Scientists Harvest Fish Oil Crop

Scientists develop a way to make crops generate fish oil, no kidding!

Plants genetically engineered to make fish oils offer a new approach to improving diet, say UK scientists.

Experiments have proved that crops containing genes from marine organisms are able to produce omega 3 fatty acids normally found in oily fish.

Adding the oil to animal feed would create omega 3-rich meat, milk and eggs.

Researchers from the EU-wide Lipgene project say such food would help tackle public health issues like obesity.

‘Good’ fats

Concerns over dwindling fish stocks and marine pollution has led researchers to seek an alternative source of long chain omega 3 fatty acids; fats that have important health benefits, especially for the heart. The best source is oily fish, such as salmon, mackerel and herring, but most people do not get enough in their diet.

Most people don’t eat enough oily fish

Omega 3 fatty acids are made not by the fish themselves but by the marine microbes they consume.

Scientists at Rothamsted Research in Harpenden, Herts, isolated key genes from a species of microscopic single-celled marine algae known as Thalassiosira pseudonana.

They inserted the genes into crops such as linseed and oil seed rape and found that the plants were able to synthesise omega 3 fatty acids in their seed oils.

“We know that this works, we’ve done proof of concept studies in model plants and also in crop plants and we can see the accumulation of some of the fish oils we’re interested in,” said research group leader Professor Johnathan Napier.

“We’re still at the stage where we’d want to optimise and improve the levels that we see so I think we’re probably three or four years away from the point where we have something ready for regulatory approval for some sort of limited field release,” he added.

The eventual aim is to feed GM-enhanced oils to animals such as chickens and cattle, to produce omega 3 enriched meat, milk and eggs.

This would provide a sustainable source of fish oil amid concern over dwindling fish stocks.

“The big problem is that fish (and fish oils) is a very seriously diminishing natural resource,” said Professor Napier.

“There are big problems with the sustainability of natural fish stocks and there are also concerns about pollution of the marine environment so we’re interested in trying to produce a sustainable alternative source with these fish oils.”

Consumer issues

Professor Ian Givens from the Nutritional Sciences Research Unit at the University of Reading said he believed that consumers would see the benefit of such foods, despite the fact they come from transgenic crops.

There is concern over dwindling fish stocks

“There has been a lot of concern and resistance about the whole GM technology in the food chain,” he said.

“Things move on. When people are able to see more clearly what the benefits to them are from these sorts of approaches, rather than the benefits to others, I suspect that mindsets will change but it will take time.”

New figures released by Lipgene show that only 30% of the UK population is consuming the recommended 450mg/day intake of omega-3 fatty acids.

Teenagers, especially males, and low income groups eat the least of all, said Professor Givens.

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) recommends that everyone should eat two portions of fish a week, including one portion of oily fish.

But because fish can contain pollutants such as dioxins and PCBs, there are limits to the amount that should be consumed, particularly for women who are pregnant and breast feeding.

An FSA spokesperson said an expert committee reviewed the evidence on the relationship between long chain omega 3 fatty acids and cardiovascular disease in 2004.

“Two portions of fish per week, one white and one oily, provides the amount of long chain omega 3 fatty acids that can help prevent heart disease,” said the spokesperson.

“The Agency recommends that it is better to eat fish, especially oily fish, rather than fish oil supplements or fish oil fortified foods because as well as being rich in long chain omega 3 fatty acids, fish also contains essential vitamins and minerals and is a good source of protein.”

This is pretty damn cool.

Making changes to our environment that we can’t take back is a bad idea. I won’t be surprized if the deminishing Bee populations is due to Round-Up Ready Corn or some similar fucking around that we have done.

[quote]on edge wrote:
Making changes to our environment that we can’t take back is a bad idea. I won’t be surprized if the deminishing Bee populations is due to Round-Up Ready Corn or some similar fucking around that we have done.[/quote]

Maybe we can engineer plants to produce honey. Problem solved. Bee stings suck anyways.

[quote]texasguy2 wrote:
on edge wrote:
Making changes to our environment that we can’t take back is a bad idea. I won’t be surprized if the deminishing Bee populations is due to Round-Up Ready Corn or some similar fucking around that we have done.

Maybe we can engineer plants to produce honey. Problem solved. Bee stings suck anyways. [/quote]

Fuck!

Good response.

