Office of the Gene Technology Regulator:
Background information, Fact Sheets:
http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/Content/factsheets
Information specific to GWD wheat:
http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/Content/dir112rarmp-toc~dir112rarmp-ch1~dir112rarmp-ch1s5
GMO Compass - Database for information on genetically modified organisms (European)
Balanced views, neither strongly pro nor anti GMO
http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/home/
Discussion of the pros, cons and science of gene use regulation technologies (GURT), sometimes described as 'terminator genes'.
http://www.adonline.id.au/terminatorseeds/
IFLScience - What you need to know about Genetically Modified Organisms
http://www.iflscience.com/environment/myths-and-controversies-gmos-0/
CSIRO RNA interference technology - part of the science behind GWD wheat.
http://www.csiro.au/en/Research/Farming-food/Innovation-and-technology-for-the-future/Gene-technology/RNAi
Centre for Strategic and International Studies - CSIS is a bipartisan, nonprofit organization headquartered in Washington, D.C. The Center’s 220 full-time staff and large network of affiliated scholars conduct research and analysis and develop policy initiatives that look to the future and anticipate change. Blog article on genetic modification:
Genetically Engineered plants and the Arbitrary Line in the Sand.
By: Dr. John McMurdy, International Research and Biotechnology Advisor, Bureau for Food Security, USAID
. The views expressed here are his own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID.
While public opinion has generally been supportive of the use of science to improve agricultural productivity, it is obvious that opinions drastically differ when it comes to the process of genetic engineering (GE). This difference in opinion may be explained by the general public perception that a plant is somehow more fundamentally changed by the process of genetic engineering than by other means. On this point, it is constructive to explore the different ways in which science has quite successfully contributed to the improvement of crop performance through genetic “modification”, both in a controlled and random fashion.
In order to utilize existing genetic diversity (or biodiversity), traditional plant breeding has been applied in some fashion as long as humans have practiced agriculture. Sexually compatible plants are cross-pollinated (or crossed) to produce offspring, each of which contains a blend of traits from the parent plants. Offspring displaying a trait of interest, say insect resistance, are selected based on the plants physical characteristics, or phenotype (e.g. does it resist insects?). This process is then repeated over successive generations with further selection based on other characteristics (yield, grain quality, etc.) until the breeders/farmers are satisfied with the overall phenotype and the variety is released.
While plant breeding has served society well for centuries, there are two fundamental limiting factors. The accessible biodiversity is limited by sexually compatible species and the selection of offspring based on phenotype is imprecise and time consuming. Modern technology has allowed plant breeders to overcome both these limiting factors.
Laboratory or “tissue culture” processes such as embryo rescue and protoplast fusion allow viable offspring to be created from species not sexually compatible in nature, greatly increasing the accessible genetic base. Marker Assisted Selection (MAS) drastically speeds up the breeding process by utilizing gene sequencing technology. In this approach, breeders leverage the existing knowledge of linkages between gene sequences and plant characteristics to identify offspring likely exhibiting beneficial traits, which is significantly more efficient than waiting for plants to first grow, and then assessing the phenotype.
Doubled Haploid Breeding approaches use a “doubling” of chromosomes to hasten plant breeding. In order to generate offspring with predictable genetic traits, it is advantageous that the parental plants have identical genes on each paired chromosome (in the case of “diploid” organisms with two copies of each chromosome), termed “homozygous”. Creating homozygous plants can be time consuming for plant breeders, usually taking at least 6 generations. In the doubled haploid process, single chromosomes are “copied” during the reproductive process using both tissue culture techniques and crosses with specific varieties. As a result of this copying, wholly homozygous plants can be created in a single generation.
Although these tools have tremendously improved the use and utilization of existing biodiversity, important farmer desired traits still may not exist in the wider accessible genetic pool. Accordingly, additional tools have been developed to create new sources of biodiversity including chemical and radiation induced mutation breeding and genetic engineering.
Mutation Breeding uses mutagenic chemicals or irradiation to create artificial biodiversity by inducing random genetic mutations. These mutations can be unstable and lethal to plants; however, they may also fortuitously create novel and beneficial genetic elements not available in other sources of accessible biodiversity. The plants are mutated and cultivated, and viable plants are selected on the basis of characteristics of interest. Mutagenic breeding has produced thousands of varieties (cereals, fruits, vegetable, cotton) released for breeding programs and direct use, and includes such products as ruby red grapefruit and premium barley for scotch whiskey.
