-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod2
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 9:21 AM
To: 'biotech-room2@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: Nuna bean
[Thanks to Edo Lin, who was also an active participant in Conference 1, for this message. Note that the "Lesser 1998" reference mentioned in the message of Wollny on 21 March was to Lesser W. (1998) Sustainable use of genetic resources under the Convention on Biological Diversity: Exploring access and benefit sharing issues. Wallingford, Oxon, UK and New York, USA, CAB International. 218 pp.....Moderator]
My name is Edo Lin and I am an independent consultant to the seed and biotechnology industry. I have some twenty years experience in the seed industry and have worked in both developing and developed countries.
I would like to react briefly to an issue raised by Ancha Srinivasan [in point 1 of his message of 22 March...Moderator] and in particular to his statement regarding the Nuna bean and the US patent obtained by a US company. The claims of the patent do not directly concern the Nuna bean, but the results of crossing Nuna beans with the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) which results in a novel bean variety which is adapted to the more temperate climates in the US. Normal Nuna beans are not suitable for growing in the US due to its long season (>200 days) and its sensitivity to day length. There are some other points too. So the idea to cross Nuna with for, instance red kidney beans, to have a bushy, uniform, adapted-to-temperate-climates, till-now-not-existing bean variety is certainly novel and the patent would be, in my opinion, defensable. [For those interested in seeing the patent application and with access to the web, see http://www.delphion.com/details?pn=US06040503__ ...Moderator]
Is there an issue on the source of the nuna beans? From the patent it is clear that the sources were from publicly available germplasm accensions which are extensively quoted in the claims.
I think that in some cases there might be a valid argument against some patents issued which concern plants or seeds collected in the wild. However, if plants or seeds are used to create novel plant varieties, such varieties must be patentable or be allowed other forms or plant breeder rights.
Edo Lin
27, rte de Bombon
77720 Breau
France
tel & fax : +33 164397844
mobile : +33 671632666
e-mail : lin.edo@free.fr
[To contribute to this conference, send your message to biotech-room2@mailserv.fao.org For further information on the FAO Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture see http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp ]
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod2
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 10:06 AM
To: 'biotech-room2@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: Re: Animal genetic resources // Africa
Sorry I didn't introduce myself clearly in the first posting. Now I do. I'm Abdelgadir A. Ageeb, I used to work for Agricultural Research Corporation (ARC), Sudan. Now I'm working as Consultant in dairy Breeding/Genetics.
This message is a reply to what Mr. Clemens B. Wollny wrote [21 March] regarding animal genetic resources in Africa.
Indigenous knowledge is simply defined as the "discoveries" by ancestors long years ago resulted from isolation, enhancement, and preservation of valuable herbs and plant crops and selection of adapted animals for their use. The indigenous knowledge related to livestock may not be as visible as that in crops and medicinal plants and herds. The rare genetic materials in livestock, apart from the Boorola gene and Tuli breed, certain breeds of dairy cattle are resistant to drought and heat stress (e.g. Kenana and Butana cattle of the Sudan); rare breeds of poultry in Africa are resistant to many fatal diseases; Zhagawa sheep (Sudan) are resistant to internal parasites; the rapid adaptive radiation of Tilapia fish in East Africa Lakes; ... and many more not yet identified (the research work going on by the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) in Kenya to identify the rare valuable genes in livestock in developing countries will be fruitful). These desirable traits are controlled by rare genes commonly called "green gold". Since the working unit in this biotechnology era is no longer the organism but rather the gene, this green gold could be isolated and propagated by cloning or DNA recombinant techniques and the end product soon be ready for marketplace. The country whose genetic material is being used to foster innovation should ask for a compensation, in whatever form it might take.
At present, the advancement of biotechnology in livestock research is not as fast as that in medicine and crops. But in the near future, the genetic materials of tropical livestock will effectively contribute to the biotechnology revolution. I agree with Mr. Wollny that the national policy measures on international research on animal genetic resources should not be used to restrict or prevent genuine research but rather regulate it for the benefits of both sides. But, in effect, the developing countries may not allow the biotech companies to get a free ride on the back of thousands of years of indigenous knowledge without cost.
Abdelgadir A. Ageeb
Quantitative Geneticist
Email : aageeb@sympatico.ca
[For more information on the genetic diversity of domesticated animal populations found throughout the world, FAO has recently published the 3rd edition of the World Watch List for Domestic Animal Diversity - see http://www.fao.org/WAICENT/OIS/PRESS_NE/PRESSENG/2000/pren0066.htm ...Moderator]
[To contribute to this conference, send your message to biotech-room2@mailserv.fao.org For further information on the FAO Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture see http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp ]
-----Original Message-----
From: Biotech-Mod2
Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 10:28 AM
To: 'biotech-room2@mailserv.fao.org'
Subject: Re: Nuna bean
The debate on IPR should, only secondly, be a legal one. It should have first an ethical dimension. The genetic resources (as with many other resources) of the developing countries, have been sacked for the benefit of powerful companies that have made a lot of money from them. Besides the welfare of these companies, millions and millions of very poor farmers subsist in the worse conditions. How can we oblige the rich to return part of their benefits to the poorest? How can we oblige them to compensate their sack? How can we oblige them to contribute to reduce the scandalous situation where there is hunger in the world for millions and excess for others.
An IPR system could be an interesting contribution but, to be moral and efficient, it should not be established to give similar rights to the North and to the South: the North should compensate previous sacks and pay more to access to South intellectual property (IP); the South should benefit at a low price of the North IP. The pharmaceutical companies bringing an action against South Africa and Brazil for their cheap production of HIV and other medicines, constitutes a scandalous example of their deep lack of ethical behaviour and of the amoral and short view of the WTO rules to defend the IPR.
Michel FERRY
Directeur scientifique
Station de Recherche sur le Palmier Dattier
et les Systèmes de Production en Zones Arides
Apartado 996
03201 ELCHE
Espagne
tél: 34.965421551
fax: 34.965423706
e-mail: m.ferry@wanadoo.es
[To contribute to this conference, send your message to biotech-room2@mailserv.fao.org For further information on the FAO Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture see http://www.fao.org/biotech/forum.asp ]