[quote]texasguy2 wrote:
on edge wrote:
Making changes to our environment that we can’t take back is a bad idea. I won’t be surprized if the deminishing Bee populations is due to Round-Up Ready Corn or some similar fucking around that we have done.

Maybe we can engineer plants to produce honey. Problem solved. Bee stings suck anyways. [/quote]

I’m less concerned about honey and more concerned about pollination. There are tons of plants that rely on bees for reproduction.

Guys, you realize omega 3s come from algae that fish accumulate in their system. You can literally eat the algae, if you’re into that kind of thing.

There is an article about this here: Getting Brain Food Straight from the Source : NPR

I’d be interested in what Tim and TC had to say on this matter given that they product a damn fine fish oil product here (Flameout). Could shed some interesting light on the dwindling supply and the possibility of eating omega3’s in everything.

this is a great example of how genetic research and experimentation can benefit society.

[quote]Rusty Barbell wrote:
this is a great example of how genetic research and experimentation can benefit society.[/quote]

Exactly. With over 6 billion people on this ball of mud we are going to have to do more of this otherwise we will fish the oceans clean.

We almost destroyed the American Bison and ancient populations wiped out entire species.

[quote]texasguy2 wrote:
on edge wrote:
Making changes to our environment that we can’t take back is a bad idea. I won’t be surprized if the deminishing Bee populations is due to Round-Up Ready Corn or some similar fucking around that we have done.

Maybe we can engineer plants to produce honey. Problem solved. Bee stings suck anyways. [/quote]

Screw that, I want to reengineer plants to produce MEAT PIES, hot, with sauce. YUM!!!

But seriously when I first thought it was making fish oil, that sounded … a bit whacko. But when I discovered that the fish oil was from algae, well, that’s no problem with me.

Hey we’ll all be eating soylent green one day

It’s great that they were able to GM these plants to produce omega 3’s… but haven’t they forgotten that there’s already a plant that does that?

Chia seeds: they contain protein, fibre, and tons of omega 3s.

There are probably hundreds of plants existing already that have fantastic benefits for health hat we are too damned lazy to investigate. Stupid lazy humans! Always going the long way around.

But seriously there are probably things to consider like where the plants can grow, yields, resistance to local disease etc… so the GM side of things can be useful to make a super crop that can grow in abundance.

[quote]on edge wrote:
texasguy2 wrote:
on edge wrote:
Making changes to our environment that we can’t take back is a bad idea. I won’t be surprized if the deminishing Bee populations is due to Round-Up Ready Corn or some similar fucking around that we have done.

Maybe we can engineer plants to produce honey. Problem solved. Bee stings suck anyways.

Fuck!

Good response.[/quote]

That was an awfully ignorant response.

Human civilization will only last around 1-2 years if too many bees die.

Unless the fertility fairies pollinate all plants that are taken care of by bees.

[quote]orion wrote:
on edge wrote:
texasguy2 wrote:
on edge wrote:
Making changes to our environment that we can’t take back is a bad idea. I won’t be surprized if the deminishing Bee populations is due to Round-Up Ready Corn or some similar fucking around that we have done.

Maybe we can engineer plants to produce honey. Problem solved. Bee stings suck anyways.

Fuck!

Good response.

That was an awfully ignorant response.

Human civilization will only last around 1-2 years if too many bees die.

Unless the fertility fairies pollinate all plants that are taken care of by bees.

[/quote]

Those fairies are hard workers too, you know.

[quote]orion wrote:
on edge wrote:
texasguy2 wrote:
on edge wrote:
Making changes to our environment that we can’t take back is a bad idea. I won’t be surprized if the deminishing Bee populations is due to Round-Up Ready Corn or some similar fucking around that we have done.

Maybe we can engineer plants to produce honey. Problem solved. Bee stings suck anyways.

Fuck!

Good response.

That was an awfully ignorant response.

Human civilization will only last around 1-2 years if too many bees die.

Unless the fertility fairies pollinate all plants that are taken care of by bees.

[/quote]

Other insects pollinate plants too however, you are right, without insects plants will fail drastically and without plants animals will fail and so on. I’d say humans would survive through alternative food sources to what we are used to, but a lot of humans would die in the meantime.

we are so dependant on those little critters

they should GM plants that encourage bees to flourish!

[quote]Magarhe wrote:
orion wrote:
on edge wrote:
texasguy2 wrote:
on edge wrote:
Making changes to our environment that we can’t take back is a bad idea. I won’t be surprized if the deminishing Bee populations is due to Round-Up Ready Corn or some similar fucking around that we have done.

