Agricultural Biotechnology in Australia

A Hot Tip about Biotechnology in Australia

Posted on: 24 Dec 2009

The United States has substantial interest in Australia?s policies and regulatory framework regarding agricultural biotechnology and products derived thereof.

Required Report - public distribution Date: 07/14/2009 GAIN Report Number: AS9027 Australia AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY ANNUAL New Agricultural Technologies Annual Report Approved By: Grant Pettrie, Agricultural Counselor Prepared By: Lindy Crothers, Agricultural Marketing Specialist Report Highlights: The United States has substantial interest in Australia?s policies and regulatory framework regarding agricultural biotechnology and products derived thereof. Unprocessed (whole) biotech corn and soybeans have not received regulatory approval in Australia and, thus, cannot be imported without further processing. Foods with biotech content of over one percent must receive prior approval and be labeled. This requirement can restrict sales of U.S. intermediate and processed products. Australia?s policies and views on this technology influence other countries in the region, and elsewhere, which may follow Australia?s lead in developing a regulatory system of their own. The moratoria on new plantings have been lifted in NSW and Victoria and the first commercial plantings of canola took place in 2008. Western Australia lifted it?s moratoria in November 2008 to allow GM cotton to be grown in the Ord River region and in April 2009 announced that trials of GM canola would be allowed at 20 sites in that state. The moratoria remain in place in South Australia, Tasmania and the ACT. Section I. Executive Summary: The United States has substantial interest in Australia?s policies and regulatory framework regarding agricultural biotechnology and products derived thereof. Unprocessed (whole) biotech corn and soybeans have not received regulatory approval in Australia and, thus, cannot be imported without further processing. Foods with biotech content of over 1 percent must receive prior approval and be labeled. This requirement can restrict sales of U.S. intermediate and processed products. Australia?s policies and views on this technology influence other countries in the region, and elsewhere, which may follow Australia?s lead in developing a regulatory system of their own. The biotech debate is very important in Australia. The federal government is very supportive of the technology, has committed considerable long-term funding to research and development, and has approved genetically modified (GM) canola varieties for general release. The State governments have also committed funds for research and development, but most have been more cautious about the introduction of the technology and most Australian states initially put in place moratoria on new plantings of biotechnology crops. After state-level reviews in November 2007, New South Wales and Victoria lifted the moratoria on genetically engineered canola. In November 2008, Western Australia lifted it?s ban to allow biotech cotton to be grown in the Ord River region and in April 2009 announced that trials of GM canola would be allowed at 20 sites in that state. South Australia has maintained its moratoria, and moratoria remain in place in Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory (ACT). Major farm groups and the Commonwealth government?s science organizations do not support this position and have argued openly for acceptance of biotech crops. Currently in Australia, about 90 percent of the cotton planted is from biotech varieties, which were approved for release prior to the state moratoria. Although genetically engineered cotton remains popular and planting of this product now dominates the cotton industry in Australia, the moratoria slowed the commercialization and adoption of the technology. Australia has a substantial risk assessment based regulatory framework for dealings with gene technology and genetically modified organisms, as well as a process for assessment and approval of genetically modified foods. The Gene Technology Act of 2000 established Australia?s regulatory scheme for dealings with gene technology and genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The Commonwealth?s Gene Technology Regulator serves the key role in assessing, regulating and licensing GMOs and enforcing license conditions. Genetically modified foods must also be assessed, determined to be safe, and be approved before being sold for human consumption. The standards for such foods are developed by Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) and are contained in the Food Standards Code. There are labeling requirements for genetically modified foods containing modified genetic material and/or novel protein, and for foods with altered characteristics. Imports of viable GMOs and food products containing genetically modified ingredients need to meet these same regulations. To date, biotech cotton, carnations and canola varieties are the only agricultural crops approved for commercial release into the environment in Australia, while biotech cotton is the only crop grown widely in the country. With the lifting of the moratoria in New South Wales and Victoria, plantings of GM canola are expected to increase rapidly. Research is being conducted on other biotech crops, with field trials controlled by the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR) being conducted on some, e.g. Indian mustard, wheat, rice, sugarcane, white clover, grapevines, pineapple, papaya, canola and cotton. Approval has already been granted for food products derived from biotech corn, soybean, sugarbeet, potatoes, alfalfa, rice and oils from biotech cotton and canola (see Appendices II & III). For GMOs that have not received regulatory approval in Australia, U.S. export opportunities are obviously restricted. For the United States, the commercial impact of this constraint is most pronounced for feed grains, e.g. whole corn, and soybeans as these products have not yet received regulatory approval. In addition to this market access restriction, Australia does not allow the importation of many grains and/or grain products for phytosanitary reasons, citing the need to limit exotic weed