Commercialization The of John C. Sanford's "Gene Gun"
A business perspective of the evolution of John Sanford's gene gun and the competing R&D firms (Monsato and Pioneer Hi-Bred), all while facing the public's opposition to genetically altered foods
"The more valuable the crop, the harder it is to alter"
Corn and soybeans dominated the US agriculture market
contributing to over 150 acres of farmland $20 billion of corn $15 billion of soybean sales
Therefore, it was extremely difficult to tamper with these crops allowing a prime opportunity for scientists to compete to find the solution.
John C. Sanford
A professor at Cornell University from 1980-1998, currently an Courtesy Associate Professor John Sanford, just an everyday scientist who would have never been expected to beat the thousands of other talented and esteemed scientists, started the journey to genetically alter plants.
The "gene gun"
John Sanford conceived the idea of shooting DNA into a cell via mixing metal particles Got a patent for this contraption named the "Biolistic Particle Delivery System" aka "gene gun"
Cornell University's Submicron Facility
John Sanford teamed up with Edward Wolf at Cornell University's Submicron Facility
Together, they discovered how to shoot DNA into another cell Unfortunately, at the time the gene gun would successfully transfer DNA, but it would kill the cell it injected the genes into.
Pioneer Hi-Bred
Pioneer Hi-Bred is a world leading, genetically altered hybrid seed producer
Pioneer produces, markets and sells hybrid seed corn in nearly 70 countries worldwide.
After signing confidentially agreements, Arthur Weissinger and Dwight Tomes, of Pioneer Hi-Bred, joined Sanford and Wolf Weissinger and Tomes were recruited because they have access to cultures of corn tissue that could be regenerated into whole corn plants and access to genes that were much more likely to work in corn. Eventually when the team pooled their resources (the gene gun and unique corn crops) they had a small success in which the genetically altered gene indeed duplicated but this was a rare occurrence.
Agracetus
The team then recruited Dennis McCabe of the biotech company Agracetus. McCabe was able to alter Sanford's gene gun to use high voltage electricity to open the cell instead of the metal gun Sanford created.
Success!
Now Agracetus owned the gene gun and recruited John Schillinger, a prominent soybean breeder, to find the genes to inject into the soybeans Eventually, John Sanford's patented gene gun wound up in the hands of the top biotech firms: Asgrow, Agracetus, and Mosanto
Regulated Growth
Monsanto manufactured a herbicide, but was not the in seed business which was what farmers wanted.
Therefore, a Monsanto employee, Dick Mahoney, had the idea to make their product operate in the business-tobusiness market. Pioneer Hi-Bred International sold billions worth of corn seed each year, and had a40% market share of the US corn market and 20% of all seed sales in the US: but never reaped high profits. Monsanto was able to sell its genetically altered genes to Pioneer Hi-Bred which doubled Pioneer's profits and Monsanto would receive 75% of Pioneer's additional profits.
Brand Equity
Robert Shapiro, a New York lawyer, suggested that Monsanto make sure that the new seed Pioneer was selling had the brand "Roundup Ready" on all seed packets and that Monsanto would claim rights to this. It was this brand which got individuals to purchase the Pioneer seed packets. Therefore, Monsanto could potentially sell their brand, "Roundup Ready", to other competing firms and reap additional profits. Therefore, Monsanto's "Roundup Ready" controlled the seed industry. In the end, Pioneer had to buy Monsanto's brand for half a million dollars, which was a right Pioneer kindly handed over to Monsanto without acknowledging the potential consequences.
Opposition
The crusade against corporate control of seeds, genes, and agriculture ("sustainable agriculture") began in 1979 by Jack Doyle and Cary Fowler.
They didn't like that large seed companies like Pioneer Hi-Bred and DeKalb were buying smaller companies, slowly making the market less competitive and more monopolistic.
In Germany, "sustainable agriculture" groups bombed plant breeding research institutions. In response, a sociologist named Wolfgang van den Dale peacefully debated against the "sustainable agriculture" movement.
In the end, he promoted the agreement that genetically engineered foods should bear labels informing consumers- but disagreed that genetically altered foods were dangerous.
This led to the fighting between biotech corps and opposition groups to cease and to instead debate whether the control of genetically altered foods should be under democratic or corporate control.
Marshall Nirenberg "Will society be prepared"
Opposition groups battled the use of John Sanford's evolved Gene Gun because they were worried private biotech monopolies would own the agriculture market, gauge prices, and reap profits by gauging the public. As Marshall Nirenberg states, it is important that an informed society controls where the line is drawn pertaining to genetic engineering. Should genetic decision making rest within the people, our democratic government, or instead within America's free market system?