11 
Dr. Gottesman ttought the working group might list examples to offer guidance 
without demandinq the specific information be supplied; a more inclusive 
workinq group document might then be constructed. 
Dr. Jane Rissler of the EPA felt attempts at brevity in the working group docu- 
ment may not be advantageous to the investigator. She suggested the working 
group guidance document should list most pertinent points, but contain language 
stating that all data requirements will not be pertinent in all cases. 
Dr. Colwell felt the working group document should specifically state important 
data considerations even if each data requirement would not apply to every 
experiment. He thought this would give investigators an idea of vhat RAC might 
consider relevant in reviewing each case. Dr. Tolin said the investigator 
should at the minimum state whether information relevant to the data requirement 
was available. 
Dr. Gottesman offered the following outline for preposed part III, Envi ronmenta 1 
Considerations , of the working group document. Part III would emphasize the 
ecological characteristics of the parental organisms and the changes in the 
modified organism. 
III. Environmental Considerations 
A. Ecological Roles 
1. Non-modi fied Parent 
2. Role of the Introduced Gene(s) 
3. Modified Organism - Expected or observed differences frem 
non-modi fied parent 
Dr. Gottesman then asked the working group to list relevant ecological concepts. 
She said ecological information should be gathered in order to assess: (1) the 
probability of survival, establishment, and dispersal of the recombinant organ- 
ism; and (2) the possibility of adverse effect. Dr. Sharpies said the working 
group would be locking for conditions that allow the organism to survive. 
Dr. Tolin said the investigator should supply information on the life cycle 
of the organism in the ecosystem. Dr. Hirano said information on grewth 
characteristics such as survival, colonization, growth rates, and optimal 
temperatures or potential nutrient sources would also be an important consider- 
ation. Dr. Colwell suggested part III of the working group document might 
address issues such as the potential for: host shift, evolution of greater 
virulence, broadening of niches, and lateral transfer of genes. Dr. Tolin 
said the original subgroup draft (Attachment IV) had lumped these concepts 
under the term "relevant genetics." 
Dr. Rissler suggested the probability of occurrence of each step required for 
the organism to have an impact could be evaluated in this part of the working 
group proposal. 
[ 21 ] 
