Genetic resources and conservation

1. Conservation Genetics
Conservation Biology + Genetics = Conservation Genetics
Destroying or changing habitats can endanger the animals, plants, and other
organisms that live there. By effectively managing these ecosystems, we can help
preserve threatened and endangered species.
The science of Conservation Biology looks at individuals and populations that
have been affected by habitat loss, exploitation, and/or environmental change.
Information gained from studying these organisms informs decisions that will
ensure their survival into the future.
The science of Genetics looks at inherited characteristics and the genes that
underlie them.
Put the two together and you get the science of Conservation Genetics.
What is conservation genetics?
Conservation genetics uses a combination of ecology, molecular biology,
population genetics, mathematical modeling, and evolutionary taxonomy (the
study of family relationships). It is both a basic and an applied science. First,
scientists must understand the genetic relationships among the organisms they are
studying. Then wildlife managers use techniques to preserve biological diversity in
these species.
The organisms that conservation geneticists study usually belong to endangered or
threatened populations. To develop ways to help these populations, scientists ask
two questions: What has brought these populations to the brink of extinction, and
what steps can we take to reverse this trend? Information about the genetic
diversity of the organisms under study helps scientists and managers to form
strategies to preserve and protect the diversity of plants and animals worldwide.
Past conservation efforts have addressed populations from a mathematical,
evolutionary, or taxonomic point of view. Modern efforts include genetic studies,
giving conservation scientists and ecological managers much more information
about the diversity among the individuals in a population. Without genetics, we
may conserve the wrong population or waste valuable resources on a population
that isn't endangered.

2. When is conservation genetics used?
Habitat Destruction
When habitat destruction or other factors put a population at risk, scientists and
conservation managers may target that population for investigation. For example,
they may study a population of plants whose habitat will be destroyed by the
building of a new shopping mall. Or they may study duck and geese populations
when new hunting regulations have been put in place. Human interference is not
the only danger to plants and animals. Natural factors, such as storms and diseases,
can also cause populations to dwindle.
Change in Population Size:-
Surveillance of small populations is critical, because they are particularly sensitive
to change. Random or unpredictable events such as natural catastrophes,
environmental changes, or genetic mutations can cause a sudden decrease in
population size. When the population of a species is small, further reduction of
their remaining numbers can sharply reduce genetic diversity. Small populations
are also more sensitive to genetic drift, as well as the problems that come with
geographic isolation and establishing a new population from only a few individuals
(founder effect). Each of these factors affects which individuals will give rise to
the next generation, and therefore which alleles will be passed on.
GEOGRAPHICAL ISOLATION:-
Sometimes even a large population can lose genetic diversity. One way loss can
happen is through geographical isolation. Geographical isolation can happen if a
new barrier is imposed through a habitat. For example, if a river changes course or
a new housing subdivision is built, a population of plants or animals may be
divided into two groups. Just by chance, the pool of gene variants in the two
separated populations may differ from one another.
HOW IS CONSERVATION GENETICS DONE?
Conservation geneticists use DNA data from an organism to inform management
choices. As in any scientific field, conservation scientists use a defined approach to
their work:

3. Identification, Inventory, and Analysis
Define populations and areas of interest. Because there are so many species of
organisms, endangered or threatened species usually take priority.
Observe the population. What are the known forms of the species? What are
known or suspected relatives of the species? What are the physical characteristics
used to classify the different forms and species?
Form hypotheses about relationships between populations and/or species and test
these hypotheses by examining genetic characteristics of the organisms (DNA or
protein data).
Use mathematical models to analyze the data. Determine how much diversity
exists in separate populations of the species, as well as the rate at which genes are
exchanged among populations (gene flow).
Interpretation and Management
Scientists and managers work together to identify endangered organisms. To begin
to develop a management strategy, they investigate the organism's habitat:
Determine the degree to which the organism is adaptable to various temperatures, soils, and
water conditions.
Examine factors that influence genetic diversity, such as the identity and
characteristics of plant pollinators. The health and welfare of pollinating species
may be critical to the survival of an endangered plant species.
Study threats to the integrity of the species' habitat, including human, climatic, and
other factors.
Once all of the aspects of the population and its environment are understood,
scientists and managers can develop an intelligent preservation plan.

