View source for Bioprospecting

{{distinguish|Biomining}}
{{Short description|Exploration of nature for material with commercial potential}}
{{multiple image|perrow = 1 |total_width=200
| image1 = Galegaofficinalis03.jpg
| image2 = Metformin.svg 
| footer = Many important medications have been discovered by bioprospecting including the diabetes drug [[metformin]] (developed from a natural product found in ''[[Galega officinalis]]'').<ref name="pmid29077533"/>}}
{{Intellectual property}}

'''Bioprospecting''' (also known as '''biodiversity prospecting''') is the exploration of natural sources for [[small molecule]]s, [[macromolecule]]s and biochemical and genetic information that could be developed into [[commercialization|commercially]] valuable products for the [[agricultural]],<ref name="CBD1">{{cite web |url=https://www.cbd.int/doc/nbsap/finance/Guide_BioProsp_Nov2001.pdf|title=Mobilizing funding for biodiversity conservation: a user-friendly training guide|publisher=United Nations|access-date=17 July 2020}}</ref><ref name="pmid30465306">{{cite journal |vauthors=Pandey A, Yarzábal LA|date=January 2019 |title=Bioprospecting cold-adapted plant growth promoting microorganisms from mountain environments|journal=Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology|volume=103 |issue=2 |pages=643–657|doi=10.1007/s00253-018-9515-2| pmid=30465306|s2cid=53720063 }}</ref> [[aquaculture]],<ref name="pmid22737038">{{cite journal | vauthors = Beattie AJ, Hay M, Magnusson B, de Nys R, Smeathers J, Vincent JF | title = Ecology and bioprospecting | journal = Austral Ecology | volume = 36 | issue = 3 | pages = 341–356 | date = May 2011 | pmid = 22737038 | pmc = 3380369 | doi = 10.1111/j.1442-9993.2010.02170.x | bibcode = 2011AusEc..36..341B }}</ref><ref name="pmid24858315">{{cite journal |vauthors=Mazarrasa I, Olsen YS, Mayol E, Marbà N, Duarte CM |date=October 2014 |title=Global unbalance in seaweed production, research effort and biotechnology markets|journal=Biotechnology Advances |volume=32 |issue=5 |pages=1028–36|doi=10.1016/j.biotechadv.2014.05.002| pmid=24858315}}</ref> [[bioremediation]],<ref name=" pmid22737038"/><ref name="pmid32140148">{{cite journal |vauthors=Pascoal F, Magalhães C, Costa R |date= February 2020 |title=The link between the ecology of the prokaryotic rare biosphere and its biotechnological potential|journal=Frontiers in Microbiology |volume=11|pages=Article 231 | doi=10.3389/fmicb.2020.00231| pmid=32140148| pmc =7042395 |doi-access= free }}</ref> [[cosmetics]],<ref name="pmid24240981">{{cite journal | vauthors = Abida H, Ruchaud S, Rios L, Humeau A, Probert I, De Vargas C, Bach S, Bowler C | title = Bioprospecting marine plankton | journal = Marine Drugs | volume = 11 | issue = 11 | pages = 4594–4611| date = November 2013 | pmid = 24240981 | pmc = 3853748 | doi = 10.3390/md11114594| doi-access = free }}</ref><ref name="pmid31214881">{{cite journal | vauthors = Gupta PL, Rajput M, Oza T, Trivedi U, Sanghvi G | title = Eminence of microbial products in cosmetic industry| journal = Natural Products and Bioprospecting | volume = 9 | issue = 4 | pages = 267–278 | date = August 2019 | pmid = 31214881 | pmc = 6646485 | doi = 10.1007/s13659-019-0215-0}}</ref> [[nanotechnology]],<ref name=" pmid22737038"/><ref name="pmid28330085">{{cite journal |vauthors=Upadhyay P, Shrivastava R, Agrawal PK |date=June 2016 |title=Bioprospecting and biotechnological applications of fungal laccase|journal=3 Biotech |volume=6 |issue=1 |pages=Article 15 |doi=10.1007/s13205-015-0316-3| pmid=28330085| pmc=4703590}}</ref> or [[pharmaceutical]]<ref name="CBD1"/><ref name="pmid32529587"/> industries. In the pharmaceutical industry, for example,  almost one third of all small-molecule drugs approved by the [[U.S. Food and Drug Administration]] (FDA) between 1981 and 2014 were either [[natural product]]s or compounds derived from natural products.<ref name="pmid26852623">{{cite journal |vauthors=Newman DJ, Cragg GM |date=March 2016 |title=Natural products as sources of new drugs from 1981 to 2014|journal=Journal of Natural Products |volume=79 |issue=3 |pages=629–661 |doi=10.1021/acs.jnatprod.5b01055| pmid=26852623|doi-access=free }}</ref>

Terrestrial [[plants]], [[fungi]] and [[Actinomycetota|actinobacteria]] have been the focus of many past bioprospecting programs,<ref name="CorinneCluis"/> but interest is growing in less explored ecosystems (e.g. seas and oceans) and organisms (e.g. [[myxobacteria]], [[archaea]]) as a means of identifying new compounds with novel [[Biological activity|biological activities]].<ref name="pmid24240981"/><ref name="pmid32529587">{{cite journal |vauthors=Cushnie TP, Cushnie B, Echeverría J, Fowsantear W, Thammawat S, Dodgson JL, Law S, Clow SM |date=June 2020 |title=Bioprospecting for antibacterial drugs: a multidisciplinary perspective on natural product source material, bioassay selection and avoidable pitfalls|journal=Pharmaceutical Research |volume=37 |issue=7 |pages=Article 125 |doi=10.1007/s11095-020-02849-1|pmid=32529587|s2cid=219590658 |url= https://zenodo.org/record/3909383}}</ref><ref name="pmid24078803">{{cite journal |vauthors=Svenson J|date=May 2012 |title=MabCent: Arctic marine bioprospecting in Norway|journal=Phytochemistry Reviews|volume=12 |issue=3 |pages=567–578 |doi=10.1007/s11101-012-9239-3|pmid=24078803|pmc=3777186}}</ref><ref name="pmid33643258"/>  Species may be randomly screened for bioactivity or rationally selected and screened based on [[ecological]], [[ethnobiology|ethnobiological]], [[ethnomedical]], [[historical]] or [[genomic]] information.<ref name="pmid32529587"/><ref name="pmid22984175">{{cite journal|author2-link=Vincent Savolainen | vauthors = Saslis-Lagoudakis CH, Savolainen V, Williamson EM, Forest F, Wagstaff SJ, Baral SR, Watson MF, Pendry CA, Hawkins JA | title = Phylogenies reveal predictive power of traditional medicine in bioprospecting | journal = Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | volume = 109 | issue = 39 | pages = 15835–40 | date = September 2012 | pmid = 22984175 | pmc = 3465383 | doi = 10.1073/pnas.1202242109 | bibcode = 2012PNAS..10915835S | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref name="pmid29747673">{{cite journal | vauthors = Baana K, Angwech H, Malinga GM| title = Ethnobotanical survey of plants used as repellents against housefly, ''Musca domestica'' L. (Diptera: Muscidae) in Budondo Subcounty, Jinja District, Uganda| journal = Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine | volume = 14 | issue = 1 | pages = Article 35 | date = May 2018 | pmid = 29747673 | pmc = 5946462 | doi = 10.1186/s13002-018-0235-6| doi-access = free}}</ref>

When a region's biological resources or [[indigenous knowledge]] are unethically appropriated or commercially [[Exploitation of natural resources|exploited]] without providing fair compensation, this is known as [[biopiracy]].<ref name="CorinneCluis">{{cite news |last=Cluis |first=Corinne | name-list-style = vanc |title=Bioprospecting: a new western blockbuster, after the gold rush, the gene rush |journal=The Science Creative Quarterly |issue=8 |publisher=The Science Creative Quarterly (University of British Columbia) |year=2013 |url=http://www.scq.ubc.ca/bioprospecting-a-new-western-blockbuster-after-the-gold-rush-the-gene-rush/ |access-date=2013-11-04 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140430033814/http://www.scq.ubc.ca/bioprospecting-a-new-western-blockbuster-after-the-gold-rush-the-gene-rush/ |archive-date=2014-04-30 }}</ref><ref name="merriamwebster2">{{cite web |url= https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/biopiracy |title=Biopiracy |publisher= Merriam-Webster |date=2020 |website= www.merriam-webster.com |access-date=17 July 2020}}</ref>  Various international treaties have been negotiated to provide countries legal recourse in the event of biopiracy and to offer commercial actors legal certainty for investment.  These include the [[United Nations|UN]] [[Convention on Biological Diversity]] and the [[Nagoya Protocol]].<ref name="CBD1"/><ref name="pmid32529587"/> The [[World Intellectual Property Organization|WIPO]] is currently [[Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore|negotiating more treaties]] to bridge gaps in this field.

