Bt cotton presentation12

Cotton is a natural fiber harvested from the cotton plant. Thousands of acres globally are devoted to the production of cotton Cotton demand a large amount of both sunshine and water,which makes its production more effecttive in tropical and sub tropical areas As a rule, the high demands of cotton in water, soil and sun mean that the planting of this cash crop frequently replaces the cultivation of sustenance crops Cotton also carries environmental controversy, particularly in the developing world, where dangerous pesticides are heavily employed.

Cotton is subject to infestation, and therefore many growers heavily douse the plant in pesticides that are harmful to human and animal health. Cotton is primarily grown in the Southern US and California, Africa,South Asia and China. In the US industrial agricultural methods are the norm, with most aspects of cultivation being mechanized The underside of the leaves of African and American species of cotton produce a sticky-sweet nectar which attracts many pests, chief among them the bollworm (the boll weevil has been largely eradicated), the larvae of a small moth, Pectinophora gossypiella. Bollworms and budworms burrow into the boll or bud shortly before harvest and feed on the fibers or lint

Cotton has a historical legacy attached to colonialism and slavery, specifically American, British, Turkish exploitation of North Africa, South Asia, and the Americas Britain sought areas where cotton could be cultivated economically. Portions of India and the Sudan proved to be suitable for this. The Nile river basin in particular was modeled to be a major supplier for the British Empire Cotton is typically grown using heavy levels of pesticides Endosulfan is the primary pesticide used to control the bollworm. It is toxic to human beings if touched or ingested and particularly lethal to children Pesticides compromise as much as 50% of the costs of cultivation for many farmers and the increasing use of pesticides has led to high levels of debt and bankruptcy among poorer farmers

An alternative to increased pesticide use is the encouragement of natural predators of the bollworm, including ladybirds, lacewings, damsel bugs, night stalking spiders, common brown earwigs, fire ants, muc wasps, and the trichogramma wasp. Pest traps, spot treatment and organic pesticides are also more sustainable alternatives. A more common alternative today is to turn to genetically-modified crops produced by companies such as Monsanto. The most common species, “Bt” or Bacillus thuringiensis, is advertised as fully resistant to the common bollworm. Early use shows that this is true, as such large portions of cotton production in the US and China (20 and 30% respectively) now use Bt strains. Bt Cotton seeds were introduced by Bollgard Cotton, a trademark of the Monsanto group. Bt Cotton was first introduced to the U.S. in 1996

The Monsanto Company is a U.S.-based multinational agricultural biotechnology corporation It is the world's leading producer of the herbicide glyphosate, marketed as "Roundup". Monsanto is also the leading producer of genetically engineered(GE)seed; it sells 90% of the US's GE seeds The Company is focused on enabling both small-holder and large-scale farmers to produce more food, feed, fibre from their land while conserving more of our world's natural resources such as water and energy. The Company is committed to innovating and partnering in India to help improve productivity for Indian farmers, and helping make India a self-sufficient global contributor in agriculture. Over four decades of partnership with Indian farmers, Monsanto has delivered high-yielding seeds and biotech traits in corn, cotton, and vegetables; as well as agricultural herbicide products.

In India, Monsanto is present under three entities: Monsanto India Limited (MIL) – A subsidiary of the parent company, MIL is the only publicly listed Monsanto company outside USA; Focuses on maize seeds - Dekalb® , India's largest selling hybrid maize seed brand) and agricultural productivity - Roundup® , the world's and India's largest selling glyphosate herbicide. Monsanto Holdings Private Limited (MHPL) – 100% wholly-owned subsidiary of Monsanto Company; and 26% Stake in Mahyco, focused on marketing Paras cotton hybrid seeds with Bollgard® and Bollgard® Bt cotton technologies, and Seminis® vegetable hybrid seeds. Mahyco Monsanto Biotech (India) Limited (MMB) – 50:50 Joint Venture between Mahyco and MHPL, which markets Bollgard® and Bollgard® II Bt cotton technologies to seed companies.

Bt Cotton is produced by inserting a synthetic version of a gene from the naturally occurring soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis, into cotton. The primary reason this is done is to induce the plant to produce its own Bt toxin to destroy the bollworm, a major cotton pest. The gene causes the production of Bt toxin in all parts of the cotton plant throughout its entire life span. When the bollworm ingests any part of the plant, the Bt cotton toxin pierces its small intestine and kills the insect.

