Arctic Apples spark debate over genetically modified apples

Arctic Apples are seeking a place in the U.S. and Canadian marketplaces, spotlighting the growing debate around genetically modified apples. “Okanagan Specialty Fruits (OSF), a Canadian biotechnology company, developed the apples to appeal to fresh-cut and foodservice markets,” said Julia Stewart, OSF spokesperson.

How Arctic Apples work

OSF scientists identified the genes that control browning in apples and figured out how to turn those genes off. “With that process, OSF can modify any apple variety to be non-browning, but so far the company has only used Golden Delicious and Granny Smith,” Stewart said. She added that OSF will likely add more varieties to the Arctic line in the future.

Founded in 1996 by Neal Carter, an apple grower in British Columbia’s Okanagan Valley, OSF seeks to use biotechnology to benefit tree fruit growers. Arctic Apples are the company’s first product, with others in development, including apples resistant to pests, scab, and fire blight.

Approval process and regulatory review

Arctic Apples have been in field trials for years, but commercial production in the U.S. requires approval from USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). OSF submitted its petition earlier this year, and APHIS will likely seek public comment before deciding.

Stewart said OSF’s petition is scientifically sound and includes the assurances APHIS requires, including evaluations of disease and environmental risks. She noted that APHIS does not weigh marketplace considerations, which remain a concern for others in the apple industry.

Industry pushback

The U.S. Apple Association (USApple) opposes OSF’s petition for unregulated market access. In a March 18 letter to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, USApple argued that Arctic Apples’ “non-browning” trait is “insufficient to warrant introduction into and possible disruption of the consumer marketplace.”

USApple emphasized that apples do not present a health risk but questioned their commercial value. “Such concerns include consumer desire for choice, possible demand for labeling, potential consumer rejection of future genetically modified produce and possible market disruption here and in our expert markets,” the group wrote.

Nancy Foster, president of USApple, stressed that the organization does not oppose genetic engineering research. “The technology holds a lot of promise for the industry, but the request from OSF seems premature at this point,” Foster said. She explained that the marketplace is still evolving in its view of genetically modified apples. For now, “the risks outweigh the benefits.”

Consumer perceptions

Steward countered that biotechnology has a strong future in the tree fruit industry. As for consumer acceptance, she pointed to research suggesting that people generally support genetically modified foods if they are the primary beneficiaries.

“We hope consumers are given the chance to make up their own minds,” she said. Stewart added that Arctic Apples might gain broader acceptance because they contain no foreign genes — only certain genes have been turned off. “The apples look, taste and grow like apples, with the benefit of being non-browning. It’s genetic modification at its most innocuous,” she said.

Next steps for growers

If regulators approve Arctic Apples, OSF plans to develop a licensing protocol for growers to purchase and plant the trees. Details are still being finalized, Stewart said.

Foodservice and fresh-cut operators represent the primary target market. Non-browning slices could eliminate the need for costly antioxidant treatments, which also create off flavors. Stewart noted that the innovation offers a practical benefit: “Apple slices that don’t brown after cutting.”

 By Matt Milkovich