Showing posts with label Genetically Modified Seeds and other Alternatives. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Genetically Modified Seeds and other Alternatives. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 27, 2015

The Barefoot Conservator

The Sunday morning in July marked the fifth straight day of rain in the fecund foothills of the Niyamgiri range in western Orissa’s Rayagada district. The delayed showers kicked off the year’s busiest period for ecologist Debal Deb, and his right-hand man Dulal, as they prepared Basudha—a 2-acre farm unlike any other in India—for an intricately planned growing season.
Wrap your mind around this: over the coming days, the farm would see the planting of 1020 indigenous varieties of rice - part of a remarkable effort underway since 1996 towards rescuing a sliver of India’s genetic diversity from extinction.
This wouldn’t just mean planting 1000 varieties of rice saplings on a plot one-tenth the size of Mumbai’s Oval Maidan, and watching them grow. Maintaining the genetic purity of each of these heirloom varieties, year on year, necessitated an intricate sowing plan crafted by Deb and his colleagues, so that no two neighbouring varieties flower at the same time, thus guarding against cross-pollination. (Deb published his methodology in the Current Science journal in July 2006, after field-testing it for six years.) The constant addition of vanishing varieties to Deb’s growing collection – last year it numbered 960 – means the plan needs seasonal redesigning.

India’s Genetic Erosion
Rice - daily sustenance for a majority of Indians - is a grass species, believed to have been domesticated over 10,000 years ago in a broad region extending from the north-eastern Himalayan foothills to southern China and south-east Asia. Over the centuries, human hands selected thousands of different strains, evolved in response to specific ecological niches. The undulating region of western Orissa called the Jeypore tract was one of the world’s leading areas of diversification where a great number of rice varieties, also called land races, were developed by cultivators - “the un-named, unknown, and greatly talented scientists of the past”, as Deb calls them.

In the 1960s, when Deb was growing up in Kolkata, India was estimated to have over 70,000 such rice land races. According to a 1991 National Geographic essay, just 20 years later, with scientists and policy makers chasing high yields through aggressively pushed modern, input-intensive hybrids, over 75% of India’s rice production was coming from under 10 varieties.
This devastating and irreversible genetic erosion from India’s farms continues: for example, rice varieties from West Bengal, which Deb had collected just five years ago, can no longer be found cultivated. The disappearance is insidious. “It can result from something as innocuous as a farmer dying, and his son dropping the variety,” says Deb. “I witnessed this on a farm in Birbhum, with a rare two-grained variety called Jugal.”

An Indian Institute of Science alum and a former Fulbright scholar at the University of California Berkeley, Deb abandoned his job at the Worldwide Wildlife Fund in the mid-1990s after struggling to convince colleagues to fund documentation of Bengal’s vanishing rice varieties. “Conservation organisations suffer from what I call charismatic mega-fauna species syndrome,” he says acerbically. “Tigers–yes. Rhinos–yes. But if some earthworms or beetles are going extinct because of chemical pollutants on a farm, who cares?”
Deb headed out to villages in search of indigenous rice, often travelling on bus rooftops or by foot – an iconoclast by temperament, the small, wiry man still abjures institutional links, relying on teaching assignments in European and American universities and donations from friends to sustain Basudha. He particularly sought out areas that were remote, un-irrigated, and having marginal farmers, who could not afford chemical inputs and seeds from the market. “The places Indian elites like to call ‘backward’ such as tribal areas were those with the greatest chances of having retained these varieties over time,” says Deb. “When I would find such a variety, I would ask the farmer’s family for a handful, explain why I wanted it, thank them for preserving a vital part of our heritage, and urge them to not give up cultivating it.”
Using such barefoot methods, Deb has collected 1020 desi rice varieties over the past 18 years. They come from 13 states across North-Eastern, Eastern and Southern India. Kashmir with 2 indigenous varieties is the latest entrant to the seed bank, which Deb has named Vrihi, Sanskrit for rice. There are seeds that will grow in soils with high salinity, or conditions of submergence; others are drought or flood-tolerant, yet others are resistant to attacks from varying pathogens, while some are suited for dryland cultivation. There are medicinal varieties as well as 88 aromatic varieties.

These land races – embodying centuries of accumulated knowledge – and farmers who can work with them are crucial for a sustainable ecological agriculture, argues Deb. Annual seed conservation trainings and a distribution effort centred on the small farmer complement his in-situ conservation project, resulting in an informal personal network of about 3000 cultivators. Farmers who approach Basudha for seeds get them free of cost, with a plea to grow them and in turn become distributors to other farmers, to help reduce the chances of the variety going extinct.
Last December, having heard of the seed bank, 40 Malkangiri farmers travelled over 200 kms to Basudha’s doorstep, and demanded indigenous seeds for their farms. “Not one asked about yield or market price,” says Deb. “It was a very moving moment for us.” Deb is also proud that the farm stands on a common property land in Rayagada’s adivasi village of Kerandiguda – its residents invited Deb after taking seeds from his bank, and hearing that he was in search of a place to house his project.
The communitarian ethos defining Deb’s work sharply contrasts with agricultural policymaking, where the voices of the small farmer—the largest group of Indians—are often impossible to detect. Take for example, a Rice Gene Bank built in recent years by the state government. Located in a government building in suburban Bhubaneshwar, 900 varieties from across Orissa are sealed in aluminium foil packets, and preserved at zero degrees in an impressive facility. It is a laudable effort. Only, how does an average farmer access it?
Officials watching over the collection say they cannot give farmers seed samples to cultivate since these might fall into the wrong hands (read: seed companies, who might exploit the genes for developing new proprietary seed lines). Never mind that the entire collection was built with farmer contributions from across the state. Why does the state not officially release these desi varieties in the market to encourage their use, and thereby survival? The release process, admit bureaucrats, is skewed towards modern, commercial varieties developed by breeders in government labs or private seed companies.
Besides being inaccessible to the average farmer, says Deb, official gene banks like the above neglect the process of life’s co-evolution, by freezing seeds in time. “Bring out seeds of a pest-resistant variety after 30-40 years. They will have lost some major traits of defence since in the mean time the pest has evolved,” he says. “They might be useful for research but are not geared towards our farmers in the field.” Deb also counters the official argument that indigenous varieties mean inferior yields: “I have several varieties which outperform the so-called High Yielding varieties.” High yields, he reminds, do not ensure food security, pointing to India being home to record stockpiles of rice and wheat, as well as a quarter of the world’s under-nourished.

