ENVIRONMENTAL RISK MANAGEMENT
AUTHORITY DECISION
Amended under Section 67A on 29 October 2004, 8 December 2004,
21 September 2007, 6 December 2007 and 5 Feb 2008
Date signed: 16 April 2003
Application code:
TNS02003
Application category:
Transhipment of a new organism through New
Zealand under the Hazardous Substances and New
Organisms (HSNO) Act 1996
Applicant:
Raytheon Polar Services New Zealand Ltd
Applicant contact:
Hope Rogers
Purpose:
To tranship samples from the U.S. National Science
Foundation programme in the Antarctic via
Christchurch to destinations outside New Zealand and
the organisms/samples listed in Annex 1 from
destinations outside New Zealand to Antarctica
Date application received:
17 October 2002
Date Stalled
22 October 2002
Date unstalled
14 April 2003
Consideration date:
15 April 2003
Considered by:
New Organisms Standing Committee of the Authority
1.
Summary of Decision
1.1.
The application to tranship samples from the U.S. National Science Foundation
programme in the Antarctic via Christchurch to destinations outside New Zealand and
the organisms/samples listed in Annex 1 from destinations outside New Zealand to
Antarctica is approved with controls in accordance with the relevant provisions of the
Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 (the HSNO Act).
2.
Legislative criteria for application
2.1.
The application was lodged pursuant to section 51 of the HSNO Act: Transhipment of
substances and organisms.
2.2.
As defined in section 2 of the HSNO Act “Transhipment means the importation into
New Zealand of a hazardous substance or new organism solely for the purpose of export
within 20 working days to another destination outside New Zealand”.
2.3.
The Authority may choose to decline approval to tranship any new organism if the
Authority considers that the new organism cannot be adequately contained so as to
prevent any adverse effects of a new organism on the environment (section 51(2)(b)(i)of
the HSNO Act).
2.4.
Alternatively, the Authority may choose to approve the transhipment with such controls
as the Authority thinks fit (section 51(2) (b) (ii) of the HSNO Act).
3.
Application Process
3.1.
The application was formally received on 17 October 2002, stalled on 22 October 2002
and unstalled on 14 April 2003.
3.2.
The documents available for the consideration of the application by the Committee
included the application (including supporting documentation provided), and the
Evaluation and Review report provided by ERMA New Zealand.
3.3.
Members of the New Organism Standing Committee of the Authority, Tony Haggerty
(Chairperson), and Jane Lancaster considered the application (pursuant to section
19(2)(b)). The application was considered by teleconference on15 April 2003.
4.
Transhipment Proposal
4.1.
This is an application under section 51 for the transhipment of samples en route from
the Antarctic to the USA.
4.2.
Transhipment of Antarctic goods, personnel and samples from the United States
Antarctic Programme (USAP) and their bases in the United States has taken place for
approximately 50 years. Raytheon is currently in year 3 of a 10 year contract for the
movement of such freight. The majority of staff employed by Raytheon worked for the
company which ran the previous contract. Facilities and procedures to ensure that these
samples are transhipped as efficiently and as safely as possible are well developed. New
Zealand is the preferred and quickest route for transit of freight for the USAP.
4.3.
The applicant has indicated that samples that may contain new organisms will be securely
contained in their shipping packages and held at the (USAP) transitional facility at 38 and
45 Orchard Road, Harewood, Christchurch. Raytheon apply annually to MAF, under the
Biosecurity Act, for Import permits (for the year 2003 these permits are numbered
2003018552 and 2003018554).
4.4.
Samples will arrive in the country at any time between 1 October and the end of
February and for a short period in mid to late August. Samples will arrive at irregular
intervals but may arrive as frequently as daily.
4.5.
Samples will arrive by US and NZ military aircraft and or charter ship direct from the
Antarctic. Samples arrive packaged according to the IATA1 Dangerous Goods
Regulations with packaging equivalent to 650 or 602. Class 6 regulations are designated
as those applicable for the transport of toxic and infectious substances. Individual
samples are packed and often palletised with other samples to minimise handling.
