Biotechnology

Biotechnology
Biotechnology is a multidisciplinary field

that involves the integration of natural
sciences and engineering sciences in order
to achieve the application of organisms,
cells, parts thereof and molecular
analogues for products and services.[1]
Faculty of Food Engineering and
Biotechnology
The term biotechnology was first used by

Károly Ereky in 1919,[2] to refer to the
production of products from raw materials
with the aid of living organisms. The core
principle of biotechnology involves
harnessing biological systems and
organisms, such as bacteria, yeast, and
plants, to perform specific tasks or
produce valuable substances.
Biotechnology had a significant impact on
many areas of society, from medicine to
agriculture to environmental science. One
of the key techniques used in
biotechnology is genetic engineering,
which allows scientists to modify the
genetic makeup of organisms to achieve
desired outcomes. This can involve
inserting genes from one organism into
another, creating new traits or modifying
existing ones.[3]
Other important techniques used in

biotechnology include tissue culture, which
allows researchers to grow cells and
tissues in the lab for research and medical
purposes, and fermentation, which is used
to produce a wide range of products such
as beer, wine, and cheese.
The applications of biotechnology are

diverse and have led to the development
of essential products like life-saving drugs,
biofuels, genetically modified crops, and
innovative materials.[4] It has also been
used to address environmental challenges,
such as developing biodegradable plastics
and using microorganisms to clean up
contaminated sites.
Biotechnology is a rapidly evolving field

with significant potential to address
pressing global challenges and improve
the quality of life for people around the
world; however, despite its numerous
benefits, it also poses ethical and societal
challenges, such as questions around
genetic modification and intellectual
property rights. As a result, there is
ongoing debate and regulation surrounding
the use and application of biotechnology in
various industries and fields.[5]
Definition
The concept of biotechnology

encompasses a wide range of procedures
for modifying living organisms for human
purposes, going back to domestication of
animals, cultivation of the plants, and
"improvements" to these through breeding
programs that employ artificial selection
and hybridization. Modern usage also
includes genetic engineering, as well as
cell and tissue culture technologies. The
American Chemical Society defines
biotechnology as the application of
biological organisms, systems, or
processes by various industries to learning
about the science of life and the
improvement of the value of materials and
organisms, such as pharmaceuticals,
crops, and livestock.[6] As per the
European Federation of Biotechnology,
biotechnology is the integration of natural
science and organisms, cells, parts
thereof, and molecular analogues for
products and services.[7] Biotechnology is
based on the basic biological sciences
(e.g., molecular biology, biochemistry, cell
biology, embryology, genetics,
microbiology) and conversely provides
methods to support and perform basic
research in biology.
Biotechnology is the research and

development in the laboratory using
bioinformatics for exploration, extraction,
exploitation, and production from any
living organisms and any source of
biomass by means of biochemical
engineering where high value-added
products could be planned (reproduced by
biosynthesis, for example), forecasted,
formulated, developed, manufactured, and
marketed for the purpose of sustainable
operations (for the return from bottomless
initial investment on R & D) and gaining
durable patents rights (for exclusives
rights for sales, and prior to this to receive
national and international approval from
the results on animal experiment and
human experiment, especially on the
pharmaceutical branch of biotechnology to
prevent any undetected side-effects or
safety concerns by using the
products).[8][9][10] The utilization of
biological processes, organisms or
systems to produce products that are
anticipated to improve human lives is
termed biotechnology.[11]
By contrast, bioengineering is generally

thought of as a related field that more
heavily emphasizes higher systems
approaches (not necessarily the altering or
using of biological materials directly) for
interfacing with and utilizing living things.
Bioengineering is the application of the
principles of engineering and natural
sciences to tissues, cells, and molecules.
This can be considered as the use of
knowledge from working with and
manipulating biology to achieve a result
that can improve functions in plants and
animals.[12] Relatedly, biomedical
engineering is an overlapping field that
often draws upon and applies
biotechnology (by various definitions),
especially in certain sub-fields of
biomedical or chemical engineering such
as tissue engineering, biopharmaceutical
engineering, and genetic engineering.
History
Brewing was an early

application of
biotechnology.
Although not normally what first comes to

mind, many forms of human-derived
agriculture clearly fit the broad definition
of "utilizing a biotechnological system to
make products". Indeed, the cultivation of
plants may be viewed as the earliest
biotechnological enterprise.
Agriculture has been theorized to have
become the dominant way of producing
food since the Neolithic Revolution.
Through early biotechnology, the earliest
farmers selected and bred the best-suited
crops (e.g., those with the highest yields)
to produce enough food to support a
growing population. As crops and fields
became increasingly large and difficult to
maintain, it was discovered that specific
organisms and their by-products could
effectively fertilize, restore nitrogen, and
control pests. Throughout the history of
agriculture, farmers have inadvertently
altered the genetics of their crops through
introducing them to new environments and
breeding them with other plants — one of
the first forms of biotechnology.
These processes also were included in

early fermentation of beer.[13] These
processes were introduced in early
Mesopotamia, Egypt, China and India, and
still use the same basic biological
methods. In brewing, malted grains
(containing enzymes) convert starch from
grains into sugar and then adding specific
yeasts to produce beer. In this process,
carbohydrates in the grains broke down
into alcohols, such as ethanol. Later, other
cultures produced the process of lactic
acid fermentation, which produced other
preserved foods, such as soy sauce.
Fermentation was also used in this time
period to produce leavened bread.
Although the process of fermentation was
not fully understood until Louis Pasteur's
work in 1857, it is still the first use of
biotechnology to convert a food source
into another form.
Before the time of Charles Darwin's work

and life, animal and plant scientists had
already used selective breeding. Darwin
added to that body of work with his
scientific observations about the ability of
science to change species. These
accounts contributed to Darwin's theory of
natural selection.[14]
For thousands of years, humans have used

selective breeding to improve the
production of crops and livestock to use
them for food. In selective breeding,
organisms with desirable characteristics
are mated to produce offspring with the
same characteristics. For example, this
technique was used with corn to produce
the largest and sweetest crops.[15]
In the early twentieth century scientists

gained a greater understanding of
microbiology and explored ways of
manufacturing specific products. In 1917,
Chaim Weizmann first used a pure
microbiological culture in an industrial
process, that of manufacturing corn starch
using Clostridium acetobutylicum, to
produce acetone, which the United
Kingdom desperately needed to
manufacture explosives during World War
I.[16]
Biotechnology has also led to the

development of antibiotics. In 1928,
Alexander Fleming discovered the mold
Penicillium. His work led to the purification
of the antibiotic compound formed by the
mold by Howard Florey, Ernst Boris Chain
and Norman Heatley – to form what we
today know as penicillin. In 1940, penicillin
became available for medicinal use to
treat bacterial infections in humans.[15]
The field of modern biotechnology is

generally thought of as having been born in
1971 when Paul Berg's (Stanford)
experiments in gene splicing had early
success. Herbert W. Boyer (Univ. Calif. at
San Francisco) and Stanley N. Cohen
(Stanford) significantly advanced the new
technology in 1972 by transferring genetic
material into a bacterium, such that the
imported material would be reproduced.
The commercial viability of a
biotechnology industry was significantly
expanded on June 16, 1980, when the
United States Supreme Court ruled that a
genetically modified microorganism could
be patented in the case of Diamond v.
Chakrabarty.[17] Indian-born Ananda
Chakrabarty, working for General Electric,
had modified a bacterium (of the genus
Pseudomonas) capable of breaking down
crude oil, which he proposed to use in
treating oil spills. (Chakrabarty's work did
not involve gene manipulation but rather
the transfer of entire organelles between
strains of the Pseudomonas bacterium).
The MOSFET (metal–oxide–
semiconductor field-effect transistor) was
invented by Mohamed M. Atalla and
Dawon Kahng in 1959.[18] Two years later,
Leland C. Clark and Champ Lyons invented
the first biosensor in 1962.[19][20] Biosensor
MOSFETs were later developed, and they
have since been widely used to measure
physical, chemical, biological and
environmental parameters.[21] The first
BioFET was the ion-sensitive field-effect
transistor (ISFET), invented by Piet
Bergveld in 1970.[22][23] It is a special type
of MOSFET,[21] where the metal gate is
replaced by an ion-sensitive membrane,
electrolyte solution and reference
electrode.[24] The ISFET is widely used in
biomedical applications, such as the
detection of DNA hybridization, biomarker
detection from blood, antibody detection,
glucose measurement, pH sensing, and
genetic technology.[24]
By the mid-1980s, other BioFETs had been

developed, including the gas sensor FET
(GASFET), pressure sensor FET
(PRESSFET), chemical field-effect
transistor (ChemFET), reference ISFET
(REFET), enzyme-modified FET (ENFET)
and immunologically modified FET
(IMFET).[21] By the early 2000s, BioFETs
such as the DNA field-effect transistor
(DNAFET), gene-modified FET (GenFET)
and cell-potential BioFET (CPFET) had
been developed.[24]
A factor influencing the biotechnology

sector's success is improved intellectual
property rights legislation—and
enforcement—worldwide, as well as
strengthened demand for medical and
pharmaceutical products to cope with an
ageing, and ailing, U.S. population.[25]
Rising demand for biofuels is expected to

be good news for the biotechnology
sector, with the Department of Energy
estimating ethanol usage could reduce
U.S. petroleum-derived fuel consumption
by up to 30% by 2030. The biotechnology
sector has allowed the U.S. farming
industry to rapidly increase its supply of
corn and soybeans—the main inputs into
biofuels—by developing genetically
modified seeds that resist pests and
drought. By increasing farm productivity,
biotechnology boosts biofuel
production.[26]
Examples
Biotechnology has applications in four

major industrial areas, including health
care (medical), crop production and
agriculture, non-food (industrial) uses of
crops and other products (e.g.,
biodegradable plastics, vegetable oil,
biofuels), and environmental uses.
For example, one application of

biotechnology is the directed use of
microorganisms for the manufacture of
organic products (examples include beer
and milk products). Another example is
using naturally present bacteria by the
mining industry in bioleaching.
Biotechnology is also used to recycle, treat
waste, clean up sites contaminated by
industrial activities (bioremediation), and
also to produce biological weapons.
A series of derived terms have been
coined to identify several branches of
biotechnology, for example:
Bioinformatics (also called "gold