Bacillus thuringiensis is a rod shaped, aerobic, spore-forming bacterium ,Gram-positive, soil-dwelling bacterium During sporulation Bt produces protein crystals which are often toxic to invertebrates.

Bacillus thuringiensis It is related to other Bacillus species such as B. cereus, the causative agent of some types of food poisoning, and B. anthracis, the causative agent of anthrax. The species comprises diverse strains with different toxin profiles, and the range of toxins can affect several different types of invertebrates. Bacillus thuringiensis (or Bt ), commonly used as a biological alternative to a pesticide Alternatively, the Cry toxin may be extracted and used as a pesticide. In 1976, Zakharyan reported the presence of a plasmid in a strain of B. thuringiensis and suggested the plasmid's involvement in endospore and crystal formation. Upon sporulation, B. thuringiensis forms crystals of proteinaceous insecticidal δ-endotoxins (called crystal proteins or Cry proteins), which are encoded by cry genes. In most strains of B. thuringiensis the cry genes are located on the plasmid.

Cry toxins have specific activities against some insect species . B. thuringiensis serves as an important reservoir of Cry toxins for production of biological insecticides and insect-resistant genetically modified crops. When insects ingest toxin crystals, the alkaline pH of their digestive tract activates the toxin. Cry inserts into the insect gut cell membrane, forming a pore. The pore results cell lysis and eventual death of the insect

History of Bt Japanese biologist, Shigetane Ishiwatari was investigating the cause of the sotto disease (sudden-collapse disease) that was killing large populations of silkworms when he first isolated the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis ( Bt ) as the cause of the disease in 1901. Ernst Berliner isolated a bacteria that had killed a Mediterranean flour moth in 1911, and rediscovered Bt . He named it Bacillus thuringiensis , after the German town Thuringia where the moth was found. Ishiwatari had named the bacterium Bacillus sotto in 1901 but the name was later ruled invalid. In 1915, Berliner reported the existance of a crystal within Bt , but the activity of this crystal was not discovered until much later.

Farmers started to use Bt as a pesticide in 1920. France soon started to make commericialized spore based formulations called Sporine in 1938. Sporine, at the time was used primarly to kill flour moths. More products containing Bt were marketed, but many of these products had limitations. Bt products such as sprays are rapidly washed away by rain, and degrade under the sun's UV rays. Also, there were many insects that are not susceptible to any of the limited number of Bt strains known at the time

In 1956, researchers, Hannay, Fitz-James and Angus found that the main insecticidal activity against lepidoteran (moth) insects was due to the parasporal crystal. With this discovery came increased interest in the crystal structure, biochemistry, and general mode of action of Bt . Research on Bt began in ernest. In the US, Bt was used commercially starting in 1958. By 1961, Bt was registerd as a pesticide to the EPA. Up until 1977, only thirteen Bt strains had been described. All thirteen subspecies were toxic only to certain species of lepidopteran larvae. In 1977 the first subspecies toxic to dipteran (flies) species was found, and the first discovery of strains toxic to species of coleopteran (beetles) followed in 1983.

In the 1980's use of Bt increased when insects became increasingly resistant to the synthetic insecticides and scientists and environmentalists became aware that the chemicals were harming the environment. Bt is organic and it affects specific insects and does not persist in the environment. Because of this, governments and private industries started to fund research on Bt . Today, there are thousands of strains of Bt. Many of them have genes that encode unique toxic crystals in their DNA.

Isolation of cry gene in Bacillus thuringiensis Approximately 0.5 g of sample are suspended in 4.5 ml of sterile distilled water and mixed vigorously by vortexing. Ten-fold serial dilutions with sterile distilled water were plated on Nutrient Agar (NA). Bt-like colonies, which are usually described as cream-colored and have the appearance of a fried egg on a plate, were labeled and subcultured. Gram positive reaction and catalase production were observed in 24-hour cultures. Endospore and crystal protein were observed after 72 hours under a phase-contrast microscope. Morphological differences among crystal proteins were examined by scanning electron The Bt index was calculated After identification as B. thuringiensis, the colonies were inoculated onto nutrient agar and stored as stock culture for insecticidal activity test.

