Biotech4 Agricultural PDF
Biotech4 Agricultural PDF
Biotech4 Agricultural PDF
Agricultural Development
Proceedings of the FAO International Technical Conference
on Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries:
Options and Opportunities in Crops, Forestry, Livestock,
Fisheries and Agro-industry to Face the Challenges of Food
Insecurity and Climate Change (ABDC-10)
Biotechnologies for
Agricultural Development
Proceedings of the FAO International Technical Conference
on Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries:
Options and Opportunities in Crops, Forestry, Livestock,
Fisheries and Agro-industry to Face the Challenges of Food
Insecurity and Climate Change (ABDC-10)
The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of FAO.
ISBN 978-92-5-106906-6
All rights reserved. FAO encourages reproduction and dissemination of material in this information product. Non-commercial uses will be authorized free of
charge, upon request. Reproduction for resale or other commercial purposes, including educational purposes, may incur fees.
Applications for permission to reproduce or disseminate FAO copyright materials, and all queries concerning rights and licences, should be addressed
by e-mail to
[email protected]
or to
the Chief, Publishing Policy and Support Branch,
Office of Knowledge Exchange, Research and Extension, FAO,
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy.
FAO 2011
Latest FAO figures indicate that the number of undernourished people in the world remains
very high at close to one billion in 2010. The fact that one in six people in developing
countries currently suffers from chronic hunger is not acceptable. Food security at local,
regional and global levels will need to be realized in the face of emerging challenges.
The first is the rapidly changing socio-economic environment. It is estimated that
the worlds population will increase from about 7 to 9 billion people by 2050; that the
proportion living in urban areas will increase from about 50 to 70 percent by 2050; and
that peoples diets will change, shifting to increased proportions of vegetables, fruits and
livestock products. The second is climate change, which is expected to have an increasing
impact on agriculture and food security.
Promoting sustainable agriculture in developing countries is key to achieving food
security, and here it is necessary to increase investment in agriculture; broaden access to
food; improve governance of global agricultural trade; and increase productivity while
conserving the natural resource base. For the latter, it will be necessary to substantially
increase investments in public agricultural research and development. Technologies to
increase productivity and conserve natural resources should be accessible, appropriate and
adapted to the needs of smallholders, and functional demand-driven extension systems are
essential for making this happen. The suite of technological options for farmers should be
as broad as possible, including agricultural biotechnologies, which represent a large range
of technologies used in food and agriculture for the genetic improvement of plant varieties
and animal populations, characterization and conservation of genetic resources, diagnosis
of plant and animal diseases, vaccine development and other purposes.
To highlight the potential role of agricultural biotechnologies, FAO, in close collaboration
with partners around the globe, organized the international technical conference on
Agricultural biotechnologies in developing countries: Options and opportunities in crops,
forestry, livestock, fisheries and agro-industry to face the challenges of food insecurity and
climate change (ABDC-10) that took place in Guadalajara, Mexico, from 1 to 4 March
2010. The conference was hosted by the Government of Mexico and co-sponsored by the
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD).
The Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), the Global
Forum on Agricultural Research (GFAR), the International Centre for Genetic Engineering
and Biotechnology (ICGEB) and the World Bank were also major collaborators in this
initiative. The conference brought together about 300 policy-makers, scientists and
representatives of intergovernmental and international non-governmental organizations,
including delegations from 42 FAO Member Nations.
B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo p m e n t v
This publication represents the ABDC-10 proceedings. It contains an extensive series
of background documents prepared for the conference, focusing on the current status
and options for biotechnologies in developing countries in crops, forestry, livestock,
fisheries/aquaculture and food processing/safety, as well as on related policy issues and
options, in particular regarding targeting agricultural biotechnologies to the poor; enabling
R&D for agricultural biotechnologies; and ensuring access to the benefits of R&D.