biotechnology") is an interdisciplinary
field that addresses biological problems
using computational techniques, and
makes the rapid organization as well as
analysis of biological data possible. The
field may also be referred to as
computational biology, and can be
defined as, "conceptualizing biology in
terms of molecules and then applying
informatics techniques to understand
and organize the information associated
with these molecules, on a large
scale".[27] Bioinformatics plays a key
role in various areas, such as functional
genomics, structural genomics, and
proteomics, and forms a key component
in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical
sector.[28]
Blue biotechnology is based on the
exploitation of sea resources to create
products and industrial applications.[29]
This branch of biotechnology is the
most used for the industries of refining
and combustion principally on the
production of bio-oils with
photosynthetic micro-algae.[29][30]
Green biotechnology is biotechnology
applied to agricultural processes. An
example would be the selection and
domestication of plants via
micropropagation. Another example is
the designing of transgenic plants to
grow under specific environments in the
presence (or absence) of chemicals.
One hope is that green biotechnology
might produce more environmentally
friendly solutions than traditional
industrial agriculture. An example of this
is the engineering of a plant to express a
pesticide, thereby ending the need of
external application of pesticides. An
example of this would be Bt corn.
Whether or not green biotechnology
products such as this are ultimately
more environmentally friendly is a topic
of considerable debate.[29] It is
commonly considered as the next phase
of green revolution, which can be seen
as a platform to eradicate world hunger
by using technologies which enable the
production of more fertile and resistant,
towards biotic and abiotic stress, plants
and ensures application of
environmentally friendly fertilizers and
the use of biopesticides, it is mainly
focused on the development of
agriculture.[29] On the other hand, some
of the uses of green biotechnology
involve microorganisms to clean and
reduce waste.[31][29]
Red biotechnology is the use of
biotechnology in the medical and
pharmaceutical industries, and health
preservation.[29] This branch involves the
production of vaccines and antibiotics,
regenerative therapies, creation of
artificial organs and new diagnostics of
diseases.[29] As well as the development
of hormones, stem cells, antibodies,
siRNA and diagnostic tests.[29]
White biotechnology, also known as
industrial biotechnology, is
biotechnology applied to industrial
processes. An example is the designing
of an organism to produce a useful
chemical. Another example is the using
of enzymes as industrial catalysts to
either produce valuable chemicals or
destroy hazardous/polluting chemicals.
White biotechnology tends to consume
less in resources than traditional
processes used to produce industrial
goods.[32][33]
"Yellow biotechnology" refers to the use
of biotechnology in food production
(food industry), for example in making
wine (winemaking), cheese
(cheesemaking), and beer (brewing) by
fermentation.[29] It has also been used
to refer to biotechnology applied to
insects. This includes biotechnology-
based approaches for the control of
harmful insects, the characterisation
and utilisation of active ingredients or
genes of insects for research, or
application in agriculture and medicine
and various other approaches.[34]
Gray biotechnology is dedicated to
environmental applications, and focused
on the maintenance of biodiversity and
the remotion of pollutants.[29]
Brown biotechnology is related to the
management of arid lands and deserts.
One application is the creation of
enhanced seeds that resist extreme
environmental conditions of arid regions,
which is related to the innovation,
creation of agriculture techniques and
management of resources.[29]
Violet biotechnology is related to law,
ethical and philosophical issues around
biotechnology.[29]
Dark biotechnology is the color
associated with bioterrorism or
biological weapons and biowarfare
which uses microorganisms, and toxins
to cause diseases and death in humans,
livestock and crops.[35][29]
Medicine
In medicine, modern biotechnology has

many applications in areas such as
pharmaceutical drug discoveries and
production, pharmacogenomics, and
genetic testing (or genetic screening). In
2021, nearly 40% of the total company
value of pharmaceutical biotech
companies worldwide were active in
Oncology with Neurology and Rare
Diseases being the other two big
applications.[36]
DNA microarray chip – some can do
as many as a million blood tests at
once.
Pharmacogenomics (a combination of
pharmacology and genomics) is the
technology that analyses how genetic
makeup affects an individual's response to
drugs.[37] Researchers in the field
investigate the influence of genetic
variation on drug responses in patients by
correlating gene expression or single-
nucleotide polymorphisms with a drug's
efficacy or toxicity.[38] The purpose of
pharmacogenomics is to develop rational
means to optimize drug therapy, with
respect to the patients' genotype, to
ensure maximum efficacy with minimal
adverse effects.[39] Such approaches
promise the advent of "personalized
medicine"; in which drugs and drug
combinations are optimized for each
individual's unique genetic makeup.[40][41]
Computer-generated image of insulin

hexamers highlighting the threefold
symmetry, the zinc ions holding it
together, and the histidine residues
involved in zinc binding
Biotechnology has contributed to the

discovery and manufacturing of traditional
small molecule pharmaceutical drugs as
well as drugs that are the product of
biotechnology – biopharmaceutics.
Modern biotechnology can be used to
manufacture existing medicines relatively
easily and cheaply. The first genetically
engineered products were medicines
designed to treat human diseases. To cite
one example, in 1978 Genentech
developed synthetic humanized insulin by
joining its gene with a plasmid vector
inserted into the bacterium Escherichia
coli. Insulin, widely used for the treatment
of diabetes, was previously extracted from
the pancreas of abattoir animals (cattle or
pigs). The genetically engineered bacteria
are able to produce large quantities of
synthetic human insulin at relatively low
cost.[42][43] Biotechnology has also
enabled emerging therapeutics like gene
therapy. The application of biotechnology
to basic science (for example through the
Human Genome Project) has also
dramatically improved our understanding
of biology and as our scientific knowledge
of normal and disease biology has
increased, our ability to develop new
medicines to treat previously untreatable
diseases has increased as well.[43]
Genetic testing allows the genetic

diagnosis of vulnerabilities to inherited
diseases, and can also be used to
determine a child's parentage (genetic
mother and father) or in general a person's
ancestry. In addition to studying
chromosomes to the level of individual
genes, genetic testing in a broader sense
includes biochemical tests for the possible
presence of genetic diseases, or mutant
forms of genes associated with increased
risk of developing genetic disorders.
Genetic testing identifies changes in
chromosomes, genes, or proteins.[44] Most
of the time, testing is used to find changes
that are associated with inherited
disorders. The results of a genetic test can
confirm or rule out a suspected genetic
condition or help determine a person's
chance of developing or passing on a
genetic disorder. As of 2011 several
hundred genetic tests were in use.[45][46]
Since genetic testing may open up ethical
or psychological problems, genetic testing
is often accompanied by genetic
counseling.
Agriculture
Genetically modified crops ("GM crops", or

"biotech crops") are plants used in
agriculture, the DNA of which has been
modified with genetic engineering
techniques. In most cases, the main aim is
to introduce a new trait that does not
occur naturally in the species.
Biotechnology firms can contribute to
future food security by improving the
nutrition and viability of urban agriculture.
Furthermore, the protection of intellectual
property rights encourages private sector
investment in agrobiotechnology.
Examples in food crops include resistance

to certain pests,[47] diseases,[48] stressful
environmental conditions,[49] resistance to
chemical treatments (e.g. resistance to a
herbicide[50]), reduction of spoilage,[51] or
improving the nutrient profile of the
crop.[52] Examples in non-food crops
include production of pharmaceutical
agents,[53] biofuels,[54] and other
industrially useful goods,[55] as well as for
bioremediation.[56][57]
Farmers have widely adopted GM

technology. Between 1996 and 2011, the
total surface area of land cultivated with
GM crops had increased by a factor of 94,
from 17,000 square kilometers (4,200,000
acres) to 1,600,000 km2 (395 million
acres).[58] 10% of the world's crop lands
were planted with GM crops in 2010.[58] As
of 2011, 11 different transgenic crops were
grown commercially on 395 million acres
(160 million hectares) in 29 countries such
as the US, Brazil, Argentina, India, Canada,
China, Paraguay, Pakistan, South Africa,
Uruguay, Bolivia, Australia, Philippines,
Myanmar, Burkina Faso, Mexico and
Spain.[58]
Genetically modified foods are foods

produced from organisms that have had
specific changes introduced into their DNA
with the methods of genetic engineering.
These techniques have allowed for the
introduction of new crop traits as well as a
far greater control over a food's genetic
structure than previously afforded by
methods such as selective breeding and
mutation breeding.[59] Commercial sale of
genetically modified foods began in 1994,
when Calgene first marketed its Flavr Savr
delayed ripening tomato.[60] To date most
genetic modification of foods have
primarily focused on cash crops in high
demand by farmers such as soybean, corn,
canola, and cotton seed oil. These have
been engineered for resistance to
pathogens and herbicides and better
nutrient profiles. GM livestock have also
been experimentally developed; in
November 2013 none were available on
the market,[61] but in 2015 the FDA
approved the first GM salmon for
commercial production and
consumption.[62]
There is a scientific consensus[63][64][65][66]
that currently available food derived from
GM crops poses no greater risk to human
health than conventional
food,[67][68][69][70][71] but that each GM food
needs to be tested on a case-by-case
basis before introduction.[72][73][74]
Nonetheless, members of the public are
much less likely than scientists to perceive
GM foods as safe.[75][76][77][78] The legal
and regulatory status of GM foods varies
by country, with some nations banning or
restricting them, and others permitting
them with widely differing degrees of
regulation.[79][80][81][82]
GM crops also provide a number of
ecological benefits, if not used in
excess.[83] Insect-resistant crops have
proven to lower pesticide usage, therefore
reducing the environmental impact of
pesticides as a whole.[84] However,
opponents have objected to GM crops per
se on several grounds, including
environmental concerns, whether food
produced from GM crops is safe, whether
GM crops are needed to address the
world's food needs, and economic
concerns raised by the fact these
organisms are subject to intellectual
property law.
Biotechnology has several applications in
the realm of food security. Crops like
Golden rice are engineered to have higher
nutritional content, and there is potential
for food products with longer shelf
lives.[85] Though not a form of agricultural
biotechnology, vaccines can help prevent
diseases found in animal agriculture.
Additionally, agricultural biotechnology can
expedite breeding processes in order to
yield faster results and provide greater
quantities of food.[86] Transgenic
biofortification in cereals has been
considered as a promising method to
combat malnutrition in India and other
countries.[87]
Industrial
Industrial biotechnology (known mainly in

