A public policy on biotechnology education: what might be relevant and effective?

The public perception of the life sciences--including biotechnology--has in recent years drifted far from the reality. Bringing perception and reality closer together requires an open dialogue between science and society based upon a well thought-out educational policy and a better mutual understanding between scientists and media professionals.

Agricultural biotechnology and the UK public.

It might be an exaggeration to claim that UK agriculture is in a state of crisis, but it is certainly a time for decisions. Uncertainties abound: the implications of growing free trade; a steady reduction in subsidies; the ongoing drift of people to towns and what some regard as the stranglehold of retailers both on food prices and on what the farmer gets. To all of this has to be added the backwash of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) and foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), and the advent of new technologies, especially those based on modern genetics.

An online agricultural genetics course.

In this age of rapidly developing online learning, the advent of a series of talks and supplementary material devoted to genetics in agriculture from Henry Stewart Talks ( http://hstalks.com/main/browse_talks.php?r=776&c=252 ) is welcome indeed. The series is designed for researchers and graduate students in the fields of genetics, plant science, animal science, agricultural science, food science, human nutrition and environmental science, advanced undergraduate students, policy makers and managers in public and private sectors, and continuing professional education/development.

The world of "GM-free".

The rapid global development of agricultural production systems using seeds derived from genetic modification (GM) has been paralleled by the growth of attempts to keep at least a part of the world's agriculture and food as free from GM-crops and their products as possible. The ideal for some proponents of such "GM-free" activity would be a total absence, usually styled "zero content"; others, perhaps more realistically, opt for a definition usually not precisely defined that allows for minimal trace levels of GM material. The reasons for wanting "GM-free" agriculture and its products are varied; they include philosophical and religious beliefs, concern for human (and animal) health--and for "the environment"-as well as commercial and political interests. With such a variety of motivations, and in the absence of legal rulings, the definitions of "GM-free" vary according to inclination and circumstances. Whatever the precise meaning, the maintenance of a "GM-free" product stream in a world where GM crop production is widespread requires the establishment of identity preservation and segregation systems in which traceability and testing are cornerstones. Inevitably these have cost implications for the supply chain and/or the ultimate consumer. In a number of countries different forms of "GM-free" labels exist for some products; the style of such labels is variable with schemes and labels typically voluntary or privately organized. In more recent years, some governments have begun to regularize the definition and meaning of "GM-free." We conclude our analysis by exploring consumer reactions both to "GM-free" and to "GM-free" labels, and ask who ultimately benefits from preserving a product stream substantially or entirely devoid of GM-content.

Multiple origins of Ashkenazi Levites: Y chromosome evidence for both Near Eastern and European ancestries.

Previous Y chromosome studies have shown that the Cohanim, a paternally inherited Jewish priestly caste, predominantly share a recent common ancestry irrespective of the geographically defined post-Diaspora community to which they belong, a finding consistent with common Jewish origins in the Near East. In contrast, the Levites, another paternally inherited Jewish caste, display evidence for multiple recent origins, with Ashkenazi Levites having a high frequency of a distinctive, non-Near Eastern haplogroup. Here, we show that the Ashkenazi Levite microsatellite haplotypes within this haplogroup are extremely tightly clustered, with an inferred common ancestor within the past 2,000 years. Comparisons with other Jewish and non-Jewish groups suggest that a founding event, probably involving one or very few European men occurring at a time close to the initial formation and settlement of the Ashkenazi community, is the most likely explanation for the presence of this distinctive haplogroup found today in >50% of Ashkenazi Levites.