Seedless Effects on Seed Production GURT offers very significant advantages for commercial seed production, especially in self-fertilising

crops. Seed producers currently face strong competition from farm-saved seed, which can effectively be overcome through this technology. GURT furthermore allows for a cheaper hybrid seed production. The widespread use of GURTs is, however, likely to increase the gap between the larger and smaller seed companies, especially when large life science companies hold the key patents on the technology. These smaller companies may not be able to enter the new commercial seed markets created by GURT. Since their breeders depend more on the use of released varieties as parents in their breeding programmes than larger ones having their own genebanks and pre-breeding programmes, they are likely to be pushed to low value niche markets. GURTs thus likely further strengthen the current trend of concentration in the global seed sector. Farmers who produce their non-GURT crops adjacent to large areas of V-GURT fields of the same crop will face viability problems when using their own seed. In self-fertilising crops like most cereals, pulses and cotton, cross fertilisation rarely exceeds 2%, and viability losses will be negligible. Such minor reductions in seed viability are commonly compensated for by increased numbers of ears per plant in cereals and by increased leaf area per plant in legumes. Introgression in truly cross-fertilising species like maize and oilseed rape may, however, go well beyond 20%, when small fields of local crops are surrounded by large areas of GURT crops. This will have a significant negative effect on crop yields. In wind-pollinated species like maize, a distance of 200

meters between GURT and non-GURT crops is sufficient to reduce the risks, but in insect-pollinated crops like sunflower and canola risks are considerable even at larger distances. Effects on the Environment Formal plant breeding leads to the development of uniform varieties that can be used by many farmers. Where GURT-protected (uniform) varieties re94 Seed Policy, Legislation and Law: Widening a Narrow Focus place genetically diverse landraces, a genetic erosion in the farmers fields will be the result that is comparable to the introduction of Green Revolution wheat and rice varieties in India and Pakistan. If the additional plant breeding is focused on farmers who already use modern varieties (e.g., from public breeding), effects on crop genetic diversity will be minimal or even positive, i.e., when increased investments allow the breeders to use a much wider genepool or develop more varieties. GURT may have a very positive effect on the risks related to the introduction of transgenic crops, especially in centres of diversity of these crops, as noted above. GURT can effectively contain geneflow from transgenic crops to such local germplasm or wild relatives, thus solving one of the major objections against genetic modification. GURT is therefore likely to increase the acceptability of GMOs in those areas where environmental concerns prevail. GURT on the other hand triggers a tremendous opposition in countries where the socio-economic aspects of genetic modifications prevail, such as in India.