Genetic Engineering Newsletter Special Issue 14 "Seed Purity"

[gtnews-redaktion@oeko.de]

-----------------------
genet-news mailing list
-----------------------

Genetic Engineering Newsletter - Special Issue 14
September 2003

supported by

Zukunftsstiftung Landwirtschaft
Seed purity

CONTENTS
Preface
Reasons for the necessity of pure seed
Agricultural and social reasons
Compliance with the GMO-threshold in food
Existing regulations regarding the purity of seed
Conventional seed purity
Genetic contamination
Production of pure seed
Contamination pathways and strategies for avoidance
Chronicle of genetic contaminations
State of the art in determining seed purity
Conclusion
Bibliography

Preface
Seeds are the basis for agriculture and food. Since centuries man 
has adapted seeds according to his requirements by breeding 
activity in different regions of the earth. Wild species, subspecies 
and varieties were collected in huge genebanks in order to serve as 
the basic material for breeding1. Thus, seeds are crucial for the 
nutrition of the world population and of very high cultural value.
Hence, the issue of tolerated contamination in seed with transgenic 
seed needs special awareness. The initiative "Save Our Seeds" 
demanding for GM-free seeds has received a wide resonance in 
society and shows the high value that public attaches to seed. 
More than 100.000 individual citizens supported the initiative so far. 
More than 300 organisations representing more than 25 million 
members joined the campaign (http://zs-l.de/saveourseeds/).
In September the EU Commission submitted the draft version of a 
new directive concerning the presence of adventitious or technically 
unavoidable presence of genetically modified seeds in seed lots of 
non-genetically modified varieties. According to the directive, a 
certain degree of contamination shall be allowed without special 
labelling. The thresholds vary between 0.3 and 0.7 percent 
depending on the crop species2. If the Standing Committee on 
Seeds accepts the directive, it will no longer be possible for the 
individual farmer to decide whether he wants to grow GM-plants or 
not. Regions and communities will no longer have the possibility to 
choose GM-free agriculture. Furthermore the guidelines of organic 
agriculture, which do not allow the use of GM-plants, would be 
impossible to maintain. It is unpredictable whether the threshold of 
a maximum 0.9 percent presence of GMO in food that was 
currently specified in a directive of the EU can still persist. The 
proposed threshold for contaminations in seeds may make a 
belated increase of the threshold for GMO contamination in food 
inevitable. The consumer's freedom to choose whether he wants to 
buy GMO or not would be severely restricted, despite the fact that 
the majority of the consumers, food producers and supermarket 
chains in the EU are against GMO in food.
The seed directive provides the chance to ensure the purity of food 
and compliance with the respective threshold with relatively little 
expense. Seed production only takes place on a relative small part 
of the whole agricultural area. Therefore, contaminations that occur 
during the seed production are easier to prevent by using a good 
practice or in GMO-free areas. GMO-free seeds would contribute to 
mitigate necessary regulation guidelines concerning the 
coexistence of transgenic and conventional varieties in agriculture 
(for example distance regulations).

Reasons for the necessity of pure seed

Agricultural and social reasons
The farmer needs pure seed in order to decide which variety with 
specific characteristics he wants to grow. Important factors that 
influence the choice are for example characteristic features of the 
location (soil type, p
recipitation, potential danger of diseases and pests etc.), the methods required for cultivation (combat of pest plants etc.), the estimated harvest and the market situation. The consumers and processing companies profit 
of pure seed because it allows them to choose between agricultural products with distinct quality characteristics. Thus, legal regulations regarding the conventional seed purity do exist since a long time and are specifie
d in the law on seed commerce in Germany (SaatVerkG 1985, 2002).
Contaminations with transgenic seed in conventional seed cannot be handled the same way as conventional contaminations in seed. Cultivation of transgenic crop is a controversy in the EU and in other parts of the world. Pu
blic opinion polls as the Eurobarometer or similar studies show that the majority of the population refuse the production of food with GMO (Gaskell et al. 2003, Strodthoff 2003). Therefore, regulations concerning the cont
amination of seed with GMO have to assure the consumer's freedom to choose products out of conventional crops. Regulations that may restrict this freedom are in conflict with the explicit wish of the population.
Besides, economic reasons exist for a low threshold of contamination in seed. There is a very high demand for GMO-free seed on the European market as well as in other parts of the world.

