As science develops further, the “veils” of the universe are lifted and humanity can explore realms beyond which our senses would normally allow.

We are conscious beings and we seek answers to our existence. People search for answers to questions like, “Who am I and why do we exist?” The sciences reveal that existence is full of meaning and purpose. However, judgmental values and beliefs enter the process; restrictive and ideological approaches lead to confusion during man’s voyage to truth.

Take the question of how we exist. Different perceptions have their own point of view and reach different conclusions. While a materialist person accepts the matter to be eternal, for some the theory of evolution has all the answers; yet on the other hand, a person of faith explains existence with creation. Therefore a materialist, an evolutionist, and a believer struggle to reach a common conclusion.

Human vision is somewhat veiled; the things that are not witnessed are considered unknown. The events of both the micro and macro cosmos are veiled to us. Yet the more our science advances, the more of these worlds we begin to see. We understand how complex existence is, while also appreciating how majestically it has come into being.

Can senses and observations guide humanity to the truth? Our strongest senses are seeing and hearing; however, these senses can only perceive a narrow band of the electromagnetic spectrum. The human eye can see the wavelengths in between 4,000-7,000 angstroms; the ear can hear frequencies in between 16-20,000 Hz. When we rely only on our senses to understand and comprehend existence, the things that are outside our ability to see or hear become absent.

Dimension and distance are very important for vision. The dimension that humans can see with the naked eye starts at the millimeter scale; in perfect conditions, we can barely see beyond 18-25 miles. Things at dimensions much smaller than a millimeter and at considerably longer distances remain out of our visual range. A microscope brings the small dimensions into our visual spectrum and the telescope does the same for long distances. Before the invention of these devices, humankind was not aware of things such as the atom, molecule, galaxy, nebula, or black hole. Today, because of scientific advances, as we get closer to seeing things on the nanometer dimension, we are newly discovering structures at this scale and the laws that are effective here. The inner makeup of the atom has not yet been elucidated; our knowledge is based on certain theories and experiences. Our information regarding the universe is also limited. It is considered that in an expanding universe, according to the expansion velocity of galaxies and gravitational force calculations, the amount of visible matter only corresponds to 4% of the total mass of the universe, the rest estimated to consist of 26% dark matter and 70% dark energy.

When the true nature of things (objects, existence) that are unknown or seem to be simple are explained through science, the truth is found to be very different. From space, the earth looks like a small and pale blue dot. After getting closer, at first the oceans, continents, and major mountain ranges start to appear. There is not any indication of people or other organisms on earth yet. However, after looking closely enough, it is observed that earth is filled with numerous life forms.

We witness the twinkle of countless stars when we gaze at the sky on a dark night. These stars, each shining as a small spot, may seem insignificant. When we turn our telescope towards one of these spots, we face a giant star or a galaxy that houses billions of stars; we become astonished. And when we take a better look at these stars, some of which are colossal, we witness interesting events. In these thermonuclear cauldrons that are utilized like millions of atomic reactors, enormous amounts of energy are released into space after being produced each second under immense pressure at temperatures reaching millions of degrees. Humans should think for a while and be amazed by these things. The power required is immense and they last millions of years.

People can also observe the wonder of the universe by delving into much smaller dimensions (the micro world). Here, we witness the creation of wonderful beings and the employment of tiny creatures in vital tasks, even though this micro world is hidden secret from the naked eye. For instance, in the thousands of small chemical factories fitted in a seemingly plain leaf, sugars are produced from carbon dioxide and water via sunlight; nutrients are synthesized from various minerals in the soil and stored in the fruits, seeds, and roots of plants to serve as nourishment for the living.

The biological structure of a human body is built by the proliferation of a fertilized single cell, called a zygote, through division. More than 200 different cells executing very unique functions in tissues such as the brain, liver, kidneys, muscles, and bones are created from a single cell. Cells have specific structures and tasks according to their types, each housing various work benches and laboratories. For example, the make-up and function of a brain, liver, or muscle cell is very diverse, each shaped for their assigned task. The organelles inside the cells are also specialized; the job of one cell type cannot be completed by another. The molecules, secreted enzymes, and hormones synthesized in cells are different. While a pancreatic cell secretes insulin and glucagon, a thyroid cell releases thyroxine. Various dimensions and models of protein, hormone, enzyme, and antibody molecules are formed with structures called ribosome to be employed in unique processes. The energy that cells need is generated in organelles of mitochondria. In addition, various transmission lines, communication networks, and defense mechanisms are established inside cells.

Organs are not just packs of meat. Billions of cells in each organ are completing their works around a common goal. In each organ and cell, micro factories and laboratories of microscopic dimensions are set up, micro-machines and robots are being utilized, and atoms and molecules are employed like conscious workers.

The entire body is formed by the specialization of this zygote into very diverse cell types during the formation of these organs. The set of tasks in different organs is programmed to sustain the life of a single organism and to serve a common goal. How could one not be amazed by the combination of trillions of cells in a way to serve one purpose, form a body, and distribute tasks to different organs?

It is also important to analyze the composition of atoms and their relations with each other for a better understanding of the facts of creation. Different atoms form with varying numbers of protons, neutrons, and electrons in their atomic structures. A different element is generated when the proton number is changed; an isotope of the same element is generated with the replacement of the neutron number. Millions of types of molecules with unique features can be made via different combinations of atoms. Molecules are the smallest units that determine the chemical properties of matter. While the simplest compound is the hydrogen molecule, formed by two atoms, there are also molecules composed of millions of atoms.