4.6.
The applicant requires that notification be received from Antarctica before samples for
transhipment are dispatched. When advice of a shipment is received from the Antarctic
onward transport arrangements are made immediately. In the majority of cases this is
done via a contracted freight forwarder.
4.7.
Samples that arrive by air in Christchurch are transferred directly to the cargo yard
immediately adjacent to the airport tarmac. All packages are inspected by a MAF officer
before the packages or pallets are logged in for storage. Palletised packages are stored in
the authorised transitional facility area or in an appropriate fridge/ freezer. Where
required individual packages will be removed from the pallets if specific storage
conditions are designated for those packages.
1
International Air Transport Association Dangerous Goods Regulations 44 th Edition
Environmental Risk Management Authority Decision: Application TNS02003
Page 2 of 10
4.8.
Samples that arrive by sea arrive at the Port of Lyttelton. Samples are collected directly
from the ship by a commercial freight company and transported to Raytheon’s Orchard
Road transitional facility. On arrival the packages are treated as per 4.3- 4.7 above.
4.9.
Accompanied packages arrive in appropriate packaging carried by individual scientists as
hand luggage. On arrival in Christchurch the scientists and their samples are checked by
MAF at the terminal and are then transported to the clothing distribution centre.
Samples are individually logged and placed in fridge/freezers within the facility for
collection prior to departure from the country.
4.10.
An audit trail of all samples is maintained and all samples are actively logged into and out
of the containment facility. The majority of samples are dispatched to the scientist in the
USA who collected them in the Antarctic.
4.11.
The applicant states that should damage of packaging result in the spillage of solid
material it would immediately be swept up, bagged and MAF notified so that inspection
of the site can occur. Any damage that would allow the escape of liquid from packages
would be remedied to prevent further loss, the liquid contained and MAF informed
immediately so that inspection can occur. On inspection the liquid would be safely
removed and the area treated as per MAF instructions.
4.12.
Samples are dispatched primarily on commercial aircraft from either Christchurch or via
Auckland. Samples are logged out of Raytheon’s facility to the freight forwarder who will
arrange their transport to the appropriate flight. 95% of samples will be transported
directly from Raytheon’s facility to air cargo dispatch. 5% will be transferred to the
freight forwarders facility and stored in their transitional facility. Should samples need to
be transhipped again in Auckland they are held between flights at the Air New Zealand
Cargo Centre in Auckland. Some samples leave on American military aircraft direct to
the United States.
4.13.
The applicant states that some samples (which will include ice samples) may leave by sea
and will leave in the same container in which they arrive in the country. Transport to the
Port of Lyttelton is the responsibility of the freight forwarder and is by road.
5.
Section 67A amendments
Amendment 1 – October 2004
5.1.
The Committee considered a request to amend the purpose statement of the original
approval to allow for transhipment of organisms from outside New Zealand through
Christchurch to the Antarctic.
5.2.
The Committee noted that although the reverse transhipment in itself was a minor in
effect change, allowing transhipment for any unspecified organisms would not be minor
in effect. This is because the Committee was not satisfied that they could say with
confidence in advance, that any future transhipped organism could be adequately
contained in accordance with section 51(2)(b)(i). Therefore the Committee required that
only those organisms listed in Annex One could be transhipped through Christchurch to
the Antarctic as these organisms could be adequately contained with the existing controls
in place. On this basis the Committee agreed that the amendment to the purpose
statement was minor in effect and in accordance with section 67A of the Act.
5.3.
