The doctor in Environmental Agrobiology and senior researcher at the University of Essex (England), Xabier Simón, argues that genetically modified crops can be "one more piece of the puzzle, not the definitive solution" against intense droughts, always combined with good agricultural practices and proper water management. However, he emphasizes that in the European Union, "with one of the strictest regulations in the world," the development and market introduction of these varieties takes, on average, "four more years" and "between 11 and 17 million euros more" than in other places.
Simón, a graduate in Biotechnology from EHU and doctor in Environmental Agrobiology, explains that, in light of the lack of forage for Basque livestock, there are "genes that in research have been related to producing more biomass or growing better in high temperatures," which would allow them to be applied to forage crops to increase production "even if temperatures rise." However, he clarifies that "those varieties would need to be developed and tested under the conditions of Euskadi, and today the cultivation of GMOs is very limited in the EU and practically prevented" in the Basque Country.
In an interview with Europa Press, the researcher emphasizes that drought-resistant varieties, "whether genetically modified, edited, or conventionally improved, can help reduce crop losses, but are not enough on their own." In his view, food security also depends on efficient irrigation management, appropriate agricultural practices, and reducing food waste, in addition to ensuring "that food reaches those who need it."
Simón stresses that "there will not be a single crop that feeds us all: depending on the climate, soil, and area, one solution or another will work, and it is reasonable to have all available tools." In this context, he mentions trials in which a gene from another species has been introduced to improve heat tolerance and yield. Thus, he details that "there is a wheat that has a sunflower gene, which in field trials in Argentina produced on average 6% more, and 16% more under drought conditions."
It also cites results in corn: "In corn, with a gene from a bacterium, the yield increased on average by 6% in field trials with little water, and between 4-8% with more severe drought in Africa." It acknowledges, in any case, that these are "moderate" advances and "not miracles," since in situations of extreme drought the harvest can also be lost.
The researcher adds that, in wheat with a gene from rice, "the weight of the grains increased by 21-34% under high temperature conditions in a controlled environment," a significant data point "because it is estimated that each degree above the optimal during grain filling reduces wheat yield by 3-4%." In these tests, he emphasizes, "corn yielded the same as the unmodified control, and in the wheat with the sunflower gene, the quality and nutritional content did not vary compared to the unmodified wheat."
When asked about the usefulness of these techniques to alleviate forage shortages in Euskadi, he responds that "yes, although not in the short term." After recalling that there are genes that "could be applied to forage crops to produce more, even as temperatures rise," he admits that, given the regulatory hurdles, "what can be applied are other avenues, such as pasture management or the conventional improvement of more resistant varieties, although the latter is slower than the newer techniques."
A regulatory framework that hinders development
Regarding the process of bringing a transgenic trait from the laboratory to the market, Simón indicates that the necessary resources "depend on the country," but that, on average, "bringing a new transgenic trait to market takes about 16 and a half years and around 100 million euros." He cites the United States, Canada, Australia, or Brazil as examples, where authorization is usually resolved in "less than two years," while in Europe it takes about four additional years. Furthermore, he warns that even a transgenic that has passed all technical and regulatory filters can end up receiving a negative vote in the EU.
The scientist recalls that, during the process, a plant "can tolerate drought well in the greenhouse and lose that ability in the field." "Drought or temperature tolerance does not depend on a single gene, but on many genes with small individual contributions, which is why it is difficult to improve it without affecting other characteristics, such as yield." All of this, he states, causes "only a few large companies" to dare to take on the entire regulatory journey.
Currently, he details, there is "a lot of research on wheat, barley, rice, or corn, especially in growth chambers, greenhouses, and some field trials," but he acknowledges that "no genetically modified cereal to withstand drought or high temperatures is grown today in Europe." He recalls that "in fact, the only genetically modified crop allowed in the EU is a corn resistant to the corn borer pest, MON810, which is mainly grown in Spain, but not in Euskadi, where the Basque Government approved in 2009 a regulation that, in practice, prevents genetically modified crops."
In his opinion, this "bureaucratic and economic obstacle" combined with scientific complexity "means that private companies often do not even attempt it in the EU, and that the public sector lacks funding to complete the process." As an example, he mentions the case of the CSIC of Córdoba, which developed a wheat with an 85% reduction in gluten. "Since it cannot be cultivated in Europe, the CSIC has sought to license it to companies in other countries, and it is most likely that it will be grown abroad and then we will import the flour," he explains.
Despite these limitations, Simón recalls the recent approval in the EU of a regulation on plants obtained with new genomic techniques, which will come into effect from July 2028. As he points out, CRISPR-type genetic editing, "used to modify DNA at very precise points," will have "a much shorter path than before" when it comes to modifications that "could also be obtained through conventional breeding."
Research on new techniques and safety
The work being developed at the University of Essex does not focus on "a specific gene or mechanism," but on a methodology "to graft cereals while they are still seeds" and obtain plants with the aerial part of one variety or species and the roots of another. "This way we can, for example, put roots of a drought-resistant cereal with a stem of a susceptible cereal and study what signals the root sends that help the plant endure better," he details, with the aim of identifying "which genes and mechanisms are activated in the aerial part and being able to work on them in sensitive cereals."
Regarding the safety of crops "legally classified as transgenic," the researcher states that the products that are approved "go through very strict safety controls." He points out that "various scientific reports and meta-analyses have found that transgenic crops are as safe for health as conventional ones." In addition, he emphasizes that genetic engineering "is just one tool among many to improve crops, along with traditional crossing or editing with CRISPR."
Simón clarifies that "this does not mean that there is nothing to debate, such as patents or dependence on large companies, but these are different debates from food safety." He insists, finally, that "there is no gene or group of genes that will solve challenges like climate change or population growth on its own, but they can help, along with other measures, for crops to produce more when water is scarce or to better withstand high temperatures."