Member Nations reached at the ABDC-10 a number of key conclusions. They
acknowledged that agricultural biotechnologies help to alleviate hunger and poverty, assist
in adaptation to climate change and maintain the natural resource base; that agricultural
biotechnologies have not been widely used in many developing countries, and have not
sufficiently benefited smallholder farmers and producers and consumers; and that more
R&D of agricultural biotechnologies should be focused on the needs of smallholder farmers
and producers. They also acknowledged that governments need to develop their own
national vision and policy for the role of biotechnologies; that effective communication
and participation strategies with the public are necessary; and that stronger partnerships
among and within countries will facilitate the development and use of biotechnologies.
The Member Nations also agreed that effective and enabling national biotechnology
policies and regulatory frameworks can facilitate the development and appropriate use of
biotechnologies in developing countries and that developing countries should significantly
increase investments in capacity-building and the development and safe use of biotechnologies
to support, in particular, smallholders, producers and small biotechnology-based enterprises.
Finally, the countries agreed that FAO and other relevant international organizations and
donors should significantly increase their efforts to support the strengthening of national
capacities in the development and appropriate use of pro-poor agricultural biotechnologies.
International conferences such as ABDC-10 offer an essential neutral forum for FAO
Member countries to meet, to access high-quality, updated science-based information and
to discuss policy options on major food and agriculture issues.
We hope that the organization of ABDC-10 and publication of these proceedings will
contribute substantially to empowering developing countries to make informed decisions about
the application of agricultural biotechnologies to face the key challenge of food insecurity.
Jacques Diouf
FAO Director-General
vi B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t
B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo p m e n t
Contents
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi
Abbreviations and Acronyms. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xix
Chapter 2: Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
2.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
A. Stocktaking: Learning from the Past. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
2.2 Overview of Conventional Technologies in Developing Countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
2.3 Current Status of Application of Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries . . . . . . . . . . . 86
2.4 Analysis of Successes and Failures of Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries . . . . . . . 102
2.5 Case Studies of Applications of Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
B. Looking Forward: Preparing for the Future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
2.6 Key Issues where Forest Biotechnologies Could be Useful. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
2.7 Identifying Options for Developing Countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
2.8 Identifying Priorities for Action for the International Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
2.9 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115
Chapter 3: Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
3.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
A. Stocktaking: Learning from the Past. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
3.2 Conventional Technologies in Developing Countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
3.3 Animal Biotechnologies: Definitions and Historical Perspective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
3.4 Current Status of Application of Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries . . . . . . . . . 136
3.5 Reasons for Successes and Failures in Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries
over the last 20 Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
3.6 Case Studies of the Use of Biotechnologies in Developing Countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
B. Looking Forward: Preparing for the Future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
3.7 Key Unsolved Problems in the Livestock Sector where Biotechnologies
Could be Fundamental to their Solution. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176
3.8 Identifying Options for Developing Countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180
3.9 Identifying Priorities for Action for the International Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
3.10 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186
viii B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t
Chapter 4: Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries
in Developing Countries
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191
4.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
A. Stocktaking: Learning from the Past. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
4.2 Overview of Main Areas where Biotechnologies are being Applied in Aquaculture and
Fisheries in Developing Countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
4.3 Current Status of Application of Biotechnologies in Developing Countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201
4.4 Case Studies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
B. Looking Forward: Preparing for the Future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
4.5 Key Issues where Biotechnologies Could be Useful. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
4.6 Identifying Options for Developing Countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228
4.7 Identifying Priorities for Action for the International Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
4.8 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
Chapter 5: Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety
in Developing Countries
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240
5.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242
A. Stocktaking: Learning from the Past. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
5.2 Biotechnology: Definition and Scope. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
5.3 Current Status of the Application of Biotechnologies in Developing Countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245
5.4 Analysis of the Reasons for Successes/Failures of Application of Biotechnologies in
Developing Countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259
5.5 Case Studies of Applications of Biotechnologies in Developing Countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
B. Looking Forward: Preparing for the Future. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