There are molecules of diverse types and sizes present in the universe. Each molecule type is constructed in a three dimensional and unique way. The number, order, and shape of the bonds present among atoms in a molecule, even the angle between atoms, is very important. Because of these differences, despite the fact that they both contain a carbon atom, a diamond and graphite (coal) are distinct substances. The carbon atom can miraculously form 1,700,000 types of compounds on its own. Just as in hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂,) and water (H₂O) molecules, a change of an atom in a molecule can alter the entire property of that particular molecule. A small change taking place on a single base sequence of the DNA chain may disrupt its condition leading it to be ineffective or cause a disease.

As humans, we only observe the tangible side of such materials. Yet the universe contains multitudes that we cannot detect or know. Just like a software composed of commands is required for computers and electronic devices made up of physical elements, the presence of an intangible world that is dominated by souls and commands undetectable by senses is necessary within the matter where the program of fate is operated.

As mankind accumulates knowledge about the universe and existence, we notice that not only do we have a greater understanding of the nature of things, but also that each dimension in existence is a veil and this veil is lifted with science.

CERN, the most advanced physics laboratory on earth, announced on July 2012 that they had found a particle that behaved like the Higgs boson, a particle predicted almost 50 years ago to exist. This discovery has brought with it the possibility that the Higgs boson may be responsible for all the mass in the universe and that if it does really exist scientists can unravel the mystery and origins of the universe a little more.

Until the 18th century there was no precise distinction between philosophers and scientists. Philosophy and science merged when the ancient philosophers shaped science and improved scientific methods as we know today. Confucius, Plato, Aristotle, Avicenna (Ibn-i Sina) and Descartes are a few of the greatest known philosophers in history. Most of the prospering scientists in different disciplines have been inspired by their works. For instance, Johannes Kepler, Galileo Galilee, Isaac Newton, James Clerk Maxwell and Albert Einstein, all highly regarded physicists, were heavily influenced by the works of ancient philosophers. All of the aforementioned physicists tried to understand the physical laws that governed energy, time, and space. Even now, modern physicists are still trying to answer some of the most important questions: What is the nature of the universe and what is it made of? Are there undiscovered physical laws of nature? Are there extra dimensions of space? How can we solve the mystery of dark energy?

Today, in order to understand the composition of matter and how the universe was created, the most prominent particle and high energy physicists are designing huge particle accelerators and detectors. Particle accelerators, also known as atom smashers, are devices that use electromagnetic fields to propel a group of charged particles (ions) to high speeds and collides them with other moving particles or a stationary target composed of a bunch of particles (http://public.web.cern.ch). Particle detectors (radiation detectors) are used to detect, track, visualize and identify particles produced from reactions in accelerators. Scientists analyze the results of the collisions and try to understand interactions between the basic constituents of matter. This is the basis of understanding the components of the universe. The largest and most complex of these scientific instruments is located at CERN, the most advanced physics laboratory on earth. Egin Lillestol, a particle physicist from the University of Bergen (Norway), says that [1] there is nothing quite like CERN anywhere else on earth.

What does CERN stand for? CERN is the French acronym of Conseil Européen pour la Recherche Nucléaire which means European Council for Nuclear Research. It was founded in 1954. It attracts physicists and engineers from all over the world. According to CERN’s sources, half of the world’s particle physicists, about ten thousand scientists, are either doing active research or visiting there. They all work together toward their common goals of advancing technology, answering questions for better understanding the material world and training future scientists. CERN has also seen the development of many practical scientific applications other than those involved with high energy and particle physics. For instance, the world-wide-web was invented at CERN to allow international scientists to communicate and share their ideas more easily. From 1954 to present, scientists at CERN have received Nobel Prizes in Physics including Sam Ting, Burt Richter, Jack Steinberg and Georges Charpak.

CERN hosts the largest and highest energy particle accelerator, the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), which is twenty-seven kilometers in circumference and about one hundred meters under the ground. The LHC enables scientists to collide two groups of particles such as protons and lead ions. Physicists analyze and study the particles that are created in the collisions to study conditions just after the Big Bang, the phenomenon that is believed to form the universe 13.7 billion years ago. Many people in the world are looking forward to see the results the LHC will be producing.

CERN: Black holes

Some people have expressed concerns about the safety of the collider at CERN. The biggest concern is whether or not an atom-smasher as big as the LHC could create black holes and destroy the earth. In 2003, LHC Safety Assessment Group (LSAG) reported that the possible production of vacuum bubbles, magnetic monopoles and magnetic black holes at the LHC have no real risk. However, concerns about the safety of creating micro black holes in such a high energy particle accelerator have surfaced in the media for many years. Some media sites claimed that a black hole would be formed and destroy everything. Others announced that the LHC might cause earthquakes. According to the administrator of lhcfacts.org, a website in which scientists discuss the lack of safety at the LHC, the possibility of creating a micro black hole at CERN cannot be ignored, and there are two predictions about what that micro hole would be: according to the more optimistic outcome, the micro black hole evaporates before becoming a threat. According to the second prediction, however, the hole could grow quickly and endanger Earth. Eventually, the LSAG finished the discussion by reaffirming and publishing a second review which reports:

“The possibility of creating micro black holes at the LHC is at the rate of the order of one per second. These are harmless because they would quickly decay by hawking radiation (thermal radiation) according to standard calculations. They decay before even reaching the detector.”

