Biotech Helping Feed Africa

Farmers benefit from biotech crops production

SPECIAL REPORT BY XINHUA CORRESPONDENT PETER MUTAI

NAIROBI (Xinhua) -- Continued progress on commercialization of biotech crops was witnessed in all three countries in Africa during the 2009 period.

According to the International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Application (ISAAA), South Africa has increased its hectarage by 17 percent while Burkina Faso increased by 14 percent.

The three countries broader coverage is of strategic importance because it allows more African countries to become practitioners of biotech crops and be able to benefit directly from learning by doing, a practice which has been proved to be very important.

This is a remarkable achievement given that Africa is the continent with the greatest challenge on food production compared to other continents.

As South Africa continue to export their biotech agricultural products such as maize, researchers now say that Kenya too could be on the beneficiary list once it adopts the technology.

With the food insecurity already ravaging most parts of sub Saharan Africa hence forcing countries to import food mainly maize and beans, the application of biotechnology could be of a solution to pest and diseases that wipe out millions of crops yearly.     Read More

You certainly get a different perspective about biotechnology in countries where so many people are starving.  There are no Michael Pollan’s in Africa and the reason is that many people over there wonder where their next meal is coming from.  Having the luxury to choose food that was raised in a certain way is a very foreign concept to people in Africa.  Our country has the ability to help feed these people yet we have full-stomached protesters and activists that are trying to stop that from happening.  This is why Pollan’s line of thinking is so out of touch with reality, a reality that too many people live with every day. 

Genetically Engineered Salmon

FDA advisors to vote on genetically engineered salmon


It grows faster, eats less and has sparked intense debate about modifying animals for our food supply.

By Andrew Zajac, Tribune Washington Bureau
7:28 PM PDT, September 18, 2010
latimes.com

In a step that may move genetically engineered meat and fish closer to the American dinner table, an FDA advisory committee will vote Monday on whether to approve preliminary findings that a modified salmon is as safe as an ordinary salmon.

The vote is not binding on the FDA, but approval would lend powerful support for a final decision by the agency charged with protecting the nation's food and drug supplies. The fish, a North Atlantic salmon developed by AquaBounty Technologies Inc. would be the country's first genetically engineered food animal.

It grows to market size in half the time of other salmon and consumes 25 percent less feed in the process, according to the company, which is based in Waltham, Mass.

The FDA will hold a separate hearing on what, if any, labeling should be required if the fish is approved. The FDA says it does not have the power to mandate labeling that describes how a food was made, only the content variation that results from a different production process.    Read More

This will be an interesting test to watch.  But rather than a strictly scientific and rational discussion, I’m guessing that plenty of misinformation and irrational fear will be used by some.  There’s nothing wrong with being skeptical of new products and processes for growing our food.  The ultimate goal of everyone involved should be to have more and better food but unfortunately that doesn’t always seem to be the case.  I’ll keep you updated on how this turns out. 

Tech Essential To Feeding The World

Croplife America Conference: Feeding A Hungry And Growing
07/18/2010
Matt Kaye

Agriculture and food safety experts agreed at a Washington, DC policy conference that technology is key to feeding a hungry and growing world, but there are other issues that may keep that from happening. Julie Borlaug, whose Nobel laureate grandfather Norman is credited with saving a billion people from starvation through plant genetics, defended GMO technology against those who argue food distribution and equity is the problem, “It is a production problem…if they cannot produce the food, if we cannot get the food to where it needs to be…it’s not just global justice, it’s global production. If they don’t have the inputs, if there’s no infrastructure, they don’t have any technology, you can’t say it’s an equity problem-it’s a production problem for the people, where they are.”

Experts at the Croplife American National Policy Conference pointed to estimates that world population will soar to 9-billion by 2050 and will require a doubling of food production on the same acreage.

Former Purdue University Ag Dean Bob Thompson says activists continue to stand in the way of GMO technology in developing nations and that regional ecosystem differences hinder transfer of the technology, “The tools of modern science are freely mobile…but then, you’ve got to make the local adaptation investments, in order to optimize those varieties for the local agro-ecological environment.” Thompson says it takes adaptation investments to get those varieties to thrive in areas and also to adapt to changing climates…all of which will take money in budget-starved countries and help from the US. Link

The only people that I see complaining about new technological advancements in the world of agriculture are the ones with full stomachs. When you are hungry your priorities change quite a bit and they have nothing to do with protesting about how food is grown.

Consumers Will Support GM Food

Food Technology: 'What's in it for Me?'
by International Food Information Council Foundation Jun 04, 2010

Many of us can probably recall a time when we waited in a long line just to purchase the latest mobile or electronic technology. But, do we have the same reaction when it comes to technology used in food production? Granted, it may not seem as exciting as that new MP3 player or cell phone, but does food technology deserve a bad rap? What do Americans really think about food technology, and what types of messages resonate with them?