Over lunch – greens, vegetables, dal and rice combining eight different varieties from the farm – Deb asked if we could measure our heirlooms in money. “Imagine a unique painting , a saree...an ornament which has been in your family for 200 years – would you sell it off to make money?” he asked. “That’s how these indigenous rice varieties are – they are our culture.”

A version of this piece first appeared in Mint Lounge's August 2014 Independence Day Issue: http://www.livemint.com/Leisure/bmr5i8vBw06RDiNFms2swK/Debal-Deb--The-barefoot-conservator.html

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

The truth about Bt brinjal

http://www.expressbuzz.com/edition/story.aspx?Title=The%20truth%20about%20Bt%20brinjal&artid=0vE7SUApjj0=&SectionID=XVSZ2Fy6Gzo=&MainSectionID=XVSZ2Fy6Gzo=&SEO=Hillary%20Clinton,%20ICAR,%20kathirikai%20poriyal,%20baingan&SectionName=m3GntEw72ik=

By K P Prabhakaran Nair

At a biotech industry conference in the US in 1999 a representative of the leading consulting firm Arthur Anderson (now defunct) asked Monsanto, the world’s number one agribusiness giant, what their ideal future looked like in 15-20 years. Monsanto representatives present replied: A world with 100 per cent seeds genetically modified and patented. Few people know that it was the legal firm of Hillary Clinton that represented Monsanto in one of the cases involving patent rights with genetically modified seeds. “Whether we like it or not, GM crops are here to stay” said the director general of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research in New Delhi, not long ago. Outside his office activists of Greenpeace were protesting against the controversial Bt brinjal, which the ICAR and government are supporting.The next time you savour your baingan ki bartha or kathirikai poriyal, you might be ingesting some highly toxic Bt toxin as well. Yes, I am writing about the just released Bt brinjal. October 14 will go down in the history of Indian agriculture as the day when the government-controlled Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) unrolled the red carpet for Monsanto and changed the course of Indian agriculture for all the time to come.Jairam Ramesh, forest and environment minister, had assured us earlier that “There is a distinction between Bt cotton, which is a non-edible crop and Bt brinjal, an edible crop”, and now has gone public that the question of commercial and widespread cultivation of Bt brinjal in India will be ‘thoroughly’ examined before giving Cabinet clearance to the GEAC decision. Meanwhile concerned citizen groups, knowledgeable and committed scientists in India and overseas have termed the GEAC clearance a disaster for Indian agriculture. Let us now examine the controversy.On September 22, 2006 in response to a public interest litigation (PIL) in Supreme Court against genetically modified crops, the court ordered that the question of GM crops and foods be examined by independent, knowledgeable and committed bodies/scientists. The question then before the court involved Bt brinjal, which Mahyco (Maharashtra Hybrid Seed Company), Monsanto’s Indian arm, had brought out and submitted to the GEAC for approval for commercial cultivation.The Hyderabad-based Centre for Sustainable Agriculture set up an independent expert committee, with this author as chairman. The committee thoroughly examined the field data generated by Mahyco from all angles — from bio-safety protocol to marketing of end products — and submitted its report in late October. The committee noted the following breach of scientific protocols: The allerginicity of the protein extract from the Bt brinjal was tested on brown Norway rats and not on male rabbits as prescribed by the Department of Biotechnology; Department guidelines prescribe in vivo immunological assays for the detection of reactogenic antibodies in the test sera. This was not done; Though the Cry 1Ac gene was earlier considered innocuous, recent published scientific evidence indicates that the Cry 1 Ac protein from Bacillus thringiensis (Bt) — is a potent systemic and mucosal adjuvant, which enhances serum and intestinal lg G antibody responses. This is the most serious biochemical and bio-safety threat from Bt brinjal; The field data were not statistically analysed for precise scientific interpretations, and as such, the conclusions drawn are invalid. No cost-benefit ratio for the farmer was calculated to examine whether or not this ‘new’ technology was economically viable. For instance, the promoters say that farmers now spray the brinjal 25-60 times to control the stem borer. This would amount to spraying a crop of 120-130 days duration almost on alternate days. No sensible farmer would spend so much on insecticide.One of the most important parameters to test the safety of Bt crops is heat stability. Heat stability studies carried out on the Bt protein in Bt brinjal highlight serious lapses on the part of the GEAC, which, though a bio-safety watchdog, acts like the handmaiden of Monsanto. Heat stability tests demonstrate whether or not the Bt toxin persists after cooking. The company claims that, once cooked, the toxin is destroyed. Yet, available facts prove the contrary.Bt protein is present even in non-GM brinjal before cooking. What does it prove? Is it a serious slip of the experimental procedure, or is it because both Bt brinjal and non-Bt brinjal were grown on adjacent plots, without appropriate ‘refuge’ or safety distance (200 m) in place? This is a clear case of pollen transfer from Bt brinjal to non-Bt brinjal, which will be the prime reason for environmental contamination. Look at the other disturbing facts.Mahyco was conducting Bt brinjal field trials in West Bengal in 2007. But the matter was never communicated to the state government. The apex state agricultural university observed that it was asked to inspect Mahyco field trials on Bt rice and Bt okra at a very late stage when the crops were ready for harvest. No meaningful scientific data can be collected from such trials. Most distressingly, the farmer on whose fields the Bt rice was grown, was never told what it was. The same thing happened in Tamil Nadu, in Ramanathapuram district and Jharkhand two years ago. It is a distressing fact that it only in India do such clandestine things go on in the name of science.The Arthur Anderson strategy is clearly unfolding in India. The larger strategy of Monsanto is to control the entire seed industry in India in 10-15 years. Bt cotton was the first step. Bt brinjal is the second. Before long, it will be Bt rice (clandestine field trials were conducted in Ramanathapuram district in Tamil Nadu and Jharkhand two years ago), Bt maize (field trials have started in India), Bt sorghum, Bt cauliflower, Bt cabbage, and so forth. The first point is that brinjal has its origin in the Indian subcontinent. The biological rigour of a plant species is lost when it is genetically modified, more so in its place of origin. Mexico has vetoed genetic modification of maize, despite American pressure, as that is its place of origin. It is pathetic that India, with its gigantic agricultural set-up, mutely watches Monsanto bulldoze into our domain.Genetic manipulation of Bt brinjal will have far-reaching environmental and bio-safety consequences. Gene modification technology is in its infancy and totally unpredictable consequences could follow. The development of super weeds, observed recently in UK, is an example. But the most perplexing question of all is, who is behind this game to push a half-baked technology on unsuspecting millions? It does look as if India is up for sale, certainly its agriculture.