5.6 Emerging Pathogens: A Key Issue where the Application of Biotechnologies Could be Useful. . . . 268
5.7 Identifying Options for Developing Countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
5.8 Identifying Priorities for Action for the International Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273
5.9 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
Chapter 6: Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies
in Developing Countries over the Last 20 Years - An E-Mail Conference
6.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278
6.2 Background to the Issues. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
6.2.1 Overview of agricultural biotechnologies in developing countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280
6.2.2 Specific points about this e-mail conference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293
6.3 Summary of an International Dialogue. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296
6.3.1 Executive summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296
6.3.2 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298
6.3.3 Biotechnologies in crops. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299
6.3.4 Biotechnologies in forestry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 311
6.3.5 Biotechnologies in livestock and aquaculture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
6.3.6 Biotechnologies in food processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 315
6.3.7 Cross-sectoral discussions: Reasons for failures of agricultural biotechnologies in developing countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316
6.3.8 Cross-sectoral discussions: Suggestions for increasing the success of agricultural biotechnologies in developing countries. . . 320
6.3.9 Participation in the conference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323
6.4 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326
B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo p m e n t ix
Chapter 7: Targeting Agricultural Biotechnologies to the Poor
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 328
7.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331
7.2 Agricultural and National Development Policy Contexts. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 334
7.2.1 National and international dimensions of agricultural policy-making and policies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335
7.2.2 Towards comprehensive agricultural development policies and strategies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337
7.3 National Biotechnology Policy/Strategy Frameworks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340
7.3.1 Biotechnology issues from a policy perspective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 340
7.3.2 Purpose and content of biotechnology frameworks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 344
7.3.3 Developing and approving national frameworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345
7.3.4 Issues for policy consideration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 346
7.4 Governance Structures and Organization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347
7.4.1 Leadership and coordination: Principles and options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347
7.4.2 Independent advice: Principles and options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 350
7.5 Setting Priorities for R&D . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351
7.5.1 At the level of government. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351
7.5.2 For biotechnologies in food and agriculture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 352
7.6 Annex: The processes of developing, approving and overseeing biotechnology policy/strategy frameworks and of
providing independent advice in selected developing countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361
7.7 References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 368
x B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t
9.3 Public Awareness and Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449
9.3.1 Participatory biotechnology R&D and extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449
9.3.2 Participatory policies for regulation of biotechnology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 451
9.3.3 Coverage in national biotechnology policy/strategy documents and regulatory frameworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454
9.4 Agricultural Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458
9.5 Annex: Coverage of IPR and genetic resources issues in national biotechnology policy/strategy
frameworks of selected developing countries. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 460
9.6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 463
Chapter 10: Agricultural Biotechnologies for Food Security and Sustainable Development:
Options for Developing Countries and Priorities for Action for the International Community
Context. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 467
10.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 468
10.2 Lessons Learned and Options for Developing Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 470
10.3 Draft Priorities for Action for the International Community . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 480
10.3.1 Policy priorities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481
10.3.2 Capacity development. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485
10.3.3 Coordination options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487
B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo p m e n t xi
Chapter 13: Summary Reports of Regional Parallel Sessions
13.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 526
13.2 Reports of the Parallel Sessions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 527
13.2.1 Latin America and the Caribbean. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 527
13.2.2 West Asia and North Africa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 529
13.2.3 Sub-Saharan Africa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 531
13.2.4 Asia-Pacific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 532
13.2.5 Europe and Central Asia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 534
xii B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t
Acknowledgments
The planning and build-up to the conference as well as the actual four-day event in
Guadalajara were all hallmarked by a highly participatory approach, and it is not possible
here to do justice to all the contributions of time, energy and expertise made by so many
organizations and individuals to the processes of preparing for and convening ABDC-10;
to writing and reviewing the background documents; and to creating the rich presentations
and discussions that took place during the parallel and plenary sessions held during ABDC-
10. FAO would like to take this opportunity to express its sincere appreciation for the kind
and sustained cooperation of all concerned.
