Comenius Project: Green Skills for Global Change, Santa Clara school partner´ blog
European Union funded Comenius Project
ANTROPOLOGIA INDIANA UNIVERSITY
domingo, 29 de diciembre de 2013
jueves, 26 de diciembre de 2013
biotecnología para detectar OGM, sitio UE
Biotechnology makes a significant contribution to core European Union policy goals including public health, ageing society, economic growth, job creation, sustainable development, and environmental protection. Its broad range of high-tech applications is increasingly playing a role in enhancing the EU's competitiveness, raising economic growth and improving the welfare of European citizens.
miércoles, 25 de diciembre de 2013
COMENIUS: proyecto para la visita y trabajo de campo en Occidente de Cantabria, 27 de febrero de 2014
http://www.cantabria102municipios.com/occidente/val_san_vicente/contenidos/fotos/06.jpg
Salida grupo Proyecto Comenius a zona occidental de Cantabria
IES Santa Clara , Santander
Fecha prevista jueves 27de febrero de 2014
Alumnos: 1º D, 1º H Bachillerato, prof. Eliseo Rabadán y Francisco A del Val
1ºF Bachillerato , prof. Azucena Santiago.
Otros posibles Profesores acompañantes: ver si hay posibilidad de que vayan Atilano e Ignacio
Salida Santander 8, 30
Itinerario:
A
9 -10 hrs. Monte Corona, salida desde autovía, rumbo a Comillas, desde Cabezón: una hora
B
10.30-12,30 Ría de la Rabia y Dunas de Oyambre. 2 horas
C
13-14 Visita al Puerto pesquero de San Vicente de la Barquera, una hora
14-15 Comida en San Vicente de la Barquera, una hora
D
15,15-17,15 Desde Los Tánagos a la playa de El Sable (Tina Menor) dos horas
E
17,30-19 Río Nansa, Muñorrodero, recorrido por la senda fluvial, una hora y media
F
19-20,30 Viaje de retorno a Santander
ASPECTOS DE TIPO ACADEMICOS PARA EL TRABAJO DE CAMPO
MONTE CORONA:
Visita a una importante masa forestal en Cantabria que se conoce como el Monte Corona. Observaremos una gran variedad de especies arbóreas, tanto autóctonas, especialmente robles y alguna haya, como de repoblación, eucaliptos y pinos principalmente, pero también encontraremos alerces, abetos, cipreses, fresnos, etc.
RIA DE LA RABIA , DUNAS DE OYAMBRE
Las rías de San Vicente de la Barquera y La Rabia, con sus playas, dunas, acantilados y la masa forestal de Monte Corona, configuran el Parque. Un claro ejemplo de ecosistema natural, en el que se aprecian y combinan la calidad paisajística de la costa y los estuarios con el gran valor de las zonas de praderías y los bosques de frondosas autóctonas.
La acción de estas rías justifica las principales características faunísticas y botánicas del Parque. Así, los estuarios son el hábitat de una fauna específica de moluscos y otros invertebrados acuáticos. En ellos, las aves acuáticas están representadas por la garza real, el zampullín chico, el ánade real y la focha, mientras que como invernantes es posible observar al somormujo lavanco, el zampullín cuellinegro, el ánader rabudo o el porrón moñudo y una variedad de limícolas, como el correlimos común o el zarapito real.
SAN VICENTE DE LA BARQUERA
San Vicente de la Barquera presenta una diversidad biológica muy elevada, relacionada tanto con la calidad ambiental del entorno como con la variedad de hábitats existentes. En los acantilados, paredes verticales entre 10 y 50 m de altura labrados sobre la caliza, la vegetación presenta una zonificación en franjas paralelas a la línea de costa. En la franja más cercana al mar crecen especies con gran resistencia a la salinidad, como el hinojo marino y el salvio. A medida que nos alejamos del agua, va desarrollándose el junco negro, más arriba, los pastizales de gramíneas, como festucas y esparragueras, y, después, los brezales y tojos. Estos acantilados son refugio para el halcón peregrino, la paloma bravía, el cormorán moñudo, la gaviota patiamarilla y reidora y el petril común.
Las dunas se fijan gracias a la vegetación, por lo que ésta es más abundante a medida que evolucionan. Las comunidades vegetales más comunes están formadas por gramíneas halonitrófilas y barronales, acompañadas de otras especies como el rábano de mar o la acelga de mar. Además de algunos insectos, mariposas y escarabajos de gran interés que habitan las playas y dunas, son comunes, tanto aquí como en las marismas, los alcatraces, negrones y diversos tipos de aves limícolas en otoño y, en invierno, garzas reales, garcetas comunes, zarapitos reales y varios tipos de anátidas, como el ánade silbón, la cerceta común, el ánade rabudo, el pato cuchara, el porrón común, el porrón moñudo y el correlimos común.
Las marismas, la de Pombo y la de Rubín, cada una en uno de los brazos de la ría de San Vicente, se encuentran flanqueadas por juncales y cañaverales de juncias marinas y carrizo. En cuanto a la fauna, además de las aves que también habitan las playas y dunas, puede verse el zampullín chico, la focha común, la polla de agua, el ánade real, el rascón, el avetorillo común y el aguilucho lagunero. Además, en los fangales que la bajamar deja al descubierto hay diferentes invertebrados. Entre ellos destacan algunos gasterópodos, como los bígaros, bivalvos, como las almejas y navajas, anélidos, como los gusanos de mar y equinodermos, como los erizos de mar.
Hacia el interior del municipio las praderas con bardales y setos de sauces, zarzamoras, escaramujos y majuelos son los elementos dominantes del paisaje, donde son frecuentes mamíferos como la comadreja, el armiño, el erizo, el topo, la musaraña común, el ratón común, la ratilla agreste, el ratón espiguero y el lirón careto. También hay encinares costeros y, en torno a los cursos de agua, bosques de ribera con alisos, sauces y avellanos.
RIO NANSA , MUÑORRODERO Y TINA MENOR
En Muñorrodero se conservan dos molinos que comparten el mismo sistema hidráulico: molino viejo y molino nuevo. El primero de ellos, del siglo XVI, se encuentra en un edificio bastante deteriorado, construido en ladrillo y compuesto por un cuerpo cuadrado de dos plantas al que se le adosó una nave rectangular con amplio soportal. El segundo, construido hacia los siglos XVIII-XIX, cumple en la actualidad función de almacén, aunque conserva parte de la maquinaria.
Las masas forestales autóctonas, en las que predominan los robles, castaños, alisos, sauces y encinas, junto a un buen número de especies exóticas, sobre todo eucaliptos y chopos americanos, y aquellas adaptadas a los medios de acantilados, rías y marismas conforman el rico tapiz vegetal de este municipio. Importantes superficies de encinar se localizan por ejemplo al sureste del núcleo de Abanillas, en Prío, en Pechón o en San Pedro de las Baheras. En estos encinares puede encontrarse el labiérnago o grazo, arbusto muy escaso en los encinares de la comarca costera occidental.
Entre la comunidad faunística de los bosques mixtos de frondosas se encuentran anfibios como la salamandra o el sapo común; reptiles como el lagarto verde; y aves como el cárabo, el mochuelo, la chocha perdiz, zorzales y córvidos, entre otros. También destacan mamíferos carnívoros como el gato montés, el zorro, la gineta, la comadreja, el tejón, la garduña... y herbívoros como el jabalí y el corzo.
Los eucaliptales y pinares ocupan las laderas de las sierras planas de Pechón y Prellezo, en las que perviven también pequeñas manchas de encinas y castaños, entremezclados con matorrales de brezos y escajos. La culminación de estas sierras ofrece una vegetación de cultivos y praderías, en el caso de El Llano de Pechón y del pinar de Monterrey, en la Jerra, en las que la fauna más representativa la constituyen luciones, lagartijas, salamandras, aguiluchos pálidos, cernícalos, mochuelos, topos, conejos, etc.
En los cantiles rocosos se refugia una flora peculiar, adaptada a la elevada salinidad del ambiente litoral, entre las que se encuentran el cenoyo y el llantén de mar, y especies más sorprendentes como el olivo o acebuche y la ruda. Estos lugares son con frecuencia refugios para aves como la gaviota reidora o la argentea y patiamarilla, así como para el cormorán grande y el moñudo, el halcón peregrino, el cernícalo o el colirrojo tizón. También reptiles, como la lagartija común o el lución, y mamíferos, como el zorro o la comadreja, habitan este ecosistema.
Por su parte, las rías y las marismas son biológicamente las zonas más ricas y productivas, tanto desde el punto de vista faunístico como vegetal. En este sentido, sus plantas son las características de suelos siempre húmedos o encharcados con aguas salinas (seda de mar, borraza, junco marino, carrizo, coclearia, etc.).
Respecto a la vida animal, en el entorno de las rías es fácil observar aves permanentes y migratorias, entre las que se encuentran el ánade real, el zarapito, la garceta común y la garza real, entre otros. Además, abundan los pequeños organismos invertebrados en las aguas, arenas y fangos, tales como gusanas, berberechos, navajas, almejas, mulatas... que a su vez son el sustento alimenticio para moluscos, crustáceos y peces. Las aves limícolas (zarapito real, correlimos común, agachadiza o laguneja...) también recorren este ecosistema cuando la bajamar deja al descubierto los arenales fangosos. Asimismo, el grupo de las zancudas, entre las que se encuentran la grulla común y las garzas real e imperial, se dejan ver en este tipo de enclaves, al igual que una gran variedad de aves marinas y especies anfibias.
domingo, 22 de diciembre de 2013
investigaciones sobre OGM , resultados de Seralini y su equipo , el caso del salmón transgénico ( y otros, como el maíz )
http://gmoseralini.org/articulos-de-investigacion/
Review
Factors to consider before production and commercialization
of aquatic genetically modified organisms: the case of
transgenic salmon
Olivier Le Curieux-Belfonda
Louise Vandelac a,b
Joseph Caronb
Gilles-E´ric Se´ralini a,c,
http://gmoseralini.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/LeCurieuxal_-2009.pdf
This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached
copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the authors institution
and sharing with colleagues.
Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or
licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.
In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the
article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier’s archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:
http://www.elsevier.com/copyright
Author's personal copy
Review
Factors to consider before production and commercialization
of aquatic genetically modified organisms: the case of
transgenic salmon
Olivier Le Curieux-Belfond a, Louise Vandelac a,b, Joseph Caron b, Gilles-E´ ric Se´ralini a,c,*
a CRIIGEN, 40 rue de Monceau - 75008 Paris, France
b CINBIOSE, Universite´ du Que´bec a` Montre´ al, C.P. 8888 Succ.A Montre´al H3C 3P8 Canada
c University of Caen and Poˆ le Risques, Laboratory of Biochemistry, EA 2608, IBFA, 14032 Caen, France
1. Introduction
Although no authorization for commercialization of genetically
modified (GM) fish products for human consumption
exists at present (beginning 2008) in North America and
Europe, several genetically modified fish or shellfish (aquatic
genetically modified organisms (GMOs)) are in development or
have been said to be close to market for some years already
(FAO, 2003). Among them, transgenic salmon is at the head of
the list, and thus a review of this product may be useful to
elucidate the numerous issues which should be considered
within the authorization assessment process, including social,
economic, public health and environmental concerns.
Some actors in aquaculture see in aquatic GMOs the
possibility of improving the benefits of aquaculture (Melamed
et al., 2002; Utter and Epifanio, 2002). This could occur through
e n v i r onmental s c i e n c e & p o li c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9
a r t i c l e i n f o
Published on line 28 November 2008
Keywords:
Genetically modified organisms
(GMOs)
Transgenic salmon
Aquaculture policy
Food safety
Environmental protection
a b s t r a c t
Many genetically modified plants have been developed, and four of them (soya, maize,
cotton, and colza) representing more than 99% of commercial crops, are widely distributed,
mainly in the United States and in America [ISAAA, 2006. Report on global status on biotech/
GM crops, Brief 35. International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications
organization, US]. Yet all over the world policy is still in development in regard to authorization
of modified plants and modified and/or cloned animals for food or feed and for their
environmental release. The most advanced animal commercial projects concern various
fish species, more easy to genetically transform, notably because conception and development
take place in water and easy access to numerous eggs. A request for authorization to
introduce genetically modified (GM) salmon onto the market has been presented to the Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) of the US. In the interim, questions have been raised
concerning the impacts of transgenic salmon, modified for productivity, on aquaculture,
wildlife, ecosystems and on human health. Herein we review these scientific studies and
sanitary, environmental, social and economic arguments. This paper analyses current gaps
in the knowledge of the impacts of transgenic fish and proposes legislation orientations
necessary for environmental and sanitary protection, should the marketing of animal
genetically modified organisms (GMOs) be authorized.
# 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: criigen@unicaen.fr (G.-E. Se´ ralini).
available at www.sciencedirect.com
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envsci
1462-9011/$ – see front matter # 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2008.10.001
Author's personal copy
increase of food conversion rates or the ability to assimilate
vegetable feed, control of reproduction and sexual differentiation
(e.g., one sex sometimes grows better than the other;
mono-sex breeding may avoid losses in growth due to
competition), acquisition of resistance to pathogens or
parasites, improved tolerance to specific environmental
conditions such as temperature, modification of behaviours
such as aggressiveness, etc. Others suggest that aquatic GMOs
will permit development of new organisms able to reduce
harmful impacts of aquaculture on the environment, or
produce molecules with therapeutic virtue or with capacity
to detect pollution. Still, the reader is warned against
hyperbolic claims with regard to advantages of aquatic GMOs
and concrete developments towards theoretical projects.
Modification of fish feed by genetic engineering or other
means, is also an important research area today (Mente et al.,
2003; Hevroy et al., 2004; Berge et al., 2005), as the production of
aquafeeds (artificially compounded feeds for farmed finfish
and crustaceans) has been widely recognized as one of the
fastest expanding agricultural industries (FAO, 1997). It has
also still to be carefully assessed.
In particular, environmental impacts should be studied in
depth, as the release of genetically modified animals would, as
for genetically modified plants, be irreversible. The introduction
of new species in a given environment could be
considered as similar to the introduction of a cocktail of
new substances into a body: interactions and impacts are very
complex and thus not subject to systematic predictability.
Thus, as for toxicity, tests, and notably long-term tests, are
necessary (Se´ ralini, 2003; Se´ ralini et al., 2007). These are
conditions to maintain food quality for a high level of human
health. Respect for protection against serious or irreparable
harm is called for in Article 15 of the Declaration of Rio, even in
the absence of scientific certitude.
The description, albeit complete, of a single function of an
inserted gene cannot reveal unpredictable characteristics
brought about by random insertions. In addition, given the
knowledge we gain constantly of the complexity of genes,
metabolic pathways and physiological functions, it seems
reasonable to propose that risk evaluation should not be
limited to the sole transgene but rather to the whole organism,
understood as a wholly new organism, indeed one about
which we may have relatively little or no knowledge.
The authorization process needs to be able to answer
crucial questions, such as: (1) What are the risks associated
with transgenic products released into the environment, in
particular with respect to biodiversity and its serious decline?
(2) Can an aquatic GMO, as an animal, food or food component,
be shown to be innocuous, or free of health risks, including in
the medium or long term of a lifespan? (3) What will be the
social, cultural and economic impacts, in particular, on
individuals and on small aquaculture companies around the
world? As producers, will they be able to invest in this new
technology? As consumers, will food choice become more
limited?
The FDA received, a number of years ago (Yoon, 2000), a
request for authorization to commercialize an Atlantic
salmon, Salmo salar, engineered as ‘‘AquAdvantage’’. This
genetic construction (opAFP-GHc2) used the Chinook salmon
growth hormone (GH) gene combined with the ocean poutantifreeze
protein gene. It allows growth all year, permitting
full growth to be attained in about half the time it takes for a
normal salmon. According to the FDA website, ‘‘most of the
gene-based modifications of animals for food production fall
under CVM (Center for Veterinary Medicine) regulation as new
animal drugs’’ (FDA, 2001). In December 2006, the company
Aqua Bounty Technologies, Inc., claimed that ‘‘the data and
information submitted adequately supports the molecular
characterization of the [gene] construct’’ of their transgenic
salmon, to the satisfaction of the FDA.