Somaclonal Variation capitalizes on the random genetic variation that occurs when plants are regenerated through a tissue culture process. While this variation can be problematic when tissue culture approaches are used to create uniform planting materials, it can also be an asset in creating new genetic diversity and potentially beneficial characteristics through the rearrangement of chromosomes and mutations.
Genetic Engineering (GE) utilizes recombinant DNA (rDNA) technology to insert genetic elements conferring beneficial traits (i.e. insect resistance, water use efficiency, herbicide tolerance). By using rDNA, the pool of biodiversity that can be utilized is widened beyond what is possible using other means, and the targeted nature of the genetic element insertion prevents the introduction of superfluous and undesirable additional genetic information, as occurs in other breeding approaches.
While all these preceding techniques fall under the umbrella of “biotechnology”, aside from GE approaches, they are generally accepted without controversy or public concern while only the GE methods are highly regulated and scrutinized for potential unintended consequences. As novel and “unnatural” genetic elements can be introduced by tissue culture methods, mutation, or rDNA, the argument that genetic enhancement through GE presents a wholly unique set of challenges regarding food safety or environmental impact is inaccurate. Additionally, unlike traditional approaches to crop improvement, varieties developed using GE are evaluated on both phenotype and genotypic characteristics (i.e. was the gene inserted? where was it inserted? how many copies were inserted? how does the gene work?). On this point, one can straightforwardly argue that the additional knowledge of a gene’s function and how it has been inserted makes plants developed using GE less likely to exhibit any unintended characteristics than crop improvement using methods that select only based on the plant’s phenotype (i.e. does it look good?).
Furthermore, as technologies to manipulate genetic elements continue to mature, categorizing varieties as either GE or non-GE will become more challenging. For example, approaches such as RNA interference (RNAi) and intraspecies shifting of gene location (cisgenics) do not express any new proteins, while new technologies such as zinc finger nucleases allow targeted cleaving and inactivation of genes. Even more transformational, as synthetic biology continues to progress, an entire plant genome may someday be synthesized from scratch, possibly using only genes from the species of interest, but having unparalleled control over gene expression and interaction. What will be regulated? What will be “acceptable”?
As many have stated, it is critical that all tools be utilized to improve global food security and develop more sustainable agricultural production systems, including the use of genetic engineering. Let’s not let the misperception that GE is somehow more “unnatural” than other breeding techniques define an arbitrary line in the sand and limit our arsenal.
http://csis.org/blog/genetically-engineered-plants-and-arbitrary-line-sand/?zbrandid=4263
Anti GMO Opinion:
Website for Cornucopia Institution - a US organisation representing small family style farms.
Interesting and thought-provoking discussion about the motive behind policy and legislation:
http://www.cornucopia.org/
Greenpeace International
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/agriculture/problem/genetic-engineering/
Pro GMO Opinion:
David Tribe, University of Melbourne is a prominent Australian commentator on GMO. He contributes to several websites:
http://theconversation.edu.au/frankenfood-or-crops-of-the-future-gaps-in-the-perception-of-gm-food-safety-7713
His own blog, GMO pundit can be found here:
http://gmopundit.blogspot.com.au/2012/08/frankenfood-or-crops-of-future-gaps-in.html
Michael Eisen Blog post on the antiGMO movement
I'm an evolutionary biologist at UC Berkeley and an Investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. My research focuses on the evolution and population genomics of gene regulation in flies, and on the ways that microbes control animal behavior. I am a strong proponent of open science, and a co-founder of the Public Library of Science. And most importantly, I am a Red Sox fan.
http://www.michaeleisen.org/blog/?p=1082
Journal Articles:
Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OTGR):
An Australian Federal Government Office, responsible for reviewing the use of genetic modification in Australia. Applications are submitted, and the scientists and policy-makers at the OTGR decide on their potential impact on the environment, safety, regulatory issues etc.
This is the link to the specific report about Glucan Water-Dikinase wheat, but there is plenty to look at if you go to the Home page.
http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/Content/dir112rarmp-toc~dir112rarmp-ch1~dir112rarmp-ch1s5
List of Journal article references - either to the summary (abstract) or linked to the full text version. You could google for full text using http://scholar.google.com.au/ or try accessing the abstract-only links via your library.
