Biotechnology and Climate Change

Climate Change and its Effect in Agriculture

The continuing increase in greenhouse gas emissions raises the temperature of the earth’s atmosphere. This results to melting of glaciers, unpredictable rainfall patterns, and extreme weather events. The accelerating pace of climate change, combined with global population and depletion of agricultural resources threatens food security globally.

The over-all impact of climate change as it affects agriculture was described by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007), and cited by the US EPA (2011)1 to be as follows:

Increases in average temperature will result to: i)  increased crop productivity in high latitude temperate regions due to the lengthening of the growing season; ii)   reduced crop productivity in low latitude subtropical and tropical regions where summer heat is already limiting productivity; and iii) reduced productivity due to an increase in soil evaporation rates.

Change in amount of rainfall and patterns will affect soil erosion rates and soil moisture, which are important for crop yields. Precipitation will increase in high latitudes, and decrease in most subtropical low latitude regions – some by as much as about 20%, leading to long drought spells.

Rising atmospheric concentrations of CO2 will boost and enhance the growth of some crops but other aspects of climate change (e.g., higher temperatures and precipitation changes) may offset any beneficial boosting effect of higher CO2 levels.

Pollution levels of tropospheric ozone (or bad ozone that can damage living tissue and break down certain materials) may increase due to the rise in CO2 emissions. This may lead to higher temperatures that will offset the increased growth of crops resulting from higher levels of CO2. 

Changes in the frequency and severity of heat waves, drought, floods and hurricanes, remain a key uncertain factor that may potentially affect agriculture.

Climatic changes will affect agricultural systems and may lead to emergence of new pests and diseases.

In 2012, almost 40% of the world population of 6.7 billion, equivalent to 2.5 billion, rely on agriculture for their livelihood and will thus likely be the most severely affected. 2

To mitigate these effects, current agricultural approaches need to be modified and innovative adaption strategies need to be in place to efficiently produce more food in stressed conditions and with net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

Contribution of Biotech Crops in Mitigating Effects of Climate Change

Green biotechnology offers a solution to decrease green house gases and therefore mitigates climate change. Biotech crops for the last 16 years of commercialization have been contributing to the reduction of CO2 emissions. They allow farmers to use less and environmentally friendly energy and fertilizer, and practice soil carbon sequestration.

Herbicide tolerant biotech crops such as soybean and canola facilitate zero or no-till, which significantly reduces the loss of soil carbon (carbon sequestration) and CO2 emissions, reduce fuel use, and significantly reduce soil erosion.

Insect resistant biotech crops require fewer pesticide sprays which results in savings of tractor/fossil fuel and thus less CO2 emissions. For 2011, there was a reduction of 37 million kg of active ingredients, decreased rate of herbicide and insecticide sprays and ploughing reduced CO2 emission by 23.1  billion kg of CO2 or removing 10.2 million cars off the road.3

Biotech Crops Adapted to Climate Change

Crops can be modified faster through biotechnology than conventional crops, thus hastening implementation of strategies to meet rapid and severe climatic changes. Pest and disease resistant biotech crops have continuously developed as new pests and diseases emerge with changes in climate. Resistant varieties will also reduce pesticide application and hence CO2 emission.  Crops tolerant to various abiotech stresses have been developed in response to climatic changes.

Salinity Tolerant Crops

Biotech salt tolerant crops have been developed and some are in the final field trials before commercialization. In Australia, field trials of 1,161 lines of genetically modified  (GM) wheat and 1,179 lines of GM barley modified to contain one of 35 genes obtained from wheat, barley, maize, thale cress, moss or yeasts are in progress since 2010 and will run till 2015. Some of the genes are expected to enhance tolerance to a range of abiotic stresses including drought, cold, salt and low phosphorous. Sugarcane that contains transcription factor (OsDREB1A) is also under field trial from 2009 to 2015.4

More than a dozen of other genes influencing salt tolerance have been found in various plants. Some of these candidate genes may prove feasible in developing salt tolerance in sugarcane 4, rice5,6, barley 7, wheat 8, tomato9, and soybean10.

