I agree, Shoe.
It's natural hybridization when two plants in the same or very closely related species swap pollen. That's just stirring the pot. Those genes have all been mixing in the same or similar populations for thousands or millions of years. (Or maybe genes from wheat in Georgia, Russia are mixing with genes in wheat from Georgia USA.)
A little mixing and selection occurs every year, and change is relatively slow. o think the main safety feature of traditional hybridization is that "genes that come from wheat stay in wheat". Umm ... ummm ... got it! The word that means "NOT transgenic" is "cisgenic".
It's genetic engineering when a team sits down with a huge library of DNA fragments from bacteria, molds, fungi, frogs, fish and plants. Moving DNA from a DIFFERENT species into a crop is "transgenic" change. Called "Frankenfood" to sound glib or scary.
Genetic engineers study what they want to change in a crop variety at the biochemical level, and then look for genes that might help. They don't care much whether that gene comes from the original species itself (different variety) or from luminescent bacteria, rattlesnakes or Bigfoot.
Exactly like "one from Column A and one from Column B".
Even the first-generation of GE tools made that fairly easy compared to 6 to dozens of generations of breeding trials.
The "first generation" of GE tools used a circular DNA fragment borrowed from the plant pathogen Agrobacterium. That bug EVOLVED to insert it's DNA into plant cells, causing tumors or warts. Biologists couldn't figure out how to do that on their own, so they copied the sequence of that circular DNA fragment ("plasmid") into their libraries of nifty DNA sequences.
Then they add whatever DNA sequences they want to the plasmid, and multiply it until they have lots. The they use it to infect a tube full of plant cells, and select out the ones that were changed. Then they grow the cells back into whole plants with "engineered DNA added".
In "short":
Agrobacterium plasmid-mediated transformation of plant cells
using DNA fragments 'engineered' using techniques including:
sequencing, recombinant DNA methods, polymerase chain reaction and others developed since around 1960"
Some of the downsides of that "first generation technique are:
1. the new DNA inserts itself into some random location on random chromosomes of the target crop. It's like adding a page to a book in a random place.
Hence,
2. The new genes are not located next to and under control of whatever natural control mechanisms cause that gene to be expressed, multiplied or inhibited.
Hence,
3. The engineers have to provide engineered initiator sites, promotor sites, maybe regulator sites if they are REALLY fancy, and get all those to behave either in a way the plant finds beneficial or the engineers think is cool.
All those "sites" are yet more DNA sequences, typically plucked out of the DNA sequence library. The promoter and initiator sequences typically come from sec9ond or third species quite unrelated to the plant itself.
4. However, biological control over the new genes' expression is still uncoordinated with the plant's growth phase and environment.
5. ALL these transgenic DNA sequences are slapped into the plants genome randomly and remain there forever, even though the only genetic change WANTED was the one little target gene that was the purpose of the exercise.
Kind of like driving in a small thumbtack with a 5 pound mallet ... and leaving the mallet inside every copy of the product sold, forever.
Next: second generation genetic engineering tools
I'll try to make it shorter. My track record with that is NOT good.