4. The Five Worst Mass Extinctions
Time periods in the history of life on Earth during which exceptionally large
numbers of species go extinct are called mass extinctions. These extinctions are
quite different from the rate of extinction, which occurs even when the diversity of
life is increasing. Many species vanished in five cataclysmic mass extinctions and
today, 99.9 percent of all species that have existed on Earth are extinct.
The Ordovician-Silurian extinction:
It occurred about 439 million years ago due to a drop in sea levels as glaciers
formed followed by rising sea levels as glaciers melted. During this extinction 25
percent of marine families and 60 percent of marine genera (the classification
above species) were lost.
The Late Devonian extinction:
It took place somewhere around 364 million years ago. To this day its cause is
unknown. However, evidence supporting the Devonian mass extinction suggesting
that warm water marine species were the most severely affected in this extinction
event, has lead many paleontologists to believe that an episode of global cooling,
similar to the event which that may have resulted in the Ordovician-Silurian mass
extinction, may have lead to the Devonian extinction. Thus this theory suggests
that the extinction of the Devonian was triggered by another glaciation event on
Gondwana, which is evidenced by glacial deposits of this age in northern Brazil.
Similarly to the late Ordovician crisis, agents such as global cooling and
widespread lowering of sea-level may have triggered the late Devonian crisis.
Scientists have also suggested that meteorite impacts may have been possible
agents for the Devonian mass extinction, but the data in support of a possible extra-
terrestrial impact remains inconclusive, and the mechanisms responsible for the
Devonian mass extinction are still under debate. What is know, however, is that
this mass extinction killed 22 percent of marine families and 57 percent of marine
genera.
The Permian-Triassic extinction:
It happened about 251 million years ago and was Earths worst mass extinction. 95
percent of all species, 53 percent of marine families, 84 percent of marine genera,
and an estimated 70 percent of land species such as plants, insects and vertebrate
animals were killed during this catastrophe. Direct evidence for this period has not

5. been found but many scientists believe a comet or asteroid impact led to this
extinction. Others think that volcanic eruption, coating large stretches of land with
lava from the Siberian Traps, which are centered around the Siberian City of Tura,
and related loss of oxygen in the seas were the cause of this mass extinction. Still
other scientists suspect that the impact of the comet or asteroid triggered the
volcanism.
The End Triassic extinction:
It making place roughly 199 million to 214 million years ago, was most likely
caused by massive floods of lava erupting from the central Atlantic magmatic
province triggering the breakup of Pangaea and the opening of the Atlantic Ocean.
The volcanism may have led to deadly global warming. Rocks from the eruptions
now are found in the eastern United States, eastern Brazil, North Africa and Spain.
22 percent of marine families, 52 percent of marine genera, and an unknown
percentage of vertebrate deaths were the result.
The Cretaceous-Tertiary extinction:
It occurred about 65 million years ago and is thought to have been aggravated, if
not caused, by impacts of several-mile-wide asteroid that created the Chicxulub
crater now hidden on the Yucatan Peninsula and beneath the Gulf of Mexico. Yet,
some scientists believe that this mass extinction was caused by gradual climate
change or flood-like volcanic eruptions of basalt lava from the Deccan Traps in
west-central India .During this extinction, 16 percent of marine families, 47
percent of marine genera, and 18 percent of land vertebrate families including the
dinosaurs.

