Monday, September 7, 2009

Blue Rose: The Impossible


Roses are loved by everyone. It signifies love. But to be precise each colour brings a different meaning and feelings. Red is said to mean love and romance; pink for grace and elegance; yellow for warmth and happiness; white for purity and innocence; orange for desire and enthusiasm; and lavender for enchantment.

So what about blue? Since blue roses do not occur naturally and it was almost impossible to inject a blue gene into a flower, it was synonym to impossible. For a long time breeders have been trying to develop blue rose by crossing rose varieties around the world with no success. So, I would think the most appropriate meaning for blue rose would be ‘impossible and unattainable’.

But thanks to Suntory Limited and Florigene, blue rose was finally developed through genetic engineering. Suntory is based on Osaka and owns 98.5% of Florigene which is based in Melbourne. Just this year the Australia’s Gene Technology Regulator has granted a licence to Florigene for the commercial release of this rose.

It was a challenge to develop blue rose as blue gene is a rarity in the flora kingdom. The enzymes responsible for the blue pigment in the rose are flavonoid 3’5’-hydroxylase from Viola tricolor and anthocyanin 5-acyltransferase from Torenia hybrida. Viola tricolor is a common European wild flower, while Torenia bybrida is commonly known as wishbone flower. These two enzymes give rise to the blue pigment in the flower petals called delphinidin.


Although the rose is not of navy blue colour but is blue enough to be called blue rose. Suntory is currently conducting more research to make blue roses “bluer”. This also serves as a starting point to create blue pigment in various other flowers as well as more varieties in rose colour.

The flower industry is a blooming industry. In the 1950s, the global flower trade was less than US$3 billion and had grown to US$100 billion in 1992. Holland is the number producer of flowers but the emergence of new producers is now transforming Holland from a producer to a trader. Colombia is the second largest exporter of flowers in the world and others are Ecuador, Ethiopia, Kenya and India.

Malaysia, with her varieties of orchids can certainly set her eye in capturing a small share in the floriculture business. Research has been going on in enhancing orchid colours and lengthening shelf life. Hope to see some commercialization in this area which will create a good job market and contribute towards our GDP.

By Mahaletchumy Arujanan

Friday, August 28, 2009

Where will the Dengue Fever Vaccine come from?


Dengue has been killing hundreds of people each year and the numbers is not going down. We have all been advised to spend 10 minutes every week to clean the pots and other mosquito breeding places around our houses. What else can we do? Is this enough to curtail the problem? Is cleaning around the house enough to deprive these creatures from breeding? Months ago we heard about the sterile male mosquitoes developed through GM technology which was supposed to be released to Pulau Ketam for a field trial. But thanks to the opponents of the technology, it did not materialise.

How about developing vaccines? What is the progress in this area? As a tropical country plagued with various tropical diseases, perhaps we should have a Centre for Research on Tropical Diseases. But again, will this answer the question and provide a solution? Who will head the centre? Who will set its direction and ensure it objectives and mandates are met? How will the funding be channelled? Do we have enough researchers to run it?



To save us all these troubles, Acuvax, a South-Australian based vaccine development company has announced that the dengue fever vaccine is set to begin phase I safety trials in the US through its affiliate company, Hawaii Biotech. This is the first recombinant subunit vaccine for dengue to enter clinical studies. The phase I study will lead to the initial clinical testing of Hawaii Biotech’s tetravalent dengue fever vaccine.

Isn’t that good news? Once the vaccine is approved for use, we can all say good-bye to dengue fever. But do not complain when we have to pay these multinationals premium prices for the vaccine. And do not also sing the same old song that multinationals are monopolising the industry. And for those who are against GM technology, please keep away from this vaccine. You might never know the risk... It is just easier and safer to clean around the house... just 10 minutes every week!

So to answer my question on where the dengue vaccine will come from, probably not from a country that is plagued by dengue. The developed countries know which tree to bark. There is huge potential in this vaccine with a huge marketplace.

If we are serious about our commitment to advance biotechnology and look into the priority areas that will benefit the nation and the people, we need to quickly sit down and analyse what is stopping us from moving forward. What are the stumbling blocks? Human capital? Brain drain? Politics? Getting the right people? Fund management? Perseverance?

Millions of dollars have been pumped into this research. Terra Rossa Capital has injected up to US$1.25 million in equity capital in the ACU subsidiary Acuvax Immunology Services. This is just part of the investment. The total investment to develop this vaccine is certainly much bigger. Could we have afforded this? Perhaps, yes. Looking at the amount spent on Antarctic and Space programmes, we can safely say we have the money. It is again barking the right tree!