Maybe we can engineer plants to produce honey. Problem solved. Bee stings suck anyways.

Fuck!

Good response.

That was an awfully ignorant response.

Human civilization will only last around 1-2 years if too many bees die.

Unless the fertility fairies pollinate all plants that are taken care of by bees.

Other insects pollinate plants too however, you are right, without insects plants will fail drastically and without plants animals will fail and so on. I’d say humans would survive through alternative food sources to what we are used to, but a lot of humans would die in the meantime.

we are so dependant on those little critters

they should GM plants that encourage bees to flourish![/quote]

Bees pollinate 80% of all plants used by humans.

[quote]orion wrote:
on edge wrote:
texasguy2 wrote:
on edge wrote:
Making changes to our environment that we can’t take back is a bad idea. I won’t be surprized if the deminishing Bee populations is due to Round-Up Ready Corn or some similar fucking around that we have done.

Maybe we can engineer plants to produce honey. Problem solved. Bee stings suck anyways.

Fuck!

Good response.

That was an awfully ignorant response.

Human civilization will only last around 1-2 years if too many bees die.

Unless the fertility fairies pollinate all plants that are taken care of by bees.

[/quote]

Orien, get a sense of humor. I’m pretty sure he was joking.

Obviously I agree with you in principle, although humanity and it’s civilizations will remain intact if we do lose the bees. Most plants can pollinate via the wind or other insects. We would lose some plants and it would be a terrible loss but we would go on.

[quote]orion wrote:
on edge wrote:
texasguy2 wrote:
on edge wrote:
Making changes to our environment that we can’t take back is a bad idea. I won’t be surprized if the deminishing Bee populations is due to Round-Up Ready Corn or some similar fucking around that we have done.

Maybe we can engineer plants to produce honey. Problem solved. Bee stings suck anyways.

Fuck!

Good response.

That was an awfully ignorant response.

Human civilization will only last around 1-2 years if too many bees die.

Unless the fertility fairies pollinate all plants that are taken care of by bees.

[/quote]

Bullshit.

[quote]texasguy2 wrote:
orion wrote:
on edge wrote:
texasguy2 wrote:
on edge wrote:
Making changes to our environment that we can’t take back is a bad idea. I won’t be surprized if the deminishing Bee populations is due to Round-Up Ready Corn or some similar fucking around that we have done.

Maybe we can engineer plants to produce honey. Problem solved. Bee stings suck anyways.

Fuck!

Good response.

That was an awfully ignorant response.

Human civilization will only last around 1-2 years if too many bees die.

Unless the fertility fairies pollinate all plants that are taken care of by bees.

Bullshit. [/quote]

The phenomenon is particularly important for crops such as almond growing in California, where honey bees are the predominant pollinator and the crop value in 2006 was US$1.5 billion. In 2000, the total U.S. crop value that was wholly dependent on honey bee pollination was estimated to exceed US$15 billion.[75]

Honey bees are not native to the Americas, therefore their necessity as pollinators in the US is limited to strictly agricultural/ornamental uses, as no native plants require honey bee pollination, except where concentrated in monoculture situations�??where the pollination need is so great at bloom time that pollinators must be concentrated beyond the capacity of native bees (with current technology).

They are responsible for pollination of approximately one third of the United States’ crop species, including such species as: almonds, peaches, soybeans, apples, pears, cherries, raspberries, blackberries, cranberries, watermelons, cantaloupes, cucumbers and strawberries. Many but not all of these plants can be (and often are) pollinated by other insects in small holdings in the U.S., including other kinds of bees, but typically not on a commercial scale. While some farmers of a few kinds of native crops do bring in honey bees to help pollinate, none specifically need them, and when honey bees are absent from a region, there is a presumption that native pollinators may reclaim the niche, typically being better adapted to serve those plants (assuming that the plants normally occur in that specific area).

However, even though on a per-individual basis, many other species are actually more efficient at pollinating, on the 30% of crop types where honey bees are used, most native pollinators cannot be mass-utilized as easily or as effectively as honey bees�??in many instances they will not visit the plants at all. Beehives can be moved from crop to crop as needed, and the bees will visit many plants in large numbers, compensating via sheer numbers for what they lack in efficiency. The commercial viability of these crops is therefore strongly tied to the beekeeping industry.