6. Fisheries in Pakistan
Fishes is the one of the oldest occupation. Thousands of people involved in
this occupation, large quantity of catching fishes and few communities started fish
breeding. This is called fish farming and “aquaculture” and farming.
There is the fishing industry of Pakistan has the potential for further developments.
Although its share of the GDP currently is 0.9%, Pakistan earns 6% of its total
foreign exchange earnings by exporting fishes, shrimps and other fish products.
There is a few types of fishes catches Sharks, Drums, Croakers, Cat fish, Skates,
Rays. These kinds of the fishes are being hunted in marine harbors. And there are
major marine harbors which are as follows.
Karachi Fish Harbor handles about 90% of fish and seafood catch in Pakistan
and 95% of fish and seafood exports from Pakistan.
Karachi Fisheries Harbor is being operated by Provincial Government of Sindh.
Korangi Fish Harbor is being managed by Federal Ministry of Food, Agriculture
and Livestock.
Pasni Fish Harbor being operated by Provincial Government of Baluchistan.
Gwadar Fish Harbor being operated by Federal Ministry of Communication.
Government efforts to develop fisheries
Fishing areas and method
Marine fisheries
Pakistan has a coastline divided into the Sindh and the Makran coasts. The Sindh
coast is 30% of the coastline and the Makran coast 70%.Mangroves trees which are
breeding grounds for fish and shrimps, grow in the mouths of the distributaries of
the Indus and Hab deltas. In Sindh, Karachi is the main fishing Centre. On the
Makran coast fishing ports are small often no more than villages like sonmiani and
Jiwani.Gwadar is the most important fishing port on this coast. It is being develop
as fishing center by providing improved facilities such as an ice factory,
refrigeration plants and modern fish curing yards. Improvement are also being
made at Ormara and Pasni.
Problem in fishing industry
The main problem facing the fishing industry in Pakistan are

7. Water pollution
Pollution on the coast of Pakistan is mostly limited to the Karachi area. The
Karachi fish harbor is severely affected by a variety of pollutants spillages of oil
from the ship and domestic and industrial waste is causing great harm to our
fishing industry
Studies have shown that numerous chemical some of these having carcinogenic
qualities toxic material and heavy metals including cadmium,aluminium and nickel
have been found in marine life including fish,prawn,crabs,shrimps and lobsters.
These dangerous substances are also entering the food chain of the people whose
diet comprises seafood.
In order to protect fish resources a system of waste disposal needs to be developed
so that pollutant does not enter the rivers and the sea.
Overfishing
Another problem associated with the fishing industry is that of over fishing of
shrimps throughout the year even in the breeding season. The problem is due in the
main to foreign trawlers. This limit the production of shrimps.
Threat to mangroves.
Mangroves act as a barrier and protect the coastlines from high and low tides. The
mangroves that are a breeding ground for fish and shrimps cannot thrive well in
polluted sea water.

8. Bioethics
Bioethics is the study of the typically controversial ethical issues emerging from
new situations and possibilities brought about by advances
in biology and medicine. It is also moral discernment as it relates to medical policy
and practice. Bioethicists are concerned with the ethical questions that arise in the
relationships among life sciences, biotechnology, medicine, politics, law,
and philosophy. It also includes the study of the more commonplace questions of
values ("the ethics of the ordinary") which arise in primary care and other branches
of medicine.
The term Bioethics (Greek bios, life; ethos, behavior) was coined in 1926 by Fritz
Jahr. In 1970, the American biochemist Van Rensselaer Potter also used the term
with a broader meaning including solidarity towards the biosphere, thus generating
a "global ethics," a discipline representing a link between biology, ecology,
medicine and human values in order to attain the survival of both human beings
and other animal species.
Purpose and scope
The field of bioethics has addressed a broadly, ranging from debates over the
boundaries of life (e.g. abortion, euthanasia), surrogacy, the allocation of scarce
health care resources (e.g. organ donation, health care rationing) to the right to
refuse medical care for religious or cultural reasons. Bioethicists often disagree
among themselves over the precise limits of their discipline, debating whether the
field should concern itself with the ethical evaluation of all questions involving
biology and medicine, or only a subset of these questions. Some bioethicists would
narrow ethical evaluation only to the morality of medical treatments
or technological innovations, and the timing of medical treatment of humans.
Others would broaden the scope of ethical evaluation to include the morality of all
actions that might help or harm organisms capable of feeling fear.
The scope of bioethics can expand with biotechnology, including cloning, gene
therapy, life extension, human genetic engineering, astroethics and life in space,
and manipulation of basic biology through altered DNA, XNA and proteins. These
developments will affect future evolution, and may require new principles that
address life at its core, such as biotic ethics that values life itself at its basic
biological processes and structures, and seeks their propagation.