Other risks associated with bioprospecting are the overharvesting of individual species and environmental damage, but legislation has been developed to combat these also.  Examples include national laws such as the US [[Marine Mammal Protection Act]] and US [[Endangered Species Act]], and international treaties such as the UN Convention on Biological Diversity, the UN [[Convention on the Law of the Sea]], the [[High Seas Treaty|Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdictions Treaty]], and the [[Antarctic Treaty System|Antarctic Treaty]].<ref name="pmid32529587"/><ref name="pmid27652415">{{cite journal |vauthors=Benson E |date=February 2012 |title=Endangered science: the regulation of research by the U.S. Marine Mammal Protection and Endangered Species Acts|journal=Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences|volume=42 |issue=1 |pages=30–61 |doi=10.1525/hsns.2012.42.1.30| pmid=27652415}}</ref>

==Bioprospecting-derived resources and products==
===Agriculture===
[[File:Ata Sugar-apple Pinha Fruta do conde.JPG|thumb|right|[[Annonin]]-based biopesticides, used to protect crops from beetles and other pests, were developed from the plant ''[[Annona squamosa]]''.<ref name="annonin1"/>]]
Bioprospecting-derived resources and products used in agriculture include [[biofertilizer]]s, [[biopesticide]]s and [[antibiotic use in livestock|veterinary antibiotics]].  ''[[Rhizobium]]'' is a genus of soil bacteria used as biofertilizers,<ref name="pmid20879835">{{cite journal | vauthors = John RP, Tyagi RD, Brar SK, Surampalli RY, Prévost D| title = Bio-encapsulation of microbial cells for targeted agricultural delivery| journal = Critical Reviews in Biotechnology | volume = 31 | issue = 3  | pages = 211–226 | date = September 2011| pmid = 20879835 | doi = 10.3109/07388551.2010.513327| s2cid = 207467630}}</ref> ''[[Bacillus thuringiensis]]'' (also called Bt) and the [[annonin]]s (obtained from seeds of the plant ''[[Annona squamosa]]'') are examples of biopesticides,<ref name="pmid12598644">{{cite journal | vauthors = Wei JZ, Hale K, Carta L, Platzer E, Wong C, Fang SC, Aroian RV | title = ''Bacillus thuringiensis'' crystal proteins that target nematodes | journal = Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America | volume = 100 | issue = 5 | pages = 2760–5 | date = 2003 | pmid = 12598644 | pmc = 151414 | doi = 10.1073/pnas.0538072100 | bibcode = 2003PNAS..100.2760W | doi-access = free }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web| url = https://patents.google.com/patent/US5147640A/en| title = Strains of ''Bacillus thuringiensis'' insecticidal compositions containing the same US5147640A| access-date = 2020-07-27| vauthors = Gard IE, Gonzalez JM |date=September 1992|display-authors=et al}}</ref><ref name="annonin1">{{cite book | vauthors = Wani JA, Wali AF, Majid S, Rasool S, Rehman MU, Rashid SM, Ali S, Farooq S, Rasool S, Ahmad A, Qamar W| title = Bioremediation and Biotechnology, Vol 2: Degradation of Pesticides and Heavy Metals | chapter = Bio-Pesticides: Application and Possible Mechanism of Action |veditors= Bhat RA, Hakeem KR, Dervash MA | pages = 97–119 | date = 2020 | location = Cham | doi = 10.1007/978-3-030-40333-1_6| isbn = 978-3-030-40332-4 | s2cid = 218939420 }}</ref><ref name="annonin2">{{Cite web| url = https://patents.google.com/patent/US4689232| title = Pure annonin and a process for the preparation thereof US 4689232 A| access-date = 2020-07-27| vauthors = Moeschler HF, Pfluger W, Wendisch D |date=August 1987 }}</ref> and [[valnemulin]] and [[tiamulin]] (discovered and developed from the [[basidiomycete]] fungi ''Omphalina mutila'' and ''[[Clitopilus|Clitopilus passeckerianus]]'') are examples of veterinary antibiotics.<ref name="pmid16589015">{{cite journal |vauthors=Kavanagh F, Hervey A, Robbins WJ|date=September 1951 |title=Antibiotic substances from basidiomycetes: VIII. ''Pleurotus multilus'' (Fr.) Sacc. and ''Pleurotus passeckerianus'' Pilat.|journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America|volume=37 |issue=9|pages=570–574|doi=10.1073/pnas.37.9.570|pmid=16589015| pmc = 1063423|bibcode=1951PNAS...37..570K |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="pmid28649239">{{cite journal | vauthors = de Mattos-Shipley KM, Foster GD, and Bailey AM| title = Insights into the classical genetics of ''Clitopilus passeckerianus'' – the pleuromutilin producing mushroom| journal = Frontiers in Microbiology | volume = 8 | pages = Article 1056 | date = June 2017| pmid = 28649239 | pmc = 5465285 | doi = 10.3389/fmicb.2017.01056| doi-access = free}}</ref>

===Bioremediation===
Examples of bioprospecting products used in bioremediation include ''[[Coriolopsis gallica]]''- and ''[[Phanerochaete|Phanerochaete chrysosporium]]''-derived [[laccase]] enzymes, used for treating [[brewery|beer factory]] [[wastewater]] and for dechlorinating and decolorizing [[paper mill]] [[effluent]].<ref name="pmid28330085"/>

===Cosmetics and personal care===
Cosmetics and personal care products obtained from bioprospecting include ''[[Porphyridium cruentum]]''-derived [[oligosaccharide]] and oligoelement blends used to treat [[erythema]] ([[rosacea]], [[flushing (physiology)|flushing]] and [[periorbital dark circles|dark circles]]),<ref name="pmid24240981"/> ''[[Xanthobacter autotrophicus]]''-derived [[zeaxanthin]] used for [[Epidermis#Skin hydration|skin hydration]] and [[UV#Human health-related effects|UV]] protection,<ref name="pmid31214881"/> ''[[Clostridium histolyticum]]''-derived [[collagenase]]s used for [[skin]] regeneration,<ref name="pmid31214881"/> and ''[[Microsporum]]''-derived [[keratinase]]s used for [[hair removal]].<ref name="pmid31214881"/>

===Nanotechnology and biosensors===
Because [[microbial]] [[laccase]]s have a broad [[substrate (chemistry)|substrate]] range, they can be used in [[biosensor]] technology to detect a wide range of [[organic compound]]s.  For example, laccase-containing [[electrode]]s are used to detect [[polyphenol|polyphenolic compounds]] in [[wine]], and [[lignin]]s and [[phenols]] in [[wastewater]].<ref name="pmid28330085"/>

===Pharmaceuticals===
[[File:Streptomyces griseus.jpg|thumb|right|The [[tuberculosis]] drug [[streptomycin]] was discovered from the [[actinomycete]] ''[[Streptomyces griseus]]''.<ref name="pmid32529587"/>]]
Many of the [[antibiotic|antibacterial drug]]s in current clinical use were discovered through bioprospecting including the [[aminoglycoside]]s, [[tetracycline]]s, [[amphenicol]]s, [[polymyxin]]s, [[cephalosporin]]s and other [[β-lactam antibiotic]]s, [[macrolide]]s, [[pleuromutilin]]s, [[Glycopeptide antibiotic|glycopeptide]]s, [[rifamycin]]s, [[lincosamide]]s, [[streptogramin]]s, and [[Phosphonate|phosphonic acid]] antibiotics.<ref name="pmid32529587"/><ref name="HoMBRG">{{cite Q|Q29581637}}</ref>  The aminoglycoside antibiotic [[streptomycin]], for example, was discovered from the soil bacterium ''[[Streptomyces griseus]]'', the fusidane antibiotic [[fusidic acid]] was discovered from the soil fungus ''[[Acremonium|Acremonium fusidioides]]'', and the pleuromutilin antibiotics (eg. [[lefamulin]]) were discovered and developed from the basidiomycete fungi ''Omphalina mutila'' and ''Clitopilus passeckerianus''.<ref name="pmid32529587"/><ref name="pmid16589015"/>

