Ag Radar

Good Read:

GM animus dooms Indian farmers: Innovation is the answer to affordable Bt cotton technology

The writer is Chairman and Managing Director, Biocon
By Kiran Mazumdar-Shaw

The biggest threat to cotton farmers is the bollworm, because of its ability to cause extraordinary damage to crops and livelihoods. In the 1990s, pesticides were the only weapon farmers had against the bollworm. Half of all the pesticide consumption in India was accounted for by just one crop - cotton.

Yet, the ability of the bollworm to develop pesticide resistance meant that millions of small cotton farmers in India were being pushed into poverty. The situation changed only after the Indian government, having conducted extensive and stringent bio-
safety tests, allowed farmers to switch to using genetically modified (GM) Bt cotton seeds in 2002.

Bt cotton contains genes from the naturally-occurring soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). GM technology is used to introduce the Bt gene into cotton seeds, which then produce a protein that effectively tackles insects like the bollworm. GM technology thus offers the cheapest and most efficient method of protecting the cotton crop from this belligerent pest.

Resulting higher yields and lower costs of cultivation have enabled Indian farmers to realise higher profits on their produce over the past decade. It has also averted a potential environmental crisis from excessive pesticide use.

The only GM product allowed for commercial cultivation in the country, Bt cotton has made India the largest cotton producer in the world and converted the country from a net importer to a net exporter of this important cash crop.

Over 90 per cent of the country's cotton growing areas today grow Bt cotton, which has resulted in the doubling of cotton yields over the last decade.

Bt cotton amply demonstrates that responsible introduction of GM crops can be one of the most potent ways of increasing productivity of crops in this country. Yet, fear mongering by activists over the bio-safety and environmental safety of GM crops has led to a hostile policy regime and resulted in a moratorium on transgenic crop trials.

As field trials are the first step towards cultivation of GM crops in India, this ban prevents biotech researchers from introducing indigenously developed GM technologies in the market. This has created a "technological monopoly" for Monsanto's Bt cotton seeds.

Indian seed companies have to pay a licence fee for using Monsanto's proprietary Bollgard technology that was approved for use in the country over a decade ago. The failure of successive Indian governments to stand up to anti-GMO activists has led to this monopoly-like situation.

The current government now wants to tackle what it perceives as "high Bt Cotton seed prices" through price controls. To this end, it has recently passed the Cotton Seed Price (Control) Order (CSPCO) 2015 to fix a uniform maximum sale price for Bt Cotton from March 2016. But two wrongs seldom make a right. Price controls will create more market distortions by further disincentivising the development of alternative Bt cotton technology

Price controls on cotton seeds through state and central government orders are the latest example of India's schizophrenic approach to innovation. On one hand we are asking foreign companies to come and 'innovate in India', but on the other we have tied the hands of Indian innovators with regulations and prevented them from bringing indigenous technologies to farmers.

Advances in agri-biotechnology have led to the development of transgenic varieties of rice, wheat, maize, sorghum, cotton, brinjal, mustard, potato, sugarcane and chickpea. Apart from this, agricultural scientists are everaging molecular markers in crop breeding for the selective propagation of genes hat improve yields and resist disease.

If the government is serious about ensuring better affordability for farmers, it will have to first put in place a clearly articulated policy on agri-biotechnology with enough checks and balances to ensure bio-safety. This will pave the way for responsible ntroduction of GM crops, leading to higher competition and eventually lower prices.

Recently, eminent agricultural scientist M S Swaminathan made a strong case against the moratorium and in favour of a smooth approval process towards field rials for GM crops, saying that they are "absolutely essential to assess risks and benefits". He even suggested that the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) should organise an All India Coordinated Project for the field testing of GM crops in he farms of agriculture universities.

The government should certainly pay heed to Swaminathan's suggestion as GM crops not only have the potential to bring succour to millions of needy in this country but also ensure food security for the entire nation. While the government understands he importance of food security, it needs to ranslate this understanding into action.

The constitution of the Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India (BRAI) as an independent regulatory body is thus critical to the country's progress in bio echnology. BRAI is proposed as the final authority on issues related to biotechnology with the mandate to take science-based decisions after due discussions and safety rials on GM products. But the BRAI Bill has been hanging fire for several years now because of the hostile public view propagated by a few, on GM crops. This has resulted in a Catch-22 situation.

It is of paramount national interest for he government to unshackle agri-biotechnology, which can provide powerful soluions to irrigation and arable land challenges in a country that has only 2.3 per cent of the world's land area but must ensure food security for 17.5 per cent of the world population.

Despite adverse weather condition, Bengal mango belt expecting high level of crop

SILIGURI: Unprecedented low level of rainfall in Eastern India might have added many wrinkles on the forehead of all in the agri arena there. But Mango farmers are finding it as highly favourable and expecting high output in 2016, the year earlier expected to be a low yielding one, traditionally known as 'Off year.'

As per Indian meteorological record, Entire Eastern zone comprising Bihar, Jharkhand, West Bengal or NE region has witnessed 20% to 59% lower than normal rainfall During 1st Jan to 24th Feb period. For sub Himalayan West Bengal region, the downfall recorded even lower at 60%- 90%. Relative humidity has also dipped even lower than 45% at some places.

"It may be bad for other crops. But we find it favourable for Mango," said Mr. U. Saha, President Maldaha Mango Merchants Association. Maldaha and adjoining districts in West Bengal form one of the largest mango yielding regions of the country producing around 5 lakh metric ton or near 5% of
India's national yield. Eventually, local economy of the whole industrially deprived region is highly dependent on Mango.