The conference brought together about 300 policy-makers, scientists and representatives
of inter-governmental organizations (IGOs) and international non-governmental
organizations (NGOs) from 68 countries, including governmental delegations from 42
FAO member countries. Special acknowledgements go to the Government of Mexico
which generously hosted the conference and provided excellent logistical and personnel
support. The national organizing committee met several times in the run up to the
conference and its members, and their representatives, are gratefully acknowledged for
their invaluable support: the Colegio de Postgraduados, Comisin Intersecretarial de
Bioseguridad y Organismo Genticamente Modificados (CIBIOGEM), Consejo Nacional
de Ciencia y Tecnologa (CONACYT), FAO Office in Mexico, Gobierno del Estado de
Jalisco, Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrcolas y Pecuarias (INIFAP),
Secretara de Agricultura, Ganadera, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentacin (SAGARPA),
Secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores (SRE) and Sistema Nacional de Investigacin y
Transferencia de Tecnologa para el Desarrollo Rural (SNITT). The national committee
was kindly chaired by Vctor M. Villalobos, the Coordinator of International Relations
at SAGARPA, and later the Officer in Charge, Lourdes Cruz Trinidad, with the support
of Elas Reyes Bravo.
Grateful appreciation is also expressed to the staff at the FAO Office in Mexico for all
their work before and during the conference, especially to the former FAO Representative
Norman Bellino, the Assistant Representative Maria del Carmen Culebro, the communications
officer Barbara Lazcano and programme officer Alicia Ituarte.
Special thanks also go to the International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD)
which co-sponsored the conference; and to the Consultative Group on International
Agricultural Research (CGIAR), the Global Forum on Agricultural Research (GFAR), the
International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (ICGEB) and the World
Bank who were major partners in the initiative.
B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo p m e n t xiii
We would also like to thank all the members of the international Steering Committee (SC),
established to act as an advisory board as well as to guide and oversee the process leading up
to the conference. These included individuals invited in their personal capacity because of
their expertise in one or more areas of agricultural biotechnologies, as well as representatives
of relevant stakeholder groups, including UN and non-UN intergovernmental organizations,
civil society organizations, private foundations and private sector organizations. M.S.
Swaminathan, from the M S Swaminathan Research Foundation in India, is also thanked for
kindly accepting to serve as the Honorary Chair of the SC.
The contributions of all the FAO colleagues who made organization of such an
international conference possible are gratefully acknowledged, including those who
assisted with the ABDC-10 website, webstreaming of the conference, media issues and
press releases, translation of conference documents, sending out official invitations to FAO
Member States, IGOs and international NGOs and with numerous other tasks. Central
to the whole process was the FAO Interdepartmental Working Group on Biotechnology
(IDWGB) whose members provided the overall technical expertise and logistical advice and
support necessary for the organization of this cross-sectoral initiative. Special appreciation
is expressed to its Chair, Shivaji Pandey, for his tireless support and total dedication to the
initiative. The former Chair of the IDWGB, James Dargie, is also especially thanked for
his many contributions to the conference and these proceedings.
The commitment and hard work of the ABDC-10 Secretariat are also gratefully
acknowledged. The Secretariat consisted of Andrea Sonnino (IDWGB Secretary) who,
inter alia, coordinated preparation of these proceedings and John Ruane and Preetmoninder
Lidder, who, in addition to other tasks, commented on numerous drafts of all the FAO
background documents. The Secretariat also consisted of Germana Borsetta, Charlotte
Lietaer, Adriana Pierconti and Sandra Tardioli, whose assistance with the innumerable
logistical issues regarding the conference and travel was invaluable.
The convening of ABDC-10 would also not have been possible without the generous
supplementary financial support provided by a number of organizations, whose contributions
are gratefully acknowledged. The majority of the funding came from FAO and IFAD.