Other examples of bioprospecting-derived anti-infective drugs include the [[antifungal]] drug [[griseofulvin]]  (discovered from the soil fungus ''[[Penicillium griseofulvum]]''),<ref name="10.1071/ch13639">{{cite journal | vauthors = Beekman AM, Barrow RA | title = Fungal metabolites as pharmaceuticals | journal = Australian Journal of Chemistry | volume = 67 | issue =6| pages = 827–843| year = 2014| doi=10.1071/ch13639}}</ref> the antifungal and [[antileishmanial]] drug [[amphotericin B]] (discovered from the soil bacterium ''[[Streptomyces nodosus]]''),<ref name="pmid22975171">{{cite journal | vauthors = Procópio RE, Silva IR, Martins MK, Azevedo JL, Araújo JM | title = Antibiotics produced by ''Streptomyces''| journal = The Brazilian Journal of Infectious Diseases | volume = 16 | issue = 5 | pages = 466–71 | year = 2012 | pmid = 22975171 | doi = 10.1016/j.bjid.2012.08.014 | doi-access = free }}</ref> the [[antimalarial]] drug [[artemisinin]] (discovered from the plant ''[[Artemisia annua]]''),<ref name="pmid29077533"/><ref name="pmid24979951">{{cite journal | vauthors = Kano S | title = Artemisinin-based combination therapies and their introduction in Japan | journal = Kansenshogaku Zasshi | volume = 88 | issue = 3 Suppl 9–10 | pages = 18–25 | date = May 2014 | pmid = 24979951 }}</ref> and the [[antihelminthic]] drug [[ivermectin]] (developed from the soil bacterium ''[[Streptomyces avermitilis]]'').<ref name="pmid31544193">{{cite journal | vauthors = Saraiva RG, Dimopoulos G | title = Bacterial natural products in the fight against mosquito-transmitted tropical diseases | journal = Natural Product Reports | volume = 37 | issue = 3 | pages = 338–354 | date = 2020 | pmid = 31544193 | doi = 10.1039/c9np00042a | s2cid = 202731385 }}</ref>

Bioprospecting-derived pharmaceuticals have been developed for the treatment of [[non-communicable disease]]s and conditions too.  These include the [[anticancer drug]] [[bleomycin]] (obtained from the soil bacterium ''[[Streptomyces verticillus]]''),<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/druginfo/meds/a682125.html|title=Bleomycin|publisher=US National Library of Medicine|access-date=27 July 2020}}</ref> the [[immunosuppressant]] drug [[ciclosporin]] used to treat autoimmune diseases such as [[rheumatoid arthritis]] and [[psoriasis]] (obtained from the soil fungus ''[[Tolypocladium inflatum]]''),<ref name="10.1007/978-1-4615-9846-6_2">{{cite book | vauthors = Borel JF, Kis ZL, Beveridge T | title = The Search for Anti-Inflammatory Drugs| chapter = The History of the Discovery and Development of Cyclosporine (Sandimmune®)| pages = 27–63| year = 1995| location = Boston, MA| doi=10.1007/978-1-4615-9846-6_2| isbn = 978-1-4615-9848-0}}</ref> the anti-inflammatory drug [[colchicine]] used to treat and prevent [[gout]] flares (obtained from the plant ''[[Colchicum autumnale]]''),<ref name="pmid29077533">{{cite journal |vauthors=Buenz EJ, Verpoorte R, Bauer BA |date=January 2018 |title=The ethnopharmacologic contribution to bioprospecting natural products|journal=Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology |volume=58 |issue=1 |pages=509–530 |doi=10.1146/annurev-pharmtox-010617-052703|pmid=29077533|doi-access=free }}</ref> the [[analgesic]] drug [[ziconotide]] (developed from the [[cone snail]] ''[[Conus magus]]''),<ref name="pmid24078803"/> and the [[acetylcholinesterase inhibitor]] [[galantamine]] used to treat [[Alzheimer's disease]] (obtained from plants in the ''[[Galanthus]]'' genus).<ref name="pmid23410167">{{cite journal | vauthors = Russo P, Frustaci A, Del Bufalo A, Fini M, Cesario A | title = Multitarget drugs of plants origin acting on Alzheimer's disease | journal = Current Medicinal Chemistry | volume = 20 | issue = 13 | pages = 1686–93 | year = 2013 | pmid = 23410167 | doi = 10.2174/0929867311320130008 }}</ref>

==Bioprospecting as a discovery strategy==
Bioprospecting has both strengths and weaknesses as a strategy for discovering new genes, molecules, and organisms suitable for development and commercialization.

===Strengths===
[[File: Halichondrin B.svg|thumb|[[Halichondrin B]], an example of a structurally complex and medically important natural product<ref name="pmid29440930">{{cite journal |vauthors=Koliou P, Karavasilis V, Theochari M, Pollack SM, Jones RL, Thway K|date=February 2018 |title=Advances in the treatment of soft tissue sarcoma: focus on eribulin|journal=Cancer Management and Research|volume=10 |issue=|pages=207–216 |doi=10.2147/CMAR.S143019|pmc=5798537| pmid=29440930 |doi-access=free }}</ref>]]
Bioprospecting-derived [[small molecule]]s (also known as [[natural product]]s) are more structurally complex than synthetic chemicals, and therefore show greater [[Chemical specificity|specificity]] towards [[biological target]]s.  This is a big advantage in [[drug discovery]] and [[drug development|development]], especially [[pharmacological]] aspects of drug discovery and development, where off-target effects can cause [[adverse drug reaction]]s.<ref name="pmid32529587"/>

Natural products are also more amenable to [[membrane transport protein|membrane transport]] than synthetic compounds.  This is advantageous when developing [[antibiotic|antibacterial]] drugs, which may need to traverse both an [[bacterial outer membrane|outer membrane]] and [[cell membrane|plasma membrane]] to reach their target.<ref name="pmid32529587"/>

For some [[biotechnological]] innovations to work, it is important to have [[enzyme]]s that function at unusually high or low temperatures.  An example of this is the [[polymerase chain reaction]] (PCR), which is dependent on a [[DNA polymerase]] that can operate at 60°C and above.<ref name="pmid33643258">{{cite journal |vauthors= Sysoev M, Grötzinger SW, Renn D, Eppinger J, Rueping M, Karan R|date=February 2021 |title=Bioprospecting of novel extremozymes from prokaryotes—the advent of culture-independent methods|journal=Frontiers in Microbiology|volume=12|issue=|pages=Article 630013|doi=10.3389/fmicb.2021.630013|pmc=7902512| pmid=33643258|doi-access=free }}</ref>  In other situations, for example [[dephosphorylation]], it can be desirable to run the reaction at low temperature.<ref name="pmid24078803"/>  [[Extremophile]] bioprospecting is an important source of such enzymes, yielding thermostable enzymes such as [[Taq polymerase|''Taq'' polymerase]] (from ''[[Thermus aquaticus]]''),<ref name="pmid33643258"/> and cold-adapted enzymes such as shrimp [[alkaline phosphatase]] (from ''[[Pandalus borealis]]'').<ref name="pmid24078803"/>

With the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) now ratified by most countries, bioprospecting has the potential to bring biodiversity-rich and technologically advanced nations together, and benefit them both educationally and economically (eg. information sharing, [[technology transfer]], [[new product development]], [[royalty payment]]).<ref name="CBD1"/><ref name="Sandhu01">{{cite web|vauthors=Sandhu HS|url=http://www.hillagric.ac.in/edu/covas/vpharma/winter%20school/lectures/21%20Bioprospecting%20Pros%20and%20cons.pdf |title=Bioprospecting: Pros and Cons|publisher=Punjab Agricultural University |access-date= 7 July 2021}}</ref>