Compliance with the GMO-threshold in food
Food containing less than 0.9 percent of GMO does not have to be labelled in the EU. This threshold was chosen taken into account different possible pathways of contamination during the cultivation of crops. A study of th
e "Scientific Committee on Plants" (2001) of the European Commission provided estimated average contaminations during the production process that cannot be prevented according to the committee. Contamination that are to b
e expected by cross pollination and volunteers as well as during harvest, transport and storage are for fully fertile oilseed rape 0.5 percent, 0.3 percent for maize and 0.2 percent for sugar beet. The study does not spec
ify the hypothetical amount of GM-cultivation in agriculture that the calculation is based on. Contaminations that are due to unintentional mixing of GMO- and GMO-free charges during the further processing of the harvest 
in mills or other processes during the production of food are not included.
The threshold for seed must be specified according to those contaminations that are inevitably if "good agricultural practice" is applied. If the threshold of 0.3 percent for rape seed would be accepted, the resulting exp
ected average contamination of the harvest would be 0.8 percent. Contaminations that occur in the further processing of the harvest were not included. As it is only a mean value, the threshold of 0.9 percent would regular
ly be exceeded3. Concerning maize the proposed allowed contamination of 0.3 percent in seed would lead to an average contamination of 0.6 percent in the harvest. For sugar beet, an allowed contamination of 0.5 percent wou
ld lead to 0.7 percent in the harvest. Economic reasons would make it also reasonable to ensure the compliance with the threshold in food by means of a low threshold for seed.

Existing regulations regarding the purity of seed

Conventional seed purity
Legal regulations regarding seed purity were already issued before the age of transgenic crops. They ensure a uniform quality of seed to the farmer and consumer. In Germany regulations can be found in the law on seed comm
erce (SaatVerkG 1985, 2002). On the EU level the directives 66/402/EWG, 2002/54/EG, 2002/55/EG, 2002/56/EG and 2002/57/EG deal with the issue. They contain minimum requirements for harvested and commercialised seed, espec
ially regarding seed purity.
The commercial production of seed is normally a multi-level process. Depending on the specific crop, pre-basic seed is made available by the breeder in order to produce basic seed, which is further used to produce certifi
ed seed. The production of basic and certified seed generally takes place on local farms. The approval of seed varieties takes place within the scope of one or several field visits on the basis of the directive concerning
 the commerce of agricultural and legume seed (SaatgutV, Rutz 1998). The requested standards concerning basic seed are higher than for certified seed.
For the production of pre-basic, basic or certified seed specific conditions have to be kept which should ensure the production of pure seed. These conditions, among others distance regulations between differing varieties
, aim at preventing an unwanted transfer of pollen. The required purity depends on the species and seed category and varies between 98 and 99 percent (Rutz 1998). For basic seed the EU directive 66/402/EWG and 69/208/EWG 
specify a purity of 99.5 to 99.9 percent. The isolation distances specified in the directive are for maize and rape 200 meter for example.
In order to ensure sufficient seed purity, seed breeders and propagation companies often use higher isolation distances than those legally specified. The German seed directive (SaatgutV) states that lower the isolation di
stances may be chosen if other methods to prevent pollen transfer are applied. Bushes or barrier seed may serve as biological barriers for example. Anti-pollen-nets may serve as physical barriers. However it is quite diff
icult to determine to which extent such measures can reduce the percentage of cross pollination (Barth et al. 2003).
The occurrence of volunteers of the same or different species are assessed during field visits, that are specified in the German seed directive (SaatgutV). For many cereal species the occurrence of 15 alien plants per 150
 square metres in the production of certified seed leads to the denial of the seed. The value varies depending on the species, the seed category and the breeding method (Rutz 1998).

