An attempt to patent genetic material donated by rural African communities has sparked a global scientific rumpus.

South African researchers and traditional leaders fear scientists will soon start patenting the genes of local ethnic groups, many of whom have donated blood samples as part of a worldwide genome-mapping project.

This week, several lawyers, researchers and community leaders denounced an American patent application for unique gene mutations found in DNA samples collected in Tanzania, Kenya and Sudan.

The American applicants, Dr Sarah Tishkoff and Dr Floyd Reed from the University of Pennsylvania, collected more than 2000 samples in East Africa and are sitting on a large blood bank of more than 5000 in total, taken from 80 African ethnic groups, including several from South Africa.

Known South African blood sample donors include the Ju-speaking !Xun (also known as Vasekela) and Khoe- speaking Khwe.

Their samples were collected from individuals in the area of Schmidtsdrift in the northwest Cape region of South Africa and provided by a prominent local scientist.

Although the Sunday Times has been unable to contact the American researchers, their research website says all African samples were collected with written consent. What remains unclear is whether the donors agreed to let the scientists use their genetic material for commercial gain.

Tishkoff shot to fame six years ago after ground-breaking genome research that led to her theory of the “African Eve”.

The latest patent application has renewed fears that scientists could profit from human DNA in much the same way as from plants and minerals.

Detailed analysis of the South African samples — collected about four years ago — is due to be published later this year in one of the world’s leading scientific journals, according to prominent local scientist Dr Maritha Kotze. She confirmed this week that she had sent the SA samples to Tishkoff.

Kotze, who is now attached to the University of Stellenbosch’s pathology department, said she had been assured there would be no commercial gain from the material.

She said the South African samples had been collected with the full consent of the communities involved, and with assurances that any commercial benefits would be shared.

“The South Africans’ ones went the right route… I’ve still got the proof from the university.” She said the research, if conducted properly, could hold vital clues about human origins and help scientists to fight disease.

South Africa’s diverse population is a major boon for this kind of research. “It’s no good if (scientists) get samples from all over the world but nothing from South Africa or Africa, with the Khoisan being such a vital group,” Kotze said.

Some human rights groups fear the Tishkoff patent application could signal an avalanche of similar applications as private genetic business groups seek to cash in on recent advances in genome sequencing, which allows scientists to come up with a person’s genetic “formula”.

National House of Traditional Leaders chief executive Abram Sithole said: “The NHTL is against any academic who will use his academic profession to patent or make a profit from poor South Africans who will benefit nothing. “We cannot allow such behaviour to continue in this modern world where care and feelings of people must be taken into consideration.”

The director of the African Centre for Biosafety, Mariam Mayet, condemned the patent application and called for firm protocols to guard against the commercial exploitation of genome research.

Other observers said South Africa was well situated to contribute to genome research, but the country needed to ensure the researchers’ conduct was ethical.

Neither Tishkoff nor Reed could be reached for comment.

— jordanb@sundaytimes.co.za