HAZARD!!!!!
Do you work in the agricultural arena; in the farm field and exposed to plant diseases (bacteria fungi etc.? Do you handle biological pesticides, insecticides, fungicides etc? Are you exposed to biological control products in a research laboratory? Are you a crop duster or are exposed to bio-control products that fill the crop duster tanks?
If the answer is yes to any of the above, then please read on. You could be at risk of serious health hazards - which may lead to illness and/or diseases. These may not show up for years.
In the case of those in the direct line of fire, the laboratory employee is at paticular risk.
A 'then' college student (who wanted outside lab experience) had accepted a temporary position as an Assistant Researcher at the microbial research and development company Agraquest, Inc. in Davis California. Years later, he still continues to get sinus infections. Read; NON REPORTED Occupational Exposures & Illnesses Sustained From Employment At Agraquest, Inc. A Microbial Biotechnology Research & Development Company - Founder Pamela Gail Marrone
The state of California Department of Health was 'owner' of fungus Lagenidium giganteum, that was the "active ingredient" in the Assistant Researcher's project, Laginex.
See PAN Pesticides Database - Pesticide Products; Product Name: Lagenidium giganteum mycelium & oospores
After he realized the connections to Agraquest and his repeated infections, he filed for Worker's compensation on October 3, 2003. On October 24, 2003 the California Department of Health was no longer the owner of the fungus as it had been since 1991 (see link Product Name: Lagenidium giganteum mycelium & oospores)
Not only was Lagenidium deemed to be a new human oomycete in 2004 (Amy Grooters), but now, described on the CDC's website, the same project the Assistant Researcher worked on, Laginex is listed in the research paper, Lagenidium giganteum Pathogenicity in Mammals.
QUOTES:
"The emergence of heat-tolerant strains of L. giganteum pathogenic to lower animals and humans is of environmental and public health concern."
"In 1995, the US Environmental Protection Agency registered L. giganteum under the trade name Laginex as a biocontrol agent (13) but later deregistered it at the request of the manufacturer (http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/ FR-2011-09-28/pdf/2011-24832.pdf)."
-
|
State of California
Co-Registrant
with PRIVATE
California Biotech company
on
California Strain of fungus
~Lagenidium giganteum
**L. giganteum is the SAME fungus that Laboratory Assistant Researcher's 'primary' project was when after only 5 months & 9 days on the job the biotech employee became violently ill with bloody pus draining from his nose. 3 days later the left half of his face and teeth were numb. Within 1 week of becoming violently ill; the injured/ill biotech employee was scheduled for what would become the 1st of 4 MAJOR sinus surgeries.
What followed? Breakdown of immune system & numerous bacteria and fungi medically identified in blood work, sinus & sputum cultures; ALL RELATED to occupational exposure from employer's patents, products and experiments.
|
|
Microorganisms, which are NATURALLY found, in plant disease, insect diseases and soils
CROSS-OVER to humans. Many are being (or have been) used in bio-control products on
agricultural crops, ornamentals and used for insect control. Some are also being as plant
growth stimulators and seed treatments.
Dr. Anne K. Vidaver gave a presentation; "Cross-infective microbes: from plants to
humans" during the 2006 "Microbial Biopesticides and Transgenic Insecticides -
Enhancing Regulatory Communication" workshop in Washington DC at the University of
California Center on Regulatory Communication in 2006, before representatives from
numerous Federal and State agencies and Universities. It is more than evident she was
desperately trying to get everyone to pay attention to the human health hazards of exposure
to plant pathogens but also that many of these plant pathogens are being used as biocontrol
products. Her talk SEEMS TO HAVE FALLEN ON DEAF EARS. Some of what she had to
say is listed below:
- "So, you might want to know why do we have this topic for this workshop. Well, because there are some organisms that are used as microbial pesticides or prospective microbial pesticides, and in my experience, plant pathologist don't know about some of these microbes and the medical community conversely does not. And it's unfortunate that with all the people ... regulatory agencies, we're missing a few internationally; hopefully learn from what I plan to say, mainly the Food and Drug Administration nationally needs help."
- "I'm going to talk about some illustrations of plants; plant/human cross infections and use those as examples, and then I'll talk about what this actually could mean, both to the scientific community and to the regulated community and challenges for regulators as well ... so."
- "More and more bacteria by the way are being reported to be the cause of some chronic diseases."
