----PLANT AND AGRI CULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY

BENEFITS OF TRANSGENIC CROPS Economic incentives and benefits Overall economic impact in the United States In 2002, the National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy (Washington, D.C.) assembled

a comprehensive report, Plant biotechnology: current and potential impact for improving

pest management in US agriculture. The study documented higher yields, higher farm

incomes, and reduced pesticide use due to extensive adoption of biotechnology-derived

crops in 2001. The Center embarked on a second study in 2004 to update the data. It

strictly focused on crops that were planted in 2003 . Impacts were assessed for 11 planted crop varieties in 2003, including biotechnology-derived crops with new pest management

traits that were grown for the first time. They included virus-resistant papaya and squash; herbicide-tolerant canola, maize, cotton and soybeans; and insect-resistant maize (three

applications) and cotton (two applications)[Sankula and Blumenthal, 2004].

Case studies of these 11 biotechnology-derived varieties showed that crop yields increased by 5.3 billion pounds, saved growers US$l. 5 billion by lowering production costs, and reduced

pesticide use by 46.4 million pounds. Base on increased yields and reduced production

costs, growers realized a net economic impact on savings of US$l. 9 billion. Compared with

2001, that represented a 41 per cent increase in yield gain, 25 per cent greater reduction in

production costs, and 27 per cent higher economic return in 2003 (Sankula and Blumenthal, 2004).

Further increases in crop production and grower returns were expected as more acres

were planted with rootworm-resistant maize hybrids. Rootworm is the most destructive pest in maize. Introduced in the market in 2003, rootworm-resistant maize was planted on

0.34 million acres and increased crop production by 86 million pounds. Acreage planted to rootworm-resistant maize increased tenfold in 2004 to about 3 million acres, and maize

growers rose production by 754 million pounds in 2004. Herbicide-tolerant soybeans still accounted for much of the reduction in biocide use at 20

million pounds. The biggest reduction in pesticide use was in cotton. When soybeans are

excluded, the reduction of pesticides in other biotechnology-derived crops was 9.4 million pounds, or 55 per cent higher in 2003 than in 2001. For insect-resistant crops alone, the

reduction in pesticide use was 2.7 million pounds, or 61 per cent higher, while it was 6.7 million pounds, or 54 per cent higher, in herbicide-tolerant crops (excluding soybeans) in

2003 than in 2001. Based on 2003 acreage, rootworm-resistant maize reduced pesticide use by 225,000 pounds. It was projected that maize growers would reduce insecticide use

by an estimated 1.98 million pounds in 2004, based on typical insecticide use of about 0.66

193

BENEFITS OF TRANSGENIC CROPS

pounds per acre for rootworm control (Sankula and Blumenthal, 2004).

Overall, impacts were greatest for Iowa, Illinois and Minnesota, because of their large acreage of maize and soybeans. Iowa led the way in increases in production, net economic

impact and further reductions in pesticide use Cl.08 billion pounds, US$239 million and

7. 5 million pounds , respectively). Illinois and Minnesota experienced the second and third greatest economic impacts, respectively (Sankula and Blumenthal, 2004).

Among the biotechnolgy-derived crops planted in 2003, adoption of herbicide-tolerant soybeans was the highest at 82 per cent, followed by herbicide-tolerant canola (75 per cent)

and herbicide-tolerant cotton (74 per cent). Comparisons between 2001 and 2003 suggested

that expansion in the planted acreage was greatest for herbicide-tolerant maize (69 per cent), followed by Bt maize (43 per cent). Adoption of the new Bt varieties which was less

than 1 per cent in 2003, due to limited seed supplies in the introductory year, has increased in 2004 as well as in the following years (Sankula and Blumenthal, 2004).

Conservation tillage practices, no-till in particular, have increased significantly since the

adoption of biotechnology-derived herbicide-tolerant crops. Grower surveys and expert

polls strongly indicated that the adoption of herbicide-tolerant crops correlated positively with increase in no-till acreage since 1996, the year when herbicide-tolerant crops were

first planted. Weed control is a major concern in no-till fields when poor weather conditions

hamper the effectiveness of herbicides. Herbicide-tolerant crops increased growers'

confidence in their ability to control weeds without relying on tillage, because herbicides

used in biotechnology-derived crops were more effective than those used before. Thus, American growers planted 45, 14 and 300 per cent more acres to no-till in soybeans, maize

and cotton, respectively, in 2003, compared with years before their introduction (Sankula and Blumenthal, 2004). See also Fernandez-Cornejo and Caswell (2006).