To gain insight into these very issues, the International Food Information Council (IFIC) recently conducted our 14 "Consumer Perceptions of Food Technology" Survey (formerly the "IFIC Survey of Consumer Attitudinal Trends toward Food Biotechnology"), which explores U.S. consumers' perceptions of various aspects of plant and animal biotechnology, as well as sustainability and new and emerging technologies such as nanotechnology.

Key Takeaways

While we gained several interesting insights from this year's Survey, one of the most important takeaways was that Americans' support of the use of food biotechnology is strongest when they consider its potential benefits for impacting issues of importance to them, such as reducing the impact of food and food production on the environment, and improving sustainability. Read More

The things that consumers want genetically enhanced foods to accomplish is exactly what they are doing. They were designed so less pesticides and herbicides would need to be used. We are producing more with less and feeding the world. Unfortunately there are many consumers out there who are basing their opinions about this technology off scary headlines and rumors. If consumers can look through the emotion and take an objective look at it, we’d all be better off.

Biotech's Benefit

Biotechnology’s benefits for U.S. farmers
Apr 15, 2010 11:36 AM
Western Farm Press

American farmers are realizing higher profits due to the widespread use of certain genetically engineered crops and are reducing environmental impacts on and off the farm according to a recently released report from the National Research Council (NRC).

Specifically, the report notes, "(m)any U.S. farmers who grow genetically engineered (GE) crops are realizing substantial economic and environmental benefits — such as lower production costs, fewer pest problems, reduced use of pesticides, and better yields — compared with conventional crops." The report was commissioned and internally funded by NRC in order to evaluate the impact of GE crops on all U.S. farmers.

Sharon Bomer Lauritsen, BIO executive vice president for food and agriculture, said, "The NRC's report acknowledges what we have known all along: That genetically engineered (GE) crops provide significant environmental, economic, and social benefits, and they are an integral tool in achieving sustainable agricultural production.

"Decades of documented evidence demonstrate that agricultural biotechnology is a safe and beneficial technology that contributes to both environmental and economic sustainability.

Farmers choose biotech crops because they produce more yields on less land with less production costs. That means farmers get a greater financial return while using environmentally friendly farming practices. Read More

Human beings have been improving the crops and livestock where we source our food from for the past 10,000 years. Nothing we eat today looks like it did back then. Genetic engineering has been taking place that entire time in order to improve the food supply. Luckily for us, we can now do it with more accuracy and in a shorter period of time. Because of that, we produce more food, more efficiently, with less inputs and less impact than ever before. That’s reason to celebrate.

GM Potatoes Approved in EU

Commission gives green light to genetically-modified potato
Published: 03 March 2010
Euractiv.com

In a controversial move, the European Commission yesterday (2 March) gave the green light for the first genetically-modified potato to be cultivated in the European Union.

At present, EU member states are able to restrict GM crop cultivation only under strict conditions as authorisation licences are valid across the 27-country bloc, in accordance with the principles of the single EU internal market.

José Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission, has voiced support for any plan that would allow the Commission to maintain EU-wide authority over GMO safety assessment and approval, while allowing countries the freedom to decide whether to cultivate GM crops.
Yesterday's decision was taken with this principle in mind, as outlined in the political guidelines for the new European Commission.

The EU executive authorised the cultivation in the EU of Amflora, a genetically-modified potato developed by German chemical company BASF.

"Responsible innovation will be my guiding principle when dealing with innovative technologies," said Health and Consumer Policy Commissioner John Dalli.

The decision was based on a series of favourable safety assessments carried out over the years by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).

After an extensive and thorough review of five pending GM files, it had become clear that there were no new scientific issues that merited further assessment, as those concerning safety had been fully addressed, the commissioner added. Read More

It’s nice to see the EU actually recognizing sound science as a good resource for their decision making process. That’s normally not the case across the pond. When it comes to genetic modification, the truth is that humans have been doing this for 10,000 years. It’s a good thing we have or we probably wouldn’t be here today.

Adequate Food Production Requires Technology Use

Biotech, Nanotech and Synthetic Biology Roles in Future Food Supply Explored

ScienceDaily (Feb. 25, 2010) — Some say the world's population will swell to 9 billion people by 2030 and that will present significant challenges for agriculture to provide enough food to meet demand, says University of Idaho animal scientist Rod Hill.

Hill and Larry Branen, a University of Idaho food scientist, organized a symposium during the American Association for the Advancement of Science annual meeting February 17 to explore ways biotechnology could provide healthy and plentiful animal-based foods to meet future demands.

Synthetic biology, nanotechnology, genetic engineering and other applications of biotechnology -- and the public's role in determining their acceptable uses -- were all addressed by panelists during the session.