For useful molecules identified through [[microbial]] bioprospecting, scale up of production is feasible at reasonable cost because the producing microorganism can be [[Microbiological culture|cultured]] in a [[bioreactor]].<ref name="pmid31214881"/><ref name="APR2021">{{cite web|url=https://www.americanpharmaceuticalreview.com/Bioprocessing/25566-Pharmaceutical-Bioreactor-Fermentor/|title=Pharmaceutical bioreactor / fermentor|publisher=American Pharmaceutical Review|access-date= 7 July 2021}}</ref>

===Weaknesses===
[[File: Koeh-146-no_text.jpg|thumb|upright|''[[Zingiber officinale]]'', an example of a medicinal plant used in multiple cultures<ref name="pmid26106644">{{cite journal |vauthors=Ahmad B, Rehman MU, Amin I, Arif A, Rasool S, Bhat SA, Afzal I, Hussain I, Bilal S, Mir M|date=2015 |title=A review on pharmacological properties of zingerone (4-(4-hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)-2-butanone)|journal= ScientificWorldJournal|volume=2015|issue=|pages=Article 816364 |doi=10.1155/2015/816364|pmc=4461790| pmid=26106644|doi-access=free }}</ref>]]
Although some potentially very useful microorganisms are known to exist in nature (eg. [[lignocellulose]]-metabolizing microbes), difficulties have been encountered cultivating these in a laboratory setting.<ref name="ASM2006">{{cite web|vauthors=Buckley M, Wall J|url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK563531/pdf/Bookshelf_NBK563531.pdf|title=Microbial energy conversion|publisher=American Society for Microbiology|access-date=7 July 2021}}</ref>  This problem may be resolvable by [[Genetic engineering|genetically manipulating]] easier-to-culture organisms such as ''[[Escherichia coli]]'' or ''[[Streptomyces coelicolor]]'' to express the [[gene cluster]] responsible for the desired activity.<ref name="pmid33643258"/><ref name="pmid33510482"/>  

Isolating and identifying the [[chemical compound|compound(s)]] responsible for a biological extract's activity can be difficult.<ref name="pmid33510482">{{cite journal |vauthors=Atanasov AG, Zotchev SB, Dirsch VM, INPST, Supuran CT|date=January 2021 |title=Natural products in drug discovery: advances and opportunities|journal=Nature Reviews Drug Discovery|volume=20 |issue=3|pages=200–216 |doi=10.1038/s41573-020-00114-z|pmc=7841765| pmid=33510482}}</ref>  Also, subsequent elucidation of the [[mechanism of action]] of the isolated compound can be time-consuming.<ref name="pmid33510482"/>  Technological advancements in [[liquid chromatography]], [[mass spectrometry]] and other techniques are helping to overcome these challenges.<ref name="pmid33510482"/>  

Implementing and enforcing bioprospecting-related treaties and legislation is not always easy.<ref name="CBD1"/><ref name="Sandhu01"/>  Drug development is an inherently expensive and time-consuming process with low success rates, and this makes it difficult to quantify the value of potential products when drafting bioprospecting agreements.<ref name="CBD1"/>  [[Intellectual property rights]] may be difficult to award too.  For example, legal rights to a [[medicinal plant]] may be disputable if it has been discovered by different people in different parts of the world at different times.<ref name="CBD1"/>

Whilst the structural complexity of natural products is generally advantageous in drug discovery, it can make the subsequent manufacture of drug candidates difficult.  This problem is sometimes resolvable by identifying the part of the natural product structure responsible for activity and developing a simplified synthetic analogue.  This was necessary with the natural product halichondrin B, its simplified analogue [[eribulin]] now approved and marketed as an [[chemotherapy|anticancer drug]].<ref>{{cite web | url = http://www.dtp.nci.nih.gov/timeline/noflash/success_stories/S4_halichondrinB.htm | title = Success story: halichondrin B (NSC 609395) E7389 (NSC 707389) | publisher = Developmental Therapeutics Program, [[National Cancer Institute]] | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20090710205200/http://dtp.nci.nih.gov/timeline/noflash/success_stories/S4_halichondrinB.htm | archive-date = 2009-07-10 }}</ref>

==Bioprospecting pitfalls==
Errors and oversights can occur at different steps in the bioprospecting process including collection of source material, screening source material for [[bioactivity]], testing isolated compounds for [[toxicity]], and identification of [[mechanism of action]].

===Collection of source material===
[[File: Allurus muricatus JS10 00405 lateral.jpg |thumb|right|Voucher deposition allows species identity to be re-evaluated if there are problems re-isolating an active constituent from a biological source.<ref name="pmid32529587"/>]]
Prior to collecting [[Biology|biological]] material or [[traditional knowledge]], the correct permissions must be obtained from the source country, land owner etc.  Failure to do so can result in [[Criminal procedure|criminal proceedings]] and rejection of any subsequent [[patent]] applications.  It is also important to collect biological material in adequate quantities, to have biological material formally [[Taxonomy (biology)|identified]], and to deposit a voucher specimen with a [[Biorepository|repository]] for long-term preservation and storage.  This helps ensure any important discoveries are reproducible.<ref name="pmid32529587"/><ref name="pmid24078803"/>
     
===Bioactivity and toxicity testing===
When testing extracts and isolated compounds for bioactivity and toxicity, the use of [[International standard|standard]] protocols (eg. [[Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute|CLSI]], [[International Organization for Standardization|ISO]], [[National Institutes of Health|NIH]], [[Alternatives to animal testing#EU Directive 2010/63/EU|EURL ECVAM]], [[OECD]]) is desirable because this improves test result accuracy and reproducibility.  Also, if the source material is likely to contain known (previously discovered) active compounds (eg. streptomycin in the case of actinomycetes), then dereplication is necessary to exclude these extracts and compounds from the discovery pipeline as early as possible.  In addition, it is important to consider [[solvent]] effects on the cells or [[Immortalised cell line|cell lines]] being tested, to include reference compounds (ie. pure [[chemical compound]]s for which accurate bioactivity and toxicity data are available), to set limits on cell line passage number (eg. 10–20 passages), to include all the necessary positive and negative [[Scientific control|controls]], and to be aware of assay limitations.  These steps help ensure assay results are accurate, reproducible and interpreted correctly.<ref name="pmid32529587"/><ref name="pmid24078803"/>

===Identification of mechanism of action===
When attempting to elucidate the mechanism of action of an extract or isolated compound, it is important to use multiple orthogonal assays.  Using just a single assay, especially a single ''in vitro'' assay, gives a very incomplete picture of an extract or compound's effect on the human body.<ref name="pmid17317057">{{cite journal |vauthors=Houghton PJ, Howes MJ, Lee CC, Steventon G|date=April 2007 |title=Uses and abuses of ''in vitro'' tests in ethnopharmacology: visualizing an elephant|journal=Journal of Ethnopharmacology|volume=110 |issue=3 |pages=391–400 |doi=10.1016/j.jep.2007.01.032|pmid=17317057}}</ref><ref name="pmid25634295">{{cite journal |vauthors=Dahlin JL, Nissink JW, Strasser JM, Francis S, Higgins L, Zhou H, Zhang Z, Walters MA|date=March 2015 |title=PAINS in the assay: chemical mechanisms of assay interference and promiscuous enzymatic inhibition observed during a sulfhydryl-scavenging HTS|journal=Journal of Medicinal Chemistry|volume=58 |issue=5 |pages=2091–2113 |doi=10.1021/jm5019093 |pmid=25634295|pmc=4360378}}</ref>  In the case of ''[[Valeriana officinalis]]'' root extract, for example, the [[Sleep induction|sleep-inducing]] effects of this extract are due to multiple compounds and mechanisms including interaction with [[GABA receptor]]s and [[Smooth muscle#Relaxation|relaxation]] of [[smooth muscle]].<ref name="pmid17317057"/>  The mechanism of action of an isolated compound can also be misidentified if a single assay is used because some compounds [[Pan-assay interference compounds|interfere]] with assays.  For example, the sulfhydryl-scavenging assay used to detect [[histone acetyltransferase]] inhibition can give a false positive result if the test compound reacts covalently with cysteines.<ref name="pmid25634295"/>  