Although the decision-making process lacks transparency
(Logar and Pollock, 2005) it will set precedents for future
regulation of transgenic fish and other aquatic animals.
Further, the information available concerning the regulatory
process and the supporting documentation indicates the
existence of difficulties in decision-making in regard to some
innovations. It is clear, also, that various jurisdictions take
markedly different approaches in this regard. However such
approaches should be harmonized, as decisions made by one
country may affect the others: if authorization processes are
shorter or incomplete in a country, the result could impact on
environmental and economic levels, including on the conditions
of non-transgenic salmon. It is also obvious that
different environments require different assessments. Environmental
regulations will not work if nearby countries do not
respect them (Jasanoff, 2005).
In this text we offer a policy input perspective based on
current scientific understanding of transgenic salmon, rather
than, for instance, a perspective grounded in one particular
jurisdiction. This work is based on a bibliographic synthesis
and personal experiences in the areas of molecular biology,
GMO regulation, aquaculture and socio-economic risk analysis.
The authors have familiarity with European legislation on
GMOs (European Directives 2001/18 and 1829-1830/2003),
Canadian legislative dispositions with regard to GMOs,
European policy on chemical substances registration and
evaluation (REACH, Regulation EC/1907/2006), as well as
macrocosm approaches toward environmental impact assessments.
This approach hopefully constitutes a useful entry
point into a discussion of decision-making concerning aquatic
GMOs and, more generally, genetically engineered organisms.
2. The salmon industry and its recent
evolution
Salmon aquaculture appears, according to FAO, to be a
growing source of food all around the world (FAO, 2004a,b),
and yet it represents a source of pollution in particular via feed
and fish wastes. Transgenic salmon may thus represent a
threat to the future of the salmon industry and to wild salmon,
through competition, worsening problems already observed.
2.1. A worldwide economy
The world production of farmed salmon rose from 484
thousand tons in 1985 to 1175 thousand tons in 2002
(GlobeFish Research Programme, 2003). Farmed Atlantic
salmon constitutes more than 90% of the farmed salmon
market, and more than 50% of the total global salmon market.
e n v i r onmental s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9 171
Author's personal copy
The most important salmon producers are Norway (460
thousand tons per year), Chile (260), United Kingdom (140)
and Canada (110). These four countries furnish 91% of world
production of farmed salmon, the largest portion of which is
Atlantic salmon, S. salar (more than 1 million tons per year); a
lesser portion is made up of two Pacific salmon species,
Oncorhynchus tshawytscha (chinook salmon) and Oncorhynchus
kisutch (coho salmon). There are in total at least five species of
Pacific salmon belonging to the genus Oncorhynchus: chinook
(O. tshawytscha), Chum (O. keta), Coho (O. kisutch), Pink (O.
gorbuscha), and Sockeye (O. nerka).
International commerce in salmon reached 3.5 billion
dollars in 2001, i.e., 7% of world trade in fishery and
aquaculture products. Fresh salmon is now often the best
seller in fish shops (Ofimer, 2005; FAO, 2003). For example, in
France, in 2005, 20,399 tons of fresh salmon were bought by
36.5% of the households, amounting to an average consumption
of 2 kg of fresh salmon, or 9% in volume of fish
consumption (highest in Europe). Salmon is the second most
consumed species, after tuna. This consumption is 90% made
up of farmed salmon, representing 60% of all farmed fish
(consumption of farmed fish versus wild: 14%) (Ofimer, 2005).
If around 30 species have been genetically modified in the
framework of laboratory research, AquAdvantage seems to be
the main salmon for which the authorization process has been
engaged, since several years now. Thus transgenic salmon
was not (as of 2008) part of the salmon market.
2.2. Threat to wild salmon population
According to World Wildlife Fund and the Atlantic Salmon
Federation (WWF and ASF, 2003), wild salmon stocks and
biodiversity are in danger. Migrations for reproduction in
rivers are increasingly disturbed by installations, pollution
and the genetic drift due to escaped farmed salmon. In the
outer Hardanger fjord on the west coast of Norway, 86% of
the fish caught during 2003 were escaped farmed fish (WWF,
2005). The waste from salmon in marine cages or in fresh
water hatcheries presents major problems, some of which
are of the same type as those foreseeable with transgenic
salmon.
Wild salmon traits show great genetic variability, a source
of biodiversity which manifest in the form of many quite
distinct populations in sea areas and in rivers. Farmed salmon,
on the contrary, are raised and reproduced with an objective of
genetic standardization, based on an aquacultural trait of
interest such as better growth, less aggressiveness, or reduced
resistance to pathology (Gausen and Moen, 1991). The crossing
of wild populations with farmed salmon thus introduces new
genetic combinations, the net effect of which may harm
adaptation to the particular conditions of each geographic
area, even of each river (Skaala, 1995). Genetic selection by
stockbreeders in general produces salmon much less adapted
for the search of food and reproduction in natural environments
(DFO, 1999). Fitness reduction and the potential
extinction of wild populations of Atlantic salmon are the
result of interactions with escaped farm salmon, if only
because the former are 48 times fewer in number than the
latter (McGinnity et al., 2003). In wild salmon found in rivers in
the Northwest of Ireland, two genetic markers showed a
crossing with Atlantic salmon escaped from marine cages
anchored in a remote area (Clifford et al., 1998).
2.3. Fishing food dependence
Protein is of course, for a carnivorous fish such as salmon, an
important part of the diet. This could make transgenic salmon
a contestable choice in regard to the lack of food supply within
the world. Lipid requirements are higher than for other marine
species, around 25% of feed weight in adult food and even
more in young stages. Although the conversion rate of this
food into salmon flesh is high, sometimes attaining a figure
near 1.5 kg food to obtain 1 kg salmon flesh (the rate depends
on food quality, temperature, fish age, etc.) (Chamberlain,
1993), yet it should be recalled that millions of tons of small
fish and crustaceans are transformed and through flour and oil
enter the composition of food pellets destined to aquaculture.
Most of the time, for each kilogram of flesh, salmon farmers
use between 1.2 and 1.4 kg dry pellets, that is to say 4 or 5 kg of
fresh fish and shellfish (Naylor et al., 2000).
In any case, there are increasing doubts regarding the longterm
sustainability of farming systems based entirely upon
these fishery resources (Naylor et al., 2000), in particular
concerning the efficiency and ethics of feeding potentially
food-grade fishery resources back to animals rather than
feeding them directly to humans (Best, 1996; Hansen, 1996;
Pimentel et al., 1996; Rees, 1997). It should be noted also that
herring and sardines, important nutritional sources in salmon
farming feed, are themselves excellent protein sources
including sources of omega-3. This then poses a double set
of socio-economic and ethical issues: the loss of food-grade
fishery resources, and the transfer of these resources from the
South (Africa and South America) towards the North (principal
commercial outlet for salmon farming products).
Therefore, efforts will need to be placed on improving the
use of fishery by-products (Alverson et al., 1994; New, 1996).
The eventual success depends upon the further development
and use of improved techniques in feed processing (Riaz, 1997;
Watanabe and Kiron, 1997) and formulation, including the
study of the potential use of specific feed additives such as
feeding stimulants, free amino acids, feed enzymes, probiotics
and immune-enhancers (Devresse et al., 1997; Feord, 1997;
Hardy and Dong, 1997).
2.4. Sources of pollution
During breeding salmon show a high density, often equivalent
to 30 kg/m of water. Increasingly, in a biological aquaculture
setting, one tends to limit this density by half in order to lower
the risks of detrimental consequences and to preserve the
quality of fish. However, salmon, as a carnivorous fish still
represents a particularly important source of nitrogen and
phosphorus pollution. In Scotland, producing a ton of farmed
salmon results in the release of about 100 kg of nitrogenous
compounds into nearby waters (Roth, 2001). These forms of
pollution, added to the uneaten particles and feces that fall on
the bottom, deteriorate the benthic ecosystem not only under
the netpens but also in a larger area around the fish farms.
Elsewhere, this pollution can cause decreases in aquaculture
productivity by promoting outbreaks of disease among the fish
172 e n v i r o nme n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9
Author's personal copy
(Naylor et al., 2000). In addition, as in aquaculture with other
species, salmon farmers use a wide range of chemicals for
prophylaxy or treatment as antibiotics; more than 51 such
products are used around the world according to Bjorkland
et al. (1991), as pesticides (algaecides, weedkillers, antifungics,
antifouling paints) and as disinfecting agents and detergents.
In some cases, new technology has helped in a given socioecologic
context. For example, in Puget Sound, on the west
coast of the United States, one salmon farmer is using a giant,
floating, semi-enclosed tub for breeding rather than the usual
porous pens made of netting. The tub prevents fish wastes
from polluting surrounding waters. Integrating the production
of fish with other products, like seaweed and mussels that
grow well in wastewater from intensive farms, can also help to
reduce the nutrient and particulate loads. In Chile, some
salmon are farmed with a red alga that removes nitrogen and
phosphorous wastes from the cages. The effluent can also be
used to produce a seaweed crop, offsetting the costs of
creating the integrated farming system (Naylor et al., 2001a,b).
2.5. Transgenic salmon as a solution?
Existing programs of genetic selection of Atlantic salmon aim
to improve salmon breeding performance (Gjoen and Bentsen,
1997), starting from populations selected generation after
generation that will then transmit the characteristics of
interest, such as speed of growth and late maturation, to
the stockbreeders. Artificial maturation is also obtained by
producing sterile triploid individuals or by techniques of
continuous lighting. However, genetic recombination proceeds
only according to natural genetic mechanisms governed
by Mendelian laws of distribution of dominant and recessive
genes to subsequent generations. Only the choice of the
parents is artificial, i.e., different from those which would have
taken place in a natural environment, but the genetic
exchanges concern whole parts of the chromosomes.
Transgenesis is not simply a technological extension of
such methods, but represents a revolution in that it makes it
possible to modify a given part of the genome even somewhere
where natural scission would not occur. This allows crossing
the barriers of species or even of realms, a phenomenon that is
still very little understood and surely generates novel
physiological and metabolic conditions. It should be noted
that positive results are more easily attained by transgenesis
involving similar species, creating an ‘‘all-salmon’’ or an ‘‘allfish’’
GMO as opposed to insertion, for example, of a
mammalian gene in a fish (Devlin et al., 1994).
The biology of fish renders particularly simple the production
of genetic modifications. Fecundation is external and
development is carried out in an aqueous medium. Control of
fecundation and recovery of eggs are relatively easy as it is
possible to recover the mature ovocytes by ‘‘stripping’’, i.e., by
the application of pressure on the latero-ventral sides.
Fecundation will only start by mixing the ovocytes with the
male milt obtained by the same technique and by adding
water. Moreover, the high number (several hundreds to
thousands) and the big size of the eggs (6–8 mm) facilitate
microinjections of DNA. By comparison, the process in the
case of transgenic bovine or sheep is much more difficult, not
only because the eggs are much fewer and smaller, but also
because these eggs must after microinjection and fecundation
be reimplanted in the mother.
The first transgenic animal was a mouse in which a
promoter of metallothioneinwas inserted to control the gene
of the growth hormone in order to activate gigantism
(Palmiter et al., 1982). After that, the first successes in
aquaculture appeared rather quickly, in particular in Asia,
with the transfer of human growth hormone into eggs of the
common goldfish, to increase the growth rate of farmed fish
(Zhu et al., 1985).
Many new transgenic aquatic species have been obtained
since then, notably the Atlantic salmon in which the DNA
fragment encoding the type III antifreeze protein was inserted
(Shears et al., 1991) to allow a better development of
aquaculture in Canadian zones where the temperature of
water goes below 0, whereas the wild salmon cannot resist
temperatures lower than 0.7 8C (Fletcher and Davies, 1991).
Alternatively, in Atlantic salmon the introduction of an
antifreeze protein promoter allows the stimulation of the
growth hormone gene throughout the year and thus increased
the speed of growth at least in the 1990s environmental
conditions (Devlin et al., 1994).
Other possible uses of transgenesis have been mentioned
in regard to the improvement of outputs and costs of salmon
production, for example improvement of vegetarian food
source for carnivorous salmon or improvement of food
efficiency with a transgenic salmon (up to 20%). But until
now, these ideas have not been developed as well as growthenhanced
transgenic salmon (Zhu, 1992). Will salmon become
herbivorous in the future? Carnivorous fish do not easily adapt
to vegetable-based food as special digestive enzymes are
required (Cheng et al., 2004). Partial fish protein substitution is
possible, notably by using extracted soybean protein concentrate
(Krogdahl et al., 2003). However, vegetable lipids may
change the flesh fatty acids profile, as mineral and trace
element composition (Solberg, 2004); if composition and taste
change dramatically, it could impact consumer acceptance.
The direct consumption of vegetarian fish may also be a
choice.
Other applications of transgenesis in fish have been
proposed as well.
(1) Fish as drug factories or as models to understand human
pathologies: Fish could be used as production units for
molecules of therapeutic interest recoverable, for example,
by extraction in sperm (Maclean et al., 2002). Fish may also
be genetically modified to be used as a model of human
pathologies (Grunwald and Eisen, 2002) or to understand
the complexity and time course of genetic interactions,
notably during various stages of development (Udvadia
and Linney, 2003). For example, study of a zebrafish
genetically modified to manifest a defective aortic valve
development has made it possible to identify the role of an
enzyme, UDP-glucose dehydrogenase, in the process of the
embryonic development of this valve (Walsh and Stainier,
2001).
(2) Fish as pollution detectors: For example, the zebrafish Danio
rerio has been genetically modified by inserting two DNA
sequences in its genome, the first one a metallothionein
promoter sensitive to presence in the environment of
e n v i r onmental s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9 173
Author's personal copy
certain heavy metals, and the second a reporter gene
which produces the fluorescent protein of a jellyfish (GFP
for Green Fluorescence Protein). These ‘‘bio-sensors’’
suggest a particularly promising method, in the context
of environmental regulations, to evaluate eco-toxicological
impacts of substances produced by human activity,
including such chemicals as dioxins (Nerbert, 2002),
estrogen-like substances (Chen and Lu, 1998) or polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons (Amanumam et al., 2002).
(3) Less allergenicity in food: Further, transgenesis is proposed as
amean for removing allergenic substances in seafood. This
type of approach could be of interest in salmon known to
present certain allergenicities (De Martino et al., 1990) that
can be at the origin of serious clinical symptoms, such as
reactions of an asthmatic or anaphylactic nature. However,
certain people allergic to some fish can possibly
tolerate other species; this might represent a strategy more
easy to implement.
3. Risks
The evaluation of the characteristics of terrestrial transgenic
plants and animals continues to stimulate debate, including
on the consequences of the process of transgenesis. With
regard to transgenic fish, this evaluation is still only in the very
early stages. Even if DNA analysis methods are well advanced,
the protocols to detect transgenic salmon have yet to be
developed, as is the case for toxicity tests (Zhang and Yang,
2004).
3.1. Genetic risk
3.1.1. The genetic modification by itself
Genetic engineering succeeds in overcoming natural limits in
transplanting nuclei, manipulating the number of sets of
chromosomes, or transferring DNA sequences. Aquatic GMO
engineeringmay be considered as another step in this biology
which circumvents natural cells and nuclear barriers by
microinjection (Chourrout et al., 1986), electroporation (Inoue
et al., 1990), sperm transfer (Muller et al., 1992), gold
microparticule bombardment (Kolenikov et al., 1990), retroviral
infection (Kurita et al., 2004), muscular injection (Tseng
et al., 1995) or transposition (Raz et al., 1997), in order to
introduce one foreign DNA fragment into the genome of a
germinal cell. All these techniques represent an insertion by
chance of one or several very precise genetic sequences in an
unknown genome.