cry gene detection by PCR technique Genomic DNA and plasmid DNA were extracted PCR amplication was carried out in a 25 ml reaction volume; 1 ml of DNA, 1x buffer deoxynucleoside triphosphate (0.2mM each), oligonucleotide primer (0.2mM each) and Taq polymerase (5U). The 24 specific primer pairs were used for identification of cry1 cry2 cry5 cry13A and cry14 gene families. Template DNA was preheated at 94oC for 5 min. Then it was denatured at 94 C for 1 min, annealed to primers at 45 C for 45 sec and extensions of PCR products were achieved at 72 C for 2 min. The PCR was done for 30 cycles. The PCR products were separated on a 1% agarose gel. Identification of cry gene was performed with a set of primers amplifying cry1, cry2, cry5, cry13A and cry14 families which produced toxic proteins to Lepidoptera Clone the genes in E.coli, in a suitable cloning site

Gene is inserted into the Agrobacterium At the early stage the cotyledon or hypocotyl pieces are dipped in a solution of Agrobacterium engineered to contain the kanamycin antibiotic resistance gene and whatever desirable gene is being transferred to the cotton. These pieces then go onto callus induction medium containing a toxic dose of kanamycin to allow only those cotton cells receiving the engineered genes to grow . The Agrobacterium provides a way of getting novel genes into a single cell of a plant such as cotton Then tissue culture is done

, Whole plants can be regenerated from small pieces of seedling cotyledons or hypocotyls by first putting them onto a medium that promotes callus production (disorganised masses of dividing cells). After about six weeks the callus is transferred to a liquid culture without the plant hormones normally necessary for the growth of the callus.

The cells organise themselves into very tiny embryos, just like the embryos found in cotton seeds, each with a root end and a cotyledon end. These small embryos can be proliferated on a different solid tissue culture medium and them germinated like a seed to produce a small plant that can be potted in soil and eventually transferred to the glasshouse to produce a normal flowering plant The whole process takes about 9 months.

How does Bt Work? The active crystal protein is attached to the Bt spore. This spore is ingested by an unfortunate organism, and the work begins. The spore and crystal enter the digestive tract, where they make their way to the organism's gut.

The crystal surrounding the protein breaks off from the spore and begins to dissolve. Once the crystal has been completely dissolved, the toxin is activated. This entire step occurs in the gut of the insect, and is the first specificity test for Bt . In order for the crystal to be dissolved and the toxin to become activated, the pH level must be within a very limited range.

The toxin actually takes affect. The toxin binds itself to receptors in the gut. In this illustration, it shows small square shapes along the gut membrane, which are (in actuality) folds along the gut membrane. Once the toxin binds itself to the membrane, it begins to bore holes through it. It completely perforates the gut membrane. Multiple toxins will bind and follow these steps, until the creature has been paralyzed, or starves to death. The creature is paralyzed because its stomach acids leak out into the rest of the body causing serious damage (pleasant)

BACKGROUND OF BT COTTON IN THE WORLD Many countries have reported positive experiences with Bt cotton. This includes USA, China and Australia. Bt cotton has spread very rapidly in China. There is good demand for it from the farmers since it reduces the cost of pesticide applications as well as the exposure to pesticides. In China the government has played a major role in providing GM technology to the farmers Commercial cultivation of Bt cotton has taken in US, Australia and Mexico in 1996 By China and South Africa after a lag of one year. Countries such as India Indonesia and Colombia have taken up its commercial cultivation much later, since 2002

The chronological progress of adoption of Bt cotton across countries is shown in Table

Table 2 shows that the area under Bt cotton has increased from 0.8 million hectare during 1996 to almost 6 million hectares by the year 2003.

BT genes in Australian Cotton Cultivars. CSIRO has recently signed a research agreement with Monsanto to utilise some of their advanced BT technology to improve the insect tolerance of Australian cotton varieties. This is being approached in two ways, By backcrossing the BT genes from the transgenic American Coker variety produced by Monsanto, into Australian cultivars by traditional breeding procedures and By direct transformation into Australian Siokra cultivars using Agrobacterium tumefaciens mediated gene transfer techniques. The backcross program is only part way through but it would be of great value to know whether the gene being introduced will be expressed at high enough levels to control the insect pests present in Australian cotton fields (ie. H. armigera and H. punctigera).