== Biopiracy ==
{{Wiktionary|biopiracy}}
The term [[biopiracy]] was coined by [[Pat Roy Mooney|Pat Mooney]],<ref name=":1">{{Cite book|title=Bioprospecting: success, potential and constraints|others=Paterson, Russell; Lima, Nelson|isbn=978-3-319-47935-4|location=Cham, Switzerland|oclc=965904321|last1 = Paterson|first1 = Russell|last2=Lima|first2=Nelson | name-list-style = vanc |date=2016-12-12}}</ref> to describe a practice in which indigenous knowledge of nature, originating with [[indigenous peoples]], is used by others for profit, without authorization or compensation to the indigenous people themselves.<ref>{{Cite book|title=A dictionary of environment and conservation|last1=Park|first1=Chris|last2=Allaby|first2=Michael| name-list-style = vanc |isbn=978-0-19-182632-0|edition= 3 |location=[Oxford]|oclc=970401188}}</ref> For example, when bioprospectors draw on indigenous knowledge of medicinal plants which is later [[patent]]ed by medical companies without recognizing the fact that the knowledge is not new or invented by the patenter, this deprives the indigenous community of their potential rights to the commercial product derived from the technology that they themselves had developed.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book|chapter-url=http://sk.sagepub.com/reference/transntlcrime-justice/n11.xml|title=Encyclopedia of Transnational Crime & Justice|last=Wyatt|first=Tanya | name-list-style = vanc |date=2012|publisher=SAGE Publications, Inc.|location=Thousand Oaks|page=30|doi=10.4135/9781452218588.n11|chapter=Biopiracy|isbn=978-1-4129-9077-6}}</ref> Critics of this practice, such as [[Greenpeace]],<ref>{{cite web |title=Agriculture and Food |work=Green Peace Australia Pacific: What We Do: Food |publisher=[[Greenpeace]] |url=http://www.greenpeace.org/australia/issues/GE/overview/causes/corporate/patents-and-biopiracy |access-date=2013-11-04 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080919153226/http://www.greenpeace.org/australia/issues/GE/overview/causes/corporate/patents-and-biopiracy |archive-date=2008-09-19 }}</ref> claim these practices contribute to inequality between developing countries rich in [[biodiversity]], and developed countries hosting [[Biotechnology|biotech]] firms.<ref name=":0" />

In the 1990s many large pharmaceutical and drug discovery companies responded to charges of biopiracy by ceasing work on natural products, turning to [[combinatorial chemistry]] to develop novel compounds.<ref name=":1" />

==Famous cases of biopiracy==
[[File:Catharanthus roseus white CC-BY-SA.jpg|thumb|right|A white rosy periwinkle]]

=== The rosy periwinkle ===
The [[rosy periwinkle]] case dates from the 1950s. The rosy periwinkle, while native to [[Madagascar]], had been widely introduced into other tropical countries around the world well before the discovery of [[vincristine]]. Different countries are reported as having acquired different beliefs about the medical properties of the plant.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.smithsonianeducation.org/migrations/zoofood/rosper.html|title=A traditional brew leads to cancer cure|work=Smithsonian Institution: Migrations in history: Medical Technology|publisher=Smithsonian Institution|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140621011629/http://www.smithsonianeducation.org/migrations/zoofood/rosper.html|archive-date=2014-06-21|url-status=live|access-date=2013-11-04}}</ref> This meant that researchers could obtain local knowledge from one country and plant samples from another. The use of the plant for [[diabetes]] was the original stimulus for research. Effectiveness in the treatment of both [[Hodgkin lymphoma]] and [[leukemia]] were discovered instead.<ref>{{cite journal|title=The Politics of Origins: Collective Creation Revisited|first=Valdimar Tr|last=Hafstein | name-list-style = vanc |date=26 July 2004|journal=Journal of American Folklore|volume=117|issue=465|pages=300–315|doi=10.1353/jaf.2004.0073|s2cid=145691975}}</ref> The Hodgkin lymphoma chemotherapeutic drug [[vinblastine]] is derivable from the rosy periwinkle.<ref name= Karasov>{{cite journal | vauthors = Karasov C | title = Focus: who reaps the benefits of biodiversity? | journal = Environmental Health Perspectives | volume = 109 | issue = 12 | pages = A582-7 | date = December 2001 | pmid = 11748021 | pmc = 1240518 | doi = 10.2307/3454734 | jstor = 3454734 }}</ref>

===The Maya ICBG controversy===
{{main|Maya ICBG bioprospecting controversy}}
The [[Maya ICBG bioprospecting controversy]] took place in 1999–2000, when the [[International Cooperative Biodiversity Group]] led by [[ethnobiologist]] [[Brent Berlin]] was accused of being engaged in unethical forms of bioprospecting by several [[NGO]]s and indigenous organizations. The ICBG aimed to document the biodiversity of [[Chiapas]], [[Mexico]], and the [[ethnobotanical]] knowledge of the indigenous [[Maya people]] – in order to ascertain whether there were possibilities of developing medical products based on any of the plants used by the indigenous groups.<ref name="Hayden2003">{{cite book | first = Cori | last = Hayden | name-list-style = vanc |title=When Nature Goes Public: The Making and Unmaking of Bioprospecting in Mexico |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9TSTxTyqZs8C&pg=PA5 |access-date=2013-11-04 |year=2003 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-0-691-09556-1 |pages=100–105}}</ref><ref name="limitations">{{cite book | vauthors = Feinholz-Klip D, Barrios LG, Lucas JC | veditors = Wynberg R, Schroeder D, Chennells R |chapter=The Limitations of Good Intent: Problems of Representation and Informed Consent in the Maya ICBG Project in Chiapas, Mexico |title=Indigenous Peoples, Consent and Benefit Sharing |year=2009 |publisher=Springer Netherlands |isbn=978-90-481-3123-5 |pages=315–331 |doi=10.1007/978-90-481-3123-5_17}}</ref>

The Maya ICBG case was among the first to draw attention to the problems of distinguishing between benign forms of bioprospecting and unethical biopiracy, and to the difficulties of securing community participation and prior informed consent for would-be bioprospectors.<ref name="Lavery2007">{{cite book | first = James V. | last = Lavery | name-list-style = vanc |title=Ethical Issues in International Biomedical Research: A Casebook |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=T8j4SN85I40C&pg=PA21 |access-date=2013-11-04 |year=2007 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-517922-4 |pages=21–43 |chapter=Case 1: Community Involvement in Biodiversity Prospecting in Mexico}}</ref>

=== The neem tree ===
[[File:Neemtree.jpg|thumb|right|A neem tree]]

In 1994, the [[U.S. Department of Agriculture]] and [[W. R. Grace and Company]] received a European patent on methods of controlling fungal infections in plants using a composition that included extracts from the [[neem]] tree (''Azadirachta indica''), which grows throughout [[India]] and [[Nepal]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://patents.google.com/patent/EP0436257B1/en|title=Method for controlling fungi on plants by the aid of a hydrophobic extracted neem oil |website=google.com|access-date=30 April 2018}}</ref><ref name=BBCneem2000>Karen Hoggan for the BBC. May 11, 2000 [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/745028.stm Neem tree patent revoked] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131226180144/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/745028.stm |date=2013-12-26 }}</ref><ref name=NatureBiotechneem>{{cite journal | vauthors = Sheridan C | title = EPO neem patent revocation revives biopiracy debate | journal = Nature Biotechnology | volume = 23 | issue = 5 | pages = 511–12 | date = May 2005 | doi = 10.1038/nbt0505-511 | pmid = 15877054 | s2cid = 29690410 }}</ref>  In 2000 the patent was successfully [[Opposition proceeding|opposed]] by several groups from the EU and India including the EU Green Party, [[Vandana Shiva]], and the [[International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements]] (IFOAM) on the basis that the fungicidal activity of neem extract had long been known in [[Ayurveda|Indian traditional medicine]].<ref name=NatureBiotechneem />  WR Grace appealed and lost in 2005.<ref name=BBCneem2005>BBC News, March 9, 2005 [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4333627.stm India wins landmark patent battle] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110601203221/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4333627.stm |date=2011-06-01 }}</ref>