Thus, the novel trait of an aquatic GMO represents a
qualitative change because most of the time it does not occur
in natural populations of the parental species, or a quantitative
one when the quantity of a natural substance is changed
compared to the wild species. These changes affect a wide
range of endpoints such as metabolic rates or endocrine
controls, influencing a variety of functions such as reproduction,
immune defence, nutrition, development and growth. In
practice the most frequently observed phenotypic contribution
derived from these changes is growth enhancement, and
may also affect resistance or tolerance to threats such as
disease, parasites or other adverse environmental conditions
(see Section 2.5).
3.1.2. Random genetic insertion
Despite rapid advances in molecular biology since two
decades, scientists do not have the capacity to control nor
really understand the genome of living organisms. In
particular, the risks of transgenesis arise from the lack of
control over the number of sequences and sites of insertion,
the rate of expression of the transgene, the complexity of
interactions between the gene networks, the multiplicity of
gene functions, epigenetics and the interactions with environment.
Here are three examples that underline the possible
approximations of GM technology.
(1) In order to bypass the pituitary gland control of GH release
during warm months, chinook GH genes were coupled to
the antifreeze gene from Atlantic pout and microinjected
into the fertilized eggs of coho salmon. Then, only 2–3% of
the resulting fry exhibited expression of the gene. Nevertheless,
after these transgenic fishes were mated to wild
fish and the progeny with itself, 75% of the fry expressed
the GH protein. Most of them then grew three to six times
more rapidly and reached a market size (3–4 kg) a year
earlier than their wild counterparts (Devlin et al., 1995).
These discrepancies underline the lack of precision.
(2) At the University of Pukyong in Korea (Nam et al., 2001)
microinjections were carried out, in loach eggs, with a
genetic construction made up of the promoter of beta-actin
combined to the growth hormone, the two elements
coming from the loach itself. Nearly 7.5% of the transgenic
fish had growth accelerated up to 35 times, and more than
65% of them transmit this character of gigantism to the
following generation. However, with exactly the same
protocol, i.e., the same construction and the samemethod
of transgenesis, a considerable variability in the growth
performance appeared with all the range from the
‘‘surprises’’ of a happy transfer to the many residual
animals not presenting the anticipated properties (Zbikowska,
2003).
(3) Transgenic tilapia expressing tilapia GH cDNA under the
control of human cytomegalovirus regulatory sequences,
exhibited less food consumption and better food conversion.
But these characteristics are in fact associated with
many outcomes: synthesis retention, anabolic stimulation
and average protein synthesis were higher, whereas some
other metabolic states were different in juveniles, for
instance, hepatic glucose. GH-tilapia juveniles show
altered physiologic and metabolic conditions but from a
commercial point of view the biologic characteristics were
more efficient (Martı´nez et al., 2000). It seems probable that
our understanding of the effects of gene insertion is less
complete than usually represented.
Different families established from separate GH-transgenic
salmons yield lines with unique growth characteristics
suggesting important site-of-integration effects on transgene
expression (Devlin et al., 2004a). The disadvantage of
transgenesis is that, at present, the control of the transgene
is unpredictable despite the known artificial promoter. It can
thus not be expressed, or it may modify another gene by
blocking it, by slowing it down, by stimulating it or by changing
174 e n v i r o nme n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9
Author's personal copy
its function. Thus, the transgene could make other genes
function in an aberrant way.
Genomic rearrangements such as translocations and
inversions occur randomly in nature. Although these rearrangements
can be deleterious and reduce the organism’s
fitness, they probably present a lower level of risk, compared
to transgenesis, perhaps because they fulfill some unknown
roles circumvented when deliberate genomic rearrangements
are induced through GM technology. In addition, novel
regulatory control of gene expression is also possible by
pleiotropic or epistatic effects of the introduced genetic
construct. Sometimes, inserted DNA sequences do not act
in the new host as they did in the donor organism, or
alterations in one part of the genome caused surprising
activity in other parts of the genome (Marx, 1988; Pursel et al.,
1989). Novel regulation of gene expression has been for
example linked to altered methylation of host regulatory
elements (MacKenzie, 1990).
If some handbooks of biochemistry or molecular biology
still retain and restate the axiom ‘‘one gene, one protein, one
function’’, reality seems now to be much more complex,
agreeing more with the theory of polygenic characters
(Mather, 1979). In fact, the number of genes is smaller than
the number of functions signifying that one gene plays several
roles. Furthermore, interactions between genes are multiple
and complex and generate novel functions; for example, most
of the time a multitude of factors act synergetically to control
one gene expression and this varies according to physiological
and environmental conditions (Shrimpton and Robertson,
1988). Moreover, one gene can naturally exist in the form of
several copies that ‘‘work’’ differently in different tissues or
during different development stages (Se´ ralini, 2004). In the
rainbow trout, for example, it has been clearly demonstrated
that the pituitary adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide
and growth hormone-releasing gene change their expression
during development, notably through alternative splicing and
variation in the gene copy number (Krueckl and Sherwood,
2001). Increasingly there is a debate around the very concept of
the gene. Philipp A Sharp noted in his Nobel lecture (1993):
‘‘what exactly the gene is has become somewhat unclear’’
(Sapp, 2003). Indeed, our knowledge about hereditary mechanisms
continues to evolve, including the fact that ‘‘the transfer
of genes across the phylogenetic spectrum is now known to
occur naturally’’ (Sapp, 2003). Today, genetically based knowledge
is in a process of flux due to observations of an
unanticipated ‘‘mind-boggling complexity’’ involving, for
instance, overlapping genes, genes within genes, transcription
(including overlapping transcripts, fused transcripts) converting
many segments of genome (from either of the DNA
strands) into multiple RNA ribbons of differing lengths and
epigenetic inheritance (Pearson, 2006).
3.2. Health risk
Health risks may arise if the transgenic organism produces a
new substance or an anticipated substance at higher concentration,
compared to the non-transgenic equivalent species;
this could therefore result in allergenic or toxic
characteristics (Berkowitz, 1993). The GMO may also tolerate
a new toxic compound or be sensitive to a pathogen (Se´ ralini,
2000, 2004). Furthermore, in particular in the case of a
hormonal substance, a complete change in many metabolic
pathways could arise, rendering the aquatic GMO markedly
different in chemical composition and thus contributing to
unexpected risks which would need to be assessed (Malarkey,
2003).
It remains a problem that in some countries like USA and
Canada, in contrast to the European Union and most countries
that have signed and applied the Carthagena protocol, it is
supposed in regulation that the whole GMO is equivalent to
the corresponding wild species, necessitating no labelling nor
mid- or long-term toxicity tests. This approach presumes that
if only one new trait has been added, this will result in the
production of only one new substance that does not change
significantly the composition. For example the transgenic
growth hormone salmon could be considered as a banal
salmon that has only the particularity of producing more GH
or a normal level of GHbut all year round. This approach called
‘‘substantial equivalence’’ is risky because it is based on an
oversimplified understanding of the complexities entailed in
transgenic modification.
3.2.1. Allergy
As it was shown for a transgenic soybean containing a gene
from Brazil nuts (Nordlee et al., 1996), the risk of allergenicity
associated with the consumption of or contact with any GMO
exists since it produces a new foreign protein that most often
comes from another organism. Thus, genetic modification
may result in making available immunoreactive structures
which were previously hidden and/or nonaccessible to the
antibodies. Biotechnological processes can also increase the
level of expression and/or exposure to existing allergens, or
even modify their allergenic potential (Wal, 2001). The impact
of GM technology on the possible appearance of new allergens
should therefore be studied in more depth before market
commitment decisions are authorized (Wal, 1997).
Identification of new allergens may begin by comparing the
sequence of a transgene with sequences already listed in data
banks, that should present at least six amino acids common
(Moneret-Vautrin, 2002). This method can be interesting solely
if the molecule is directly produced by a particular transgene
(not indirectly) and if the allergen is known. This approach in
silico is thus very limited.
Thus, allergy tests made either in vitro with the serum of
sensitive patients, or by cutaneous exposition of patients to
the potential allergen, could bring additional security to the
consumer. However, this approach is limited by the availability
of the specific rapid and simple tests linked to a decision
of public policy. Traceability of modified organisms and
labelling is necessary for the consumer to recognize this kind
of food.
3.2.2. Toxicity
Within major international organizations the concept of
substantial equivalence has been presented as a useful part
of a safety evaluation framework (now increasingly known as
comparative safety assessment (Kok and Kuiper, 2003)), based
on the idea that existing foods can serve as a basis for
comparing the properties of GM foods with the appropriate
counterpart (Kuiper et al., 2001). This approach is not
e n v i r onmental s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9 175
Author's personal copy
appropriate in evaluation of the safety of an organism
modified for its metabolism like the described aquatic GMOs
and should be changed, as suggested, for instance, by the
Royal Society of Canada (Expert Panel, 2001), because nothing
predicts that all the characteristics of transgenic salmon
remain exactly equivalent to its non-transgenic counterpart
(Blier et al., 2002). This is also considered true for all whole
GMOs in a majority of countries, requesting mid- and longterm
toxicity tests (Directive European Community 2001/18/
EC), at least theoretically, until this Directive is scientifically
applied as for pesticides and drugs.
Because of the random insertion and the genome complexity
described previously, transgenesis can modify some
biochemical pathways and/or physiological regulations in
an aquatic GMO, which may then become, for example, a
larger bio-accumulator of a pollutant that it tolerates
(Kapuscinski and Hallerman, 1994). For instance polybrominated
diphenyl ethers used as flame-retardants in several
products of daily life, are now sometimes measured at levels
averaging 1.46 ng/g wet weight in farmed Atlantic salmon in
Chile (Montory and Barred, 2006). It was also often measured
in human blood. Nothing guarantees that this rate could not
increase in GH salmon that grows faster and have less time to
eliminate this kind of toxic chemical.
Salmon dietary qualities are of interest in human nutrition
and are associated with a positive image. Notably, proteins,
polyunsaturated fatty acids (including the omega-3 group)
(Sidhu, 2003), vitamin A and carotenoids (Rajasingh et al.,
2006) content are high, especially in wild salmon. Evaluation
should verify that these characteristics persist, especially in
an animal that grows faster. Growth-enhanced transgenic
salmon, compared to control fish, exhibited a 10% improvement
in gross feed conversion efficiency, but body protein, dry
matter, ash, lipid and energy were significantly lower relative
to controls while moisture content was significantly higher
(Cook et al., 2000). Similarly, essential amino acids and other
elements were changed in other aquatic GMO species, such as
GH-transgenic carps, showing that this should be taken into
account systematically (Chatakondi et al., 1995).
Some examples of GM agricultural products show that
unexpected effects should be prospected. When mice in
gestation are fed with rations containing 14% of soy
genetically modified to be glyphosate tolerant (the active
ingredient of many weedkillers), modifications were observed
in hepatic cells: irregularly shaped nuclei, a lowering in the
concentrations of certain nucleolar and nucleoplasmic factors
participating in the nucleic splicing process, as well as an
abnormal accumulation of perichromatic granules (Malatesta
et al., 2002a). (Transgenic salmon, in aquaculture, could also be
fed with this GM soya.) This suggests a reduction of posttranscriptional
processes (modification of RNA) and, thus,
reduction of nucleic flow of acids from the core towards the
cytoplasm. Elsewhere, the same GM food reduces zymogene
granules and digestive enzyme secretions inmouse pancreatic
cells (Malatesta et al., 2002b). A diet containing genetically
modified soybean also showed some effects on mouse testis
(Vecchio et al., 2004), maybe due to the traces of contained
herbicide to which the soybean was tolerant. The immunolabelling
of some specific targets as the RNA Polymerase II
showed a decrease notably in Sertoli cells of young GM-fed
mice. Furthermore a few cytological details were found
modified in GM-fed mice of all ages: the number of
perichromatin granules was higher, the nuclear pore density
lower and the smooth endoplasmic reticulum of the Sertoli
cells was enlarged (Vecchio et al., 2004). This could be
explained by the fact that the herbicide Roundup containing
glyphosate has been demonstrated to directly induce cellular
toxicity in human embryonic and placental cells (Richard
et al., 2005; Benachour et al., 2007) at doses that could be
present in GM food or feed (dilutions 1/10,000). Furthermore, a
commercialized GM maize called Bt MON863 has shown signs
of hepatorenal toxicity after rat consumption for 90 days
(Se´ ralini et al., 2007).
In addition, even if some authors perceive a great
difference between the growth hormones of fish and humans
with, for example, 32% homology between red fish and
humans (Mahmoud et al., 1996), these similar genetic
sequences are important, especially when one thinks of the
multiple physiological roles of growth hormone. It has been
shown, for example, that the bovine growth hormone is able to
activate, even with weak concentrations like 50 ng/ml, the
synthesis of sexual steroids in the ovarian cells of sea trout
(Singh and Thomas, 1993).
3.2.3. Horizontal gene transfers
Transgenic constructions may include marker genes to
facilitate identification of the bacteria carrying the transgene.
Generally, at present, it is a gene coding for resistance to an
antibiotic which allows, in bacterial cultures containing
antibiotic, to keep only the resistant colonies alive, i.e.,
bacteria having integrated the genetic construction in their
genome. Thus the potential risk for horizontal gene transfer to
the soil, bacteria, or organisms consuming the GMO should be
studied.
Horizontal gene transfer occurs even more easily in an
aquatic environment. For example, the ampicillin resistance
from a transgenic Escherichia coli strain was found in another
microorganism, Micrococcus (Popova et al., 2005). More
generally, horizontal transfer from one species to another,
even when both species are phylogenetically very different,
seems to be a significant risk related to GMOs (Panoff et al.,
2006). For example, transfer of resistance to streptomycin was
demonstrated from a genetically modified plant, tobacco, to
the bacterium Acinobacter (Kay et al., 2002). In the human
digestive tract this kind of horizontal transfer could also be
possible (Bertolla and Simonet, 1999; Kleter et al., 2005) and
thus the removal of this kind of gene in commercialized GMOs
has been proposed to avoid an increased risk of antibiotic
resistant diseases (ACNFP, 1996). The proposal is still not
applied in 2008.
3.3. Environmental risk
The presence of a high percentage of farmed fish among fish
caught in the wild – up to nearly 30% – raises many questions
about transgenic salmon (McGinnity et al., 2003). In the
eventuality of an accidental escape, would transgenic salmon
pose a threat to ecosystemequilibrium? Could they contribute
to a reduction in biodiversity? Would it be possible for the
transgene to be transmitted to wild salmon or other species?
176 e n v i r o nme n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9
Author's personal copy
What could be the possible consequences? Can transgenic
salmon be reliably confined to prevent them from escaping?
And in more general terms, if aquatic GMOs arrive on the
market, each species will pose very different problems from an
environmental point of view, because their biology and their
reproductive cycles are very different; how can protection of
the environment be assured?
3.3.1. Ecological knowledge
Guidance in assessing the capacity of an aquatic GMO to
survive in nature and understanding which ecosystems it
could access, will surely be furnished by a deep knowledge of
the parental organism in natural environments and during
stocking. One would look to the documentation of physical
and chemical tolerances (temperature, salinity, pH, dissolved
oxygen, etc.) and biological factors needed by the species
(habitat, predators, pathogens, nutrient requirements).
However, this background is not sufficient and should be
strengthened with other information. Thus particular attention
should be given, notably, to cases where survival and
persistence occurred contrary to expectations. From time to
time, it is observed in fish ponds that birds catch fish, transport
them some distance, but lose them before consuming them; in
this way, new fish species or disease can be transferred in or
out of fish ponds, or from one river to another. Another
unexpected example could be cited: a Canadian salmon
hatchery had made the assumption that the juvenile stages
would survive only in the waters around the farm and simply
flushed into Lake Superior more than 20,000 juveniles.
