Will the GM mustard hit the right chord in the farmers?

 

28 October 2022

 

                    Photo: Mustard crop at ICAR-DRMR Bharatpur

Genetically modified [GM] mustard was developed about two decades ago to exploit its heterosis vigour potential by Prof Deepak Pental and his associates, as conventional methods of hybrid development are tedious, time consuming and imprecise. Just few days back, Australia approved this technology for commercialization. It is now approved by the Government of India vide the minutes of GEAC’s 147th meeting held on 18.10.2022.

This GM technology involves expression of a barnase gene derived from the soil microbe that causes male sterility in the flowers. In order to maintain the same genotype, barstar gene restores its fertility, thus perpetuating an elite female flower bearing parent. When GM plants with only female flowers are grown side by side with non-GM plants bearing flowers with both male as well as female parts, these are fertilised with pollens of plants with normal flowers with the aid of winds and insect pollinators, thus easily producing hybrid seeds in GM plants. Besides, another bar gene [marker] in the GM mustard is known to tolerate phosphinic acid based herbicide, bialaphos/bialanaphos and closely related commerical product like glufosinate, thus offering herbicide tolerance trait in GM mustard for controlling weeds. Thus, GM mustard will have high yield potential through heterosis vigour as well as tolerance to these herbicides thereby saving on labour costs during crop management.

The main reason for developing this technology is poor yields of mustard as compared to other countries. In India, mustard is grown over about 8.7 million hectares with production of about 11 million tonnes and yield of 1265 kg/ha. India is the largest importer of edible oil, with import bill of about Rs 1,10,000 crores last year. It meets its 60% edible oil needs through import.

Similar to GM mustard, is another conventional technology that uses cytoplasmic genetic male sterility [CGMS] system, quite prevalent in crop plants. These plants are restored by crossing with isogenic male fertile flowering plants. Presently, mustard hybrids developed through CGMS route are available to the farmers. And these yield about 20 to 30% more than the conventional varieties. It is expected that GM mustard hybrids too will enhance yields similarly through hybrid vigour.

Overall, both technologies-GM as well as non-GM help in developing hybrids. While GM approach is more precise, less time consuming and helpful for developing male sterility in any parent material, non-GM approach using CGMS will however need conventional breeding approach to develop male sterility in the given parental type. 

As far as herbicide tolerance is concerned, this GM mustard may not offfer much promise as it is not tested against the well known herbicide like glufosinate [closely related to bialaphos] under the field conditions. Thus, the farmers may not gain for this trait in crop management, unless further field evaluation is done and glufosinate is registered for use in mustard.

 Herbicides approved in mustard as on 31.3.2022

Name, chemical group and mode of action

Weeds targetted

Dose gm/ha

Formulation and per ha solution needed

Waiting period [days]

Oxadiargyl 6%EC

[N-phenyl oxadiazolone] inhibitor of protoporphyrinogen oxidase [Gr 14]

Chenopodium album, Melilotus spp.

90

1500 ml in 500 lt

35

Pendimethalin 38.7%CS [Dinitroaniline group] inhibitor of  microtubule assembly [Gr 3]

Chenopodium album, Digera arvensis, Amaranthus spp.

338.6

875 ml in 500 lt

111

Bialaphos/bilanaphos [phosphinic acid] similar to glufosinate; inhibitor of glutamine synthetase [Gr 10]

Non-selective, non-systemic herbicide, registered abroad in canola; not in India

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments

  1. Dr Vasant Patil29 October 2022 at 07:36

    GM crops have proven potential of improved yield as compared to non GM crops as evident from other GM crops grown by farmers in North America, Latin America , Australia , Philippines and we have seen that in India for cotton . It is most disturbing that adoption of globally adopted science based technology takes so long in India( GM mustard had to wait up to 20years ). If GOI ( government of India) including top policy makers want to expedite efforts in doubling farmers income this ( embracing GM approach) is one sure shot and ICAR needs to double the efforts as how GM, gene editing technology can be leveraged for benefit of Indian agriculture to fight challenges climate change, sustainability for small growers in long run .It is time to move out of ideological silos !!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

How robust is our pesticide policy? A case of waiting period or post-harvest interval for safe consumption of produce

Image
Top: Saurashtra farmer who was keen to offer us a gift of maize, but for spray a day before; Bottom: Ready to spray with mixture on cotton.   As early as 1985, India recognised importance of integrated pest management to achieving optimal crop protection in its agricultural policy. This policy also envisaged reduction in the use of synthetic pesticides and increase in eco-friendly safe tactics in the agroecosystem. Safety to all is pivotal of crop protection policy. However, synthetic pesticides remained the bulwark of integrated pest management in agriculture. In fact, consumption of synthetic pesticides has increased over the past two decades from about 45,000 tons to about 60,000 tons. And hence, it has become necessary that we use pesticides judiciously so that farmers save their farm produce from the ravages of pests and at the same time, consumers get foodgrains and other farm produce that are safe to eat. Some years back, I was reading the data on major uses of pesticides, e
Read more

Probit Analysis of bioassays: Sure, you are seriously talking about it

Image
    After reviewing a manuscript, I thought of talking to my friend who works in the prestigious Government institution to know as to how he estimates various parameters of toxicity like LC50, fiducial limits [FL] or Confidence intervals [CI], intercept. And this reminded me of my days as a M.Sc. student when I would do these calculations using a Facit® manual calculator on a tabulated sheet that our insect toxicology teacher, Dr. B.S. Atri would provide us. It was tedious work involving filling of columns like concentrations, log concentrations, % mortality, their transformation into probits, weighting coefficients, empirical probits, expected probits, working probits and other parameters meticulously up to three decimal points until we came to an equation, y=a+bx, where y is 5.0, a, an intercept and b, a slope and x (log LC50) is what we will calculate. For 95% FL, we used two equations, m1=m-1.96 √ V and m2=m+.6 √ V where m1, m2, lower and upper FLs of LC50, √ square root of varian
Read more

Pheromone-based Crop Protection: Mating Disruption technology needs many researchable inputs to succeed sustainably

Image
Moths of the pink bollworm in the pheromone trap Farmers' gathering: pheromone MD formulation, PB knot tied on stem of cotton larva of the pink bollworm feeding inside the raw cotton boll It was in mid-1980s and early 1990s that the American bollworm caused havoc to cotton production in the country leading some farmers to commit suicides in the erstwhile state of Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra and others, as they had taken loans in expectation of bumper yields. Farmers did not believe that this bollworm can be a key pest, reducing their cotton production significantly. The pest insect had developed resistance to most of insecticides used in cotton and thrived well. Insecticide-based control of pests was a big failure, affecting environment and health of all stakeholders. Everyone scrambled for solution. Botanicals like neem, microbials like nucleopolyhedrosis virus, and parasites like Trichogramma chilonis were reported to be alternate to insecticides. The need-based use of insect
Read more