have to build up defences to all sorts of things.”

Many plants use chemicals to keep them from being eaten by animals or by insects, and so researchers analyze these compounds with an eye to finding a new use for them.

That’s the case with buffalo beans, which are only found in southern Alberta, northern Montana and Saskatchewan.

It’s a short plant with small yellow flowers, which eventually turn into beans, and has a fast growing cycle. And while the hardy native prairie pasture plant is one of the earlier species to bloom, cattle don’t find it palatable and avoid eating it.

People should, too.

“We also know that there was a case study at the Foothills Hospital in Calgary where it was documented that children had eaten the buffalo bean plant and were quite sick because of it,” said Golsteyn.

“That’s bad for the people who had eaten it, but scientifically, it turns out to be quite interesting because it means there are chemicals in it that affect human health.”

Scientists at the University of Lethbridge conducted a series of tests on the buffalo beans. They’ve harvested leaves from the plant and added extracts from these leaves on growing cancer cells. The extracts killed cancer cells, and were found to resemble other types of cancer drugs.

“We’re on the way to propose that there are chemicals inside this plant that should be studied as a real cancer drug,” said Golsteyn.

He and the members of his lab are in the third year of a project to investigate native plant species in Alberta.

They’re finding new plants to test just from having conversations with people.

“Usually these plants will be toxic,” said Golsteyn. “But the relationship between toxicity and medicine is always just the dose. If an animal eats it, it will eat too much of it.

“There’s a lot of good medicines out there that were first identified as toxic, but if you give the correct dose, these things could save lives. The No. 1, 2, or 3 cancer drugs are from plants.”

Anyone who has an interesting native pasture plant — no matter where they live in the province — can contact him, said Golsteyn. His email is roy.golsteyn@uleth.ca.

The post Cancer-fighting drugs in your pasture? appeared first on Alberta Farmer Express.