Twenty-four years later, however, the pink salmon (Oncorhynchus
gorbuscha) population, previously inexistent in this
area, exploded in the Lower Great Lakes (Emery, 1981).
Although the zone of tolerance of a given aquatic GMO to
physical and chemical factors must be considered to evaluate
its potential for colonizing accessible ecosystems, this
information is nonetheless probably insufficient. Firstly,
assessment of the tolerance to individual parameters is not
problematic, but assessment becomes more complex with the
combination of different factors. Secondly, in certain conditions,
the organism could survive long enough to pass through
an ecosystem that has bad conditions, to finally reach another
habitat where the animal could then persist and reproduce. It
was observed that Tilapia persist several months in a
temperate ecosystem until temperature declines in winter,
this delay allowing the tropical fish to ‘‘prospect’’ for new
territories. In coastal wetlands in south-eastern Mississippi,
the presence of an aquaculture downstream thermal area
unexpectedly provides a refuge for continued survival of
released Tilapia (Peterson et al., 2005).
3.3.2. Biodiversity considerations
Environmentally safe research and commercial production is
particularly important to protect biodiversity (Convention on
Biological Diversity, 2006). Other aquatic organisms such as
molluscs and crustaceans could join salmon in being
genetically modified with the aim of market commercialization
and introduction into the environment. This could,
however, affect biodiversity worldwide, and aquatic biodiversity
has already suffered dramatic declines (IUCN, 2004).
For example, since 1970 a dramatic decrease of freshwater
biodiversity has been observed, with more than a 50% decline
in species populations (WWF, 2006a), and in oceans 27% of fish
fauna is endangered, threatened or of special concern (Hugues
and Noss, 1992). Yet until now we have identified only a
fraction of the earth’s biological diversity and thus have just a
rudimentary understanding of how biological, geophysical,
and geochemical processes interact to contribute to human
and ecosystem well-being (WWF, 2006b). Therefore, protection
of this natural diversity at genetic, species and population
levels is of paramount importance. We have only begun to
consider the untold costs of lost biodiversity and the potential
gains of biodiversity maintained (Pimentel et al., 2004).
Commercial fishing and its growing technologies already
exert pressure on biodiversity, and GM biotechnology could
further their negative effects.
3.3.3. Three possible environmental scenarios
To predict the environmental impact of escaped transgenic
salmon is a particularly difficult exercise. As is known since
Darwin, one genetic trait is able to change a whole population,
and as is known since Mo¨ bius, many interactions exist
between organisms in a given ecosystem. Who could have
predicted the excellent adaptation of the tropical alga Caulerpa
taxifolia to the coasts of the North of the Mediterranean Sea
except in some areas around Corsica (Boudouresque and
Verlaque, 2002)?
Transgenic fish modified for fast growth can fairly quickly,
as new arrivals in an area, become strong competitors in
search for food (Devlin et al., 1999), habitat and/or reproduction
(Johnsson and Bjo¨ rnsson, 2001), in predator avoidance
(Dunham, 1995), and this even if sterile (Masaru et al., 1993). It
has been observed, for example, that transgenic coho salmon
O. kisutch were more willing to take risks when feeding
(Sundstro¨m et al., 2003). In a longer time frame, the
heterogeneity of the wild populations could also be seriously
reduced by a ‘‘genetic flow’’ resulting from the escaped
transgenic salmon crossing with the wild populations
(Kapuscinski and Brister, 2001; McGinnity et al., 2003).
However, many traits that appear to confer an advantage in
the short-term could have long-term costs that make them
overall detrimental. For example, domesticated trout, that
grows faster but takes more risk during feeding, do not tend to
survive when predators are abundant, compared to wild trout
(Biro et al., 2004).
The potential effect of such genetic flow has been explored
using as laboratory and field models tropical species smaller
than salmon and reproducing more easily and faster, such as
Medaka and zebrafish. In addition, simulations were conducted
taking into account factors such as the weight of the
genetic traits (ecological advantages and disadvantages) and
their Mendelian transmission. Results show that ‘‘the invasion
of transgenes’’ in wild populations is very probable, even
were only some individuals to escape into the natural
environment (Hedrick, 2001; Muir and Howard, 1999). Further,
it was shown that each transgenic fish is a particular case, and
that some traits could drive the long-term effect of the genetic
invasion. For example, the consumption of more oxygen could
be unfavourable to the development of a transgenic population
(Stevens et al., 1998), whereas a higher size of sterile males
or a lower rate of viability of the offspring could render both
e n v i r onmental s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9 177
Author's personal copy
wild and transgenic populations extinct (Andersson, 1994;
Howard et al., 2004).
Thus, if transgenic fish are introduced into a wild
population, modeling and experimental studies give raise to
three hypothetical environmental scenarios after several
generations of cohabitation (Hedrick, 2001; Muir and Howard,
1999, 2002):
Elimination: After some generations, the transgene associated
with a major disadvantage is gradually eliminated
from the population and the fish population is composed
finally of the wild genotype. The impact on the wild
population can however be more or less important during
the few generations necessary to ‘‘purge’’ the transgene.
Invasion: Because it is associated with a major advantage,
like an earlier sexual maturity, the transgene is progressively
propagated by regular crossings with the wild type to
finally be present in all the genomes; the wild genotype thus
disappears completely.
‘‘Trojan gene’’: The gene is propagated in the wild population
during several generations thanks, for example, to a
reproductive advantage, but because associated characters,
such as low rates of larval survival, are nonviable, the
tendency is toward extinction of the whole population. It
was estimated that if 60 transgenic salmon were disseminated
among 60,000 wild salmon, the natural population
would be decimated in 40 generations (Howard et al., 2004).
3.3.4. Physical and biological confinement
The great mobility of fish and their reproductive strategy, built
on abundant eggs deposited in rivers, make the environmental
risks much greater in the case of these animals, compared
with terrestrial vertebrates.
Cages lose fish by direct predation or because the
installations are damaged by predators such as fish and birds,
and also sometimes by poachers. Bad weather conditions –
swells and storms, currently increasing with climate change –
are also able to degrade a marine farm. And in everyday
operations, handling and transferring fish, for example, with
boats and other mechanical devices, losses can occur. Sometimes,
even if only once, as many as several hundreds of
thousands of salmon escaped from nets (Hallerman and
Kapuscinski, 1992). Strict confinement is almost impossible.
Land-based systems of breeding, confined within physical
structures isolated from natural waterways by filtration
apparatus and other forms of water treatment, give a more
robust guarantee of effective confinement. However, even so,
risks are not totally absent, in particular when a hatchery is on
the site, because the number and the small size of eggs and fry
make it very difficult to assure confinement. Dissemination in
the environment is possible, for example, on water droplets
transported on clothes. Discipline in handling and transport is
of course able to improve biosafety but will not overcome
human error, in particular if the application of protocols and
work conditions are not strictly regulated and supervised.
Control of the reproductive capacity of transgenic fish is
one solution advanced to mitigate the environmental risk.
Triploidization is the tentative sterilization technique most
often employed. By a chemical or physical stress, it prevents
the normal separation of the chromosomes at the time of
meiosis leading to sets of 3n chromosomes. The process
appears sometimes in nature, and these laboratory procedures
are currently used in aquaculture, notably to enhance
maturation (Lincoln and Scott, 1984) and to increase growth
rates (Seeb et al., 1993).
Alternatively, more sophisticated approaches can be
considered. For example, a suitable maternal species could
be subjected to gene transfer and perpetuated as an all-female
transgenic line, whose eggs are fertilized with cryopreserved
sperm of a compatible paternal species in order to generate
sterile transgenic hybrids. After that, to yield 100% transgenic
offspring, the transgene should be fixed in the maternal line in
a homozygous state through at least three generations
(Colombo et al., 1998).
There is need to validate the success rates claimed for such
procedures of sterilization or containment. Nevertheless it can
never be 100% in biology. Moreover, sterile transgenic salmon,
even unable to reproduce, can interfere in the reproduction of
wild salmon, for example, by competition for the food
resources (Muir et al., 2001).
3.4. Socio-economic risk
Different socio-economic frames induce different risks. One
link with the socio-economic risks is that if salmon is sterile,
fish farmers would be totally dependant on companies
commercializing the GMOs. This will probably drive out of
business many family fish farms all over the world in favour of
a few big companies. Moreover, the rapid growth of commercial
fish farming over the past decade has led to sharp
decreases in salmon prices. Once commercially available,
transgenic salmon could flood the market, driving down the
price of farmed salmon even further. Falling prices could put
some farmers out of business while forcing others to accept
the new technology – willingly or unwillingly – for fear of
losing out economically.
In general, the cultivation of GMOs is currently associated
solely with large-scale production. In most cases, this
production does not benefit countries where the greatest food
needs prevail. Rather than bringing food products and food
diversity to local communities, GMO technology has on the
contrary tended to bring the fruit of its production to world
markets and this patented technology has not been financially
accessible to small-scale farmers whose focus is rather
farming as a ready source of subsistence. Similar scenarios
are foreseeable for aquatic GMOs. Elsewhere, it could be
questioned if transgenic pollution sprayed in aquatic environments
could perturb the supply in wild salmon for
‘‘traditional’’ salmon farming. Conflicts could appear similar
as between transgenic agriculture farmers and organic farmers
(Conner et al., 2003).
As stated before (see Sections 2.2 and 2.3), the heavy
exploitation (and often, overexploitation) of natural marine
resources (Gill, 1997) is also a factor which may deeply
influence the salmon industry in the future. Better food
production efficiency will be a challenge for this industry, and
at least three technological strategies will be used to answer
the challenge: use of aquafeed and genetic modification both
will entail more dependence and more investment and thus,
similarly to industrial agriculture, will demand intensification
178 e n v i r o nme n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9
Author's personal copy
of production, or more pragmatically, the choice of a less
carnivorous species and less sustainable development.
Transgenesis is an additional stage in the impoverishment
of the genetic pool of salmon, whereas it is well known by
farmers that genetic diversity is often the best weapon against
pathologies. For example, in Europe, the oyster Ostrea edulis
was contaminated in the 1920s by two parasites Marteilia
refringens (Marteil, 1971) and Bonamia ostreae (Comps, 1985a);
the oyster Crassostrea angulata became then the solution to
save the oyster economy. In the 1970s, Crassostrea angulata was
also weakened by a viral epizooty that killed more than 90% of
this too homogeneous production (Comps, 1985b), and again
another species, Crassostrea gigas, was the solution to help the
oyster farmers to survive after a major social crisis.
Last but not least, appropriation of ownership over life
forms, through patents, is contributing to widespread debate
which should integrate of course ethical considerations.
Patents on life forms promote the ‘‘artificialization’’ of
ecosystems and the possibility of establishing monopoly
control over parts of it. Moreover, such biotechnologies
support a two-speed aquaculture, which in the long run will
be unfavourable to small-scale farms and the poor countries.
Whereas these farmers should continue polyculture, with the
objective of maintaining their self-sufficiency, the adoption of
aquatic GMOs would push these farmers towards dependency
on multinationals, as observed with agriculture farmers
(Friends of Earth, 2007). This could be especially true if
sterilization was systematically adopted as one solution to
environmental threats, a scenario which some companies and
countries have adopted in agriculture, with the sterile seeds
known as ‘‘terminator’’ or the genetic use restriction technologies
(GURTS).
4. Some propositions for risk assessment in
the case of a transgenic fish
While a faster-growing salmon is one of the first transgenic
fish, the biotech industry is seeking to introduce many others
GM animals to market. Scientists worldwide have altered the
genes of at least 30 other aquatic species, including flounder,
carp, lobster, and shrimp for both scientific study and
commercial production. Terrestrial transgenic animals in
farms are also developed, but not commercialized such as
pigs which produce meat with less fat, chickens resistant to
bacterial infections, and cows that can grow faster on less
feed. It is obviously important, therefore, that the decision to
approve or not approve this first transgenic animal be well
done.
The proposals outlined below aim to take into account
knowledge which exists about transgenic aquatic organisms,
while recognizing zones of ignorance. Further, policy work has
already resulted in some general orientation in this area,
including expert opinion sought by FAO/WHO (FAO/WHO
Expert Consultation, 2003), legislative initiatives in Europe
(starting with Directive 2001/18/EC), ongoing reflection in and
international collaboration from Canada, and at least one
scientific initiative aimed at identifying risk components to be
evaluated before adoption of aquatic transgenic organism
production (Scientists’ Working Group on Biosafety, 1998).
It has been well recognized that regulation of aquatic GMOs
should be based on principles and criteria agreed upon by
scientists and in international political arenas. We may
mention, for example, early initiation of citizen participation
and consultation, and principles of sustainable development,
substitution, duty of care, and precaution. International
agencies (such as OECD, FAO/WHO, Convention on Biological
Diversity) and important national authorities (such as the EPA
in the US) have adopted these principles, thus leading the way
to establish them as guideposts to conceive an ambitious
process of rigorous evaluation and risk management. In these
matters, it seems clear that acceptance by the public will be
facilitated by strong guarantees of safety with regard to health
and the environment.
4.1. Principles
It is generally recognized in Western countries that science
and technology (S&T) have contributed strongly to a general
increase in standards of living and health. However, we now
understand more clearly how these ‘‘advances’’ may be
accompanied by previously uncalculated environmental and
socio-economic costs. Thus, an increasing challenge faces
policy makers: to succeed in deriving optimal benefit from S&T
while concurrently supporting precautionary approaches in
regard to public health, environment and social equity, which
are the basis for sustainable development.
It has been proposed that the general principles of
evaluation of transgenic crops could be applied to GM animals
(FAO/WHO Expert Consultation, 2003). Some elements of
evaluation will, however, necessarily be specific to animals
and, even more, to aquatic animals. Furthermore, this should
be developed in continuity and in coherence with rigorous and
evolving codes and guidelines, such as: (1) state of the art
standards of scientific evaluation and research on GMOs, (2)
national and international legislation and regulations on the
production, the transport and the marketing of food resulting
from GMOs, (3) the Convention on biological diversity, and (4)
FAO’s Code of Conduct of the activities of fishing and
aquaculture. Elsewhere, fundamental and traditional principles
concerning environmental protection rights should be
used such as the Amerindian precept according to which ‘‘we
did not inherit the ground from our ancestors, we borrowed it
from our children’’; or the International Declaration of
Stockholm in 1972 to promote ‘‘the right to an environment
of quality’’; and the principle of precaution as enunciated in
Principle 15 of the Declaration of Rio in 1992.
The notion of alternatives to new technologies is now a
principle increasingly adopted in legislations, for examples in
the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants or
in the European regulation ‘‘REACH’’ concerning the Registration,
Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals
(EC/1907/2006). This approach also theoretically promotes the
consideration of the future risks entailed in particular options
with regard to fulfilling an identified need (GMO-ERA, 2004).
The ‘‘Polluter Pays’’ principle has been also proposed, and it
charges the expenditure relating to possible pollution to the
responsible parties, in particular through payment of ecological
taxes. In our example, these green taxes could be paid by
companies that engineer the transgenic salmon as salmon
e n v i r onmental s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9 179
Author's personal copy
farmerswho use it. This principle, recommended by the OECD,
is also put forward by the European Council. Further, there is
need to explore other avenues through which the civil
(including financial) responsibility of innovators and developers
is ensured. Another possibility is to adopt an international
ban on techniques considered too risky, too difficult or
impossible to control, especially from an environmental or
socio-economic perspective.
Each aquatic GMO should be considered unique, and
analysis of the health and environmental risks should be
pursued on a case-by-case basis. A transgenic salmon (a
growth hormone-modified salmon, for example) may not be
identical to another, even if the two salmons are elaborated
within the same company and on the same day, due to
differential transgene insertion for instance.