The Committee considered New Zealand’s international obligations pursuant to section
6(f) of the Act and noted the proposal involved the transhipment of genetically modified
organisms to the Antarctic. The Committee sought advice from the Ministry of Foreign
Environmental Risk Management Authority Decision: Application TNS02003
Page 3 of 10
Affairs and Trade (Antarctic Policy Unit) (MFAT) and Antarctic New Zealand. MFAT
advised that the Ross Dependency is not part of New Zealand so persons importing
genetically modified organisms to Antarctica are not subject to HSNO regulations. The
Committee was satisfied with this interpretation.
5.4.
MFAT did advise that the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty
does apply and that Article 8 requires an environmental impact assessment to be
completed prior to work being undertaken in the Antarctic. This assessment should be
done in the applicant’s country of origin, in this case the United States, which is
administered by the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Office of Polar Programs. The
NSF requires applicants to complete and have approved an Antarctic Conservation Act
Application and Permit form (ACA 2005-009). This permit was supplied by the applicant
stating the intention to import genetically modified bacterial strains. The Committee was
satisfied that the applicant therefore had the necessary permits to conduct this work.
5.5.
Although New Zealand does not have jurisdiction in the Ross Dependency and the
HSNO Act does not apply there, the Committee sought and received assurances from
the applicant that the facilities and procedures for containment and disposal of the
genetically modified bacteria were adequate to prevent escape.
5.6.
The Committee consider that changing the decision to read the “new organism” rather
than the “hazardous substance” is thus approved in section 6.4 constitutes the correction
of a minor error.
Amendment 2 – December 2004
5.7.
The Committee composed of Ass. Prof. Marie Dziadek (Chair) and Mr Tony Haggerty,
considered a request to add an additional organism, Shewanella oneidensis Venkateswaran et
al. 1999, genetically modified by the insertion of a green fluorescent protein marker to
Annex 1. The Committee considered that this organism could be adequately contained
with the existing controls in place. On this basis the Committee agreed that the addition
of this organism to Annex 1 was minor in effect and in accordance with section 67A of
the Act
Amendment 3 – July 2007
5.8.
The Committee composed of Max Suckling (Chair) and Deborah Read considered a
request to add the following organism description to Annex 1:
Escherichia coli (Migula 1895) Castellani and Chalmers 1919 non-pathogenic laboratory
strains (modified for cloning purposes).
Amendment 4 – October 2007
5.9.
The Committee composed of Kieran Elborough (Chair) and Deborah Read considered a
request to add the following organisms to Annex 1:
Chamydomonas raudensis H. Ettl.
Gemingera cryophila (D.L. Taylor & C.C. Lee) D.R.A. Hill 1991
Amendment 5 – January 2008
5.10.
The Committee composed of Max Suckling (Chair) and Kieran Elborough considered a
request to add the following organisms to Annex 1:
Genetically modified bacteria, isolated in Antarctica, and modified outside of Antarctica.
Environmental Risk Management Authority Decision: Application TNS02003
Page 4 of 10
6.
CONSIDERATION
6.1.
The Committee has considered this application under section 51 of the Act to tranship
new organisms, and is satisfied that it fits the criteria for that section.
6.2.
The Committee has considered the transhipment proposal and proposed storage controls
in the E&R report.
6.3.
The Committee is satisfied that the controls will be adequate to prevent any adverse
effects of the new organism on the environment.
6.4.
The application to tranship the new organisms is thus approved, with controls.
7.
CONTROLS
7.1.
All samples to be transhipped shall be packaged using the IATA Dangerous Goods
Regulations with packaging equivalent to 602 and 650 and in accordance with Section
13.4(d) and (e) of the Australian New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 2243.3:2002 Safety in
laboratories (Part 3 Microbiological aspects of Containment). Samples that are known to
contain unusual or virulent organisms sourced from humans must be packaged according
to IATA Dangerous good regulations packaging standard 650.
7.2.
All samples shall be covered by the applicable plant or animal transhipment permits and
be held in a MAF approved transitional facility.
7.3.
All samples to be transhipped must do so within 20 working days of arrival in the
country.
7.4.