Bruce, T. A. (2012). GM as a route for delivery ofsustainable crop protection. Journal of Experimental Botany, 63(2),
537-541. doi:10.1093/jxb/err281
Conlon, M. A., Kerr, C. A., McSweeney, C. S., Dunne,
R. A., Shaw, J. M., Kang, S., . . . Topping, D. (2012). Resistant starches protect against colonic DNA damage and alter microbiota and gene expression inrats fed a Western diet. The Journal of Nutrition, 142(5), 832-840.
doi:10.3945/jn.111.147660
Davison, J. (2010). GM plants: Science, politics andEC regulations. Plant Science, 178, 94-98.
doi:10.1016/j.plantsci.2009.12.005
Ellis, J. G., Rohit, M., Kota, R., Dodds, P. N.,
McFadden, H., Lawrence, G., . . . Lagudah, E. (2007). Wheat Rust Resistancework at CSIRO. Australian Journal of Agricultural Research, 58, 507-511.
doi:10.1071/AR06151
Finkel, E. (2011). Brave new wheat. Cosmos, Issue
41. (W. da Silva, Ed.) Sydney, NSW, Australia: Cosmos Media Pty Ltd.
Gregory, P. J., & George, T. S. (2011). Feedingnine billion: the challenge to sustainable crop production. Journal of
Experimental Botany, 62(15), 5233-5239. doi:10.1093/jxb/err232
Herring, R. J. (2010). Epistemic brokerage in thebio-property narrative: contributions to explaining opposition to transgenictechnologies in agriculture. New Biotechnology, 27(5), 614-622.
doi:10.1016/j.nbt.2010.05.017
Jansen, K., & Gupta, A. (2009). Anticipating thefuture: 'Biotechnology for the poor' as unrealised promise? Futures, 41,
436-445. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2009.01.008
Kearney, J. (2010). Food consumption trends anddrivers. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B - Biological
Sciences, 365, 2793-2807. doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0149
Miller, H. I., Morandini, P., & Ammann, K. (2008).
Is biotechnology a victim of anti-science bias in scientific journals? Trends
in Biotechnology, 26(3), 122-125. doi:10.1016/j.tibtech.2007.11.011
Naqvi, S., Ramessar, K., Farre, G., Sabalza, M.,
Miralpeix, B., Twyman, R. M., . . . Christou, P. (2011). High-value productsfrom transgenic maize. Biotechnology Advances, 29, 40-53.
doi:10.1016/j.biotechadv.2010.08.009
Ral, J.-P., Bowerman, A. F., Li, Z., Sirault, X.,
Furbank, R., Pritchard, J. R., . . . Morell, M. K. (2012). Down-regulation ofGlucan, Water-Dikinase activity in wheat endosperm increases vegetative biomassand yield. Plant Biotechnology Journal, 10, 871-882.
doi:10.1111/j.1467-7652.2012.00711.x
Sands, D. C., Morris, C. E., Dratz, E. A., &
Pilgeram, A. L. (2009). Elevating optimal human nutrition to a central goal ofplant breeding and production of plant-based foods. Plant Science, 177,
377-389. doi:10.1016/j.plantsci.2009.07.011
_______________________________________________
Media Articles
• From:The Australian
• August 06, 201212:00AM
URL:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/super-yielding-wheat-may-solve-food-crisis/story-e6frg8y6-1226443415291
“We see collaborations as a good way to get the best results from the funding available and we’ll be working closely with others on developing traits such as drought and frost tolerance, improved yields and better nitrogen use efficiency,” Mr Harvey said.
According to Mr Harvey, Australia’s crop research and development budget contributed about 2 per cent of the world’s research, so the GRDC needed to tap into other networks to ensure Australian farmers got access to cutting edge research.
Along with the work done with the major public international breeding concerns, he said GRDC was also looking at developing closer links with large private breeders.
“The six largest biotech businesses are spending $5 billion a year on research and development; it just dwarfs what can be done in the public sector.
“We feel that by engaging with the private sector, we’ll get access to know-how and technologies that aren’t publicly available.”
He said the Australian breeding industry had undergone a massive change over the past decade.
“Wheat breeding in Australia has gone commercial, and there’s also been a big swing towards foreign investment in our breeding industry.
“You look at major Australian breeders and they have generally got a link with a multinational business, such as AGT and Limagrain, or Intergrain and Monsanto.”
Mr Harvey said Australian farmers would need to continue to support the end point royalty (EPR) system if they wanted new, improved varieties to hit the market.