=== Basmati rice ===
{{main|RiceTec#Basmati patent controversy}}
In 1997, the US corporation [[RiceTec]] (a subsidiary of RiceTec AG of Liechtenstein) attempted to patent certain hybrids of [[basmati]] rice and semidwarf long-grain rice.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://patents.google.com/patent/US5663484C1/en|title=Rice lines bas 867 rt1117 and rt112 |website=google.com|access-date=30 April 2018|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180430165947/https://patents.google.com/patent/US5663484C1/en|archive-date=30 April 2018}}</ref> The Indian government challenged this patent and, in 2002, fifteen of the patent's twenty claims were invalidated.<ref name="10.2139/ssrn.1143209">{{cite journal| vauthors = Mukherjee U |date=June 2008|title=A study of the basmati case (India-US basmati rice dispute): The geographical indication perspective|ssrn=1143209 |doi=10.2139/ssrn.1143209|journal=[[Social Science Research Network|SSRN]]|s2cid=130991379}}</ref>

=== The Enola bean ===
[[File:"Enola" Bean 4 (3887465932).jpg|thumb|right|The Enola bean]]
The Enola bean is a variety of Mexican [[Phaseolus vulgaris#Cultivars and varieties|yellow bean]], so called after the wife of the man who patented it in 1999.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.2135/cropsci2004.0968 | vauthors = Pallottini L, Garcia E, Kami J, Barcaccia G, Gepts P |title=The Genetic Anatomy of a Patented Yellow Bean |journal=Crop Science |date=1 May 2004 |volume=44 |issue=3 |pages=968–977 |url=http://crop.scijournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/44/3/968 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050418042121/http://crop.scijournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/44/3/968 |archive-date=18 April 2005 }}</ref> The allegedly distinguishing feature of the variety is seeds of a specific shade of yellow. The patent-holder subsequently sued a large number of importers of Mexican yellow beans with the following result: "...export sales immediately dropped over 90% among importers that had been selling these beans for years, causing economic damage to more than 22,000 farmers in northern Mexico who depended on sales of this bean."<ref>{{cite web |last=Goldberg |first=Danielle | name-list-style = vanc |title=Jack and the Enola Bean |work=TED Case Studies Number xxx |publisher=Danielle Goldberg |year=2003 |url=http://www1.american.edu/TED/enola-bean.htm |access-date=2013-11-04 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131110023325/http://www1.american.edu/TED/enola-bean.htm |archive-date=2013-11-10 }}</ref> A lawsuit was filed on behalf of the farmers and, in 2005, the US-PTO ruled in favor of the farmers. In 2008, the patent was revoked.<ref>{{Cite web |date = April 2008 |title = US Patent Office rejects company's claim for bean commonly grown by Latin American farmers | publisher = American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) | url = https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-04/bc-upo043008.php}}</ref>

=== ''Hoodia gordonii'' ===
[[File:Hoodia gordonii P1010383.JPG|thumb|right|The succulent ''Hoodia gordonii'']]

''[[Hoodia#Uses and horticulture|Hoodia gordonii]]'', a [[succulent plant]], originates from the [[Kalahari Desert]] of [[South Africa]]. For generations it has been known to the traditionally living [[San people]] as an [[appetite suppressant]]. In 1996 South Africa's [[Council for Scientific and Industrial Research]] began working with companies, including [[Unilever]], to develop dietary supplements based on ''Hoodia''.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Maharaj, VJ, Senabe, JV, Horak RM | date = 2008 | title = ''Hoodia'', a case study at CSIR. Science real and relevant | journal = 2nd CSIR Biennial Conference, CSIR International Convention Centre Pretoria, 17&18 November 2008 | url = https://researchspace.csir.co.za/dspace/handle/10204/2539 | page = 4 | hdl = 10204/2539 }}</ref><ref name="WynbergSchroeder2009">{{cite book | vauthors = Wynberg R, Schroeder D, Chennells R |title=Indigenous Peoples, Consent and Benefit Sharing: Lessons from the San-Hoodia Case |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=1yrvafKoV2UC |access-date=2013-11-04 |date=30 September 2009 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-90-481-3123-5}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Vermeylen |first=Saskia | name-list-style = vanc |title=Contextualizing 'Fair' and 'Equitable': The San's Reflections on the ''Hoodia'' Benefit-Sharing Agreement |journal=Local Environment |volume=12 |issue=4 |pages=423–436 |year=2007 |doi=10.1080/13549830701495252 |bibcode=2007LoEnv..12..423V |s2cid=153467522 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Wynberg |first=Rachel | name-list-style = vanc |title=Hot air over ''Hoodia'' |work=Grain: Publications: Seedling |publisher=Grain |date=2013-10-13 |url=http://www.grain.org/article/entries/4047-hot-air-over-hoodia |access-date=2013-11-03 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131103223041/http://www.grain.org/article/entries/4047-hot-air-over-hoodia |archive-date=2013-11-03 }}</ref> Originally the San people were not scheduled to receive any benefits from the commercialization of their traditional knowledge, but in 2003 the South African San Council made an agreement with CSIR in which they would receive from 6 to 8% of the revenue from the sale of ''Hoodia'' products.<ref>{{cite news |last=Foster |first=Laura A. | name-list-style = vanc |title=Inventing ''Hoodia'': Vulnerabilities and Epistemic Citizenship in South Africa |work=UCLA Center for the Study of Women: CSW update |publisher=UCLA Center for the Study of Women |date=April 2001 |url=http://www.csw.ucla.edu/publications/newsletters/2010-2011/article-pdfs/Apr11_Foster.pdf |access-date=2013-11-04 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140430032944/http://www.csw.ucla.edu/publications/newsletters/2010-2011/article-pdfs/Apr11_Foster.pdf |archive-date=2014-04-30 }}</ref>

In 2008 after having invested €20 million in R&D on ''Hoodia'' as a potential ingredient in [[dietary supplements]] for weight loss, Unilever terminated the project because their clinical studies did not show that ''Hoodia'' was safe and effective enough to bring to market.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.unilever.com.au/sustainability/nutrition/ |title=Nutrition &#124; Unilever |access-date=2014-04-10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140413132944/http://www.unilever.com.au/sustainability/nutrition/ |archive-date=2014-04-13 }}</ref>

=== Further cases ===

The following is a selection of further recent cases of biopiracy.  Most of them do not relate to traditional medicines.