Europe as white biotechnology) is the
application of biotechnology for industrial
purposes, including industrial
fermentation. It includes the practice of
using cells such as microorganisms, or
components of cells like enzymes, to
generate industrially useful products in
sectors such as chemicals, food and feed,
detergents, paper and pulp, textiles and
biofuels.[88] In the current decades,
significant progress has been done in
creating genetically modified organisms
(GMOs) that enhance the diversity of
applications and economical viability of
industrial biotechnology. By using
renewable raw materials to produce a
variety of chemicals and fuels, industrial
biotechnology is actively advancing
towards lowering greenhouse gas
emissions and moving away from a
petrochemical-based economy.[89]
Synthetic biology is considered one of the

essential cornerstones in industrial
biotechnology due to its financial and
sustainable contribution to the
manufacturing sector. Jointly
biotechnology and synthetic biology play a
crucial role in generating cost-effective
products with nature-friendly features by
using bio-based production instead of
fossil-based.[90] Synthetic biology can be
used to engineer model microorganisms,
such as Escherichia coli, by genome editing
tools to enhance their ability to produce
bio-based products, such as bioproduction
of medicines and biofuels.[91] For instance,
E. coli and Saccharomyces cerevisiae in a
consortium could be used as industrial
microbes to produce precursors of the
chemotherapeutic agent paclitaxel by
applying the metabolic engineering in a co-
culture approach to exploit the benefits
from the two microbes.[92]
Another example of synthetic biology
applications in industrial biotechnology is
the re-engineering of the metabolic
pathways of E. coli by CRISPR and CRISPRi
systems toward the production of a
chemical known as 1,4-butanediol, which is
used in fiber manufacturing. In order to
produce 1,4-butanediol, the authors alter
the metabolic regulation of the Escherichia
coli by CRISPR to induce point mutation in
the gltA gene, knockout of the sad gene,
and knock-in six genes (cat1, sucD, 4hbd,
cat2, bld, and bdh). Whereas CRISPRi
system used to knockdown the three
competing genes (gabD, ybgC, and tesB)
that affect the biosynthesis pathway of
1,4-butanediol. Consequently, the yield of
1,4-butanediol significantly increased from
0.9 to 1.8 g/L.[93]
Environmental
Environmental biotechnology includes

various disciplines that play an essential
role in reducing environmental waste and
providing environmentally safe processes,
such as biofiltration and
biodegradation.[94][95] The environment can
be affected by biotechnologies, both
positively and adversely. Vallero and
others have argued that the difference
between beneficial biotechnology (e.g.,
bioremediation is to clean up an oil spill or
hazard chemical leak) versus the adverse
effects stemming from biotechnological
enterprises (e.g., flow of genetic material
from transgenic organisms into wild
strains) can be seen as applications and
implications, respectively.[96] Cleaning up
environmental wastes is an example of an
application of environmental
biotechnology; whereas loss of
biodiversity or loss of containment of a
harmful microbe are examples of
environmental implications of
biotechnology.
Regulation
The regulation of genetic engineering

concerns approaches taken by
governments to assess and manage the
risks associated with the use of genetic
engineering technology, and the
development and release of genetically
modified organisms (GMO), including
genetically modified crops and genetically
modified fish. There are differences in the
regulation of GMOs between countries,
with some of the most marked differences
occurring between the US and Europe.[97]
Regulation varies in a given country
depending on the intended use of the
products of the genetic engineering. For
example, a crop not intended for food use
is generally not reviewed by authorities
responsible for food safety.[98] The
European Union differentiates between
approval for cultivation within the EU and
approval for import and processing. While
only a few GMOs have been approved for
cultivation in the EU a number of GMOs
have been approved for import and
processing.[99] The cultivation of GMOs
has triggered a debate about the
coexistence of GM and non-GM crops.
Depending on the coexistence regulations,
incentives for the cultivation of GM crops
differ.[100]
Database for the GMOs used in the
EU
The EUginius (European GMO Initiative for

a Unified Database System) database is
intended to help companies, interested
private users and competent authorities to
find precise information on the presence,
detection and identification of GMOs used
in the European Union. The information is
provided in English.
Learning
In 1988, after prompting from the United