- "The prospective virtue of fungi; which I'll talk more about later, is that in some ways they are more desirable as microbial control agents; but I'll say more about why that is."
"Now, the majority of the diseases that I'm going to talk about in humans are rare; but, there will be a few that are not so rare; and I'll try to point those out when we come to those. And obviously, for anybody in the regulatory arena, this causes at least a plausible thought, but I'll indicate what some of the challenges are with this."
- "OK, so first of all, what am I talking about? The terms are not yet agreed upon what this means. You can talk about organisms that are cross infected; mainly go to from plants to humans. You can also call them cross-over pathogens and you can also call them Cross, or inter-kingdom pathogens, and Dr. Tauxe from the CDC invented the term as far as I know. Phytoses to force on with zoo-onoces, that is organisms that go from animals to people. What they are not; is they're not overlapped pathogens in the select agent list with the FDA and AMA."
- "One of the important questions for people in ... the more we know in the way; the less we know is actually do we classify organisms? I mean this is a human endeavor but we have to do this in order to communicate."
- "One place I think that there's something missing, and it is not perhaps straight forward to talk about, is that we could have an interdisciplinary program across agencies, there's certainly interagency programs already in many areas, but we do not have any, as far as I know, that incorporate USDA and NIH [inaudible], certainly in this area of cross-infective microorganisms."
- " I dare say the medical community has no idea that some of these are really a problem in plants and the plant community has no idea that these are problems in medicine."
- " Actually, the question really for the medical community and even for the plant community is, are we talking about the same organism? In many cases, that's still very much the question."
- "And so, then how we do this is still a very fluid field, and this is good; but it's a very challenging area then for anyone who is in the regulatory arena. "
- " This is also then true in terms of nanoclature. What are you going to name an organism? How are you going to identify it, and then how are you going to characterize any group of individuals [inaudible] by rank?"
- " And then for species; at least for the present time, for bacteria you have a species being defined with at least 70% related misbind DNA."
- "Homology: Well, some microbial geneticists believe that this is, in again, inappropriate maybe with what we know, but no one has yet come up with something that is actually being received well as an alternative, so this is still a challenge."
- "What is the species? And I'm not sure even for the fungi that there is agreement on what is the species; and I don't know about some of the other organisms as well."
- "And then for defining a strain that you would actually use and that you would worry about stability, we're talking about the descendants of a single isolation, your culture."
- "Then there's the question of what do you do about the host responses. How do you measure the population; even of plants or people or animals as the case may be, because we are not in a scattered population in any of those categories."
- " We need to know a lot more about induced and innate immunity; simply to be able to combat all these challenging organisms that are multiplying and changing at a faster rate than we are. "
- "A DNA shuffling is going on often ; that is the rearrangement of genomes and how will this be actually seen by regulatory agencies is not clear. It could be [inaudible] that may come out in this workshop."
- "Our model system analysis appropriate; it can all be complex depending on what you're looking at it and many people that are on both sides of the fence, but in any case this is a challenge; both for the regulated community and the regulatory system."
Dr. Anne K. Vidaver's Abstract of CROSS-INFECTIVE MICROBES: FROM PLANTS TO
HUMANS states;
"Microorganisms that infect and cause disease in both plants and people are uncommon but increasing in frequency of isolation. These cross-infective microorganisms are more insidious than those simply transmitted to humans by contact or consumption of plants. Currently 22 bacterial taxa and 38 fungal taxa have been reported as causing ‘phytoses’. Several examples of bacterial and fungal diseases of plants and corresponding human disease will be presented. Questions that arise include accuracy of systematics analyses, role and similarity of virulence factors, genomic and pathogenicity islands and antimicrobial resistance. Newer biological techniques such as synthetic biology, illustrated by the construction of new viruses and DNA shuffling or intragenomic reconstruction, complicate oversight and regulatory action. Regulatory challenges among presumed equivalent taxa among plant and medical communities include definition and assessment of risk groups, permitting for interstate transport and differential perspective on the use and formulation of regulatory agency guidance documents. Assessment of alternatives for microbial pesticide niche markets will be presented. Potential interagency programs on cross-over pathogens will be discussed. The major challenge for agencies with regulatory responsibility for microbial biopesticides is the assessment and accuracy of taxa and scope of both natural and modified biological variations that may be used and their genomic stability. Management of cross-infective diseases of both plants and animals will require more interdisciplinary research and cooperative agency interactions."