K P Prabhakaran Nair is chairman of a committee set up by the Centre for Sustainable Agriculture, Hyderabad

Friday, November 6, 2009

Kerala firms reject GM seeds, urges prime minister not go ahead

http://www.southasiapost.org/2009/20091031/features.htm#4

IN a clear and cogent manner the CPM led government in Kerala has rejected GM seeds. In a letter to the prime minister, the chief minister has argued in derail about the dangers of these GM seeds and the threat from the multinationals to Indian bio diversity.

Here is the Text of the letter.

Shri. Manmohan Singh,
Honourable Prime Minister of India,
South Block, New Delhi.
Greetings from the ‘God’s own country’.

I am addressing an important issue here - the introduction of GM crops and food in the State as well as in the country. I understand our stand on the GM crops and foods was already made very clear to the Union Agriculture Minister, Shri. Sarat Pawar, and to your kind self, by our Agriculture Minister, Shri . Mullakara Ratnakaran and the Chairman of the Kerala State Biodiversity Board, Dr. V. S. Vijayan respectively.

We are concerned about the introduction of the GM crops into the State. We had conducted a national workshop on the desirability of the GM crops sometime in April 2008 and, at the end of the two day workshop, it had come out with a unanimous resolution that the GM crops and foods should not be allowed in the State and, the resolution further says that we should also try to impress upon the Union Government in banning the GM in the country. A copy of the resolution is enclosed herewith for your ready reference.

May I reiterate that the Kerala State has already taken a policy decision not to allow GM crops, even for trials, until the debate on the issue of GM that is going on the world over is settled for ever. We are convinced with the available information that:


(a) GM crops are not economically viable for the farmers,
(b) GM crops and foods lead to unimaginable health hazards,
(c) GM crops contaminate the local and wild varieties, the damages of which are irrevocable and, such contamination of our traditional varieties cause irreparable damage to food security of the country
(d) GM denies the farmers right to choose what he wants to sow in his own farm, and ultimately,
(e) The country’s sovereignty over food and agriculture will be endangered.

Moreover, we are convinced that the Genetic Modification of crops is not a solution for hunger as has been wrongly advocated by the proponents of the GM, because the genetic modification is done not to increase the productivity, but to control the insect pests or the weeds. I am sure, you would agree with me that there are several cheaper and environment-friendly options to control the pests and weeds.
It may also be noted the Task Force on Application of Biotechnology on Agriculture headed by Prof. M. S. Swaminathan is unambiguous that the mega-diversity centres and biodiversity hotspots like Western Ghats shall be kept free of any GM experiments/ crops.

The Task Force report further recommends that even the transgenic research should not be undertaken in crops/commodities where our international trade will be affected.

In this context, you may please note that Kerala is a State heavily depended on international market for its agricultural commodities. Any contamination from genetic modification can cause further damage in the trade prospects of the State.

Kerala is also an important centre of diversity of medicinal plants and heritage of traditional medicines like ayurveda. Serious concern has already been expressed by the Ayurveda practitioners on GM research being undertaken on various crops.

You would be delighted to note that the State has already declared an Organic Farming Policy, Strategy and Action Plan in 2008. Accordingly, the entire food crops would be converted to organic within five years and the cash crops within another five years. This will, apart from helping to feed the people with non-poisoned food, enhance our export possibilities with a high premium. However, introduction of GM crops will certainly defeat the very purpose of organic farming, because GM crops/foods are more disastrous than those from crops raised using chemical pesticides and fertilisers. It would also kill the State’s trade prospects.

Considering all these, the Government of Kerala has taken a decision to prohibit all environmental release of GMOs and keep the State totally GM free. We would also request the Honourable Prime Minister to reconsider the policy on GM in the national scale and declare a moratorium at least for the next 50 years, so that we could learn the desirability of GM from other countries where it is being practised in large scale.

