By CANDICE CHOI

NEW YORK (AP) — Inside an Indiana aquafarming complex, thousands of salmon eggs genetically modified to grow faster than normal are hatching into tiny fish. After growing to roughly 10 pounds (4.5 kilograms) in indoor tanks, they could be served in restaurants by late next year.

The salmon produced by AquaBounty are the first genetically modified animals approved for human consumption in the U.S. They represent one way companies are pushing to transform the plants and animals we eat, even as consumer advocacy groups call for greater caution.

AquaBounty hasn’t sold any fish in the U.S. yet, but it says its salmon may first turn up in places like restaurants or university cafeterias, which would decide whether to tell diners that the fish are genetically modified.

“It’s their customer, not ours,” said Sylvia Wulf, AquaBounty’s CEO.

To produce its fish, Aquabounty injected Atlantic salmon with DNA from other fish species that make them grow to full size in about 18 months, which could be about twice as fast as regular salmon. The company says that’s more efficient since less feed is required. The eggs were shipped to the U.S. from the company’s Canadian location last month after clearing final regulatory hurdles.

As AquaBounty worked through years of government approvals, several grocers including Kroger and Whole Foods responded to a campaign by consumer groups with a vow to not sell the fish.

Already, most corn and soy in the U.S. is genetically modified to be more resistant to pests and herbicides. But as genetically modified salmon make their way to dinner plates, the pace of change to the food supply could accelerate.

This month, President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing federal agencies to simplify regulations for genetically engineered plants and animals. The move comes as companies are turning to a newer gene-editing technology that makes it easier to tinker with plant and animal DNA.

That’s blurring the lines around what should be considered a genetically modified organism, and how such foods are perceived. In 2015, an Associated Press-GfK poll found two-thirds of Americans supported labeling of genetically modified ingredients on food packages. The following year, Congress directed regulators to establish national standards for disclosing the presence of bioengineered foods.

The disclosure regulation will start being implemented next year, but mandatory compliance doesn’t start until 2022. And under the rules , companies can provide the disclosures through codes people scan with their phones. The disclosure also would note that products have “bioengineered” ingredients, which advocacy groups say could be confusing.

“Nobody uses that term,” said Amy van Saun of the Center for Food Safety, who noted “genetically engineered” or “genetically modified” are more common.

The center is suing over the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s approval of AquaBounty’s salmon, and it is among the groups that asked grocers to pledge they wouldn’t sell the fish.

The disclosure rules also do not apply to restaurants and similar food service establishments. Greg Jaffe of the Center for Science in the Public Interest noted that AquaBounty’s fish will represent a tiny fraction of the U.S. salmon supply, and that many people may not care whether they’re eating genetically modified food. Still, he said restaurants could make the information available to customers who ask about it.

“The information should not be hidden,” Jaffe said.

AquaBounty’s Wulf noted its salmon has already been sold in Canada, where disclosure is not required. She said the company believes in transparency but questioned why people would want to know whether the fish are genetically modified.

“It’s identical to Atlantic salmon, with the exception of one gene,” she said.

____

Follow Candice Choi at http://www.twitter.com/candicechoi

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

By MARCIA DUNN and EMILY SWANSON

CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) — Americans prefer a space program that focuses on potential asteroid impacts, scientific research and using robots to explore the cosmos over sending humans back to the moon or on to Mars, a poll shows.

The poll by The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research , released Thursday, one month before the 50th anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing, lists asteroid and comet monitoring as the No. 1 desired objective for the U.S. space program. About two-thirds of Americans call that very or extremely important, and about a combined 9 in 10 say it’s at least moderately important.

Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin on July 20, 1969, became the first humans to walk on another celestial body. In all, 12 NASA astronauts stepped on the moon.

Jan Dizard, 78, a retired environmental studies professor living in Chico, California, acknowledges there’s more to learn on the moon and it would be “miraculous” to send astronauts to Mars. But now’s not the time, he stressed.

“There are all kinds of other things, not the least of which is climate change, that deserve our attention,” Dizard told the AP. “This other stuff can wait.”

After asteroid and comet monitoring, scientific research to expand knowledge of Earth and the rest of the solar system and universe came next on the list of Americans’ space priorities — about 6 in 10 said that was very or extremely important. Close to half said the same about sending robotic probes, rather than astronauts, to explore space, and about 4 in 10 said the same about continued funding of the International Space Station.