"Flowering of mango takes place till first week of March and low rainfall during this period is good for the soft flowers to remain attached to inflorescence," said Prof. A. Chaudhury, DEAN, North Bengal Agriculture University. In addition, "Low humidity at this season has also kept attack of common disease like Anthracnose under controllable limit," said experts.

"Though as per traditional trend, after high yielding 'On Year' 2015, this 2016 was expected to be a low yielding 'Off Year.' But it is likely to break the tradition and become 'On Year' with an output of around 3 lakh Metric Ton from Maldaha alone," said Mr. Saha.

However, "The situation can take a serious negative turn if it does not rain after mid-March. Because too low humidity in soil and air can seriously re**rd transformation of flowers into baby fruits. In addition, this juicy fruit demands high level of water supply for proper growth. The farmers must remain prepared," said Prof. Chaudhury giving a caution.

35 new pests were detected in Brazil in the last decade

"At least 35 new pests were detected on crops in the last 10 years and recently three new agricultural pests were detected in the country”. The information is from Claudio Spadotto, member of the Scientific Council for Sustainable Agriculture of Brazil and general-manager of Embrapa Land Management.
"One of them is Helicoverpa punctigera, as aggressive as H. armigera. Identified in Ceará in 2015, the H.punctigera can lead to huge losses in cotton, corn, and soybean crops. Another is Melanagromyza sp., identified in Rio Grande do Sul in July last year. It is an important pest in Australia, where it causes losses of up to 30% of grain production and is also widespread in Asia. This fly is also present in Paraguay and Argentina. Other plague identified in 2015, in Mato Grosso, is the invasive plant careless w**d (maranthus palmeri), well known in the U.S. crops of cotton and soybeans. It is known that the lack of control can lead to losses of 80% or 90% of infested crops.”
According to him, “new pests with potential of generating big damages to Brazilian agriculture are at the imminence of getting to the country and the Ministry of Agriculture has adopted measures to strengthen the control to prevent entrances and establishment of quarantine pests. Actions of enforcement and control at the ports, airport and border check-points at the inspection of agricultural products that characterize risk compose the Contingency Plans, with operational procedures for applying preventing and emergency measure to eradicate focus and plague contention”.
“The understanding and awareness on the threats that the quarantine pests represent are primary. We need to know which pests are to come and where they can enter and establish in our fields. The characterization and detailing of the possible access of pest, along with the locations of crops threatened, are subsidies to the government programs of crop protection, especially in a country with vast and diversified territory, with extensive borders and intense trade relations as Brazil.
“We have to rationalize and optimize the phytosanitary surveillance actions, considering the distribution and dynamics of agriculture in the territory throughout time. The risk management in territorial base is indispensable because it enhances our capacity to anticipate and act proactively. The incorporation of territorial intelligence can supply data and consistent information, which helps to control access, establishment and dissemination of pests, diseases and w**ds, it bring the possibility of unusual views and innovative approaches on crop protection,” explains Spadotto.
The expert cites the example of Embrapa work in the Cerrado region, which defined 141 municipalities that should be prioritized for the monitoring of Helicoverpa armigera. “Another example is a study, also from Embrapa, with Chilo partellus, which is a pest not present in Brazil. This moth presents potential to attack several crops, including corn, sugar and sugarcane. The results show that areas in Roraima (rice), São Paulo (cane), Paraná and Mato Grosso do Sul (sugarcane and corn) should be prioritized in phytosanitary surveillance actions,” he adds.
"Other quarantine pest not present in Brazil, but already present in neighboring countries (Colombia, Ecuador and Peru) is Prodiplosis longifila. This fly has caused serious damages in areas with avocado, artichoke, cotton, potatoes, beans, orange, lemon, tangerine and tomato in other countries. The Embrapa study allowed eight municipalities as a priority for surveillance actions on this pest,” he explains.
"Therefore, the geospatial analysis can support the entrance prevention and the establishment of quarantine pests in Brazil, as well as support the planning of containment and control measures using georeferenced data and tolls of the Geographic Information System,” he concludes.

Senate Committee on Agriculture Votes Against Mandatory GMO Labeling

American companies already label GMO foods overseas.

Want to know if your food contains genetically modified organisms? Hope that food companies feel like telling you.

In a 14-6 vote, the Senate Committee on Agriculture approved a bill that makes GMO labeling voluntary, preempting any state or local initiatives that would have made it mandatory. The legislation will now make its way to the full Senate for consideration.

Proponents for GMO labeling, which includes a vast majority of consumers, argue that people have the right to know what exactly is in their food. Those who are against it argue that it’s expensive. Committee Chairman Pat Roberts says that this legislation solves the issue of state-by-state labeling laws, which he says are “disrupting the interstate flow of agriculture and food products in our nation’s marketplace.” He also pointed to a Senate hearing from last year in which three government agencies—the USDA, EPA, and FDA—declared GMOs to be Former financial and food industry analyst Robyn O’Brien responded to the Senate vote, specifically regarding claims that GMO labeling is too expensive. “Food prices didn’t skyrocket,” O’Brien writes. “Families weren’t priced out of Twinkies, farmers didn’t go over because of the labeled Ding D**g, they simply added a few words.”

She includes a picture of what the label looks like—an unassuming footnote on the back of the packaging—as well as a list of 64 countries in which American companies are required to label their GMO-derived products as such, a market that she estimates to include 60% of the global population.