The Conservation Technology Information Center reported in 2002 that increased use

of conservation tillage practices such as no-till reduced soil erosion by nearly 1 billion tons and saved US$3.5 billion in sedimentation treatment costs. Other benefits from no-tillage

included Significant fuel savings (3.9 gallons of fuel per acre), reduced machinery wear and tear, reduction in pesticide use (70 per cent), less water runoff (69 per cent), reduction in

greenhouse gases due to improved carbon sequestration, and improved habitat for birds and animals (Sankula and Blumenthal, 2004).

Incentives for the farmers and benefits for the consumers

It is often stated that there is no benefit for the consumer. Given that maize and soybeans

are commodities, used mainly in animal feed and oil production, it is clear that there will be no one product which a shopper can put in her/his basket and see significant price

reduction. Nevertheless, there is a follow-through effect, because increased production

PLANT AND AGRIC ULT URAL BIOTECHNOLOGY

efficiencies reduce prices. In 1999, there was a 0.9 per cent reduction in soybean prices due

to the introduction of advanced biotechnology, and a net benefit of US$318 million flowing

through to the consumer. This would rise to US$900 million in case of global adoption of the current technology, assuming no yield increase; in the case of a 5 per cent yield increase, the

net consumer benefit was estimated at over US$1.3 billion.

In the industrialized countries, most crops are used in processed foodstuffs rather than sold as raw materials. It is therefore easier and cheaper for food manufacturers to improve

food nutritional value by adding the relevant substances in the factory. This is not the case in

most developing countries where genetically engineered food crops with in-built traits such

as a higher vitamin content or different oil composition could have an important impact on

population nutrition and health. However, the rich countries are not systematically against adopting genetically engineered

crops with improved nutritional properties, flavour and savour. In these countries, the

farmers who adopted herbicide-tolerant and insect-resistant crops have reacted to the statements that agricultural biotechnology favoured them and not the consumers, by

stressing that they are also part of society, that this adoption is more environmental-friendly

and decreases health risks for consumers due to the reduced use of pesticides and lower presence of mycotoxins in Bt crops. From a technical viewpoint, one should underline that

herbicide-tolerance or insect-resistance is easier to obtain than nutritional quality or flavour

improvement, because the transfer of more than one gene is necessary in the latter case.

However, Japanese researchers have identified the agent in onions that causes eyes to water. The enzyme causing this effect, lacrymatory factor synthase, is independent of flavour, and

could potentially be turned off by genetic modification. The finding that a single gene controls

the irritant effects has been reported as paving the way to a genetically engineered onion with direct benefit for the consumers.

In France, in November 2000, research work showed that the use of oilseed rape varieties , tolerant to some herbicides, could be very interesting for farmers growing them on 20 to

40 per cent of total farm acreage . Using these varieties would result in 20 to 85 per cent reduction in the quantity of herbicides usually sprayed. Another series of studies by the

National Agricultural Research Institute (INRA) and relating to the long-term impact of GMOs and the biovigilance system, carried out over the eight-year period 1995-2003, have shed

new light on gene flow, the eventual appearance of tolerance, the impact on fauna, etc. A study conducted by INRA in 2001 revealed that 70 per cent of farmers interviewed

would grow herbicide-tolerant oilseed rape and beet, and 40 per cent would cultivate Bt

maize resistant to the European corn stem borer. If this were the case, the gain for all the

crop stakeholders was estimated at €36 million for oilseed rape, €18 million for beet and €18 million for Bt maize.

195

BENEFITS OF TRANSGENIC CROPS

Finally, the enhancement of nutritional quality of crops is an important objective when

one deals with animal husbandry and feed production. Monsanto and Cargill have formed a

joint venture whose aim is to modify the protein composition of soybeans and maize grown fo r animal feed, boosting the concentration of some essential amino-acids.

On the other hand, Diversa, a San Diego-based firm, is developing versions ofthe enzyme

phytase, which will break phytic acid contained in feedstuffs (e .g. soybeans) in the animals'

gut and liberate phosphorus which can be absorbed as well as trace nutrients such as zinc.