Drought Resistant Crops

Transgenic plants carrying genes for water-stress management have been developed.  Structural genes (key enzymes for osmolyte biosynthesis, such as proline, glycine/betaine, mannitol and trehalose, redox proteins and detoxifying enzymes, stress-induced LEA proteins) and regulatory genes, including dehydration–responsive, element-binding (DREB) factors, zinc finger proteins, and NAC transcription factor genes, are being used. Transgenic crops carrying different drought tolerant genes are being developed in rice, wheat, maize, sugarcane, tobacco, Arabidopsis, groundnut, tomato, potato and papaya.11, 12

An important initiative for Africa is the Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) project of the Kenyan-based African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF) and funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) and Howard G. Buffet Foundations. Drought tolerant WEMA varieties developed through marker assisted breeding could be available to farmers within the next two or three years. Drought-tolerant and insect-protected varieties developed using both advanced breeding and transgenic approaches could be available to farmers in the later part of the decade.13 In 2012, a genetically modified drought tolerant maize MON 87460 that expresses cold shock protein B has been approved in the US for release in the market.14

Biotech Crops for Cold Tolerance

By using genetic and molecular approaches, a number of relevant genes have been identified and new information continually emerges. Among which are the genes controlling the CBF cold-responsive pathway and together with DREB1 genes, integrate several components of the cold acclimation response to tolerance low temperatures.15

Cold tolerant GM crops are being developed such as GM eucalypti, which is currently being field tested in the US by Arborgen LLC since 2010. Thale cress has been improved to contain the DaIRIP4 from Deschapsia antarctica, a hairgrass that thrives in frosts down to -30C, and sugarcane are being introgressed with genes from cold tolerant wild varieties.4

Biotech Crops for Heat Stress

Expression of heat shock proteins (HSPs) has been associated with recovery of plants under heat stress and sometimes, even during drought. HSPs bind and stabilize proteins that have become denatured during stress conditions, and provide protection to prevent protein aggregation. In GM chrysanthemum containing the DREBIA gene from Arabidopsis thaliana, the transgene and other heat responsive genes such as the HSP70 (heat shock proteins) were highly expressed when exposed to heat treatment. The transgenic plants maintained higher photosynthetic capacity and elevated levels of photosynthesis-related enzymes.16

Forward Looking

Improved crops resilient to extreme environments caused by climate change are expected   in a few years to a decade. Hence, food production during this era should be given another boost to sustain food supply for the doubling population. Biotech research to mitigate global warming should also be initiated to sustain the utilization of new products. Among these are: the induction of nodular structures on the roots of non-leguminous cereal crops to fix nitrogen. This will reduce farmers’ reliance on inorganic fertilizers. Another is the utilization of excess CO2 in the air by staple crop rice by converting its CO2 harnessing capability from C3 to C4 pathway. C4 plants like maize can efficiently assimilate and convert CO2 to carbon products during photosynthesis.

References

US EPA. 2011. Agriculture and Food Supply: Climate change, health and environmental effects.  April 14, 2011. http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/effects/agriculture.html

IFPRI. 2009. Climate change impact on agriculture and cost adaptation. http://www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/pr21.pdf

Brookes, G and P Barfoot. 2012. Global economic and environmental benefits of GM crops continue to rise. http://www.pgeconomics.co.uk/page/33/global-impact-2012

Tammisola, J. 2010. Towards much more efficient biofuel crops – can sugarcane pave the way? GM Crops 1:4; 181-198. http://www.landesbioscience.com/journals/gmcrops/02TammisolaGMC1-4.pdf

http://thesecondgreenrevolution.blogspot.com/2012/02/salt-tolerant-gm-barley-trials-in.html

http://irri.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=9952:drought-submergence-and-salinity-management&lang=en

Salt Tolerant GM Barley Trials in Australia, Successful. http://thesecondgreenrevolution.blogspot.com/2012/02/salt-tolerant-gm-barley-trials-in.html

http://www.grdc.com.au/director/research/prebreeding?item_id=E31810F9A59C5C8E62BAE7

