Last week, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that plants bred using the so-called Crispr-Cas method are considered genetically modified. They therefore fall under the so-called GMO Directive, which regulates the release of such organisms for experimental purposes, among other things. In this interview, plant geneticist Prof Dr Sascha Laubinger explains how plant breeding works and why researchers feel thwarted by the ECJ ruling.
QUESTION: Mr Laubinger, how does classical plant breeding actually work?
ANSWER: The genetic material of all organisms is always changing. This is the basis of evolution and this is also how crop plants have evolved. Through mutations and selection, we humans have bred the crops we have today from plants that were often unproductive or even poisonous. Natural mutations are caused by sunlight, for example. To increase the mutation rate, humans treat the plants with radiation or chemicals. This often leads to thousands of mutations, sometimes even destroying parts of the genetic material. Durum wheat, for example, was created through this type of breeding. As so many mutations occur with these methods, disadvantages are also more frequent. Nevertheless, all these methods are classic breeding methods and the products can be sold without labelling - even in organic supermarkets.
Huge progress
QUESTION: How can Crispr-Cas be used to modify the genetic material of plants?
ANSWER: Crispr-Cas is often referred to in public as gene scissors. We can direct the Crispr-Cas molecule complex specifically to the areas of the genetic material that we already know are important for the yield of a plant, for example. Crispr-Cas then causes a break in the DNA there, which means that the genetic strand is cut. The plant can repair this break itself, resulting in mutations. Crispr-Cas research has made huge progress in this area. DNA can now also be modified directly without inducing a break.
QUESTION: What distinguishes this method from conventional genetic engineering methods?
ANSWER: In conventional genetic engineering, DNA, i.e. genetic material, from other organisms, such as bacteria, is usually introduced into the plant. That is not the point here. Instead, the aim is to create specific mutations that could also occur naturally through conventional breeding - just in exactly the right place.
Rapid breeding
QUESTION: What are the advantages of the Crispr-Cas method and what are the risks?
ANSWER: The method is very precise - it only changes one spot and is therefore actually safer than conventional breeding methods, which use radiation or chemicals and produce thousands of mutations. The method is also faster, because with conventional breeding you have to wait for random hits in the relevant DNA section. Ultimately, conventional breeding and Crispr-Cas can produce identical plants that are no longer distinguishable. The risks of both breeding methods do not differ. This opinion is shared by scientists worldwide. It is often said that Crispr-Cas also brings about undesirable changes. However, this is no longer the case. In addition, experts can verify the changes through genome sequencing.
QUESTION: In your opinion, what opportunities does the Crispr-Cas method offer?
ANSWER: More and more people need food under changing climate conditions. At the same time, we need to conserve our resources. This is of course a complex problem and several levers need to be pulled. The development of new varieties, for example of heat and drought-resistant wheat using Crispr-Cas technology, is an important component of a comprehensive strategy.
Setback for research
QUESTION: Following the ruling of the European Court of Justice on 24 July, plants bred using Crispr-Cas fall under the EU Directive, which regulates the release of genetically modified organisms, among other things. What does this mean for research?
ANSWER: The judgement is a setback for all plant research in Europe. This is because we can no longer simply transfer the results of basic research, as we receive them, to crop plants in practice. The development of new plant varieties, for example of drought-resistant and higher-yielding cereals, is now being driven forward in other countries such as the USA and China - also with the results of basic research that European citizens have financed with their taxes. The judgement also strengthens large companies - small companies and start-ups that breed innovative crops are unlikely to be able to bear the financial risks.