How to Assure That Farmers Apply New Technology According to Good Agricultural Practice: Lessons From Dutch Initiatives

The application of Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) contributes to many aspects of sustainable farming, including integrated control of weeds, diseases, and pests, and optimization of fertilization and irrigation. It is a relatively neglected issue in debates regarding the application of new technology, such as genetic modification (GM), which often revolve around the intrinsic properties of a GM crop allegedly leading to unsatisfactory performance. However, the performance largely depends on the agronomic and institutional embedding of applying new technology, which generally applies to all crops, whether conventional or GM. We describe and discuss four cases in which the government or private partners in the production chain regulate this, using legal measures, incentives, or mutual agreements, or a combination thereof. These cases serve as a starting point for a discussion on how GAP can be stimulated, organized, and guaranteed. We argue that next to the government, also seed suppliers, NGOs, and buyers, as well as farmers can be drivers for the application of GAP when tools are available that enable farmers to make optimal farming choices

Untangling the hedge: Genetic diversity in clonally and sexually transmitted genomes of European wild roses, Rosa L.

While European wild roses are abundant and widely distributed, their morphological taxonomy is complicated and ambiguous. In particular, the polyploid Rosa section Caninae (dogroses) is characterised by its unusual meiosis, causing simultaneous clonal and sexual transmission of sub-genomes. This hemisexual reproduction, which often co-occurs with vegetative reproduction, defies the standard definition of species boundaries. We analysed seven highly polymorphic microsatellite loci, scored for over 2 600 Rosa samples of differing ploidy, collected across Europe within three independent research projects. Based on their morphology, these samples had been identified as belonging to 21 dogrose and five other native rose species. We quantified the degree of clonality within species and at individual sampling sites. We then compared the genetic structure within our data to current rose morpho-systematics and searched for hemisexually co-inherited sets of alleles at individual loci. We found considerably fewer copies of identical multi-locus genotypes in dogroses than in roses with regular meiosis, with some variation recorded among species. While clonality showed no detectable geographic pattern, some genotypes appeared to be more widespread. Microsatellite data confirmed the current classification of subsections, but they did not support most of the generally accepted dogrose microspecies. Under canina meiosis, we found co-inherited sets of alleles as expected, but could not distinguish between sexually and clonally inherited sub-genomes, with only some of the detected allele combinations being lineage-specific

Recent Progress and Recommendations on Celiac Disease From the Working Group on Prolamin Analysis and Toxicity

Celiac disease (CD) affects a growing number of individuals worldwide. To elucidate the causes for this increase, future multidisciplinary collaboration is key to understanding the interactions between immunoreactive components in gluten-containing cereals and the human gastrointestinal tract and immune system and to devise strategies for CD prevention and treatment beyond the gluten-free diet. During the last meetings, the Working Group on Prolamin Analysis and Toxicity (Prolamin Working Group, PWG) discussed recent progress in the field together with key stakeholders from celiac disease societies, academia, industry and regulatory bodies. Based on the current state of knowledge, this perspective from the PWG members provides recommendations regarding clinical, analytical and legal aspects of CD. The selected key topics that require future multidisciplinary collaborative efforts in the clinical field are to collect robust data on the increasing prevalence of CD, to evaluate what is special about gluten-specific T cells, to study their kinetics and transcriptomics and to put some attention to the identification of the environmental agents that facilitate the breaking of tolerance to gluten. In the field of gluten analysis, the key topics are the precise assessment of gluten immunoreactive components in wheat, rye and barley to understand how these are affected by genetic and environmental factors, the comparison of different methods for compliance monitoring of gluten-free products and the development of improved reference materials for gluten analysis

Removing celiac disease-related gluten proteins from bread wheat while retaining technological properties: a study with Chinese Spring deletion lines