By Mahaletchumy Arujanan

Friday, August 21, 2009

Into the industry: the leap of faith


Of late MABIC has been getting some enquiries by Monashians who want to know about their prospects in the biotechnology industry. I have to apologise on behalf of all of us, as we were in the midst of a few major projects and we could not provide too much time for them to answer all their queries. They have been very concerned that when they come out, they graduate with a degree that leads them nowhere, and leaves them hanging in other less than ideal jobs in contrast to other industries like finance, IT etc. One of the major reasons is that, biotechnology being "non-traditional" doesn't really allow one to fall back on the usual strategies like sifting through newspapers or asking elders for advice. Many students realise after a year or two of studying biotech, that research is not their cup of tea. And they feel their future is doomed as they are not aware of the various opportunities that lie ahead of them with a degree in biotech. It is pure ignorance to think biotech graduates all end up as researchers. This is where they need to be exposed more to the biotech industry and the whole spectrum of career available in there.


Of course, lately, there has been much improvement in this sense, with graduates being offered training programmes like that of the BeST programme by BiotechCorp, and internships, as I noted in my last post, as well as bio-career fair during 25 Apr 09 to 26 Apr 09. It makes you wonder why students are still jittery over where they would end up, and what job prospects they would have in the long run.

Primarily, I think universities should take a more proactive role, by organising career talks not only general ones on how to write resumes and go for interviews, but real industry dialogues where students are allow greater interaction with industry players on their expectations, hopes and fears. At MABIC, we are planning a talk soon to address this issue at Monash, in hopes that students would get a better idea on what they should be expecting when they leave the hallowed confines of the ivory tower. On the other hand, it would also be shock therapy to them for them to find that some of their expectations might fall flat. For example, I remember some planning to earn RM3000-4000 per month as a fresh grad, when a more realistic range would be RM1,600-2,500.

I also am concerned on whether the students know enough to search for further information if they are in doubt. Bio-career was a big event organised by BiotechCorp, and graduating students should be attending to have a good gauge of what is waiting for them out there, instead of sitting in the darkened lecturer theater waiting for people to spoonfeed them with such information. If all else fails, google is just a click away and with their capabilities in searching through wikipedia to help them with their homework, why not use it to help them with their jobs.



To try and limit the scope of what careers in biotech is about is pretty silly, as biotech is vast that it would be plain impossible to try to define a single category of jobs. Graduates can apply jobs ranging from marketing to sales, research, science writing, and regulatory, just to name a few. I also know several close friends who end up out of the biotech field, and they are very happy with what they do. The scope is limitless and it only boils down to what one has a stronger preference for. I for one cannot envision myself sitting in a research lab analysing samples, while others may find my line of interviewing and writing on science issues intimidating. All I can say is, keep your eyes and ears open. If all fails, google is your friend. :) I will update on the bio-career dialogue soon. Until then.

- KC, Liew

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Brief 40: Communicating Crop Biotechnology: Stories from Stakeholders

The human race has always been a storytelling species. From cave paintings outlining a successful hunt, to fairytales and the Brothers Grimm on our bedside. We have always been captivated by the spell of word weaving, conjuring up nitty gritty stories which bring us tales, fact or fiction, which are beyond our experiences in life. We love reading and hearing of stories which bring up experiences of others vividly, capturing us spell-bound, and bringing us knowledge from afar, enabling us to think and imagine out of the box of our daily grind and accept new knowledge from the experiences of others. The most recent ISAAA Brief captures this sentiment, on the communication of crop biotechnology by divulging and intimating the stories of various stakeholders and how it came to pass their involvement with crop biotechnology.


The Brief was written in a global cooperation between various knowledge centers under ISAAA, including MABIC, whereby Maha and I interviewed 9 individuals from various stakeholder groups to give a comprehensive overview of the effects of biotechnology in Malaysia. When we set out to write the articles for the brief, it was determined that the first priority is to vet the language used so that it would not be too academese for lay people, and not too simple that it would lose the information that would be conveyed.


The work ended up being a delicate tightrope where the outcome was a series of articles which should be considered as another part of the factual storytelling that we have as a culture.


The brief is downloadable from the ISAAA website, here.


Please also enjoy the short Youtube clip that we have created for the brief below. 


Tuesday, July 21, 2009

Finding a Common Language between Ulama and Scientists on Agribiotech


MABIC just organised an international workshop for Islamic scholars “Islam and Agribiotechnology: Finding a Common Language between Ulama and Scientists”. The workshop proved the existence of a wide communication and information gap between the two groups. More so, among the religious scholars and officers where there is lack of understanding of biotechnology. Scientists remained guided by their knowledge on religion and ethics, however, as technical knowledge is only gained through formal education, the religious group requires assistance and basic training in this area.

