Plant Biotech Blog

The Washington Post published the following commentary this week on Europe’s resistance of genetically modified products. The article focuses on a ruling by the European Commission that will not allow GM animal feed would not be allowed into the European Union. Many agriculture officials are concerned that the livestock industry will continue to suffer if GM feed is not let in, according to the article.

Dr. C Kameswara Rao

Agricultural trade squeals
Washington Times
February 29, 2008

European Union officials adamantly refuse to let the World Trade Organization save them from themselves.

Despite a 2005 WTO ruling that some European countries were breaking international trade rules by prohibiting the importation of gene-spliced, or “genetically modified (GM),” crops and foods, Europe remains recalcitrant, unrepentant — and on the verge of slaughtering its own livestock industry.

European Union agriculture ministers failed yet again Monday to permit imports of five biotech crops intended for animal feed, causing a group that represents European farmers to warn that without greater use of gene-spliced crops, the livestock industry could be decimated.

European shortages of grain for animal feed and soaring prices — caused by both the rejection of gene-spliced grains and the diversion of corn to production of ethanol for fuel — are causing panic among livestock producers. Pig and poultry farmers have been forced to reduce their output, while consumer consumption is down because of higher prices.

Although the WTO bluntly scolded the EU for imposing a moratorium on gene-spliced crop approvals from 1998 to 2004, that finding was a foregone conclusion. European politicians, including then-EU Environment Commissioner Margot Wallstroem, had acknowledged that the moratorium was “an illegal, illogical, and otherwise arbitrary line in the sand.”

Read more…

The biotechnology news site Check Biotech reported today that researchers in Indonesia are working on developing five genetically engineered crops that will hopefully be available for commercial use in five years. Tomato, potato, papaya, rice and cassava are the crops they are working on. Read more about this below.

Dr. C Kameswara Rao

Agriculture ministry growing five food crops through genetic engineering
Check Biotech
February 27, 2008

JAKARTA - The Agriculture Ministry’s Research and Development Agency (Litbangtan) is currently cultivating five food crops through biotechnological engineering for commercial use in five years’ time, a spokesman said.

M Herman, a Litbangtan researcher, said here Tuesday the food crops the agency was growing through genetic engineering were tomato, potato, papaya, rice and cassava.

“The commodities are being researched and they are expected to be ready for commercial use after five years,” Herman said, adding that biotechnological development of soybean, corn and cotton in the agricultural sector was dominated by multinational companies.

Herman said a relatively long time was needed before agricultural produce grown through genetic engineering could be released for commercial use because they had to be subjected to meticulous tests to ensure their food and environmental safety.

Multinational companies had been carrying out research and tests on biotechnological produce since 1996 but the produce were only released for public use after 10 years, he noted.

Citing another example, he said the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in the Philippines had been doing research on so-called “Golden Rice” since 1990 but the rice variety would be made available to the public only in 2011.

Read more…

ABC News in Australia is reporting that the Victorian Farmers Federation (VFF) is standing by their endorsement of genetically modified crops, despite calls from anti-GM food groups to maintain a ban on GM canola. The article below includes a quote from VFF president Simon Ramsay who says that by ending the moratorium of GM canola, farmers will have more choices and can take advantage of new technology.

Dr. C Kameswara Rao

VFF says GM crops give farmers ‘choice’
ABC News
February 27, 2008

The Victorian Farmers Federation (VFF) is countering calls from anti-genetically modified (GM) food groups for the Government to maintain its ban on genetically modified canola.

The moratorium on GM canola expires in Victoria tomorrow, allowing seed and chemical companies to start selling their patented seeds.

Anti-GM groups are concerned conventional crops will be contaminated, and that herbicide resistant canola will become an environmental weed.

VFF president Simon Ramsay says farmers will be able to start the accreditation process to grow and sell GM grain under licence.

“What’s important now with the sun setting here in Victoria tomorrow is that farmers will be able to have that choice, they’ll be able to take advantage of the new technology,” he said.

“It not only has good economic outcomes, but it has good environmental outcomes and that’s important given that farmers are facing the challenge of climate change.”

Read more…

Fellow biotechnology blogger David Tribe posted a letter to the editor of the Canberra Times today. The writer seems to be correcting some previous ideas in the newspaper on the true benefits of GM canola.

Dr. C Kameswara Rao

Canadian agronomists detail the benefits of GM canola in the ground.
GMO Pundit
February 26, 2008

Dr Rene Van Acker is right to suggest Australia should learn from Canada’s experiences regarding genetically modified canola (Look to Canada for GE solutions, February 5, p11).

However, he is less correct in the Canadian lessons he gives. The benefits of herbicide tolerant canola for western Canada have far out weighed the risks over the last 11 years.

A recent study on the impacts of GMHT canola in western Canada carried out by the University of Saskatchewan gives some real life lessons that can be heeded. Results show that 90 per cent of canola farmers report reduced soil erosion and increased soil moisture conservation.