518CD28067&pageNumber=1&filter1=&filter2=&filter3=&filter4=

Moghaieb RE, A Nakamura, H Saneoka and K Fujita. 2011. Evaluation of salt tolerance in ectoine-transgenic tomato plants (Lycopersicon esculentum) in terms of photosynthesis, osmotic adjustment, and carbon partitioning. GM Crops. 2(1):58-65. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21844699

http://www.springerlink.com/content/h51n73352374v877/.

http://bioeconomy.dk/outcome/presentations/27-march/panel-discussion-building-global-bioeconomy/zhang-yis-presentation

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15427520802418251#preview

http://www.monsanto.com/ourcommitments/pages/water-efficient-maize-for-africa.aspx

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/2011/12/brs_actions.shtml

Sanghera, GS, S H Wani, W Hussain, and N B Singh. 2011. Engineering cold stress tolerance in crop plants. Curr Genomics 12 (1): 30-43. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3129041/?tool=pubmed

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19234675

Top Ten Facts about Biotech/GM Crops in 2012

A new overview of biotech crops in 2012

FACT # 1. 2012 was the 17th year of successful commercialization of biotech crops.

Biotech crops were first commercialized in 1996. Hectarage of biotech crops increased every single year between 1996 to 2012 with 12 years of double digit growth rates, reflecting the confidence and trust of millions of risk-averse farmers around the world, in both developing and industrial countries.

FACT # 2. Biotech crop hectares increased by an unprecedented 100–fold from 1.7 million hectares in 1996, to over 170 million hectares in 2012.

This makes biotech crops the fastest adopted crop technology in recent times – the reason – they deliver benefits. In 2012, hectarage of biotech crops grew at an annual growth rate of 6%, up 10.3 million from 160 million hectares in 2011. Millions of farmers in ~30 countries worldwide, have made more than 100 million independent decisions to plant an accumulated hectarage of ~1.5 billion hectares, equivalent to 50% more than the total land mass of the US or China; this reflects the fact that biotech crops deliver sustainable and substantial, socioeconomic and environmental benefits.

FACT # 3. For the first time in 2012, developing countries planted more hectares than industrial countries.

Notably, developing countries grew more, 52%, of global biotech crops in 2012 than industrial countries at 48%. In 2012, growth rate for biotech crops was at least three times as fast, and five times as large in developing countries, at 11% or 8.7 million hectares, versus 3% or 1.6 million hectares in industrial countries.

FACT # 4. Number of countries growing biotech crops.

Of the 28 countries which planted biotech crops in 2012, 20 were developing and 8 were industrial countries; two new countries, Sudan (Bt cotton) and Cuba (Bt maize) planted biotech crops for the first time in 2012. Germany and Sweden could not plant the biotech potato "Amflora" because it ceased to be marketed. Stacked traits are an important feature – 13 countries planted biotech crops with two or more traits in 2012, and notably, 10 of the 13 were developing countries – 43.7 million hectares, or more than a quarter, of the 170 million hectares were stacked in 2012.

FACT # 5. Number of farmers growing biotech crops.

In 2012, a record 17.3 million farmers, up 0.6 million from 2011, grew biotech crops – remarkably over 90%, or over 15 million, were small resource-poor farmers in developing countries. Farmers are the masters of risk-aversion and in 2012, a record 7.2 million small farmers in China and another 7.2 million in India, elected to plant almost 15 million hectares of Bt cotton, because of the significant benefits it offers. In 2012 over one-third of a million small farmers in the Philippines benefited from

biotech maize.

FACT # 6. The top 5 countries planting biotech crops.

The US continued to be the lead country with 69.5 million hectares, with an average ~ 90% adoption across all crops. Brazil was ranked second, and for the fourth consecutive year, was the engine of growth globally, increasing its hectarage of biotech crops more than any other country – an impressive record increase of 6.3 million hectares, up 21% from 2011, reaching 36.6 million hectares. Argentina retained its third place with 23.9 million hectares. Canada was fourth at 11.8 million hectares with 8.4 million hectares of canola at a record 97.5% adoption. India was fifth, growing a record 10.8 million hectares of Bt cotton with an adoption rate of 93%, In 2012, each of the top 10 countries planted more than 1 million hectares providing a broad foundation for future growth

FACT # 7. Status of biotech crops in Africa.