Genetic contamination
In the EU presently a directive concerning the "adventitious or technically unavoidable presence of genetically modified seeds in seed lots of non-genetically modified varieties" shall be adopted. A draft version of the d
irective was already presented (SANCO/1542/00). A level of 0.3 to 0.7 percent of genetic contamination in seed shall be allowed depending on the plant species. The purity requirements should be 0.3 percent for rape, 0.5 f
or maize, sugar beet, tomato, cotton, chicory and potatoes and 0.7 percent for soy.
The contaminations do not have to be labelled if it is adventitious or technically unavoidable. For approval, the producer has to prove the use of adequate measures to prevent contaminations with GMO.
In the present draft version of the EU directive the threshold for contamination in seed is lower for crops where contaminations are more difficult to prevent during cultivation. For canola the threshold is 0.3 percent be
cause the risk of contamination by cross-pollination or volunteers is relatively high during agriculture compared to other crops. As a consequence the threshold for crops where a high level of purity in seed can be easily
 achieved is unnecessary high. Therefore a high contamination is accepted or even abetted for those species. Because strategies to minimize GMO-contaminations are of a certain financial and organizational expense, seed pr
oducer will surely adjust the level of contamination to a certain degree according to the specified threshold.
The Standing Committee on Agricultural, Horticultural and Forestry Seeds and Plants can adopt the EU directive4. By a necessary majority in mid-October the directive will have direct legal consequences. If the committee d
oes not agree on the directive it will be brought forward to the Council of Ministers. The parliament is not involved into these actions. However the directive must be submitted to the WTO.
Presently in the EU an interim solution regulates the handling of GMO contamination in conventional seed since June 2000. Until legal regulations become effective up to 0.5 percent of contamination with approved GMO-varie
ties will be accepted (Standing Committee on Agricultural, Horticultural and Forestry Seeds and Plants 2000).
In Austria the seed-genetic-engineering-directive (Saatgut-Gentechnik-Verordnung) regulates the handling of GMO contamination in conventional seed. According to the directive, primary testing has to show the absence of GM
Os. A value of 0.1 percent contamination does not have to be exceeded in seed commerce control. The requirements for testing and interpreting methods are specified in §5 of the seed law.
In Switzerland, the seed directive, which was updated in 2000, regulates the handling of GMO contaminations in conventional seed. The threshold for the labelling of contaminations is 0.5 percent. Additionally, only contam
inations with varieties that are approved according to the EU directive 90/220 are tolerated. The GMO also has to be approved as food or animal feed in Switzerland. Seed importers are committed to take adequate measures i
n order to prevent contamination with GMOs. They have to prove a functioning quality management.
In Germany, there already exists regular testing on GMO contamination in seed. The KWS Saat AG, a major seed producer, undertakes such testing within the scope of a quality security management (Beck et al. 2002, KWS SAAT 
AG, parol 2002).
The organic agriculture organisations, agree worldwide in the guidelines of the associations not to use GMOs. The basic guidelines of the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movement (IFOAM) regulates the gene
ral ban GMOs and explicitly of GM-seed. The corresponding legal norms of the consumer protection laws reflect this fact, especially in the USA, Japan and the EU (Barth et al. 2003). The EU directive 2092/91/EWG bans the u
se of GMOs in organic agriculture.