The goal for the session, which was part of the nation's largest general science meeting held annually, was to encourage a dialogue among scientists and the public, said Hill, a Moscow-based molecular physiologist who studies muscle growth in cattle.

"There will be a significant challenge for agriculture and the science that will be required to provide a healthy, nutritious and adequate food supply in coming decades for a rapidly growing population," Hill said.
A key question, he said, is whether the Earth can continue to provide enough food without technological support. The history of civilization and agriculture during the last 10,000 years suggests otherwise.

"Unaided food production is an unattainable ideal -- current society is irrevocably grounded in the technological interventions underpinning the agricultural revolution that now strives to feed the world," Hill said. Read More

I have no doubts that technology will continue providing with the answers to feeding a growing world. In contrast, obtaining the social license to use that technology could be the biggest challenge. Unfortunately, it may come down to a simple question that everyone will have to answer. Do we abandon technology and concede that millions, if not billions, of people will starve to death? Or do we utilize safe, proven technology to ensure we can feed as many people as possible? How you answer that question will probably depend on how full your stomach is at the time you are being asked.

Growing Enough Food

Food crisis looms, warn scientists
By Stuart Gary for ABC Science Online
Feb 12, 2010

A new report by Australian researchers claims far more needs to be done if we are to feed the estimated 9 billion people who will be living on the planet by 2050.

The report, by Professor Mark Tester and Professor Peter Langridge of the Australian Centre for Plant Functional Genomics at the University of Adelaide, appears today in the journal Science.
"The simple fact is while food production has increased by 32 million tonnes a year, an annual increase of 44 million tonnes a year is what's actually needed to meet the food targets for 2050 set down by the World Summit on Food security," Professor Tester said.

"But this represents a 38 per cent increase over historical improvements in food production and it needs to be sustained for the next 40 years.

"This scale of increase is unprecedented and will require huge changes to current food production methods."

"India, which has more undernourished people than Africa, is a real challenge," he said.
"Especially with their government's hard stand on genetically modified foods."

Professor Tester believes new breeding technologies are needed to increase crop yields by quickly identifying the best genes for any given conditions.

"This is the way forward if we are to feed the world in the future." Read More

We continue to hear food production experts stress the importance of using technology to meet demand. Just like Norman Borlaug used all the resources and technology at his disposal to stave off world wide famine, we will need to do the same. It would be unethical at this point in time to do anything less. We can’t turn our back on the ability to produce more food when we have hungry people in this world. We can’t let the Michael Pollan’s of the world decide who will eat and who won’t.

The Soybean Genome

Genome sequencing speeds ability to improve soybeans
(1/13/2010)
Feedstuffs

Purdue University scientists led an effort to sequence the soybean genome, giving researchers a better understanding of the plant's genes and how to use them to improve its characteristics.
The genome was published in the Jan. 13 issue of the journal Nature.

This sequencing of the soy genome is the culmination of more than 15 years of collaborative research. The team used a whole-genome shotgun approach to sequence 85% of the 1.1 billion nucleotide base pairs that spell out the soybean's entire DNA code.

Purdue agronomy professor Scott Jackson said the U.S. departments of Energy and Agriculture study found that the soybean has about 46,000 genes, but many of those — 70-80% — are duplicates. This duplication may make it difficult to target the genes necessary to improve soybean characteristics such as seed size, oil content or yield.

Despite the difficulties the soybean genome presents, having a sequenced genome does speed up the work scientists are able to do to improve the plant's characteristics. Genome sequencing eliminates the need for meticulous searches for particular genes.

"It really is going to change the way we ask questions about soybeans in research," said Randy Shoemaker, a research geneticist from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Agricultural Research Service at Iowa State University and the paper's co-author. "What used to take us literally years can take us weeks or months now. This is the entire genetic code in front of you."

Read More

As we continue to learn more about the plants and animals that we rely on for food, fiber and pharmaceuticals, the more opportunities we find to improve our lives and the planet we live on. The soybean is one of our most versatile crops and with this new understanding we will continue to grow the list of uses. Continuing to fund research in agriculture will be vital to the future success of feeding our world.

Using Critical Thinking Skills

GM corn health risks identified
16 Dec, 2009 04:45 PM

AN INTERNATIONAL study of three Monsanto genetically manipulated maize (corn) varieties shows clear evidence of health risks, according to anti-GM lobby group Gene Ethics.

It says that the study analysed data from 90-day rat feeding trials of: insecticide-producing Mon 810 and Mon 863 GM maize; and Roundup herbicide tolerant NK 603 GM maize.

Adverse impacts were found on the kidneys, livers and the dietary detoxifying organs of experimental rats, and also some damage to heart, adrenal glands, spleen and the haematopoietic system.

The research was conducted by French scientists from the universities of Caen and Rouen and is published in the International Journal of Biological Sciences.