Although NUMEROUS biocontrol agents are on the market presently (or were on the market and have since been cancelled) there remains the question as to how many agricultural workers and those employed in biotechnology research and development laboratories around the world have no idea just what they have been exposed to that have made them ill and/or sustained terrible diseases because of occupational exposure/s to the bacteria and fungi on the following list? This does not take into account the question as well as to how many family members have medical problems because their loved one carried home microscopic bacteria and fungi on their clothes, their shoes and anything that was brought home from the workplace environment?
In Humans / Animals & Cross-Infections from Plants, Soils and Insects you will find a
detailed list of the following bacteria and fungi that cross-infect humans). Many of these are
the "active ingredient" in bio-control products.
***The check mark '√ ' indicates the connection of the bacteria and fungi to bio-control products
Absidia
√ Acinetobacter
Acremonium
√ Agrobacterium
√ Alternaria
√ Aspergillus
Aureobasidium
√ Bacillus
Bipolaris
Blastomyces
Botryodiplodia
√ Burkholderia
√ Chaetomium
Cladophialophora
Cladosporium
Clostridium
Cochilobolus |
Coniothyrium
Corynespora
√ Cryptococcus
Curtobacterium
Curvularia
Cylindrocapron
Dickeya
Diplodia
Drechslera
Enterobacter
√ Enterobacter
Enterococcus
Erwinia
√ Escherichia Coli
Exophiala
Exserohilim
Filobasidiella |
Fusarium
Fusicoccum
Gibberella
Glomerella
Haematonectria
Hendersonula
Histoplasma
Hortaea
Hypocrea
Hyphomyces
Klebsiella
√ Lagenidium
Lasiodiplodia
Lecythophora
Legionella
Lewia |
Microbacterium
Mucor
√ Muscodor
Mycobacterium
Nattrassia
√ Paecilomyces
√ Pantoea
Pectobacterium
√ Penicillium
Phaeoacremonium
Phaeoannelloymces
Phialophora
√ Phoma
Pleurostomophora
Pseudocochliobolus
√ Pseudomomas |
√ Pythium
Rathayibacter
√ Rhizobium
Rhizopus
Schizophyllum
√ Scytalidium
√ Serratia
Setosphaeria
Sporothichum
Sporothrix
Staphylococcus
Stenotrophomonas
√ Streptomyces
Togninia
√ Trichoderma
√ Xanthomona |
|
REFERENCED BY:
1. Acinetobacter Infection by L. Silvia Munoz-Price, M.D., and Robert A. Weinstein, M.D.; New England Journal of Medicine
2. Isolation of Acinetobacter from Soil and Water; Paul Baumann1 Department of Bacteriology and Immunology,University of California, Berkeley, California 94720
3. page 601: STUDIES ON CULTURED AND UNCULTURED MICROBIOTA OF WILD CULEX QUINQUEFASCIATUS MOSQUITO MIDGUT BASED ON 16S RIBOSOMAL RNA GENE ANALYSIS; Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg., 70(6), 2004, pp. 597–603
4. National Institute of Health: Tissues of the Mosquito Vector Aedes albopictus
5. MARCH 24-26, 2004; Focus on Fungal Infections 14,New Orleans, Louisiana
6. AgraQuest seeks $5 million infusion; Sacramento Business Journal - December 5, 1997 by Lynn Graebner Staff Writer
7. FEMS Microbiol Rev, Apr;31(3):239-277; Molecular mechanisms of pathogenicity: how do pathogenic microorganisms develop cross-kingdom host jumps?
8. BIOLOGICAL SAFETY - Principles and Practices; LABORATORY, GROWTH CHAMBER AND GREENHOUSE MICROBIAL SAFETY: PLANT PATHOGENS AND PLANT-ASSOCIATED MICROORGANISMS OF SIGNIFICANCE TO HUMAN HEALTH by ANNE K VIDAVER, SUE A. TOLIN, AND PATRICIA LAMBRECHT - 4th edition
9. “Cross-infective microbes: from plants to humans” by Anne Vidaver;
Enhancing Regulatory Communication Workshop November 2006
16. US NUS National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health; J Am Mosq Control Assoc. 2007;23(2 Suppl):50-7. Oomycetes: Lagenidium giganteum.; Kerwin JL.; Source Department of Biological Chemistry, School of Medicine University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA.
|
Agraquest's Muscodor Albus is cause for more concern for everyone who worked at
Agraquest if they were exposes to it.