The remainder came from the United States Mission to the UN Agencies in Rome, the
Government of Mexico, GFAR, the Iowa State University Biosafety Institute and the Japan
International Cooperation Agency. The ICGEB, International Union for Conservation of
Nature (IUCN), United Nations Industrial development Organization (UNIDO) and World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) also funded participation of all the panellists
for the parallel sessions that they organized and a number of other organizations funded
participation of some of the panellists for their parallel sessions.
xiv B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t
These proceedings were edited by James Dargie (former Chair of the IDWGB) and
John Ruane, IDWGB. Contributions to the individual Chapters are now acknowledged.
Seven technical documents were prepared under the responsibility of FAO for presentation
at ABDC-10. Five were sector-specific and are provided here in Chapters 1-5. One dealt with
policy options for agricultural biotechnologies and was organized in three main Sections.
For these proceedings, the Sections are presented in Chapters 7-9. The seventh document,
which builds upon and integrates/synthesizes information from these six documents, is
provided in Chapter 10.
For each of the FAO documents, there was an FAO focal point, a lead consultant and a
working group (consisting of volunteers from the SC) to which the documents were circulated
for comments. The seventh document was circulated to the entire SC for comments. The
FAO focal point was responsible, with assistance from the lead consultant and the ABDC-
10 Secretariat, for circulating the document to the working group and members of the
IDWGB and, after receiving their comments, for finalizing the document. Here we gratefully
acknowledge the contributors to these Chapters.
For the Chapter on crops (nr. 1), the FAO Focal Point was Andrea Sonnino (ABDC-10
Secretariat) and the lead consultant was Denis Murphy (University of Glamorgan, United
Kingdom). Comments from the following SC members are gratefully acknowledged: Denise
Dewar (CropLife International, United States); Dominic Glover (Wageningen University, the
Netherlands); Kathleen Jones (Food and Drug Administration, United States); Pat Mooney
(ETC Group, Canada); Olivier Sanvido (Agroscope Reckenholz Tnikon Research Station,
Switzerland); and Roberto Tuberosa (University of Bologna, Italy). Comments from the
following FAO colleagues are gratefully acknowledged: Karin Nichterlein and John Preissing
(both from the Office of Knowledge Exchange, Research and Extension); Kakoli Ghosh, Elcio
Guimares, Philippe Le Coente, Annie Monard, Tom Osborn and Shivaji Pandey (all from
the Plant Production and Protection Division); and Erik Busch-Petersen, Qu Liang, Chikelu
Mba and Minh-Long Nguyen (all from the Joint FAO/IAEA Division, Austria).
For the Chapter on forestry (nr. 2), the FAO Focal Point was Oudara Souvannavong (Forest
Conservation Service) and the lead consultants were Daniel Baskaran Krishnapillay (Pulau Banding
Foundation, Malaysia) and Claire Williams (Silver Springs LLC, United States). Comments
from the following SC members are gratefully acknowledged: Rowland Burdon (New Zealand
Forest Research Institute Ltd, New Zealand) and E.M. Muralidharan (Kerala Forest Research
Institute, India). Comments from the following FAO colleagues are gratefully acknowledged:
Zohra Bennadji (visiting scientist from the Instituto Nacional de Investigacin Agrupecuaria,
Uruguay), Nuria Alba Montfort (visiting scientist from the Instituto Nacional de Investigacin
y Tecnologa Agraria y Alimentaria, Spain) and J.A. Prado (Forest Management Division).