In the event that transgenic salmons were to be considered
equivalent to their wild counterparts, a reduced amount of
information would be produced concerning the transgenic
populations. In this eventuality, a legally binding ‘‘duty of
care’’ becomes all the more important. Giving this duty legal
status would codify existing voluntary commitments of the
aquaculture biotechnology industry, thus ensuring that
producers, distributors and transformers of transgenic salmon
are responsible for their products and assuring both reassurance
and recourse for citizens and consumers. To ensure such
legal duty we must consider the necessity to establish a
superfund like the one established by EPA.
Furthermore, downstream users and the public could have
access to all information relevant to environment and health
with regard to GMOs, thus allowing them to understand and
intervene in issues of security standards. Sufficient information
could be given to enable retailers and consumers to find
out about transgenic aquaculture products, notably by
systematic labelling of all products which goes with traceability,
as a tool for choice, and also as an insurance for all food
and feed producers in case of any problem.
It is also essential to call for a strict counter-expertise
embedded in public policies, so as to counter-balance
information provided by industry. Independent contribution
by experts and by the public as well, should be planned and
implemented at all the stages of the regulation elaboration, as
called for by FAO/WHO expert consultants (FAO/WHO, 2003).
In addition, if new scientific information emerges after
authorization has been accorded, showing the need for wider
precautionary measures or even prohibition of an aquatic
GMO, then procedures should allow for modified and
emergency measures. A clear separation of responsibilities
between companies and researchers who propose GMOs, and
policy makers setting protection rules and risk assessment
guidelines, constitutes a key element of public policy quality.
International indications of growing concern show that the
public wants to be involved in developing biosafety regulations
(McLean, 2005).
To resume, important facets to be considered should
include: (1) measures and evaluations of health, environmental
and socio-economic risks, (2) determination of conditions
to be respected in the stages of production, handling and
transport. Further, there should be clear and well-defined
procedures to be followed for, (3) authorization of production,
distribution and marketing of GMOs and especially aquatic
GMOs, (4) control mechanisms which should be put into place,
with guarantees as to transparency of process and results.
Also, there should be (5) early and complete informationsharing
and effective consultation on the relevance of the
project on all its aspects with citizens, including consumers,
and (6) ongoing information availability, for instance through
traceability and labelling.
4.2. Identification of the GMO
The description of the GMO should be delivered following
different headings. Firstly there should be a general description
of the host including its taxonomy and variability, the
genetic trait to be modified, the method of genetic transformation
and the DNA source. Under a second heading, one
should find a detailed genetic description of the introduced
material sequenced after transgenesis, real transcripts and
protein encoded, with the knowledge of surrounding genes
and potential interactions. Thirdly one should find a description
of the variations in the functions and the expression of the
transgene, especially those not envisaged initially by the
construction. The knowledge of the number of copies and
places of insertion of the transgene(s) would reduce considerably
the doubt around the identity of the new organism,
and enhance the quality of traceability. Certain molecular
strategies, called ‘‘directed’’ transgenesis, are already able to
improve this control and should be preferred (Tronche et al.,
2002).
4.3. Assessment of toxicity
A complete evaluation of the toxicity and the pathogenicity of
the whole aquatic GMO and its genetic components is
necessary. The development and validation of new profiling
methods such as DNA microarray technology (Von Schalburg
et al., 2005), proteomics, and metabolomics for the identification
and characterization of unintended effects, which may
occur as a result of the genetic modification, promise to
furnish tools which will help to draw a good basic molecular
profile. However, the basic strategy resides in more classic
allergenicity and toxicological assessments, albeit with modifications
in the test sets required and in technical elements of
the protocols.
4.3.1. Evaluation of the allergenicity
The degree of allergenicity must be evaluated so as to inform
sensitive individuals (FAO, 2001). Ideally, an evaluation by
comparison with sequences of known allergens to find
homologies of at least six similarly aligned amino acids
(Gendel, 1998) and by pepsin degradation testing (because an
easily degraded protein is less likely to be of risk), combined to
in vitro tests of reactivity of immunoglobulin E of blood
(Moneret-Vautrin, 2002) and/or cutaneous tests on humans.
This could provide a better level of safety to inform
consumers, if there is clear separation of channels of
production, traceability and labelling.
4.3.2. Evaluation of toxicity
Given the importance of ensuring the safety of new foods, an
aquatic GMO should be examined as a new organism. It is not
180 e n v i r o nme n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9
Author's personal copy
simply ‘‘an animal drug’’ even if US FDA is actually evaluating
AquAdvantage transgenic salmon in this framework. Firstly, a
complete chemical analysis of the various nutrient groups and
also of the pollutants potentially accumulated in the animal is
necessary for health considerations, especially when no
particular advantage for the consumer can justify any added
risk. Secondly, it would be inadequate to focus solely on the
protein expected to be produced from a transgene (for
instance, from growth hormone insertion), because this would
not consider all the modifications or unexpected results, due
to random insertion, generated by the transgene. Therefore
toxicological tests should not simply estimate if the hormone
is overexpressed regarding our knowledge about sequence
homologies, digestive half-life or human blood rate, but rather
check all the possible effects of an unknown product, without
any assumption. Thirdly, sub-chronic and chronic series of
tests of toxicity are necessary to identify any risk, including
unexpected ones. Indeed ‘‘substantial equivalence’’ is a
concept used in evaluations of GMOs intended for consumption,
to distinguish organisms needing more complete
evaluation from those needing less. This practical approach
is meant to determine the safety of new food by comparison
with similar, traditional food (OECD, 1993), and it has also been
recommended in the case of aquatic organisms resulting from
biotechnologies (OECD, 1994). However, it can indicate, in
particular, acute risks of toxicity, but as a criterion or test is not
very powerful for prediction of risk of chronic or sub-chronic
toxicity in which large set of endpoints are checked as
reprotoxicity, immunotoxicity, teratogenicity, genotoxicity,
hepatotoxicity or unspecific toxicities.
4.3.3. Modification of the OECD chronic oral toxicity test 452
The studies of chronic oral toxicity, carried out to evaluate the
cumulative toxicity by prolonged and repeated exposure to a
drug over aminimum period of 1 year, usually follow the OECD
Directive no. 452 (OECD, 1981). This approach is not adopted in
the international regulation of GM crops, but it could be used
as a basis to assess the long-term toxicity of an aquatic GMO
such as transgenic salmon, using a 2-year minimum duration
of tests on laboratory mammals to better approximate
consumption realities. When extrapolating to humans, particular
attention should be given to potential special sensitivities
of certain populations such as pregnant women and
children. The implementation of these guidelines would
generate data helpful to identify the majority of chronic
effects and to determine even non-linear dose-response or
age, time- and sex-related relationships. Ideally, the protocol
should allow for detection of all the general toxicities
including endocrinological, neurological, physiological, biochemical,
and haematological effects and exposure-related
morphological effects.
In chronic toxicity studies proposed here, endocrine effects
may not follow a linear dose-response. Sex steroids and
reproductive functions require particular attention. Therefore,
at least three dose levels should be used after a choice in
preliminary experiments. The highest dose level should
correspond in nutrition to the maximum acceptable to a
physiological point of view and should always be applied
within a balanced diet. The route of administration would be,
of course, oral.
Careful clinical examinations should be performed at least
on a weekly basis during chronic tests for mammalian or
animal consumption. They should include neurological and
ocular changes as well as mortality and morbidity. Body
weight and food and water intake should be recorded weekly,
whereas detailed haematological examination should be
performed at 3months the first time, and at 6-month intervals
thereafter. At the same intervals, urine samples should be
collected for analysis to determine appearance, protein,
glucose, ions, ketones, occult blood and microscopy of
sediment; and clinical chemistry measurements in plasma
should determine total protein concentration, albumin concentration,
liver function tests (such as alkaline phosphatase,
glutamic oxalacetic transaminase and gamma glutamyl
transpeptidase), carbohydrate metabolism (such as fasting
blood glucose), and kidney function tests (such as blood urea
nitrogen) as well as sex steroids. Histopathological examination,
macroscopic as well as microscopic, is often the
cornerstone of the chronic toxicity study. These aspects
should therefore receive all necessary attention and should be
described and reported in detail, including diagnosis. A wellperformed
gross necropsy may provide optimal information
for microscopic examination and may in certain cases
facilitate more restrictive microscopic examination. All organs
and tissues should be preserved for microscopic examination.
This usually concerns brain, pituitary, thyroid, thymus, lungs,
heart, aorta, salivary glands, liver, spleen, kidneys, adrenals,
oesophagus, stomach, duodenum, jejunum, ileum, caecum,
colon, rectum, uterus, urinary bladder, lymph nodes, pancreas,
gonads, accessory genital organs, female mammary
gland, skin, musculature, peripheral nerve, spinal cord,
sternum with bone marrow and femur (including joint) and
eyes. All grossly visible tumours and other lesions should be
examined microscopically. In addition, microscopic examinations
should be conducted of all preserved organs and tissues,
with complete description of all lesions found; and the organs
or tissues showing abnormalities caused, or possibly caused,
by the aquatic GMO food should also be examined in the lower
dose groups. Because transgenic animals could substitute
without experience the basis of the food for the whole
population, these parameters should be inspired by what is
presently done for drug assessments. A modified metabolism
in aGMOcould make it more sensitive to diseases provoking in
turn an unsafe consumption.
The test report must include all information necessary to
provide a complete and accurate description of the test
procedures and an evaluation of the results. It should contain
a summary of the data, an analysis of the data, and a statement
of the conclusions drawnfromtheanalysis.The summarymust
highlight data or observations and any deviations fromcontrol
data which may be indicative of toxic effects. In addition a 4–8
page scientific paper summarizing the materials andmethods,
the resultsand the interpretationshouldbeprovided.The crude
data should be available for the scientific community.
In addition to the studies of animal toxicity described
above, other special studies can be required to obtain
information on specific effects of the aquatic GMO linked to
the transformation. Flexibility for a case-by-case adaptation
should be integrated into the regulation, in order to not miss
any toxicity.
e n v i r onmental s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9 181
Author's personal copy
4.4. Assessment of environmental risks
Knowing that ‘‘ecological knowledge about potential environmental
effects of transgenic organisms is crucial for understanding
and avoiding these types of risks’’ (Ecological Society
of America position paper: Snow et al., 2005) and that the
environmental impacts of transgenic salmon can be irrevocable
(Muir and Howard, 1999), a strategy of prevention is
necessary. This should be based primarily on a set of impact
studies, pursued under at least five headings: (1) analysis of
the state of a site and its environment, (2) analysis of GMO’s
direct and indirect effects on the environment, (3) reasons for
which a project is proposed, analysed with respect to
alternatives, (4) analysis of provisions envisioned to eliminate
or reduce environmental damage, and (5) critical analysis of
impact measures and methods proposed.
4.4.1. Biological and environmental knowledge
Detailed phenotypic descriptions including, in particular,
environmental knowledge of the wild counterpart and results
of experiments in confined artificial ecosystems will contribute
to the evaluation of the environmental risks. However,
if aquatic GMO farming is eventually authorized, a field
monitoring program should also be planned to collect further
data in order to alert and/or improve biosafety management,
as it is done by the ‘‘Resources Agency’’ of California, which
collects data year round on the distribution and relative
abundance of all races of juvenile chinook salmon using the
Delta and lower Sacramento River (California Department of
Fish and Game, 2005).
The European Community improved its environmental
protection policy, but there is still room for progress. For
example, ‘‘the scenario approach’’ which models expositions
is based most of the time on a few accurate eco-toxicological
tests (i.e., European Biocides Directive EC/98/8). Therefore,
geneticflow should not be estimated only by experiments with
other species (for instance, tropical fish to assess transgenic
salmon) coupled to modelization, but also by macrocosm case
studies, in order to assess the transgene stability, the genetic
flow towards related wild species, and the effectiveness of
fertility or sterility.
4.4.2. Macrocosm approach
In addition, the macrocosm approach could, keeping in mind
that any introduction of a new species into an ecosystem can
in cascade destabilize its equilibrium, help to investigate other
ecological endpoints as whether the voracity of GH-enhanced
salmon could be a threat to other fish species (Devlin et al.,
2004b). Ideally, one would study each new transgenic line
within macrocosms, which are artificial ecosystems which
mimic the natural environment, while remaining completely
enclosed, allowing testing of various cyclic phases and
ecological conditions. These systems should closely resemble
real environmental conditions and be sufficiently replicable to
be statistically processed. This means that they should
contain all the likely species with which the salmon could
interact directly or indirectly in a natural environment, as also
the main physico-chemical conditionsmet in the field such as
water currents, presence of specific habitats with plants and
gravels, etc. All the pertinent questions should be asked for
each new species and its specific environment, and the
experiment designed to answer them. For example, the most
important questions – but not the only ones – that should be
asked in the case of GH-transgenic salmon are: what are its
tolerances (which ecosystems will it be able to colonize)? Will
it be a strong competitor for food with wild salmon and also,
for example, with sea trout (Bakke et al., 1999)? Will a genetic
flow occur with the wild? In order to answer these questions,
experiments should be then split into several sub-experiments
to test the different life stages of the salmon. There are
a multitude of biological parameters which will have to be
studied as food behaviours, aggressiveness, capacities of
escape from containment structures and of migration,
reproduction aptitudes, survival rates, tolerance to physiological
stresses like containment and changes in temperature
and oxygen, etc. Moreover, the approach must be multidisciplinary
associating molecular and physiological aspects
with ecological ones (Hodgson and Sugden, 1988; Tiedje et al.,
1989).
4.4.3. Sterilization
Sterilization of transgenic fish appears to be a biosafety
measure impossible to circumvent (Kapuscinski and Hallerman,
1990; Seeb and Miller, 1990). Although sterilization would
greatly reduce the genetic pressure of transgenic salmon on
wild stocks, it cannot guarantee 100% efficiency (CEQ, 2001),
nor can it preclude competition for tropic resources, habitat
and reproduction. Even these sterilization methods are
relatively easy and sometimes allow rates close to 100%; for
example, for triploidization in salmon, the results vary
according to the species and the techniques employed. Thus
the reliability of the method of sterilization must be measured
and considered in the evaluation of the risk on case-by-case, in
particular knowing that the regular release of small quantities
of fish can have an impact as pernicious as a very spectacular
massive release (Maclean and Laight, 2000).
4.5. Implementation and management
4.5.1. Biotechnological revolution
It seems that caution and circumspection should be applied to
our understanding of the claims in regard to an imminent
‘‘biotechnological revolution’’ (Nightingale and Martin, 2004).
A variety of motivations underlie discourses on the so-called
revolution. In order to generate investments for research and
development, the actors of biotechnological innovation need
to raise hopes and interest in the future benefits both
therapeutic and economic. Development and marketing of a
biotechnology-derived food or drug is a long process, with
many distinct stages characteristic of the scientific, technological,
financial, commercial and marketing aspects involved,
to name only those. The process is therefore characterized by
significant risks and often complex forms of collaboration
which, varying according to the sector, may involve years,
even decades, before innovations bear results from the market
(Benneworth, 2003; Teitelman, 1989; Pisano, 2006). Lastly, nongovernmental
organizations report disappointing results and
consequences from transgenic corn crops, such as contamination
of ‘‘biological’’ crops, weaker outputs than in traditional
(non-GM) agriculture and questionable protection from
182 e n v i r o nme n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9
Author's personal copy
insect pests against which GMOs were supposed to be
protected (Friends of Earth, 2007). Transgenic salmon regulation
should not follow this long and uncertain route of
criticisms. It should be comprehensive in the first instance.
4.5.2. Participative decision-making
Variations in national treatments of science and technology
are influenced by particular interests. They influence in turn
the understanding and degree of acceptance which citizens
show with regard to new knowledge and practices. Evaluation
and orientation toward new and better practices is thus most
wisely approached in collaboration with the broadest range of
interested parties, thus ensuring a more complete understanding
of the issues. Effective citizen participation should
start at the earliest possible point in the process, starting with
relevance of the project (Vandelac, 2006) and continuing on
(FAO/WHOExpert Consultation, 2003). In Canada, for instance,
numerous parliamentary committee hearings and government
reports describe a complex set of issues and interests
which characterize current Canadian aquaculture practices.