Production of pure seed

Contamination pathways and strategies for avoidance
Seeds of plant individuals that do not correspond to the typical pattern of the variety (and therefore have an adverse effect on seed purity) can get into seed lots by different mechanism. The most important pathways for 
contaminations are listed below.
* Pollination by a different variety may happen during breeding and production of seed. The level of contamination can be extremely reduced by large separation distances to other fields, pollen barriers or other methods a
pplied during cultivation. The required separation distances vary according to the specific pollination system of the species and the specific location of the field (Barth et al. 2003). In order to achieve contaminations 
of less than 0.1 percent, distance of about 100 metres would be necessary for fertile wheat and distances of various kilometres for corn. For canola appropriate distances are difficult to determine but they would have to 
be considerably higher than for corn (Genetic Engineering Newsletter - Special Issue 11&12). Relatively wide and contiguous areas where no GM-crops are cultivated would be required.
* During harvest, a certain percentage of seed falls onto the field and germinates in the following year. If transgenic varieties were cultivated on a field for seed production in the previous years, a mixing of conventio
nal seed with transgenic seeds of volunteers cannot be prevented.
* Transgenic volunteers of the same or closely related species can be another source for cross-pollination. The same accounts for closely related wild species that are transgenic due to previous cross-pollination.
* Contamination of seed may also happen during sowing or harvesting. Machines that are used for different varieties can still contain remaining seeds. Other sources for contamination are the storage, transport, cleaning o
r packing of seed. For certified seed the risk of contamination is lower because existing regulations for the harvest, collection and packing of seed are stricter.
If the approval and cultivation of transgenic varieties in the EU should increase during the next few years, high purity will be difficult to achieve for some hybrid varieties and especially in male sterile canola varieti
es (Scientific Committee on Plants 2001). In order to prevent contamination of conventional seed, seed producer already started to displace their production into GM-free countries in 2000. Advanta Seeds declared that they
 displaced their production partly to New Zealand. Pioneer Hi-Bred displaced the biggest part of their corn seed production to Romania, Hungary and Austria (The Times, 29.05.2000, cited in GENET 7-Business, 31.05.2000).
Generally, it is possible to produce pure seed even with a high share of transgenic varieties being cultivated in agriculture. In Austria, the Seed Agency proved evidence of GM contamination in 16 of 230 corn samples (7 p
ercent). Only in half of those cases the contamination was higher than 0.1 percent. This means that 96 percent of the samples did not exceed the threshold of 0.1 percent though the focus of the seed samples was on imports
 that originated from countries where the risk of contamination is high (Molterer 2002). Seed producer can achieve high purity of seed if they apply adequate measures. Areas where no cultivation of GMO is allowed can also
 be expedient (Girsch et al. 2002).
The additional costs that would originate from the production of seed with less than 0.1 percent contamination of GMO was estimated in the study of the Joint Research Centre (Bock et al. 2002). The study estimates a 25 pe
rcent of extra costs during the production of oilseed-rape for the hypothetical case that 50 percent of the agricultural area was cultivated with transgenic varieties. Because seed prices contribute only a very small shar
e to the production costs in agriculture, it would have very little effect on the price of the final product.
Worldwide many farmers save seeds for the next sowing. In Germany the share is 50 percent of all sown seed. Saving seed is only possible for non-hybrid varieties. For corn the seed propagation takes place almost exclusive
ly outside of Germany because of climatic reasons (Beck et al. 2002). Farmers that save seed cannot use the same security measures in order to provide as high seed purity as commercial seed producer. Therefore the risk of
 contamination is higher. If high contamination levels in commercially produced seed would be allowed without labelling, the farmer might loose the possibility to save seed. These seeds would presumably not guarantee the 
required purity of 99.1 percent in the harvest for not having to be labelled in the EU.

Chronicle of genetic contaminations
Transgenic seed may get into non-transgenic varieties by different pathways. In 2002, the worldwide acreage of agricultural crops was about 60 millions ha. (James 2002). The cultivation mainly takes place in the USA, Arge
ntina, Canada, Brazil and China. In these countries the potential for genetic contamination is already very high for seed production. In contrast in the EU genetic contaminations of seed may actually only arise from field
 trials with the exception of Spain (20.000 to 25.000 hectares of GM corn). However, even imports from countries where cultivation of GMO-crop is widespread do not contain as much contamination as one might expect. The re
asons are that seed producers apply a good practice. (Press release of the Ministry of Environment, Nature Conservation and Agriculture Schleswig-Holstein 17.04.2002 and answer to the parliamentary enquiry by the Austrian
 minister for agriculture, forestry, environment and water management Molterer 2002). Therefore, genetic contaminations in seed cannot be seen as a normal and inevitable case even with a high share of transgenic crop bein
g cultivated. Model calculations show that it is possible to keep contamination level very low even if on half of the EU-fields transgenic varieties were grown. In order to obtain a purity of 0.03 percent in oilseed rape 
for example, an additional cost of about 25 percent has been estimated (Bock et al. 2001). Contaminations of seed do actually rather represent "accidents", caused by inappropriate production and marketing methods. During 
the past few years contaminated seed was found several times in the EU. Table 1 lists examples of contaminated seed.