The continent continued to make progress with South Africa increasing its biotech area by a record 0.6 million hectares to reach 2.9 million hectares; Sudan joined South Africa, Burkina Faso and Egypt, to bring the total number of African biotech countries commercializing biotech crops to four. Five countries, Cameroon, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria and Uganda conducted field trials of biotech crops, the penultimate step prior to approval for commercialization. The lack of appropriate, science-based and cost/time-effective regulatory systems continue to be the major constraint to adoption. Responsible, rigorous but not onerous, regulation is needed, particularly for small and poor developing countries.

FACT # 8. Status of biotech crops in the EU.

Five EU countries planted a record 129,071 hectares of biotech Bt maize, up 13% from 2011. Spain led the EU with 116,307 hectares of Bt maize, up 20% from 2011 with a record 30% adoption rate in 2012.

FACT # 9. Benefits offered by biotech crops.

From 1996 to 2011, biotech crops contributed to Food Security, Sustainability and the Environment/Climate Change by: increasing crop production valued at US$98.2 billion; providing a better environment, by saving 473 million kg a.i. of pesticides; in 2011 alone reducing CO2 emissions by 23.1 billion kg, equivalent to taking 10.2 million cars off the road for one year; conserving biodiversity by saving 108.7 million hectares of land; and helped alleviate poverty for >15.0 million small farmers and their families totaling >50 million people, who are some of the poorest people in the world. Biotech crops are essential but are not a panacea and adherence to good farming practices such as rotations and resistance management, are a must for biotech crops as they are for conventional crops.

FACT # 10. Future Prospects.

Cautiously optimistic with more modest annual gains likely due to the already high rates of adoption in the principal biotech crops in mature markets in both developing and industrial countries.

NOTE: First posted at http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/44/toptenfacts/default.asp)

Stealing weather tools is a 15-year jail term, DOST-PAGASA warns

By Rodolfo P. de Guzman, S&T Media Service, DOST-STII               

The Department of Science and Technology (DOST) -  Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration (PAGASA) warns of stiff penalties for those thinking of stealing, taking, and tampering government equipment  for weather monitoring, risk reduction,  and disaster preparedness. 

The penalties  range from two to 15 years imprisonment and/or fines   from P200,000 to P 3 million. Further, under R.A. 10344 or An Act Penalizing the Unauthorized Taking, Stealing, Keeping or Tampering of Government Risk Reduction and Preparedness Equipment, Accessories and Similar Facilities, the mere possession of said equipment is already prima facie evidence for prosecution and imposition of penalties.

Congressman Angelo Palmones of AGHAM Party List, principal author of the law, stressed that the penalties are  bigger because the consequences of stealing the equipment are far greater than ordinary theft. “An example of this is what happened in Agno River where the cables connecting the sensors were stolen and so no warning was given to the people, resulting in damages,” said Palmones.

On the other hand, Dr. Renato U. Solidum, Phivolcs  director said, “The role of the community and the people is very important and the local government units must be vigilant in helping safeguard the equipment in their areas. “

During the open forum, veteran broadcaster Mario Garcia, formerly of PTV 4, suggested that PAGASA inscribe tamper-proof and visibly identifiable labels on the equipment bearing the words “Government Property” for easy identification. By doing so, Garcia said it would be easier for the government to punish violators.

“When I was a director in SBMA in Subic, we formed the Social Fencing Group that created a network of informants in the communities who provided them information as to possible perpetrators because they are the ones who knew the residents, ” Garcia shared.

Other speakers during the public hearing were Lita Suerte Felipe, legislative liaison specialist of DOST; Dr. Vicente Malano of PAGASA; and Usec. Corazon Jimenez and Col. Gerry Ilagan of the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority.