Kevin Folta

Kevin M. Folta
Kevin Folta at The Amaz!ng Meeting 8 in 2010
Born	Chicago, Illinois[1]
Fields	Molecular biology, horticulture, agricultural science
Institutions	University of Florida
Alma mater	Northern Illinois University, University of Illinois at Chicago
Thesis	Blue light regulation of the pea Lhcb1*4 gene in transgenic Arabidopsis thaliana (1998)
Doctoral advisor	Lon S. Kaufman
Other academic advisors	Edgar Spalding
Known for	Light control of plant traits, novel genomics approaches, science communication
Notable awards	National Science Foundation CAREER Award, Howard Hughes Medical Institute Distinguished Mentor Award[2]
Website www.talkingbiotech.com

Kevin M. Folta is a professor and chairman of the horticultural sciences department at the University of Florida. From 2007 to 2010 he helped lead the project to sequence the strawberry genome, and continues to research photomorphogenesis in plants and compounds responsible for flavor in strawberries. Folta has been active as a science communicator since 2002, especially relating to biotechnology.

Education and career

Folta received his B.S. and M.S. in biology in 1989 and 1992, respectively, from Northern Illinois University, and his Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at Chicago in molecular biology in 1998.^[3] He completed postdoctoral research at the University of Wisconsin, and joined the faculty at the University of Florida in 2002. He assumed the role of Interim Department Chair in 2012 and accepted the Chair position in 2013.^[4]

Awards and honors

• University of Florida Postdoctoral Mentoring Award, 2013^[5][6][7]
• University of Florida Foundation Research Professor, 2010^[5][8]
• Northern Illinois University LA&S Golden Alumni Award (top 50 distinguished graduates), 2009^[5][9]
• National Science Foundation Young Faculty CAREER Award, 2008^[5][10]
• Howard Hughes Medical Institute Distinguished Mentor of Undergraduate Research, 2007^[5][11]

Research

Folta's laboratory has two primary research areas: how to control plant traits with light, and using genomics to identify molecular markers for key fruit-plant traits.

Plants and light

Folta's work with light began in 1987, while working with genes associated with the phytochrome response in plants. This research resulted in the discovery that exposure to blue light mediates specific gene responses and physiology in the plant Arabidopsis thaliana through cryptochrome and phototropin receptors.^[12]

Since then, Folta has continued this work to explore new findings in how plants grow and move in green-enriched environments, which are the challenging conditions plants have to grow in under the shade of other plants, and the unusual effects this produces.^[13] His work in plant biology would later extend to using light emitting diodes (LEDs) to control specific attributes of plants, such as quality, flavor, aroma, nutrition, and texture.^[14][15] On this, Folta says that each plant's genetic makeup gives it a certain genetic potential that can be altered by selection or genetic modification, but how this potential is reached depends on environmental conditions that we can manipulate through photomorphogenesis. He says this depends entirely on how the plant's genes that are responsible for controlling growth are activated or deactivated in response to light.^[15]

Folta believes this research would be of interest to farmers wanting to get the most genetic potential out of their crops without the need for chemicals or genetic modification,^[15] and he believes his research involving red and far-red light could be used on postharvest fruits to improve their flavor while stored in grocery stores and home refrigerators.^[16]

Strawberry genomics and flavors

His work in strawberry genomics began in 2002.^[17] Folta was the contributing author in sequencing the strawberry genome in 2011.^[17][18] During the project, they discovered molecular markers that speed traditional breeding for enhanced flavors.^[17]

Folta's more recent work with strawberries has involved identifying chemicals responsible for taste that are present in different varieties of the fruit in order to breed these characteristics back into commercial varieties; characteristics which have been lost due to traditionally having been bred for disease resistance, firmness, size, and yield instead of flavor.^[19][20] As a result of this research, his team has identified 30 compounds present in strawberries that affect its flavor, including some that resemble other fruits such as grapes and pineapples, and 6 associated with a human's perception of sweetness.^[20][21] These findings can also be used for other staple plants in the rose family such as peaches, almonds, apples, raspberries, and blackberries,^[19] and contribute to a growing list of compounds that can be used in the future to produce more flavorful foods without as much sugar.^[21]

Folta's research could result in more flavorful and aromatic strawberries arriving on the market as early as 2018, bred using conventional techniques and without the use of genetic modification.^[20]

Science communication

Folta has formal training in communication and has been recognized for his skill by scholarly institutions.^[22] He uses his experience to provide workshops to teach scientists and farmers how to communicate science effectively, and engages with the public through outreach programs, the internet, and other means.^[22][23][24]

Nature Biotechnology described Folta as "a gifted communicator—one of the rare scientists who has engaged the public, with over 12 years experience behind him. Not someone who merely discusses public engagement; but someone who actually communicates directly with non-expert audiences—at science fairs, in schools, at retirement homes, in blogs and podcasts."^[24]

Folta has considered his outreach efforts among his proudest achievements and stated that his most important contributions to science "won’t come out of my lab. They’ll come out of my mouth.”^[17]

Views

Folta has been active in the public discussion of politically controversial topics such as evolution, climate change, vaccines, and agricultural biotechnology since 2002.^[23][25][26] He views a disconnect between science and the public understanding, and believes a priority should be given to increase public awareness and to "give scientists the tools to effectively participate at that interface.”^[17]

He has said the scientific consensus regarding the safety of genetically modified foods is comparable to those regarding global warming and vaccines.^[27] He is an outspoken critic of food blogger Vani Hari's claims about the alleged dangers of certain food additives.^[28] Folta advocates for a "soft and effective" approach in handling anti-GMO activists, believing overly inflammatory responses from the scientific community will alienate the public audience.^[29]