“In Australia, 75pc of the crop is eligible for EPRs and 85pc of that is paid, making it one of the few places in the world where there is a good environment for companies operating on EPRs.”
Mr Harvey was upbeat about the prospects of the Australian grains industry.
“In the short-term, we may face some pressure from lower cost producers in places such as Argentina, the Black Sea nations and eastern Europe, but in the long-term, everything looks rosy, with good demand for our products.”
He said there had been good investment in research and development in Australia, including upgrades to the IA Watson research institute at Narrabri and the opening of the Australian grains seed bank at Horsham.
In terms of varietal advances, Mr Harvey said he was excited by work with the GWD wheat gene, which had been found to increase yield substantially.
“These findings came about from a project designed to look at starch levels in wheat, but they found they got larger plants with 20-30pc more biomass, and this has tentatively been shown to go all the way through to grain yield, so it will be interesting to see further research there.”
It is not just wheat research that is seeing breakthroughs, however.
“In canola, there are good results with getting higher levels of Omega 3 oils into canola oil.”
“We have found one hectare of canola can provide the equivalent Omega 3 oil of 10,000 fish.”
http://theland.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/grains-and-cropping/wheat/working-on-wheat-variability/2619487.aspx?storypage=2
World Bank Press Release on Food Price Volatility
We cannot allow short-term food-price spikes to have damaging long-term consequences for the world's most poor and vulnerable” – World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim
WASHINGTON, July 30, 2012—Given the exceptional drought in the US, current crop conditions in other grain producing regions, and the resulting increase in international food prices, the World Bank today expressed concern for the impacts of this volatility on the world's poor, who are highly vulnerable to increases in food prices.
“When food prices rise sharply, families cope by pulling their kids out of school and eating cheaper, less nutritious food, which can have catastrophic life-long effects on the social, physical, and mental well being of millions of young people,” said World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim. “The World Bank and our partners are monitoring this situation closely so we can help governments put policies in place to help people better cope.”
“In the short-term, measures such as school feeding programs, conditional cash transfers, and food-for-work programs can help to ease pressure on the poor,” continued Kim. “In the medium- to long-term, the world needs strong and stable policies and sustained investments in agriculture in poor countries. We cannot allow short-term food-price spikes to have damaging long-term consequences for the world's most poor and vulnerable.”
Thus far, crop projections do not indicate the potential for actual shortages in the major grains; however, stocks are low, and the harvests will continue to be dependent upon global weather, which leaves prices more vulnerable to higher volatility.
Food price volatility creates unpredictability in the market and poses fundamental food security risks for consumers and governments. Volatility also discourages needed investment in agriculture for development due to increased financial risks and uncertainty for producers and traders.
While the prices of many food staples have risen sharply, the Bank noted that the current conditions differ from the 2008 crisis. In 2008, while other grains increased in price, rice and wheat prices rose the most, although the price fell quite substantially in 2009 due to a notable supply response by farmers seeking to benefit from higher prices. In 2012, prices have risen across all the non-rice grains - wheat, corn and soybeans:
In 2008, the price of rice more than tripled, which had a huge negative impact on the poor, especially in Asia. Although current rice prices remain at elevated levels, existing rice stocks are relatively comfortable. In addition, current prices of crude oil, fertilizers and international freight are at lower levels than in 2008, which will both ease the costs of importing food, and also the sowing and growing of next season’s crop.
The impact of the U.S. drought on global markets is exacerbated by other countries also currently suffering from weather-related production issues. Almost continuous rain is causing problems for the wheat crop in many European countries, whereas the wheat crops in Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan have been hit hard by a lack of rain. In India, monsoon rainfall is about 20 percent below the long-term annual average. July is the critical planting month and there may be major negative implications if rains do not pick up.
Should the current situation escalate, the World Bank Group stands ready to assist client countries through measures such as increased agriculture and agriculture-related investment, policy advice, fast-track financing, the multi-donor Global Agriculture and Food Security Program, and risk management products. We are also coordinating with UN agencies through the High-Level Task Force on the Global Food Security Crisis and with non-governmental organizations, as well as supporting the Partnership for Agricultural Market Information System (AMIS) to improve food market transparency and to help governments make informed responses to global food price spikes.
The World Bank has long cautioned that we can expect to see volatile, higher than average grain prices until at least 2015. In the poorest countries, where people spend up to two-thirds of their daily income on food, rising prices are a threat to global growth and social stability. However, higher prices can bring desperately needed income to poor farmers, enabling them to invest, increase their production and thereby become part of the global food security solution.