Moreover, these kind of events, even with higher energies than those created in any man-made atom smasher, occur naturally and routinely in the universe. For example, ultra high energy cosmic rays (particles created in outer-space) come into contact with Earth’s atmosphere without any hazardous consequences. In brief, American physicist Karen D. Camarda said “If anything bad was going to happen, nature would have already done it.”

CERN: Higgs Boson

Another case which has dominated world news headlines mid-2012 was the Higgs boson, otherwise known as the “God particle.” What exactly is the Higgs boson and why is it called the God particle? The Higgs boson is a yet undiscovered particle which is taught to be a mechanism for how subatomic particles acquire mass. Most likely, it has a mass between the regions 115-130 GeV of energy. The Higgs mechanism was postulated by British physicist Peter Higgs in 1960s. The theory hypothesizes that the Higgs field, a kind of three dimensional frameworks, fills the universe. A particle borrows mass from the Higgs field when it moves through it. This is similar to the process that an electron undergoes as it gains mass when it passes through a positively charged crystal lattice of atoms. The “God particle” was coined as a nickname of the Higgs boson after Nobel prize winning physicist Leon Lederman published his popular science book in 1993 with the title of The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question? Lederman said he gave the particle this nickname because it is “so central to the state of physics today, so crucial to our understanding of the structure of matter” [2]. To explain further, the term “God particle” is more applicable to marketing than to science and theology. According to many scientists, calling it the “God particle” is inappropriate because it does not have any connection with God or any religion. Many wonder what will happen if scientists find the Higgs boson. Brad Hirschfield, President of the National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership said in his article [3] in The Washington Post:

“While not exactly a theory of creation, finding the God Particle would bring us closer to an understanding of the fundamental processes that govern physical existence.”

Furthermore, some scientists admit that exploration in this field will be far from over even after the Higgs boson is found. Instead, the discovery will open doors to newer and more complex questions. For instance, Michio Kaku, the co-founder of String Theory, asserts [4] that finding the Higgs boson is not enough. He says that “we are at the beginning, not the end of physics. The adventure continues.” In spite of these sentiments, some people, including myself, believe that the discovery of the Higgs boson might reveal a very large missing piece in the physics puzzle.

Acknowledgment: This article is produced at Mergeous [5], an online article and project development service for authors and publishers dedicated to the advancement of technologies in the merging realms of science and religion.

Kara is a freelance pop-sci writer pursuing a PhD in Physics.

References

[1] CERN, “A Unique Experience,” http://user.web.cern.ch/

[2] Lederman, Leon M. 1993. The God Particle: If the Universe Is the Answer, What Is the Question?: A Tale of Two Particles and the Ultimate T-Shirt, Bantam Doubleday Publishing Group.

[3] Hirschfield, Brad. 2011. “The ‘God Particle’ and God,” The Washington Post.

[4] Kaku, Michio. 2011. “The ‘God Particle’ and the Origins of the Universe,” The Wall Street Journal.

[5] Mergeous, Online article and project development platform, http://www.mergeous.com

[11] DOE/NSF, High Energy Physics Advisory Panel, Quantum Universe, The Revolution in 23st Century Particle Physics, 2003.

The role of mathematics in understanding nature

Mathematics is a discipline of thought. It helps to develop our way of thinking and is an exercise in improving our intelligence. Mathematics can be considered as another kind of language, a language very different from that of a spoken language. When it is hard to convey our thoughts in terms of words, or our words become insufficient to express our thoughts, mathematics may be used as an alternative. On some occasions, expressing ideas via mathematics might be more concise, much clearer and more understandable. Although mathematics is considered to be a separate branch of science, in fact it is related to all branches of science. Nowadays, even in biological and social sciences, extensive studies are being conducted using mathematics.

Engineering was one of the earliest application fields of mathematics. It has strong links with mathematics as well as physics. Many engineering problems can be considered as an application of mathematics and hence applied mathematicians and engineers share common research areas. Engineers try to improve the quality of life by designing new products and in the design process, geometry and mathematics play a vital role.

Since the first day of existence on the world, mankind has tried to understand and formulate the surroundings and events that take place around them. They have investigated the world and the cosmos and accumulated knowledge. Each question that was answered yielded more questions to be answered and the more the knowledge that was acquired the better the extent of our ignorance about the universe was understood.

The universe has been established in a very complex orderly manner. The magnificent order observed cannot be expressed well in words, but may also be expressed using mathematics. A person who develops their knowledge of mathematics can understand more about this supreme order. For example, the universal gravitational law, which describes the movement of planets, can best be understood through mathematical equations, while the solutions of the equations yield the well-known elliptic paths. The concept of infinity that is attributed to the Creator can be realized through the concept of infinity that is frequently used in mathematics. So mathematics is an essential tool in developing our understanding of the nature and universe. It is essential also in applying the principles of physical laws in nature to improve our quality of life. The design of an airplane requires extensive mathematical calculations and applications of physical laws.

