Biotechnology
Beta vulgaris was among the first crops to be modified by genetic engineering. Sugar beet
has been modified to be resistant to herbicides, as previously noted. With world sugar production
exceeding demand, there has been little incentive to modify sugar beet to increase yield. Herbicide-resistance
makes weed control in sugar beet more efficient and reduces on-farm costs.
There have been sound commercial reasons for concentrating on herbicide-resistance as a trait in
transgenic crops. It helps, for instance, to preserve the market share for brand-name herbicides. Monsanto,
for instance, have modified a range of crops to be resistant to glyphosate herbicide at a time when its
Roundup glyphosate herbicide is coming out of patent. Roundup has been one of Monsanto's most profitable
products over recent years. Farmers must sign a licensing agreement with Monsanto when growing the company's
Roundup-Ready crops, in which they agree to spray only Roundup herbicide, and not generic glyphosate
products, on these crops. New factories producing Roundup are springing up around the world, most notably
in South America, to meet demand for increased Roundup spraying on Round-up soybeans, maize, cotton,
oilseed rape and sugar beet.
Although herbicide-resistant sugar beet is being grown successfully in the USA and other countries, its
introduction into Europe has been delayed due to concerns that its cultivation will be detrimental to the
environment. Countryside and agriculture are much more intrinsically linked in Europe than in North America.
In an extensive three-year programme of farm-scale evaluations of transgenic crops in the UK, it was found
that herbicide-resistant sugar beet was sprayed with more herbicide than conventional sugar beet, reducing
weed biomass sixfold late in the season, with detrimental effects on biodiversity. Reductions in seed and
insect food could have serious long-term effects on bee, butterfly and bird populations. In parts of Europe
there is a move to see farmers not just as producers of food but also as custodians of the countryside; a view
that acknowledges the economic importance of rural tourism. When growing a crop that is already overproduced,
moves towards methods of cultivation that enable crop production and nature to co-exist need to be encouraged.
The scorched earth, weed-free transgenic crop route is out of step with this way of thinking.
Other concerns expressed about the cultivation of transgenic sugar beet include gene flow and the increased
possibility that resistance will develop in weeds to herbicides. Transgenes could easily spread from transgenic
sugar beet to other cultivated and wild Beta vulgaris plants, all of which readily interbreed. The
exchange of genes between bolting sugar beet and weeds has been demonstrated in France, where hybrid weed beets
are a significant weed problem. The acquisition of herbicide-resistance genes could make weed beet an even
greater problem. The spread of herbicide-resistant transgenes from one sugar beet crop to another was first
reported in Europe in 2000.
The first wave of transgenic crops was primarily modified for herbicide-resistance. However, a wider
range of modifications are now being made to crops. Sugar beet, for instance, is now being modified for
resistance to the viral pathogen Beet Necrotic Yellow Vein Virus (BNYVV) and resistance to nematode pests.
Transgenic sugar beet could soon be developed with a modified sugar content. Work in Europe, for instance,
is underway to produce a range of sugar molecules called fructans in sugar beet roots. Novel fructans will
be designed to meet a range of needs as functional foods or food ingredients, including low-calories
sweeteners, dietary fibre or bulking agent in processed food. Fructans can also be used as raw materials
in a wide range of non-food products such as biodegradable plastics, detergents and adhesives, and in
cosmetics. Such modifications would effectively convert sugar beet into a new crop. Sugar beet farmers
in Europe would benefit from diversification and increased markets, at a time of sugar overproduction
and when their subsidies for growing sugar are being threatened by a World Trade Organization (WTO) ruling
(May 2004). Beet may become an important crop in which to produce novel chemicals for industrial applications.
Sugar beet has been put to a range of uses over the years. In addition to refined sucrose and sweet
products, the tops and pulp have been used as animal fodder, the dried pulp has provided a coffee substitute,
and its by-products have been used to manufacture industrial and pharmaceutical products. Its juice can be
processed into a tough varnish with industrial applications, for example, while sugar beet is a source of
citric acid. The cosmetics industry makes extensive use of citric acid, which is added to products to help them
match the pH of the skin.