seeds. Australia requires that food products derived from GMOs, if they contain more than one percent of biotech product, get prior approval from Food Standards Australia New Zealand before they can be sold. Such products must also be labeled to indicate that they contain biotech products. Section II. Biotechnology Trade and Production: Commercial Crops Biotech cotton, color modified carnations and canola are the only crops approved for commercial release by Australia?s Gene Technology Regulator. It is estimated that biotech cotton varieties are grown on about 90 percent of Australia?s cotton area. The Regulator approved the commercial releases of two biotech canola varieties in 2003. With the lifting of the moratoria in New South Wales and Victoria in early 2008, that was the first year that GM canola was grown commercially anywhere in the country. Biotech carnations became the first biotech products to be assessed by the Gene Technology Regulator to ?pose minimal risks to people or the environment, and are sufficiently safe to be used by anyone without the need for a license? and they have accordingly been placed on the GMO Register. Biotech Cotton Biotech cotton has been grown commercially in Australia since the approval and introduction of Bt, or Ingard, cotton in 1996. Roundup Ready cotton (herbicide tolerance) and Roundup Ready/Bt cotton (herbicide tolerance/insect resistance) were subsequently approved and grown commercially for the first time in 2001. In 2003, Australia?s Gene Technology Regulator approved an additional cotton variety ? ?Bollgard II? ? for commercial release and the first major commercial plantings were made during the 2003/04 season. Currently, over 90 percent of the Australian cotton crop is made up of GM varieties. In addition, there are a number of new biotech cotton varieties currently being developed (see Appendix II at the end of this report). Australian food standards require approval and labeling of food or food ingredients that contain new genetic material or protein or have altered characteristics as a result of gene modification. Refined oil from biotech cottonseed, however, does not require a label because the oil contains no genetic material and the cottonseed oil is identical to conventional cottonseed oil. Canola The commercial releases of two biotech canola varieties (InVigo ®r hybrid & Roundup Ready®) were approved by OGTR in 2003. The first commercial plantings of these varieties took place in 2008 after the state governments in NSW and Victoria lifted their moratoria on commercial plantings of GM canola. Approximately 9,600 hectares of GM canola was planted by 108 growers. It is expected that area planted to GM canola varieties will expand in 2009, possibly by as much as a multiple of 4, bringing the total to nearly 40,000 ha. Applications Under Evaluation A list of GMO applications currently under evaluation by OGTR is contained in Appendix I of this report. Imported Products Under the Gene Technology Act 2000, approval or authorization must be obtained to deal with genetically modified organisms. This means that the importation of live, viable GMOs, are regulated under the Act. Importers need to apply to OGTR for a license or authorization to import any GMO into Australia. OGTR and the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS) work closely to regulate and enforce this situation. The AQIS application form for an import permit contains a section relating to the genetically modified status of the product. Foods containing biotech materials must be approved by Food Standards Australia New Zealand and be labeled if the biotech content is greater than 1% before they can be sold in Australia. This applies to all domestically produced and imported food. A list of currently approved biotech food products is contained in Appendix III of this report. Processed animal feeds, such as soy meal, are not covered by biotech legislation in Australia. These products, therefore, do not require prior approval or a license (see Section III of this report) to be imported. There are, however, quarantine restrictions on some products. Unprocessed biotech products imported as feed (i.e. whole grain, etc), would require a license from OGTR, as there is a possibility that seed could be released into the environment. Products Developed Outside U.S. GM crops grown in Australia have been developed in Australia (see Appendices I & II for list of crops & their developers). Given that most of Australia?s cotton products comes from GM varieties, it is likely that any exports of cotton & cotton products would contain these varieties. Australia does not export cotton to the U.S. No cotton seed was exported to the U.S. in 2008 although small amounts have been exported in the past. Section III. New Technologies: There is a small amount of work currently being conducted in Australia on genetically engineered agriculturally- relevant animals ? mainly chicken & sheep. The work is in the very early stages and is being carried out by public and private research institutions and universities. GE animals are considered ?Notifiable Low Risk Dealings? (NLRDs) by the OGTR ? i.e. ?dealings with GMOs that have been assessed as posing low risk to the health and safety of people and the environment provided certain risk management conditions are met.? A full list of NLRDs, including the institutions carrying out the research, is available on the OGTR website at: http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/Content/nlrdclass-2. No GE animals are currently anywhere near the commercial production stage. Should they become commercially viable and be intended for the food chain, they would be subject to the same regulations as plant-derived GM food products are - see ?Biotech Food? section below. Section IV. Biotechnology Policy: The GMO Regulatory System The Gene Technology Act 2000 (the Act) came into force on June 21, 2001 as the Commonwealth component of a national regulatory scheme. The Act and the associated Gene Technology Regulations 2001, provide a comprehensive process for the Gene Technology Regulator to assess proposed dealings with live and viable GMOs ranging from contained work in certified laboratories to general releases of GMOs into the environment, and extensive powers