While samples are in the country during transhipment they are the responsibility of
Raytheon Polar Services Ltd. During this time the samples are to be adequately tracked
to ensure that all packages arriving and leaving the country can be verified and
reconciled. Tracking records to ensure that all packages can be accounted for must be
maintained and made available for auditing by MAF.
7.5.
Samples transferred to a freight forwarder (contracted to Raytheon) that do not leave the
country within 6 hours must be held within a registered transitional facility.
7.6.
A contingency plan to deal with any breakages or damage that may occur allowing the
escape of new organisms must be in place.
7.7.
Any significant damage that results in the package contents being spilt must be reported
to ERMA New Zealand and to MAF.
Signed: Mr Tony Haggerty
Date: 16 April 2003
Chair
Environmental Risk Management Authority Decision: Application TNS02003
Page 5 of 10
Decision amended under S67A on 29 October 2004 including purpose statement,
correction of wording for a new organism rather than a hazardous substance and
addition of Annex 1.
_________________________
Ass. Prof. Marie Dziadek
Chair
Date: 29 October 2004
Decision amended under S67A on 8 December 2004 including addition of an organism to
Annex 1.
_________________________
Ass. Prof. Marie Dziadek
Chair
Date: 8 December 2004
Decision amended under S67A in July 2007, addition of organisms to Annex 1.
_________________________
21 September 2007
Dr Max Suckling
Chair
Date
Decision amended under S67A in October 2007, addition of organisms to Annex 1.
_________________________
6 December 2007
Dr Kieran Elborough
Chair
Date
Decision amended under S67A in January 2008, addition of organisms to Annex 1.
_________________________
5 February 2008
Dr Max Suckling
Chair
Date
Environmental Risk Management Authority Decision: Application TNS02003
Page 6 of 10
Annex 1 – list of organisms approved for transhipment from destinations outside of New Zealand to Antarctica
Reference Culture
Number
number
1
H25B
Isolation
details
Lake Hoare,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
2
H2F
Lake Hoare,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
3
H14E
Lake Hoare,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
4
H4.5C
Lake Hoare,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
5
H16C
Lake Hoare,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
6
H5B
Lake Hoare,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
7
H29D
Lake Hoare,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
Details of genetic modification
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
Environmental Risk Management Authority Decision: Application TNS02003
Page 7 of 10
Permit1
supplied
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Reference Culture
Number
number
8
H12D
Isolation
details
Lake Hoare,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
9
F11D
Lake Fryxell,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
10
F15B
Lake Fryxell,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
11
F7B
Lake Fryxell,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
12
F10J
Lake Fryxell,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
13
F10I
Lake Fryxell,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
14
F10B
Lake Fryxell,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
15
F6A
Lake Fryxell,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
Details of genetic modification
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
Environmental Risk Management Authority Decision: Application TNS02003
Page 8 of 10
Permit1
supplied
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Reference Culture
Number
number
16
F8D
Isolation
details
Lake Fryxell,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
Details of genetic modification
Permit1
supplied
Yes
21
pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
(Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
Lake Fryxell, pBBR122 plasmids containing a transgenic construct composing promoter sequence from rpsL gene
F5B
Dry Valleys, (Bacillus subtilis), fluorescent protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP (Green),
CFP (cyan), RFP (red), YFP (yellow) or their derivatives), and rrnBT1T2 transcription termination
Antarctica
sequence (E. coli); and a chloramphenicol resistance gene.
Shewanella oneidensis
pMRP9-1 plasmids containing the gfp gene from Aequorea ictoria under the control of the lac
Venkateswaran et al.
promoter (Davies et al. 19982). The inserted GFP sequence was derived from pGFPmut2 (Cormack
1999
et al. 19963). The plasmid also confers resistance to carbenicillin.
Escherichia coli (Migula
May be genetically modified for cloning purposes.
1895) Castellani and
Chalmers 1919 nonpathogenic laboratory
strains.