This contributes to constrain and influence future actions of
entrepreneurs and governmental authorities. Assuming passage
through an authorization process as discussed in
previous sections (although Canada has not yet – in 2008 –
produced its promised – in 2001 – authorization process
specific to aquatic GMOs), the introduction of a transgenic
salmon would need to compose – beyond the scientific aspects
– with environmental, social and economic realities of the
sector. Others have suggested ways in which American policy
makers could incorporate effective public participation
mechanisms within the processes of a regulatory framework
(Logar and Pollock, 2005). It has been shown that given
appropriate and accessible information, citizens are capable of
positive contributions to a reasonable and rational evaluation
of advantages and risks. Adjustment of public policy
approaches seems to represent the most important modification
which would enable attainment of the goal of effective
change in this area (Marris et al., 2001). This approach has
today to be implemented with the transgenic salmon dossier
in order to assess its social necessity and acceptability.
4.5.3. Alternatives
Decision-making should include comparison with alternatives,
as in the case of agriculture, it is proposed to evaluate the
relative benefits and costs of gene-modified varieties
(Schmidt, 2005). For example, the promise of GM rice in China
should have been compared with results of a study on
thousands of Chinese farmers using agro-ecological techniques.
These are based on crop heterogeneity and may
represent a solution to the vulnerability of monocultured
crops to disease. It has been shown that an agro-ecological
approach yielded an increase of 89% productivity while
completely eliminating usage of some of the most common
pesticides (Zhu et al., 2000). More generally, Chinese farmers
using ecologic techniques significantly reduced pesticide use
without expensive patented gene-modified seeds (Yanqing,
2002) and this kind of result should also be taken into account
when deciding upon use of any GMOs.
Concerns with regard to the safety of aquatic GMOs and the
need for careful management of the risks should not prevent
the pursuit of research in this area because, firstly, research
is needed to determine the nature and severity of risks, and
secondly, aquatic GMOs could offer medical or environmental
solutions. However, while certain projects may
appear to be of interest, the consideration of other parameters
may lead to a different overall evaluation. Integration
of other factors at the time of the design of new productsmay
make alternatives appear more viable, indeed as better
directions of development. Here are two examples to
illustrate that, like the European chemical regulation
‘‘REACH’’ (EC/1907/2006) or the European Biocides Directive
(EC/98/8), for which a process to compare with other
solutions (substitution principle or efficiency assessment)
should be a part of the assessment:
(1) Let us suppose a salmon to have been modified to enable
digestion of more vegetable-based feed, for instance due
to one or more enzymes of degradation of vegetable
fibres. This could result in change of colour, flavour and
odour of the fish as well as its immunizing defences
(IFFO, 2001). Biotechnology could study these issues but
it remains to be seen whether this would be a financially
profitable solution, especially since an alternative solution
might be found by simply changing the choice of
species, choosing one which is naturally omnivorous or
vegetarian.
Another possibility is that biotechnology is used only or
also to feed salmons, for instance to colour the fish.
Researchers at Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) are
exploring the use of molecular technology to develop
alternatives to natural or synthetic astaxanthin and
canthaxanthin, the classical carotenoid-class antioxidant
pigments giving a red–orange colour to the flesh. In
addition to modify salmons so that they produce their
own pigments, they are investigating the production of GM
plants to produce these pigments, but also the improvement
of the ability of salmon to take up and deposit these
pigments in their flesh, so less expensive quantities would
be required in their feeds.
Usually, salmon and shellfish get astaxanthin from
eating plankton directly or indirectly, which get astaxanthin
from feeding on micro-algae that produce the
carotenoid in the first place. Farmed salmon get astaxanthin
as a feed additive, both because consumers will not
buy white- or grey-fleshed salmon, and because astaxanthin
is essential for salmon’s growth and overall health
(Higuera-Ciapara et al., 2006, vitalchoice.com).
(2) As another example: the promise of a transgenic fish
resistant to pathology appears to be of particular interest
when some viruses, bacteria or parasites cause very
important losses. However, this approach can encounter
problems similar to those which are now observed in
agriculture. Indeed, experience has shown that transgenic
crops, after some years, may engender resistance or new
developments in pest species or new parasites, which will
occupy the vacant ecological niche. This obliges farmers to
increase pesticide treatments to above the quantities used
in conventional agriculture (Benbrook, 2004). In fact
maintenance of some biodiversity around and in crop
e n v i r onmental s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9 183
Author's personal copy
exploitation areas seems a better strategy to fight diseases.
This approach could be also preferable in farms where fish
density is high.
4.5.4. Labelling
The right of consumers to be informed should also be taken
into consideration. Information is essential for consumers to
be able to choose between an aquatic genetically modified
organism and its non-GM counterpart, and labelling is also a
source of security for health and the economy of food and feed
industries. This is only possible if information is available
when products are sold. For agricultural products in Europe,
the Regulation EC/1830/2003 concerning the traceability and
labelling of genetically modified organisms, obliges companies
to mention any GM ingredient.
4.5.5. Biosafety
Management should integrate biosafety measures during the
production process and, post-production, in transport, distribution
and consumption. Traceability and monitoring are
the tools which would permit operationalization of this
objective, and their feasibility has been demonstrated, for
GM crops in Europe for instance. Public health and environmental
concerns dictate a precautionary approach in this
regard, as problems of potentially similar nature, it has been
shown, may become manifest only over a lengthy period of
time, in geographically distant places, in a succeeding
generation or in other persons within a close social network
(family, for instance).
A post-monitoring period may be mentioned as well, in
that technical advances will surely continue to facilitate
detection and, hopefully, diminish costs as well, thus
permitting on the one hand detection of risks previously
not discernable, and on the other hand to progress scientifically
and technically to improve biosafety, notably through
containment.
To summarize, given this wide range of issues of concern,
governmental intervention and authority appears necessary
to guarantee appropriate determination and application of
aquatic GMO evaluation and management, with the participation
and collaboration of the public and interested parties.
Further, it is essential to have international agreement and
coordination in place so as to move forward with confidence
and trust in areas of international commerce in these new
products.
5. Conclusion
The complexity of decisions to bemade with regard to aquatic
GMOs will result in significant challenges. This will surely
contribute to long-term sustainable development with a
minimum of external costs. Economic development, environmental
protection, and social and health well-being could be
advanced through such a shared perspective.
With this objective in mind, we have signaled a broad range
of scientific issues and suggested possible guidelines for the
evaluation of GM salmon that could inspire all new organism
assessment. Complete and in depth research is necessary in
order to properly evaluate and validate the innocuity of new,
proposed products considered on a case-by-case basis. This is
not performed yet today (ISAAA, 2006). However, it must be
remembered that discussion of risk enters into a domain
which is not simply reducible to scientific facts. Public
consultation must be regarded as an unavoidable way to gain
acceptability. This is why democratic decision-making will be
furthered by associating as early as possible a broad range of
interests, including citizenry, as inclusion of various viewpoints
will render the decision-making more robust (Nowotny
et al., 2001).
Evaluation of health risks should be done according to
tested and recognized scientific methods including a modified
long-term oral toxicity test (see Section 4.3), while being based
on very complete information of the aquatic GMO. This would
include deep knowledge of its genetic construction after
transgenesis, whose stability should be assured, but yet still
might result in polygenic characters. Evaluation should be
characterized by a real will to detect any human and animal
health risk, notably by using chronic toxicity tests. The
regulation should, furthermore, be able to accommodate a
rapidly evolving state of the art in regard to precision in
measurements and methods. In any case, progressive and
local authorizations for experiments, following international
and national guidelines, should be the rule in such cases.
Aquatic GMOs may be claimed to reduce environmental risks
by incorporating specific genetic features, such as sterility,
reduced fitness, inducible rather than constitutive gene
expression, and the absence of undesirable selectable markers.
Yet the environmental impacts of aquatic GMOs are
unverifiable on a theoretical point of view, and they could be
permanent and irreversible. The first precautionary principle
that dictates not to release unknown engineered aquatic
animals into the environment should not be by-passed. Thus
environmental risk assessments should necessarily include
an artificially confined ecosystem - macrocosm - approach. In
addition, it should be kept in mind that the establishment of
an aquatic GMO in a new environment depends on its
capacities of escape from breeding installations, dissemination,
competitiveness for habitat and food, resistance to
environmental characteristics and reproductive capabilities.
Thus, if authorisations are delivered, monitoring on site and in
the area should be systematic.
In summary, decisions about aquatic GMOs should follow
some important general principles, starting with transparency
with respect to projects, procedures, results of experiments,
and decisions. Guarantee of independent expert controls is
necessary to assure and maintain citizen confidence in the
evolving capacities of public evaluation and control. Other
important aspects include implementation of the precautionary
principle, adoption of a transdisciplinary, integrated
and ecosystemic approach, and evaluation and monitoring of
long-term effects of aquatic GMOs. Further, evaluation should
concern not only scientific aspects of aquatic GMOs but also
alternatives to this new technology, benefits and costs, and
broader social aspects, including availability of information
for consumers, and issues of concern in North–South and
West–East relations. If aquatic GMOs are authorized, environmental
monitoring, traceability and labelling for consumers
appear to be unavoidable steps towards social acceptability if
the citizens are included in the decision process. This is the
184 e n v i r o nme n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9
Author's personal copy
price for which industry, citizens and the environment will
together benefit from sustainable aquatic biotechnologies.
Acknowledgements
The research for this paper was funded by the Social Sciences
and Humanities Research Council of Canada. The project:
Towards a scientific and social evaluation mechanism with
regard to life technosciences, in the area of transgenic food :
the case of transgenic salmon, was directed by L. V.
This work was made in collaboration with CRIIGEN, France
(Committee for Independent Research and Information on
Genetic Engineering). We thank the Human Earth Foundation
for structural support.
r e f e r e n c e s
ACNFP, 1996. The Use of Antibiotic Resistance Markers in
Genetically Modified Plants for Human Food: Clarification of
Principles for Decision-making. Advisory Committee on
Novel Foods and Processes, MAFF London.
Alverson, D.L, Freeberg, M.K., Murawski, S.A., Pope, J.G., 1994. A
global assessment of fisheries bycatch and discards. FAO
Fisheries Technical Paper 339, Rome.
Amanumam, K., Tone, S., Saito, H., Shigeoka, T., Aoki, Y., 2002.
Mutational spectra of benzo[a]pyrene and MelQx in rpsL
transgenic zebrafish embryos. Mutat. Res. 513, 83–92.
Andersson, M., 1994. Sexual Selection. Princeton University
Press, New Jersey.
Bakke, T.A., Soleng, A., Harris, P.D., 1999. The susceptibility of
Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) brown trout (S. trutta)
hybrids to Gyrodactylus salaris Malmberg and G. derjavini
Mikailov. Parasitology 119, 467–481.
Benachour, N., Sipahutar, H., Moslemi, S., Gasnier, C., Travert,
C., Seralini, G.E., 2007. Time- and dose-dependent effects of
roundup on human embryonic and placental cells. Arch.
Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 53, 126–133.
Benbrook, C.M., 2004. Genetically engineered crops and
pesticide use in the United States: the first nine years.
BioTech InfoNet Technical Paper Number 7.
Benneworth, P., 2003. Breaking the mould: new technology
sectors in an old industrial region. Int. J. Biotechnol.
5 (3–4).
Berge, G.B., Baeverfjord, G., Skrede, A., Storebakken, T., 2005.
Bacterial protein grown on natural gas as protein source in
diets for Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar, in saltwater.
Aquaculture 244 (1–4), 233–240.
Berkowitz, D.B., 1993. The food safety of transgenic animals:
implications from traditional breeding. J. Anim. Sci. 71
(Suppl. 3), 43–46.
Bertolla, F., Simonet, P., 1999. Horizontal gene transfers in the
environment: natural transformation as a putative process
for gene transfers between transgenic plants and
microorganisms. Res. Microbiol. 150, 375–384.
Best, P., 1996. Focus on feed: should fish meal be cowed by the
ethics of environmentalism? Feed Int. 17 (8), 4.
Biro, P.A., Abrahams, M.V., Post, J.R., Parkinson, E.A., 2004.
Predators select against high growth rates and risk-taking
behaviour in domestic trout populations. Proc. Roy. Soc.
Lond. B 271, 2233–2237.
Bjorkland, H.V., Rabergh, C.M.I., Bylund, G., 1991. Residues of
oxolinic acid and oxytetracycline in fish and sediments
from fish farms. Aquaculture 97, 85–96.
Blier, P.U., Lemieux, H., Devlin, R.H., 2002. Is the growth rate of
fish set by digestive enzymes or metabolic capacity of the
tissues? Insight from transgenic coho salmon. Aquaculture
209 (1), 379–384.
Boudouresque, C.F., Verlaque, M., 2002. Biological pollution in
the Mediterranean Sea: invasive versus introduced
macrophytes. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 44 (1), 32–38.
California Department of Fish and Game, 2005. Review
Guidelines for Protection of Delta Smelt (Hypomesus
transpacificus) Winter Run Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus
tshawytscha) and Spring Run Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus
tshawytscha) in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Estuary.
Resources Agency, Sacramento, California.
CEQ, 2001. Council on Environmental Quality, US. case study no.
I, growth enhanced salmon, in CEQ and OSTP assessment:
case studies of environmental regulation for biotechnology,
available at: www.ostp.gov/html/ceq_ostp_study2.pdf.
Chamberlain, G.W., 1993. Aquaculture trends and feed
projections. World Aquacult. 24 (1), 19–29.
Chatakondi, N., Lovell, R.T., Duncan, P.L., Hayat, M., Chen, T.T.,
Powers, D.A., Weete, J.D., Cummins, K., Dunham, R.A., 1995.
Body composition of transgenic common carp, Cyprinus
carpio, containing rainbow trout growth hormone gene.
Aquaculture 138, 99–109.
Chourrout, D., Guyinard, R., Houdebine, L.M., 1986. High
efficiency gene transfer in rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri)
by microinjection into egg cytoplasm. Aquaculture 51,
143–150.
Chen, T.T., Lu, J.K., 1998. Transgenic fish technology: basic
principles and their application in basic and applied
research. In: de la Fuente, J., Castro, F.O. (Eds.), Gene
Transfer in Aquatic Organism. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp.
45–73.
Cheng, Z.J., Hardy, R.W., Huige, N.J., 2004. Apparent digestibility
coefficients of nutrients in brewer’s and rendered animal
by-products for rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss
(Walbaum). Aquacult. Res. 35 (1), 1–9.
Clifford, S.L., McGinnity, P., Ferguson, A., 1998. Genetic changes
in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) populations of Northwest
Irish rivers resulting from escapes of adult farm salmon.
Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 55, 358–363.
Colombo, L., Barbaro, A., Francescon, A., Libertini, L., Bortolussi,
M., Argenton, F., Dalla Valle, L., Vianello, S., Belvedere, P.,
1998. Towards an integration between chromosome set
manipulation, intergeneric hybridization and gene transfer
in marine fish culture. Cahiers Options Me´diterrane´ennes
24, 77–122.
Comps, L., 1985a. Haemocytic disease of flat oyster. Sheet no.18.
In: Ifremer, Sindermann, C.J. (Eds.), NOAA National Marine
Fisheries Service, New Jersey, U.S.A.
Comps, L., 1985b. Portuguese oyster disease. Sheet no.13. In:
Ifremer, Sindermann,C.J. (Eds.), NOAA National Marine
Fisheries Service, New Jersey, U.S.A.
Conner, A.J., Glare, T.R., Nap, J.P., 2003. The release of
genetically modified crops into the environment. II.
Overview of ecological risk assessment. Plant J. 33,
19–46.
Convention on biological diversity, 2006. Decisions adopted by
the conference of the parties to the convention on biological
diversity at its eighth meeting (COP8). Curitiba, 20–31 March
2006/Decision VIII/22.