We would urge the Central Government to respect the well informed decision of the State Government and issue necessary orders to all concerned Ministries not to permit any GM research or release of GMOs within the boundaries of the State. Such an order from the Union Government will further strengthen the federal fabric of our nation as enshrined in the constitution.

With kind regards
Yours sincerely,
V. S. Achuthanandhan
Copy to: Ministry of: Environment and Forests; Agriculture and Cooperation; Science and Technology; Health and Family Welfare; and Department of Biotechnology

Thursday, November 5, 2009

Valuing Folk Crop Varieties for Agroecology and Food Security

http://www.bioscienceresource.org/news/article.php?id=42

by Dr Debal Deb

On May 25, 2009, Hurricane Aila hit the deltaic islands of the Sunderban of West Bengal. The estuarine water surged and destroyed the villages. Farmer’s homes were engulfed by the swollen rivers, their properties vanished with the waves, and their means of livelihood disappeared, as illustrated by the empty farm fields, suddenly turned salty. In addition, most of the ponds and bore wells became salinized.

Since Aila’s devastation, there has been a frantic search for the salt-tolerant rice seeds created by the ancestors of the current Sunderban farmers. With agricultural modernization, these heirloom crop varieties had slipped through the farmers’ hands. But now, after decades of complacency, farmers and agriculture experts alike have been jolted into realizing that on the saline Sunderban soil, modern high-yield varieties are no match for the “primitive,” traditional rice varieties. But the seeds of those diverse salt-tolerant varieties are unavailable now; just one or two varieties are still surviving on the marginal farms of a few poor farmers, who now feel the luckiest. The government rice gene banks have documents to show that they have all these varieties preserved, but they cannot dole out any viable seeds to farmers in need. That is the tragedy of the centralized ex situ gene banks, which eventually serve as morgues for seeds, killed by decades of disuse. The only rice seed bank in eastern India that conserves salt-tolerant rice varieties in situ is Vrihi, which has distributed four varieties of salt-tolerant rice in small quantities to a dozen farmers in Sunderban. The success of these folk rice varieties on salinized farms demonstrates how folk crop genetic diversity can ensure local food security. These folk rice varieties also promote sustainable agriculture by obviating the need for all external inputs of agrochemicals.


Folk rice varieties, the best bet

Not only the salinization of soil in coastal farmlands but also the too-late arrival of the monsoon this year has caused seedlings of modern rice varieties’ to wither on all unirrigated farms and spelled doom for marginal farmers’ food security throughout the subcontinent. Despite all the brouhaha about the much-hyped Green Revolution, South Asia’s crop production still depends heavily on the monsoon rains and too much, too late, too early, or too scanty rain causes widespread failure of modern crop varieties. Around 60 per cent of India’s agriculture is unirrigated and totally dependent on rain. In 2002, the monsoon failure in July resulted in a seasonal rainfall deficit of 19 percent and caused a profound loss of agricultural production with a drop of over 3 percent in India’s GDP (Challinor et al. 2006). This year’s shortfall of the monsoon rain is likely to cause production to fall 10 to 15 million tons short of the 100 million tons of total production forecast for India at the beginning of the season (Chameides 2009). This projected shortfall also represents about 3 percent of the expected global rice harvest of 430 million tons.

In the face of such climatic vagaries, modern agricultural science strives to incorporate genes for adaptation -- genes that were carefully selected by many generations of indigenous farmer-breeders centuries ago. Thousands of locally-adapted rice varieties (also called “landraces”) were created by farmer selection to withstand fluctuations in rainfall and temperature and to resist various pests and pathogens. Most of these varieties, however, have been replaced by a few modern varieties, to the detriment of food security.

Until the advent of the Green Revolution in the 1960s, India was believed to have been home to about 110,000 rice varieties (Richharia and Govindasamy 1990), most of which have gone extinct from farm fields. Perhaps a few thousand varieties are still surviving on marginal farms, where no modern cultivar can grow. In the eastern state of West Bengal, about 5600 rice varieties were cultivated, of which 3500 varieties of rice were shipped to the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) of the Philippines during the period from 1975 to 1983 (Deb 2005). After an extensive search over the past fourteen years for extant rice varieties in West Bengal and a few neighboring states, I was able to rescue only 610 rice landraces from marginal farms. All others--about 5000--have disappeared from farm fields. The 610 extant rice varieties are grown every year on my conservation farm, Basudha. Every year, these seeds are distributed to willing farmers from the Vrihi seed bank free of charge.

Vrihi (meaning “rice seed” in Sanskrit) is the largest non-governmental seed repository of traditional rice varieties in eastern India. These varieties can withstand a much wider range of fluctuations in temperature and soil nutrient levels as well as water stress than any of the modern rice varieties. This year’s monsoon delay has not seriously affected the survivorship and performance of the 610 rice varieties on the experimental farm, nor did the overabundant rainfall a few years earlier.

Circumstances of loss

If traditional landraces are so useful, how could the farmers afford to lose them? The dynamics are complex but understandable. When government agencies and seed companies began promoting “miracle seeds,” many farmers were lured and abandoned their heirloom varieties. Farmers saw the initial superior yields of the high input–responsive varieties under optimal conditions and copied their “successful” neighbors. Soon, an increasing number of farmers adopted the modern, “Green Revolution” (GR) seeds, and farmers not participating in the GR were dubbed backward, anti-modern, and imprudent. Seed companies, state agriculture departments, the World Bank, universities, and national and international development NGOs (non-governmental organizations) urged farmers to abandon their traditional seeds and farming practices--both the hardware and software of agriculture. After a few years of disuse, traditional seed stocks became unviable and were thereby lost. Thus, when farmers began to experience failure of the modern varieties in marginal environmental conditions, they had no other seeds to fall back on. Their only option was, and still is, to progressively increase water and agrochemical inputs to the land. In the process, the escalating cost of modern agriculture eventually bound the farmers in an ever-tightening snare of debt. After about a century of agronomists’ faith in technology to ensure food security, farming has become a risky enterprise, with ever greater debt for farmers. Over 150,000 farmers are reported to have committed suicide between 1995 and 2004 in India (Government of India 2007), and the number grew by an annual average of 10,000 until 2007 (Posani 2009).