That means less need for supplements, and therefore cheaper feed. By early 1999, Syngenta

purchased over 5.5 million shares of Diversa's stock and the two companies initiated a

strategic alliance that led by the end of 1999 to the formation of Zymetrics, a joint venture to develop products for animal feed. Zymetrics' first product was an enzyme for animal feed,

introduced on the Mexican market in 2003. The company planned to launch transgenic

maize phytase and amylase for the feed industry between 2006 and 2007 through Syngenta

Seeds. In February 2003, Syngenta closed one of its most important research centres in the United States and transferred 71 of its researchers over to Diversa as part of a seven-year

US$118 million transaction. Syngenta also rose its ownership stake in Diversa to around

20 per cent.

Weed management and yield increase Weed management is an important incentive for farmers using herbicide-tolerant crops. In 1995, 86 per cent of the US soybean crop was treated with at least two different herbicides,

and 23 per cent received four or more. Control of weeds was good, but in 1994 it was still

estimated that 7 per cent of yield was lost, and complex spraying regimes were needed to avoid such loss (Carpenter and Gianessi, 2001).

The availability of glyphosate-tolerant soybeans had the following advantages:

• much greater flexibility of application, leading to Simpler treatment patterns and, in many cases, less spraying:

• less crop injury; • no effect on follow-on crops because of low persistence in the soil.

The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) estimates that the average glyphosate cost for transgenic soybeans in 1998 - including the "technology fee" paid to the seed supplier - was

US$40 per hectare, compared with a range of costs for conventional treatments of from US$35 to US$60 per hectare. Clearly, for the weedier areas requiring more conventional

spraying, there is worthwhile saving to be made in crop-protection costs alone (Carpenter and Gianessi, 2001).

The potential to increase yield or maintain it in years of high pest pressure is a key reason

fo r adopting insect-resistant transgenic crops. Herbicide-tolerant crops, by enabling more

196

PLANT AND AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY ... .... .. ........ ....... ........ ,.

efficient weed management, can also contribute to giving higher yields, although the effect may vary with the growing season. In a recent report for the International Food Policy

Research Institute (IFPRI, Washington, D.C.), the following yield data has been compiled:

I-~~ ----------c~;_----GR~WING AR~--~~~:A~: (~~R~~~~!~~) -

i Insect·resistant maize US corn belt 26 .7 bushels/ha

I' Herbicide·tolerant oilseed rape Canada . 4.7 b-us-he-Is-/h-a ---

(canola)

----------AVERAGE NET PROFIT

INCREASE

US$ 148.4/ha

US$ 27.9/ha

I ___________ _

I Herbic ide·to lerant i soybeans

North Caro lina 6.7 bushels/ha US$ 34.6/ha

1 ______ - ----_._._----

Even in the case of herbicide-tolerant canola in Canada, the small yield decrease actually

still leads to increased profitability because of lower input costs (Canola Council of Canada, 2000).

A study carried out in 1998 on the implications of introducing virus-resistant transgenic

potatoes into Mexico concluded that large-scale farmers would see yields increase on average

by 15 per cent (4.75 tons/hal. For small farmers, starting from a much lower baseline, yields

were predicted to increase from 11.1 tons to 16.2 tons/ha on average, with an increase in

profitability of 140 per cent (from US$680 to US$l ,646 per hectare) [Carpenter and Gianessi, 2001].

The case of transgenic cotton In China and India, as well as in other developing countries that adopted transgenic cotton, the

decision was made by farmers, not by bureaucrats or supply companies. The anti-transgenic crops notion that third world farmers have to be arm-twisted or deceived into transgenic

crop planting is not correct. If they can measure the results in cash, farmers will embrace

transgenic crops. So much for the notion that the only real gainer from transgenic crops is

the multinational Monsanto! In fact, on the seed supply side, it has rivals. Switzerland-based Syngenta, its big European competitor, is moving into transgenic cotton seed production,

through a deal signed in August 2004 with Delta and Pine Land Corporation, a US market leader already offering Monsanto's versions. In addition, countries like India, China, Egypt,

are producing their own transgenic cotton varieties (The Economist, 2004e).

