Professional Documents
Culture Documents
050316
GeneticsLabBL213
AnalyzingifCornMuffinMixisGeneticallyModified
Introduction
Thisstudyanalyzesfoodtodetermineifitisgeneticallymodified.Geneticallymodified
organismsareorganismsthathaveDNAthathasbeenmodifiedinanunnaturalway,by
introducingnewgenes(WorldHealthOrganization,2016).Thefirstmodifiedfooditem,
tomatoes,wereapprovedtobesoldin1994(Laskos,2013).Somecommongeneticallymodified
cropsaremaize,soybean,cotton,andcanola.In2014,therewereatotalof12cropsthatwere
beingmodifiedandcommerciallyused(Bradshaw,2016).Aswithmostadvancesinscience,
therearemanyprosandconsthatgoalongwithgeneticallymodifiedorganisms.
Someoftheprosofusinggeneticallymodifiedfoodarelesspesticideuse,morenutrition,
anditsbetterfortheenvironment.Pesticidesareusedonplantstokillbugsthatwilltrytoeat
them.Pesticideusecanbeharmfultopeopleanddangeroustotheirhealth.Pesticidescanalso
pollutetheenvironmentordamagethesoil.Withgeneticallymodifiedfood,itcanbealteredso
thatpesticidesarenotneededtobeapplied(Havahart,n.d.).Forexample,Bacillusthuringiensis
canbeinsertedintothegenomeofcorn.Atoxicproteinwillthenbeproducedthatwillkillcorn
borersiftheytrytofeedonit.Bacillusthuringiensiscanbeinsertedintoothercropstoo,suchas
cotton(Qaim&Kouser,2013).Anotherprotogeneticallymodifiedfoodisnutritionvalue.
Somethirdworldcountriesareinneedoffoodandvaccines.Thecountriesaretoopoororthe
conditionsareunfavorablefornutritiousandplentifulfood.Foodcanbemodifiedsothat
caloriesornutritionvalueofcertainfoodswillgoup.Also,scientistscouldpotentiallyadd
vaccinestofood,whichwillbecheaperandeasiertodistributetothethirdworldcountries.
Finally,geneticallymodifiedfoodcanbebetterfortheenvironment.Notasmanyharsh
chemicalswillbeneededtouseonthecropsthusnotasmanyharshchemicalswouldbegoing
intotheenvironment.
Alongwithpros,therearealsoconstogeneticallymodifiedfood.Problemsthatcan
occurare:superweedsandsuperbugs,disruptiontotheecosystem,andantibioticresistance.
Superweedscouldoccurfromcrosspollinationbetweentheweedsandthegeneticallymodified
food.Superbugscouldbeproducedifthebugsbecomeresistanttothecompoundsinthecrops
thataremeanttokillthem.Alongwiththis,itcouldleadtodisruptionoftheecosystem.Some
believethatthisisalteringnaturewhichisdisruptingthenaturalenvironment.Alteringone
componentcanleadtoundesiredeffectsinothercomponentsfartherdowntheline.Anothercon
isthatantibioticresistancemaybecomeanissue(Mahgoub,2015).Antibioticresistantgenesare
usedasmarkersinthemodifiedorganisms,sothereisapossibilitythattheantibioticresistance
canthenhappeninotherplacesthanthecrops,inhumansforinstance(FoodandAgriculture
OrganizationoftheUnitedNations,2003).
Withgeneticallymodifiedorganisms,thereisaspecificterminatorand/orpromoterthat
ispresent85%ofthetime.Thecommonpromoteriscauliflowermosaicvirus,CAMV35S.This
geneisonthefiveprimeendandwillactivatetranscriptioninanyplant.Thecommonterminator
2
isnopalinesynthase.Thisgeneisonthethreeprimeendandwillindicatewheretranscription
shouldend.