Cook, J.T., McNiven, M.A., Richardson, G.F., Sutterlin, A.M., 2000.
Growth rate, body composition and feed digestibility/
conversion of growth-enhanced transgenic Atlantic salmon
(Salmo salar). Aquaculture 188 (1–2), 15–32.
De Martino, M., Novembre, E., Galli, L., de Marco, A., Botarelli, P.,
Marano, E., Vierucci, A., 1990. Allergy to different fish
species in cod-allergic children: in vivo and in vitro studies.
J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 86, 909–914.
e n v i r onmental s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9 185
Author's personal copy
Devlin, R.H., Yesaki, T.Y., Biagi, C.A., Donaldson, E.M., Swanson,
P., Chan, W.K., 1994. Extraordinary salmon growth. Nature
371, 209–210.
Devlin, R.H., Yesaki, T.Y., Donaldson, E.M., Hew, C.L., 1995.
Tranmission and phenotypic effects of an antifreeze/GH
gene construct in coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch).
Aquaculture 137, 161–169.
Devlin, R.H., Johnsson, J.I., Smailus, D.E., Biagi, C.A., Johnsson,
E., Bjornsson, B.T., 1999. Increased ability to compete for
food by growth hormone transgenic coho salmon
(Oncorhynchus kisutch Walbaum). Aquacult. Res. 30, 1–4.
Devlin, R.H., Biagi, C.A., Yesaki, T.Y., 2004a. Growth, viability
and genetic characteristics of GH transgenic coho salmon
strains. Aquaculture 236 (1–4), 607–632.
Devlin, R.H., D’Andrade, M., Uh, M., Biagi, C.A., 2004b.
Population effects of growth hormone transgenic coho
salmon depend on food availability and genotype by
environment interactions. PNAS 101 (25), 9303–9308.
Devresse, B., Dehasque, M., Van Assche, J., Merchie, G., 1997.
Nutrition and Health. In: Tacon, A., Basurco, B. (Eds.)
Feeding Tomorrow’s Fish. Cahiers Options
Mediterraneennes vol. 22. Zaragoza, Centre International de
Hautes Etudes Agronomiques Mediterraneenes, Institut
Agronomique Mediterraneen de Zaragoza, pp. 35–66.
DFO, 1999. Fisheries & Oceans Canada. Interaction between wild
and farmed Atlantic salmon in maritime Provinces. DFO
maritimes regional habitat status report 99/1 E.
Dunham, R.A., 1995. Predator avoidance, spawning and foraging
ability of transgenic catfish. In: Levin, M., Grim, C., Angle,
J.S. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Biotechnology Risk
Assessment Symposium, College Park, M.D. United States
Department of Agriculture, Environmental Protection
Agency, pp. 151–169.
Emery, L., 1981. Range extension of pink salmon in the lower
Great Lakes. Fisheries 6 (2), 7–10.
Expert Panel of the Royal Society of Canada, 2001. Elements of
Precaution: Recommendations for the Regulation of Food
Biotechnology in Canada. Royal Society, Ottawa.
FAO, 1997. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations. Review of the state of the world aquaculture. FAO
Fisheries Circular No. 886, Rev.1, Rome.
FAO, 2001. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations. Genetically modified organisms, consumers, food
safety and the environment. FAO Ethics Ser. 2, Rome.
FAO, 2003. Genetically modified organisms and aquaculture.
FAO Fisheries Circular No. 989 FIRI/C989(E), Rome.
FAO, 2004a. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations. State of world fisheries and aquaculture report
(SOFIA), Rome.
FAO, 2004b. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations. Future prospects for fish and fishery products:
medium-term projections to the years 2010 and 2015, Rome.
FAO/WHO, 2003. Expert Consultation on the Safety Assessment
of Foods Derived from Genetically Modified Animals,
including Fish, Rome.
FDA, 2001. U. S. Food and Drug Administration. By Carol lewis. A
New Kind of Fish Story: The Coming of Biotech Animals.
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/ dms/fdbiofsh.html.
Feord, J.C., 1997. An enzyme system specially developed to
enhance the nutritional value of soya based carp and tilapia
diets. Paper presented Feed lngredients Asia ‘97, Singapore
International Convention and Exhibition Centre, Singapore,
18–19 March, 1997, Published proceedings by Turret Group
PLC, p. 9.
Fletcher, G.L., Davies, P.L., 1991. Transgenic fish for aquaculture.
In: Setlow, J.K. (Ed.), Genetic Engineering, vol. 13. Plenum
Press, N.Y., pp. 331–370.
Friends of Earth international, 2007. Who benefits from gm
crops? An analysis of the global performance of gm crops
(1996–2006). http://www.foei.org/en/publications/pdfs/
gmcrops2007full.pdf.
Gausen, D., Moen, V., 1991. Large-scale escapes of farmed
Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) into Norweigan rivers threaten
natural populations. Can. J. Aquat. Sci. 48, 426–428.
Gendel, S.M., 1998. The use of amino acid sequence alignments
to assess potential allergenicity of proteins used in
genetically modified foods. Adv. Food Nutr. Res. 42, 45–62.
Gjoen, H.M., Bentsen, H.B., 1997. Past, present and future of
genetic improvement in salmon aquaculture. J. Mar. Sci. 54,
1009–1014.
Gill, C., 1997. World feed panorama: high cost of feedstuffs:
global impact, response. Feed Int. 18 (1), 6–16.
GlobeFish Research Programme, 2003. vol. 73, Salmon—A Study
of Global Supply and Demand, July 2003.
GMO-ERA, 2004. Environmental Risk Assessment (ERA) of
Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO). An initiative of
public sector scientists associated with the Global Working
Group on Transgenic Organisms. Integrated Pest
Management and Biocontrol of the International
Organization for Biological Control (IOBC). Kapusinski, A.R.,
Schei, P.J. (Eds.), CABI Publishing, Wallingford, UK.
Grunwald, D.J., Eisen, J.S., 2002. Headwaters of the zebrafish -
emergence of a new model vertebrate. Nat. Rev. 3, 717–724.
Hallerman, E.M., Kapuscinski, A., 1992. Ecological and
regulatory uncertainties associated with transgenic fish. In:
Hew, C.L., Fletcher, G.L. (Eds.), Transgenic Fish. Word
Scientific Pub. Co., Singapore, Chap. 12, pp. 209–228.
Hansen, P., 1996. Food uses of small pelagics. INFOFISH Int. 4,
46–52.
Hardy, R.W., Dong, F.M., 1997. Salmonid nutrition: constraints
and quality standards. In Feed Ingredients Asia ‘97.
Uxbridge, Turret-RAI, p. 9.
Hedrick, P.W., 2001. Invasion of transgenes from salmon or
other genetically modified organisms into natural
populations. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 58, 841–844.
Hevroy, E.M., Sandnes, K., Hemre, G.I., 2004. Growth, feed
utilisation, appetite and health in Atlantic salmon (Salmo
salar L.) fed a new type of high lipid fish meal, Sea Grain1,
processed from various pelagic marine fish species.
Aquaculture 235 (1–4), 371–392.
Higuera-Ciapara, I., Felix-Valenzuela, L., Goycoolea, F.M., 2006.
Astaxanthin: a review of its chemistry and applications.
Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 46, 85–96.
Hodgson, J., Sugden, A.M., 1988. Planned Release of Genetically
Engineered Organisms. Trends in Biotechnology/Trends in
Ecology and Evolution, Special Publication. Elsevier,
Cambridge, England.
Howard, R.D., DeWoody, J.A., Muir, W.M., 2004. Transgenic male
mating advantage provides opportunity for Trojan gene
effect in a fish. PNAS 101 (9), 2934–2938.
Hugues, R.M., Noss, R.F., 1992. Biological diversity and biological
integrity: current concerns for lakes and streams. Fisheries
17 (3), 11–19.
IFFO, 2001. Sustainability of Fishmeal and Fish Oil Supply.
Presented at the Scottish-Norwegian Conference on
Sustainable Futures for Marine Fish Farming. International
Fishmeal and Fish Oil Organisation.
Inoue, K., Yamashita, S., Hata, J., Kabeno, S., Asada, S.,
Nagahisa, E., Fujita, T., 1990. Electroporation as a new
technique for producing transgenic fish. Cell. Differ. Dev. 29
(2), 123–128.
ISAAA, 2006. Report on global status on biotech/GM crops, Brief
35. International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech
Applications organization, US.
IUCN 2004. Red List of Threatened Species: A Global Species
Assessment. Baillie, J.E.M, Hilton-Taylor, C., Stuart, S.N.
(Eds.). The World Conservation Union, Gland, Switzerland
and Cambridge, UK.
186 e n v i r o nme n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9
Author's personal copy
Jasanoff, S., 2005. Designs on Nature? Science and Democracy in
Europe and the United States. Princeton University Press,
Princeton & Oxford.
Johnsson, J.I., Bjo¨ rnsson, B.T., 2001. Growth-enhanced fish can
be competitive in the wild. Funct. Ecol. 15, 654–659.
Kapuscinski, A.R., Brister, D.J., 2001. Genetic impacts of
aquaculture. In: Black, K. (Ed.), Environmental Impacts of
Aquaculture. Sheffield Academic Press, Sheffield, England,
pp. 128–153.
Kapuscinski, A.R., Hallerman, E.M., 1990. Anticipating
environmental impacts of transgenic fish. Fisheries 15 (1),
2–11.
Kapuscinski, A.R., Hallerman, E.M., 1994. Benefits, Risks, and
Policy Implications: Biotechnology in Aquaculture. Contract
report for Office of Technology Assessment (U.S. Congress).
Aquaculture: Food and Renewable Resources from U.S.
Waters.
Kay, E., Vogel, T.M., Bertolla, F., Nalin, R., Simonet, P., 2002. In
situ transfer of antibiotic resistance genes from transgenic
(transplastomic) tobacco plants to bacteria. Appl. Environ.
Microbiol. 68 (7), 3345–3351.
Kleter, G.A., Peijnenburg Ad, C.M., Aarts, H.J.M., 2005. Health
considerations regarding horizontal transfer of microbial
transgenes present in genetically modified crops. J. Biomed.
Biotechnol. 2005 (4), 326–352.
Kok, E.J., Kuiper, H.A., 2003. Comparative safety assessment for
biotech crops. Trends Biotechnol. 21 (10), 439–444.
Kolenikov, V.A., Alimov, A.A., Barmintsev, V.A., Benyumov,
A.O., Zelenina, I.A., Karsonov, A.M., Dzhabur, R., Zelenin,
A.V., 1990. High velocity mechanical injection of foreign
DNA into fish eggs. Genetika 26, 2122–2126.
Krogdahl, A., Bakke-McKellep, A.M., Baeverfjord, G., 2003.
Effects of graded levels of standard soybean meal on
intestinal structure, mucosal enzyme activities, and
pancreatic response in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.).
Aquacult. Nutr. 9 (6), 361–371.
Krueckl, S.L., Sherwood, N.M., 2001. Developmental expression,
alternative splicing and gene copy number for the pituitary
adenylate cyclase-activating polypeptide (PACAP) and
growth hormone-releasing hormone (GRF) gene in rainbow
trout. Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 182 (1), 99–108.
Kuiper, H.A., Kleter, G.A., Noteborn, H.P., Kok, E.J., 2001.
Assessment of the food safety issues related to genetically
modified foods. Plant J. 27 (6), 503–528.
Kurita, K., Burgess, S.M., Sakai, N., 2004. Transgenic zebrafish
produced by retroviral infection of in vitro-cultured sperm.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 101 (5), 1263–1267.
Lincoln, R.F., Scott, A.P., 1984. Sexual maturation in triploid
rainbow trout, Salmo gairdneri Richardson. J. Fish. Biol. 25,
385–392.
Logar, N., Pollock, L.K., 2005. Transgenic fish: is a new policy
framework necessary for a new technology? Environ. Sci.
Policy 8, 17–27.
Malarkey, T., 2003. Human health concerns with GM crops. Mut.
Res. 544 (2–3), 217–221.
Malatesta, M., Caporaloni, C., Gavaudan, S., Rocchi, M.B.,
Serafini, S., Tiberi, C., Gazzanelli, G., 2002a. Ultrastructural
morphometrical and immunocytochemical analyses of
hepatocyte nuclei from mice fed on genetically modified
soybean. Cell. Struct. Funct. 27 (4), 173–180.
Malatesta, M., Caporaloni, C., Rossi, L., Battistelli, S., Rocchi,
M.B., Tonucci, F., Gazzanelli, G., 2002b. Ultrastructural
analysis of pancreatic acinar cells from mice fed on
genetically modified soybean. J. Anat. 201 (5), 409–415.
Maclean, N., Laight, R.J., 2000. Transgenic fish: an evaluation of
benefits and risks. Fish Fish. 1, 146–172.
Maclean, N., Rahman, M., Sohm, F., Hwang, G., Iyengar, A.,
Ayad, H., Smith, A., Farahmand, H., 2002. Transgenic tilapia
and the tilapia genome. Gene 295 (2), 265.
MacKenzie, D., 1990. Jumping genes confound German
scientists. New Sci. 1990 (December), 18.
Mahmoud, S.S., Moloney, M.M., Habibi, H.R., 1996. Cloning and
sequencing of the goldfish growth hormone cDNA. Gen.
Comp. Endocrinol. 101, 139–144.
Marris, C., Wynne, B., Simmons, P., Weldon, S., and contribution
of others, 2001. Public Perceptions of Agricultural
Biotechnologies in Europe (PABE). Final Report of the PABE
research project funded by the Commission of European
Communities.
Marteil, L., 1971. Environment and mortality of common oysters
from the Belon river (1961–1970). Generalities. Revue des
Travaux de l’Institut des Peˆches Maritimes 35 (2),
103–108.
Martı´nez, R., Juncal, J., Zaldı´var, C., Arenal, A., Guille´n, I.,
Morera, V., Carrillo, O., Estrada, M., Morales, A., Estrada,
M.P., 2000. Growth efficiency in transgenic tilapia
(Oreochromis sp.) carrying a single copy of an homologous
cDNA growth hormone. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
267 (1, 7), 466–472.
Marx, J.L., 1988. Multiplying genes by leaps and bounds. Science
240, 1408.
Masaru, N., Tsuchiya, F., Iwahashi, M., Nagahama, Y., 1993.
Reproductive characteristics of precociously mature triploid
male masu salmon, Oncorhynchus masou. Zool. Sci. 10, 117–
125.
Mather, K., 1979. Historical overview: quantitative variation and
polygenic systems. In: Thompsjorn, J.N., Thodaya, J.M.
(Eds.), Quantitative Genetic Variation. Academic Press, New
York, pp. 5–34.
McGinnity, P., Prodohl, P., Ferguson, A., Hynes, R., Maoileidigh,
N.O., Baker, N., Cotter, D., O’Hea, B., Cooke, D., Rogan, G.,
Taggart, J., Cross, T., 2003. Fitness reduction and potential
extinction of wild populations of Atlantic salmon, Salmo
salar, as a result of interactions with escaped farm salmon.
Proc. Roy. Soc. B 270, 2443–2450.
McLean, K.G., 2005. Bridging the gap between researchers and
policy-makers: international collaboration through the
biosafety clearing-house. Environ. Biosaf. Res. 4, 123–126.
Melamed, P., Gong, Z.Y., Fletcher, G.L., Hew, C.L., 2002. The
potential impact of modern biotechnology on fish
aquaculture. Aquaculture 204, 255–269.
Mente, E., Deguara, S., Santos, M.B., Houlihan, D., 2003. White
muscle free amino acid concentrations following feeding a
maize gluten dietary protein in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar
L.). Aquaculture 225 (1–4), 133–147.
Moneret-Vautrin, D.A., 2002. Allergic risk of transgenic food:
prevention strategies. Bull. Acad. Natl. Med. 186 (8), 1391–
1400.