B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo p m e n t xv
For the Chapter on livestock (nr. 3), the FAO Focal Point was Paul Boettcher
(Animal Production and Health Division) and the lead consultant was Harinder Makkar
(University of Hohenheim, Germany). Comments from the following SC members
are gratefully acknowledged: James Dargie (former Chair of the IDWGB), Elisabeth
Erlacher-Vindel (World Organisation for Animal Health, France), Kathleen Jones (Food
and Drug Administration, United States), Arthur da Silva Mariante (Brazilian Agricultural
Research Corporation, Brazil) and Catherine Monagle (United Nations University
Institute of Advanced Studies, Japan). Comments from the following FAO colleagues
are gratefully acknowledged: Samuel Jutzi and Irene Hoffmann (both from the Animal
Production and Health Division) and Adama Diallo, Mario Garcia-Podesta, Kathrin
Schaten, Hermann Unger and Gerrit Viljoen (all from the Joint FAO/IAEA Division,
Austria). Appreciation is expressed to the following people who contributed to the
case studies in the Chapter: P.S. Brar and A.S. Nanda (Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and
Animal Sciences University, India), John Crowther (Joint FAO/IAEA Division, Austria),
Jos Fernando Garcia (So Paulo State University, Brazil), Mohammed Shamsuddin
(Bangladesh Agricultural University, Bangladesh) and Chanda Nimbkar (Nimbkar
Agricultural Research Institute, India).
For the Chapter on aquaculture and fisheries (nr. 4), the FAO Focal Points were
Rohana Subasinghe and Doris Soto (both from the Fisheries and Aquaculture Management
Division). Lead consultant was Victor Martinez (Universidad de Chile, Chile). Comments
from the following SC members are gratefully acknowledged: John Benzie (University
College Cork, Ireland) and C.V. Mohan (Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-
Pacific, Thailand).
For the Chapter on food processing and food safety (nr. 5), the FAO Focal Points were
Rosa Rolle (Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific), who coordinated parts relevant to
biotechnology applications in food processing, and Masami Takeuchi (Nutrition and Consumer
Protection Division), who coordinated parts relevant to biotechnology applications in food
safety. Lead consultants were Olusola Oyewole (University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, Nigeria)
and Ruud Valyasevi (National Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology, Thailand).
Comments from the following SC members are gratefully acknowledged: Kathleen Jones
(Food and Drug Administration, United States), Marci Levine (International Life Sciences
Institute, United States), Haruko Okusu (CGIAR Independent Science and Partnership
Council, Italy), Masashi Kusukawa (Codex Alimentarius Commission, Italy) and Jrgen
Schlundt (World Health Organization, Switzerland). Comments from the following FAO
colleagues are gratefully acknowledged: Maria de Lourdes Costarrica, Sridhar Dharmapuri
and Annika Wennberg (all from the Nutrition and Consumer Protection Division) and
Adama Diallo (Joint FAO/IAEA Division, Austria).
xvi B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t
For the Chapter (nr. 6) on the e-mail conference held as part of the build up to ABDC-10,
the Background document to the e-mail conference (Part 6.2) was prepared by John Ruane
and Andrea Sonnino (both from the IDWGB). Comments from the following external
referees are gratefully acknowledged: Harinder Makkar (University of Hohenheim,
Germany); Victor Martinez (Universidad de Chile, Chile); Denis Murphy (University
of Glamorgan, United Kingdom) and Rajeev Varshney (International Crops Research
Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, India). Comments from the following FAO colleagues
are gratefully acknowledged: Zohra Bennadji (visiting scientist from the Instituto Nacional
de Investigacin Agrupecuaria, Uruguay), Nuria Alba Montfort (visiting scientist from
the Instituto Nacional de Investigacin y Tecnologa Agraria y Alimentaria, Spain) and
Preetmoninder Lidder (IDWGB). The Summary Document to the conference (Part 6.3)
was prepared by John Ruane, and grateful appreciation is expressed to Harinder Makkar
(University of Hohenheim, Germany) who provided the first draft of this document. Special
thanks are extended to the 834 people who subscribed to the conference, in particular to the
83 people living in 36 different countries who contributed the 121 messages that were posted.