to monitor and enforce license conditions. An Inter-Governmental Agreement, between the Commonwealth and the states and territories, underpins the system for regulating genetically modified organisms in Australia. The Ministerial Council for Gene Technology, comprising ministers from the Commonwealth and each state and territory, oversees the regulatory framework and provides advice to the Gene Technology Regulator on policy principles to assist in decision-making. The individual states and territories have passed or are developing complimentary legislation to the Gene Technology Act in their jurisdictions. The object of the Gene Technology Act is: "To protect the health and safety of people, and to protect the environment, by identifying risks posed by or as a result of gene technology, and by managing those risks through regulating certain dealings with genetically modified organisms." The Act prohibits all dealings with GMOs unless the dealing is: A licensed dealing; A notifiable low risk dealing; Exempt dealing; or Included on the GMO Register. Key features of the Act are the appointment of an independent Gene Technology Regulator and a requirement for transparent and accountable implementation. The Regulator administers the regulation of all dealings with GMOs in Australia, in accordance with the Act and ensures compliance with the conditions of any approvals. The Regulator consults extensively with the community, research institutions and private enterprise. The Gene Technology Regulator liaises with other regulatory agencies to coordinate the approval of biotech products for use and sale (see table below). The Act creates a Public Record of GMO Dealings and GM Products that resides on the OGTR website: www.ogtr.gov.au. Regulatory Agencies in Australia with a Role in Regulation of Gene Technology Agency What They Regulate Scope Relevant Legislation OGTR ? Office of Dealings The Gene Technology Regulator administers a Gene the Gene with GMOs national scheme for the regulation of GMOs in Technology Technology Australia in order to protect health & safety of Act 2000 Regulatory people, and to protect the environment, by (supporting the identifying risks posed by or as a result of Gene Technology gene technology, and by managing those risks Regulator) through regulating certain dealings with GMOs. TGA ? Medicines, TGA administers legislation that provides a Therapeutic Therapeutic Goods medical national framework for the regulation of Goods Act Administration devices, medicines, medical devices, blood and tissues 1989 blood & in Australia, including GM & GM-derived tissues therapeutic products, & ensures their quality, safety & efficacy. FSANZ ? Food Food FSANZ is responsible for setting standards for Food Standards the safety, content and labeling of food. Standards Australia & New FSANZ conducts mandatory pre-market safety Australia New Zealand assessments for food produced using gene Zealand Act technology. 1991 APVMA ? Agricultural APVMA operates the national system that Agricultural & Australian & Veterinary regulates all agricultural chemicals (including Veterinary Pesticides & Chemicals those produced or used on GM crops) and Chemicals Veterinary veterinary therapeutic products. Assessments (Code) Act Medicines consider human and environmental safety, 1994 Authority product efficacy (including insecticide and herbicide resistance management), and trade Agricultural & issues relating to residues Veterinary Chemicals Administration Act 1994 NICNAS ? Industrial NICNAS provides a national notification & Industrial National Industrial Chemicals assessment scheme to protect the health of Chemicals Chemicals the public, workers & the environment from (Notification & Notification & the harmful effects of industrial chemicals. Assessment) Assessment Act 1989 Scheme AQIS ? Australian Quarantine AQIS regulates the importation into Australia Quarantine Act Quarantine & of all animal, plant & biological products that 1908 Inspection Service may pose a quarantine pest &/or disease risk. Import permit applications must indicate the Imported Food presence of GMOs or GM material and the Control Act relevant authorization under the Gene 1992 Technology Act 2000. The Act also establishes three committees to advise the Regulator and the Ministerial Council: The Gene Technology Technical Advisory Committee (GTTAC) ? a group of highly qualified experts who provide scientific and technical advice on applications; The Gene Technology Ethics Committee (GTEC) ? a group of expert ethicists, which provides ethical advice, particularly in the areas of law, religious practices, animal welfare and population health; and The Gene Technology Community Consultative Committee (GTCCC) ? a group of people representing the broad interests within the Australian community, including consumers, researchers, and environmentalists. This group looks beyond the science of gene technology to matters of general concern to the community in relation to GMOs. GMOs vs GM Product The Gene Technology Act 2000 distinguishes between genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and genetically modified (GM) products. A genetically modified product - ?GM product? - means a thing (other than a GMO) derived or produced from a GMO (Section 10 of the GT Act). The Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR) does not directly regulate the use of GM products in Australia. However, the use of GM products is regulated by other regulatory agencies in a number of situations as set out in the table above. GMOs Already Licensed by OGTR A list of GMOs already licensed by OGTR is contained in Appendix II of this report. Biotech Food Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) is the Australian Government agency responsible for approving GM food products for the Australian market. Mandatory labeling of genetically modified foods, where introduced DNA or protein is present in the final food, came into force in Australia on December 7, 2001. Regulations for labeling are contained in Standard 1.5.2 of the Food Standards Code. A list of currently approved biotech food products is contained in Appendix III of this report. Under the Standard, food or ingredients labeled genetically modified contain new genetic material or protein as