9. Principles
One of the first areas addressed by modern bioethicists was that of human
experimentation. The National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects
of Biomedical and Behavioral Research was initially established in 1974 to
identify the basic ethical principles that should underlie the conduct of biomedical
and behavioral research involving human subjects. However, the fundamental
principles announced in the Belmont Report (1979),
namely, autonomy, beneficence and justice—have influenced the thinking of
bioethicists across a wide range of issues. Others have added non-
maleficence, human dignity and the sanctity of life to this list of cardinal values.
Another important principle of bioethics is its placement of value on discussion
and presentation. Numerous discussion based bioethics groups exist in universities
across the United States to champion exactly such goals. Examples include the
Ohio State Bioethics Society and the Bioethics Society of Cornell. Professional
level versions of these organizations also exist.
The use of animals in research is a very controversial topic in today's scientific
community. While animal research was once common and unquestioned, it now
raises an important ethical issue: is it ethical to harm animals with the aim of
improving human lives? An experiment's design and application must be ethical
whether the research subjects are humans or animals, but how "ethical" is defined
across species is the subject of much debate.
A key difference between an animal and a human is that animals cannot provide
informed consent to participate in an experiment because they cannot understand
the risks or consequences of the experiment. While a person can consent to
participate in research after being informed of an experiment's goals and methods
(and in fact this is a mandatory guideline for ethical research among humans), this
is not possible for animals, which raises complicated questions about ethics.
The Animal Rights Debate
Two main questions about the ethics of animal testing are whether animals have
rights and, if they do, whether those rights should be protected. A legal right is a
law-based entitlement that applies to all members of a particular group and is
upheld by the justice system. Those in favor of extending equal rights to animals
argue that the suffering and well-being of other species are just as important as the
suffering and well-being of humans and should be treated accordingly. It is known
that animals can feel pain and distress, and therefore many consider the act of
subjecting animals to pain, injury, or death for the sake of science to be immoral.

10. Others argue against extending equal rights to animals, positing that human interest
should be placed above the well-being of animals. Many argue that animal research
has yielded substantial benefits to the human race, and that these outweigh the
negative effects on animals.
Current animal rights
The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) of 1966 is the only federal law in the United
States regulating the treatment of animals in research; while some other laws and
policies may include additional species coverage or specifications for animal care
and use, all refer to the AWA as the minimally acceptable standard for animal
treatment and care. Some of the animals covered under the AWA include any live
or dead cat, dog, hamster, rabbit, nonhuman primate, or guinea pig. Animals
excluded from this act are birds, rats, mice, farm animals, and cold-blooded
animals.
Under the AWA, all animal dealers must be registered and licensed, and all animal
testing facilities in compliance with this act are required to establish a special
committee that includes at least one person trained as a veterinarian and one person
who is not affiliated with the facility. These committees regularly assess animal
care, treatment, and practices during research. In addition to compliance with the
Animal Welfare Act, most research institutions have an institutional review board
(IRB), which is a committee that has been formally designated to approve,
monitor, and review biomedical and behavioral research involving humans. Most
studies involving humans must pass IRB approval before they can begin.
A variety of animals are used in experiments. While animals with shorter life spans
and less sophisticated nervous systems tend to be used, this is not always true.
Some advocate that there should be a hierarchy of animal rights, with more rights
granted to sophisticated species, while others argue that the same rights should be
awarded to all living beings.
Genetically modified organisms and Bioethics
Genetically modified organisms (GMOs), organisms in which genes from another
organism are inserted into the targeted organism’s DNA, have the potential to both
positively and negatively affect the environment and human health. Plants can be
genetically modified easily because they can be grown from a single cell or small
pieces of tissue. Thus, one only needs to modify a single cell to produce an entire
genetically modified organism.