* Thirty-six cases of biopiracy in Africa.<ref>{{Cite web |access-date = 31 March 2006 |archive-date=January 24, 2013 |title = Africa suffers 36 cases of biopiracy | publisher = GhanaWeb |url = http://www.ghanaweb.com/public_agenda/article.php?ID=5062 |archive-url = https://archive.today/20130124003628/http://www.ghanaweb.com/public_agenda/article.php?ID=5062 }}</ref>
* The case of the Maya people's ''[[pozol]]'' drink.<ref>{{Cite web |access-date = 13 October 2005 |archive-date=October 13, 2005 |title = Biopiracy - a new threat to indigenous rights and culture in Mexico | publisher = Global Exchange |url = http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/americas/mexico/biopiracy.pdf |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20051013101935/http://www.globalexchange.org/countries/americas/mexico/biopiracy.pdf }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |access-date = 27 February 2008 |archive-date=September 25, 2003 |title = Biopiracy: the appropriation of indigenous peoples' cultural knowledge | publisher = New England Law |url = http://www.nesl.edu/intljournal/vol9/degeer.pdf |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20030925235120/http://www.nesl.edu/intljournal/vol9/degeer.pdf }}</ref>
* The case of the Maya and other people's use of ''[[Mimosa tenuiflora]]'' and many other cases.<ref>{{Cite web |access-date = 18 July 2020 |title = Of patents & piⓇates | publisher = Genetic Resources Action International | url = https://www.grain.org/en/article/53-of-patents-pi-ates}}</ref>
* The case of the Andean ''[[Lepidium meyenii|maca]]'' radish.<ref>{{Cite web |access-date = 18 July 2020 |title = Maca: the dubious aphrodisiac Chinese biopirates took from Peru |date = 31 October 2019 | publisher = Dialogo Chino | url = https://dialogochino.net/en/agriculture/31279-maca-the-dubious-aphrodisiac-chinese-biopirates-took-from-peru/}}</ref>
* The cases of ''[[turmeric]]'' (India),<ref name="pt">{{cite web|url=http://pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=61511|title=Know Instances of Patenting on the UES of Medicinal Plants in India|date=May 6, 2010|publisher=PIB, Ministry of Environment and Forests|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100510005340/http://pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=61511|archive-date=May 10, 2010|url-status=live}}</ref> ''[[karela]]'' (India), ''[[quinoa]]'' (Bolivia), ''[[Pentadiplandra brazzeana|oubli]]'' berries (Gabon), and others.<ref>{{Cite web |access-date = 18 July 2020 |title = The United Kingdom Select Committee on Environmental Audit 1999; Appendices to the Minutes of Evidence, Appendix 7: Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) and Farmers' Rights | publisher = www.parliament.uk | url = https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmenvaud/45/45ap08.htm}}</ref>
* The case of [[captopril]] (developed from a Brazilian tribe's [[Arrow poison|arrowhead poison]]).<ref>{{cite web | access-date = 18 July 2020 | url = https://www.reuters.com/article/us-brazil-biopiracy-idUSTRE6BL37820101222 | vauthors = Ellsworth B | title = Brazil to step up crackdown on "biopiracy" | work = Ruters | date = December 2010 | archive-date = 7 September 2012 | archive-url = https://archive.today/20120907145405/http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/12/22/us-brazil-biopiracy-idUSTRE6BL37820101222 | url-status = live }}</ref>

==Legal and political aspects==
{{More citations needed section|date=August 2020}}

=== Patent law ===
{{see|Societal views on patents}}
One common misunderstanding is that pharmaceutical companies [[patent]] the plants they collect. While obtaining a patent on a naturally occurring organism as previously known or used is not possible, patents may be taken out on specific chemicals isolated or developed from plants. Often these patents are obtained with a stated and researched use of those chemicals.{{Citation needed|date=May 2007}} Generally the existence, structure and synthesis of those compounds is not a part of the indigenous medical knowledge that led researchers to analyze the plant in the first place. As a result, even if the indigenous medical knowledge is taken as prior art, that knowledge does not by itself make the active chemical compound "obvious," which is the standard applied under patent law.

In the [[United States]], [[patent law]] can be used to protect "isolated and purified" compounds – even, in one instance, a new chemical element (see USP 3,156,523).  In 1873, [[Louis Pasteur]] patented a "yeast" which was "free from disease" (patent #141072).  Patents covering biological inventions have been treated similarly.  In the 1980 case of ''[[Diamond v. Chakrabarty]]'', the [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] upheld a patent on a bacterium that had been genetically modified to consume petroleum, reasoning that U.S. law permits patents on "anything under the sun that is made by man."  The [[United States Patent and Trademark Office]] (USPTO) has observed that "a patent on a gene covers the isolated and purified gene but does not cover the gene as it occurs in nature".<ref>{{Citation |title=Department of Commerce: United States Patent and Trademark Office [Docket No. 991027289-0263-02] RIN |work=Federal Register: Notices |volume=66 |issue=4 |pages=1092–1099 |publisher=Office of the Federal Register of the National Archives and Records Administration |date=2001-01-05 |url=http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/notices/utilexmguide.pdf |access-date=2013-11-04 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130224105437/http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/notices/utilexmguide.pdf |archive-date=2013-02-24 }}</ref>

Also possible under US law is patenting a [[cultivar]], a new variety of an existing organism. The patent on the Enola bean (now revoked)<ref>{{cite web |access-date = 27 July 2020 | url = http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/2009/07/mexican-yellow-bean-patent-finally-cooked.html| vauthors = Crouch D | title = Mexican yellow bean patent finally cooked | work = PatentlyO | date = July 2009 }}</ref> was an example of this sort of patent.  The [[intellectual property]] laws of the US also recognize [[plant breeders' rights]] under the [[Plant Variety Protection Act]], 7 U.S.C. §§&nbsp;2321–2582.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Chen |first=James Ming | name-list-style = vanc |title=The Parable of the Seeds: Interpreting the Plant Variety Protection Act in Furtherance of Innovation Policy |journal=Notre Dame Law Review |volume=81 |issue=4 |pages=105–166 |year=2006 |ssrn=784189 }}</ref>

===Convention on Biological Diversity===
[[File:Convention on Biological Diversity2.svg|thumb|upright=1.3|
{{legend|#00aa00|Parties to the CBD<ref name="196parties"/>}}
{{legend|#926ec6|Signed, but not ratified<ref name="196parties"/>}}
{{legend|#ff9911|Non-signatory<ref name="196parties"/>}}
]]
{{Main|Convention on Biological Diversity}}
The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) came into force in 1993. It secured rights to control access to [[genetic resources]] for the countries in which those resources are located. One objective of the CBD is to enable lesser-developed countries to better benefit from their resources and traditional knowledge. Under the rules of the CBD, bioprospectors are required to obtain [[informed consent]] to access such resources, and must share any benefits with the biodiversity-rich country.<ref>{{cite web | vauthors = Notman N | title = Cracking down on wildlife trafficking. | work = Image | date = August 2012 | url = http://www.scienceinschool.org/2012/issue24/juliana | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20140812213818/http://www.scienceinschool.org/2012/issue24/juliana | archive-date = 12 August 2014 | quote = CBD stating that the benefits arising from the use of genetic resources should be shared in a fair and equitable way (Rau, 2010) }}</ref> However, some critics believe that the CBD has failed to establish appropriate regulations to prevent biopiracy.<ref name = "Finegold_2005">{{cite book | vauthors = Finegold DL, Bensimon CM, Daar AS, Eaton ML, Godard B, Knoppers BM, Mackie J, Singer PA | title = BioIndustry Ethics | chapter = Conclusion: Lessons for Companies and Future Issues | publisher = Elsevier | date = July 2005 | isbn = 978-0-12-369370-9 | doi = 10.1016/b978-012369370-9/50036-7 | pages = 331–354 }}</ref> Others claim that the main problem is the failure of national governments to pass appropriate laws implementing the provisions of the CBD.<ref>{{cite web |title=Policy Commissions |work=International Chamber of Commerce: About ICC |publisher=International Chamber of Commerce |url=http://www.iccwbo.org/about-icc/policy-commissions/ |access-date=2013-11-03 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131102193344/http://www.iccwbo.org/about-icc/policy-commissions/ |archive-date=2013-11-02 }}</ref> The [[Nagoya Protocol]] to the CBD, which came into force in 2014, provides further regulations.<ref>{{cite web |access-date = 2020-08-01 | url = https://www.cbd.int/abs/ | title = The Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing | work = United Nations Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity | date = July 2020 }}</ref>  The CBD has been ratified, acceded or accepted by 196 countries and jurisdictions globally, with exceptions including the [[Holy See]] and [[United States]].<ref name="196parties">{{cite web |access-date = 2020-08-03 | url = https://www.cbd.int/information/parties.shtml | title = Convention on Biological Diversity: List of parties | work = United Nations Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity| date = April 2011 }}</ref>