States Congress, the National Institute of
General Medical Sciences (National
Institutes of Health) (NIGMS) instituted a
funding mechanism for biotechnology
training. Universities nationwide compete
for these funds to establish Biotechnology
Training Programs (BTPs). Each
successful application is generally funded
for five years then must be competitively
renewed. Graduate students in turn
compete for acceptance into a BTP; if
accepted, then stipend, tuition and health
insurance support are provided for two or
three years during the course of their PhD
thesis work. Nineteen institutions offer
NIGMS supported BTPs.[101]
Biotechnology training is also offered at
the undergraduate level and in community
colleges.
References and notes
1. "Biotechnology" (https://goldbook.iupac.or
g/terms/view/B00666) . IUPAC Goldbook.
2014. doi:10.1351/goldbook.B00666 (http
s://doi.org/10.1351%2Fgoldbook.B0066
6) . Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/
20220120205824/https://goldbook.iupac.o
rg/terms/view/B00666) from the original
on January 20, 2022. Retrieved
February 14, 2022.
2. Ereky, Karl. (June 8, 1919). Biotechnologie
der Fleisch-, Fett-, und Milcherzeugung im
landwirtschaftlichen Grossbetriebe: für
naturwissenschaftlich gebildete Landwirte
verfasst (https://catalog.hathitrust.org/Rec
ord/006798043) . P. Parey. Archived (http
s://web.archive.org/web/2016030502325
2/http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/006
798043) from the original on March 5,
2016. Retrieved March 16, 2022 – via Hathi
Trust.
3. "Genetic Engineering" (https://www.genom
e.gov/genetics-glossary/Genetic-Engineeri
ng) . National Human Genome Research
Institute, US National Institutes of Health.
December 15, 2023. Retrieved
December 18, 2023.
4. Gupta, Varsha; Sengupta, Manjistha;
Prakash, Jaya; Tripathy, Baishnab Charan
(October 23, 2016). "An Introduction to
Biotechnology" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.g
ov/pmc/articles/PMC7119977) . Basic and
Applied Aspects of Biotechnology: 1–21.
doi:10.1007/978-981-10-0875-7_1 (https://
doi.org/10.1007%2F978-981-10-0875-7_
1) . PMC 7119977 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.ni
h.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7119977) .
5. O’Mathúna, Dónal P. (April 1, 2007).
"Bioethics and biotechnology" (https://ww
w.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2267
612) . Cytotechnology. 53 (1–3): 113–119.
doi:10.1007/s10616-007-9053-8 (https://d
oi.org/10.1007%2Fs10616-007-9053-8) .
ISSN 0920-9069 (https://www.worldcat.or
g/issn/0920-9069) . PMC 2267612 (http
s://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PM
C2267612) . PMID 19003197 (https://pub
med.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19003197) .
6. "Biotechnology" (https://web.archive.org/w
eb/20121107072612/http://portal.acs.org/
portal/acs/corg/content?_nfpb=true) .
portal.acs.org. American Chemical Society.
Archived from the original (https://portal.ac
s.org/portal/acs/corg/content?_nfpb=true&
_pageLabel=PP_ARTICLEMAIN&node_id=1
188&content_id=CTP_003377&use_sec=tru
e&sec_url_var=region1&__uuid=5a1c54a6-f
f5a-4f69-84c1-763835d11162) on
November 7, 2012. Retrieved March 20,
2013.
7. "BIOTECHNOLOGY-PRINCIPLES &
PROCESSES" (https://web.archive.org/we
b/20150807020753/http://nvsrochd.gov.i
n/s_club/biology/ch11_bilas.pdf) (PDF).
Archived from the original (http://nvsrochd.
gov.in/s_club/biology/ch11_bilas.pdf)
(PDF) on August 7, 2015. Retrieved
December 29, 2014.
8. What is biotechnology? (https://archive.tod
ay/20130414170840/http://www.europabi
o.org/what-biotechnology) . Europabio.
Retrieved on March 20, 2013.
9. Key Biotechnology Indicators (December
2011) (http://www.oecd.org/science/innov
ationinsciencetechnologyandindustry/4930
3992.pdf) Archived (https://web.archive.or
g/web/20121108080057/http://www.oecd.
org/science/innovationinsciencetechnology
andindustry/49303992.pdf) November 8,
2012, at the Wayback Machine. oecd.org
10. "Biotechnology policies" – Organization for
Economic Co-operation and Development
(http://www.oecd.org/sti/biotechnologypoli
cies/keybiotechnologyindicators.htm) .
Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/201
20831071244/http://www.oecd.org/sti/bio
technologypolicies/keybiotechnologyindica
tors.htm) August 31, 2012, at the Wayback
Machine. Retrieved on March 20, 2013.
11. Goli, Divakar; Bhatia, Saurabh (May 2018).
History, scope and development of
biotechnology (http://iopscience.iop.org/bo
ok/978-0-7503-1299-8/chapter/bk978-0-75
03-1299-8ch1) . IOPscience.
doi:10.1088/978-0-7503-1299-8ch1 (http
s://doi.org/10.1088%2F978-0-7503-1299-8
ch1) . ISBN 978-0-7503-1299-8. Archived
(https://web.archive.org/web/2019051820
2836/https://iopscience.iop.org/book/978-
0-7503-1299-8/chapter/bk978-0-7503-129
9-8ch1) from the original on May 18, 2019.
Retrieved October 30, 2018.
12. What Is Bioengineering? (http://www.bione
wsonline.com/k/what_is_bioengineering.ht
m) Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/
20130123084548/http://www.bionewsonli
ne.com/k/what_is_bioengineering.htm)
January 23, 2013, at the Wayback Machine.
Bionewsonline.com. Retrieved on March
20, 2013.
13. See Arnold JP (2005). Origin and History of
Beer and Brewing: From Prehistoric Times
to the Beginning of Brewing Science and
Technology. Cleveland, Ohio: BeerBooks.
p. 34. ISBN 978-0-9662084-1-2.
OCLC 71834130 (https://www.worldcat.or
g/oclc/71834130) ..
14. Cole-Turner R (2003). "Biotechnology" (htt
p://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3404
200058.html) . Encyclopedia of Science
and Religion. Archived (https://web.archive.
org/web/20091025010817/http://www.enc
yclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3404200058.htm
l) from the original on October 25, 2009.
Retrieved December 7, 2014.
15. Thieman WJ, Palladino MA (2008).
Introduction to Biotechnology.
Pearson/Benjamin Cummings. ISBN 978-0-
321-49145-9.
16. Springham D, Springham G, Moses V, Cape
RE (1999). Biotechnology: The Science and
the Business (https://books.google.com/bo
oks?id=9GY5DCr6LD4C) . CRC Press. p. 1.
ISBN 978-90-5702-407-8.
17. "Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303
(1980). No. 79-139 (http://caselaw.lp.findla
w.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=44
7&invol=303) Archived (https://web.archiv
e.org/web/20110628191938/http://casela
w.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=
us&vol=447&invol=303) June 28, 2011, at
the Wayback Machine." United States
Supreme Court. June 16, 1980. Retrieved
on May 4, 2007.
18. "1960: Metal Oxide Semiconductor (MOS)
Transistor Demonstrated" (https://www.co
mputerhistory.org/siliconengine/metal-oxid
e-semiconductor-mos-transistor-demonstra
ted/) . The Silicon Engine: A Timeline of
Semiconductors in Computers. Computer
History Museum. Archived (https://web.arc
hive.org/web/20191027045554/https://ww
w.computerhistory.org/siliconengine/metal
-oxide-semiconductor-mos-transistor-demo
nstrated/) from the original on October 27,
2019. Retrieved August 31, 2019.
19. Park, Jeho; Nguyen, Hoang Hiep; Woubit,
Abdela; Kim, Moonil (2014). "Applications
of Field-Effect Transistor (FET)–Type
Biosensors" (https://doi.org/10.5757%2FAS
CT.2014.23.2.61) . Applied Science and
Convergence Technology. 23 (2): 61–71.
doi:10.5757/ASCT.2014.23.2.61 (https://do
i.org/10.5757%2FASCT.2014.23.2.61) .
g/issn/2288-6559) . S2CID 55557610 (http
s://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:5555
7610) .
20. Clark, Leland C.; Lyons, Champ (1962).
"Electrode Systems for Continuous
Monitoring in Cardiovascular Surgery".
Annals of the New York Academy of
Sciences. 102 (1): 29–45.
Bibcode:1962NYASA.102...29C (https://ui.a
dsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1962NYASA.102...
29C) . doi:10.1111/j.1749-
6632.1962.tb13623.x (https://doi.org/10.1
111%2Fj.1749-6632.1962.tb13623.x) .
g/issn/1749-6632) . PMID 14021529 (http
s://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14021529) .
S2CID 33342483 (https://api.semanticscho
lar.org/CorpusID:33342483) .
21. Bergveld, Piet (October 1985). "The impact
of MOSFET-based sensors" (https://core.ac.
uk/download/pdf/11473091.pdf) (PDF).
Sensors and Actuators. 8 (2): 109–127.
Bibcode:1985SeAc....8..109B (https://ui.ad
sabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985SeAc....8..109
B) . doi:10.1016/0250-6874(85)87009-8 (h
ttps://doi.org/10.1016%2F0250-6874%288
5%2987009-8) . ISSN 0250-6874 (https://w
ww.worldcat.org/issn/0250-6874) .
Archived (https://ghostarchive.org/archive/
20221009/https://core.ac.uk/download/pd
f/11473091.pdf) (PDF) from the original
on October 9, 2022.
22. Chris Toumazou; Pantelis Georgiou
(December 2011). "40 years of ISFET
technology:From neuronal sensing to DNA
sequencing" (https://www.researchgate.ne
t/publication/260616066) . Electronics
Letters. Retrieved May 13, 2016.
23. Bergveld, P. (January 1970). "Development
of an Ion-Sensitive Solid-State Device for
Neurophysiological Measurements". IEEE
Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.
BME-17 (1): 70–71.
doi:10.1109/TBME.1970.4502688 (https://
doi.org/10.1109%2FTBME.1970.450268
8) . PMID 5441220 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nl
m.nih.gov/5441220) .
24. Schöning, Michael J.; Poghossian, Arshak
(September 10, 2002). "Recent advances in
biologically sensitive field-effect transistors
(BioFETs)" (http://juser.fz-juelich.de/recor
d/16078/files/12968.pdf) (PDF). Analyst.
127 (9): 1137–1151.
Bibcode:2002Ana...127.1137S (https://ui.a
dsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002Ana...127.113
7S) . doi:10.1039/B204444G (https://doi.or
g/10.1039%2FB204444G) . ISSN 1364-
5528 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/1364
-5528) . PMID 12375833 (https://pubmed.
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12375833) . Archived (htt
ps://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/ht
tp://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/16078/files/
12968.pdf) (PDF) from the original on
October 9, 2022.
25. VoIP Providers And Corn Farmers Can
Expect To Have Bumper Years In 2008 And
Beyond, According To The Latest Research
Released By Business Information Analysts
At IBISWorld (https://web.archive.org/web/
20080402034432/http://www.ibisworld.co
m/pressrelease/pressrelease.aspx?prid=1
15) . Los Angeles (March 19, 2008)
26. "The Recession List - Top 10 Industries to
Fly and Flop in 2008" (https://web.archive.o
rg/web/20080602160516/http://www.bio-
medicine.org/biology-technology-1/The-Re
cession-List---Top-10-Industries-to-Fly-and-
Flop-in-2008-4076-3/) . Bio-Medicine.org.
March 19, 2008. Archived from the original
(http://www.bio-medicine.org/biology-tech
nology-1/The-Recession-List---Top-10-Indu
stries-to-Fly-and-Flop-in-2008-4076-3/) on
June 2, 2008. Retrieved May 19, 2008.
27. Gerstein, M. "Bioinformatics Introduction (h
ttp://www.primate.or.kr/bioinformatics/Cou
rse/Yale/intro.pdf) Archived (https://web.a
rchive.org/web/20070616013805/http://w
ww.primate.or.kr/bioinformatics/Course/Ya
le/intro.pdf) 2007-06-16 at the Wayback
Machine." Yale University. Retrieved on May
8, 2007.
28. Siam, R. (2009). Biotechnology Research
and Development in Academia: providing
the foundation for Egypt's Biotechnology
spectrum of colors. Sixteenth Annual
American University in Cairo Research
Conference, American University in Cairo,
Cairo, Egypt. BMC Proceedings, 31–35.
29. Kafarski, P. (2012). Rainbow Code of
Biotechnology (http://www.chemikinternati
onal.com/pdf/2012/08_2012/chemik_8_20
12_01.pdf) Archived (https://web.archive.o
rg/web/20190214054125/http://www.che
mikinternational.com/pdf/2012/08_2012/c
hemik_8_2012_01.pdf) February 14, 2019,
at the Wayback Machine. CHEMIK. Wroclaw
University
30. Biotech: true colours. (2009). TCE: The
Chemical Engineer, (816), 26–31.
31. Aldridge, S. (2009). The four colours of
biotechnology: the biotechnology sector is
occasionally described as a rainbow, with
each sub sector having its own colour. But
what do the different colours of
biotechnology have to offer the
pharmaceutical industry. Pharmaceutical
Technology Europe, (1). 12.
32. Frazzetto G (September 2003). "White
biotechnology" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.g
ov/pmc/articles/PMC1326365) . EMBO
Reports. 4 (9): 835–7.
doi:10.1038/sj.embor.embor928 (https://d
oi.org/10.1038%2Fsj.embor.embor928) .
PMC 1326365 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.g
ov/pmc/articles/PMC1326365) .
PMID 12949582 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/12949582) .
33. Frazzetto, G. (2003). White biotechnology
(http://embor.embopress.org/content/4/9/
835) Archived (https://web.archive.org/we
b/20181111024351/http://embor.embopre
ss.org/content/4/9/835) November 11,
2018, at the Wayback Machine. March 21,
2017, de EMBOpress Sitio
34. Advances in Biochemical
Engineering/Biotechnology (https://link.spri
nger.com/book/10.1007%2F978-3-642-398
63-6) Archived (https://web.archive.org/w
eb/20180719084141/https://link.springer.c
om/book/10.1007/978-3-642-39863-6)
July 19, 2018, at the Wayback Machine,
Volume 135 2013, Yellow Biotechnology I
35. Edgar, J.D. (2004). The Colours of
Biotechnology: Science, Development and
Humankind. Electronic Journal of
Biotechnology, (3), 01
36. "Top Global Pharmaceutical Company
Report" (https://torreya.com/publications/p
harma-1000-report-update-torreya-2021-11
-18.pdf) (PDF). The Pharma 1000.
November 2021. Archived (https://web.arc
hive.org/web/20220315051910/https://tor
reya.com/publications/pharma-1000-report
-update-torreya-2021-11-18.pdf) (PDF)
from the original on March 15, 2022.
37. Ermak G. (2013) Modern Science & Future
Medicine (second edition)
38. Wang L (2010). "Pharmacogenomics: a
systems approach" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.n
ih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3894835) . Wiley
Interdisciplinary Reviews: Systems Biology
and Medicine. 2 (1): 3–22.
doi:10.1002/wsbm.42 (https://doi.org/10.1
002%2Fwsbm.42) . PMC 3894835 (https://
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3
894835) . PMID 20836007 (https://pubme
d.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20836007) .
39. Becquemont L (June 2009).
"Pharmacogenomics of adverse drug
reactions: practical applications and
perspectives". Pharmacogenomics. 10 (6):
961–9. doi:10.2217/pgs.09.37 (https://doi.
org/10.2217%2Fpgs.09.37) .
nih.gov/19530963) .
40. "Guidance for Industry Pharmacogenomic
Data Submissions" (https://www.fda.gov/d
ownloads/RegulatoryInformation/Guidance
s/ucm126957.pdf) (PDF). U.S. Food and
Drug Administration. March 2005. Archived
(https://ghostarchive.org/archive/2022100
9/https://www.fda.gov/downloads/Regulat
oryInformation/Guidances/ucm126957.pd
f) (PDF) from the original on October 9,
41. Squassina A, Manchia M, Manolopoulos VG,
Artac M, Lappa-Manakou C, Karkabouna S,
Mitropoulos K, Del Zompo M, Patrinos GP
(August 2010). "Realities and expectations
of pharmacogenomics and personalized
medicine: impact of translating genetic
knowledge into clinical practice".
Pharmacogenomics. 11 (8): 1149–67.
doi:10.2217/pgs.10.97 (https://doi.org/10.
2217%2Fpgs.10.97) . PMID 20712531 (htt
ps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20712531) .
42. Bains W (1987). Genetic Engineering For
Almost Everybody: What Does It Do? What
Will It Do? (https://archive.org/details/gene
ticengineeri00bain/page/99) . Penguin.
p. 99 (https://archive.org/details/geneticen
gineeri00bain/page/99) . ISBN 978-0-14-
013501-5.
43. U.S. Department of State International
Information Programs, "Frequently Asked
Questions About Biotechnology", USIS
Online; available from USinfo.state.gov (htt
p://usinfo.state.gov/ei/economic_issues/bi
otechnology/biotech_faq.html) Archived (h
ttps://web.archive.org/web/200709120655
54/http://usinfo.state.gov/ei/economic_iss
ues/biotechnology/biotech_faq.html)
September 12, 2007, at the Wayback
Machine, accessed September 13, 2007.
Cf. Feldbaum C (February 2002).
"Biotechnology. Some history should be
repeated". Science. 295 (5557): 975.
doi:10.1126/science.1069614 (https://doi.
org/10.1126%2Fscience.1069614) .
nih.gov/11834802) . S2CID 32595222 (http
5222) .
44. "What is genetic testing? – Genetics Home
Reference" (https://web.archive.org/web/2
0060529002711/http://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/han
dbook/testing/genetictesting) .
Ghr.nlm.nih.gov. May 30, 2011. Archived
from the original (http://www.ghr.nlm.nih.g
ov/handbook/testing/genetictesting) on
May 29, 2006. Retrieved June 7, 2011.
45. "Genetic Testing: MedlinePlus" (https://ww
w.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/genetictesting.
html) . Nlm.nih.gov. Archived (https://web.a
rchive.org/web/20110608142655/http://w
ww.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/genetictestin
g.html) from the original on June 8, 2011.
Retrieved June 7, 2011.
46. "Definitions of Genetic Testing" (https://we
b.archive.org/web/20090204181251/htt
p://eurogentest.org/patient/public_health/i
nfo/public/unit3/DefinitionsGeneticTesting-
3rdDraf18Jan07.xhtml) . Definitions of
Genetic Testing (Jorge Sequeiros and
Bárbara Guimarães). EuroGentest Network
of Excellence Project. September 11, 2008.
Archived from the original (http://www.euro
gentest.org/patient/public_health/info/publ
ic/unit3/DefinitionsGeneticTesting-3rdDraf
18Jan07.xhtml) on February 4, 2009.
Retrieved August 10, 2008.
47. Genetically Altered Potato Ok'd For Crops
(https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=
A0YyAAAAIBAJ&sjid=jOYFAAAAIBAJ&pg=
4631,1776980&hl=) Archived (https://web.
archive.org/web/20220731032615/https://
news.google.com/newspapers?id=A0YyAA
AAIBAJ&sjid=jOYFAAAAIBAJ&pg=4631,17
76980&hl=) July 31, 2022, at the Wayback
Machine Lawrence Journal-World – May 6,
1995
48. National Academy of Sciences (2001).
Transgenic Plants and World Agriculture.
Washington: National Academy Press.
49. Paarlburg R (January 2011). "Drought
Tolerant GMO Maize in Africa, Anticipating
Regulatory Hurdles" (https://web.archive.or
g/web/20141222081325/http://www.ilsi.or
g/Documents/2011%20AM%20Presentatio
ns/CERAPaarlberg.pdf) (PDF).
International Life Sciences Institute.
Archived from the original (http://www.ilsi.
org/Documents/2011%20AM%20Presentat
ions/CERAPaarlberg.pdf) (PDF) on
December 22, 2014. Retrieved April 25,
2011.
50. Carpenter J. & Gianessi L. (1999).
Herbicide tolerant soybeans: Why growers
are adopting Roundup Ready varieties (htt
p://agbioforum.org/v2n2/v2n2a02-carpent
er.htm) Archived (https://web.archive.org/
web/20121119133446/http://www.agbiofo
rum.org/v2n2/v2n2a02-carpenter.htm)
November 19, 2012, at the Wayback
Machine. AgBioForum, 2(2), 65–72.
51. Haroldsen VM, Paulino G, Chi-ham C,
Bennett AB (2012). "Research and adoption
of biotechnology strategies could improve
California fruit and nut crops" (https://doi.or
g/10.3733%2Fca.v066n02p62) . California
Agriculture. 66 (2): 62–69.
doi:10.3733/ca.v066n02p62 (https://doi.or
g/10.3733%2Fca.v066n02p62) .
52. About Golden Rice (http://www.irri.org/inde
x.php?option=com_k2&view=item&layout=i
tem&id=10202&Itemid=100571&lang=en)
21102112216/http://www.irri.org/index.ph
p?option=com_k2&view=item&layout=item
&id=10202&Itemid=100571&lang=en)
November 2, 2012, at the Wayback
Machine. Irri.org. Retrieved on March 20,
2013.
53. Gali Weinreb and Koby Yeshayahou for
Globes May 2, 2012. FDA approves Protalix
Gaucher treatment (http://www.globes.co.i
l/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=100074
5325&fid=1725) Archived (https://web.arc
hive.org/web/20130529030847/http://ww
w.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.as
p?did=1000745325&fid=1725) May 29,
2013, at the Wayback Machine
54. Carrington, Damien (January 19, 2012) GM
microbe breakthrough paves way for large-
scale seaweed farming for biofuels (http
s://www.theguardian.com/environment/20
12/jan/19/gm-microbe-seaweed-biofuels)
70511010433/https://www.theguardian.co
m/environment/2012/jan/19/gm-microbe-
seaweed-biofuels) May 11, 2017, at the
Wayback Machine The Guardian. Retrieved
March 12, 2012
55. van Beilen JB, Poirier Y (May 2008).
"Production of renewable polymers from
crop plants" (https://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1
365-313X.2008.03431.x) . The Plant
Journal. 54 (4): 684–701.
doi:10.1111/j.1365-313X.2008.03431.x (htt
ps://doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1365-313X.2008.
03431.x) . PMID 18476872 (https://pubme
d.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18476872) .
lar.org/CorpusID:25954199) .
56. Strange, Amy (September 20, 2011)
Scientists engineer plants to eat toxic
pollution (http://www.irishtimes.com/news
paper/ireland/2011/0913/122430402746
3.html) Archived (https://web.archive.org/
web/20110913133755/http://www.irishtim
es.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0913/12
24304027463.html) September 13, 2011,
at the Wayback Machine The Irish Times.
Retrieved September 20, 2011
57. Diaz E, ed. (2008). Microbial
Biodegradation: Genomics and Molecular
Biology (https://archive.org/details/microbi
albiodegr0000unse) . Caister Academic
Press. ISBN 978-1-904455-17-2.
58. James C (2011). "ISAAA Brief 43, Global
Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM
Crops: 2011" (http://www.isaaa.org/resour
ces/publications/briefs/43/executivesumm
ary/default.asp) . ISAAA Briefs. Ithaca,
New York: International Service for the
Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications
(ISAAA). Archived (https://web.archive.org/
web/20120210025832/http://www.isaaa.o
rg/resources/publications/briefs/43/execu
tivesummary/default.asp) from the
original on February 10, 2012. Retrieved
June 2, 2012.
59. GM Science Review First Report (http://ww
w.bis.gov.uk/files/file15655.pdf) Archived
(https://web.archive.org/web/2013101610
0707/http://www.bis.gov.uk/files/file1565
5.pdf) October 16, 2013, at the Wayback
Machine, Prepared by the UK GM Science
Review panel (July 2003). Chairman
Professor Sir David King, Chief Scientific
Advisor to the UK Government, P 9
60. James C (1996). "Global Review of the
Field Testing and Commercialization of
Transgenic Plants: 1986 to 1995" (http://w
ww.isaaa.org/kc/Publications/pdfs/isaaabr
iefs/Briefs%201.pdf) (PDF). The
International Service for the Acquisition of
Agri-biotech Applications. Archived (http
s://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/htt
p://www.isaaa.org/kc/Publications/pdfs/is
aaabriefs/Briefs%201.pdf) (PDF) from the
original on October 9, 2022. Retrieved
July 17, 2010.
61. "Consumer Q&A" (https://www.fda.gov/ani
malveterinary/developmentapprovalproces
s/geneticengineering/geneticallyengineere
danimals/ucm113672.htm) . Fda.gov.
March 6, 2009. Archived (https://web.archiv
e.org/web/20130110170104/http://www.f
da.gov/animalveterinary/developmentappr
ovalprocess/geneticengineering/geneticall
yengineeredanimals/ucm113672.htm)
from the original on January 10, 2013.
62. "AquAdvantage Salmon" (https://www.fda.g
ov/animalveterinary/developmentapproval
process/geneticengineering/geneticallyeng
ineeredanimals/ucm280853.htm) . FDA.
21231004929/http://www.fda.gov/AnimalV
eterinary/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/G
eneticEngineering/GeneticallyEngineeredA
nimals/ucm280853.htm) from the original
on December 31, 2012. Retrieved July 20,
2018.
63. Nicolia, Alessandro; Manzo, Alberto;
Veronesi, Fabio; Rosellini, Daniele (2013).
"An overview of the last 10 years of
genetically engineered crop safety
research" (https://www.pps.net/cms/lib/OR
01913224/Centricity/Domain/3337/peer%
20reviewed%20meta%20study%20on%20G
MOs%20copy.pdf) (PDF). Critical Reviews
in Biotechnology. 34 (1): 77–88.
doi:10.3109/07388551.2013.823595 (http
s://doi.org/10.3109%2F07388551.2013.82
3595) . PMID 24041244 (https://pubmed.n
cbi.nlm.nih.gov/24041244) .
S2CID 9836802 (https://api.semanticschol
ar.org/CorpusID:9836802) . Archived (http
ps://www.pps.net/cms/lib/OR01913224/C
entricity/Domain/3337/peer%20reviewed%
20meta%20study%20on%20GMOs%20cop
y.pdf) (PDF) from the original on October
9, 2022. "We have reviewed the scientific
literature on GE crop safety for the last 10
years that catches the scientific consensus
matured since GE plants became widely
cultivated worldwide, and we can conclude
that the scientific research conducted so
far has not detected any significant hazard
directly connected with the use of GM
crops.
The literature about Biodiversity and the GE