The overall benefits from the cultivation of insect-resistant transgenic cotton or Bt cotton can be illustrated by the following data for 2003:

• in terms of yields (kg/ha): +33 per cent in Argentina; +19 per cent in China; +80 per

cent in India; + 11 per cent in Mexico; and +65 per cent in South Africa;

197

BENEFITS OF TRANSGENIC CROPS ~~----------~-----------------------.---

• in terms of reduction in pesticide use (US$/ha): -47 per cent in Argentina; -67 per cent in China; -77 per cent in Mexico; and -58 per cent in South Africa;

• in terms of profit (US$/ha): +31 per cent (US$23/ha) in Argentina; +340 per cent

(US$470/ha) in China; +12 per cent (US$295/ha) in Mexico; and +299 per cent (US$651

ha) in South Africa. In China, savings equivalent to up to US$200 per hectare can be made in insecticide

spraying by planting Bt cotton, with the net cost of cotton production being reduced by

between 20 per cent and 33 per cent depending on variety and location (Pray et ai., 2001) .

At the Agribex Fair, held in Brussels in February 2002, a small-scale farmer from the

Makhathini Flats, Kwazulu-Natal, South Africa, indicated that "treatment of cotton cultures

used to cost €200 per season. With Bollgard cotton, only €20 have to be invested per

season". A prominent advocate of the cause of African cotton producers, who denounces the unfair

subsidies allocated by developed countries to this crop, is Franc;ois Traore, chairman of the National Union of Cotton Producers of Burkina Faso (UNPCB). He is also a producer with

about 100 hectares and, since 1999, he has been member of the administration board of

the cotton company Sofitex, where he represents the producers. On 21 November 2001, when cotton prices were very low, he published a "Common Appeal of West Africa's cotton

producers" in order to rally to his just cause all those who wished to struggle against the

subsidies allocated by the United States and the European Union to their cotton producers. In 2003, the World Trade Organization's summit in Cancun resounded with the protests of

African cotton producers, and also in Hong Kong in December 2005 (Bernard, 2005). In Burkina Faso, the participation of producers in the overall management of the cotton

industry is more active than in any other African country. Linked to a network of village

associations, the cotton scheme involves UNPCB in the capital and management boards of the companies originating from the recent privatization of Sofitex - the former state corporation

in charge of the whole industry, from seeds to exports (Bernard, 2005).

While strongly denouncing the selfish behaviours of developed countries and the

unfair impact of globalization of trade, F. Traore does not share the views of European or

international environmentalists regarding genetically modified crops. He is a member of the team which supervises the trials of transgenic cotton in his country in collaboration with

Monsanto and Syngenta. He stated: "the Europeans should let us decide what is good for us. After all, the lessons they have been teaching us for 40 years on development did not make us progress!" (Bernard, 2005).

In Australia, in 2004, the area oftransgenic cotton reached a quarter of a million hectares,

up from 115,000 hectares in 2003. Bollgard II cotton requires an average of 85 per cent

less insecticide than conventional cotton. With over two-thirds of cotton planted to varieties

198

PLANT AND AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY

containing Bollgard II in 2004, the cotton industry as a whole was expected to use half the quantity of insecticide compared with the amount that might have been necessary had the

level of adoption of transgenic cotton remained the same one year earlier. This was the

first reason that Bollgard II cotton varieties were available across all cotton growing regions following a phased introduction that began in 2002. "Given freedom of choice, growers

across New South Wales and Queensland have voted for biotechnology as an economically

environmentally sustainable tool for cotton production which has contributed to making Australian cotton industry a world leader in environmental best practice", stated Terry

Bunn, managing director of Monsanto Australia.

Biotechnology is the first insect control technology to be introduced with a managed and audited insect resistance management plan. This plan has been developed with independent

academics and government regulators in collaboration with the cotton industry. The plan is designed to protect the value of effective insect control with biotechnology for many years.

In Mexico, the adoption rate of Bt cotton over the period 1996-2000 can be summarized as follows:

----_._-.-.---~

YEAR

1996

1997

1998

1999

TOTAL ACREAGE OF COTTON (HAl

314.168

214.378

249,602

144.995

ACREAGE OF BT COTTON (HAl

900

15.000

37,000

17,000

PERCENTAGE OF ACREAGE OF BT COTTON

< 1 per cent

7 per cent

15 per cent

12 per cent 1·--------­i--------- _._------ _._--- _ . . ----~------ --------

2000 79,5 81 26,106 33 per cent

While the yield (tlha) of conventional cotton decreased in the region of Comarca Lagunera

(centre-north of the country) from about 1.4 tons/ha in 1984 down to 0.8-0.9 tons/ha in

1992, that of Bt cotton rose from 1.2 tons/ha in 1994 up to 1.6 tons/ha in 2000. It has been

estimated that in Comarca Lagunera the benefits drawn from the cultivation of Bt cotton went to farmers (84 per cent) and to industry - Monsanto (16 per cent). The conclusions

were that: Bt cotton has been adopted rapidly in the regions where its effectiveness has been demonstrated; there has been a drastic reduction in the use of pesticides; farmers benefited

significantly, while Monsanto received a moderate income; there has been governmental financial support for the adoption and cultivation of Bt cotton. See also Chauvet et al. (2004).