The plants being produced are crosses with a single transgenic parent Coker plant, selected by Monsanto as the best performing plant from amongst a number of independent transgenic plants. This plant showed high levels of BT protein expression and effective killing of H. zea. Although we have seen impressive control of H. armigera in laboratory tests of some of the backcrossed material,

The Indonesian experience Indonesia was the first country in Southeast Asia to permit commercial GM farming against the warnings of scientists and activists on the environmental and socio-economic impacts. Fortunately, permission was granted only on a year-by-year basis, and the government reviewed the impact of the failed Bt crop. The review was scathing. This "Gene Revolution", it said, seemed to be "a modern tool for cementing farmers’ dependence on seeds and transnational agrochemical corporations appearing in developing countries in different guises." The evidence from Indonesia is that "GM crops are nothing more than a profit-motivated deployment of scientific power dedicated to sucking the blood of farmers." Monsanto promised Bt cotton would return 3-4 tonnes of cotton per hectare while requiring less pesticide and fertilizer than Kanesia, the local cotton variety. The seed was given to farmers with pesticide, herbicide, (including Roundup) and fertilizer as part of a credit scheme costing sixteen times more than non-Bt cotton. In fact, the average yield was 1.1 tonnes per hectare and 74% of the area planted to Bt-cotton produced less than one tonne per hectare. About 522 hectares experienced total crop failure. Despite that, the government extended approval for Bt cotton for another year; and the results were no better.

In 2001 farmers signed contracts, but in 2002 the seed price rose and the cotton price slumped. Farmers had no choice but to shoulder the debt and sell at the company’s rate; as a result, 76% of farmers who joined the credit scheme couldn’t repay their debt and many burned their cotton in protest against the government and the company In 2003, Monsanto halted operations saying that the Indonesian Government’s decision to authorize Bt cotton production on a year-by-year basis had been a big obstacle to business investment. PT Monagro Kimia, a Monsanto subsidiary, was under investigation by the US Department of Justice and the Indonesian Corruption Eradication Commission on suspicion that a payment of US$ 50 000 was made to Indonesian officials in 2002. In January 2005, Monsanto was found guilty of authorising the bribe and fined $1.5m

Bt cotton in China Monsanto received a permit in 1997 for commercial production of Bt cotton in China and has since shared the Bt cotton market with domestically developed varieties that have expanded quickly over the country’s cotton-growing area. China has been held up as the success story in GM cotton, and is the key to statistics claiming benefit for small farmers from GM. However, earlier warnings of major problems have now been confirmed by a Chinese researcher who reports that the technology will not only be useless within six to seven years, but "could cause a disaster". Liu Xiaofeng, a researcher from Henan, China’s second largest cotton producing province, told Reuters that the cotton bollworm is indeed developing resistance and will not be susceptible to Bt cotton after 20-30 generations, or in six to seven years. Moreover, Bt cotton does not effectively control secondary pests such as Lygus bug.

The early warnings appeared in a study published in June 2002 based on the work of scientists at a research institute funded by China’s Environmental Protection Agency. It found that although Bt cotton was effective in bollworm control, it had adverse impacts on the parasitic natural enemies of bollworm, and was not effective in controlling many secondary pests that damaged the crop. The study also found the diversity indices of the insect community in Bt cotton fields to be lower than in conventional cotton fields, and that the cotton bollworm could develop resistance to Bt cotton. Liu’s work has received further collaboration by another study published in October 2004, which found that Bt cotton did not reduce the total numbers of insecticide sprays because additional sprays were required against sucking pests.

Field trials in Africa South Africa, already the sixth biggest producer of GM crops in the world, grows Bt cotton on large and small commercial scales, extolling the benefits to small farmers in spite of the serious debts incurred. Although there is a glut of cotton in the world market and depressed prices caused by US subsidies to their own growers worth $3.7 b per annum, the US government and the world’s biggest agrochemical companies are putting pressure on West African countries to introduce Bt cotton, the ‘trojan horse’ for other GM crops waiting in the wings. In West Africa there are wild relatives of cotton that may be contaminated, but in the US, GM cotton is prohibited in Florida where wild relatives grow. In November 2003, USAID, with the official support of the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture, declared that it wants to ‘GM-ize’ Africa. Mali’s National Agricultural Research Institute has been negotiating with Monsanto and Syngenta for field trials of Bt cotton. There is a plan to convert the country’s crop to GM varieties over the next five years; local farmers and the public are unaware of this intention. West African farmers, already unable to sell enough natural cotton because of subsidies, are locked into a cycle of poverty with credit against next years harvest.