a result of the genetic modification or have altered characteristics, e.g. changed nutritional values, compared to the conventional food. Some flavorings may also be derived from genetically modified organisms, but labeling is only required if they are in a concentration of more than 1 gram per kilogram (0.1%). Food additives and processing aids do not need to be labeled unless the introduced genetic material is present in the final food. Under the labeling standard, for packaged foods the words 'genetically modified' must be used in conjunction with the name of the food, or in association with the specific ingredient within the ingredient list; and for unpackaged foods for retail sale (such as unpackaged fruit and vegetables, or unpackaged processed or semi-processed foods) the words 'genetically modified' must be displayed in association with the food, or in association with the particular ingredient within that food. Biotech Feed Products Animal feeds containing GMOs (e.g. whole grains or oilseeds) are regulated by the OGTR. The OGTR considers any biosafety risks associated with the product and, if necessary, will apply special conditions, or may prohibit the use of the product as animal feed. As an example, after a GMO has undergone field trials, the organization conducting the trials may wish to use the unviable by-product (such as seed) as animal feed. Before the product is used in any way, the Gene Technology Regulator will consider any risks and, if necessary, will apply conditions or disallow the product to be used. The Australian Quarantine & Inspection Service (AQIS) and the OGTR must approve genetically modified whole grain commodities (including oilseeds) imported into Australia for animal feed (such as whole soybeans and corn). The AQIS provides quarantine inspection and certification for the arrival of imports of the products to ensure the product is free of pest and disease and specific license conditions are enforced to ensure the product meets requirements. The OGTR also assesses the product, issues a license to the organization importing the product, and may apply further conditions above those stipulated by AQIS. Large amounts of biotech feed products are used in Australia?s intensive livestock sector. A large proportion of Australia?s soybean meal is imported, including from the United States. All cottonseed meal used in Australia is considered to be biotech as over 90 percent of the cotton crop is planted to biotech varieties. Biotech and non- biotech cotton varieties are not typically segregated in Australia. Genetically modified animal feed does not require special labeling in Australia. Coexistence between Biotech & Non-Biotech Crops Coexistence of biotech, conventional, and organic crops has occurred in Australia since biotech cotton varieties were commercially grown in 1996. As part of any license to grow a biotech crop, OGTR stipulates the conditions under which the crop can be grown to ensure no cross-contamination with conventional or organic crops in the vicinity. In October 2005, national consensus was achieved in Australia regarding practical thresholds to deal with the issue of traces of GM canola in conventional canola consignments and variety trials. The Primary Industries Ministerial Council (PIMC), which is comprised of Ministers from the Australian Government and each state and territory, agreed upon adventitious presence (AP) thresholds for the presence of GM canola in conventional grain and seed. The PIMC meeting agreed on two thresholds: An AP threshold of 0.9 per cent GM canola in canola grain. This is the threshold supported by the Australian Oilseeds Federation (AOF). A second threshold for AP of GM canola in seed was set at 0.5 per cent for 2006 and 2007, to be reduced to 0.1 per cent thereafter. The Australian Seed Federation (ASF) established an AP threshold of 0.5 per cent GM seed in non-GM planting seed in 2003 following two years of research and consultation with the canola seed industry. A number of projects on GMO supply chain management have been undertaken as part of the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries & Forestry's Biotechnology Strategy for Agriculture, Food and Fibre (BSAFF). These publications are available at: http://www.daff.gov.au/agriculture-food/biotechnology. Biosafety Protocol Australia has not signed or ratified the Biosafety Protocol and the Australian Government has no timetable for consideration of accession to the Protocol. This is due to concerns about how the Protocol will operate in practice (documentation requirements, and the liability and compliance arrangements are yet to be agreed), uncertainty about how parties will implement the Protocol and whether they will do so in a way which respects all of their international obligations, and uncertainty about any individual country?s capacity to influence decision-making. Moreover, the government considers that the Protocol is not needed for Australia to manage biotech imports as Australia already has a robust regulatory framework through the Office of Gene Technology Regulator. Section V. Marketing: Market Acceptance Australia has a substantial, risk assessment based regulatory framework for dealings with gene technology and genetically modified organisms and the Government is supportive of the technology for its agricultural producers and has been an ally of the United States with regard to the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (CPB). This comes despite anti-biotechnology activism in Australia that promoted stringent labeling requirements and encouraged moratoria on biotechnology plantings. Australia?s biotechnology sector is small in global terms, but growing, with over 440 biotechnology companies (this includes all types of biotechnology, not just agricultural biotechnology). Major Australian commodity groups originally voiced concerns about introducing biotech canola and advocated for a ?go-slow? approach largely because of the potential impact biotech canola, which OGTR approved for commercial release in 2003, could have on their domestic and export businesses. In 2003 and 2004, several state governments (Victoria, NSW, South Australia, Western Australia, Tasmania and the ACT), using their powers over commodity ?marketing?, imposed