AFP

Dozens of scientists, experts and campaigners called for a ban on the release of genetically-edited organisms into the wild, in a statement Friday warning of potentially severe risks to the world’s pollinators.

The appeal was launched at crunch biodiversity talks in Montreal, where delegates from almost all the world’s countries were meeting to negotiate a strategy to halt human environmental destruction, which threatens the natural life support systems of the planet.

A host of new genome-editing tools that modify the genetic material of living beings have emerged in recent years, and are being researched and developed largely to target insects and plants in agriculture.  

Supporters argue that they could help human health, agriculture and even species conservation.

But their use in the wild carries “understudied risks which could accelerate the decline of pollinator populations and put entire food webs at risk,” according to the letter drafted by the French non-governmental organisation Pollinis. 

The signatories — including researchers specialising in insects, pollinators and agroecology — called for countries party to the UN biodiversity talks to oppose the deployment of genetic biotechnologies in nature. 

They said current scientific research was unable to provide “reliable and robust” risk assessments for potential harms to other species including pollinators and the plants, animals and whole ecosystems that rely on them.    

“Pollinating insects are already facing an alarming decline due to external stressors, adding hazardous and unassessed genetic biotechnologies to this fatal mix will aggravate the stress on pollinators and may precipitate their extinction,” the statement said.

The UN talks in Montreal are tasked with laying out an ambitious plan for how people can live “in harmony with nature” in the coming decades, as scientists warn a million species are threatened with extinction. 

One of the targets up for negotiation looks specifically at the potential risks of genetic biotechnology and the decision on this point could lead either to greater regulation or help facilitate their use.

– Engineered eradication –

Unlike genetically modified organisms (GMOs), which introduce an external gene into a plant or animal, new gene editing techniques directly modify the genome of a living being, without adding external elements.

One example is so-called gene drive technology, which uses tools such as CRISPR-Cas9 — DNA snipping “scissors” that can insert, delete or otherwise edit genes.    

This can push an engineered trait so it is passed down to a higher proportion of offspring than would have occurred naturally, across many generations.

A flagship project, funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, has developed the technology to try to eradicate malaria. 

In 2018 researchers were able to wipe out an entire population of malaria-carrying mosquitos in the lab using a gene editing tool to programme their extinction.

The Pollinis letter said companies have filed patent applications describing the use of gene drive technology to target “hundreds” of agricultural pests.     

Another type of biotechnology uses “genetic silencing” to inhibit certain genetic expressions in animals or plants. 

This would make it possible to combat crop pests such as the Colorado potato beetle, which decimates potato crops, or fruit flies.

Some of these biotechnologies have already been approved for use in different parts of the world, the Pollinis statement said, calling for the issue to be “urgently addressed at the international level”.

– Into the wild? –

Advocates of these biotechnologies want permission to take these experiments out of the laboratory and conduct field trials. 

In Europe, Monsanto’s insect-resistant MON810 corn is the only GMO authorised for cultivation. 

But biotech products benefit from a much more flexible framework in the United States, Canada, Argentina, Brazil, Japan and India, among others.

Christophe Robaglia, professor of biology at the University of Aix-Marseille and a GMO expert with the European Food Safety Authority said the EU’s regulations on these biotechnologies were largely “obsolete”. 

When it comes to use on plants, he said the use of some of these so-called new breeding techniques could “improve” them, making them resistant to viruses or herbicides or make them more drought tolerant.  

In September 2021, a meeting of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) passed a motion which noted the particular importance of the “precautionary principle” with synthetic biology. 

The Pollinis statement is most concerned about the use of these techniques on insects that are not limited to a single area. 

It raised particular concern about “gene transfer” between species. 

This is the risk that modifications made to pests could potentially contaminate the genome of non-target species, potentially destabilising a cascade of other species. 

Dugongs — large herbivorous marine mammals commonly known as “sea cows” — are now threatened with extinction, according to an official list updated Friday.

These gentle cousins of the manatee graze on seagrass in shallow coastal waters, and are an important source of ecotourism in their tropical habitats. 

Despite their moniker, they are more closely related to elephants than to cows. 

Dugong populations in East Africa and New Caledonia have now entered the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) Red List as “critically endangered” and “endangered,” respectively.

Globally, the species remains classified as “vulnerable.”

Their primary threats are unintentional capture in fishing gear in East Africa and poaching in New Caledonia, as well as boat injuries in both locations.

In East Africa, fossil fuel exploration and production, pollution and unauthorized development are also degrading their seagrass food source. In New Caledonia seagrass is being damaged by agricultural run-off and pollution from nickel mining, among other sources.