Table 1: Examples of GMO-contaminations in seed
Crop; Year; Variety (producer); Country; GMO-fraction; Source
Maize; 2003; ? (Pioneer); Italy; ?; Greenpeace 10.07.03
Maize; 2002; YieldGard (Monsanto) LibertyLink (Aventis); New Zealand; < 0,05 %; Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry NZ, 03.10.02
Maize; 2002; (u.a. Monsanto & DuPont); Italy; ?; Reuters 08.08.2002
Maize; 2001; GT200 (Monsanto); Canada; ?; Reuters 25.04.2001
Maize; 2001; Arsenal (Monsanto) & Janna (Pioneer); Germany; ?; 27.04. und 02.05.2001 @grar.de Aktuell
Maize; 2001; Star Link (Aventis); USA; ?; CropChoice #257, 08.03.2001; 
Maize; 2001; pr39d81, Ribera & Monalisa (Pioneer); Austria; < 0,1-0,5 %; Friend of the Earth, 05/2001
Maize; 2001; Stark Link (Aventis); USA; ?; Reuters 20.03.2001
Maize; 2000; Verschiedene Sorten; USA; 0.01 - 1 %; New Scientist (Coghlan) 27.05.2000
Maize; 2000; Clarica (Pioneer); Austria; > 3 %; @grar.de Aktuell 24.08.2000
Maize; 2000; ? (Golden Harvest); France; ?; Reuters Meldung, 22.06.2000
Maize; 1999; Ulla, Fenicia (Pioneer); Switzerland; 0.01 %; Neue Zurcher Zeitung 28.05.1999 / FiBL (Eric Wyss)
Maize; 1999; Benicia (Pioneer); Germany; 0.1 %; BUND 19.04.1999
Canola; 2002; (Aventis); England; ?; The Independent group, 16.08.02
Canola; 2000; Hyola (Advanta Seeds); Germany; 0.03 - 1 %; transgen.de 19.5.2000
Canola; 2000; Hyola (Advanta Seeds); Austria; ?; Friend of the Earth, 05/2001
Canola; 2000; Hyola (Advanta Seeds); Sweden; 0.4 - 2.6 %; Billig (2000)
Canola; 2000; Hyola (Advanta Seeds); Denmark; ?; Friend of the Earth, 05/2001
Soy; 2002; (u.a. Monsanto & DuPont); Italy; ?; Reuters 08.08.2002
Soy; 2000; ?; France; 0.8 - 1.5 %; Reuters 05.08.2000; ; 2000; ?; USA; ?; Grand Forks Herald, USA, 12.11.02
Cotton; 2001; Navbharat 151; India; ?; Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology India  12.11.2001
Cotton; 2000; ?; Greece; ?; Greenpeace International, 10.03.2000
Sugar beet; 2000; ? (KWS Saat); Germany; ?; Financial Times Deutschland, 9.10.2000

State of the art in determining seed purity 
Sufficient separation distances between fields and the separate use of machinery should prevent genetic contamination in seed. However, analytic methods are required to control the amount of unintended or inevitable conta
mination. Today, the technical limit for detection of recombinant DNA ranges between 0.01 and 1 percent depending on the degree of processing, the variety and the method of analysis. For seeds 0.1 percent can be seen as a
 reliable detection limit (Nowack Heimgartner et al. 2002). Different methods are used for the detection of genetically modified DNA. So-called screening methods identify genetic sequences that are often introduced in gen
etically modified plants. These are regulatory sequences as the nos 3´-terminal sequence of the soil bacteria Agrobacterium tumefaciens or the 35S-promotor sequence of the cauliflower-mosaic-virus (CaMV). Screening method
s allow only qualitative statements. Other methods specifically detect genetically introduced DNA-sequences that are specific for a certain kind of transgenic plan, for example sequences encoding for the production of Bt-
toxin or for a special herbicide resistance. In order to quantify the amount of GMO in a sample, the so-called polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is used. Detection of transgenic sequences is normally analysis of trace eleme
nts. The accuracy and significance of the analysis depend on:
* a representative sampling
* the selected preparation method (extraction of genetic material)
* the selected detection method for recombinant DNA.
Therefore a protocol for testing of seed of maize, rape and soy seed for the presence of genetically modified seed exists for example in New Zealand (Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry 2002 a-c). The protocol regulates 
the method of sampling, analysis and interpretation of the results specifically for each crop species. The costs for the analysis have to be paid by the importing company. 
In Switzerland, importers have to report every delivery of precarious seed like maize, soy, rape, chicory, tomatoes and sugar beets at the federal agency of agriculture in order to obtain an import licence. Random samples
 are taken of one to ten percent of the charges. In 2000 traces of GMO of a variety that is approved in Switzerland were only found in one charge. This variety was withdrawn from the market by the importer (Nowack Heimgar
tner et al. 2002).
The draft version of the EU seed specifies that testing of commercialized seed have to take place. The testing should be carried out according to a protocol of sampling and analysis methods that will further be defined by
 the commission. The European Commission already found a scientific and technical network of GMO-laboratories. This network (European Network of GMO Laboratories ENGL) shall contribute to the harmonisation and standardisa
tion of methods concerning sampling and analysis of GMO. The network could play an important role regarding the testing of seed.

