MFA stands firmly behind the development of the Life Sciences Center at the University of Missouri-Columbia. In fact, MFA Incorporated donated $250,000 for development of the project. We did that in conjunction with Missouri Ag Industries Council which donated $300,000. That's a lot of money to both MFA and Mo-Ag Industries. But it's a small piece of the nearly $60 million being devoted to the Life Sciences Center project. It's money well spent. Missouri U.S. Sen. Kit Bond deserves a lion's share of the credit for bringing this project to fruition. In the last three years, Sen. Bond has earmarked $30 million in federal dollars to the project. The late Gov. Mel Carnahan proposed adding another $30 million in state funds that should be forthcoming.

Sen. Bond has made no small plans for the University of Missouri and its Life Sciences Center. He sees it as a step toward making the university the "Silicon Valley" of biotechnology. He sees the center's mission as no less than providing world-leading research and academics. It's a plan worth supporting. And we do.

The Life Sciences Center is attracting support from agriculture in these times of low grain prices for one simple reason. Despite a series of preventable setbacks, biotechnology is the future of agriculture for the United States and the world. And the University of Missouri should be a player in that arena. The Life Sciences Center will house 50 research laboratories as well as six teaching and computer laboratories. In addition, the center will have 50 faculty members, 150 postdoctoral fellows, 200 graduate students and 450 undergraduates.

Targeted program areas include:

1. Crop genomics and nutraceuticals
2. Animal reproduction
3. Metabolic engineering and bioproducts
4. Control of infectious diseases
5. Cardiovascular function and disease prevention
6. Diagnosis, treatment and prevention of cancer
7. Bioremediation and environmental sustainability
8. Human development and aging

Seven divisions of the university will share the research and teaching laboratories at the center: agriculture, food and natural resources; arts and sciences; medicine; veterinary medicine; engineering; human environmental sciences; and nursing. Included in the mix will be such programs as the maize gene-mapping project, human health projects and environmental protection research.

As Dr. Tom Payne, dean of the College of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources, pointed out, the center will "bring together scientists in a state-of-the-art laboratory designed to increase the pace of their research by more effectively stimulating interaction and collaboration among research groups." He went on to explain that the center will "facilitate the rapid transfer of discoveries and new technology to the private sector and the public." Tom Payne understands the university's land-grant mission. He understands the potential for research, outreach and educational opportunities. More importantly, he sees the possibilities of enhancing that land-grant mission that can be brought about by the Life Sciences Center.

Synergy is what he's referring to. Synergy is a word that's been over used. Constant use has eroded its effect. But at its root is an indisputable principle. Synergy stands for the process by which the whole can be greater than its parts; it's a way of combining those parts to create a greater, more effective action or force.

The synergy developed through the interaction of the diverse disciplines will allow researchers, scientists and students to improve, increase or enhance the following areas listed by the university: quality and performance of crops; animal reproduction; nutritional control of diseases; application for metabolic engineering and production of bioproducts; control of infectious diseases; understanding of cardiovascular function and disease prevention; diagnosis, treatment and prevention of cancer; methods for bioremediation and sustaining the environment; and understanding human development and aging. The results will be a more safe and abundant food supply, improved medicine and health care, and cleaner air and water.

Why, in these times of overproduction and under pricing, should we strive for abundant production? Why should we spend $60 million on technology that's under attack? For one reason. We can never stop searching the horizon--even when it's easier to look no further than the farm gate. Despite the current low grain prices, despite the anti-technology fervor, we have to look to the future. Generations to come will judge us harshly if we squander opportunity today at the expense of tomorrow.