The Political Economy of Regulation of Biotechnology in Agriculture - The Oxford Topic of Food, Politics, and Society - page 704

activists continue to rail against a “terminator” technology that does not exist outside
the laboratory.
The Transcontainer Project
The Transcontainer Project (2002-2006), funded by the European Commission,
supported nine research institutions in eight European countries, along with several
companies and one government agency. The aim of the project was to develop biologi-
cal containment strategies for GM crops. None of the strategies developed was to be
tested in the field, only in laboratories and greenhouses. The purpose of the project
was ostensibly to promote co-existence of GM and non-GM agriculture in Europe
by finding biological means to decrease the potential for gene flow from GM crops
and thus simplify existing rules for coexistence. Part of the project was to assess the
potential economic impact and enhance consumer understanding and acceptance
of the biocontainment approach. The research undertaken focused on chloroplast
transformation in sugar beet and oilseed rape, controlling flowering in sugar beet
and forage crops, and controlling plant fertility in oilseed rape, forage crops, tomato,
and eggplant. Chloroplasts, contained in plant cells, have their own DNA that can
potentially be transformed via genetic engineering. An advantage of targeting chlo-
roplasts for transformation is that they are not contained in pollen and thus would
not be transferred to a cross-pollinated plant, in essence, biologically “containing” the
GM trait. Work on controlling flowering focused on crops that are grown for their
vegetative parts. By inhibiting flowering, the spread of pollen could be contained. The
Transcontainer Project used two approaches to repress flowering, one based on the
CETS gene family and one based on MADS-box genes. Most projects that focused on
fertility control concentrated on male sterility-based transgene containment systems;
but, one project that aimed to develop a transgene containment system in oilseed
rape was based on “recoverable block of function” (RBF). This latter approach is quite
reminiscent of what the anti-biotech movement had dubbed the “terminator.” Similar
to the “terminator,” the RBF would be a genetic use restriction technology (GURT)
that would function by blocking germination of GM seeds. The RBF would have one
gene construct that would cause the seed to fail to germinate and another that would
allow recovery of germination by using an environmental or chemical trigger. This
approach would not actually address the gene flow issue because the pollen would
still be fertile and could still cross with non-GM compatible plants on neighboring
properties. Farmers using the RBF would have to “restore fertility” of the seeds each
year by activating the patented engineered trait. The claim was that this system would
facilitate co-existence by limiting the potential spread of transgenes to wild relatives—
any seed produced in such a cross-pollination event would not germinate, it would be
essentially sterile. This technology was subsequently dubbed “Zombie Technology”
by anti-biotech activists.