Burkino Faso has been field-testing Bt cotton since July 2003 in collaboration with Monsanto. But Francois Traore, president of the National Union of Cotton Producers, says, "If we already have the means to reduce pesticide use, why look for things that are going to complicate life?" Benin has had a moratorium on GM products since March 2002, but is under constant pressure to introduce Bt cotton. Senegal ran an unofficial field trial of Monsanto’s Bt cotton, but efforts were abandoned after the cotton failed to perform. Egypt has a pro GM policy with field trials underway for Bt cotton and many other crops. Kenya has many research institutes pushing GM crops, and research on GM cotton is under way. Uganda has just published its first biosafety policy bill, which has yet to be made law by parliament, however it is expected to take up Bt cotton soon. Zimbabwe: The government destroyed some unsupervised field trials of Bt cotton conducted by Monsanto some years ago.

The Americas In the US, home of Monsanto’s Bollgard first planted in 1996, there have been problems with erratic and disappointing yield, especially in Southeast Arkansas where costs were significantly higher on Bt acreage. In 2002, despite the use of supplementary pesticides, 7.5% of the Bt crop was destroyed by bollworm and 1.4% destroyed by Spodoptera and Pseudoplusia includens caterpillars. The total insecticide use has remained relatively stable due to the increasing importance of secondary pests; it is lower in dry states such as Texas, but increasing in the Mississippi delta. Research on Bollgard cotton adopted in North Carolina, conducted between 1996-2003 by Jack Bacheler, North Carolina State University Extension entomologist found changes in insect communities, and that while damage from bollworms decreased, stink bug problems have increased.

In 2004, Bt cotton was grown in nine states and comprised more than 75% of all cotton grown. Most varieties are Roundup Ready (RR) or RR and Bt combined [1]. The proposed ‘technology fee for Bollgard II was US $99 ha in 2004, this is to be added to the seed price. Bt cotton is also grown in Brazil, Argentina, Mexico and Columbia. In Columbia the vice-president of the biosafety council works for Monsanto and was thus able to both apply for and grant permission for release of a Bt crop in an area that is a centre of origin for some wild cotton species. Moreover, the pest responsible for 70% of pesticide use on cotton is the picudo , which is not targeted by Monsanto’s cotton. The small farmer will once again lose out due to this folly

Why was it introduced? Bt cotton in India When cotton farming was introduced as a lucrative alternative to food crops in the 1980s, farmers invested in expensive varieties of seeds and pesticides. This put small farmers in conditions of severe indebtedness, often driving them to suicide. The spate of suicides that began from Andhra Pradesh, first in 1987 and then again in 1998-99, have so far taken a heavy toll, spreading to Karnataka, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana and Punjab. This desperate situation was caused basically by the resistance the American bollworm insect developed, to all kinds of pesticides and pesticide cocktails. Farmers found themselves on a “pesticide treadmill' where higher pesticide use led to greater resistance which in turn led to even higher pesticide use, an so on.

The Government of India allowed the production of three genetically modified Bt cotton hybrids for three years from April 2002 to March 2005. This followed the controversial unauthorized release and cultivation of Bt cotton in some areas in the previous year The authorized cotton varieties are Bt MECH 162, Bt MECH 184, and Bt MECH 12. By 2002/03,officially Bt cotton has been grown in about 1 lakh hectares in Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat,Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu. Unofficial use, especially in Gujarat is said to be quite large. Even though the performance of Bt cotton has been projected to be satisfactory in some circles, there is great discontent in different quarters with the variety. Some indicate that the variety is susceptible to the bollworm and the yield is below par The study indicated that Bt Cotton has failed on many counts and the claims made by the company were wrong. It neither improved yield through better plant protection nor reduced the pesticide usage and the returns were less since the pods were small, seeds were more, lint and the staple length were less

