Authors: James Kisaakye , Hendrika Fourie , Danny Coyne, Laura Cortada, Shirlyne Masinde, Sevgan Subramanian and Solveig Haukeland.

Abstract: The banana weevil (BW), Cosmopolites sordidus, is the main coleopteran pest of banana, causing up to 100% yield loss. In this study, we screened 20 isolates of entomopathogenic fungi (EPF) for the management of BW. In the lab, eight Beauveria bassiana isolates caused >50% mortality of the adult BW, whereas Metarhizium anisopliae and Isaria fumosorosea isolates were less pathogenic. B. bassiana isolates ICIPE 648, ICIPE 660 and ICIPE 273 were the most pathogenic, killing ≥80% of adult BW. B. bassiana isolate ICIPE 622 yielded the highest spores per BW cadaver (1.84 × 108 spores), followed by ICIPE 660, ICIPE 273 and ICIPE 648—1.17 × 108 , 3.8 × 107 and 3.6 × 107 spores, respectively. ICIPE 273 had the shortest LT50 (5.3 days) followed by ICIPE 648 (9.8 days) and 660 (11.1 days). Similarly, the LC50 values for the three isolates were 5.18 × 107 , 5.49 × 107 and 5.2 × 107 spores mL−1 , respectively. In the field, ICIPE 273 and ICIPE 648 had the highest (31.3%) and lowest (20.8%) pathogenicity, respectively. This study indicates that the B. bassiana isolates ICIPE 273, ICIPE 648 and ICIPE 660 are potential candidates for the environmentally sustainable management of BW.

Evaluation of the Entomopathogenic Potential of Beauveria bassiana, Metarhizium anisopliae and Isaria fumosorosea for Management of Cosmopolites sordidus Germar (Coleoptera: Curculionidae),pdf

Author:  Job de Lange, Lawton Lanier Nalley, Wei Yang, Aaron Shew, Hans de Steur

Abstract: This study surveyed 669 plant scientists globally to elicit how (which outcomes of gene editing), where (which continent) and what (which crops) are most likely to benefit from CRISPR research and if there is a consensus about specific barriers to commercial adoption in agriculture. Further, we disaggregated public and private plant scientists to see if there was heterogeneity in their views of the future of CRISPR research. Our findings suggest that maize and soybeans are anticipated to benefit the most from CRISPR technology with fungus and virus resistance the most common vehicle for its implementation. Across the board, plant scientists viewed consumer perception/knowledge gap to be the most impeding barrier of CRISPR adoption. Although CRISPR has been hailed as a technology that can help alleviate food insecurity and improve agricultural sustainability, our study has shown that plant scientists believe there are some large concerns about the consumer perceptions of CRISPR.

The future of CRISPR gene editing, according to plant scientists. pdf

Authors: Dominique Van Der Straeten, Navreet K. Bhullar, Hans De Steur, Wilhelm Gruissem, Donald MacKenzie, Wolfgang Pfeiffer, Matin Qaim , Inez Slamet-Loedin, Simon Strobbe  , Joe Tohme, Kurniawan Rudi Trijatmiko , Hervé Vanderschuren , Marc Van Montagu , Chunyi Zhang  & Howarth Bouis 

Abstract: Ending all forms of hunger by 2030, as set forward in the UN-Sustainable Development Goal 2 (UN-SDG2), is a daunting but essential task, given the limited timeline ahead and the negative global health and socio-economic impact of hunger. Malnutrition or hidden hunger due to micronutrient deficiencies affects about one third of the world population and severely jeopardizes economic development. Staple crop biofortification through gene stacking, using a rational combination of conventional breeding and metabolic engineering strategies, should enable a leap forward within the coming decade. A number of specific actions and policy interventions are proposed to reach this goal.

Multiplying the efficiency and impact of biofortification through metabolic engineering, pdf

Authors: Piet van der Meer, Geert Angenon, Hans Bergmans, Hans Joerg Buhk,Sam Callebaut, Merijn Chamon, Dennis Eriksson, Godelieve Gheysen, Wendy Harwood, Penny Hundleby, Peter Kearns, Thomas McLoughlin, Tomasz Zimny.

Abstract:;In a ruling on 25th July 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union concluded that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis constitute GMOs in the sense of Directive 2001/18 and that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis are not excluded from the scope of the Directive. Following the ruling, there has been much debate about possible wider implications of the ruling. In October 2019, the Council of the European Union requested the European Commission to submit, in light of the CJEU ruling, a study regarding the status of novel genomic techniques under Union Law. For the purpose of the study, the Commission initiated early 2020 stakeholder consultations. Those consultations focused on the technical status of novel genomic techniques.
 This article aims to  contribute to the discussion on the legal status of organisms developed through novel genomic techniques, by firstly offering some historical background of the negotiations on the EU GMO Directives as well as technical context of some of the terms in the Directive and secondly an analysis of the ruling. The article advances that (i) the conclusion that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of mutagenesis constitute GMOs under the Directive means that the resulting organisms must comply with the GMO definition, i.e. the genetic material of the resulting organisms has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination; (ii) the conclusion that organisms obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis were not intended to be excluded from the scope of the Directive is consistent with the negotiation history of the Directive; (iii) whether an organism falls under the description of ‘obtained by means of techniques/methods of directed mutagenesis’ depends on whether the genetic material of the resulting organisms has been altered in a way that does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination. Finally, the article offers an analysis of the EU GMO definition, concluding that for an organism to be a GMO in the sense of the Directive, the technique used as well as he genetic alterations of the resulting organism must be considered.

The status under EU law of organisms developed through novel genomic techniques, pdf