Peter Borst wrote:

> Here are examples of plant and animal genomics projects under way at
> Purdue University:
>
> Purdue researchers have created more than 300,000 genetically altered
> plants, and scientists at other institutions have created hundreds of
> thousands of additional genetically altered plants.

>"We have developed
> specific gene markers that predict the probability of queen bees
> having the African version of stinging genes so it will be easier for
> breeders to avoid using them," Hunt says. "Now that we have the
> markers we can selectively breed for gentle bees."

Am I missing something here? The program was to map the bees genes. The
issue was the creation of a gm bee from that mapping.

But all the citing of GMO are for plants and that has been going on for
quite some time at most all ag colleges. As far as I can see the recent
mapping is for identification of sites that can be linked to
characteristics so that bees can be better selected for or not selected
for those characteristics.

So all that is going on is a very large step above what we all do to
some degree or other, which is select bees for what we want. The only
difference here is the researchers can see which genes are responsible
and can eliminate much of the trial and error we have to work through.
They are not talking about genetic modification but genetic selection, a
major difference.

There can be an issue about GMO, but that is not what is happening to
bees, according to this post. If we are concerned about what might
happen because someone somewhere might use science for evil, then it is
more a matter of ethics. Good luck in solving that question. Any
discovery can be used for good or bad. For example, broccoli.

Bill Truesdell
Bath, Me