Gemingera cryophila (D.L.
Not genetically modified
Taylor & C.C. Lee)
D.R.A. Hill 1991
Chamydomonas raudensis
Not genetically modified
22
F15B
Lake Fryxell, The mini Tn7 tagging system (Lambertsen et al. 2004) containing Tn7 ends (Tn7L andTn7R), fluorescent
Dry Valleys, protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP Green), CFP (cyan), RFP (red) or YFP
yellow), and antibiotic resistance genes to chloramphenicol and gentamicin.
Antarctica
Yes
23
H4.5C
Lake Hoare, The mini Tn7 tagging system (Lambertsen et al. 2004) containing Tn7 ends (Tn7L andTn7R), fluorescent
Dry Valleys, protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP Green), CFP (cyan), RFP (red) or YFP
yellow), and antibiotic resistance genes to chloramphenicol and gentamicin.
Antarctica
Yes
17
18
19
20
H. Ettl.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Davies, D.G., Parsek, M.R., Pearson, J.P., Iglewski, B.H., Costerton, J.W., and Greenberg, E.F. (1998) The Involvement of Cell-to-Cell Signals in the Development of a Bacterial
Biofilm. Science 280: 295-298.
3 Cormack, B.P., Valdivia, R.H., and Falkow, S. (1996) FACS-optimized mutants of the green fluorescent protein (GFP). Gene 173: 33-38.
2
Environmental Risk Management Authority Decision: Application TNS02003
Page 9 of 10
Permit1
supplied
Yes
Reference Culture
Number
number
24
F10.5
Isolation
details
Lake Fryxell,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
25
F7B
Lake Fryxell, The mini Tn7 tagging system (Lambertsen et al. 2004) containing Tn7 ends (Tn7L andTn7R), fluorescent
Dry Valleys, protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP Green), CFP (cyan), RFP (red) or YFP
yellow), and antibiotic resistance genes to chloramphenicol and gentamicin.
Antarctica
Yes
26
H16C
Lake Hoare,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
The mini Tn7 tagging system (Lambertsen et al. 2004) containing Tn7 ends (Tn7L andTn7R), fluorescent
protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP Green), CFP (cyan), RFP (red) or YFP
yellow), and antibiotic resistance genes to chloramphenicol and gentamicin.
Yes
27
H5B
Lake Hoare,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
The mini Tn7 tagging system (Lambertsen et al. 2004) containing Tn7 ends (Tn7L andTn7R), fluorescent
protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP Green), CFP (cyan), RFP (red) or YFP
yellow), and antibiotic resistance genes to chloramphenicol and gentamicin.
Yes
28
F8D
Lake Fryxell, The mini Tn7 tagging system (Lambertsen et al. 2004) containing Tn7 ends (Tn7L andTn7R), fluorescent
Dry Valleys, protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP Green), CFP (cyan), RFP (red) or YFP
yellow), and antibiotic resistance genes to chloramphenicol and gentamicin.
Antarctica
Yes
29
H6A
Lake Hoare,
Dry Valleys,
Antarctica
Yes
Details of genetic modification
The mini Tn7 tagging system (Lambertsen et al. 2004) containing Tn7 ends (Tn7L andTn7R), fluorescent
protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP Green), CFP (cyan), RFP (red) or YFP
yellow), and antibiotic resistance genes to chloramphenicol and gentamicin.
The mini Tn7 tagging system (Lambertsen et al. 2004) containing Tn7 ends (Tn7L andTn7R), fluorescent
protein reporter genes derived from invertebrates (either GFP Green), CFP (cyan), RFP (red) or YFP
yellow), and antibiotic resistance genes to chloramphenicol and gentamicin.
Applicants need to supply a copy of the Antarctic Conservation Act Permit or equivalent that allows importation of organisms/samples into
Antarctica.
Environmental Risk Management Authority Decision: Application TNS02003
Page 10 of 10