For Chapters 7-9, focusing on policy options (covering respectively targeting agricultural
biotechnologies to the poor; enabling R&D for agricultural biotechnologies; and ensuring
access to the benefits of R&D), the FAO Focal Point was John Ruane (IDWGB) and lead
consultant was James Dargie (former Chair of the IDWGB). Comments from the following
SC members are gratefully acknowledged: Bertrand Dagallier (Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development, France); Denise Dewar (CropLife International, United
States); Dominic Glover (Wageningen University, the Netherlands); Sharon Bomer Lauritsen
(Biotechnology Industry Organization, United States); Susan Owens (Department of
Agriculture, United States); Decio Ripandelli (ICGEB, Italy); Olivier Sanvido (Agroscope
Reckenholz Tnikon Research Station, Switzerland); and Rajeev Varshney (International
Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, India). Comments from the following
FAO colleagues are gratefully acknowledged: John Preissing (Office of Knowledge Exchange,
Research and Extension); Dennis Bittisnich, Sridhar Dharmapuri and Masami Takeuchi
(all from the Nutrition and Consumer Protection Division); and Nuria Urquia (Plant
Production and Protection Division). Appreciation is expressed to M. Karembu and D.
Wafula (both ISAAA AfriCenter, Kenya) for information concerning biotechnology policies
in African countries and to N. Beintema (International Food Policy Research Institute,
Italy) for providing the information on agricultural science and technology investments
used in Chapter 8.
For the final FAO background document (Chapter 10) which built upon and
integrated/synthesized information from the previous documents, the FAO Focal Point
was Andrea Sonnino (ABDC-10 Secretariat) and the lead consultant was Charles Spillane
B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo p m e n t xvii
(National University of Ireland, Galway, Ireland). Comments from the following SC members
are gratefully acknowledged: James Dargie (former Chair of the IDWGB); Denise Dewar
(CropLife International, United States); Kathleen Jones (Food and Drug Administration,
United States); Harinder Makkar (University of Hohenheim, Germany); E.M. Muralidharan
(Kerala Forest Research Institute, India); Denis Murphy (University of Glamorgan, United
Kingdom); Susan Owens (Department of Agriculture, United States); and Olivier Sanvido
(Agroscope Reckenholz Tnikon Research Station, Switzerland). Comments from the
following colleagues in FAO Headquarters are gratefully acknowledged: Christine Deane
(CGIAR Independent Science and Partnership Council), Eva Hain (Commission on Genetic
Resources for Food and Agriculture), May Hani (Office of Knowledge Exchange, Research
and Extension) and Shivaji Pandey (Chair of the IDWGB).
Regarding the outcomes of ABDC-10, we wish firstly to express our sincere gratitude
to Jeffrey McNeely (formerly of the International Union for Conservation of Nature
(IUCN), Switzerland) who chaired the Conference, as well as to Fernando Gmez Merino
(Colegio de Postgraduados Campus Crdoba, Mexico) who was the Rapporteur and
Richard Laing (FAO consultant, Canada) for assistance in drafting the report (Chapter
15) that was adopted by the FAO member countries on the final day of the Conference.
We also gratefully acknowledge the vice-chairs of the meeting: Marilia Nutti (Brazilian
Agricultural Research Cooperation, Brazil) and Priyanjalie Wijegoonawardane (National
Aquatic Resources Research Development Agency, Sri Lanka).
Opening remarks were kindly presented on the first day by Alvaro Garca Chvez,
Secretario de Desarrollo Rural del Gobierno del Estado de Jalisco; Modibo Traor, FAO
Assistant Director-General, Agriculture and Consumer Protection Department; and Mariano
Ruiz-Funes Macedo, Subsecretario de Agricultura, SAGARPA. Closing statements on the
final day were kindly given by Modibo Traor; Victor M. Villalobos, Director General,
Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture; and Salvador Fernndez Rivera,
Coordinador de Investigacin, INIFAP. Presentations to the Plenary by Rodney Cooke,
Director of the Operational Policy and Technical Advisory Division, IFAD; Thomas
Lumpkin, Director General of the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center,
on behalf of the CGIAR; and Shakeel Bhatti, Secretary of the International Treaty on Plant
Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture, are also gratefully acknowledged.