The government gave ample subsidies for irrigation and fertilizers to convert marginal farms into more productive farms and boosted rice production in the first decade that GR seeds were used. Soon after, however, yield curves began to decline. After 40 years of GR, the productivity of rice is declining at an alarming rate (Pingali 1994). IRRI’s own study revealed yield decreases after cultivation of the “miracle rice variety” IR8 over a 10-year period (Flinn et al 1982). Today, just to keep the land productive, rice farmers in South Asia apply over 11 times more synthetic nitrogen fertilizers and 12.8 times more phosphate fertilizers per hectare than they did in the late 1960s (FAI 2008). Cereal yield has plummeted back to the pre-GR levels, yet many farmers cannot recall that they had previously obtained more rice per unit of input than what they are currently getting. Most farmers have forgotten the average yields of the traditional varieties and tend to believe that all traditional varieties were low-yielding. They think that the modern “high-yielding” varieties must yield more because they are so named.

In contrast, demonstration of the agronomic performance of the 610 traditional rice varieties on Basudha farm over the past 14 years has convinced farmers that many traditional varieties can out-yield any modern cultivar. Moreover, the savings in terms of water and agrochemical inputs and the records of yield stability against the vagaries of the monsoon have convinced them of the economic advantages of ecological agriculture over chemical agriculture. Gradually, an increasing number of farmers have been receiving traditional seeds from the Vrihi seed bank and exchanging them with other farmers. As of this year, more than 680 farmers have received seeds from Vrihi and are cultivating them on their farms. None of them have reverted to chemical farming or to GR varieties.

Extraordinary heirlooms

Every year, farmer-researchers meticulously document the morphological and agronomic characteristics of each of the rice varieties being conserved on our research farm, Basudha. With the help of simple equipment--graph paper, rulers, measuring tape, and a bamboo microscope (Basu 2007)--the researchers document 30 descriptors of rice, including leaf length and width; plant height at maturity; leaf and internode color; flag leaf angle; color and size of awns; color, shape and size of rice seeds and decorticated grains; panicle density; seed weight; dates of flowering and maturity; presence or absence of aroma; and diverse cultural uses.

Vrihi’s seed bank collection includes numerous unique landraces, such as those with novel pigmentation patterns and wing-like appendages on the rice hull. Perhaps the most remarkable are Jugal, the double-grain rice, and Sateen, the triple-grain rice. These characteristics have been published and copyrighted (Deb 2005) under Vrihi’s name to protect the intellectual property rights of indigenous farmers.

A few rice varieties have unique therapeutic properties. Kabiraj-sal is believed to provide sufficient nutrition to people who cannot digest a typical protein diet. Our studies suggest that this rice contains a high amount of labile starch, a fraction of which yields important amino acids (the building blocks of proteins). The pink starch of Kelas and Bhut moori is an essential nutrient for tribal women during and after pregnancy, because the tribal people believe it heals their anemia. Preliminary studies indicate a high content of iron and folic acid in the grains of these rice varieties. Local food cultures hold Dudh-sar and Parmai-sal in high esteem because they are “good for children’s brains.” While rigorous experimental studies are required to verify such folk beliefs, the prevalent institutional mindset is to discard folk knowledge as superstitious, even before testing it-- until, that is, the same properties are patented by a multinational corporation.

Traditional farmers grow some rice varieties for their specific adaptations to the local environmental and soil conditions. Thus, Rangi, Kaya, Kelas, and Noichi are grown on rainfed dryland farms, where no irrigation facility exists. Late or scanty rainfall does not affect the yield stability of these varieties. In flood-prone districts, remarkable culm elongation is seen in Sada Jabra, Lakshmi-dighal, Banya-sal, Jal kamini, and Kumrogorh varieties, which tend to grow taller with the level of water inundating the field. The deepest water that Lakshmi-dighal can tolerate was recorded to be six meters. Getu, Matla, and Talmugur can withstand up to 30 ppt (parts per thousand) of salinity, while Harma nona is moderately saline tolerant. No modern rice variety can survive in these marginal environmental conditions. Traditional crop varieties are often recorded to have out-yielded modern varieties in marginal environmental conditions (Cleveland et al. 2000).

Farmer-selected crop varieties are not only adapted to local soil and climatic conditions but are also fine-tuned to diverse local ecological conditions and cultural preferences. Numerous local rice landraces show marked resistance to insect pests and pathogens. Kalo nunia, Kartik-sal, and Tulsi manjari are blast-resistant. Bishnubhog and Rani kajal are known to be resistant to bacterial blight (Singh 1989). Gour-Nitai, Jashua, and Shatia seem to resist caseworm (Nymphula depunctalis) attack; stem borer (Tryporyza spp.) attack on Khudi khasa, Loha gorah, Malabati, Sada Dhepa, and Sindur mukhi varieties is seldom observed.

Farmers’ agronomic practices, adapting to the complexity of the farm food web interactions, have also resulted in selection of certain rice varieties with distinctive characteristics, such as long awn and erect flag leaf. Peasant farmers in dry lateritic areas of West Bengal and Jharkhand show a preference for long and strong awns, which deter grazing from cattle and goats (Deb 2005). Landraces with long and erect flag leaves are preferred in many areas, because they ensure protection of grains from birds.