Montory, M., Barred, R., 2006. Preliminary dated one
polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in farmed fish
tissues (Salmo salar) and fish feed in Southern Chile.
Chemosphere 63 (8), 1252–1260.
Muir, W.M., Howard, R.D., 1999. Possible ecological risks of
transgenic organism release when transgenes affect mating
success: sexual selection and the Trojan gene hypothesis.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 96, 13853–13856.
Muir, W.D., Smith, S.G., Williams, J.G., Hockersmith, E.E.,
Skalski, J.R., 2001. Survival estimates for migrant yearling
chinook salmon and steelhead tagged with passive
integrated transponders in the lower Snake and lower
Columbia rivers, 1993–1998. North Am. J. Fish. Manag. 21,
269–282.
Muir, W.M., Howard, R.D., 2002. Assessment of possible
ecological risks and hazards of transgenic fish with
implications for other sexually reproducing organisms.
Transgenic Res. 11 (2), 101–114.
Muller, F., Ivics, Z., Erdelyi, F., Papp, T., Varadi, L., Horvatha, L.,
Maclean N, Orban, L., 1992. Introducing foreign genes in fish
e n v i r onmental s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9 187
Author's personal copy
eggs by electroporated sperm as a carrier. Mol. Mar. Biol.
Biotechnol. 1, 276–281.
Nam, Y.K., Noh, J.K., Cho, Y.S., Cho, H.J., Cho, K.N., Kim, C.G.,
Kim, D.S., 2001. Dramatically accelerated growth and
extraordinary gigantism of transgenic mud loach Misgurnus
mizolepis. Transgenic Res. 10 (4), 353–362.
Naylor, R., Goldburg, R., Primavera, J., Kautsky, N., Beveridge, M.,
Clay, J., Folke, C., Lubchenco, J., Mooney, H., Troll, M., 2000.
Effect of aquaculture on world fish supplies. Nature 405,
1017–1024.
Naylor, R., Goldburg, R.J., Primavera, J., Kautsky, N., Beveridge,
M.C.M., Clay, J., Folke, C., Lubchenco, J., Mooney, H., Troell,
M., 2001a. Effects of Aquaculture on World Fish Supplies.
Issues in Ecology, Winter No. 8.
Naylor, R.L., Williams, S.L., Strong, D.R., 2001b. Aquaculture: a
gateway for exotic species. Science 294, 1655–1656.
Nerbert, D., 2002. Use of reporter genes and vertebrate DNA
motifs in transgenic zebrafish as sentinels for assessing
aquatic pollution. Environ. Health Perspect. 110 (1), A15.
New, M.B., 1996. Responsible use of aquaculture feeds. Asian
Aquacult. 1 (1), 3–15.
Nightingale, P., Martin, P., 2004. The myth of the biotech
revolution. Trends Biotechnol. 22 (11), 564–569.
Nordlee, J.A., Taylor, S.L., Townsend, J.A., Thomas, L.A., Bush,
R.K., 1996. Identification of has Brazil-nut allergen in
transgenic soybeans. N. Engl. J. Med. 334, 688–692.
Nowotny, H., Scott, P., Gibbons, M., 2001. Re-Thinking Science.
Knowledge and the Public in an Age of Uncertainty. Polity,
Cambridge and Oxford.
OECD, 1981. Directive 452: Guideline for Testing of Chemicals,
‘‘Chronic Toxicity Studies’’. Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development, Paris.
OECD, 1993. Safety Evaluation of Foods Derived by Modern
Biotechnology: Concepts and Principles. Organisation for
Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris.
OECD, 1994. Aquatic Biotechnology and Food Safety.
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development,
Paris.
Ofimer, 2005. Bilan annuel De la consommation des produits de
la peche et de l’aquaculture. Office national
interprofessionnel des produits de la mer et de
l’aquaculture, Paris.
Palmiter, R.D., Brinster, R.L., Hammer, R.E., Trumbauer, M.E.,
Rosenfeld, M.G., Bimberg, N.C., Evans, R.M., 1982. Dramatic
growth of mice that develop from eggs microinjected with
metallothionein-growth hormone fusion gene. Nature 300,
611–615.
Panoff, J.M., Velot, C., Se´ ralini, G.E., 2006. Les transferts
ge´ne´tiques horizontaux. Biofutur 269, 53–54.
Pearson, H., 2006. What is a Gene? Nature 441, 399–401.
Peterson, M.S., Slack, W.T., Woodley, C.M., 2005. The occurrence
of non-indigenous Nile Tilapia, Oreochromis niloticus
(Limnaeus) in coastal Mississippi, USA: ties to aquaculture
and thermal effluent. Wetlands 25 (1), 112–121.
Pimentel, D., Shanks, R.E., Rylander, R.C., 1996. Bioethics of fish
production: energy and the environment. J. Agric. Environ.
Ethics 9 (2), 144–164.
Pimentel, D., Berger, B., Filiberto, D., Newton, M., Wolfe, B.,
Karabinakis, E., Clark, S., Poon, E., Abbett, E., Nandagopal,
S., 2004. Water Resources, Agriculture and the Environment,
Report 04-1.
Pisano, G.P., 2006. Can science be a business? Harv. Bus. Rev.
84, 10.
Popova, L.Y., Kargatova, T.V., Ganusova, E.E., Lobova, T.I.,
Boyandin, A.N., Mogilnaya, O.A., Pechurkin, N.S., 2005.
Population dynamics of transgenic strain Escherichia coli
Z905/pPHL7 in freshwater and saline lake water
microcosms with differing microbial community structures.
Adv. Space Res. 35 (9), 1573–1578.
Pursel, V.G., Pinkert, C.A., Miller, K.F., Bolt, D.J., Campbell, R.G.,
Palmiter, R.D., Brinster, R.L., Hammer, R.E., 1989. Genetic
engineering of livestock. Science 244 (4910), 1281–1288.
Rajasingh, H., oyehaug, L., Vage, D.I., Omholt, S.W., 2006.
Carotenoid dynamics in Atlantic salmon. BMC Biol. 4, 10.
Raz, E., van Luenen, H.G.M.A., Schaerringer, B., Plasterk, R.H.A.,
Driever, W., 1997. Transposition of the nematode
Caenorhabditis elegans Tc3 element in the zebrafish Danio
rerio. Curr. Biol. 8, 82–88.
Rees, T., 1997. New pressures, new perspectives. Fish Farmer 20
(1), 46–48.
Riaz, M.N., 1997. Aquafeeds to optimise water quality. Feed Int.
18 (3), 22–28.
Richard, S., Moslemi, S., Sipahutar, H., Benachour, N., Seralini,
G.E., 2005. Differential effects of glyphosate and roundup on
human placental cells and aromatase. Environ. Health
Perspect. 113 (6), 716–720.
Roth, S., 2001. The horrors of intensive salmon farming. The
ecologist, Special issue (June).
Sapp, J., 2003. Genesis. The Evolution of Biology. Oxford
University Press, Oxford & New York.
Schmidt, C.W., 2005. Genetically modified foods: breeding
uncertainty. Environ. Health Perspect. 113, A527–A533.
Edmonds Institute, Edmonds, Washington.
Seeb, J.E., Miller, G.D., 1990. The integration of allozyme
analyses and genomic manipulations for fish culture
and management. In: Whitmore, D. (Ed.), Electrophoretic
and Isolectric Focusing Techniques in Fisheries
Management. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL, pp.
265–280.
Seeb, J.E., Thorgaard, G.H., Tynan, T., 1993. Triploid hybrids
between chum salmon female chinook salmon male have
early sea-water tolerance. Aquaculture 117, 37–45.
Se´ ralini, G.E., 2000. OGM, le vrai de´bat. Flammarion (Ed.), Paris.
Se´ ralini, G.E., 2003. Ge´ne´tiquement incorrect. Flammarion (Ed.),
Paris.
Se´ ralini, G.E., 2004. Ces OGM qui changent le monde.
Flammarion (Ed.), Paris.
Se´ ralini, G.E., Cellier, D., de Vendomois, J.S., 2007. New analysis
of a rat feeding study with a genetically modified maize
reveals signs of hepatorenal toxicity. Arch. Environ.
Contam. Toxicol. 52 (4), 596–602.
Shears, M.A., Fletcher, G.L., Hew, C.L., Gauthier, S., Davies, P.L.,
1991. Transfer, expression, and stable inheritance of
antifreeze protein genes in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar).
Mol. Mar. Biol. Biotechnol. 1, 58–63.
Shrimpton, A.E., Robertson, A., 1988. The isolation of polygenic
factors controlling bristle score in Drosophila melanogaster. II.
Distribution of third chromosome bristle effects within
chromosome sections. Genetics 118, 445–459.
Singh, H., Thomas, P., 1993. Mechanism of stimulatory action of
growth hormone on ovarian steroidogenesis in spotted
seatrout (Cynoscion nebulosus). Gen. Comp. Endocrinol. 89,
341–353.
Skaala, O., 1995. Possible Genetic and Ecological Effects of
Escaped Salmonids in Aquaculture. Environmental Impacts
of Aquatic Biotechnology. Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris, France, pp.
77–86.
Sidhu, K.S., 2003. Health benefits and potential risks related to
consumption of fish or fish oil. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 38
(3), 336–344.
Snow, A.A., Andow, D.A., Gepts, P., Hallerman, E.M., Power, A.,
Tiedje, J.M., Wolfenbarger, L.L., 2005. Genetically engineered
organisms and the environment: current status and
recommendations. Ecol. Appl. 15, 377–404.
Solberg, C., 2004. Influence of dietary oil content on the growth
and chemical composition of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar).
Aquacult. Nutr. 10 (1), 31–37.
188 e n v i r o nme n t a l s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9
Author's personal copy
Stevens, E.D., Sutterlin, A.M., Cook, T., 1998. Respiratory
metabolism, oxygen dependency and swimming
performance of growth hormone transgenic Atlantic
salmon. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 55, 2028–2035.
Sundstro¨m, L.F., Devlin, R.H., Johnsson, J.I., Biagi, C.A., 2003.
Vertical position reflects increased feeding motivation in
growth hormone transgenic coho salmon (Oncorhynchus
kisutch). Ethology 109, 701–712.
Teitelman, R., 1989. Gene Dreams. Wall Street, Academia, and
the Rise of Biotechnology. Basic Books, New York.
Tiedje, J.M., Colwell, R.K., Grossman, Y.L., Hodson, R.E., Lenski,
R.E., Mack, R.N., Regal, P.J., 1989. The planned introduction
of genetically engineered organisms: ecological
considerations and recommendations. Ecology 70, 298–315.
Tronche, F., Casanovab, E., Turiaulta, M., Sahlya, I.,
Kellendonkc, C., 2002. When reverse genetics meets
physiology: the use of site-specific recombinases in mice.
FEBS Lett. 529, 116–121.
Tseng, F.S., Liao, I.C., Tsai, H.J., 1995. Transient expression of
mouse tyrosinase gene in catfish albino mutants (Clarias
fuscus) by subcutaneous microinjection. Fish. Sci. 61, 163.
Udvadia, A.J., Linney, E., 2003. Windows in to development:
historic, current, and future perspectives on transgenic
zebrafish. Dev. Biol. 256, 1–17.
Utter, F., Epifanio, J., 2002. Marine aquaculture: genetic
potentialities and pitfalls. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish. 12 (1), 59–77.
Vandelac, L., 2006. Pre´face in Le BAPE devant les citoyens.
Presses de l’Universite´ Laval, Que´bec, IX-XVI.
Vecchio, L., Cisterna, B., Malatesta, M., Martin, T.E., Biggiogera,
M., 2004. Ultrastructural analysis of testes from mice fed on
genetically modified soybean. Eur. J. Histochem. 48 (4), 448–
454.
Von Schalburg, K.R., Rise, M.L., Cooper, G.A., Brown, G.D., Gibbs,
A.R., Nelson, C.C., Davidson, W.S., Koop, B.F., 2005. Fish and
chips: various methodologies demonstrate utility of a 16,006-
gene salmonid microarray. BMC Genomics 6, 126–134.
Wal, J.M., 1997. Evaluation of the safety of foods derived from
genetically modified organisms. Revue Franc¸aise
d’Allergologie et d’Immunologie Clinique 37 (3), 326–333.
Wal, J.M., 2001. Biotechnology and allergic risk. French Rev.
Study Allergies Clin. Immunol. 41 (1), 36–41.
Walsh, E.C., Stainier, D.Y.R., 2001. UDP-Glucose dehydrogenase
required for cardiac valve formation in zebrafish. Science
293, 1670–1673.
Watanabe, T., Kiron, V., 1997. Feed protein ingredients for
aquaculture in Japan. In Feed Ingredients Asia ‘97. Uxbridge,
Turret-RAI.
WWF, 2005. On the run–escaped farmed fish in Norwegian
waters, Norway.
WWF, 2006a. Milestones in water conservation. Total
freshwater programs, Netherlands.
WWF, 2006b. Species and People: Linked Future. International
WWF, Switzerland.
WWF & ASF, 2003. Protecting wild Atlantic Salmon from
impacts of salmon aquaculture: a country-by-country
progress report. Published jointly by World Wildlife Fund
and Atlantic Salmon Federation.
Yanqing, W., 2002. Integrated pest management and green
farming in rural poverty alleviation in China. In: Rural
Poverty Alleviation through Integrated Pest Management
(IPM) and Green Farming. In: Proceedings of the Regional
Workshop on Integrated Pest Management and Green
Farming in Rural Poverty Alleviation, Suwon, Republic of
Korea, pp. 32–40.
Yoon, C.K., 2000. Altered salmon leading way to dinner plates,
but rules lag. The New York Times, May 1, 2000, p. A1.
Zhang, X., Yang, X., 2004. Safety evaluation of food from
transgenic fish and the molecular biological mechanism.
Wei Sheng Yan Jiu 33 (2), 233–236.
Zbikowska, H.M., 2003. Fish can be first-advances in fish
transgenesis for commercial applications. Transgenic Res.
12 (4), 379–389.
Zhu, Z., Li, G., He, L., Chen, S., 1985. Novel gene transfer into the
fertilized eggs of gold fish (Carassiuss auratus). A. Angew.
Ichthyol 1, 31–34.
Zhu, Z., 1992. Generation of fast growing transgenic fish:
Methods and mechanisms. In: Hew, C.L., Fletcher, G.L.
(Eds.), Transgenic Fish. Singapore World Scientific,
Singapore, pp. 92–119.
Zhu, Y., Chen, H., Fan, J., Wang, Y., Li, Y., Chen, J., Fan, J., Yang,
S., Hu, L., Leung, H., Mew, T.W., Teng, P.S., Wang, Z., Mundt,
C.C., 2000. Genetic diversity and disease control in rice.
Nature 406 (6797), 718–722.
Olivier Le Curieux-Belfond is a Ph.D. graduate in ecophysiology at
the University of Caen in France. His research interests include
pollutions in aquatic organisms and ecosystems, as aquaculture.
He presently works on European regulations of chemicals as
member of the Risk Assessment Committee of ECHA (European
Chemical Agency), and GMOs at CRIIGEN (Comite´ de Recherche et
d’Information Inde´pendantes sur le ge´nie GENe´ tique).
Louise Vandelac Ph. D. is Professor, Sociology Department and
Environmental Sciences Institute, University of Quebec in Montreal
(UQAM) and CINBIOSE,WHOand PAO Collaborative Center in
environmental and occupational health.
Joseph Caron Ph.D., consultant in science policy and independent
researcher, is an Associate Member, CINBIOSE, University of Quebec
in Montreal.
Gilles-Eric Seralini Ph.D., HDR, is Professor of molecular biology in
the University of Caen, France. From 1998 he is a member of
National and International Committes for GMOs assessments
and regulations and is President of the CRIIGEN scientific council.
e n v i r onmental s c i e n c e & p o l i c y 1 2 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 1 7 0 – 1 8 9 189
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)