food/feed consumption has sometimes
resulted in animated debate regarding the
suitability of the experimental designs, the
choice of the statistical methods or the
public accessibility of data. Such debate,
even if positive and part of the natural
process of review by the scientific
community, has frequently been distorted
by the media and often used politically and
inappropriately in anti-GE crops
campaigns."
64. "State of Food and Agriculture 2003–2004.
Agricultural Biotechnology: Meeting the
Needs of the Poor. Health and
environmental impacts of transgenic crops"
(http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/Y5160E/y
5160e10.htm#P3_1651The) . Food and
Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations. Archived (https://web.archive.org/
web/20190109114119/http://www.fao.or
g/docrep/006/Y5160E/y5160e10.htm#P3_
1651The) from the original on January 9,
2019. Retrieved August 30, 2019. "Currently
available transgenic crops and foods
derived from them have been judged safe
to eat and the methods used to test their
safety have been deemed appropriate.
These conclusions represent the
consensus of the scientific evidence
surveyed by the ICSU (2003) and they are
consistent with the views of the World
Health Organization (WHO, 2002). These
foods have been assessed for increased
risks to human health by several national
regulatory authorities (inter alia, Argentina,
Brazil, Canada, China, the United Kingdom
and the United States) using their national
food safety procedures (ICSU). To date no
verifiable untoward toxic or nutritionally
deleterious effects resulting from the
consumption of foods derived from
genetically modified crops have been
discovered anywhere in the world (GM
Science Review Panel). Many millions of
people have consumed foods derived from
GM plants – mainly maize, soybean and
oilseed rape – without any observed
adverse effects (ICSU)."
65. Ronald, Pamela (May 1, 2011). "Plant
Genetics, Sustainable Agriculture and
Global Food Security" (https://www.ncbi.nl
m.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3120150) .
Genetics. 188 (1): 11–20.
doi:10.1534/genetics.111.128553 (https://
doi.org/10.1534%2Fgenetics.111.12855
3) . PMC 3120150 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.ni
h.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3120150) .
nih.gov/21546547) . "There is broad
scientific consensus that genetically
engineered crops currently on the market
are safe to eat. After 14 years of cultivation
and a cumulative total of 2 billion acres
planted, no adverse health or
environmental effects have resulted from
commercialization of genetically
engineered crops (Board on Agriculture and
Natural Resources, Committee on
Environmental Impacts Associated with
Commercialization of Transgenic Plants,
National Research Council and Division on
Earth and Life Studies 2002). Both the U.S.
National Research Council and the Joint
Research Centre (the European Union's
scientific and technical research laboratory
and an integral part of the European
Commission) have concluded that there is
a comprehensive body of knowledge that
adequately addresses the food safety issue
of genetically engineered crops
(Committee on Identifying and Assessing
Unintended Effects of Genetically
Engineered Foods on Human Health and
National Research Council 2004; European
Commission Joint Research Centre 2008).
These and other recent reports conclude
that the processes of genetic engineering
and conventional breeding are no different
in terms of unintended consequences to
human health and the environment
(European Commission Directorate-General
for Research and Innovation 2010)."
66. But see also:
Domingo, José L.; Bordonaba, Jordi Giné