Beet crops may become increasingly used in the production of biofuels. The technology
for this is already in place. The gasohol that drives cars in Brazil, for example, is made
using sugar cane. Using the same principle, sugar beet is one of the crops that can
produce bioethanol in Europe. Mixtures of bioethanol and petrol are used to fuel cars
in some European countries.
Biotechnology is extending the industrial uses of sugar beet by-products. Beet pulp is a raw material
used as a substrate for the culturing of bacteria. The ferulic acid naturally found in beet pulp, for example,
can be converted into vanillin by a species of soil bacterium in the laboratory. Vanillin is the most
important component of vanilla essence. A range of industrial products, including ethylene fuel and
polyurethane foams could be produced from sugar beet with the aid of biotechnology.
The techniques of tissue culture and genetic engineering developed for sugar beet are applicable to
beetroot. Tissue culture involves the production of clonal regenerants from tissue taken from a plant;
usually undifferentiated callus tissue from the cotyledon of a plant embryo. Regenerants grow into normal
plants. They are easily screened in breeding programmes and are ideal for genetic manipulation. An
additional advantage of large-scale tissue culture is that it gives rise to somaclonal variation or
novel genetic material for plant breeders to exploit. Beetroot was included to a limited extent in
early studies of regenerating Beta vulgaris in tissue culture, although most work has been done
on sugar beet. Sabir and Ford-Lloyd included a fodder beet and four beetroot cultivars in their
study of the mass production of regenerants in tissue culture (micropropagation). This study showed
that all the tested forms of Beta vulgaris produced large numbers of regenerants under tissue
culture conditions.
Beetroot could be genetically engineered for herbicide-resistant or for resistance to viral pathogens
in the same way as sugar beet. However, it is unlikely that such modifications can be justified in commercial
terms. Modifications relating to colour or to root components having medicinal properties are more likely
goals. Variations in beetroot pigments, specifically the betalains that give the roots their distinctive
red colour, have been studied using clonal material obtained by tissue culture. Girod and Zryd demonstrated
the importance of light, for instance, in the induction of betalain synthesis using beetroot cell cultures.
It may soon be possible to manipulate betalain pigments in beetroot to influence root colour or to make
the pigments more stable. This could be done to improve their value as a source of natural food colouring.
However, beetroot is a rustic crop, on the fringes of agribusiness. It is not a natural designer crop.
The market for beetroot is small compared to most of the crops that have been genetically modified. These crops
have tended to be commodity crops that are heavily processed, whereas beetroot is usually just boiled and
pickled when processed. Beetroot also has relatively few pest and disease problems, and is easy to
cultivate organically without pesticides. The main problem that has beset beetroot growers over the
years has been bolting or premature flowering. Conventional breeding methods have produced cultivars
that are resistant to bolting, which can be grown early in the season. It is therefore unlikely that
transgenic beetroot will ever be sold as a fresh vegetable. However, it is quick and easy to grow, and
the methods to genetically engineer it have already been worked out using sugar beet. Therefore, in the
future beetroot could be genetically modified to produce high-value products for use in the pharmaceutical
and food industries.
Bibliography for Chapter Four
Allen, A. (2003) Saving seed from biennial veg, The Organic Way, 173: 22-23.
Biggs, M., J. McVicar and B. Flowerdew (1997) The Complete Book of Vegetables, Herbs and Fruit.
London: Kyle Cathie, pp. 38-42.
Bosemark, N.O. (1993) Genetics and breeding, in: D.A. Cooke & A.K. Scott (eds.) The Sugar
Beet Crop. London: Chapman and Hall, pp. 67-119.
Castellane, P.D., D.E. Foltran, M.E. Ferreira and P.A. Bellingieri (1990) NPK fertilization of
carrot (Daucus carota L.) and beetroot (Beta vulgaris L.) crops on soil of high fertility,
Revista de Agricultura, Piracicaba, 65(3): 257-266.