Someoftherisksassociatedwithgeneticallymodifiedcropsareunknownbecausethis
processisstillrelativelynew.Istheregoingtobelongtermeffectsonpeopleshealthorthe
environmentfromrepeatedexposure?Itshardtotellbecausealthoughtheyarenotseenyet,
unforeseenconsequencescouldstillshowup(Laskos,2013).Justbecausetherearenotany
negativeeffectsthatdoesnotmeantheyarenotstillthere.Scientistswillhavetotakethecases
astheycome,astheyarealreadytryingtocutofftheproblemsbeforetheyhappen(GreenFacts,
n.d.).
TheexperimentalobjectivesofthisexperimentincludeisolatingandamplifyingDNA
fromplantmaterialthroughpolymerasechainreaction(PCR)andgelelectrophoresis.Thepoint
oftheexperimentistotestafoodproductandconcludeifitisgeneticallymodifiedornot.Along
withthis,wecantesttheunknowntoseehowitisaffected.
Twomainprocedureswereusedinthisexperiment:PCRandgelelectrophoresis.PCR
worksbyfindingaDNAsequencethatisspecifictotheprimerandthenitamplifiesthis
sequence.ForPCR,thefoodproductsweregrindedupandmixedwithwaterandinstagene.The
instageneincludesdetergenttobreakthemembranes,bufferwithRNases,proteases,andDNase
inhibitor,andsomethingtobreaktheplantcellwalls.Theseslurrieswerethenmixedwiththe
PCRmastermixandranthroughthethermocycler,whichwaswheretheDNAwasamplified.
ThePCRmastermixincludednucleotides,theprimer,taqman,buffer,andmagnesium.Gel
electrophoresisuseselectricalcurrenttoseparateproteinproductbyweight.DNAisnegatively
chargedsoitmigratestowardsthepositivecharge.Thebiggerproductsmigrateslowerthanthe
3
smallerproductsdo.Forthegelelectrophoresis,3%agarosegelwaspreparedwithgelreddye.
Thethreesamples,anegativecontrol,theunknownsample,andapositivecontrol,wereloaded
andran.
IhypothesizedthatcornmuffinmixwouldshowproteinproductfortheCAMV35S
and/ornopalinesynthasewhentheDNAwasamplifiedandanalyzedbecauseitisgenetically
modified.
Results
Inwelloneabandisshownat500bp.Inwelltwotherearenobandsshownexceptfora
bandinthedimerregion.Inwellthreethereisabandat500bp.Inwellfourthereisabandat
200bpandabandinthedimerregion.Inwellfivethereisabandat500bp.Inwellsixthereisa
bandat200bpandabandinthedimerregion.
4
Figure1.AgaroseGelqualitativeanalysisindicatinggeneticallymodifiedfoodand
nongeneticallymodifiedfood.Wellsoneandtwoindicatethenegativecontrol,
nongeneticallymodifiedoats.Wellsthreeandfourindicatethecornmuffinmix.Wells
fiveandsixindicatethepositivecontrol.Theplantprimerwasusedinwellsone,three,
andfive.Thegeneticallymodifiedorganismprimerwasusedinwellstwo,four,andsix.
Gelreddyewasusedsothatthebandsarevisible.
Discussion
Thehypothesiswasacceptedbasedontheresultsachievedafterthegelelectrophoresis.
ThegelshowninFigure1indicatesthatthecornmuffinmixisgeneticallymodified.
Withgeneticallymodifiedfood,therewillbeabandsaround200bp.CAMV35Swill
appearat203bpandnopalinesynthasewillappearat223bp.AgaroseGelisnotidealto
indicateasmalldistancelikethis,butinourcasewedidnotcarewhichofthetwospecifically
showedup.Ourexperimentwasjusttoshowthattherewasabandinthatarea.At500bp,bands
willappearthatindicateaplantprimer.Theplantprimeristheretoindicatethatthetestis
workingcorrectly.Theplantprimerisoneforachloroplastgeneandwillshowupinallthree
plantsbecauseitisuniversalinallplantcells.