Finally, it should be noted that mathematics also has its limits, as it is something that has been developed by human beings and may not be sufficient to express the total order and all physical laws. Chaotic motion, a very complex order, was developed recently to understand some phenomena that do not obey the rules of deterministic motion. A daily example of such motion would be atmospheric motion. With even super computers and satellite technology, the path of the hurricane Katrina could not be predicted precisely due to its largely chaotic behavior and these errors cost thousands of lives.

Basic engineering principles and their applications in nature

First, let’s briefly describe some of the fundamental engineering courses and their aims. Dynamics is the science of motion. It models motion, describing the relation among displacement, velocity and acceleration. The specific type of motion and its causes, such as forces, movements, impulses etc. are examined. Dynamics deal with solid bodies while fluid mechanics basically deals with liquids and gases.. In the context of fluid mechanics the rest states of fluids as well as their motions are investigated. The strength of materials deals basically with the design of structures and mechanical parts to loading conditions. Under a given loading condition, what would be the best design for withstanding the loads while using the minimum amount of material? Materials science deals basically with the mechanical properties of various materials and the causes (microstructure etc.) of those properties. Proper selection of the materials to perform the required task is another important issue.

Living organisms can also be considered as some sort of design, but of course they are different from man-made designs. Living organisms, whether they are plants, animals or human beings, are designed to perform a specific predetermined task. The organism has to move, find food, safely operate and resist the forces that act on it throughout its life, and it must reproduce. Therefore, organisms have to be designed (or more precisely created) according to the principles of engineering. The development of technology drew attention to creatures and the underlying engineering principles in their structures. Extensive research on living creatures revealed a clear conclusion: Designs applied in nature are much more sophisticated then the ones humans come up with.

Bernoulli’s principle is a fundamental principle in fluid mechanics. Basically, the principle states that when the velocity of fluid increases the pressure drops and visa versa. The lift force generated in the wing of a plane is explained with this principle. Air separates in front of the wing and reattaches at the back. When the upper surface of the wing is slightly curved and the bottom flatter, the air particles in the upper part travel a further distance at a higher velocity and meet the particles traveling under the wing at the back. The relatively higher velocity on top causes a pressure difference in the lift direction and this lift force balances the weight of the plane. Many applications of Bernoulli’s principle can be found in living organisms. A fish moving in water is a good example. In particular, fish that swim at great speeds, like the tuna, have distinctive body shapes: The mouth of the fish is at the front where the fluid comes to rest and the pressure is very high, making the fluid intake of oxygen easier. The heart is located at the minimum pressure point to make it easier for it to beat. The eyes are located on a precise saddle point, a place which is not affected by velocity changes. Since the pressure is constant for all ranges of velocities, vision is not distorted by movement. Another example is the human body. When one breathes in the fluid velocity in the nose increases and pressure drops. The outer pressure is higher than the inner pressure and the walls tend to collapse. If bones were found at the tip of the nose, they might easily break when excessive force was present. We need some other material to sustain the shape yet be elastic enough not to break down. Cartilage is the best choice in this case, as it has both strength and elasticity. Our ears are also made from the same material. If bones were used instead of cartilage in our ears, resting our head on one side would be painful or even cause damage to the ears.

Insect flight is another important issue and has attracted considerable research recently. Fluid scientists now realize that insect flight is much more developed than our flight techniques. Turbulence is the main issue. In turbulent flow, the fluids move in erratic paths colliding with each other, forming eddies and irregularities. This is a dangerous state, especially for planes, and increases the friction forces between fluid and structure. Therefore the maintenance of a regular flow (laminar flow) over the wings is advantageous. However, all insects benefit from turbulence and some portion of their lift is gained from eddies that are formed over their wings. Mechanical insect robots are built to understand insect flight. Insects have movable elastic wings, but aircraft only have immovable rigid wings. Movable elastic wings would certainly improve the flight of planes and their maneuverability, but extensive research has to be done before these designs can be safely implemented.

The bumps on the fins and heads of some whales are not accidents of nature. They were given to them by the Creator for some very special purposes. They decrease the friction (drag) force by 10% and increase the lift by 5%.1 When some have the effect of decreasing drag, they can also decrease lift and visa versa. This effect of both decreasing drag and increasing lift, which can be observed in whales, is very uncommon in fluid mechanics.

Streamlining is a very important issue for an object that moves in a fluid. Fluid particles move around an object that follows a path. Roughly speaking these paths are streamlines (in a steady motion) and it is a general rule that abrupt distortion of these streamlines should be avoided. Smooth changes in the streamline help to reduce the friction force between the object and fluid. All organisms, particularly those that move at greater speeds, have been created in accordance to streamlining principles. In these you can find many species of birds and fish, such as dolphins, sharks, whales etc. The friction reduction caused by the shape of a dolphin is still a controversial issue in science and the underlying mechanism has not yet been well understood.

