Sir

On 5 June 2008, our authorized, small-scale field trial of transgenic potato plants for nematode control was destroyed by people seeking to coerce government and society. It was one of only two trials authorized in the United Kingdom this year.

Our concern is that Directive 2001/18/EC, the European Union (EU) legislation that governs such trials, is confused. Although it recognizes the need for field releases at the research stage (clause 23), it does not distinguish between these and development-stage trials in its risk assessments. It has also set the legal precedent of providing precise locations of trial sites to vandals.

We have no evidence that the 400 transgenic plants we released posed any environmental concern, particularly when considered in the context of the annual UK potato crop of 8,000 million plants and their naturally hazardous glycoalkaloid content.

If EU governments cannot protect the trials they authorize, they should establish secure, vandal-proof national testing centres.

Unfortunately, a failure to distinguish a research trial from product-development trials seems to have blinded activists to the published, broader aims of our work. We develop controls for nematodes on subsistence crops in Africa and Asia, where both farmers and governments recognize the need for new technologies.

What is the distinction between burning university books 75 years ago and now destroying university research intended for publication in scientific journals? European governments must ensure that science in our universities can progress without coercion.