Different rice varieties are grown for their distinctive aroma, color, and tastes. Some of these varieties are preferred for making crisped rice, some for puffed rice, and others for fragrant rice sweets to be prepared for special ceremonies. Blind to this diversity of local food cultures and farm ecological complexity, the agronomic modernization agenda has entailed drastic truncation of crop genetic diversity as well as homogenization of food cultures on all continents.

Sustainable agriculture and crop genetic diversity

Crop genetic diversity, which our ancestors enormously expanded over millennia (Doebley 2006), is our best bet for sustainable food production against stochastic changes in local climate, soil chemistry, and biotic influences. Reintroducing the traditional varietal mixtures in rice farms is a key to sustainable agriculture. A wide genetic base provides “built-in insurance” (Harlan 1992) against crop pests, pathogens, and climatic vagaries.

Traditional crop landraces are an important component of sustainable agriculture because their long-term yield stability is superior to most modern varieties. An ample body of evidence exists to indicate that whenever there is a shortage of irrigation water or of fertilizers--due to drought, social problems, or a disruption of the supply network-- “modern crops typically show a reduction in yield that is greater and covers wider areas, compared with folk varieties” (Cleveland et al. 1994). Under optimal farming conditions, some folk varieties may have lower mean yields than high-yield varieties but exhibit considerably higher mean yields in the marginal environments to which they are specifically adapted.

All these differences are amply demonstrated on Basudha farm in a remote corner of West Bengal, India. This farm is the only farm in South Asia where over 600 rice landraces are grown every year for producing seeds. These rice varieties are grown with no agrochemicals and scant irrigation. On the same farm, over 20 other crops, including oil seeds, vegetables, and pulses, are also grown each year. To a modern, “scientifically trained” farmer as well as a professional agronomist, it’s unbelievable that over the past eight years, none of the 610 varieties at Basudha needed any pesticides--including bio-pesticides--to control rice pests and pathogens. The benefit of using varietal mixtures to control diseases and pests has been amply documented in the scientific literature (Winterer et al. 1994; Wolfe 2000; Leung et al. 2003). The secret lies in folk ecological wisdom: biological diversity enhances ecosystem persistence and resilience. Modern ecological research (Folke et al. 2004; Tilman et al. 2006; Allesina and Pascual 2008) supports this wisdom.

If the hardware of sustainable agriculture is crop diversity, the software consists of biodiversity-enhancing farming techniques. The farming technique is the “program” of cultivation and can successfully “run” on appropriate hardware of crop genetic and species diversity. In the absence of the appropriate hardware however, the software of ecological agriculture cannot give good results, simply because the techniques evolved in an empirical base of on-farm biodiversity. Multiple cropping, the use of varietal mixtures, the creation of diverse habitat patches, and the fostering of populations of natural enemies of pests are the most certain means of enhancing agroecosystem complexity. More species and genetic diversity mean greater complexity, which in turn creates greater resilience--that is, the system’s ability to return to its original species composition and structure following environmental perturbations such as pest and disease outbreaks or drought, etc.

Ecological functions of on-farm biodiversity

Food security and sustainability at the production level are a consequence of the agroecosystem’s resilience, which can only be maintained by using diversity on both species and crop genetic levels. Varietal mixtures are a proven method of reducing diseases and pests. Growing companion crops like pigeonpea, chickpea, rozelle, yams, Ipomea fistulosa, and hedge bushes provide alternative hosts for many herbivore insects, thereby reducing pest pressure on rice. They also provide important nutrients for the soil, while the leaves of associate crops like pigeonpea (Cajanus cajan) can suppress growth of certain grasses like Cyperus rotundus.

Pest insects and mollusks can be effectively controlled, even eliminated, by inviting carnivorous birds and reptiles (unless they have been eliminated from the area by pesticides and industrial toxins). Erecting bamboo “T’s” or placing dead tree branches on the farm encourages a range of carnivorous birds, including the drongo, bee eaters, owls, and nightjars, to perch on them. Leaving small empty patches or puddles of water on the land creates diverse ecosystems and thus enhances biodiversity. The hoopoe, the cattle egret, the myna, and the crow pheasant love to browse for insects in these open spaces.

Measures to retain soil moisture to prevent nutrients from leaching out are also of crucial importance. The moisturizing effect of mulching triggers certain key genes that synergistically operate to delay crop senescence and reduce disease susceptibility (Kumar et al. 2004). The combined use of green mulch and cover crops nurtures key soil ecosystem components--microbes, earthworms, ants, ground beetles, millipedes, centipedes, pseudoscorpions, glow worms, and thrips -- which all contribute to soil nutrient cycling.

Agricultural sustainability consists of long-term productivity, not short-term increase of yield. Ecological agriculture, which seeks to understand and apply ecological principles to farm ecosystems, is the future of modern agriculture. To correct the mistakes committed in the course of industrial agriculture over the past 50 years, it is imperative that the empirical agricultural knowledge of past centuries and the gigantic achievements of ancient farmer-scientists are examined and employed to reestablish connections to the components of the agroecosystem. The problems of agricultural production that arise from the disintegration of agroecosystem complexity can only be solved by restoring this complexity, not by simplifying it with technological fixes.

References

Allesina S and Pascual M (2008). Network structure, predator-prey modules, and stability in large food webs. Theoretical Ecology 1(1):55-64.

Basu, P (2007). Microscopes made from bamboo bring biology into focus. Nature Medicine 13(10): 1128. http://www.nature.com/nm/journal/v13/n10/pdf/nm1007-1128a.pdf.