An example of the strength of natural materials can now be given. Our bones are optimum structures, combining strength with lightness. In modern buildings, 60-70% of the buildings consist of the skeletons, which carry the loads and moments. In our body, our skeleton is only 1/7th of our body weight. Bones have inspired a new generation of lightweight structures. For instance, a bridge inspired by the backbone was recently designed.2 When a longitudinal cross-section is taken from a femur, some curved lines are observed. Recent numerical simulations revealed that these lines are to be found in one exact place and their configuration increases the strength of the bone. Our backbone and the muscles around it withstand very high loads, equivalent to 7,000 Newtons or approximately 700 kilograms of weight.3 The bones of mammals are hollow inside to increase strength. The inner to outer ratio of the radii is at the optimum range, between 0.4 and 0.7.4

Hardness is another important issue in some applications. Seashells are the leaders in this issue. Their microstructures are being investigated under electron microscopes to invent new materials with extreme hardness properties. Micro-cracks inside a material grow over time, finally leading to failure. This is a major problem in turbine blades and this phenomenon is responsible for some plane crashes. In seashells, micro-crack inhibiting mechanisms are inserted to prevent crack growth. Inspired by spider silk and the microstructure of bird feathers, a new generation of bullet-proof waistcoats has been developed.

Owls are very silent flyers; they need to be so in order to approach rodents as rodent ears are highly sensitive to sound. Recent investigations have shown that the special geometry of their wings results in this silent flight. Their feathers are placed to form fringes on their wings. The technology might be mimicked to reduce the noise generated in planes.5

A recent engineering discipline is robotics. There are industrial robots, which are designed to perform some very special tasks. But there are also robots inspired by living organisms. A new robot is designed to mimic caterpillar motion so that it can be stable enough in a hazardous region, pass through small gaps and detect humans who are alive under debris.6 By mimicking the motion and body of a scorpion, a military robot was designed with a camera and sensors to safely operate in a battle region.7 Of course there are human-like robots that are designed to mimic our motion and activities. The developments in robotics teach us a very important lesson: All animals are much more sophisticated in their locomotion, actions, and behavior and it is extremely hard to mimic those. A robot that can move freely like a cat and climb a tree yet maintain its balance has not yet been produced. Our robots are very slow in motion, and their stability in movement is an important technological issue that requires extensive sensors and control designs.

Newly developing engineering branches

As mentioned above, one of the newly developing branches of engineering is robotics. Day by day, better robots are being designed and those designs try to better mimic animals and humans. Some 50 years ago, a human walking might be considered a simple issue, but now we know that comfort in walking and excellent balance in such movement are very complex issues.3 Each new design in robotics adds to our knowledge of understanding animal locomotion and behavior and how miraculous their designs are. Some people think that robots may take control of the world in the future. Yet this is simply not possible: If humans are to design them, there is no way that such machines can be superior to the designers.

Other promising new fields are the MEMS (Micro-electrical machinery systems) and nano-technology. These are design attempts on extremely small scales which actually mimic some micro biological systems and micro-physics. A vertebrate consists of an enormous number of cells, while the chemical and physical events that take place inside the cells and their establishment as a system are crucial parts of staying alive. It is extremely hard to design at the micro and nano scale and it is likely that research in this field will reveal more about understanding the art of God.

Notes

1. M. Le Page, “Speed Bumps Give Humpbacks a Surprise Boost,” New Scientist, 13 January 2001, p. 22.
2. I. Sample, “A Bridge with Backbone,” New Scientist, 16 September 2000, p. 7.
3. R. Mc Neill Alexander, The Human Machine, Colombia University Press, 1992.
4. R. Mc Neill Alexander, Optima for Animals, Princeton University Press, 1996.
5. C. Seife, “Deadly Hush,” New Scientist, 6 march 1999, p. 10.
6. C. Zandonella, “Wriggle into Rubble,” New Scientist, 10 November 2001, p. 22.
7. D. Graham-Rowe, “Walk Like a Scorpion,” New Scientist, 21 April 2001, p. 18.

In the industrialised countries biotechnology has been one of the fastest developing and most promising fields of research in recent decades. It is defined as the application of biological organisms, systems or processes to manufacturing and service industries. There are sub-divisions within biotechnology — such as fermenter technology, genetic engineering, enzyme technology, environmental technology, animal and plant biotechnology. In this article, we will look briefly at some topics in plant biotechnology which deals with the building- blocks of agriculture, horticulture, and the food, chemical and pharmacological industries. Already, commercially important applications of plant biotechnology such as transgenic vegetables and fruits, insecticide-resistant corn and cotton, herbicide-resistant beans and synthetic seeds have begun to appear in the market-places of America, Japan and Europe. This trend is set to expand dramatically in the coming decade.

Molecular biology

Molecular biology tools figure importantly in plant biotechnology. Plant breeders are trying to discover and determine the best combination of the genetic characters in different plants with the help of Randomly Amplified Polymorphic DNA (RAPD) and Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphisim (RFLP) techniques. The aim is to identify desirable characters and their precise location on chromosomes. Then, recombinant DNA technology can be applied to transfer a particular gene into a plant cell so as to alter and improve its original character. This technique enables us to, for example, produce flowers of a specified shape and colour or plants which secrete anti-fungal and anti- insect proteins.

The Human Genome Prced(HGP) is one of the grandest scientific projects of the end of the 20th century. The location, functions and base sequences of all human genes will be identified and the information used for diagnostic purposes such as controlling cancer or ageing genes. There is another, comparable project on model plant Aribidopsis which contains the smallest genome size in. The gene sequences of Aribidopsis are expected to have been fully mapped in ten years time. Japanese scientists are trying to determine the gene sequences of rice by using the mRNAs. Plant genome projects will be as important as the HGP in the coming century, because understanding the gene structures of plants may, by permitting us to produce ‘new’ genetically enhanced foods, provide the solution to the problem of ensuring food supplies while protecting the environment.