11. Several methods have been used to insert foreign genes into the target organism. In
one method, the target organism takes up a vector with cloned DNA from a donor
organism and incorporates this foreign DNA into its genome. Another method
involves removing the wall of the target cell, allowing the introduced DNA to easily
penetrate. A third method requires using a special gun to inject foreign DNA into the
target cell in hopes that the cell will incorporate the new DNA into its genome.
Crops have been modified for centuries by humans using selective breeding
techniques, but GMO biotechnology is a more specific and rapid selection
process. For instance, genes from a different species can be incorporated into the
modified crop. Therefore, GMO technology creates concern over potential
environmental and human health impacts.
The use of genetically modified organisms is a practice still in its infancy. The long-
term effects of this technology are yet to be seen, and thus we must proceed with
caution as we develop our practices and guidelines.
Effects on the Environment
Herbicide Use and Resistance
Effects on the environment are a particular concern with regard to GMO crops and
food production. One area of development involves adding the ability to produce
pesticides and resistance to specific herbicides. These traits are helpful in food
production, allowing farmers to use fewer chemicals, and to grow crops in less than
ideal conditions. However, herbicide use could be increased, which will have a larger
negative effect on the surrounding environment. Also unintended hybrid strains of
weeds and other plants can develop resistance to these herbicides through cross-
pollination, thus negating the potential benefit of the herbicide. One such herbicide
that has already been added is RoundUp. Crops of RoundUp-ready soybeans have
already been implemented into agricultural practices, possibly conferring RoundUp
resistance to neighboring plants.
Effects on Untargeted Species
Bt corn, which produces its own pesticide, is also in use today. Concerns have
been raised regarding adverse effects on Monarch butterfly populations, which are not
the original target of the pesticide (Losey, 1999). Although the pesticide can protect
crops against unwanted insects, they can also have unintentional effects on neutral or
even beneficial species.

12. Effects on Human Health
Allergies
GMO crops could potentially have negative effects on human health as well. When
splicing genes between species, there are examples in which consumers have
developed unexpected allergic reactions. Researchers used a gene from the Brazil nut
to increase the production of Methionine in soya beans. The insertion of this gene
inadvertently caused allergic reactions to the soya bean in those with known nut
allergies, but no previous allergy to the soya bean, according to the product developer,
Pioneer Hi-Bred (“Biotech Soybeans”).
Long-Term Effects
Because GMO technology has been available for such a short amount of time, there is
relatively little research which has been conducted on the long-term effects on
health. The greatest danger lies not in the effects that we have studied, but in those
which we cannot anticipate at this point.
New Proteins
Proteins which have never been ingested before by humans are now part of the foods
that people consume every day. Their potential effects on the human body are as of
yet unknown.
Food Additives
GMOs also present us with possibilities of introducing additional nutrients into foods,
as well as antibiotics and vaccines. This availability of technology can provide
nutrition and disease resistance to those countries that don’t have the means to provide
these otherwise. The distribution of these foods is more feasible than mass
inoculations for current diseases. However, even these possibilities carry with them
potential negative effects such as the creation of antibiotic and vaccine-resistant
strains of diseases.
It is imperative that we ensure that environmental issues and human health are kept at
the forefront of development in this field. It is important that we not lose sight of the
repercussions that could accompany the benefits if we do not carefully investigate and
control development.

13. Quarantine regulations
Quarantine, the detention or restraint of humans or other creatures that may have
come into contact with communicable disease until it is deemed certain that they
have escaped infection. In the vocabulary of disease control the terms quarantine
and isolation are used interchangeably. In the strictest sense, however, isolation is
the separation of an infected individual from the healthy until he is unable to
transmit the disease.
Early practices.
The earliest recognition that diseases might be communicable led to extreme
measures designed to isolate infected persons or communities. Fear
of leprosy caused wide adoption of the control measures, namely, isolation of the
infected and the cleansing or burning of his garments. Against acute, highly fatal
diseases like bubonic plague, which spread rapidly, attempts were made by healthy
communities to prevent the entry of goods and persons from infected communities.
In the 14th century the growth of maritime trade and the recognition that plague
was introduced by ships returning from the Levant led to the adoption of
quarantine in Venice. It was decreed that ships were to be isolated for a limited
period to allow for the manifestation of the disease and to dissipate the infection
brought by persons and goods. Originally the period was 30 days, trentina, but this
was later extended to 40 days, quarantina. The choice of this period is said to be
based on the period that Christ and Moses spent in isolation in the desert. In 1423
Venice set up its first lazaretto, or quarantine station, on an island near the city.
The Venetian system became the model for other European countries and the basis
for widespread quarantine control for several centuries.
In the 16th century the system was extended by the introduction of bills of health, a
form of certification that the last port of call was free from disease; a clean bill,
with the visa of the consul of the country of arrival, entitled the ship to free
pratique (use of the port) without quarantine. Quarantine was later extended to
other diseases besides plague, notably yellow fever, with the growth of American
trade, and cholera, which was particularly associated with the pilgrimages to
Mecca.
By the mid-19th century the practice of quarantine had become a considerable
nuisance. The periods of quarantine were arbitrary and variable from country to
country, and there were instances of perverse and bureaucratic application of the
quarantine regulations. The disinfection of letters and rummaging of papers could