Conclusion
The decision for or against the use of transgenic plants in food production includes ethical, cultural and scientific aspects. The freedom to choose must be given for each farmer and consumer. Therefore the EU seed direct
ive has to assure this freedom.
The threshold for contamination with transgenic varieties in seed should be specified as low as possible. Three reasons justify setting the threshold to 0.1 percent, which is the present limit for technical detection.
* Contaminations in seed constitute a basis contamination that is directly responsible for contaminations in the harvest and food products that derive from it. The risk exists that the threshold of 0.9 percent GMO contami
nation for "GMO-free" products will consequently be difficult or impossible to achieve.
* Seed production takes place on a relatively small area by a restricted number of producers. Strict requirements for preventing seed contamination are easier to realize and practice in seed production than during cultiva
tion. Consequently, the generating extra-costs for the production of GMO-free products will be lower.
* The seed industry has sufficient knowledge and possibilities to use adequate measures in order to guarantee a high purity in seed. Protection measures should only to the smallest possible extend be shifted on the indivi
dual farmer and the whole agricultural area.
The producer of transgenic varieties should come up for the costs of sampling according to the polluter-pays-principle. The regulations could be according to the Austrian model.
In the EU, the threshold for adventitious or technically unavoidable contaminations in food is currently 0.5 percent for transgenic varieties that are not yet approved in the EU but are found to be save by scientific boar
ds. This regulation is only temporary for three years. After that time no contamination with GMO that are not approved are allowed. Therefore the respective technical limit for detection should serve as a threshold for th
ose varieties.
For the production of GM-free seed, areas where the cultivation of transgenic crops is exceptionally not permitted could be specified. In order to effectively prevent the transfer of pollen, an area of more than 100 squar
e kilometres would be needed (Barth et al. 2003). Models for such regulations exist and are already applied in conventional seed production today on the basis of §29 of the German Seed Law (SaatG). Contiguous areas for se
ed production are specified upon request where farmers are not allowed to grow concurring crops. Even without respective legal regulations for GMO, seed producer started already to displace their production in GMO-free ar
eas in order to prevent contaminations.