Chiji, H., S. Tanaka and M. Izawa (1980) Phenolic germination inhibitors in the seed balls of red beet,
Agricultural Biological Chemistry, 44: 205-207.
Coleman, S.M. (2004) 'Oriental wisdom', Seed News (HDRA), 41: 9-10.
Cooke, D.A. (1993) Pests, in: D.A. Cooke & A.K. Scott (eds.) The Sugar Beet Crop.
London: Chapman and Hall, pp. 429-483.
Darwin, C. (1859) The Origin of Species. Harmondsworth: Penguin Classics, p. 357.
Draycott, A.P. (1972) Sugar-beet Nutrition. Barking, UK: Applied Science Publishers.
Duan, X., J.S. Burris (1997) Film coating impairs leaching of germination inhibitors in sugar beet
seed, Crop Science, 37: 515-520.
Duffus, J.E. and E.G. Ruppel (1993) Diseases, in: D.A. Cooke & A.K. Scott (eds.) The Sugar Beet Crop.
London: Chapman and Hall, pp. 347-427.
Girod, P.A. and J.P. Zryd (1987) Clonal variability and light induction of betalain synthesis in red
beet cell cultures, Plant Cell Report, 6: 27-32.
Hellyer, A. (1993) The Hellyer Pocket Guide. London: Hamlyn.
HDRA (2003) Seed Saving Guidelines. Henry Doubleday Research Association, Ryton, UK.
Hruschka, H.W. (1977) Postharvest weight loss and shrivel in five fruits and five vegetables,
USDA-ARS Market Research Reports, 1059, 23pp.
Kays, S.J. (1997) Postharvest Physiology of Perishable Plant Products. Athens, Georgia,
USA: Exon Press, pp. 347, 356.
Nottingham, S.F. (2002) Genescapes: The Ecology of Genetic Engineering. London: Zed Books.
Philips, R. and M. Rix (1993) Vegetables. London: Pan, pp. 70-75.
RHS (Brickell, C. ed.) (1992) Royal Horticultural Society Encyclopedia of Gardening.
London: Dorling Kindersley.
Sabir, A.A. and B.V. Ford-Lloyd (1991) Processing crop plant germplasm in vitro for mass production
of regenerants: a case study with beet, Journal of Biotechnology, 17: 257-268.
Salter P.J., J.K.A. Bleasdale et al.. (1979) Know and Grow Vegetables. Oxford,
UK: Oxford University Press.
Santos, D.S.B., and M.F.A. Pereira (1989) Restrictions of the tegument to the germination of
the Beta vulgaris seeds, Seed Science and Technology, 17: 601-611.
Smit, T. and P. McMillan Browse (2000) The Heligan Vegetable Bible. London: Cassell Illustrated.
Strickland, S. (1998) Heritage Vegetables: The Gardener?s Guide to Cultivating Diversity.
London: Gaia Books.
Sudell, R. (ed.) (1935) The New Illustrated Gardening Encyclopaedia. London: Oldham Press, pp. 99-101.
Taylor, A.G., M.C. Goffinet, S.A. Pikuz, T.A. Shelkovenko, M.D. Mitchell, K.M. Chandler and
D.A. Hammer (2003) Physio-chemical factors influence beet (Beta vulgaris L.) seed germination,
in: G. Nicolas K.J. Bradford, D. Come, and H.W. Pritchard (eds.) The Biology of Seeds: Recent Research
Advances. Wallingford, UK: CABI Publishing, pp. 433-440.
Thornton, N.C. (1933) Carbon dioxide storage. III. The influence of carbon dioxide on oxygen uptake
by fruits and vegetables, Boyce Thompson Inst. Contrib., 5: 371-402.
Whitney, E.D. (1989) Beta maritima as a source of powdery mildew resistance in sugar beet,
Plant Disease, 73: 487-489.