According to Gene Ethics, the report shows the GM maize events contained novel pesticide residues that will also be present in human food and animal feed where they may pose grave health risks.

As a result of the findings, the scientists are calling for an immediate prohibition on the import and cultivation of this GM maize and have strongly recommended more long-term and multi-generational animal feeding studies.

Corn Genome Possibilities

300-bushel averages by 2030?
Posted: Saturday, December 12, 2009 9:25 am
By LORI POTTER Hub Staff Writer 0 comments

KEARNEY — Scientists who recently completed sequencing the corn genome may have ensured success for crop breeders and farmers racing to double 2000 world corn production by 2030.
That means Nebraska farmers who are harvesting a 2009 crop averaging 200 bushels or more per acre in many fields soon could see 300-bushel yields, said Chandler Mazour, manager of Monsanto’s Water Utilization Learning Center south of Gothenburg.

“It’s big on a global scale,” he said about the importance of the genome mapping, because doubling production while using fewer inputs is vital to feeding a world population expected to grow from 6 billion to 9 billion by 2050.

Craig Wietjes of Riverdale, who has been a Pioneer seed representative for 20 years, said, “We are becoming very limited on obtaining or developing more acres for the products to be produced. We now must focus on making our products — mainly corn and soybeans — produce more per acre.”

He described the gene mapping as “a pivotal industry-changing movement.”

Smithfield farmer Dennis Gengenbach, who is vice president of the Nebraska Corn Board and serves on the National Corn Growers Association Research Committee, said, “It’s gonna take a few years to determine what changes we want to make and how. But it’s limited only by your imagination.” Read More

Several of our food crops have been sequenced now, including some of our livestock. Knowing this information will make it much easier for plant and livestock breeders to bring more favorable genes to the forefront and eliminate those that cause problems. Humans have been genetically enhancing their food crops for 10,000 years now and that continues today with new and better technology that will help us grow more food.

Biotech's Contributions

Biotech crops making important contributions to food production & sustainable farming

Wednesday, 18 November 2009 22:44
PG Economics
www.pgeconomics.co.uk

In the light of ongoing world food security, agricultural sustainability and climate change debates, PG Economics has released three summary documents of the yield, income and environmental effects of biotech crops . These summaries are supplemented by more detailed examinations of these impacts in the latest report on the global socio-economic and environmental impacts of the technology 1996-2007 .

The three summaries document the real contribution of biotech crops to; improving global crop yields, increasing production (and estimated contributions to food security), improving farm income and reducing the environment ‘footprint’ of agriculture.

Key impacts are:

• Biotech crops have contributed to significantly reducing the release of greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural practices. In 2007, this was equivalent to removing 14.2 billion kg of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere or equal to removing nearly 6.3 million cars from the road for one year;

• A reduction in pesticide spraying (1996-2007) of 359 million kg (equivalent to 125% of the annual volume of pesticide active ingredient applied to arable crops in the European Union);

• There have been substantial net economic benefits at the farm level amounting to $10.1 billion in 2007 and $44.1 billion for the twelve year period. The farm income gains in 2007 is equivalent to adding 4.4% to the value of global production of the four main biotech crops of soybeans, corn, canola and cotton;

• Of the total farm income benefit, 46.5% ($20.5 billion) has been due to yield gains, with the balance arising from reductions in the cost of production;

• Farmers in developing countries obtained the largest share of the farm income gains in 2007 (58%) and over the twelve year period obtained 50% of the total ($44.1 billion) gains. Developing country farmers have also seen the largest increases in farm income on a per hectare basis from using the technology;

• Since 1996, biotech traits have added 67.8 million tonnes and 62.4 million tonnes respectively to global production of soybeans and corn. The technology has also contributed an extra 6.85 million tonnes of cotton lint and 4.44 million tonnes of canola;

• The average yield gains across the global area planted to biotech insect resistant corn and cotton (1996-2007) were over 6% and 13% respectively. The highest yield gains have been experienced by developing country farmers;

• The additional production arising from biotech crops (1996-2007) has contributed enough energy (in kcal terms) to feed about 402 million people for a year (additional production in 2007 contributed enough energy to feed 88 million, similar to the annual requirement of the population of the Philippines);

• If GM technology had not been available to the (12 million) farmers using the technology in 2007, maintaining global production levels at the 2007 levels would have required additional plantings of 5.9 million ha of soybeans, 3 million ha of corn, 2.5 million ha of cotton and 0.3 million ha of canola. This total area requirement is equivalent to about 6% of the arable land in the US, or 23% of the arable land in Brazil. Link

Here are some very interesting numbers that show how much modern agricultural techniques have improved our ability to produce food and fiber. With a limited amount of natural resources, specifically land, available on this planet, we must continue to improve our efficiency and productivity.