moratoria on the commercial release of products of biotechnology (with the exception of the previously approved cotton and carnations). Most of the moratoria were reviewed in 2007, and the states of NSW and Victoria lifted their bans on commercial plantings of GM canola and the first commercial crops were grown in these two states in 2008. In November 2008, the Western Australian government lifted their moratoria to allow GM cotton to be grown in the Ord River area and in April 2009 they also announced that trials of GM canola would be allowed at 20 sites in that state. Moratoria remain in place in South Australia, Tasmania and the ACT. Currently in Australia about 90 percent of the cotton planted is from biotech varieties, and there has been little controversy concerning its cultivation. Indeed, environmental benefits and the significant decline in pesticide and herbicide use for this crop have been widely reported. Biotech cottonseed does appear in the domestic market through the oil and meal, and this has not met with any major opposition. A survey conducted on behalf of Biotechnology Australia in 2007 comparing changes in consumer attitudes towards biotechnology from 2005 to 2007 found significant increases in both awareness of and support for GM food crops since 2005. Attitudes towards biotechnology in food and agriculture were found to be, on balance, less positive than attitudes towards biotechnology in health and medicine. Many respondents tended to associate GM crops with commercial objectives ? although when prompted (and sometimes spontaneously), people voiced strong support for the development of GM crops that could contribute to humanitarian or environmental objectives (the most prominent example being drought resistant crops). Most participants in the survey regarded environmental objectives as very valuable in the development of gene technology and GM plants. A minority of survey participants remain strongly opposed to GM food crops in particular. This resistance is associated with a number of attitudes and beliefs, including a belief in natural (non-industrialized) farming practices; opposition to big business and the globalization of commercial agriculture; environmental opposition to the release of unnaturally modified organisms into the ecosystem; health concerns about genetic modification in the food chain, and discomfort with science and new technology generally. Opposition to genetic modification is much stronger where animal products are involved ? including among those not overly concerned about GM plants. Stated willingness to eat foods commonly eaten ? such as food with preservatives and food made with the use of pesticides ? was equally as low as willingness to eat non-animal related GM products. Therefore it would seem that stated concerns are somewhat inflated and that actual behavior will not necessarily follow claimed intent. Compared to food crops, awareness of understanding of GM non-food crops is much lower, although there is more in-principle support for non-food crops due to lower perceived risks to human health in the long term. Support is especially strong for GM biofuel crops, with people readily associating such crops with the looming fuel crisis and the need to combat global warming. However, some research participants expressed caution on this issue, arguing that care (and perhaps GM) would be needed to avoid displacing food crops from prime land. There was a low understanding of the use of non-GM techniques in agriculture, with the majority unsure what such techniques would entail. Many assume that the techniques would be more ?natural? and therefore preferable to genetic modification. The survey found that, broadly speaking, it appears that people became more familiar with biotechnology and gene technology between 2005 and 2007 and that there is no reason to suppose that the trend towards greater acceptance will not continue, as these technologies become a more normal part of everyday life. They found that there was no great public appetite for detailed factual information about how things are done; rather, people were more interested in learning about the potential benefits of technology. A full copy of the survey report is available at: http://www.biotechnology.gov.au/assets/documents/bainternet/Eurekafoodandagriculture200720070801082636.pdf A number of reports on market acceptance are also available on the DAFF website at: http://www.daff.gov.au/agriculture-food/biotechnology/reports/marketing_and_trade. National Biotechnology Strategy The Australian Federal Government launched the National Biotechnology Strategy (NBS) in July 2000 with A$30.5 million over three years (FY 2001?04) for targeted initiatives to support the Government?s vision for biotechnology. The Strategy was boosted in January 2001 by a further A$66.5m from the Innovation Statement, Backing Australia?s Ability, with funding for the Biotechnology Center of Excellence and additional funding for the Biotechnology Innovation Fund. In July 2004, under Backing Australia?s Ability- Building Our Future through Science and Innovation, the Australian Government provided a further A$20m to strengthen Australia?s competitiveness in biotechnology, through continuing the National Biotechnology Strategy and Biotechnology Australia till 2008. Further funding was also provided to extend support for the Australian Stem Cell Centre until 2010-11. Biotechnology also receives funding through other programs in the health, agriculture, environment and education portfolios. In addition to the Commonwealth Government?s contribution to biotechnology development, Australia?s State and Territory governments also commit resources to the development of biotechnology. The key objective of the Strategy is to provide a framework for Government and key stakeholders to work together to ensure that developments in biotechnology are captured for the benefit of the Australian community, industry and the environment, while safeguarding human health and ensuring environmental protection. The Strategy addresses six key themes with specific objectives and strategies to achieve them: Biotechnology in the community Ensuring effective regulation Biotechnology in the economy Australian biotechnology in the global market Resources