Also of concern is the the surrounding community and the public at large. This concern pertains to the fungus Muscodor Albus [QST 20799]; which was only one of the vast microorganisms that Agraquest touts to be 23,000 micoorganisms.
The United States Department of Agriculture; ResearchEducation & Economics Information System
**Source: OREGAN STATE UNIVERSITY.. submitted to C R I S
***TITLE: BIOFUMIGATION OF BARK BASED MEDIA WITH MUSCODOR ALBUS
ARSProject.BIOFUMIGATION.MUSCODOR.ALBUS.413096.2010AnnualReport.pdf
NOTE: THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION HAS BEEN REMOVED BY THE USDA, & IT HAS TO BE RELOADED ON THIS WEBSITE. WHAT HAS BEEN PUT ON COMMENTS WHEN I TRY TO SUBMIT THIS INFORMATION CONTAINS THE THE FOLLOWING:
403 FORBIDDEN
www.reeis.usda.gov
"It was necessary to modify the project.... Muscordor albus cultures and inoculum, and in light of new information on the health hazard of volatiles released by M. Albus." "Meanwhile, Agraquest, Inc. (Davis, CA) obtained an exclusive license for use of M. albus. All experiments with M. Albus, including those with cultures grown in university labs, require a Materials Transfer Agreement (MTA) with Agraquest, Inc. An MTA between Agraquest and Oregon State University, completed in Sept. 2009, stipulated that Agraquest would provide OSU with a rye formulation of M. Albus. However, in the process of pursuing EPA registration,
Agraquest discovered that volatiles produced by the fungus pose a significant human health hazard. Agraquest is no longer making or handling Muscodor formulations, is no longer pursuing EPA registration, and is discouraging the scientific community from working with this organism because of the toxicity of the active ingredient."
|
***Toxicology Reports (Muscodor albus) from the Canadian Journal of Microbiology and Cornell University Studies on Muscodor Albus were provided by Dr. Jack Dwayne Thrasher, Phd, Toxicologist.
1. Can J Microbiol 2009 Feb;55(2).203=6
 Effect of water activity on the production of volatile organic compounds by Muscodor albus and their effect of three pathogens in stored potato: Corcuff R Mercier, Tweeddel R Arul J.; SOURCE: horticultural Research Centre, Pavillon de 1"Envirotron, Universite, Quebec, Canada
"Rye grain culture of the fungus produced six alcohols, three aldehydes, five acids or esters, and two terpenoids. the most abundant VOC were: isobutric acid; buulnesene, a sesquiterpene; an unidentifed terpene.
2. Cornell Universite Animal Science; Sesquiterpene Lactones and their toxicity to livestock
~
Agraquest's QST 20799 - [Muscodor Albus] was discovered in Honduras by Gary Strobel [ received his PhD at University of California - Davis ]. The February 2006 Bulletin of Puget Sound Mycological Society reveals Agraquest uses "professional microbe hunters, mainly academics who prowl wilderness areas" looking for a new or 'novel' microorganism/s. The bulletin also says, Strobel licensed Muscodor Albus to Agraquest "for around $100,000, plus royalties".
Was Muscodor Albus in Agraquest’s ‘culture collection at the time “Research Technician / Assistant Researcher” was with the company? Was he exposed to it?
Gary Strobel discovered this fungus in 1997, as is described in Biocontrol News and Information 28(4), 67N–83N pestscience.com ; GENERAL NEWS (pages 69N & 70N) and Strobel's United States Patent # 6,911,338; Endophytic fungi and methods of use. *NOTE: Denise C Manker; one of Agraquest's founding scientist is listed as one of the inventors. [It was Manker who testified against “Research Technician / Assistant Researcher” during his worker's compensation trial.]
Read more...
Thursday, 11 September 2008 20:47
administrator
Agraquest's submission to the EPA in 1999 of "new active ingredient" (QST713 - bacillus subtilis) AND in support of their pesticide petition
Agraquest's 4/26/1999 submission,"EPA has received a pesticide petition 8F5032 from AgraQuest, Inc., 1105 Kennedy Place, Davis, California 95616, proposing pursuant to section 408(d) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), 21 U.S.C. 346a(d), to amend 40 CFR part 180 to establish an exemption from the requirement of a tolerance for the microbial pesticide Bacillus subtilis QST 713 strain in or on all raw agricultural commodities (RAC).