Sixty per cent of growers reported a carry-over benefit to the subsequent crop year in terms of improved weed control, with half of these growers assigning a dollar value of $A13.09, or about the cost of one glyphosate application in Canada. Fifty per cent reported they used no chemicals on crops that followed GMHT canola which had dramatically reduced the volume of chemicals applied to fields.

Canola used to be reserved for the most weed-free fields but is now a crop for difficult fields with weed problems.

In addition to the direct benefits to growers of increased yield and profitability, breeding and crop development activities by private companies has increased dramatically. The result has been more (150) and higher-yielding hybrid variety choices.

Read more…

UK farmers are not opposed to genetically modified crops a study conduced by Open University found. The researchers found that farmers are not opposed to GM crops as long as they provide an economic benefit to the farmer. Read the Science Daily article on the study below.

Dr. C Kameswara Rao

What Farmers Think About GM Crops
Science Daily
February 24, 2008

Farmers are upbeat about genetically modified crops, according to new research funded by the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC).

A group at the Open University, led by Professor Andy Lane, has taken the first systematic look at what large-scale, commodity farmers — not those mainly involved in organic growing - think about genetically-modified crops. We know how consumers, governments and the food industry regard GM, but this is the first proper look at the attitudes of the people who would use GM crops.

Lane and his colleagues found that both farmers who have been involved in GM crop trials and those who have not, regard GM as a simple extension of previous plant breeding techniques, such as those which have produced today’s established crop types. They regard GM crops as an innovation which they would assess on its merits. Their real interest is in how GM crops would work in practice and whether they can contribute to the profitability of their farms. The research suggests that these farmers do not think that GM raises any issues of principle, or that it is a matter of right or wrong.

Professor Lane said: “New technology such as GM is attractive to farmers. They want to produce high-quality food profitably and they want to farm in an environmentally sensitive way. GM may allow them to reconcile this conundrum by doing both of these things at once.”

Read more…

According to Pioneer Hi-Bred, a distributor of genetically modified seeds, GM crops may be the answer to rising food costs. Reuters interviewed Pioneer President Paul Shickler on the subject; Shickler believes that the only way we can meet the growing demand for food is through improved productivity and that improvement can come from GM technology.

Dr. C Kameswara Rao

Pioneer sees GMOs gaining global market acceptance
Reuters
February 22, 2008

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Rising food prices will encourage worldwide acceptance of genetically engineered crops as more consumers set aside health concerns for the lower prices that biotech crops may deliver, a leading seed company executive said.

Governments that have been slow to accept biotech crops, or GMOs, will find it increasingly difficult to deny access to the technologies as food costs are poised to continue climbing.

“The only way we’re going to meet some of these demand expectations that we have and are going to have in the future is through improved productivity. A lot of that productivity will come through technology,” said Paul Shickler, president of Pioneer Hi-Bred International and vice president of DuPont Co (DD.N: Quote, Profile, Research).

U.S. food prices rose by a 17-year high of 4 percent last year and were seen rising by another 3 to 4 percent in 2008. Food inflation was expected to outpace the general inflation rate through 2010, the U.S. Agriculture Department forecast.

Global food prices have risen even faster and will continue to do so, economists said.

Read more…

Reg Clause, a board member for the agricultural biotechnology group Truth about Trade & Technology, recently posted a commentary on the ISAAA report on the state of biotechnology in the world. Clause addresses the response by Friends of the Earth to the report and also writes on sections of the report citing the benefits of GM crops.

Dr. C Kameswara Rao

The Farmers Choice
Truth about Trade & Technology
February 22, 2008

I noticed a news headline the other day, “Biotech reports spark debate over potential benefits.” I discovered two things upon reading the article. 1) Utilization of biotech crops is growing in double digits annually, increasing global productivity substantially, reducing poverty by helping farmers and keeping food affordable, reducing the environmental impacts of farming and contributing to the potential for cost effective biofuels. All backed up by objective evidence. 2) A group called “Friends of the Earth” will have none of this and take issue with the report line by line; generally backing up their statements with all-to-familiar spin and bluster.

Now, in regards to the “Friends” mentioned above, I couldn’t help thinking of a line from a comedian I once heard. He said, “some people are afraid of heights. Not me, I’m afraid of widths.”

I mean, really, there is no amount of good news that will satisfy some folks.

Check out the new report from the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA), which determines the global area of biotech crops each year. The latest one, covering 2007, was just released. It tells a now familiar story of rapid growth in the use of biotech and the totally positive impacts on the environment and people’s lives.

Twelve million farmers in 23 countries were responsible for this achievement, up from 10.3 million in 21 countries in 2006. The number of biotech acres they planted increased by 12 percent from a year before. The newest members of the GM club are Chile and Poland.