(2011). "A literature review on the safety
assessment of genetically modified plants"
(http://gaiapresse.ca/images/nouvelles/28
563.pdf) (PDF). Environment International.
37 (4): 734–742.
doi:10.1016/j.envint.2011.01.003 (https://d
oi.org/10.1016%2Fj.envint.2011.01.003) .
nih.gov/21296423) . Archived (https://ghos
tarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://gaia
presse.ca/images/nouvelles/28563.pdf)
(PDF) from the original on October 9, 2022.
"In spite of this, the number of studies
specifically focused on safety assessment
of GM plants is still limited. However, it is
important to remark that for the first time, a
certain equilibrium in the number of
research groups suggesting, on the basis of
their studies, that a number of varieties of
GM products (mainly maize and soybeans)
are as safe and nutritious as the respective
conventional non-GM plant, and those
raising still serious concerns, was
observed. Moreover, it is worth mentioning
that most of the studies demonstrating that
GM foods are as nutritional and safe as
those obtained by conventional breeding,
have been performed by biotechnology
companies or associates, which are also
responsible of commercializing these GM
plants. Anyhow, this represents a notable
advance in comparison with the lack of
studies published in recent years in
scientific journals by those companies."
Krimsky, Sheldon (2015). "An Illusory

Consensus behind GMO Health
Assessment". Science, Technology, &
Human Values. 40 (6): 883–914.
doi:10.1177/0162243915598381 (https://d
oi.org/10.1177%2F0162243915598381) .
lar.org/CorpusID:40855100) . "I began this
article with the testimonials from
respected scientists that there is literally no
scientific controversy over the health
effects of GMOs. My investigation into the
scientific literature tells another story."
And contrast:
Panchin, Alexander Y.; Tuzhikov, Alexander
I. (January 14, 2016). "Published GMO
studies find no evidence of harm when
corrected for multiple comparisons".
Critical Reviews in Biotechnology. 37 (2):
213–217.
doi:10.3109/07388551.2015.1130684 (htt
ps://doi.org/10.3109%2F07388551.2015.1
130684) . ISSN 0738-8551 (https://www.w
orldcat.org/issn/0738-8551) .
nih.gov/26767435) . S2CID 11786594 (http
6594) . "Here, we show that a number of
articles some of which have strongly and
negatively influenced the public opinion on
GM crops and even provoked political
actions, such as GMO embargo, share
common flaws in the statistical evaluation
of the data. Having accounted for these
flaws, we conclude that the data presented
in these articles does not provide any
substantial evidence of GMO harm.
The presented articles suggesting possible

harm of GMOs received high public
attention. However, despite their claims,
they actually weaken the evidence for the
harm and lack of substantial equivalency of
studied GMOs. We emphasize that with
over 1783 published articles on GMOs over
the last 10 years it is expected that some
of them should have reported undesired
differences between GMOs and
conventional crops even if no such
differences exist in reality."
and
Yang, Y.T.; Chen, B. (2016). "Governing
GMOs in the USA: science, law and public
health". Journal of the Science of Food and
Agriculture. 96 (4): 1851–1855.
Bibcode:2016JSFA...96.1851Y (https://ui.a
dsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016JSFA...96.185
1Y) . doi:10.1002/jsfa.7523 (https://doi.or
g/10.1002%2Fjsfa.7523) . PMID 26536836
(https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2653683
6) . "It is therefore not surprising that
efforts to require labeling and to ban GMOs
have been a growing political issue in the
USA (citing Domingo and Bordonaba,
2011). Overall, a broad scientific consensus
holds that currently marketed GM food
poses no greater risk than conventional
food... Major national and international
science and medical associations have
stated that no adverse human health
effects related to GMO food have been
reported or substantiated in peer-reviewed
literature to date.
Despite various concerns, today, the