Pursuant to section 408(d)(2)(A)(i) of the FFDCA, as amended, AgraQuest, Inc. has submitted the following summary of information, data, and arguments in support of their pesticide petition. This summary was prepared by AgraQuest, Inc. and EPA has not fully evaluated the merits of the pesticide petition. The summary may have been edited by EPA if the terminology used was unclear, the summary contained extraneous material, or the summary unintentionally made the reader conclude that the findings reflected EPA's position and not theposition of the petitioner."
Agraquest's 6/16/1999 submission, "2. File Symbol: 69592-L. Applicant: Agraquest Inc., 1105 KennedyPlace, Davis, CA 95616. Product Name: QST 713 Technical. Microbial Fungicide. Active ingredient: QST 713 strain of dried Bacillus subtilis at 5%. Proposed classification/Use: None. For use in manufacturing or formulating end-use products to control various fungal plant pathogens and terrestrial use.
**Agraquest only received a "CONDITIONAL TIME-LIMITED REGISTRATION [view 4 page form→HERE ] from the EPA on 6/20/2000 (Janet L. Anderson, Ph.D, Director - Biopesticides and Pollutions Preventon Division) as the EPA themselves found fault....
Listed on the above June 20, 2000 "Conditional Time-Limited" Registration for QST 713 Technical:
•The submitted manufacturing processed did not have sufficient quality control fermentation batches.
Data required
•Data for the 12 month storage stability of the end-use product has not been submitted.
•Additional data described in the December 12, 1999 review and March 8 2000 letter are required to upgrade submitted process, MRID# 44519-04 to acceptable. This includes:
•1) A formal submission that clearly describes new quality control steps taken to assure the consistent CFU/g values and limit microbial impurities in the Technical Powder.
•2) A 5 batch analysis of Technical Powder produced from cell cultures with latest QC.
•3) Raw data for the above mentioned 5 batch analyses.
Ecological Effects Data Required
•A 21 day Freshwater Aquatic Invertebrate Study must be performed. Attenuated and filter sterilized controls should be used in the test. Test lab should attempt to determine cause of death and whether pathogenicity involved.
•[Shrimp] Required due to report of disease in terrestrial amphipod crustacean associated with B. subtilis infection. Protocol must be submitted before initiating study.
•QST Technical was shown to cause mortality to parasitic Hymenoptera. MRID 44619-14 is graded supplemental. Potential pathogenicity was not investigated.
•[HONEY BEE] All test concentrations showed treatment related mortality. MRID 4456519-17 is supplemental due to the short test duration and the lack of a determination as to whether mortality was due to toxicity only or whether pathogenicity contributed.
PLEASE NOTE: The submissions of April , 1999 and June , 1999 by Agraquest to the EPA were one of the products, [QST Technical wettable powder] that “Research Technician / Assistant Researcher” had transferred from LARGE drums into 24 pound bags for shipment. He was told "it was safe" and didn't wear a respirator.
Last Updated on Monday, 28 October 2013 01:13
"One" of the Agraquest Products that the injured/ill Assistant Researcher was exposed to was QST 713 Bacillus Subtilis Technical. This was the Seven Hundred Thirteenth microorganisms that Agraquest "screened". This bacterium was also discovered in a peach orchard by Agraquest scientist, Sherry Heins.
The 4/1999 and 6/1999 submission to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) by Agraquest of "new active ingredient" (QST713 - bacillus subtilis) only received a "CONDITIONAL TIME-LIMITED REGISTRATION from the EPA on 6/20/2000 (Janet L. Anderson, Ph.D, Director - Biopesticides and Pollutions Prevention Division) as the EPA themselves found fault.... Storage Stability, Manufacturing Process - toxicity/pathogenicity to; Freshwater Fish, Freshwater aquatic invertebrate, paleomonetes vulgaris (shrimp) and HONEY BEES.
Alarming reasons were questions to cause of death in Freshwater Aquatic Invertebrate, question of Bacillus Subtilis infection in shrimp, questions of death to "HONEY BEES" and Agraquest DID NOT meet guideline requirements in their submission (studies) on the toxicity and pathogenicity to "FRESH WATER FISH".
[See the four (4) page EPA form here→ June 20, 2000 "Conditional Time-Limited" Registration for QST 713 Technical]
Listed on the above June 20, 2000 "Conditional Time-Limited" Registration for QST 713 Technical:
•The submitted manufacturing processed did not have sufficient quality control fermentation batches.