=== Bioprospecting contracts ===
The requirements for bioprospecting as set by CBD has created a new branch of international [[patent law|patent]] and [[international trade|trade law]], bioprospecting contracts.<ref name="CBD1"/> Bioprospecting contracts lay down the rules of benefit sharing between researchers and countries, and can bring royalties to [[Developing countries|lesser-developed countries]]. However, although these contracts are based on prior informed consent and compensation (unlike biopiracy), every owner or carrier of an indigenous knowledge and resources are not always consulted or compensated,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Shiva|first=Vandana| name-list-style = vanc |date=2007|title=Bioprospecting as Sophisticated Biopiracy|journal=Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society|language=en|volume=32|issue=2|pages=307–313|doi=10.1086/508502|s2cid=144229002|issn=0097-9740}}</ref> as it would be difficult to ensure every individual is included.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal| first = Joseph | last = Millum | name-list-style = vanc | date=2010|title=How Should the Benefits of Bioprospecting Be Shared?|journal=Hastings Center Report|language=en|volume=40|issue=1|pages=24–33|doi=10.1353/hcr.0.0227| pmid = 20169653 | pmc = 4714751 |issn=1552-146X}}</ref> Because of this, some have proposed that the indigenous or other communities form a type of representative micro-government that would negotiate with researchers to form contracts in such a way that the community benefits from the arrangements.<ref name=":2" /> Unethical bioprospecting contracts (as distinct from ethical ones) can be viewed as a new form of biopiracy.<ref name = "Finegold_2005" />

An example of a bioprospecting contract is the agreement between [[Merck & Co.|Merck]] and [[INBio]] of [[Costa Rica]].<ref>{{cite web |last=Eberlee |first=John | name-list-style = vanc |title=Assessing the Benefits of Bioprospecting in Latin America |work=IDRC Reports Online |publisher=IDRC |date=2000-01-21 |url=http://idl-bnc.idrc.ca/dspace/bitstream/10625/32433/1/114581.pdf |access-date=2013-11-03 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130623025334/http://idl-bnc.idrc.ca/dspace/bitstream/10625/32433/1/114581.pdf |archive-date=2013-06-23 }}</ref>

===Traditional knowledge database===

Due to previous cases of biopiracy and to prevent further cases, the Government of India has converted [[Ayurveda|traditional Indian medicinal]] information from ancient manuscripts and other resources into an electronic resource; this resulted in the [[Traditional Knowledge Digital Library]] in 2001.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Bisht TS, Sharma SK, Sati RC, Rao VK, Yadav VK, Dixit AK, Sharma AK, Chopra CS | title = Improvement of efficiency of oil extraction from wild apricot kernels by using enzymes | journal = Journal of Food Science and Technology | volume = 52 | issue = 3 | pages = 1543–51 | date = March 2015 | pmid = 25745223 | pmc = 4348260 | doi = 10.1007/s13197-013-1155-z }}</ref> The texts are being recorded from [[Tamil language|Tamil]], [[Sanskrit]], [[Urdu]], [[Persian language|Persian]] and [[Arabic]]; made available to patent offices in English, German, French, Japanese and Spanish. The aim is to protect India's heritage from being exploited by foreign companies.<ref name=":3">{{Cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4506382.stm|title=India hits back in 'bio-piracy' battle|date=2005-12-07|access-date=2019-04-11|language=en-GB}}</ref> Hundreds of [[asana|yoga poses]] are also kept in the collection.<ref name=":3" /> The library has also signed agreements with leading international [[patent office]]s such as [[European Patent Office]] (EPO), [[United Kingdom Patent Office|United Kingdom Trademark & Patent Office]] (UKTPO) and the [[United States Patent and Trademark Office]] to protect [[traditional knowledge]] from biopiracy as it allows [[patent examiner]]s at International Patent Offices to access TKDL databases for patent search and examination purposes.<ref name="pt" /><ref>{{cite news |last=Koshy |first=Jacob P. | name-list-style = vanc |title=CSIR wing objects to Avesthagen patent claim |newspaper=Live Mint |department=Companies |date=2010-04-28 |url=http://www.livemint.com/2010/04/28214947/CSIR-wing-objects-to-Avesthage.html |access-date=2013-11-04 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100430002100/http://www.livemint.com/2010/04/28214947/CSIR-wing-objects-to-Avesthage.html |archive-date=2010-04-30}}</ref><ref name="in">{{cite press release |title=India Partners with US and UK to Protect Its Traditional Knowledge and Prevent Bio-Piracy |publisher=Press Information Bureau, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India |date=2010-04-28 |url=http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=61122 |access-date=2013-11-04 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130531235837/http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=61122 |archive-date=2013-05-31 }}</ref>

== See also ==
{{Wiktionary}}
{{col div|colwidth=30em}}
* [[Intellectual capital]]/[[Intellectual property]]
* [[Natural capital]]
* [[Biological patent]]
* [[Traditional knowledge]]/[[Indigenous knowledge]]
* [[Pharmacognosy]]
* [[Plant breeders' rights]]
* [[Bioethics]]
* [[Maya ICBG bioprospecting controversy]]
* [[International Cooperative Biodiversity Group]]
* [[Biological Diversity Act, 2002]]
* [[Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights|Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)]] (1994)
* [[International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture]] (2001)
{{colend}}

== References ==
{{Reflist|30em}}

== Bibliography and resources ==
{{refbegin}}
* The Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (United Nations Environment Programme) maintains an [https://web.archive.org/web/20060418041208/http://www.biodiv.org/doc/info-centre.shtml information centre] which as of April 2006 lists some 3000 "monographs, reports and serials".
* Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (United Nations Environment Programme), [https://web.archive.org/web/20060425201122/http://www.biodiv.org/doc/lists/bib-art-cbd.pdf Bibliography of Journal Articles on the Convention on Biological Diversity] (March 2006). Contains references to almost 200 articles. Some of these are available in full text from the [https://web.archive.org/web/20060418041208/http://www.biodiv.org/doc/info-centre.shtml CBD information centre].
* {{cite book |first=Vandana |last=Shiva | name-list-style = vanc |year=1997 |title=Biopiracy: The Plunder of Nature and Knowledge |publisher=South End Press }}
* {{cite journal | first = Jim | last = Chen |author-link1=Jim Chen | name-list-style = vanc |title=Biodiversity and Biotechnology: A Misunderstood Relation |journal=[[Michigan State Law Review]] |year=2005 |volume=2005 |pages=51–102 |ssrn=782184}}
{{refend}}

== External links ==
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20161209012742/http://www.edmonds-institute.org/outofafrica.pdf Out of Africa:  Mysteries of Access and Benefit-Sharing] – a 2006 report on biopiracy in Africa by [http://www.edmonds-institute.org/ The Edmonds Institute]
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20041224233949/http://www.activistmagazine.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=127 Cape Town Declaration] – Biowatch South Africa
* [https://grain.org/ Genetic Resources Action International (GRAIN)]
* [https://www.scidev.net/asia-pacific/news/indian-scientist-denies-accusation-of-biopiracy-sa/ Indian scientist denies accusation of biopiracy] – [[scidev|SciDev.Net]]
* [https://www.scidev.net/global/news/african-biopiracy-debate-heats-up/ African 'biopiracy' debate heats up] – [[scidev|SciDev.Net]]
* [http://comenius.susqu.edu/biol/312/bioprospectinglegitimateresearchorbiopiracy.pdf Bioprospecting: legitimate research or 'biopiracy'?] – [[scidev|SciDev.Net]]
* ETC Group papers on Biopiracy : [https://web.archive.org/web/20070709054650/http://www.etcgroup.org/en/issues/biopiracy.html Topics include: Monsanto's species-wide patent on all genetically modified soybeans (EP0301749); Synthetic Biology Patents (artificial, unique life forms); Terminator Seed Technology; etc...]
* [https://academic.oup.com/plphys/article/134/4/1295/6112341 Who Owns Biodiversity, and How Should the Owners Be Compensated?], ''Plant Physiology'', April 2004, Vol. 134, pp.&nbsp;1295–1307
* {{cite journal | vauthors = Heald PJ | year = 2001 | title = 'Your Friend in the Rain Forest': An Essay on the Rhetoric of Biopiracy | journal = SSRN Electronic Journal| doi = 10.2139/ssrn.285177 }}

{{Indigenous rights footer}}
{{Natural resources}}
{{Property navbox}}{{Intellectual property activism}}
[[Category:Bioethics]]
[[Category:Biopiracy]]
[[Category:Botany]]
[[Category:Plant genetics]]
[[Category:Plant breeding]]
[[Category:Biodiversity]]
[[Category:Food security]]
[[Category:Plant conservation]]
[[Category:Seeds]]
[[Category:Sustainable agriculture]]
[[Category:Commercialization of traditional medicines]]