In the case of the United States, it is worth mentioning that in 1996, Hardee and Herzog

199

BENEFITS OF TRANSGENIC CROPS

wrote in the Proceedings of the 49th Annual Conferene Report on Cotton Insect Research

and Co ntrol: "the numbers of bollworms present in 1995 and their resistance to pyretroids,

carbamates and other pesticides were such that cotton producers were deprived of the

adequate tools that would have allowed them to grow cotton in Alabama. They hoped that the new Bollgard cotton varieties (insect-resistant) and agrochemicals would become

available to save the industry". Regarding the distribution of benefits drawn from the cultivation of Bt cotton in the United

States, the following figures are worth mentioning:

• over the three-year period, 1996-1997, the average proportion of benefits was 19 per cent for the consumers, 36 per cent for the industry and 45 per cent for the farmers;

• in 1996, total benefits in US$ millions were shared as follows: US$58 million for

consumers, US$141 million for farmers and US$63 million for the industry;

• in 1997, the figures were: US$37 million; US$80 million; and US$85 million; • in 1998, the figures were: US$37 million; US$97 million; and US$93 million. It can therefore be concluded that:

• most of the benefits went to the farmers; • a drastic reduction in the use of toxic pesticides has occurred (some 15 million

applications of insecticides were spared);

• a high annual variability was observed with regard to the levels of infestation of the crop and to the resistance of the Bt cotton varieties; geographical location was also an important factor of variability. See also Traxler and Falck-Zepeda (1999).

Environmental benefits Meeting agricultural productivity needs

Nowadays, agriculture alone accounts for 37 per cent of global land area, 70 per cent of

water withdrawals and 87 per cent of consumptive use worldwide . It is also the major

determinant of land clearance and habitat loss. For instance, between 1980 and 1995,

developing countries lost 190 million hectares of forest cover mainly because their increase

in agricultural productivity was exceeded by growth in food demand, while developed countries had increased their forest cover by 20 million hectares because their productivity outpaced demand (Goklany, 2001) .

Demand for agricultural and forest products is almost certainly going to increase

substantially. The world's population will also inevitably grow from about 6 billion in 2002 to between 10 and 11 billion in 2100, an increase of 70 per cent to 80 per cent. The average

person is likely to be richer, which ought to increase food demand per capita (Goklany,

2001). Overall food production in recent years has increased at an annual rate of 1.3 per

cent, while the world's population has maintained an annual growth rate of 2.2 per cent.

200

PLANT AND AGRIC ULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY ....... .

----- --------- --- -- ------------ - ------- -------- -------- - ------------- --------

At the same time, there is increasing damage to agricultural basic resources - land, water, atmosphere, biological diversity. Faced with a choice between cultivating new land and

thereby destroying forests and other natural ecosystems, which are storehouses of biological

diversity and serve to moderate climate change, or increasing the productivity of existing agro-ecosystems, the second option is definitely preferred (R. Swaminathan, 2004).

If the average agricultural productivity in 2050 (when global population will most likely

be 8.9 billion) is the same as it was in 1997, the entire increase in production (106 per cent) would have to come from an expansion in global cropland. This would translate into

additional habitat loss of at least 1,600 million hectares beyond the 1,510 million hectares

devoted to cropland in 1997. That extension, mainly at the expense of forested areas, would lead to massive habitat loss and fragmentation, and put severe pressure on the world's

remaining biological diversity, and on in situ conservation (Goklany, 2001). By contrast, a

productivity increase of 1.0 per cent per year, equivalent to a cumulative 69 per cent increase from 1997 to 2050, would reduce the net amount of the cropland required to meet the future

demand to 325 million hectares . Such an increase in productivity is theoretically possible without resorting to biotechnology provided sufficient investments are made in human

resources, research and development, extension services, infrastructure expansion, inputs

such as fertilizers and pesticides, and the acquisition of technologies to limit or mitigate

environmental impacts of agriculture (Goklany, 2001).