Data required
•Data for the 12 month storage stability of the end-use product has not been submitted.
•Additional data described in the December 12, 1999 review and March 8 2000 letter are required to upgrade submitted process, MRID# 44519-04 to acceptable. This includes:
•1) A formal submission that clearly describes new quality control steps taken to assure the consistent CFU/g values and limit microbial impurities in the Technical Powder.
•2) A 5 batch analysis of Technical Powder produced from cell cultures with latest QC.
•3) Raw data for the above mentioned 5 batch analyses.
Ecological Effects Data Required
•A 21 day Freshwater Aquatic Invertebrate Study must be performed. Attenuated and filter sterilized controls should be used in the test. Test lab should attempt to determine cause of death and whether pathogenicity involved.
•[Shrimp] Required due to report of disease in terrestrial amphipod crustacean associated with B. subtilis infection. Protocol must be submitted before initiating study.
•QST Technical was shown to cause mortality to parasitic Hymenoptera. MRID 44619-14 is graded supplemental. Potential pathogenicity was not investigated.
•[HONEY BEE] All test concentrations showed treatment related mortality. MRID 4456519-17 is supplemental due to the short test duration and the lack of a determination as to whether mortality was due to toxicity only or whether pathogenicity contributed.
PLEASE NOTE: The submissions of April 28, 1999 and June 19, 1999 by Agraquest to the EPA were one of the products, [QST Technical wettable powder] which the injured/ill Assistant Researcher was instructed to transferred, from LARGE drums, to 24 pound bags for shipment. He was told "it was safe" and "it wouldn't hurt a fly". He didn't wear a respirator.
Sunday, 07 December 2008 19:46
administrator
Agraquest is the biotechnology company that searches throughout the world for the "novel" microorganism (fungus, bacteria) to be used in the place of chemicals for diseases of plants and insect control. Although not known unless it has affected someone close to you, these plant diseases also produce diseases in humans as well. Remember, when a new microorganism is found it has to be screened and identified (if possible) and then it is tested on various bacteria and fungal diseases of plants or against insects. This took place in David's workplace environment at Agraquest. David Bell and many other microbiologist like him are exposed daily, and more times than not, without knowledge to these human disease producing microorganisms that are in their workplace environment.
Where does Agraquest "search" for the "novel" microorganism? [Meaning of "novel"; "of a new kind; different from anything seen or known before"] Agraquest and/or it’s representatives have made public where they search for these microorganisms in soil, plants, plant roots, lichen, leaves and/or it’s litter, mulch and other decaying organic matter, fruit, bird feathers, dead insects, lake beds, forests, dunes and ocean caves, animals from terrestrial sources, marine sources (sponges, sea urchins, etc.) insects of all kinds, rain forests, jungles, dry creek beds, orchards, farm fields, and gardens. This is only what has been published. (This information was obtained through searching articles and interviews by or about Agraquest. (This information was obtained through searching articles and interviews by or about Agraquest. “Excerpts” from these references can be viewed [ HERE ]
Included within these "excerpts" is the article: "March of agricultural technology continues, Bio-warriors come in from the cold" (August 24, 2000) in which states:
•"Partnering in the project with Davis, CA-based AgraQuest are Drs. Elena Stepanova and Elena Ryabchikova, State Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology ("Vector"), New Siberia Region, Russia."
•"[Vector} once a top secret biological warfare research facility in the Soviet Union"
Also included in the "excerpts" in the article, "Recruiting microbes to do the dirty work";By Michael Kanellos Staff Writer, CNET News.com - April 11, 2006 in which states:
•"The microbe for root-knot nematodes studied at AgraQuest was discovered in an Eastern European creek by scientists once associated with a bioweapons lab in Siberia. The company's first product, Serenade, derives from a microorganism found in a peach orchard near Fresno, Calif., where a farmer had noted that a particular strand of trees never got hit with the dreaded brown rot. And the active ingredient in a fungicide called Sonata is a patented strain of Bacillus pumilus, originally found in a garden in Micronesia."
Agraquest's product QST 20,799 is the fungus, muscodor albus that was found in a cinnamon tree in Honduras.
The point is that microbes, fungus and bacteria from locations from the around the world have been and still are at the Agraquest lab. These are "known", "WHAT" are the "unknown"?
Last Updated on Friday, 13 January 2012 21:22
Read more...
|
|
