2-Plants: Monsanto's gene-altered crops experience resistance inIndia
- To: GENET-news <GENETfirstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: 2-Plants: Monsanto's gene-altered crops experience resistance inIndia
- From: GENET <email@example.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2003 15:38:57 +0100
- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
- Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Sender: email@example.com
genet-news mailing list
-------------------------------- GENET-news --------------------------------
TITLE: Monsanto's gene-altered crops experience resistance in India
SOURCE: The Associated Press/The Seattle Times, USA, by S. Srinivasan
DATE: Feb 10, 2003
------------------ archive: http://www.gene.ch/genet.html ------------------
Monsanto's gene-altered crops experience resistance in India
BENAKENAKONDA, India -- Here, under a blazing sun in a southern Indian
cotton field 9,000 miles from U.S. biotechnology giant Monsanto's
headquarters, Chikkappa Nilakanti has literally sown seeds of discontent.
Nilakanti is one of 55,000 farmers in India who recently planted cotton
genetically engineered by Monsanto to fight pests without pesticides.
India permitted the crop into the country last year after a raucous four-
year battle and that decision is still being hotly contested in a country
that has always been skeptical of biotechnology.
Even now, no edible biotechnology crops are legally grown for consumption
in India, the world's second-most populous country.
Nilakanti's small plot of land and thousands like it throughout India
have become yet another front line in the global battle over
biotechnology, which is demonized as the near-exclusive domain of the
Still, slumping U.S. biotechnology companies are aggressively pressing to
sell their wares in new places overseas, including pressuring the Bush
administration to force open European markets.
St. Louis-based Monsanto is looking to shake off a yearlong profit slide
sparked by patent expirations, increased worldwide concern over
biotechnology and a drought at home. The company forced its longtime
chief executive to step down last month and promised angry stockholders
it would do better this year. And so it is pinning some of its turnaround
hopes on emerging international markets, including India.
Inefficiency in production
India's cotton industry is notoriously inefficient: It has the most land
under cotton cultivation but is only the third-largest producer of
cotton. Consequently, Monsanto's promise of improving yields by as much
as 60 percent resonated with the government.
Monsanto's cotton seed is spliced with genetic material taken from
bacterium called bacillus thuringiensis and commonly referred to as BT.
The bacterium harms bollworms but not people.
The biotech seed costs three times as much as the natural stuff, but
Monsanto and its Indian partner, Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Co., promise
that the cotton crop, brand name Bollgard, will increase farmers' yields
and cut costs because fewer chemical pesticides are needed.
But Nilakanti and pockets of other Indian cotton farmers who planted the
biotech cotton seed complained that the pricey technology was a bad
investment because their yields have not improved. The ruinous boll
weevils have not disappeared.
Nilakanti paid about $33 for a 450-gram packet of BT seeds, nearly four
times the cost of traditional seeds.
Standing in his field, Nilakanti watched boll weevils pop up their heads
as if in a greeting and then resume their business of eating away his
"BT bedaappa," Nilakanti said in his native tongue, Kannada. "I do not
Meanwhile, the same anti-biotechnology activists who fought to keep
biotech cotton out of India have continued with their vocal campaign.
A survey conducted by an anti-biotechnology advocacy group, Research
Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology, called Monsanto's
technology a failure, saying it has left "farmers in a great economic and
livelihood crisis," and led to the emergence of "new pests and diseases."
Government and company officials dispute those findings and argue that
the complaining farmers are in the minority. Even more gene-altered
cotton is expected to be planted this year.
"BT cotton has done very well in all the five states where it was
planted," said Ranjana Smatecek, Monsanto India's public-affairs director.
Smatecek said Monsanto's genetically engineered cotton doesn't repel all
bollworms but does reduce the amount of pesticide needed to control the
pest. He said it's not surprising that farmers are finding bollworms on
some of their engineered crops, because it takes up to three days for the
insects to die.
Environment minister T.R. Baalu told Indian Parliament that Monsanto's
cotton had performed "satisfactorily."
In Friday's issue of the journal Science, two Western professors
published a paper supporting the government's position. David Zilberman
of the University of California, Berkeley, and Matin Qaim of the
University of Bonn said they found that BT dramatically increased yields
and significantly reduced pesticide use.
The study's authors argue that BT cotton and similar technologies
involving genetically modified organisms, or GMOs, hold particular
promise for poor farmers in developing nations.
"It would be a shame," Zilberman said, "if anti-GMO fears kept important
technology away from those who stand to benefit the most from it."
AP biotechnology writer Paul Elias contributed to this report.