title: Transgenic crops: the present state and new ways of genetic modification.
abstract: Transgenic crops were first commercialised almost 20 years ago, which makes it a good opportunity to reflect on this technology. In this review, we compare its status with the predictions included in Vasil's forecast published in 2002. Our analysis shows that science has provided a wide range of possibilities to modify different traits in plants, yet the economy benefits from that range to very different extents. We also point out the most important constituents of the technology development involving methodology improvement and novel traits expressed in varieties introduced into agriculture. Using native genes (or their elements) in transgenes, accumulating previously produced transgenes to cascade resistance and using herbicide resistance as a selectable marker have been considered typical of novel genetically modified (GM) plant varieties. A vast portion of the novelties in stacked varieties is doubtful in terms of EU regulations. Attention has also been directed to completely novel methodology solutions that hold out the prospect of a more comprehensive use of genetic modification in agriculture as a whole, and, particularly, make its use possible in the EU and even in sustainable agriculture.
authors.affiliation: Department of Plant Genetics, Breeding and Biotechnology, Faculty of Horticulture, Biotechnology and Landscape Architecture, Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Nowoursynowska Street 159, 02-776, Warsaw, Poland.
authors.forename: Bartosz M
authors.initials: BM
authors.lastname: Szabala
authors.forename: Pawel
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Osipowski
authors.forename: Stefan
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Malepszy
mesh_terms: D018556:Crops, Agricultural / Q000235:genetics*; D005818:Genetic Engineering / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D030821:Plants, Genetically Modified / Q000235:genetics*
references.citation: Nat Biotechnol. 2012 May 07;30(5):390-2
references.pmid: 22565958
references.citation: Trends Biotechnol. 2002 May;20(5):193-6
references.pmid: 11943373
references.citation: Cell Res. 2013 Oct;23(10):1233-6
references.pmid: 23999856
references.citation: FASEB J. 1999 Oct;13(13):1796-9
references.pmid: 10506582
references.citation: Trends Biotechnol. 2014 Feb;32(2):70-3
references.pmid: 24418332
references.citation: Wound Repair Regen. 2010 Mar-Apr;18(2):168-79
references.pmid: 20419874
references.citation: Trends Biotechnol. 2013 Jun;31(6):375-83
references.pmid: 23601269
references.citation: Trends Microbiol. 2013 Nov;21(11):562-7
references.pmid: 24095303
references.citation: Curr Pharm Biotechnol. 2012 Dec;13(15):2692-704
references.pmid: 23072394
references.citation: Nat Biotechnol. 2013 Aug;31(8):686-8
references.pmid: 23929338
references.citation: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Jun 29;107(26):12028-33
references.pmid: 20508152
references.citation: Nat Biotechnol. 2012 Mar 07;30(3):231-9
references.pmid: 22398616
references.citation: Trends Biotechnol. 2013 Jul;31(7):397-405
references.pmid: 23664777
references.citation: Nat Biotechnol. 2003 Aug;21(8):849-51
references.pmid: 12894193
references.citation: J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013 Apr;68(4):e117-e126
references.pmid: 21982060
references.citation: Nature. 2009 May 21;459(7245):437-41
references.pmid: 19404259
references.citation: Plant Physiol. 2013 Jan;161(1):20-7
references.pmid: 23124327