Challinor A, Slingo J, Turner A and Wheeler T (2006). Indian Monsoon: Contribution to the Stern Review. University of Reading. www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/Challinor_et_al.pdf.

Chameides B (2009). Monsoon fails, India suffers. The Green Grok. Nicholas School of the Environment at Duke University. www.nicholas.duke.edu/thegreengrok/monsoon_india.

Cleveland DA, Soleri D and Smith SE (1994). Do folk crop varieties have a role in sustainable agriculture? BioScience 44(11): 740–751.

Cleveland DA, Soleri D and Smith SE (2000). A biological framework for understanding farmers’ plant breeding. Economic Botany 54(3): 377–394.

Deb D (2005). Seeds of Tradition, Seeds of Future: Folk Rice Varieties from east India. Research Foundation for Science Technology & Ecology. New Delhi.

Doebley J (2006). Unfallen grains: how ancient farmers turned weeds into crops. Science 312 (5778): 1318–1319.

FAI (2008). Fertiliser Statistics, Year 2007-2008. Fertilizer Association of India. New Delhi. http://www.faidelhi.org/

Flinn JC, De Dutta SK and Labadan E (1982). An analysis of long term rice yields in a wetland soil. Field Crops Research 7(3): 201–216.

Folke C, Carpenter S, Walker B, Scheffer M, Elmqvist T, Gunderson L and Holling CS (2004). Regime shifts, resilience and biodiversity in ecosystem management. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 35: 557–581.

Government of India (2007). Report of the Expert Group on Agricultural Indebtedness. Ministry of Agriculture. New Delhi. http://www.igidr.ac.in/pdf/publication/PP-059.pdf

Harlan JR (1992) Crops and Man (2nd edition). , p. 148. American Society of Agronomy, Inc and Crop Science Society of America, Inc., Madison, WI.

Kumar V, Mills DJ, Anderson JD and Mattoo AK (2004). An alternative agriculture system is defined by a distinct expression profile of select gene transcripts and proteins. PNAS 101(29): 10535–10540

Leung H, Zhu Y, Revilla-Molina I, Fan JX, Chen H, Pangga I, Vera Cruz C and Mew TW (2003). Using genetic diversity to achieve sustainable rice disease management. Plant Disease 87(10): 1156–1169.

Pingali PI (1994). Technological prospects for reversing the declining trend in Asia’s rice productivity. In: Agricultural Technology: Policy Issues for the International Community (Anderson JR, ed), pp. 384–401. CAB International.

Posani B (2009). Crisis in the Countryside: Farmer suicides and the political economy of agrarian distress in India. DSI Working Paper No. 09-95. Development Studies Institute, London School of Economics and Political Science. London. http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/DESTIN/pdf/WP95.pdf

Richharia RH and Govindasamy S (1990). Rices of India. Academy of Development Science. Karjat.
Note: The only reliable data are given in Richharia and Govindasamy (1990), who estimated that about 200,000 varieties existed in India until the advent of the Green Revolution. Assuming many of these folk varieties were synonymous, an estimated 110,000 varieties were in cultivation. Such astounding figures win credibility from the fact that Dr. Richharia collected 22,000 folk varieties (currently in custody of Raipur University) from Chhattisgarh alone - one of the 28 States of India. The IRRI gene bank preserves 86,330 accessions from India [FAO (2003) Genetic diversity in rice. In: Sustainable rice production for food security. International Rice Commission/ FAO. Rome. (web publication) URL:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/006/y4751e/y4751e0b.htm#TopOfPage ]
Singh RN (1989). Reaction of indigenous rice germplasm to bacterial blight. National Academy of Science Letters 12: 231-232.
http://nasi.iiita.ac.in/library/National%20Academy%20Science%20Letters/Vol%2012/1989_PART07_VOLXII_SCIENCELETTER.pdf

Tilman D, Reich PB and Knops JMH (2006). Biodiversity and ecosystem stability in a decade-long grassland experiment. Nature 441: 629-632.

Winterer J, Klepetka B, Banks J and Kareiva P (1994). Strategies for minimizing the vulnerability of rice to pest epidemics. In: Rice Pest Science and Management. (Teng PS, Heong KL and Moody K, eds.), pp. 53–70. International Rice Research Institute, Manila.

Wolfe MS (2000). Crop strength through diversity. Nature 406: 681–682.


The author is the Founder-Chair, Centre for Interdisciplinary Studies, India

Thursday, May 24, 2007

A seed farm’s success story

http://www.thestatesman.org/page.arcview.php?date=2007-05-17&usrsess=1&clid=23&id=183972


Statesman News Service
MEMARI, May 16: An NGO and an officer with the district seed farm have succeeded in their experiment to prevent the gradual decrease in fertility of agricultural fields in Burdwan villages. It will reduce to a large extent the extensive use of chemical fertilizer and multiply average productivity.
For long, the district agricultural authority has been expressing concern over the drastic decrease in fertility of the farmlands due to the widespread use of chemical fertilizer.
The ADO, Burdwan, Mr Manas Mukherjee, said: “We have been indulging in use of manure and organic fertilizer, instead of chemical fertilizer, for some time to enrich the fields and improve yields.”
The Sankalpa People’s Development Society, an NGO operating in the villages of Memari block in the eastern part of Burdwan, undertook a comprehensive development programme, leading to a positive change in the lifestyle and professional design of the farmer families in such villages as Kathalia, Sridharpur, Satgachia, and Balia.
The hazardous components in chemical fertilizer such as nitrogen, potassium and phosphate are said to be harming the fields.
The joint effort of the NGO and officials of the district agricultural farmhouse has reduced nitrogen and phosphate up to 30 per cent and 25 per cent, respectively, while cultivating 77 bigha of land scattered in these villages.
Mr Mukherjee said: “Organic fertilizer and manure utilise bacteria synthesis. The cultivation cost has reduced by Rs 365 a bigha, with the removal of chemical fertilizer and reduction in pesticide use.” The yield, according to farmers Jatindramohan Sil of Satgachia and Nausar Ali of Sridharpur, “has increased by about seven to eight times a bigha with the new cultivation method.”
The seed quality has improved and so has its resistance power to fight diseases. The experiments were done on Boro paddy seeds of IR-64 and Ratna brand.
The yield per bigha used to be 880 kg on an average. It is now 1,160 kg per bigha.