American Association for the Advancement
of Science, the World Health Organization,
and many independent international
science organizations agree that GMOs are
just as safe as other foods. Compared with
conventional breeding techniques, genetic
engineering is far more precise and, in
most cases, less likely to create an
unexpected outcome."
67. "Statement by the AAAS Board of Directors
On Labeling of Genetically Modified Foods"
(http://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/A
AAS_GM_statement.pdf) (PDF). American
Association for the Advancement of
Science. October 20, 2012. Archived (http
p://www.aaas.org/sites/default/files/AAAS
_GM_statement.pdf) (PDF) from the
August 30, 2019. "The EU, for example, has
invested more than €300 million in
research on the biosafety of GMOs. Its
recent report states: "The main conclusion
to be drawn from the efforts of more than
130 research projects, covering a period of
more than 25 years of research and
involving more than 500 independent
research groups, is that biotechnology, and
in particular GMOs, are not per se more
risky than e.g. conventional plant breeding
technologies." The World Health
Organization, the American Medical
Association, the U.S. National Academy of
Sciences, the British Royal Society, and
every other respected organization that has
examined the evidence has come to the
same conclusion: consuming foods
containing ingredients derived from GM
crops is no riskier than consuming the
same foods containing ingredients from
crop plants modified by conventional plant
improvement techniques."
Pinholster, Ginger (October 25, 2012).
"AAAS Board of Directors: Legally
Mandating GM Food Labels Could "Mislead
and Falsely Alarm Consumers" " (https://w
ww.aaas.org/sites/default/files/AAAS_GM_
statement.pdf) (PDF). American
Science. Archived (https://ghostarchive.or
g/archive/20221009/https://www.aaas.or
g/sites/default/files/AAAS_GM_statement.
pdf) (PDF) from the original on October 9,
68. European Commission. Directorate-General
for Research (2010). A decade of EU-
funded GMO research (2001–2010) (http://
ec.europa.eu/research/biosociety/pdf/a_de
cade_of_eu-funded_gmo_research.pdf)
(PDF). Directorate-General for Research and
Innovation. Biotechnologies, Agriculture,
Food. European Commission, European
Union. doi:10.2777/97784 (https://doi.org/
10.2777%2F97784) . ISBN 978-92-79-
16344-9. Archived (https://ghostarchive.or
g/archive/20221009/http://ec.europa.eu/re
search/biosociety/pdf/a_decade_of_eu-fun
ded_gmo_research.pdf) (PDF) from the
August 30, 2019.
69. "AMA Report on Genetically Modified Crops
and Foods" (https://www.isaaa.org/kc/Publ
ications/htm/articles/Position/ama.htm) .
American Medical Association. January
2001. Archived (https://web.archive.org/we
b/20160402230422/http://www.isaaa.org/
kc/Publications/htm/articles/Position/am
a.htm) from the original on April 2, 2016.
Retrieved August 30, 2019 – via
International Service for the Acquisition of
Agri-biotech Applications."Report 2 of the
Council on Science and Public Health (A-
12): Labeling of Bioengineered Foods" (http
s://web.archive.org/web/2012090702303
9/http://www.ama-assn.org/resources/do
c/csaph/a12-csaph2-bioengineeredfoods.p
df) (PDF). American Medical Association.
2012. Archived from the original (http://ww
w.ama-assn.org/resources/doc/csaph/a12-
csaph2-bioengineeredfoods.pdf) (PDF) on
September 7, 2012. Retrieved August 30,
2019.
70. "Restrictions on Genetically Modified
Organisms: United States. Public and
Scholarly Opinion" (http://www.loc.gov/la
w/help/restrictions-on-gmos/usa.php#Opin
ion) . Library of Congress. June 30, 2015.
91230064111/http://www.loc.gov/law/hel
p/restrictions-on-gmos/usa.php#Opinion)
from the original on December 30, 2019.
Retrieved August 30, 2019. "Several
scientific organizations in the US have
issued studies or statements regarding the
safety of GMOs indicating that there is no
evidence that GMOs present unique safety
risks compared to conventionally bred
products. These include the National
Research Council, the American
Science, and the American Medical
Association. Groups in the US opposed to
GMOs include some environmental
organizations, organic farming
organizations, and consumer
organizations. A substantial number of
legal academics have criticized the US's
approach to regulating GMOs."
71. National Academies Of Sciences,
Engineering; Division on Earth Life Studies;
Board on Agriculture Natural Resources;
Committee on Genetically Engineered
Crops: Past Experience Future Prospects
(2016). Genetically Engineered Crops:
Experiences and Prospects (http://www.na
p.edu/read/23395/chapter/7#149) . The
National Academies of Sciences,
Engineering, and Medicine (US). p. 149.
doi:10.17226/23395 (https://doi.org/10.17
226%2F23395) . ISBN 978-0-309-43738-7.
nih.gov/28230933) . Archived (https://web.
archive.org/web/20211116025318/https://
www.nap.edu/read/23395/chapter/7#14
9) from the original on November 16,
2021. Retrieved August 30, 2019. "Overall
finding on purported adverse effects on
human health of foods derived from GE
crops: On the basis of detailed examination
of comparisons of currently
commercialized GE with non-GE foods in
compositional analysis, acute and chronic
animal toxicity tests, long-term data on
health of livestock fed GE foods, and
human epidemiological data, the
committee found no differences that
implicate a higher risk to human health
from GE foods than from their non-GE
counterparts."
72. "Frequently asked questions on genetically
modified foods" (https://www.who.int/food
safety/areas_work/food-technology/faq-ge
netically-modified-food/en/) . World Health
Organization. Archived (https://web.archiv
e.org/web/20201104021737/https://www.
who.int/foodsafety/areas_work/food-techn
ology/faq-genetically-modified-food/en/)
from the original on November 4, 2020.
Retrieved August 30, 2019. "Different GM
organisms include different genes inserted
in different ways. This means that
individual GM foods and their safety should
be assessed on a case-by-case basis and
that it is not possible to make general
statements on the safety of all GM foods.
GM foods currently available on the
international market have passed safety
assessments and are not likely to present
risks for human health. In addition, no
effects on human health have been shown
as a result of the consumption of such
foods by the general population in the
countries where they have been approved.
Continuous application of safety
assessments based on the Codex
Alimentarius principles and, where
appropriate, adequate post market
monitoring, should form the basis for
ensuring the safety of GM foods."
73. Haslberger, Alexander G. (2003). "Codex
guidelines for GM foods include the
analysis of unintended effects". Nature
Biotechnology. 21 (7): 739–741.
doi:10.1038/nbt0703-739 (https://doi.org/
10.1038%2Fnbt0703-739) .
nih.gov/12833088) . S2CID 2533628 (http
628) . "These principles dictate a case-by-
case premarket assessment that includes
an evaluation of both direct and unintended
effects."
74. Some medical organizations, including the
British Medical Association, advocate
further caution based upon the
precautionary principle:
"Genetically modified foods and health: a

second interim statement" (http://www.arg
enbio.org/adc/uploads/pdf/bma.pdf)
(PDF). British Medical Association. March
2004. Archived (https://ghostarchive.org/ar
chive/20221009/http://www.argenbio.org/
adc/uploads/pdf/bma.pdf) (PDF) from the
August 30, 2019. "In our view, the potential
for GM foods to cause harmful health
effects is very small and many of the
concerns expressed apply with equal
vigour to conventionally derived foods.
However, safety concerns cannot, as yet, be
dismissed completely on the basis of
information currently available.
When seeking to optimise the balance

between benefits and risks, it is prudent to
err on the side of caution and, above all,
learn from accumulating knowledge and
experience. Any new technology such as
genetic modification must be examined for
possible benefits and risks to human health
and the environment. As with all novel
foods, safety assessments in relation to
GM foods must be made on a case-by-case
basis.
Members of the GM jury project were
briefed on various aspects of genetic
modification by a diverse group of
acknowledged experts in the relevant
subjects. The GM jury reached the
conclusion that the sale of GM foods
currently available should be halted and the
moratorium on commercial growth of GM
crops should be continued. These
conclusions were based on the
precautionary principle and lack of
evidence of any benefit. The Jury
expressed concern over the impact of GM
crops on farming, the environment, food
safety and other potential health effects.
The Royal Society review (2002) concluded