Farmers in the United States accounted for about half of the world’s biotech acres. Growers in South America–mainly Argentina and Brazil, plus Paraguay and Uruguay–planted about one-third of the total. Canada, India, China, and South Africa also devoted substantial acreage to GM crops.

Read more…

GMO Africa blogger James Wachai posted a blog entry on the newly released report by the ISAAA. Wacahi writes about attempts by anti-biotechnology advocacy groups to mislead Africans into thinking the worst about biotech crops. He concludes his post by listing a few highlights from the report.

Dr. C Kameswara Rao

ISAAA reports a surge in biotech crops cultivation
GMO Africa
February 21, 2008

The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications (ISAAA) has released a report that shows a surge in cultivation of biotech crops. Contrary to many anti-biotech critics, the surge seems to portend biotech crops striking a nerve with farmers.

What’s perhaps more interesting is the fact that developing countries continue to perform as well as developed countries in growing biotech crops. This disambiguates a widely held argument that biotech crops are a preserve of developed countries. On this blog, in August 2006, I argued that smallholder farmers benefit from biotech crops as much as large-scale farmers.

Despite this, sadly, Africa continues to lag behind in the adoption of biotech crops. To the continent, crop genetic engineering remains an enigma. Politics has, unfairly, been infused into this debate. As the rest of the world angles itself to share the spoils of modern agricultural biotechnology, African countries, with the exception of South Africa, are still haggling on whether or not to admit biotech crops to their farms.

The 2007 ISAAA’s latest report, perhaps, sends an unambiguous message that there’s something striking in modern crop genetic engineering that Africa, and other parts of the developing world, can’t afford to ignore. Africa ought to know that a lot of debate swirling around biotech crops, principally, is meant to mislead and confuse. There are groups ought to hijack landmark scientific innovations, especially in the field of agricultural biotechnology, for their own selfish ends. Let’s all take a lesson from the ISAAA report, whose other highlights include:

• Biotech crops cultivation grew by 12%, which translates to 12.3 hectares.
• There are currently about 114.3 million hectares of land under biotech crops.
• The number of countries growing biotech crops increased to 23 from 21 in 2006. The new entrants are Chile and Poland.
• From 1996, when the first biotech crop was commercialized, to 2007, the accumulated hectarage of these crops stands at 690 million hectares.

Read more…

During a speech at the National Farmer’s Union Conference in England, Iain Ferguson, chief executive of Tate & Lyle and president of the UK’s Food and Drink Federation endorsed the use of biotechnology. He said that he believed that genetic modification could be help with rising food costs and food shortages. Food Navigator posted the following article about his speech.

Dr. C Kameswara Rao

GM may provide solution to rising food prices
Food Navigator
February 20, 2008

The continuing increases in raw material costs could shine a favourable light on genetic modification as pressure mounts in Europe to boost harvests.

Speaking at yesterday’s National Farmer’s Union Conference, Iain Ferguson, chief executive of Tate & Lyle and president of the UK’s Food and Drink Federation (FDF), said British food prices are rising at their fastest rate since records began.

He quoted the Daily Telegraph as saying food prices in the UK are fuelling a rise in the average family’s annual shopping bill of £750.

“We have to face up to the issue of genetic modification and rise to the challenge of helping to foster a fair and scientific debate on an issue that has typically been clouded by suspicion and a lack of trust,” Ferguson said.

“The current economic climate with rising food prices and concerns over long term availability of commodities may well give us the opportunity to begin to do this.”

Farmers have remained cautious to support the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) while consumers continue to express concern on their environmental impact and possible long term health risks.

Read more…

The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) released a report recently that found India is growing more genetically modified cotton, a trend that is likely to continue. According to ISAAA, India is likely to grow genetically modified cotton on 80 percent of its total cultivated land in the next 2-3 years. Read more about this report and it’s findings in the Reuters article below.

Dr. C Kameswara Rao

GM cotton acreage to touch 80 pct in India

Reuters

February 18, 2008

NEW DELHI (Reuters) - India is likely to grow genetically modified (GM) cotton on 80 percent of its total cultivated area under the fibre in the next 2-3 years, a global research body said on Monday.

The country, the world’s second-biggest cotton producer, hopes to produce a record output of 31 million bales (1 bale = 170 kg) in the crop year to September as farmers plant more transgenic seeds.

Indian farmers, who grow cotton on an average 9.06 million hectares, produced 28 million bales last year.

“In 2007, Bt cotton area went up to 6.2 million hectares from 3.2 million hectares in 2006,” Clive James, chairman of the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications, told a news conference.

The organisation is a non-profit research body that advocates large-scale use and application of genetically modified crops.

“Rapid strides that India has made in cotton production since the country embraced Bt cotton and the fact that it has overtaken the U.S. speak volumes about the technology,” he said.

Read more…