There are nearly one billion hungry people worldwide. More than 60 percent of the world’s hungry are women. Malnutrition contributes to infant, child and maternal illness; decreased learning capacity; lower productivity and higher mortality. One-third of all child deaths globally are attributed to under-nutrition, and up to 80 percent of our brain architecture develops during the first 1,000 days of life, making access to nutritious food critical, particularly for young children.
How the World Bank is helping
http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/2012/07/30/food-price-volatility-growing-concern-world-bank-stands-ready-respond?cid=EXT_TWBN_D_EXT
European Crop Protection Authority - Press Release on Global food pricing
FAO reports 6% rise in global food price index, citing untimely rains, drought and production difficulties as major factors
As global food prices return to dangerously high levels, the UK Crop Protection Association (CPA) is warning that the EU must re-think its stance on modern, science-based agriculture or risk sleep-walking into a food crisis with potentially devastating socio-economic and humanitarian consequences.
The Food and Agriculture Organisation’s global food price index increased sharply last month as extreme weather conditions hit harvest prospects in many parts of the world, prompting fresh fears of a return to the soaring prices, food riots and export bans of 2008.
FAO reported a 6% rise in the global food price index in July, citing untimely rains in Brazil, drought conditions in the United States, and production difficulties in Russia as major factors.
According to FAO, cereal values increased by 17% and sugar prices rose by 12%, while extensive drought damage in the US pushed maize prices up by almost 23% in a single month.
“With heightened concern over the combined impact of population growth and climate change on global food security, these latest statistics from FAO should serve as a wake-up call to Europe’s policy-makers,” said CPA chairman Stephen Henning.
“As one of the world’s major food producing economies, the EU has significant capacity to influence global food prices and availability, but we are at risk of sleep-walking into a food crisis unless current policies that impede or restrict production-boosting technologies are reversed.
“Innovations in plant science, for example, from novel crop protection products to improvements in the plants they are used on, offer major opportunities for Europe’s farmers to deliver sustainable gains in agricultural productivity. Yet such advances are discouraged by a seemingly anti-productive farming policy agenda in Brussels.
“This latest spike in global food prices highlights the fragility of the world’s food supply base, and sends a clear message to policy-makers of the need to embrace developments in agricultural science and innovation to ensure production can keep pace with burgeoning demand,” said Mr Henning. “Doing nothing is not an option.”
http://www.ecpa.eu/news-item/food/08-10-2012/689/global-food-price-rise-must-prompt-eu-re-think-science-based-agricultu
AV Content_______________________________________________
Media Articles
Super-yielding wheat may solve food crisis
• by: SUE NEALES, RURAL REPORTER• From:The Australian
• August 06, 201212:00AM
A FLUKE experiment tinkering with the genes of Australian wheat has
created a new variety that could rocket wheat yields by 30 per cent a
year.
The chance discovery by a CSIRO research team is considered
so significant that it has been heralded worldwide as a possible
solution to future global food shortages.
Grains Research &
Development Corporation chief John Harvey described the surprise
breeding breakthrough as one of the most exciting scientific advances
for wheat in decades.
"It was a lucky, serendipitous discovery," a
delighted Mr Harvey told a national grain industry conference in
Melbourne. "Researchers at CSIRO's division of Plant Industry were
looking at ways to change starch in wheat (for industrial processing
reasons) and noticed when they grew (these new wheat types) the plants
ended up 30 per cent larger, with 30 per cent bigger heads and a 30 per
cent increase in grain yield."
The new "super-wheat", bred by a
research team in Canberra headed by Matthew Morell, is being grown in
field trials in three locations around Australia.
It is hoped it
will provide the momentous leap in wheat productivity that researchers
have spent years searching for, after worryingly slow advances in recent
times.
Jeremy Burdon, CSIRO Plant Industry chief, said yesterday
that after the "green revolution" of the 1960s and 70s, when new
varieties resistant to common diseases and pests brought giant wheat
yield gains, there had been only incremental productivity boosts in
recent years.
"The new plant breeding challenge now is, unlike in
the past where it was about developing disease resistance, about
increasing wheat biomass and grain head yields," Dr Burdon said.
"That's
why this new development is potentially so significant; a 30 per cent
yield increase is an extraordinary achievement if it can be replicated
in the field."