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Gluten proteins can induce celiac disease (CD) in genetically susceptible individuals. In CD patients gluten-derived peptides are presented to the immune system, which leads to a CD4⁺T-cell mediated immune response and inflammation of the small intestine. However, not all gluten proteins contain T-cell stimulatory epitopes. Gluten proteins are encoded by multigene loci present on chromosomes 1 and 6 of the three different genomes of hexaploid bread wheat (<it>Triticum aestivum</it>) (AABBDD).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The effects of deleting individual gluten loci on both the level of T-cell stimulatory epitopes in the gluten proteome and the technological properties of the flour were analyzed using a set of deletion lines of <it>Triticum aestivum </it>cv. Chinese Spring. The reduction of T-cell stimulatory epitopes was analyzed using monoclonal antibodies that recognize T-cell epitopes present in gluten proteins. The deletion lines were technologically tested with respect to dough mixing properties and dough rheology. The results show that removing the α-gliadin locus from the short arm of chromosome 6 of the D-genome (6DS) resulted in a significant decrease in the presence of T-cell stimulatory epitopes but also in a significant loss of technological properties. However, removing the ω-gliadin, γ-gliadin, and LMW-GS loci from the short arm of chromosome 1 of the D-genome (1DS) removed T-cell stimulatory epitopes from the proteome while maintaining technological properties.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The consequences of these data are discussed with regard to reducing the load of T-cell stimulatory epitopes in wheat, and to contributing to the design of CD-safe wheat varieties.</p

Statement of the Prolamin Working Group on the Determination of Gluten in Fermented Foods Containing Partially Hydrolyzed Gluten

On August 12, 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has finalized a rule related to gluten-free labeling for foods containing fermented, hydrolyzed ingredients. The FDA believes that there is no scientifically valid analytical method effective for determining gluten in fermented or hydrolyzed foods. In the absence of an analytical method, the FDA has decided to evaluate gluten-free claims on these foods based only on evidence that the food or ingredient used is gluten-free before fermentation or hydrolysis. For example, barley-based beers from which gluten is removed during brewing using special filtration, adsorption and/or enzymatic treatment are therefore excluded from bearing a gluten-free label

Statement of the Prolamin Working Group on the Determination of Gluten in Fermented Foods Containing Partially Hydrolyzed Gluten

On August 12, 2020, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has finalized a rule related to gluten-free labeling for foods containing fermented, hydrolyzed ingredients. The FDA believes that there is no scientifically valid analytical method e ective for determining gluten in fermented or hydrolyzed foods. In the absence of an analytical method, the FDA has decided to evaluate gluten-free claims on these foods based only on evidence that the food or ingredient used is gluten-free before fermentation or hydrolysis. For example, barley-based beers from which gluten is removed during brewing using special filtration, adsorption and/or enzymatic treatment are therefore excluded from bearing a gluten-free label. The Prolamin Working Group (PWG) acknowledges that the FDA rule is a regulatory act and might have to take into consideration several aspects other than scientific evidence, including risk assessment. Nevertheless, the PWG thinks that science has to be the most important driver for regulatory acts in risk management.Fil: Scherf, Katharina Anne. Karlsruher Institut Für Technologie; AlemaniaFil: Catassi, Carlo. Università Politecnica Delle Marche; ItaliaFil: Chirdo, Fernando Gabriel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - La Plata. Instituto de Estudios Inmunológicos y Fisiopatológicos. Universidad Nacional de La Plata. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas. Instituto de Estudios Inmunológicos y Fisiopatológicos; ArgentinaFil: Ciclitira, Paul J.. University of East Anglia; Reino UnidoFil: Feighery, Conleth Francis. Universidad de Dublin; IrlandaFil: Gianfrani, Carmen. Institute of Biochemistry and Cell Biology; ItaliaFil: Koning, Frits. Leiden University; Países BajosFil: Lundin, Knut E. A.. University of Oslo; NoruegaFil: Masci, Stefania. No especifíca;Fil: Schuppan, Detlef. No especifíca;Fil: Smulders, Marinus J. M.. Wageningen University and Research; Países BajosFil: Tranquet, Olivier. No especifíca;Fil: Troncone, Riccardo. University Federico II; ItaliaFil: Koehler, Peter. No especifíca