A 1 per cent per year increase in the net productivity in the food and agricultural sector (per unit area) is within the bounds of historical experience given that it increased 2 per cent

per annum between 1961-1963 and 1996-1998. Specifically, conventional methods could

be used for that purpose by: further limiting pre-harvest crop losses to pests and diseases, which currently reduce global yields by an estimated 42 per cent; increasing fertilizer use;

liming acid soils; adapting higher-yielding varieties to specific locations around the world; and reducing post-harvest and end-use losses, estimated at about 47 per cent worldwide.

Moreover, precision farming could help reduce chemical and water use without reducing

yields, which would mitigate many of the adverse effects of modern agriculture (Goklany, 2001).

Contribution of agricultural biotechnology However, biotechnology could reduce current gaps between average yields and yield ceilings, and between yield ceilings and the theoretical maximum yield. Ifthrough biotechnology the

annual rate at which productivity could be increased sustainably went up from 1.0 per cent to 1.5 per cent per year, then cropland could actually be reduced by 98 million hectares

rather than increased by 325 million hectares, while at the same time meeting the increased

food demand of a larger and wealthier population. This would correspond to a net increase

- - -- - ----.. - ._- --_. -------_._- -----_ ... - _._------------- --_ .. __ ._--201

BENEFITS OF TRANSGENIC CROPS

in productivity of 30 per cent in 2050 due to biotechnology alone . And if productivity was increased 2.0 per cent per year, then by 2050 at least 422 million hectares of current cropland

could be returned to the rest of nature or made available for other human use . This would

correspond to a net improvement in agricultural productivity of 69 per cent by 2050 due to

biotechnology (Goklany, 2001) . Several transgenic crops, currently in various stages between research and field release,

could contribute to the increase in agricultural productivity (Goklany, 2001): • cereals tolerant to aluminium and able to grow on acidic soils, to drought, high salt

concentrations, SUbmergence, chilling and freezing; 43 per cent of tropical soils are acidic; more cropland is lost to high salinity than is gained through forest clearance; and salinity has rendered one-third of the world's irrigated land unsuitable for agriculture; moreover, as the world is warming up, the ability to withstand droughts, high salinity, submergence and acidity could be especially important for achieving global food security;

• rice combining the African variety's ability to shade out weeds when young with the high yield capacity of the Asian variety; in addition, transgenic varieties resistant to drought, pests and diseases could be particularly useful for Africa because there increases in rice yields have so far lagged behind the rest of the world's:

• rice being able to close stomata more readily, so as to increase water use efficiency and net photosynthetic efficiency, particularly under dry conditions;

• rice with the alternative C-4 pathway for photosynthesis (e .g. in maize), a trait that could be especially useful at higher temperatures (due to climatic change);

• maize, rice and sorghum with resistance to Striga, a parasitic weed which could annihilate yields in sub-Saharan Africa;

• rice and maize (accounting for 20 per cent of global cropland) with enhanced uptakes of phosporous and nitrogen;

• rice, maize, potato, sweet potato and papaya with resistance to insects, nematodes, bacteria, fungi and viruses;

• cassava, a staple in much of Africa, with resistance to the cassava mosaic virus and including a gene coding for a replicase with the ability to disrupt the life cycles of a number of other viruses, could increase yield tenfold; work is also proceeding on producing a transgenic cassava which contains less cyanide-producing compounds;

• spoilage-prone fruits bioengineered for delayed ripening, thereby increasing their shelf­life and reducing post-harvest losses (in Africa, these include bananas and plantains, and elsewhere, melons, strawberries and raspberries);

• high-lysine maize and soybeans, maize with high oil and calorie content, and forage

crops with lower lignin content, which will improve livestock feed and reduce the overall demand for land needed to raise livestock.

202

PLANT AND AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY

The above-mentioned transgenic crops, by increasing crop yields and reducing the

acreage of cultivated land, would also reduce the area subject to soil erosion from agricultural practices, which in turn would limit associated environmental impact on water bodies and

aquatic species, and reduce loss of carbon sinks and stores in the atmosphere (Goklany, 2001).

In Europe and the United States, only 18 per cent of the nitrogen and 30 per cent of the

phosphorus in fertilizers are incorporated into crops, between 10 per cent and 80 per cent of

the nitrogen and 15 per cent of the phosphorus end up in aquatic ecosystems, and much of

the remainder accumulates in the soil, to be later weathered into aquatic systems. Nitrogen­

fixing crops would reduce reliance on fertilizers and, thereby, reduce ground and surface water pollution (Goklany, 2001) .