Plants genetically resistant to insects and herbicides

Insect pests and diseases caused by fungal, viral and bacterial pathogens are responsible for substantial losses in crop yields world-wide. The chemical control of insects and fungal pathogens represents a large segment of the crop- protecting business, currently estimated at US$ 8.7 billion annually. The global losses due to insects or diseases, despite extensive use of pesticides, are still 12-13%. Although all plants have some defensive systems to protect against insects and pathogens, the crop varieties used in modern agriculture often lack sufficient resistance. A kind of ‘killer proteins’ secreted by plants and micro-organisms prevent the larval development of insects or fungal and bacterial growths. The ‘killer protein’ genes are transposed to make genetically resistant varieties of such crops as corn, cotton, tomato, yellow squash, tobacco, and other model transgenic plants. For example, transgenic potato plants expressing a synthetic gene from B.thuringiensis sub sp terebrionus at high level exhibited strong resistance to Colorado potato beetle (CPB) in a large number of field trials and have recently been approved for commercial release. Potato growers currently spend US$ 75-100 million annually on the protection of about 480,000 hectares of potato. The CPB resistance potatoes will significantly reduce their use of environmentally undesirable insecticides.

Another example: Roundup is a commonly used herbicide which deactivates one of the chloroplast enzymes and so causes the death of the target plant but which also negatively affects crops. Plant molecular biologists identified a highly expressing enzyme which can defuse the effect of Roundup. This strain has been successfully transferred to some important crop species such as a rice which is now genetically resistant to the Roundup herbicide.

Natural plant metabolites in cell suspension cultures

Plants sometimes produce secondary metabolites (unlike primary metabolites such as DNA and amino acids) to adapt to their environment or to protect themselves from enemies. There are more then 100,000 types of secondary metabolites secreted by many kinds of plants which count as ‘natural products’ used particularly in the dyeing, pharmacology and cosmetic industry, and in insecticide and herbicide production. Some of the secondary metabolites are produced in batch cultures (growing plant cells in suspension medium) in plant biotechnology laboratories. Not all metabolites are in production, only a few and (for the present) economically non-viable metabolites have been produced over the last few decades. However, some metabolites are extremely important such as vincristine and taxol natural products which are used as anticancer drugs in medicine. Taxol is naturally produced by taxus tree (Taxus brevifolia), and costs approximately US$ 1.6 million kg-i. Taxol can be synthesized in chemistry labs in 52 steps, but is so laborious and expensive as not to hold much hope for commercial application. Vincristine is the rarest alkaloid found (1 part in 5 million dry weight) which is naturally produced by Madagascar Periwinkle (Catharanthus roseus) and it costs US$ 3 million kg-i. Five to six year- old trees are used to extract these ‘fine chemicals’. 250 kg of taxol is needed throughout the world each year. That means we must destroy one million taxol trees every year in order to supply this amount. This is not a cost-efficient or environment friendly process. Today, some economically less important chemicals are produced in bioreactors but, as yet, valuable Chemicals like taxol and vincristine are still waiting for the development of economically viable in vitro production techniques. If that aim is achieved, destroying trees for extraction will stop, production will be increased and prices come down.

‘Edible vaccine production in transgenic plants

Plant and animal protein structures are almost similar. Today, micro-organisms are used to produce vaccines. However, plants can easily be made to produce some pharmacalogically important antigens, and can economically be used as an alternative method. For instance, the production of hepatic B surface antigen (HBsAg) was expressed by transgenic tobacco plant. Although the expression level was low, HBsAg was expressed with similar physical properties to the serum-derived protein. The antigen extracted from tobacco has recently been demonstrated successfully in mice.

There are some other reports on vaccine production against cholera and malaria by transgenic plants. The demonstration that vaccine antigens can provide new opportunities for bio-farming of vaccines, If the antigens were orally active, food-based ‘edible vaccines’ could allow economical production and delivery in developing countries. Astonishingly, the vaccines containing edible plants may be developed and will be commercially available, and in the very near future, children in developing countries will be eating tailor-made polysaccharide containing potato as a nutrient, as well as a vaccine to protect them from cholera. The ‘edible vaccine’ plant foods will be one of the most amazing new products of the next century.

Micro-propagation and somatic embryogenesis

Plant cells unlike animals, have the potential, known as totipotency, to make individual plant organisms. Plants can be regenerated in biotechnology labs by the help of tissue culture techniques. Natural seeds are generally heterogeneous and lose desired characters in their phenotypes. Therefore, seed manufacturers produce homozygous (wild type) products but this is time-consuming and uneconomical. Plant biotechnologists are dealing with this problem by regenerating the plant in vitro. Micro-propagation and somatic embryogenesis are two principal ways of plant regeneration in vitro.

Micro-propagation involves the germination of seeds, cutting axillary buds of regenerants and then distributing on solid media to get new regenerated plants. Thousands of similar genomic structure regenerants can be produced by this technique. Although this technique needs less labour and money on a small scale, there are some technical problems in scaling up.