Habitat degradation is compounded by climate change throughout the dugongs’ range in the Indian and western Pacific Oceans.

The updated list comes as delegates from across the world meet in Montreal for a UN biodiversity conference to finalize a new framework for “a peace pact with nature,” with key goals to preserve Earth’s forests, oceans and species.

IUCN deputy director Stewart Maginnis told AFP: “The ability to slow and limit extinction rate, to buy us more time has been focused very much on a large terrestrial species.”

“But the fact is that we are 30 years behind on effective marine conservation — now hopefully we can catch that up.”

Climate change is driving ocean acidification as well as deoxygenation, while flows of agricultural and industrial pollution from the land are causing significant impacts on ocean species, effects that cascade throughout food webs.

Maginnis stressed that the Red List is not a hopeless catalog of doom — it serves as a scientifically rigorous tool that helps focus conservation action.

It includes more than 150,000 species, with over 42,000 threatened with extinction. Over 1,550 marine animals and plants assessed are at risk of extinction, with climate change impacting at least 41 percent of those threatened.

– Poaching, pollution, climate change –

In other updates to the IUCN list, 44 percent of all abalone shellfish are now threatened with extinction, while pillar coral has moved to “critically endangered.”

Abalone species are considered gastronomic delicacies, leading to unsustainable extraction and poaching by international organized crime networks, for example in South Africa.

They are also deeply susceptible to climate change, with a marine heatwave killing 99 percent of Roe’s abalones off Western Australia in 2011.

Agricultural and pollution run-off also cause harmful algal blooms, which have eliminated the Omani abalone, a commercial species found in the Arabian Peninsula, across half of its former range.

Twenty of the world’s 54 abalone species are now threatened with extinction.

“Abalones reflect humanity’s disastrous guardianship of our oceans in microcosm: overfishing, pollution, disease, habitat loss, algal blooms, warming and acidification, to name but a few threats,” said Howard Peters of the University of York who led the assessment.

“They really are the canary in the coal mine.”

Pillar coral, which are found throughout the Caribbean, moved from “vulnerable” to “critically endangered” after its population shrunk by over 80 percent across most of its range since 1990. 

Bleaching caused by sea surface temperature rise — as well as antibiotics, fertilizers and sewage running into the oceans — have left them deeply susceptible to Stony coral tissue loss disease, which has ravaged their numbers over the past four years.

Overfishing around coral reefs has piled on more pressure by depleting the number of grazing fish, allowing algae to dominate.

“The pillar coral is just one of the 26 corals now listed as Critically Endangered in the Atlantic Ocean, where almost half of all corals are now at elevated risk of extinction due to climate change and other impacts,” said Beth Polidoro of Arizona State University.

Canada will look to quickly ramp up production of critical minerals that are vital to its transition away from climate-harming fossil fuels, according to a new strategy unveiled Friday.

The 58-page document notes that Canada is home to vast untapped deposits of lithium, graphite, nickel, cobalt, copper and rare earth elements.

But under a current framework, it adds, it can take from five to 25 years to get new mines approved and operational.

With global demand set to soar and China controlling much of existing supplies, Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson said it is paramount for Canada and its allies “to establish and maintain resilient critical minerals value chains.”

The new strategy, he added, “sets out a course for Canada to become a global supplier of choice for critical minerals and the clean digital technologies they enable.”

Critical minerals are used, for example, in electric vehicle batteries, solar panels, wind turbines and semiconductors.

They are “the building blocks for the green and digital economy. There is no energy transition without critical minerals,” says the strategy document.

New mine proposals typically undergo a patchwork of rigorous environmental review and permitting process. Wilkinson vowed to streamline that process, including eliminating duplicate reviews at both the federal and provincial levels.

“We recognize that, although responsible regulations are vital, complex regulatory and permitting processes can hinder the economic competitiveness of the sector and increase investment risk for proponents,” says the document.

The new strategy is not backed by any new funding, but in its 2022 budget, the federal government earmarked Can$3.8 billion (US$2.8 billion) over eight years for the sector — including a 30 percent tax credit to spur exploration.

Ottawa also acknowledges in the document the need for new infrastructure such as roads and ports in order to access and exploit the deposits.

To counter China’s supremacy in critical minerals, Canada, the United States and its allies have committed to boosting extraction, processing and recycling of critical minerals.

In late October, Canada also tightened its investment rules to make it more difficult for foreign state-owned companies to buy into its critical minerals sector, following a backlash over Chinese investments in Canada.

Such deals, the government said at the time, would only be approved on “an exceptional basis.”

It has also recently ordered three Chinese resources companies to divest their stakes in Canadian critical minerals firms.