Podcasting

Folta operates the Talking Biotech podcast which is billed as "A science-based assessment of new technology and the future of food",^[30] in which he interviews agriculture scientists and experts in the fields of science and communication to discuss the genetic improvement of plants, animals, and microbes and other issues in biotechnology.^[31]

He has also created the Science Power Hour podcast, which is a parody of an AM talk radio show hosted by Folta's alter ego "Vern Blazek". Folta describes it as an attempt to deliver science communication in an entertaining way that would appeal to a more general audience, and as a way to convey serious topics using humor.^[32][33]

Kevin Folta has been a guest on numerous other podcasts such as Talk Nerdy,^[34][35] Heartland Daily Podcast,^[36] Food and Farm,^[37] Science for the People,^[38] Vegan Chicago,^[39] The Joe Rogan Experience,^[40] and The Skeptics' Guide to the Universe.^[41][42][43]

Conflict of interest allegations

In early February 2015, US Right to Know (USRTK), an organic-industry front group,^[44] filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the University of Florida.^[24][45] USRTK suspected that Folta was pressured by food and agricultural companies into claiming that GMOs are safe .^[27] The University released documents, including email exchanges with Monsanto, which indicated that he had not committed scientific misconduct.^[25] In February 2015, Folta told Science that he anticipated trouble: "Unfortunately, when you skim through the 70,000 e-mails I have … [USRTK] will find opportunities to pull out a sentence and use it against me. They will show I have 200 e-mails from big ag companies. While it is former students … or chitchat about someone's kids, it won't matter. They'll report, 'Kevin Folta had 200 emails with Monsanto and Syngenta,' as a way to smear me."^[46]

In a Nature article from August 2015 Keith Kloor wrote that Folta had "close ties to Monsanto and other biotechnology interests".^[25] Folta denied these claims,^[47] and wrote that the accusation was based on a few dozen emails and three professional direct interactions over thirteen years, and that he was reimbursed customary travel expenses by Monsanto for $719.76, covering airfare, a rental car, 2 hotel nights, and parking for one event to speak to farmers in Colorado in September 2014.^[48][49][50] Folta has maintained that he has always communicated consistently according to his research and understanding as a scientist working for a public institution.^[47]

In September 2015, Eric Lipton writing for the New York Times reported that the agriculture industry had enlisted academics, including Folta, to use their "independent voices" to advocate for public perception and policy, which appeared favorable to the industry.^[45] At the request of Folta, the University of Florida had received a $25,000 grant from Monsanto to be used at the university's discretion which was earmarked for an established biotechnology communication program. Folta submitted expense reports to use the biotechnology communication fund to pay for travel expenses, a small projector, coffee and food.^[48][50] Most of these expenses had since been reimbursed to the fund with honoraria from his talks and private donations from individuals and small businesses, while none of the donation from Monsanto was used.^[49][50] In response to the controversy and personal threats against Folta, the university offered to return the donation, which Monsanto refused, so funds were redirected to a university food pantry.^[25][50][51] Folta has promised a complete accounting for his research and extension activities, which he says "defines a new standard of transparency and a new tool to cultivate trust" he hopes other scientists and advocates will adopt.^[49]

In October 2015, Nature Biotechnology wrote that scientists like Folta have been "targeted because they speak inconvenient truths about GM technology" and stated that the funds "were tied neither to [Folta] directly nor to his research. His conflict of interest disclosures were wholly compliant with his university's rules. He never used industry funds for personal gain." The journal criticized the journalists for "cherry-picking" and creating "hostile environments that threaten vibrant rare species with extinction."^[24]

Jack Payne, head of the University of Florida's Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences, characterized this as an example of activist groups attempting to silence scientists who wish to engage in public discussion of politically controversial topics, describing it as a "spiral of silence".^[51] Professor and science communicator Steven Novella wrote that "The shill witch hunt is just getting started, and now they are emboldened by the PR bonanza they have found in FOIA requests for e-mails. All of this is likely to have a chilling effect on scientists speaking out in the public square on controversial issues."^[52]

In February 2015, Gretchen Goldman writing for the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), a nonprofit science advocacy organization, criticized the FOIA requests for being "overly wide", saying it would create "chilling effects on researchers and confuse the public about the state of the science."^[27][53][54] In March 2015, Nina Fedoroff, Peter Raven, and Phillip Sharp, three former presidents of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, wrote in The Guardian comparing the USRTK's use of FOIA against scientists to "Climategate" and criticized the organization backing them for "promoting the interests of the organic food business", calling their activities "anti-science".^[55]

Ralph Nader expressed support for the use of FOIA requests to "uncover corruption and wrongdoing". He wrote, "One thing is clear; food safety, public health, the commercialization of public universities, corporate control of science, and the research produced by taxpayer-funded scientists to promote commercial products are all appropriate subjects for FOIA requests."^[56][57]

Bibliography

• 2009 Genetics and Genomics of Rosaceae : Springer International Publishing : edited by Kevin M. Folta, Susan E. Gardiner : ISBN 9780387774909^[3][58]
• 2011 Genetics, Genomics and Breeding of Berries : CRC Press : edited by Kevin M. Folta, Chittaranjan Kole : ISBN 9781578087075^[3][59]

References

External links

• Profile at Google Scholar
• Faculty information page at the University of Florida
• Illumination blog
• Talking Biotech and Talking Biotech Podcast
• Kevin Folta Anti-GMO Activism and Its Impact on Food Security Genetic Literacy Project, Science trumps ideology, December 4, 2014