that the risks to human health associated
with the use of specific viral DNA
sequences in GM plants are negligible, and
while calling for caution in the introduction
of potential allergens into food crops,
stressed the absence of evidence that
commercially available GM foods cause
clinical allergic manifestations. The BMA
shares the view that there is no robust
evidence to prove that GM foods are unsafe
but we endorse the call for further research
and surveillance to provide convincing
evidence of safety and benefit."
75. Funk, Cary; Rainie, Lee (January 29, 2015).
"Public and Scientists' Views on Science
and Society" (http://www.pewinternet.org/2
015/01/29/public-and-scientists-views-on-
science-and-society/) . Pew Research
Center. Archived (https://web.archive.org/w
eb/20190109232405/http://www.pewinter
net.org/2015/01/29/public-and-scientists-v
iews-on-science-and-society/) from the
original on January 9, 2019. Retrieved
August 30, 2019. "The largest differences
between the public and the AAAS scientists
are found in beliefs about the safety of
eating genetically modified (GM) foods.
Nearly nine-in-ten (88%) scientists say it is
generally safe to eat GM foods compared
with 37% of the general public, a difference
of 51 percentage points."
76. Marris, Claire (2001). "Public views on
GMOs: deconstructing the myths" (https://
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1
083956) . EMBO Reports. 2 (7): 545–548.
doi:10.1093/embo-reports/kve142 (https://
doi.org/10.1093%2Fembo-reports%2Fkve1
42) . PMC 1083956 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1083956) .
nih.gov/11463731) .
77. Final Report of the PABE research project
(December 2001). "Public Perceptions of
Agricultural Biotechnologies in Europe" (htt
ps://web.archive.org/web/2017052504282
2/http://csec.lancs.ac.uk/archive/pabe/doc
s/pabe_finalreport.doc) . Commission of
European Communities. Archived from the
original (http://csec.lancs.ac.uk/archive/pa
be/docs/pabe_finalreport.doc) on May 25,
78. Scott, Sydney E.; Inbar, Yoel; Rozin, Paul
(2016). "Evidence for Absolute Moral
Opposition to Genetically Modified Food in
the United States" (http://yoelinbar.net/pap
ers/gmo_absolute.pdf) (PDF).
Perspectives on Psychological Science. 11
(3): 315–324.
doi:10.1177/1745691615621275 (https://d
oi.org/10.1177%2F1745691615621275) .
nih.gov/27217243) . S2CID 261060 (http
60) . Archived (https://ghostarchive.org/arc
hive/20221009/http://yoelinbar.net/paper
s/gmo_absolute.pdf) (PDF) from the
original on October 9, 2022.
79. "Restrictions on Genetically Modified
Organisms" (http://www.loc.gov/law/help/r
estrictions-on-gmos/) . Library of
Congress. June 9, 2015. Archived (https://
web.archive.org/web/20190403002624/htt
p://www.loc.gov/law/help/restrictions-on-g
mos/) from the original on April 3, 2019.
80. Bashshur, Ramona (February 2013). "FDA
and Regulation of GMOs" (https://web.archi
ve.org/web/20180621044554/https://ww
w.americanbar.org/content/newsletter/pub
lications/aba_health_esource_home/aba_h
ealth_law_esource_1302_bashshur.html) .
American Bar Association. Archived from
the original (http://www.americanbar.org/c
ontent/newsletter/publications/aba_health
_esource_home/aba_health_law_esource_1
302_bashshur.html) on June 21, 2018.
81. Sifferlin, Alexandra (October 3, 2015). "Over
Half of E.U. Countries Are Opting Out of
GMOs" (http://time.com/4060476/eu-gmo-
crops-european-union-opt-out/) . Time.
82. Lynch, Diahanna; Vogel, David (April 5,
2001). "The Regulation of GMOs in Europe
and the United States: A Case-Study of
Contemporary European Regulatory
Politics" (https://web.archive.org/web/201
60929200540/http://www.cfr.org/agricultu
ral-policy/regulation-gmos-europe-united-st
ates-case-study-contemporary-european-re
gulatory-politics/p8688) . Council on
Foreign Relations. Archived from the
original (http://www.cfr.org/agricultural-poli
cy/regulation-gmos-europe-united-states-c
ase-study-contemporary-european-regulato
ry-politics/p8688) on September 29, 2016.
83. Pollack A (April 13, 2010). "Study Says
Overuse Threatens Gains From Modified
Crops" (https://www.nytimes.com/2010/0
4/14/business/energy-environment/14cro
p.html) . The New York Times. Archived (ht
tps://web.archive.org/web/201711210759
39/http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/b
usiness/energy-environment/14crop.html)
from the original on November 21, 2017.
Retrieved February 24, 2017.
84. Brookes, Graham; Barfoot, Peter (May 8,
2017). "Farm income and production
impacts of using GM crop technology
1996–2015" (https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/2
1645698.2017.1317919) . GM Crops &
Food. 8 (3): 156–193.
doi:10.1080/21645698.2017.1317919 (htt
ps://doi.org/10.1080%2F21645698.2017.1
317919) . ISSN 2164-5698 (https://www.w
orldcat.org/issn/2164-5698) .
nih.gov/28481684) .
85. Tyczewska, Agata; Twardowski, Tomasz;
Woźniak-Gientka, Ewa (January 2023).
"Agricultural biotechnology for sustainable
food security" (https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.tibtech.2022.12.013) . Trends in
Biotechnology. 41 (3): 331–341.
doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2022.12.013 (https://
doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.tibtech.2022.12.01
3) . ISSN 0167-7799 (https://www.worldca
t.org/issn/0167-7799) . PMC 9881846 (htt
ps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P
MC9881846) . PMID 36710131 (https://pu
bmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36710131) .
S2CID 256304868 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:256304868) .
86. Sairam, R. V.; Prakash, C. S. (July 2005).
"OBPC Symposium: maize 2004 & beyond
—Can agricultural biotechnology contribute
to global food security?" (https://dx.doi.or
g/10.1079/ivp2005663) . In Vitro Cellular &
Developmental Biology - Plant. 41 (4):
424–430. doi:10.1079/ivp2005663 (http
s://doi.org/10.1079%2Fivp2005663) .
g/issn/1054-5476) . S2CID 25855065 (http
5065) .
87. Kumar, Pankaj; Kumar, Arun; Dhiman,
Karuna; Srivastava, Dinesh Kumar (2021),
"Recent Progress in Cereals Biofortification
to Alleviate Malnutrition in India: An
Overview" (https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-
981-16-2339-4_11) , Agricultural
Biotechnology: Latest Research and Trends,
Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore,
pp. 253–280, doi:10.1007/978-981-16-
2339-4_11 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2F978
-981-16-2339-4_11) , ISBN 978-981-16-
2338-7, S2CID 245834290 (https://api.sem
anticscholar.org/CorpusID:245834290) ,
retrieved February 14, 2023
88. Industrial Biotechnology and Biomass
Utilisation (http://www.unido.org/fileadmi
n/media/documents/pdf/Energy_Environm
ent/Industrial_biotech_and_biomass_utilisa
tion_EGM_report.pdf) Archived (https://we
b.archive.org/web/20130405175248/htt
p://www.unido.org/fileadmin/media/docu
ments/pdf/Energy_Environment/Industrial_
biotech_and_biomass_utilisation_EGM_rep
ort.pdf) April 5, 2013, at the Wayback
Machine
89. "Industrial biotechnology, A powerful,
innovative technology to mitigate climate
change" (https://web.archive.org/web/201
40102191501/http://www.innovationeu.or
g/news/innovation-eu-vol2-1/0262-industri
al-biotechnology.html) . Archived from the
original (http://www.innovationeu.org/new
s/innovation-eu-vol2-1/0262-industrial-biot
echnology.html) on January 2, 2014.
Retrieved January 1, 2014.
90. Clarke, Lionel; Kitney, Richard (February 28,
2020). "Developing synthetic biology for
industrial biotechnology applications" (http
C7054743) . Biochemical Society
Transactions. 48 (1): 113–122.
doi:10.1042/BST20190349 (https://doi.or
g/10.1042%2FBST20190349) . ISSN 0300-
-5127) . PMC 7054743 (https://www.ncbi.n
lm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7054743) .
nih.gov/32077472) .
91. McCarty, Nicholas S.; Ledesma-Amaro,
Rodrigo (February 2019). "Synthetic Biology
Tools to Engineer Microbial Communities
for Biotechnology" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.ni
h.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6340809) . Trends
in Biotechnology. 37 (2): 181–197.
doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2018.11.002 (https://
doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.tibtech.2018.11.00
2) . ISSN 0167-7799 (https://www.worldca
t.org/issn/0167-7799) . PMC 6340809 (htt
MC6340809) . PMID 30497870 (https://pu
bmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30497870) .
92. Zhou, Kang; Qiao, Kangjian; Edgar, Steven;
Stephanopoulos, Gregory (April 2015).
"Distributing a metabolic pathway among a
microbial consortium enhances production
of natural products" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4867547) .
Nature Biotechnology. 33 (4): 377–383.
doi:10.1038/nbt.3095 (https://doi.org/10.1
038%2Fnbt.3095) . ISSN 1087-0156 (http
s://www.worldcat.org/issn/1087-0156) .
nih.gov/25558867) .
93. Wu, Meng-Ying; Sung, Li-Yu; Li, Hung;
Huang, Chun-Hung; Hu, Yu-Chen (December
15, 2017). "Combining CRISPR and CRISPRi
Systems for Metabolic Engineering of E.
coli and 1,4-BDO Biosynthesis". ACS
Synthetic Biology. 6 (12): 2350–2361.
doi:10.1021/acssynbio.7b00251 (https://d
oi.org/10.1021%2Facssynbio.7b00251) .
g/issn/2161-5063) . PMID 28854333 (http
s://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28854333) .
94. Pakshirajan, Kannan; Rene, Eldon R.;
Ramesh, Aiyagari (2014). "Biotechnology in
environmental monitoring and pollution
abatement" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
pmc/articles/PMC4017724) . BioMed
Research International. 2014: 235472.
doi:10.1155/2014/235472 (https://doi.org/
10.1155%2F2014%2F235472) . ISSN 2314-
-6141) . PMC 4017724 (https://www.ncbi.n
lm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4017724) .
nih.gov/24864232) .
95. Danso, Dominik; Chow, Jennifer; Streit,
Wolfgang R. (October 1, 2019). "Plastics:
Environmental and Biotechnological
Perspectives on Microbial Degradation" (htt
MC6752018) . Applied and Environmental
Microbiology. 85 (19).
Bibcode:2019ApEnM..85E1095D (https://u
i.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApEnM..85
E1095D) . doi:10.1128/AEM.01095-19 (htt
ps://doi.org/10.1128%2FAEM.01095-19) .
g/issn/1098-5336) . PMC 6752018 (http
C6752018) . PMID 31324632 (https://pub
med.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31324632) .
96. Daniel A. Vallero, Environmental
Biotechnology: A Biosystems Approach,
Academic Press, Amsterdam, NV;
ISBN 978-0-12-375089-1; 2010.
97. Gaskell G, Bauer MW, Durant J, Allum NC
(July 1999). "Worlds apart? The reception
of genetically modified foods in Europe and
the U.S". Science. 285 (5426): 384–7.
doi:10.1126/science.285.5426.384 (http
s://doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.285.5426.3
84) . PMID 10411496 (https://pubmed.ncb
i.nlm.nih.gov/10411496) . S2CID 5131870
(https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:
5131870) .
98. "The History and Future of GM Potatoes" (ht
tps://web.archive.org/web/201310120338
05/http://www.potatopro.com/newsletters/
20100310.htm) . Potato Pro. March 10,
2010. Archived from the original (https://w
ww.potatopro.com/newsletters/20100310.
htm) on October 12, 2013. Retrieved
January 1, 2014.
99. Wesseler J, Kalaitzandonakes N (2011).
"Present and Future EU GMO policy". In
Oskam A, Meesters G, Silvis H (eds.). EU
Policy for Agriculture, Food and Rural Areas
(2nd ed.). Wageningen: Wageningen
Academic Publishers. pp. 23–332.
100. Beckmann VC, Soregaroli J, Wesseler J
(2011). "Coexistence of genetically
modified (GM) and non-modified (non GM)
crops: Are the two main property rights
regimes equivalent with respect to the
coexistence value?". In Carter C, Moschini
G, Sheldon I (eds.). Genetically modified
food and global welfare. Frontiers of
Economics and Globalization Series.
Vol. 10. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group
Publishing. pp. 201–224.
101. "Biotechnology Predoctoral Training
Program" (https://web.archive.org/web/20
141028215034/http://www.nigms.nih.gov/
Training/InstPredoc/Pages/PredocDesc-Bi
otechnology.aspx) . National Institute of
General Medical Sciences. December 18,
2013. Archived from the original (http://ww
w.nigms.nih.gov/Training/InstPredoc/Page
s/PredocDesc-Biotechnology.aspx) on
October 28, 2014. Retrieved October 28,
2014.
External links
What is Biotechnology? Wikimedia

Commons has
– A curated collection
media related
of resources about the to
Biotechnology.
people, places and At Wikiversity,
you can learn
technologies that have
more and
enabled biotechnology teach others
about
(http://www.whatisbiot
Biotechnology
echnology.org/) at the
Department of
Retrieved from Biotechnology
"https://en.wikipedia.org/w/ind
ex.php?title=Biotechnology&oldid=1191384865"
This page was last edited on 23 December 2023,

at 06:25 (UTC). •
Content is available under CC BY-SA 4.0 unless
otherwise noted.

Biotechnology - Wikipedia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Biotechnology - Wikipedia

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Biotechnology - Wikipedia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Biotechnology is a multidisciplinary field

The term biotechnology was first used by

Other important techniques used in

The applications of biotechnology are

Biotechnology is a rapidly evolving field

The concept of biotechnology

Biotechnology is the research and

By contrast, bioengineering is generally

Brewing was an early

Although not normally what first comes to

These processes also were included in

Before the time of Charles Darwin's work

For thousands of years, humans have used

In the early twentieth century scientists

Biotechnology has also led to the

The field of modern biotechnology is

By the mid-1980s, other BioFETs had been

A factor influencing the biotechnology

Rising demand for biofuels is expected to

Biotechnology has applications in four

For example, one application of

Bioinformatics (also called "gold

In medicine, modern biotechnology has

Computer-generated image of insulin

Biotechnology has contributed to the

Genetic testing allows the genetic

Genetically modified crops ("GM crops", or

Examples in food crops include resistance

Farmers have widely adopted GM

Genetically modified foods are foods

Industrial biotechnology (known mainly in

Synthetic biology is considered one of the

Environmental biotechnology includes

The regulation of genetic engineering

The EUginius (European GMO Initiative for

In 1988, after prompting from the United

References and notes

The literature about Biodiversity and the GE

Domingo, José L.; Bordonaba, Jordi Giné

Krimsky, Sheldon (2015). "An Illusory

The presented articles suggesting possible

Despite various concerns, today, the

"Genetically modified foods and health: a

When seeking to optimise the balance

The Royal Society review (2002) concluded

What is Biotechnology? Wikimedia

This page was last edited on 23 December 2023,

You might also like