With 650 million tonnes of wheat grown annually
around the world -- Australia grew a record 29.5 million tonnes last
year -- wheat is one of the most important food crops needed to feed the
growing global population of nine billion by 2050.
World wheat
prices hit a record high last week following major droughts in the US,
Canada and Russia, and world grain prices are expected to continue to
rise over the next five to 10 years.
"With this technology, we
see more vigorous wheat with larger seed heads, and larger seed," said
Bruce Lee, director of CSIRO's Food Futures Flagship.
"If we can
achieve significant yield increases in the field, this will have a major
impact on food production on a global scale."
CSIRO and
grower-funded GRDC jointly own the new wheat "GWD variety", bred using
gene manipulation and slicing techniques that turned off a naturally
occurring enzyme gene in wheat's genetic makeup.
Dr Morell and
his CSIRO Plant Industry team were originally looking to breed a new
wheat line with a lower starch content and viscosity, to make industrial
wheat flour processing easier. While the CSIRO team has achieved that
aim, the discovery of the super-high-yielding new wheat has bowled over
the international plant breeding world.
Multinational chemical
and seed company Bayer last week signed a joint venture agreement with
CSIRO and the GRDC to take the new high-yielding super GM wheat variety
through to international commercialisation.
"This is a complex
scientific challenge and a long road for development, which we believe
will benefit from partnerships with some of the best innovators in the
world to help wheat farmers access these significant gains sooner,"
Bayer Crop Science business head Mathias Kremer said.
Mr Harvey
said while Bayer would help further development and refinement of the GM
high-yielding trait "outside Australia", all the initial field trials
would be located within in Australia.
URL:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/super-yielding-wheat-may-solve-food-crisis/story-e6frg8y6-1226443415291
Working on wheat variability
23 Aug, 2012 04:00 AM
WORK on breeding wheat varieties able to withstand the wide range
of abiotic stresses, in particular heat and frost, will be a major
target for the Grains Research and Development Corporation (GRDC),
according to its managing director John Harvey. To achieve this
outcome, he said the corporation had embarked on a number of
public-private joint ventures with private research partners and would
also continue to work closely with international wheat breeding
organisations, such as the International Maize and Wheat Improvement
Centre (CIMMYT) and International Center for Agricultural Research in
the Dry Areas (ICARDA). “We see collaborations as a good way to get the best results from the funding available and we’ll be working closely with others on developing traits such as drought and frost tolerance, improved yields and better nitrogen use efficiency,” Mr Harvey said.
According to Mr Harvey, Australia’s crop research and development budget contributed about 2 per cent of the world’s research, so the GRDC needed to tap into other networks to ensure Australian farmers got access to cutting edge research.
Along with the work done with the major public international breeding concerns, he said GRDC was also looking at developing closer links with large private breeders.
“The six largest biotech businesses are spending $5 billion a year on research and development; it just dwarfs what can be done in the public sector.
“We feel that by engaging with the private sector, we’ll get access to know-how and technologies that aren’t publicly available.”
He said the Australian breeding industry had undergone a massive change over the past decade.
“Wheat breeding in Australia has gone commercial, and there’s also been a big swing towards foreign investment in our breeding industry.
“You look at major Australian breeders and they have generally got a link with a multinational business, such as AGT and Limagrain, or Intergrain and Monsanto.”
Mr Harvey said Australian farmers would need to continue to support the end point royalty (EPR) system if they wanted new, improved varieties to hit the market.
“In Australia, 75pc of the crop is eligible for EPRs and 85pc of that is paid, making it one of the few places in the world where there is a good environment for companies operating on EPRs.”
Mr Harvey was upbeat about the prospects of the Australian grains industry.
“In the short-term, we may face some pressure from lower cost producers in places such as Argentina, the Black Sea nations and eastern Europe, but in the long-term, everything looks rosy, with good demand for our products.”
He said there had been good investment in research and development in Australia, including upgrades to the IA Watson research institute at Narrabri and the opening of the Australian grains seed bank at Horsham.
In terms of varietal advances, Mr Harvey said he was excited by work with the GWD wheat gene, which had been found to increase yield substantially.
“These findings came about from a project designed to look at starch levels in wheat, but they found they got larger plants with 20-30pc more biomass, and this has tentatively been shown to go all the way through to grain yield, so it will be interesting to see further research there.”
It is not just wheat research that is seeing breakthroughs, however.