14. be an excuse for political espionage, and the opportunities for bribery and
corruption were frequently exploited. Great discomfort and delay was caused to
travelers; the prison reformerJohn Howard had, in 1786, deliberately sailed from
Smyrna to Venice in a ship with a foul bill of healthso that he could gain firsthand
experience of lazarettos; his account (An Account of the Principal Lazarettos in
Europe [1789]) presents a depressing picture.
International cooperation.
General dissatisfaction with quarantine practice led to the convening of the first
international sanitary conference in Paris in 1851. The arguments were conducted
at two levels. Commercially, the conflict was between the countries with
considerable vested interests in quarantine and the major maritime nations, which
favoured its abolition; medically, the opposition was between the “contagionists,”
who believed that diseases like cholera and plague were transmitted from person to
person, and the “miasmatists,” who thought that they were caused by infected
atmosphere and that the remedy was sanitation, not quarantine. Despite these
differences, agreement was reached on some important general principles for the
standardization of quarantine procedures. The convention and regulations were not
generally ratified, however.
In the next 50 years a succession of sanitary conferences, with better understanding
of the epidemiology of communicable disease, reached some agreement on the
maximum permissible measures of control and on the removal of the most irksome
restrictions of quarantine practice, but the accord reached by the 11th conference,
at Paris in 1903, was the first really effective measure to be signed. Out of it came,
in 1907, the Office International d’Hygiène Publique (“International Office of
Public Health”), the forerunner of the World Health Organization. (The forerunner
of the Pan American Sanitary Bureau had been established five years earlier, in
1902).
Present practices.
Today, isolation of persons is practiced much less rigidly or extensively than
formerly in the control of communicable disease. It may be appropriate in some
cases; some physicians, for example, suggest that known asymptomatic carriers of
the diphtheria bacillus be isolated during antibiotic treatment, and patients with
active pulmonary tuberculosis may be temporarily segregated in hospital in order
to prevent the infection of persons thought to be susceptible to the disease. It is
recognized, however, that isolation may fail for a variety of reasons. It is
ineffective in diseases that are transmitted by an intermediate carrier—e.g., the

15. mosquito in yellow fever and malaria. In plague, isolation is important to prevent
person-to-person spread but does not have any effect on the main route of
infection—by bites of the rat flea. It is inappropriate to isolate human cases of a
disease, such as brucellosis, that is usually acquired by contact with infected farm
animals or their products. Even for diseases in which it may protect individuals,
isolation will often have little effect on the general epidemic; this may be, as in
measles, because infectivity precedes the appearance of the characteristic feature,
the rash, by a few days, or, as in polio virus infections, because a number of
persons are carriers, harbouring the disease agent without discernible illness. The
difficulty of recognizing potentially infective persons often makes isolation
impracticable even in situations in which it could be appropriate.
Quarantine is much modified in modern practice because of the better
understanding of communicable disease. In its purest form it is applied to animals,
as in the control of rabies. In the control of human disease the common practice is
surveillance of contacts, with, possibly, daily reporting to a doctor to get prompt
recognition of illness but without restricting movement; such a policy, coupled
with other control measures, is generally accepted. In some instances modified
quarantine is imposed: adult contacts of typhoid should be excluded from food
handling until repeated bacteriological examination of feces and urine has shown
them to be free of the disease. At one time susceptible children exposed
to measles were kept home from school, but the practice was declining even before
the widespread use of measles vaccines.
Quarantine and exclusion of plants and of plant products are still widely practiced
in accordance with international agreements.
Pakistan plant protection act
The “Destructive Insects and Pests Act, 1914” was enacted by former British
Indian Government for preventing the introduction and spread of exotic pests and
diseases which could be destructive to field crops, horticulture floriculture and
forests.
In order to make these rules fully effective under Pakistan conditions, it was felt
necessary to revise the rules and update them as far as possible so that they are in
conformity with the recommendations of the FAO International Plant Protection
Convention, 1951 and rules and regulation of other countries. The Plant Quarantine
Rules were revised and consolidated in 1966 under the provisions of the
Destructive Insects and Pests Act and published in Government Gazette of
Pakistan Extraordinary vide SRO 129 (K) / 67, dated 2nd January, 1967. With the