The workshop was an eye-opener for many religious scholars and officers on basic molecular biology such as “what is a gene and DNA; and how GM crops are developed”. Foreign delegates mostly, both scientists and scholars seemed to be more at ease with the technology compared to the Malaysian counterparts. Many were also amazed to see the progress of GM technology in Iran and the advancement of their home-grown technology. The progress in Pakistan, India and Egypt were equally impressive.

The workshop indicated a number of issues:

  1. Malaysia is clearly lacking behind many other Muslim countries in terms of GM technology – both in research and commercialisation
  2. There is a crucial need for Malaysian religious scholars, especially at the officer level to be exposed to biotechnology
  3. Personal views, sentiments and emotions cloud the process of decision making, especially among the middle management, where there is a lack of proper understanding of both Islam and biotechnology. This proved that little knowledge can be really disastrous
  4. Biotechnology does not seem to be priority for religious agencies
As I always preach for a sector to be developed, all areas should be given importance, not just the key areas such as research, development and commercialisation. The peripheral areas are even more important as it can take us off guard just as the technology is ready to be launched. For example, what is point of having successfully developed a GM crop, when the market is not ready to accept it, or when our religious authority is not fully equipped with the right knowledge to assess it halal-ness?

The peripheral areas such as public communication, awareness, science literacy and trust among the public and other stakeholders has to be developed. This does not just rely on one ministry or agencies, but the effort should be a coherent one from various parties. Are we ready to take up the challenge to work together and forgo the territorial behaviour rampant among our institutes?

As GM crops are gaining more acreage and Malaysian is a big food importer, better understanding of biotechnology among religious scholars must be given a priority if Malaysia wants to ensure informed decisions are made on the halal-ness of GM food.




By Mahaletchumy Arujanan

Monday, July 6, 2009

Enzymes and the pseudoscience heresy



A previous post of mine spoke about how one could conduct scientific research in the kitchen, with everything from tissue culture to molecular biology. However, one must always remember that these suggestions and comments actually come with a pre-condition of a good knowledge in science and a sensible head on ones shoulders.


One of my favourite phrases, “detox” is one of the most commonly used term among pseudoscience junkies. Somehow, the idea of the body being so full of bad chemicals and harmful elements due to our daily consumption, from the sound of if, probably as dangerous as a Chernobyl, that one needs expensive, “organic” (another 'favourite' pseudoscience term of mine) foodstuff to keep our bodies “clean”. Of course, most of them forget the most basic of their biology classes, the part where our kidneys and liver cleans out all waste products in the body.

However, recent developments in the country has caused me quite some concern on my previous suggestions, especially with the current “enzyme-making” fad and other related pseudoscience claims. Phrases like “natural live enzymatic components”, “enzyme drink for health and well-being”, etc. When none of the claims have any factual basis in science.

Hence, the recent fad of “creating” enzymes in the kitchen, 100% home-made, despite the fact that all recipes provided require you to buy certain overpriced products from direct-selling companies, are just nothing more than a less informed attempt to DIY. Let's all face it, one would not be able to DIY and make an antique-stained, chestnut wood cupboard without knowing how to wield a hammer and saw, despite what certain furniture companies would like you to think. Buying ready-made furniture, and putting them together with an allen key and crowing about how you DIY-ed your kitchen sink is just plain pure misguided.

I shudder to think what is currently brewing in the kitchens of most people “making enzymes”, primarily the literature being provided does not give much prominence to the necessity of sterile conditions. What is being sought out is a monoculture, may end up with a whole rainforest of bacteria, fungi and yeast. Similarly, the literature does not provide explanations on the necessity of various procedures and equipment, but instead just provided a recipe-book manner of instruction. Let's not forget how most home cooks have a tendency to substitute certain items should they find lacking. The whole exercise may be a living, ticking pathogen time bomb!

Hence I cite the example of a family friend who was “making enzymes”. She ended up having the cola bottle exploding in the kitchen coating the ceiling with gunk because no one bothered to inform her in the manual that it is important to allow gas to be expelled during the fermentation process. Instead, generic instructions on the importance of using glass/ceramic bottles/jars were provided without a science-backed explaination.

I am disgusted by how retailers actually prey on the gullibility of the public, and how uninformed the public are, and even more disgusted at consumer associations and related NGOs actually following such fads without a basis in science. I'm interested to see how many more explosions in the kitchen one can have before the public begins to wisen up.

-KC Liew