The cultivation of Bt cotton in the United States has reduced chemical pesticides

considerably, increased yields and farmers' income (see pp . 192-193 and 200-201) . In India,

the world's third biggest cotton producer, cotton occupied only 5 per cent of its land, yet cotton farmers bought about 50 per cent of all pesticides used in the country. The cultivation

of Bt cotton has been beneficial in terms of decrease in insecticide spraying, increase in yield and farmers' revenue (see pp . 198-199).

In Australia, pesticide use fell by about 50 per cent where Monsanto's Ingard cotton was

planted, compared with conventional cotton, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) stated. Ingard cotton was introduced in 1996 to Australia,

one of the world's largest cotton exporters and a key supplier to Asian markets . Bollgard II, a new version of Monsanto's transgenic cotton commercially available in Australia in 2002-

2003, promised even less insecticide use, according to the CSIRO Plant Industry Division:

"Three years of field trials show Bollgard II reduces pesticide use by up to 75 per cent compared with conventional cotton. Furthermore, cotton fibre yield and quality in Bollgard

II varieties are equivalent to those in conventional cotton varieties".

Bollgard II was developed by inserting two insecticidal genes from Bacillus thuringiensis

into cotton, killing cotton's major insect pest, HelicDverpa , the Australian equivalent of the

worldwide scourge of cotton, the bollworm. By 2005, Bollgard II was expected to supply 80 per cent of the cotton crop as Ingard was phased out of production to minimize the risk of

developing resistance to the entomotoxin. Low phytic acid maize and soybeans, and phytase feed, which help livestock better digest

and absorb phosphorus, would reduce phosphorus in animal waste and decrease runoff into streams, lakes and other water bodies, mitigating one of the major sources of excess nutrients

in the environment; it would also reduce the need for inorganic phosphorus supplements in feedstuffs (Goklany, 2001).

Herbicide-tolerant crops could help reduce the amount, toxicity and/or persistence of the

202

PLANT AND AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY

The above-mentioned transgenic crops . by increasing crop yields and reducing the

acreage of cultivated land. would also reduce the area subject to soil erosion from agricultural practices. which in turn would limit associated environmental impact on water bodies and

aquatic species. and reduce loss of carbon sinks and stores in the atmosphere (Goklany. 2001).

In Europe and the United States. only 18 per cent of the nitrogen and 30 per cent of the

phosphorus in fertilizers are incorporated into crops. between 10 per cent and 80 per cent of

the nitrogen and 15 per cent of the phosphorus end up in aquatic ecosystems. and much of

the remainder accumulates in the soil. to be later weathered into aquatic systems. Nitrogen­

fixing crops would reduce reliance on fertilizers and. thereby. reduce ground and surface water pollution (Goklany. 2001).

The cultivation of Bt cotton in the United States has reduced chemical pesticides

considerably. increased yields and farmers' income (see pp. 192-193 and 200-201) . In India.

the world's third biggest cotton producer. cotton occupied only 5 per cent of its land. yet cotton farmers bought about 50 per cent of all pesticides used in the country. The cultivation

of Bt cotton has been beneficial in terms of decrease in insecticide spraying. increase in yield and farmers' revenue (see pp. 198-199).

In Australia. pesticide use fell by about 50 per cent where Monsanto's Ingard cotton was

planted. compared with conventional cotton. the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) stated. Ingard cotton was introduced in 1996 to Australia.

one of the world's largest cotton exporters and a key supplier to Asian markets. Bollgard II. a new version of Monsanto's transgenic cotton commercially available in Australia in 2002-

2003. promised even less insecticide use. according to the CSIRO Plant Industry Division:

"Three years of field trials show Bollgard II reduces pesticide use by up to 75 per cent compared with conventional cotton. Furthermore. cotton fibre yield and quality in Bollgard

II varieties are equivalent to those in conventional cotton varieties".

Bollgard II was developed by inserting two insecticidal genes from Bacillus thuringiensis

into cotton. killing cotton's major insect pest. Helicoverpa. the Australian equivalent of the

worldwide scourge of cotton. the bollworm. By 2005. Bollgard II was expected to supply 80 per cent of the cotton crop as Ingard was phased out of production to minimize the risk of

developing resistance to the entomotoxin.