Tuesday, May 8, 2007

Genitically Modified seeds

INDIA: AP govt holds introduction of Bollgard II cottonseed
Source: Agencies, May 3 2007
http://www.bharattextile.com/newsitems/2003838

HYDERABAD: The State Government at a high-level meeting held here in the
city has directed the Agriculture Department to hold the introduction of
Bollgard-II variety of cottonseed in Andhra Pradesh, industry sources said
here on May 02.

Mr N. Raghuveera Reddy, Minister for Agriculture who attend the meet
commented that the introduction of Bollgard cottonseed at a higher rate at
this juncture would only create confusion among farmers.

However, the decision to hold the introduction has hit a roadblock to the
hopes of cottonseed companies to introduce Bollgard-II in Andhra Pradesh as
the Agriculture Department officials has been directed not to be in a hurry
to allow it.

Despite a high price of Rs 1850 for a packet of 450 gm, the Bt cotton
acreage has gone up significantly in the last two years in the State;
whereas on the other hand, seed manufacturers in the last year had agreed to
reduce the price to Rs 750, following a legal conflict between the Andhra
Pradesh Government and Mahyco-Monsanto Biotech Ltd (MMBL).

Further, MMBL announced introduction of Bollgard II technology even the
companies agreed to sell Bollgard I seeds at Rs 750.

The price of Bollgard II cottonseed has been fixed at Rs 975, the price
variation could trigger confusion as most of the farmers, who are not
literate, don't distinguish between Bollgard I and Bolgard II.

The Bollgard I variety protects the cotton plant only from bollworm, while
the Bollgard II offers a two-way protection against bollworm and heliothis.

Monday, February 12, 2007

Jabberwocky: Folk rice wisdom

http://www.thestatesman.net/page.news.php?clid=16&id=146133&usrsess=1
Folk rice wisdom
Jabberwocky
Samantak Das

RECENTLY, I had the privilege of spending a few days at Vasudha, an extraordinary farm in a remote corner of Bankura district, where Dr Debal Deb, an ecologist of international repute, has been trying to preserve an irreplaceable part of our natural heritage — those varieties of rice that have been selectively bred over generations by our farmers in order to create hardy specimens capable of yielding good crops in extreme climatic conditions.These traditional or “folk” rice varieties require none of the inputs that we associate with High Yielding Varieties of rice so beloved of our agronomists and planners — no chemical fertilisers, no insecticides or pesticides, and little or nothing by way of augmented water supply (supplied, in the typical HYV scenario, by largescale irrigation projects). These traditional rice varieties have played a significant part in assuring India’s food security over millennia. Scientists estimate that India had some 62,000 varieties of rice in the not-too-distant past. That number has now dwindled to 4,000. Of these, several hundred varieties are cultivated in West Bengal, although this number, too, is decreasing under the pressures exerted by the Green Revolution-led push towards standardisation and homogenisation. On Dr Deb’s farm, there are hundreds of folk rice varieties, collected over many years from all over the state, with a bewildering combination of characteristics.Such varieties include “kelas”, a black rice whose pink starch is given to post-parturition and nursing women, and which is well-adapted to dry and semi-arid land. Or take, for example, “dudh-sar”, whose name suggests its white, bold grain. A highly nutritious variety, believed to possess curative properties, it can be grown in rain-fed lowlands. “Khaskani” is a small-grained, highly aromatic variety of rice used on festive occasions, while “dahar-nagra” has a bold grain particularly suited for making muri (puffed rice). Then there is “asit-kalma” with a medium-long grain, which gives high yields and is well adapted to medium lands. These are just five of the over 500 folk rice varieties that Dr Deb grows on his farm.A recent (October 2006) publication by Greenpeace International entitled “Future of Rice – 2006”, jointly authored by Drs Deb and Emerlito Borromeo, formerly of the International Rice Research Institute, spells out, in no uncertain terms, the threats posed to the wellbeing of our planet and the food security of the majority of its human inhabitants by the use of Green Revolution techniques of rice cultivation and the push to introduce Genetically Engineered rice varieties. The report is, in its own words, “about the compelling reasons why we should embrace rice knowledge developed by farmers over thousands of years and combine it with the best of modern biotechnology; not genetic engineering but science that is precise, predictable and acceptable to the public”.With a wealth of data the report demonstrates that “the real cutting edge solutions to the problems of rice production lie not in developing GE rice but rather in developing and/or adopting strategies that take advantage of ecological principles within agricultural systems, and integrating traditional farming practices with modern scientific knowledge”.Dr Deb works without any institutional support, and very meagre funds, yet his methods for sustainable, ecologically viable agricultural practices have not only won him international renown, they are increasingly being adopted by local farmers, tired of the decreasing yields and increasing inputs required by HYV rice varieties. I came away from Vasudha with a sense that I may have witnessed the small beginnings of a way of life and living that might well be our last chance of survival in this, our already abused, bruised and overburdened planet.

(Dr Debal Deb can be contacted at debaldeb@wildmail.com.)