for biotechnology; and Maintaining momentum and coordination. Biotechnology Australia Biotechnology Australia (BA) was established in 1999 as an agency comprising five Australian Government departments - Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry; Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations; Department of Health and Ageing; Department of Innovation, Industry, Science and Research; and, Department of Environment, Heritage and the Arts. Funding for BA ceased on June 30, 2008 and its functions devolved to these five departments. National Farmers Federation In September 2007, the National Farmers Federation released a Gene Technology Policy recognizing the potential of biotechnology as a valuable tool within agricultural production systems and urging that all potential benefits should be available to farmers to make informed choice in their farming decisions. Country Specific Studies Relevant to U.S. Exporters The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries & Forestry has a number of publications, studies and fact sheets available on the Agriculture & Food Biotechnology page. Agrifood Awareness Australia ? This organization publishes a large number of bulletins and information guides. The Australian Bureau of Agriculture & Resource Economics (ABARE) has released a large number of studies & papers on GM industries. Conduct a search for GM on the ABARE website. Section VII. Author Defined: Reference Material Below are links to various organizations involved in the agricultural biotechnology sector in Australia. Australian Government Office of the Gene Technology Regulator Food Standards Australia New Zealand Australian Pesticides & Veterinary Medicines Authority Therapeutic Goods Administration Department of Agriculture, Fisheries & Forestry Department of Health & Ageing Department of Innovation, Industry, Science & Research Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) Other Organizations Agrifood Awareness Australia National Farmers Federation Appendix I: GMO Applications Under Evaluation The Office of the Gene Technology Register has received the following applications for evaluation. All applications are posted on the OGTR website when they are first received and again when public comment is sought. Full details of all applications can be found at: http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/Content/ir- evaluation-1 Product Trait Category Applicant Status Limited and controlled release of Suga Notification posted 10 June rcane sugarcane genetically modified for BSES Limited 2009 herbicide tolerance Limited and controlled release of sugarcane genetically modified for Suga improved drought tolerance and rcane BS on posted 18 ES Limi Notificatited nitrogen use efficiency, enhanced February 2009 sucrose and fermentable sugars accumulation, and altered plant growth Whea Limited and controlled release of wheat t & Ba and barley genetically modified for CS tification posted 10 IRO No rley February 2009 enhanced nutrient utilization efficiency Commercial release of cotton genetically Cotton tification posted 31 modi Dow AgroSciences Australia Nofied for insect resistance October 2008 (Wi Ltd. destrike Insect Protection cotton) Appendix II: GMOs Already Licensed for Use in Australia The table below provides summary information about all Dealings for Intentional Release (DIRs) currently on the GMO Record (i.e. granted licenses for various uses). Full details of all applications can be found on the OGTR website at: http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/Content/dirclass-2 Crop Applicant Modified Trait License Purpose Status Limited and Wheat & Barley controlled release of (Triticum aestivum L. Altered grain starch wheat and barley IRO Current and Hordeum CSvulgare composition genetically modified L. ) for altered grain starch composition Limited and Whea controlled release of t CS tered grain IRO Al wheat genetically Current (Triticum aestivum L.) composition modified for altered grain composition Commercial release Rose Florigene Pty of rose genetically tered flower color t (Rosa X hybrida) Ltd Al modi Currenfied for altered flower color White Clover Victorian Viral disease Limited and Current (Trifolium repens L.) Department of resistance, Antibiotic controlled release of Primary resistance white clover Industries genetically modified to resist infection by Alfalfa mosaic virus Limited and Cotton controlled release of Bayer cotton genetically (Gossypium hirsutum CropScien Insect resistance, ce modi Current fied for insect L.) Pt herbicide tolerance y Ltd resistance and herbicide tolerance The genetic modification helps to Limited and identify maize genes controlled release of Ma that may alter plant ize CS maize genetically IRO characteristics. (corn) (Zea mays L.) An modi Current fied to tibiotic resistance, h investigate gene erbicide tolerance function and reporter gene activity Limited and controlled release of Cotton p cotton genetically osition (Gossypium hirsutum atty acid com CSIRO F o modified for altered Current f the cottonseed oil L.) fatty acid composition of the cottonseed oil Limited and controlled release of Torenia Florigene Pty ho torenia genetically sphate uptake (Torenia x hybrida) Ltd P modi Current fied for enhanced phosphate uptake Limited and controlled release of Cotton Wat cotton genetically erlogging (Gossypium hirsutum CSIRO modified for Current tolerance L.) enhanced waterlogging tolerance Perennia Limited and l ryegrass & tall fescue Vi controlled release of ctorian (Lolium perenne L.) Dep perennial ryegrass artment of Altered lignin and and tall fescue Current and (Lolium Primary fructan metabolism arundinaceum genetically modified ) Industries for improved forage (Schreb.) Darbysh qualities Limited and Cotton controlled release of Monsanto cotton genetically (Gossypium hirsutum Australia Water use efficiency modi Current fied for L.) Limited enhanced water use efficiency Vi Limited and ctorian Bread controlled release of Wheat Department of Drought tolerance wheat genetically Current (Triticum aestivum L.) Primary modified for drought Industries tolerance Limited and Banana Queensland Enhanced disease controlled release of (Musa. acuminata cv. University of resistance, reporter banana genetically