There is an alternative but less known somatic embryogenesis technique. It offers the production of ‘synthetic seeds’ in vitro on a large scales. A few model plant synthetic seeds such as carrot, alfalfa, spruce and celery have been successfully achieved in bio-industries. This technique involves the production of large numbers of synthetic seeds and then their encapsulation by variety gels. Subsequently, the synthetic seeds grow successfully in greenhouses. The aim in this field is to achieve large scale production of economically important plant seeds containing desirable characters.

Ethics

The question of what the effects will be of transgenic products on human health and on nature still remains unanswered. Should we answer this question now or should we wait until we see the bad consequences? It is our view that this question should be answered by scientists, philosophers and lay people before the products are released onto the market.

It is my belief that the earth has enough resources to provide the well-being of its human population, and human beings can enhance these resources by sensitive application of the new technologies, some aspects of which we have just looked at. However, some of the major problems of food supply and environmental degradation arise not from the lack of resources but from inequalities in access to and distribution of those resources, not least of which is the resource of knowledge and technology. If we are to use the new technologies for the benefit of human beings generally, without destroying the environment we all share, the political and social problems of distribution and transfer of technologies must be addressed. We need to live co-operatively and collaboratively both with ourselves and with our planet.

References 

• Mason H. S. & Amtzen C. J. (1994)‘Transgenic Plants as Vaccine Production System’, Trends In Biotechnology (Elsveir Trends Journals). 13(9), pp.388-392.
• Onishi N., Sakamato Y. & Hirosawa T.(1994) ‘Synthetic Seeds as an Application of Mass Production of Somatic Embryos, Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture (Kluwer Academic Publications), 39, pp.137-48.
• Pezzuta J., (1996) ‘Taxol Production in Plant Cell Culture Comes of age’. Nature Biotechnology, 14, p.1063.
• Shah M.D.. Rommens C.M T. & Beachy R.N. (1994) ‘Resistance to Diseases and Insects in Transgenic Plants: Progress and Applications to Agriculture’, Trends In Biotechnology (Elsveir Trends Journals), 13(9), pp.362-7.
• Smith J.E. (1981) Biotechnology, Edward Arnold Ltd, London, pp.1-6.
• Stogkigt J., Obitz P., Falkenhagen H.,Lutterbach R. & Endress S. (1995) ‘Natural Products And Enzymes From Plant Cell Cultures’, Plant Cell, Tissue and Organ Culture (Kluwer Academic Publications), 43. pp.97- 105. 

There has been strong opposition to the idea. The issue was discussed in the U.S. and Europe as long ago as the early 20th century. In 1980, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Diamond v. Chakrabarty that: ‘anything under the sun made by man’ is patentable. The court considered a distinction between a product of nature and a product of human invention or intervention as the decisive factor, rather than the distinction between sentient life and insentient matter. In ex Parte Allen, the Board of Appeal held that an oyster was patentable because it had been genetically altered by human intervention. In the end of the U.S. Patent Office ruled non-naturally occurring non-human multicellular living organisms, including animals, to be patentable. More recently, in 1988, Harvard University was granted a patent on a transgenic mammal named ‘Once Mouse’.

Is the situation any different in Europe? In Germany, inventions in the field of biology were not, in principle, excluded from patent protection, the Federal Supreme Court decided in the Red Dove. The European Patent Convention or EPC, signed in Munich and ratified in 1977, came into force on 1 June 1978 in the member states. Article 53 of the EPC provides that European patents shall not be granted in respect of:

a. inventions, the publication or exploitation of which would be contrary to ‘public order’ or morality, provided that the exploitation shall not be deemed to be so contrary merely because it is prohibited by law or regulation in some or all of the contracting states;

b. plant or animal varieties or essentially biological processes for the production of plants or animals. This provision does not apply to microbiological processes or the products thereof.

This article contains three exceptions to patentability of plant and animals.

1. Animal varieties and plant varieties.

2. Essentially biological processes for the production of plant and animals.

3. Inventions which are contrary to ‘public order’ or ‘morality’.

1. What is the meaning of the term variety?

This question was debated by the Examining Division’s decision (EPOR 4 (1990)) in regard to Once Mouse. The application was made by Harvard University for a patent for a genetically modified animal which was to be used to cure cancer.

The application was refused:

a. on the grounds of non-reproducibility under Article 83 of the EPC. Although the application was based on claims related to all non-human mammalian animals, actual tests had only been done on mice: it could not be assumed that the same manipulation could be successfully performed on other mammals without inventive skill; and,

b. on the grounds that the legislators had intended to exclude animals in general from patentability under Article 53 (b).

However the Board of Appeal did not see any reason to limit the claims under Article 83. Also, the Board did not agree with the Examining Division’s interpretation of Art 53 (b) as excluding animals as such from patent protection. They pointed out that the legislators must have intended the phrase ‘animal varieties’ to be more narrowly construed than ‘animals’. The Board, therefore, held the question to the Examining Division.

On reconsideration, the Division decided that ‘Once Mouse’ did not fall under the terms of the ‘variety’ exemption. It concluded that in relation to Article 53 (b) claims directed to non-human mammals generally did not fall within the scope of the terms ‘animal variety’, (race animale).

The ‘variety’ exemption was also considered in the Giba-Geiy Case by the Technical Board of Appeal.

In- this case, the claimed invention satisfied the requirements of patentability but the Examining Division refused to grant a patent because the subject matter fall into scope of the Art. 53 (b).