“In canola, there are good results with getting higher levels of Omega 3 oils into canola oil.”
“We have found one hectare of canola can provide the equivalent Omega 3 oil of 10,000 fish.”
http://theland.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/grains-and-cropping/wheat/working-on-wheat-variability/2619487.aspx?storypage=2
World Bank Press Release on Food Price Volatility
We cannot allow short-term food-price spikes to have damaging long-term consequences for the world's most poor and vulnerable” – World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim
WASHINGTON, July 30, 2012—Given the exceptional drought in the US, current crop conditions in other grain producing regions, and the resulting increase in international food prices, the World Bank today expressed concern for the impacts of this volatility on the world's poor, who are highly vulnerable to increases in food prices.
“When food prices rise sharply, families cope by pulling their kids out of school and eating cheaper, less nutritious food, which can have catastrophic life-long effects on the social, physical, and mental well being of millions of young people,” said World Bank Group President Jim Yong Kim. “The World Bank and our partners are monitoring this situation closely so we can help governments put policies in place to help people better cope.”
“In the short-term, measures such as school feeding programs, conditional cash transfers, and food-for-work programs can help to ease pressure on the poor,” continued Kim. “In the medium- to long-term, the world needs strong and stable policies and sustained investments in agriculture in poor countries. We cannot allow short-term food-price spikes to have damaging long-term consequences for the world's most poor and vulnerable.”
Thus far, crop projections do not indicate the potential for actual shortages in the major grains; however, stocks are low, and the harvests will continue to be dependent upon global weather, which leaves prices more vulnerable to higher volatility.
Food price volatility creates unpredictability in the market and poses fundamental food security risks for consumers and governments. Volatility also discourages needed investment in agriculture for development due to increased financial risks and uncertainty for producers and traders.
While the prices of many food staples have risen sharply, the Bank noted that the current conditions differ from the 2008 crisis. In 2008, while other grains increased in price, rice and wheat prices rose the most, although the price fell quite substantially in 2009 due to a notable supply response by farmers seeking to benefit from higher prices. In 2012, prices have risen across all the non-rice grains - wheat, corn and soybeans:
- Wheat prices are up over 50 percent since mid-June;
- The price for corn has risen more than 45 percent since mid-June; and
- Soybeans are up almost 30 percent since the beginning of June and up almost 60 percent since the end of last year.
In 2008, the price of rice more than tripled, which had a huge negative impact on the poor, especially in Asia. Although current rice prices remain at elevated levels, existing rice stocks are relatively comfortable. In addition, current prices of crude oil, fertilizers and international freight are at lower levels than in 2008, which will both ease the costs of importing food, and also the sowing and growing of next season’s crop.
The impact of the U.S. drought on global markets is exacerbated by other countries also currently suffering from weather-related production issues. Almost continuous rain is causing problems for the wheat crop in many European countries, whereas the wheat crops in Russia, Ukraine and Kazakhstan have been hit hard by a lack of rain. In India, monsoon rainfall is about 20 percent below the long-term annual average. July is the critical planting month and there may be major negative implications if rains do not pick up.
Should the current situation escalate, the World Bank Group stands ready to assist client countries through measures such as increased agriculture and agriculture-related investment, policy advice, fast-track financing, the multi-donor Global Agriculture and Food Security Program, and risk management products. We are also coordinating with UN agencies through the High-Level Task Force on the Global Food Security Crisis and with non-governmental organizations, as well as supporting the Partnership for Agricultural Market Information System (AMIS) to improve food market transparency and to help governments make informed responses to global food price spikes.
The World Bank has long cautioned that we can expect to see volatile, higher than average grain prices until at least 2015. In the poorest countries, where people spend up to two-thirds of their daily income on food, rising prices are a threat to global growth and social stability. However, higher prices can bring desperately needed income to poor farmers, enabling them to invest, increase their production and thereby become part of the global food security solution.
There are nearly one billion hungry people worldwide. More than 60 percent of the world’s hungry are women. Malnutrition contributes to infant, child and maternal illness; decreased learning capacity; lower productivity and higher mortality. One-third of all child deaths globally are attributed to under-nutrition, and up to 80 percent of our brain architecture develops during the first 1,000 days of life, making access to nutritious food critical, particularly for young children.