Current Grande Naine) Technology gene expression modified for disease resistance Limited and controlled release of Sugarcane The University Altered sugar sugarcane (Saccharum spp.) of Queensland production g Current enetically modified for altered sugar production Limited and Enh controlled release of anced tolerance to wheat and barley Whea abiotic stressors, t & barley Th genetically modified e University including soil boron (Triticum aestivum)and of Adelaide and drough for enhanced Current t, and (Hordeum vulgare) tolerance to abiotic increased beta glucan stresses or levels increased beta glucan Limited and Banana Queensland Increased levels of controlled release of (Musa. acuminata cv. University of pro-vitamin A, vitamin banana genetically Current Williams) Technology E or iron modified for enhanced nutrition Limited and Cotton controlled release of Monsanto Insect resistance GM insect resistant (Gossypium Australia and/or herbicide Current b and/or herbicide arbadense L.) Limited tolerance tolerant Gossypium barbadense cotton Limited and Cotton Insect resistance and controlled release of Monsanto insect GM insect resistant (Gossypium hirsutum Australia Current and insect L.) Limited resistance/herbicide tolerance resistant/herbicide tolerant cotton Department of Limited and Bread wheat Primary Drough Controlled Release t tolerance Current (Triticum aestivum L.) Industries - of GM drought Victoria tolerant wheat Al Limited and tered plant Controlled Release Suga architecture, rcane BSES Limi of GM Sugarcane ted enhanced water or (Saccharum spp.) improved nitrog wi Current th altered plant en use architecture, efficiency enhanced water or improved nitrogen use efficiency Limited and Canola controlled release of & Indian Mus Bayer Herbicide tolerance GM herbicide tard CropScience and hybrid breeding tolerant hybrid Current (Brassica napus L. and Br Pty Ltd system Brassica napus and assica juncea L.) hybrid Brassica juncea Limited and Torenia cv. Al Controlled Release tered flower colour Florigene Pty of Genetically "Summerwave®" (flavonoid Current Ltd (Torenia X hybrida) b Modified (GM) iosynthesis) Torenia with altered flower color Limited and Cotton Controlled Release erlogging (Gossypium hirsutum CSIRO Wat of Waterlogging Current tolerance L.) Tolerant (GM) Cotton Commercial Release Cotton of GM herbicide Monsanto e tolerant tolerant and/or (Gossypium hirsutum Au Herbicidstralia Current and/or insect resistant insect resistant L.) Limited cotton lines north of latitude 22° South Limited and Cotton Monsanto Controlled Release (Gossypium hirsutum Australia Insect resistance of Insect Resistant Current L.) Limited Genetically Modified Cotton Limited and Cotton Monsanto Controlled Release (Gossypium hirsutum Australia Water-use efficiency of Water-Efficient Current L.) Limited Genetically Modified Cotton Cotton Field trial of GM cotton expressing (Gossypium hirsutum Hexima Ltd Fungal resistance n Current atural plant genes L.) for fungal control Cotton mercial release Baye Comr of herbicide tolerant (Gossypium hirsutum CropScience Herbicide tolerance Current Liberty Link® L.) Pty Ltd Cotton Indian mustard Field trials of (includes Brown and Bayer Herbicide tolerance genetically modified Oriental mustard) CropScience and hybrid breeding herbicide tolerant, Current (Brassica juncea L. Pty Ltd system hybrid Brassica Czern and Coss.) juncea Bread Altered grain starch Field trial of wheat CSIRO and Antibiotic genetically modified Current (Triticum aestivum L.) resistance wheat with altered grain starch Herbicide tolerance, antibiotic resistance Field trial of and reporter genes Cul genetically modified tivated rice have been randomly rice (Oryza sativa (Oryza sativa L. cv CSIRO inserted into rice Current Nipp L.) functional onbare) plants. Some plant g characterisation of rowth traits may be modi the rice genome fied by gene knockouts. Field trial of Sugarcane Altered sugar genetically modified (Saccharum The University officinarum o production and (GM) sugarcane Current f Queensland L. x S. spontaneum L.) antibiotic resistance expressing sucrose isomerase expression of green fluorescent protein (GFP) expression of envelope glycoprotein E2 expression of a truncated E0 Bovine herpesvirus 1 Queensland glycoprotein Vaccination of cattle (BoHV-1) Department of fused to GFP or with recombinant (Bovine herpesvirus 1 Primary to the E2 subtype 1.2b strain Industries & g bovine herp Current esvirus lycoprotein V155) vaccines Fisheries localization of introduced proteins on the surface of the GMOs or host cells deletion or disruption of endogenous BoHV-1 genes Field trial to assess Cotton transgenic cotton (Gossypium hirsutum Hexima Insecticidal action, expressing natural Current Limited antibiotic resistance L.) plant genes for insect control Field Evaluation of Department of Genetically Modified Whi Viral Disease te Clover Primary R White Clover esistance, Antibiotic Current (Trifolium repens L.) Industries Resistant to resistance (Victoria) Infection by Alfalfa Mosaic Virus Fowl adenovirus Immunomodulatory Limited and Imugene (Fowl adenovirus, protein expression, controlled release of Current Limited serotype 8, isolate Attenuation GM fowl adenovirus CFA44) (FAV) Agronomic assessment and seed increase of Cotton Dow transgenic cottons Insecticidal and (Gossypium h AgroSciencesirsutum Au expressing Current stralia Pty herbicide tolerance L.) insecticidal genes Ltd (cry1Ac and cry1Fa) from Bacillus thuringiensis Cotton Field Evaluation of Modified fatty acid Genetically Modified (Gossypium hirsutum CSIRO content in cottonseed High Oleic (HO Current ) L.) oil Cotton Cotton The Evaluation of Insect resistance, Transgenic Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum Syngenta Seeds Pty Ltd antibiotic resistance Plan Current ts Expressing L.) the VIP Gene Attenuation by Commercial release Cholera removal of cholera vaccine of recombinant live Current (Vibrio ch CSL Ltd toxin subunit A and olerae) oral cholera vaccine inclusion of a mercury (Orochol® vaccine) resistance marker Field Trial - Seed Canola Bayer h increase and field erbicide tolerant urrent (Brassica n CropScience apus L.) Pt h evaluation of C ybrid canola y Ltd herbicide tolerant hybrid canola E Field trial of GM xpression of modified grapevines - colour, sugar Evaluation of berry G composition, flowering rapevines CS ur, sugar IRO and fruit development colo, Current (Vitis vinifera L.) composition, flower expression of green and fruit fluorescence protein, development and antibiotic resistance gene flow study R Field trial of eduction of pineapple plants Pineapp Department of blackheart, delayed le modified for rimary flowering, reporter (An Panas comosus) b Current lackheart reduction Industries gene expression, and to delay antibiotic resistance flowering Field trial for De evaluation of GM layed fruit ripening, Papaya papaya to delay fruit The University reporter gene ripening and to test Current (Carica papaya) of Queensland expression and the expression of antibiotic resistance the introduced genes Canola Bayer Herbicide tolerance, Commercial release pScience Hybrid Breeding of InVigor® hybrid Current (Brassica napu Cros L.) Pty Ltd System canola (Brassica napus) for use in the Australian cropping system General release of Canola Monsanto Australia H Roundup Ready® erbicide tolerance Current (Brassica napus L.) canola (Brassica Limited napus) in Australia Small and large scale trialing of Canola Aventis Hybrid breeding InVigor® canola CropScience system and herbicide (Brassica napus) for Current (Brassica napus L.) Pty Ltd tolerance development for the Australian cropping system Appendix III: Approved GM Food Products The following table contains a current list of approved biotech food products. Detailed information is contained in Standard 1.5.2 on the FSANZ web site. Food Produced Using Gene Technology Special Conditions Food derived from amylase-modified corn line 3272 Food derived from glufosinate ammonium-tolerant corn line T25 Food derived from glufosinate ammonium tolerant cotton line LL25 Food derived from glufosinate ammonium-tolerant rice line LLRICE62 Food derived from glufosinate ammonium tolerant soybean lines A2704-12 and A5547-127 Food derived from glyphosate-tolerant corn line GA21 Food derived from glyphosate-tolerant corn line NK603 Food derived from glyphosate-tolerant cotton line MON 88913 Food derived from glyphosate-tolerant lucerne J101 and J163 Food derived from glyphosate-tolerant soybean line 403-2 Food derived from glyphosate-tolerant soybean line MON 89788 Food derived from glyphosate-tolerant sugarbeet line 77 Food derived from high lysine corn line LY038 Unless the protein content has been removed as part of a refining process, the label on or attached to a package of a food derived from high lysine corn line LY038 must include a statement to the effect that the food has been genetically modified to contain increased levels of lysine. Food derived from high oleic acid soybean lines The label on or attached to a package of G94-1, G94-19 and G168 a food derived from high oleic acid soy bean lines G941, G94-19 and G168 must include a statement to the effect that the food has been genetically modified to contain high levels of oleic acid Food derived from insect- and potato leafroll virus- protected potato lines RBMT21-129, RBMT21-350, and RBMT22-82. Food derived from insect- and potato virus Y- protected potato lines RBMT15-101, SEM15-02 and SEM15-15. Food derived from insect-protected and glufosinateammonium tolerant corn line 1507 Food derived from insect-protected and glufosinate ammonium-tolerant DBT418 corn Food derived from insect-protected and glyphosatetolerant corn line MON88017 Food derived from insect-protected Bt-176 corn. Food derived from insect-protected corn line MIR162 Food derived from insect-protected corn line MIR604 Food derived from insect-protected corn line MON 810 Food derived from insect-protected corn event MON863 Food derived from insect-protected corn line MON 89034 Food derived from insect-protected, glufosinate ammonium-tolerant Bt-11 corn. Food derived from insect-protected, glufosinate ammonium-tolerant corn line DAS-59122-7 Food derived from insect-protected potato lines BT- 06, ATBT04-06, ATBT04-31, ATBT04-36, and SPBT0205 Food derived from sugar beet line H7-1 Oil and linters derived from bromoxynil-tolerant cotton containing transformation events 10211 and 10222 Oil and linters derived from glyphosate-tolerant cotton line 1445 Oil and linters derived from insect-protected cotton line COT102 Oil and linters derived from insect-protected cotton lines containing event 15985 Oil and linters derived from insect-protected cotton lines 531, 757 and 1076 Oil and linters derived from insect-protected, glufosinate ammonium-tolerant cotton line MXB-13 Oil derived from bromoxynil-tolerant canola line Westar-Oxy-235 Oil derived from glufosinate-ammonium tolerant canola lines Topas 19/2 and T45 and glufosinate- ammonium tolerant and pollination controlled canola lines Ms1, Ms8, Rf1, Rf2 and Rf3 Oil derived from glyphosate-tolerant canola line GT73 Recent Reports from FAS/Canberra The reports listed below can all be downloaded from the FAS website at: http://www.fas.usda.gov/scriptsw/AttacheRep/default.asp. Report Number Title of Report Date AS9025 Australia Gains Improved Access for Citrus & Mangos to China 06/17/09 AS9024 Global Biosecurity Conference to be held in Australia: Call for Abstracts 06/11/09 AS9020 Dairy & Products Semi-Annual 05/15/09 AS9018 Cotton Annual 04/28/09 AS9016 Sugar Annual 04/02/09 AS9015 Grain and Feed Annual 2009 03/20/09 AS9014 Stone Fruit Annual 2009 03/13/09 AS9012 Agricultural Economy and Policy Report 03/12/09 AS9010 Livestock Semi-Annual 03/06/09 AS9009 Government Announces A$32m Research into Soil Carbon & Emissions 03/06/09 AS9008 Wine Annual 2009 03/05/09 AS9007 New Import Conditions for Chicken Meat Finalized 03/05/09 AS9006 Cotton Quarterly Update ? March 02/20/09 AS9005 Agricultural situation 2009 02/11/09 AS9004 Govt. announces A$9 million boost to wood export industries 01/29/09 AS9003 February Grain Lockup 01/29/09 AS9002 New Support for Wheat Exporters to Develop Markets Announced 01/27/09 AS9001 Australian Government Announces Food Production Grants Programs 01/23/09
Posted: 24 December 2009

See more from Biotechnology in Australia

Expert Views    
Biotechnology Opportunities   By UK Trade & Investment
Healthcare Opportunities   By UK Trade & Investment
Hot Tips    
Agricultural Biotechnology in Australia   By Foreign Agricultural Service