Low phytic acid maize and soybeans. and phytase feed. which help livestock better digest and absorb phosphorus. would reduce phosphorus in animal waste and decrease runoff into

streams. lakes and other water bodies. mitigating one of the major sources of excess nutrients in the environment; it would also reduce the need for inorganic phosphorus supplements in

feedstuffs (Goklany. 2001) .

Herbicide-tolerant crops could help reduce the amount. toxicity and/or persistence of the

203

BENEFITS OF TRANSGENIC CROPS

herbicides employed. Secondly, such crops would also increase yields, while facilitating no­

tillage cultivation which, by stemming soil erosion, protects future agricultural productivity

(Goklany, 2001). Africa did not benefit from the green revolution as much as Asian and Latin American

nations did, because plant breeders focused on improving crops such as rice and wheat, which are not as widely grown in Africa. In addition, much of the African drylands receive

little rainfall and have no potential for irrigation, both of which played key roles in productivity

success stories for crops such as Asian rice. And the remoteness of many African villages and

the poor transportation infrastructure in landlocked African countries make it difficult for

farmers to obtain agrochemical inputs such as fertilizers, insecticides and herbicides - even when they are donated by aid agencies and charities . However, by packaging technological

inputs within seeds, biotechnology could provide the same, or better, productivity advantages

as chemical inputs, but in a much more user and environment friendly manner (Conko and

Prakash, 2004).

Public health benefits About 850 million people were undernourished in the developing countries in 2005, i.e . could not meet their basic needs for energy and protein. Reducing these numbers over the

next half-century, while also reducing pressures on biological diversity despite population

increases would require increasing the quantity of food produced per unit of land and water

(Goklany, 2001). But increasing food quantity was not enough; improving the nutritional quality of food

was just as important. About 2 billion people did not have enough iron in their diet, making

them susceptible to anaemia. Some 250 million people are affected by vitamin A deficiency which causes xerophthalmia; if not treated, the latter would lead to blindness (500,000

children go blind annually and 3,000 deaths per day are due to this deficiency) . Through the

cumulative effects of these deficiencies, malnutrition is responsible for several million deaths

annually and worldwide in children under five years of age. Bioengineering crops could also help reduce many of these micronutrient deficiencies.

Beta-carotene-enriched rice of "golden rice" would help reduce vitamin A deficiency; crossed

with another variety rich in iron and cysteine, would also help reduce vitamin A and iron deficiency. Iron-fortified rice, whether "golden" or not, would also reduce the need for meat,

one of the primary sources for dietary iron (see pp. 59-65). African farmers and consumers in particular could benefit from such transgenic crops as

"golden rice"; a new high-protein potato variety developed by Indian scientists and available

fo r commercial cultivation; an improved mustard variety with more beta-carotene in its oil, also developed by Indian scientists working with technical and financial assistance from

204

PLANT AN D AGR ICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY

Monsanto; sweet potatoes with enhanced concentration of dietary protein, developed at

Tuskegee University, Alabama, United States, and a common staple food in sub-Saharan Africa (Conko and Prakash, 2004).

Transgenic crops could also help battle the so-called "diseases of affluence", namely

ischemic heart disease, hypertension and cancer. The International Food Information

Council (1999) noted that biotechnology could make: vegetable oils and their products, such as margarines and shortenings, more healthful (more polyunsaturated fatty acids, such as

oleic acid); peanuts with improved protein balance and deprived of allergenic compounds;

tomatoes with increased antioxidant content; potatoes with less starch than conventional

potatoes, so as to reduce the amount of oil absorbed during the processing of chips; fruits

and vegetables fortified with, or containing higher amounts of, vitamins C and E; and higher protein rice (Goklany, 2001).

Moreover, the concentrations of mycotoxins, which apparently increase with insect

damage in crops, are lower in Bt maize. Some mycotoxins, such as fumonisin, could be fatal to horses and pigs, and might be human carcinogens. Some scientists also argued

that Bt food crops were safer than conventional crops sprayed with Bt suspensions, because the latter contained several toxins which could affect both insects and mammals, while the

transgenic crop variety contained a single toxin known to be harmful to insects but not to

mammals (Goklany, 2001).

Finally, to the extent pest-resistant transgenic plants could reduce the amount, toxiCity

and/or persistency of pesticides used in agriculture (by themselves or as parts of integrated pest management systems), that would reduce accidental poisonings and other untoward health effects on farm workers (Goklany, 2000).