16. rapid development of fast means of transport, increased trade relations and
establishment of new air, land and sea routes, the movement of plants and plant
material has increased manifold. The adapted Destructive Insects and Pests Act,
1914, needed revision and modifications in the light of present advances in the
field of Plant Protection and Plant Quarantine. The new Plant Quarantine bill
entitled “Pakistan Protection Quarantine Act, 1976” was, therefore, enacted to
safeguard the national crop wealth from destructive pests and diseases which are
not know to occur in Pakistan.
Import of Plant material:
No person shall import any plant or plant material which may be a source be a
source or medium of infestation or infection by diseases and pests destructive to
agriculture or medium for the introduction of noxious weeds, except under a valid
import permit obtained prior to such importation in Form I issued by the Director
or the Entomologist (Quarantine) and except through the ports or points of entry.
4. Plant material for which special permit is required:
Not with standing anything contained in rule 3, plant material likely to carry new
complex of pests or diseases may be imported into Pakistan in limited quantities by
special permit in Form I for the purpose of introducing new varieties and
propagating stock from countries which maintain regular plant quarantine and
inspection service.
Application for permit to import plant material:
1) Before any plant or plant material is imported, an application for permit shall be
submitted to the Director or to the Entomologist (Quarantine). 2) All such
applications shall be signed by the person who intends to import the pant or plant
material or his duly authorized agent and shall specify
Notice of arrival by the importer:
The importer shall inform the Director or the Plant Quarantine Officer, of the
probable date of arrival of the plant or plant material at the prescribed port or point
of entry and shall, on arrival of the plant or plant material, notify to the Director he
number of the permit, name of ship or vessel, date of arrival, country of origin and
locality where grown, and the character and quality of the plant or plant material.
Foreign Certificate of Inspection:
(1) A plant or plant material the shipment of which originates from a country
maintaining a plant quarantine service shall be accompanied by an official

17. certificate. (2) In the case of countries which do not maintain a plant quarantine
service, the certificate of inspection of the plant or plant material must be
accompanied by a declaration of ht exporter or shipper concerned to the effect that
the plant or plant material does not originate from a place where injurious insects
or plant diseases were prevalent and has not been kept or stored in places infested
with injurious insects or infested by diseases and plant pests, and that all treatment,
fumigation, disinfestation required prior to shipment has been done under technical
supervision.

18. Genetic Rescue
1. The first level is pure information — finding out what is going on genetically with
endangered species that have small populations or special vulnerabilities, such as to
disease. Comparing the full genome sequences of a variety of individuals may provide a
diagnosis of their situation and suggest ways to treat it. The thorough analysis of the
genome of a species (living or extinct) may also yield “paleogenomic” information –
clues to past events in its history such as the scale and timing of major changes in
population size.
2. The second level uses genome editing for living, endangered species. Techniques
developed for de-extinction might be used with living small populations to
restore genetic diversity, working even with variations of genes that can now only be
found in the ancient DNA of museum specimens (“extinct alleles.”) Susceptibility to
disease may also be genetically treatable. The techniques proposed so far include
sequencing of ancient DNA, gene-function interpretation, cryopreserved cell lines,
induced pluripotent stem cells, cloning (somatic cell nuclear transfer), and precision
genome editing for trait alteration.
3. The third level uses genome editing to revive extinct species. Here the quality of the
ancient DNA from museum specimens and fossils is key, along with having a closely
related living species. The trick will be to transfer the genes that define the extinct
species into the genome of the related species, effectively converting it into a living
version of the extinct creature. In addition to the techniques mentioned above, this level
involves massive gene transfer, interspecies cloning, surrogate mothers and surrogate
parenting.
The goal of each level of genetic rescue is to restore a species to full genetic health. Success is
when it can prosper in the wild without further treatment.