Bibliography
BARTH R, BRAUNER R, HERMANN A, HERMANOWSKI R, NOWACK K, SCHMIDT H, TAPPESER B (2003): Grüne Gentechnik und ökologische Landwirtschaft. UBA-Texte 01/03 Hrsg.: Umweltbundesamt, Berlin.	
http://www.oeko.de/bereiche/gentech/documents/gruene_gentech.pdf
http://www.oeko.de/bereiche/gentech/documents/summ_gruene_gentech_en.pdf (english summary)
BECK, A., BRAUNER, R., HERMANOWSKI, R., MÄDER, R., MEIER, J., NOWACK, K., TAPPESER, B., WILBOIS, K.-P. (2002): Bleibt in Deutschland bei zunehmendem Einsatz der Gentechnik in Landwirtschaft und Lebensmittelproduktion die 
Wahlfreiheit auf GVO-unbelastete Nahrung erhalten? Auftragnehmer: Forschungsinstitut für biologischen Landbau Berlin e.V. und Öko-Institut e.V. Im Auftrag des BUND.	
http://www.oeko.de/bereiche/gentech/documents/bund_gentechnik.pdf
BOCK, A.-K., LHEUREUX, L., LIBEAU-DULOS, M., NILSAGÅRD, H., RODRIGUEZ-CEREZO, E. (2002): Scenarios for co-existence of genetically modified, conventional and organic crops in European agriculture, Joint Research Centre (D
G JRC) Institute for Prospective Technological Studies of the European Commission	
http://www.jrc.cec.eu.int/download/GMCrops_coexistence.pdf
BUNDESKANZLERAMT (Hrsg.) (2001): Bundesgesetzblatt für die Republik Österreich. 478. Verordnung: Saatgut-Gentechnik-Verordnung. Nr. 478, S.2691	
http://bgbl.wzo.at/pdf/2001/2001b478.pdf
COGHLAN, A. (2000): Sowing dissent. New Scientist, 27 May 2000, 4
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (2003): Draft: COMMISSION DIRECTIVE of amending Council Directives 66/401/EEC, 66/402/EEC, 2002/54/EC, 2002/55/EC, 2002/56/EC and 2002/57/EC in particular as regards additional condi
tions and requirements concerning the adventitious or technically unavoidable presence of genetically modified seeds in seed lots of non-genetically modified varieties and the details of the information required for label
ling in the case of seeds of genetically modified varieties. SANCO/1542/2000 Rev. 4, Brüssel.	
http://www.zs-l.de/saveourseeds/downloads/seed_directive_2003_en.pdf
GASKELL, G., ALLUM, N & STARES ,S. (2003): Europeans and Biotechnology in 2002 - Eurobarometer 58.0, 2nd edition.	
http://europa.eu.int/comm/public_opinion/archives/eb/ebs_177_en.pdf
GENETIC ENGINEERING NEWSLETTER - SPECIAL ISSUE 11&12 (2002): Gene-flow - so what? Institute for applied ecology (Öko-Institut e.V.)	
http://www.oeko.de/bereiche/gentech/newslet/documents/s_gen_e_11_12.pdf
GIRSCH, L., HARTMANN, J. , DEJNEGA, D., ZIMMERMANN, H., RATZENBÖCK A. (2002): Betrachtungen zur Erzeugung von Saatgut in "Abgegrenzten Erzeugungsprozessen" (IP) zur Vermeidung einer Verunreinigung mit Gentechnisch Verände
rten Organismen (GVO) in Österreich.
http://www.lwvie.ages.at/institut/saatgut/beratung/gvo/geschlossene_anbaugebiete_8_2002.pdf
HOLDEN P (1999): Policy Paper: Segregation of GM Foods - Written Evidence to the House of Common Select Committee on Agriculture. With Annex 1: Soil Association standards regarding Genetic Engineering. Annex 2: GMO risk e
valuation matrix - to establish the need for a site visit. Annex 3: Criteria for assessing pollution risk of organic holdings lying within a six mile notification zone of intended GM trial plots. Soil Association:	
http://www.soilassociation.org/sa/saweb.nsf/848d689047cb466780256a6b00298980/80256ad80055454980256862003d7538?OpenDocument
JAMES, C. (2002): Global Status of Commercialized transgenic crops 2002. ISAAA Briefs No. 27, International Service for the Acquisition of Agro-Biotech Applications, Ithaca, USA
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY (MAF) (2002 A): Protocol for testing imports of Zea mays seed for sowing for the presence of genetically modified seed	
http://www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity/imports/plants/papers/gm-seeds/zea-mays-protocol.pdf
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY (MAF) (2002 B): Protocol for testing imports of Glycine max seed for sowing for the presence of genetically modified seed	
http://www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity/imports/plants/papers/gm-seeds/glycine-max-protocol.pdf
MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY (MAF) (2002 C): Protocol for testing imports of Brassica napus var. oleifera seed for sowing for the presence of genetically modified seed	
http://www.maf.govt.nz/biosecurity/imports/plants/papers/gm-seeds/brassica-napus-protocol.pdf
MOLTERER, W (2002): Parlamentarische Anfragebeantwortung durch Minister Molterer zu der Anfrage (3683/J) der Abgeordneten Sima betreffend Saatgut- und Futtermittel-Kontrollen sowie der Saatgut-Grenzwert-Verordnung (3653/A
B, XXI. GP, eingelangt am 21.05.2002), Österreichisches Parlament	
http://www.parlament.gv.at/pd/pm/XXI/AB/his/036/AB03653_.html
NOWACK HEIMGARTNER, K., R. BICKEL, R. PUSHPARAJAH LORENZEN, E. WYSS (2002): Sicherung der gentechnikfreien Produktion. Eintrittswege gentechnisch veränderter Organismen, Gegenmassnahmen und Empfehlungen. Hrsg. Bundesamt f
ür Umwelt, Wald und Landschaft (BUWAL). Schriftenreihe Umwelt Nr. 340. 90 S.	
http://www.umwelt-schweiz.ch/buwal/shop/files/pdf/phpjtcf0H.pdf
RUTZ, H.W. (HRSG.) (1998): Sorten- und Saatgut-Recht, 8. Auflage. AgriMedia Verlag
SaatVerkG (1985): Bundesgesetzblatt BGBl I 1985, S.1633
SaatVerkG (2002): Zweites Gesetz zur Änderung des Saatgutverkehrsgesetzes. Bundesgesetzblatt BGBl Nr.21 2002, S.1146
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON PLANTS (2001): Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Plants concerning the adventitious presence of GM seeds in conventional seeds.	
http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/scp/out93_gmo_en.pdf
SCHWEIZERISCHE BUNDESRAT (2000): Verordnung über die Produktion und das Inverkehrbringen von pflanzlichem Vermehrungsmaterial (Saatgut-Verordnung), Änderung vom 5. Juni 2000	
http://www.admin.ch/ch/d/as/2000/1646.pdf
STANDING COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURAL, HORTICULTURAL AND FORESTRY SEEDS AND PLANTS (2002): Meeting Report 10 July 2000	
www.europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/rc/scsp/rap15_en.html
STRODTHOFF, H. (2003): Gentechnik in Lebensmitteln hat keine Chance! Greenpeace - Umfrage bei 216 Firmen. Greenpeace e.V. Deutschland, Hamburg	
http://www.greenpeace.org/deutschland/?page=/deutschland/fakten/gentechnik/index