Searching for life on other planets came in fifth with 34{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b} rating it at least very important, followed by 27{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b} for human Mars expeditions and 23{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b} for crewed moonshots.

In a dead heat for last place among the nine listed goals: setting up permanent human residences on other planets, with 21{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b} ranking it as a very high priority, and establishing a U.S. military presence in space with 19{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b}. While other goals were considered at least moderately important by majorities of Americans, about half called a military presence and space colonies unimportant.

President Donald Trump, who wants to create a Space Force as a new military service, said at a rally formally kicking off his reelection campaign this week that, if he wins a second term, the country will “lay the foundation” for landing astronauts on Mars.

That came after a confusing tweet from Trump in which he said that NASA “should NOT be talking about going to the Moon” and instead focus on “much bigger things” including “Mars (of which the Moon is a part).” NASA administrator Jim Bridenstine later explained that the moon can be used as a “waypoint” for Mars access.

Toni Dewey, 71, a retired clerical worker in Wilmington, North Carolina, said space exploration should benefit life on Earth and the explorers should be machines versus humans.

As for the moon, Dewey noted, “We’ve been there.”

But Alan Curtis, 47, of Pocatello, Idaho, considers moon and Mars trips a top priority, especially if the U.S. is to remain a world leader in space. Compared with its feats of the 1960s and 1970s, the U.S. space program is now a second thought, he said.

“It’s pretty bad that we have to rent a spot on a Russian spacecraft to get to the space station,” said Curtis, a store cashier who says he’s an occasional bounty hunter. He pointed to the first-ever landing by a spacecraft on the far side of the moon, by China in January.

Abdul Lotiff, 28, a retail security company manager in Mason City, Iowa, also favors a return to the moon. He sees economic benefits there, with the resulting new tech spilling into areas outside the space business. In addition, he said, if and when Earth becomes overpopulated, the moon could serve as a springboard for humanity’s expansion into space.

The survey asked Americans to directly choose between the moon and Mars for exploration by U.S. astronaut. The red planet was the winner by about double: 37{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b} compared with 18{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b}. However, 43{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b} said neither destination was a priority.

For Americans under 45 — born after NASA’s Apollo moonshots — Mars came out on top by an even larger margin: 50{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b} prefer a Mars trip, versus 17{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b} for the moon. A third said neither should be a priority.

For those 45 and older, 52{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b} said neither Mars nor the moon should be a priority as a human destination. Of that age bracket, 26{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b} preferred sending astronauts to Mars and 19{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b} to the moon.

As for the White House’s deadline of returning astronauts to the moon within five years — NASA is aiming for the water ice-rich lunar south pole by 2024 — about 4 in 10 Americans favored the plan, versus 2 in 10 against. The remainder had no strong opinion either way.

The good news, at least for NASA and its contractors, is that 60{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b} of Americans believe the benefits of the space program have justified the cost.

In 1979 — on the 10th anniversary of the first manned moon landing — 41{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b} of Americans said the benefits were worth the cost, according to an AP-NBC News poll.

If given an opportunity to experience space travel themselves, about half of Americans said they would orbit the Earth, while about 4 in 10 would fly to the moon and about 3 in 10 would go to Mars. Among those willing to travel to the red planet, about half — or 15{99cd714f394079a7f0ed2eb1518dd31342ff3ceb5b6c267c3ad8acd5b5a7d66b} of all Americans — said they would move to a Mars colony, even if it meant never returning to Earth.

Men were more likely than women to want to travel to any space destination: Earth orbit, moon and Mars.

Curtis contends the U.S. might have a colony on the moon by now “if we had put our money in the right places.”

“We haven’t been there in so long,” he said. “Is the flag even still there?”

U.S. flags were planted on the moon during each of the Apollo landings through 1972. The first was knocked over by engine exhaust when Apollo 11′s Armstrong and Aldrin blasted off the moon.

___

Swanson reported from Washington. Associated Press writer Jeremy Rehm in New York contributed to this report.

___

The AP-NORC poll of 1,137 adults was conducted May 17-20 using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 4.1 percentage points.