The price of Bt cotton was reported to be 10 percent less in the local market (Business Line, 2002). In some cases, the new pests and diseases emerged, and Bt cotton failed to prevent even the boll worm attack. Some reports indicated that initially Bt Cotton showed resistance to boll worms but as soon as the formation of bolls started, the worms started attacking them (RFSTE, 2002). Despite these concerns, Bt cotton cultivation is spreading steadily and farmers in developing countries are also willing to adopt this technology to reduce the pest damage and the cost of production with due consideration for the environment (Iyengar and Lalitha, 2002). According to official estimates, the area under Bt cotton in India is about 1 million hectare, or about 11 percent of the total area under cotton in the country. As of 2005,the share of area under Bt cotton to total area under cotton was over 27 percent in Madhya Pradesh, and about 18 percent in Maharashtra.

Agencies Involved in Rules,1989 of EPAct 1986 GOVERNMENT OF INDIA Dept. of Biotechnology Dept. of Environment RCGM GEAC IBSC PI/ Applicant SBCC Large Scale Imports, Production and Release DLC Applicant Monitoring -cum- Evaluation Committee R&D, Limited experimental field trials and imports for R&D.

Bt Cotton Controversy Strongest opposition to GM in India came from farmers’ organizations and Non-Governmental Organizations One farmers’ organization – Karnataka Rajya Ryotha Sangha (KRRS) - based in Karnataka has been especially active in criticizing GM Vandana Shiva also been a vocal critic. Shiva and KRRS: ‘Cremate Monsanto 1998: Anti-GM protest KRRS and Shiva linked the farmers’ suicides to what they called the ‘Terminator technology’ being developed by Monsanto Said that Monsanto were trialling terminator technology in India so that farmers could no longer use farmer-saved seed

1998: Anti-GM campaign II BUT: Monsanto quickly denied that it would develop and market terminator technology Monsanto never trialed let alone marketed terminator technology in India Karnataka farmers who committed suicide were not using terminator seeds, they weren’t even using GM crops. Karnataka farmers were actually using conventional crops which failed as a result of pest attack EVEN SO, KRRS/Shiva managed to convince many people that Monsanto was the aggressor in case of farmer suicides The implications of KRRS and Shiva’s stand against Monsanto and GM Brought KRRS and Shiva into conflict with other farmers’ movements, e.g. Shetkari Sanghatana, led by Sharad Joshi in Maharasthra Joshi argued that GM would provide possibilities for peasant farmers to earn large incomes independently of state interference (links to New Right ideas) GM perceived to embody the freedoms associated with the rational application of science to agriculture

Shankarikappa in response to Shiva and KRRS: For one acre of non Bt cotton, a farmer spends Rs.10,000 for spraying insecticides and can expect a yield of 20 quintals, and that if the farmer succeeds in eliminating pests at the right time of fruiting. In contrast, for one acre of Bt cotton, a farmer gets a yield of 25 quintals without spending on insecticides, as the Bollgard gene from Monsanto imparts insect tolerance to cotton…. Pesticides were sprayed just twice to control pests other than bollworms. Whereas trial plots of the other varieties yielded muchless in spite of spraying insecticides six times .

Bollgard Performance – ICAR Trial Summary Bollgard Hybrids mature 15 days earlier The increase in yield over non-Bt counterparts by 31%. Bollgard recorded 20q/ha highest yield Insecticide spray reduction to the tune of 65%. Under unprotected conditions also performance of Bollgard cotton was better. The Bollgard cotton hybrids fit well in IPM module. Bollgard yielded additional economic benefit of Rs.10000/ha.

Recommended Bt cotton hybrids for commercial cultivation in India 2005 North Zone Central Zone South Zone (6) (12) (10) MRC-6301 MECH-12 MECH-12 MRC-6304 MECH-162 MECH-162 RCH-134 MECH-184 MECH-184 RCH-317 MRC-6301 RCH-2(2004) Ankur-651 RCH-2 (2004) RCH-20 Ankur-2534 RCH-118 RCH-368 RCH-138 MRC-6322 RCH-144 MRC-6918(HB) Ankur-651 Bunny Ankur-09 Mallika Bunny Mallika