Asshowninfigure1,wellsoneandtwoweretheoats.Inwellone,thebandthat
appearedat500bpwastheplantprimer.Inwelltwo,abanddidnotappearat200bpsothat
meansthefoodwasnotmodified.Thiswasournegativecontrolforthestudy.Wellsthreeand
fourwerethecornbreadmuffinmix.Wellthreehasabandat500bpsothisshowsthatthetest
5
wasworkingcorrectlyandthecornbreadmixisaplantproduct.Forwellfour,afaintbandcan
beseenat200bp.ThismeansthateitherCAMV35Sornopalinesynthaseispresentinthe
DNA,sotheplantisinfactgeneticallymodified.Wells5and6werethepositivecontrol,DNA
fromaknowngeneticallymodifiedfood.Wellfiveshowsabandat500bptoindicatethatthe
testisworkinganditisaplant.Wellsixhasabandat200bpsoitisgeneticallymodified.
Lowerthan200bpthereareseveralbandsshown.Thesebandsareindicativeofdimers
forming.Dimerscanformiftheprimerforthegeneticallymodifiedfoodreactswithitself.The
bandsappearlowerbecausethedimersareadifferentweightthanthemonomers.
Maizeisoneofthemostcommongeneticallymodifiedcropssoitmakessensethatcorn
muffinmixwouldgiveresultsthatitisgeneticallymodified.Ourstudyconfirmedthatcornis
geneticallymodified,whichgoesalongwithwhatisalreadyknown.Itisimportantforpeopleto
knowwhatisgeneticallymodifiedbecausesomedonotwanttoconsumetheseproducts.There
isagapbetweenpeoplethatknowaboutgeneticallymodifiedfoodandthosewhodonot
becausethereisalotofinformationthatcansometimesbehardtogetthrough(Mahgoub,2015).
Labelinggeneticallymodifiedfoodsisagoodwaytoletpeopleknow,butsinceonlyafewstates
intheUnitedStatesrequirelabeling,theinformationneedstobespreadotherways(Jalonick,
2015).
Agoodfutureexperimentcouldbeonethatanalyzesfoodsthatarenotcommonly
geneticallymodified.Theexperimentcouldlookatfoodsthatdonotsayiftheyaremodifiedor
iftheyarenot.Thisexperimentwasagoodstartingpointbecausewegottheresultswewere
supposedtoandthestudyworkedforus.So,wecouldfurthertheresearchwithotherfoodsand
crops.
6
References
Bradshaw,J.E.(2016).GeneticallyModifiedCrops.InPlantBreeding:Past,Present,and
Future(Ch17).Retrievedfrom
http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/9783319232850_17#page1
FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations(2003).WeighingtheGMO
Arguments:Against.Retrievedfrom
http://www.fao.org/english/newsroom/focus/2003/gmo8.htm(noncrediblesource)
GreenFacts(n.d.).GeneticallyModifiedCrops.Retrievedfrom
http://www.greenfacts.org/en/gmo/index.htm#4(noncrediblesource)
Havahart(n.d.).WhyOrganic:HarmfulEffectsofChemicalPesticides.Retrievedfrom
http://www.havahart.com/whyorganicharmfuleffectsofchemicalpesticides
(noncredibesource)
Jalonick,M.C.(2015).HousePassesBilltoPreventMandatoryGMOFoodLabeling.PBS.
Retrievedfrom
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/housepassesbillpreventmandatorygmofoodl
abeling/(noncrediblesource)
Laskos,M.(2013).RiskBenefitAnalysisofGeneticallyModifiedFood.Synapse,Spring2013,
3031.Retrievedfrom
http://www.upennsynapse.com/uploads/3/1/7/8/31787151/1081.pdf#page=30
Mahgoub,S.E.O.(2015).GeneticallyModifiedFoods:Basics,Applications,andcontroversy.
Availablefrom
https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=Av5CQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&d
7
q=cons+of+genetically+modified+food&ots=MkB3NEsRT&sig=89C8XupjwmtD9n0B
PFpfZYFjQ#v=onepage&q=cons%20of%20genetically%20modified%20food&f=false
QaimM,KouserS(2013)GeneticallyModifiedCropsandFoodSecurity.PLoSONE8(6).
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0064879
WorldHealthOrganization(2016).Food,GeneticallyModified.Retrievedfrom
http://www.who.int/topics/food_genetically_modified/en/