Contrary to the Division’s view, the Europe Patent Office (EPO) Technical Board argued that 53(b) excludes only plant varieties and it is clear that ‘plant’ is different from ‘plant varieties’. According to the Board, ‘plant variety’ means stability of characteristics within specific tolerances after every individual propagation or propagation cycle. The Board of heed that 53(b) excludes ‘only the plants or their propagating material in the fixed form of the plant variety.’

2. Another problematic clause under Article 53(b) concerns ‘essentially biological processes for the production of plants and animals’ which are excluded with the proviso that ‘this exclusion does not apply to microbiological processes or products thereof’.

Two main question arises here. Firstly: what differentiates ‘essentially biological processes’ from ‘microbiological processes’?

Llewelyn has assumed that ‘an essentially biological process could be defined, most simply, as one where natural methods are the dominant influence’. The EPO defined ‘essentially biological process’ as dependent on the extent to which there is technical intervention by man in the process. If such intervention plays a significant part in determining or controlling the result the process will not be an ‘essentially biological’ one.

It has been held by the EPO Board, in the context of plants in Lubrizal/Hybrid Plants, that the meaning of ‘essentially biological process’ must be judged on the basis of the essence of the invention, taking into account the totality of human intervention and its impact on the result achieved.’ Human intervention may also mean that the process is not ‘a purely biological’ one even though the intervention made by only a trivial contribution.

The Draft Directive established a new and different approach, namely that a distinction must be made between naturally occurring substance itself and the product in a useful form, which results from human intervention in isolating it from its natural environment.

Art 53(b) says that ‘essentially biological processes’ are not patentable but the Draft Directive provides that this only covers traditional biological breeding activities thereby and rescues the interventions in ‘essentially biological process’ from non-patentability.

The most significant element of Article 53(b) is its inclusion of the products of microbiological processes. This means that a plant or animal produced by a ‘microbiological process’ falls outside the scope of the exclusionary provision of Art 53 (b) and is therefore patentable. It could be said that the aim was specifically to enable products of microbiological processes to be patented, i.e. all genetically engineered plant and animal.

Again, the problem is one precise definition. How does one decide that a process which has been carried out is a ‘microbiological’ one? EPO guidelines explain that ‘microbiological’ covers the processes used by micro-organisms and processes used for producing micro-organisms. Also, ‘micro-organism’ includes material such as plasmids and viruses (which have been used to create new plant genetic matter) and cell lines. All such process are patentable. The Draft Directive similarly rules (in its Article 5) that processes which either use or operate upon a micro-organism, or result in a micro-organism, should be considered microbiological and thus eligible for patent. It goes further: ‘the word micro-organism shall be interpreted in its broadest sense as including all microbiological entities capable of replication, e.g. as comprising, inter alia, bacterium fungi . . . and cells.’

3. The third exception is on the grounds of immorality. Art 53 (a) provides that a patent should not be granted in respect of inventions, the publication or exploitation of which would be contrary to ‘Public Order’ or ‘morality’. In other words, if the public considers an invention ‘immoral’ a patent would not be granted.

But, the Examining Division ruled in regard to ‘Once Mouse’ that irrespective of whether the public considered it moral or immoral, such inventions incontrovertibly assisted mankind in the care of ‘widespread and dangerous’ diseases. The Technical Board of Appeal pointed out in its recommendations to the Division that the possible suffering to animals and risks to the environment should be balanced against the invention’s usefulness in meeting human needs (diagnosis, treatment, food supply for a rapidly growing world population) on the other hand. The Division stated that ‘the invention would reduce the overall level of animal suffering by reducing the number of animals used in conventional animal testing.

Considerable doubts remain. Whether or not ‘Once Mouse’ may help save people dying from cancer, who is to guarantee that mice or other animals will not be manipulated to which achieve a cure for baldness or other trivial (but commercially ‘compelling’) purpose. What is the excuse for creating a very unhappy, transgenic rat to cure a widespread but non-lethal condition such as acne?

Genetic engineering should be the subject of general legislation rather than ‘patent law’ especially in respect of ‘immorality’. 

Conclusion

The development of new features in plants and animals using microbiological methods is a long, difficult, expensive process with no guarantee for success. Therefore patents which have been granted by appropriate and competent bodies need to cover not only the first generation of the altered animals or plants but also their progeny which are then the result of natural breeding: and this was allowed in the claims of the Harvard Patent.

Despite strong arguments on several grounds, a new invention related to living matter should not be prevented from securing a patent. It is also our view that the distinction between patentable and non-patentable should be made on the basis of human intervention (especially in relation to microbiological processes) rather than on the basis of sentient or insentient matter.

However the patentability of human life or any part of human life must always be regarded as unacceptable in principle because human life should not be subject to commercialism: it would open the way to a new form of slavery.

• References
• CHRISRIE, A. (1989) ‘Patent for plant innovation’ EIPR, 3.
• CORREA, C. (1992) ‘Biological resources and intellectual property rights’ EIPR, 5.
• NOTT, R. (1992) ‘Patent protection for plant and animals’ EIPR, 3, p.79.
• PAVER, M. (1992) ‘All animals are patentable but some are more patentable than others’, Patent World, March, 9.
• WHAITE, R.& JONES, N. (1989) ‘Biotechnological patent in Europe’, The Draft Directive, EIPR, 5.