Benefit of Bt cotton cultivation is the reduction in the use of pesticides, which thereby, reduces the cost of cultivation. Since it reduces the use of pesticides thereby minimising the chemical pollution of soil and atmosphere, it is recognised as environment friendly or Eco-friendly. In the non-Bt cotton cultivation, generally, 15 rounds of spray of chemicals are required in a season to control the pest especially the bollworm. But in case of Bt cotton crop only 3 rounds of spray of chemicals are considered enough. The cost of chemicals for a single round of spray is around Rs 300 per hectare. It means that more than Rs 3,500 could be saved per hectare if Bt cotton is cultivated. In India, cotton cultivation area is only 5 per cent of the total agricultural area but it consumes around 50 per cent of the total pesticides used for all the crops. In value terms the cost of pesticides used for non-Bt cotton cultivation is around Rs 2,000 crores. Besides this, the yield increases by 30 per cent by better protection from the pests. The increase in productivity consequently increases the income of cotton farmers significantly. In addition to the above, the studies indicate that a considerable extent of manpower is saved through reduced spray of pesticides in Bt cotton cultivation as compared to other varieties. Bt cotton technology also reduces the amount of exposure and risk involved in purchasing, transporting, mixing and spraying the insecticide (for caterpillar control) to the workers or cultivators of cotton.

Problems of Bt cotton cultivation The first problem is that the seeds produced after cultivation of Bt cotton are not reusable. For each time, the farmer has to buy seeds from Monsanto-Mahyco. Since Monsanto is in a monopolistic position so they are free to charge any price. This means benefits of Bt cotton to cultivators will largely depend on the price of seeds at which they procure and availability of seeds at the time of season. In the long term, safeguarding the interest of farmers can be made against such a situation by developing indigenous technology. . The second problem is that if Bt cotton is cultivated without the recommended method then bollworm pest might develop the resistance against Bt gene and that would lead to loss of effectiveness of natural eco-friendly pesticides forever. . The third problem is the chance of availability of fake seeds of Bt cotton in the market. And it would be difficult for a farmer to differentiate between Bt and non-Bt cotton seeds. As a result the failure of crops and uncertainty of yield could be higher. . There is also a big threat of gene contamination. It might be carried by insect or even wind that transfer pollen grains from Bt cotton to non-Bt cotton plants cultivated nearby.

Safeguard measures In order to minimise the negative aspects of Bt cotton cultivation following safeguard measures may be adopted: There is an urgent need to create awareness among the farmers about the entire Bt-technology and its functioning, because farmers are under the impression that Bt cotton is the panacea for all the woes (pest problem). They seem to understand that usage of Bt cotton seeds will eliminate the complete use of pesticides and production will increase considerably. There is also great need for training to the cotton farmers about the recommended methods of Bt cotton cultivation i.e. 80 per cent of Bt cotton and 20 per cent of non-Bt cotton farming and 3 to 3.5 metre border plantation of non-Bt cotton in Bt cotton field. This minimises the chance of development of resistance in bollworm pests against the Bt gene and also reduces the chances of genetic contamination. For the welfare of Bt cotton cultivators, the government should establish an institution or organisation which will prevent the selling of fake Bt cotton seeds and also meet the requirement of Bt cotton cultivator regarding the type of training or help they need. This organisation should also be empowered to interfere in the pricing policy of Bt cotton seeds so that Bt cotton seed distribution companies do not charge extraordinary price to the cotton farmers. In order to check the fake Bt cotton seeds being supplied to the farmers, some private companies as well as CICR have already developed certain tools, but these are to be made available in the market at nominal prices. For the welfare of Bt cotton cultivators, the government should enact some law so that Bt cotton seeds distributor companies pay compensation to the Bt cotton cultivators in case of seeds failure under ideal conditions. A special crop insurance scheme may be developed. There is also a need for the development of indigenous Bt cotton seeds in India so that our farmers need not depend solely on Monsanto Bt cotton seeds.

REFERENCE http://www.i-sis.org.uk/GMCFATW.php The geography of food Bt COTTON IN INDIA A STATUS REPORT Bt Cotton or Better Cotton?Kunal Datt http://www.cottoncrc.org.au/content/Communities/Cotton_Info/The_Science_behind_Transgenic_cotton.aspx www.maf.govt.nz/mafnet/rural-nz/...bt.../using-bt02.htm

Bt cotton presentation12

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to Bt cotton presentation12

Recently uploaded

Bt cotton presentation12

Editor's Notes