How the World Bank is helping
- In FY12, which ended June 30, new Bank Group commitments to agriculture and related sectors reached over $9 billion. This exceeded projected lending in the Bank’s Agriculture Action Plan, which foresaw an increase from an average of $4.1 billion annually in FY06-08 to $6.2-$8.3 billion annually in FY10-12. IBRD/IDA assistance in FY12 was the highest in 20 years.
- In response to drought in the Horn of Africa, the WBG is providing $1.8 billion to save lives, improve social protection, and foster economic recovery and drought resilience.
- A first-of-its-kind risk management product provided by the IFC will enable protection from volatile food prices for farmers, food producers, and consumers in developing countries.
- The Bank is supporting the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program (GAFSP), set up by the WBG in April 2010 at G20’s request. Seven countries and the Gates Foundation have pledged about $1.2 billion over 3 years, with $752 million received.
- The Global Food Price Crisis Response Program (GFRP) has reached 40 million people in 47 countries - through $1.6 billion in emergency support. From July 2012 onwards the Bank’s emergency response is channeled through the International Development Association’s Crisis Response Window and the recently approved Immediate Response Mechanism that will provide basis for emergency assistance in the future.
- The Scaling Up Nutrition (SUN) framework for action to address under-nutrition was endorsed by over 100 partners, including the World Bank.
- The WBG is coordinating with UN agencies through the High-Level Task Force on the Global Food Security Crisis and with non-governmental organizations.
- Supporting the Partnership for Agricultural Market Information System (AMIS) to improve food market transparency and help governments make informed responses to global food price spikes.
- Advocacy for more investment in agriculture research -- including through the Consultative Group on International Agriculture Research (CGIAR) – and monitoring agricultural trade to identify potential food shortages.
- Supporting improved nutrition among vulnerable groups through community nutrition programs aimed at increasing use of health services and improving care giving. As part of its response to the food crisis, the Bank has supported the provision of some 2.3 million school meals every day to children in low income countries.
- IFC will invest up to $1 billion in the Critical Commodities Finance Program, aimed to support trade in key agricultural and energy-related goods, to help reduce the risk of food and energy shortages, as well as improve food security for the world’s poorest.
http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/2012/07/30/food-price-volatility-growing-concern-world-bank-stands-ready-respond?cid=EXT_TWBN_D_EXT
European Crop Protection Authority - Press Release on Global food pricing
FAO reports 6% rise in global food price index, citing untimely rains, drought and production difficulties as major factors
As global food prices return to dangerously high levels, the UK Crop Protection Association (CPA) is warning that the EU must re-think its stance on modern, science-based agriculture or risk sleep-walking into a food crisis with potentially devastating socio-economic and humanitarian consequences.
The Food and Agriculture Organisation’s global food price index increased sharply last month as extreme weather conditions hit harvest prospects in many parts of the world, prompting fresh fears of a return to the soaring prices, food riots and export bans of 2008.
FAO reported a 6% rise in the global food price index in July, citing untimely rains in Brazil, drought conditions in the United States, and production difficulties in Russia as major factors.
According to FAO, cereal values increased by 17% and sugar prices rose by 12%, while extensive drought damage in the US pushed maize prices up by almost 23% in a single month.
“With heightened concern over the combined impact of population growth and climate change on global food security, these latest statistics from FAO should serve as a wake-up call to Europe’s policy-makers,” said CPA chairman Stephen Henning.
“As one of the world’s major food producing economies, the EU has significant capacity to influence global food prices and availability, but we are at risk of sleep-walking into a food crisis unless current policies that impede or restrict production-boosting technologies are reversed.
“Innovations in plant science, for example, from novel crop protection products to improvements in the plants they are used on, offer major opportunities for Europe’s farmers to deliver sustainable gains in agricultural productivity. Yet such advances are discouraged by a seemingly anti-productive farming policy agenda in Brussels.
“This latest spike in global food prices highlights the fragility of the world’s food supply base, and sends a clear message to policy-makers of the need to embrace developments in agricultural science and innovation to ensure production can keep pace with burgeoning demand,” said Mr Henning. “Doing nothing is not an option.”
http://www.ecpa.eu/news-item/food/08-10-2012/689/global-food-price-rise-must-prompt-eu-re-think-science-based-agricultu
ABC News: Greenpeace destroys GM Wheat
Jessica Nairn, July 14th 2011
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-14/20110714-greenpeace-gm-protest/2794272
BBC - Jimmy's GM Food Fight
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCnld7-maoE
No comments:
Post a Comment