Note:
If you have a special interest in getting information on specific issues of genetic engineering and biotechnology, which we can provide in the framework of a Special Issue of the Genetic Engineering Newsletter, you can se
nd your question either by email or by regular mail to:
e-mail: j.teufel@oeko.de
regular mail: Dr. Jennifer Teufel; Öko-Institut e.V.; Postfach 6226; D-79038 Freiburg, Germany
The text of this issue was compiled by:
Holger Christ
1 Important genebanks are for example the "International Rice Research Institute" (IRRI) in the Philippines, the "International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center" (CIMMYT) in Mexico, the "Wawilow-Institute" in Russia and
 the "Institute for Plant Genetics and Crop Plant Research" (IPK) in Gatersleben, Germany.
2 The threshold is 0.3 percent for canola, 0.5 percent for corn, sugar beet, tomato, potato, cotton and chicory and 0.7 percent for soy.
3 Data of the standard variation are not given. This would be important in order to predict the share of the harvest that would exceed the threshold.
4 Germany is represented by members of the "Bundessortenamt" ("Federal Variety Agency") and the Federal Biological Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry (BBA). (Meeting of the Standing Committee on Seed and Propaga
ting Material for Agriculture, Horticulture and Forestry: http://www.europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/rc/scsp/index_en.html)
10
If you would like to support our work, we would appreciate tax-deductible donations to:
Öko-Institut e.V., Sparkasse Freiburg, bank code 680 501 01
account number 2063447, please note 'Genetic Engineering Newsletter'

1
The Genetic Engineering Newsletter is available on the Internet:
http://www.oeko-institut.org/bereiche/gentech/newslet/index.html or
http://www.biogene.org/index.html Subscription to the Genetic 
Engineering Newsletter as e-mail:
mailto:listserver@oeko.de, NO subject, text: subscribe gen-news-
en@oeko.de


Dr. Jennifer Teufel
Biodiversity, Nutrition & Agriculture
OEko-Institut e.V. - Institute for Applied Ecology
PO Box 6226
D-79038 Freiburg
Germany

Phone: ++49 - 761 - 45295-52
Fax:      ++49 - 761 - 475437

email: j.teufel@oeko.de

http://www.oeko.de