The preparation of Chapters 11, 12 and 13, providing the outcomes of sector-specific,
cross-sectoral and regional parallel sessions respectively, would not have been possible
without the organizational, technical and presentational skills of the many panel members,
facilitators and rapporteurs named in these Chapters, and their contributions are gratefully
acknowledged. We would also like to thank all the people who participated actively in
xviii B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t
the session discussions, assisted in report writing and who helped to develop and plan the
session programmes. FAO is truly grateful to all of the people who contributed in so many
ways to these 27 sessions.
The ten sector-specific sessions described in Chapter 11 were organized by FAO
and the many members of the IDWGB who contributed to make these a success are
gratefully acknowledged.
For most of the cross-sectoral and regional parallel sessions described in Chapters 12
and 13, FAO invited relevant IGOs and NGOs to organize them and the programme for
the sessions was then developed by the organizers, with guidance from FAO. We would
like to express here our gratitude to the organizations involved and the people working
there who were the main contacts with FAO and who contributed behind the scenes to
planning and organizing the sessions.
The three sessions on genomic resources, genomic applications and genetic resources
respectively (Parts 12.2.1 to 12.2.3) were organized by the CGIAR and the main focal points
were John McDermott (International Livestock Research Institute, Kenya), Dave Hoisington
(International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics, India) and Jean-Marcel
Ribaut (Generation Challenge Programme, Mexico). The sessions on the role of the farmer
and on public-private partnerships (Parts 12.2.4 and 12.2.7 respectively) were organized
by FAO with support from the International Federation of Agricultural Producers (IFAP)
and the main focal points were Nora Ourabah and David King (both from IFAP, France).
The session on ensuring equitable access to technology (Part 12.2.5) was organized by Oxfam
International and the main focal point was Gigi Manicad (Oxfam Novib, the Netherlands). The
session on public participation (Part 12.2.6) was organized by IUCN and the main focal point
was Keith Wheeler (IUCN Commission on Education and Communication, United States).
The session on biosafety in the context of biosecurity (Part 12.2.8) was organized by the FAO
Nutrition and Consumer Protection Division, and the main focal points were Ezzeddine Boutrif
and Masami Takeuchi (both from this Division, Italy).
The session on intellectual property rights (Part 12.2.9) was organized by the World Intellectual
Property Organization (WIPO) and the main focal point was Anja von der Ropp (WIPO,
Switzerland). The session on biotechnology policy coherence at the regional level (Part 12.2.10)
was organized by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)
and the main focal points were Angel Gonzalez Sanz and Constantine Bartel (both UNCTAD,
Switzerland). The session on non-food uses of plants (Part 12.2.11) was organized by the United
Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and the main focal points were Magnus
Bosse and George Tzotzos (both UNIDO, Austria). The session on capacity building (Part 12.2.12)
was organized by the ICGEB and the main focal point was Decio Ripandelli (ICGEB, Italy).
B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo p m e n t xix
Regarding the five regional parallel sessions, the session for Latin America and the
Caribbean (Part 13.2.1) was organized by the Inter-American Institute for Cooperation
on Agriculture (IICA), the International REDBIO Foundation (FRI) and the Technical
Cooperation Network on Agricultural Biotechnology in Latin America and the Caribbean
(REDBIO), and the main focal points were Ramn Lastra (IICA, Costa Rica), Alicia
Diamante (FRI, Argentina) and Juan Izquierdo (FAO Regional Office for Latin America
and the Caribbean, Chile).
The West Asia and North Africa session (Part 13.2.2) was organized by the Association
of Agricultural Research Institutions in Near East and North Africa (AARINENA), and
the main focal point was Ibrahim Hamdan (AARINENA, Jordan). The Sub-Saharan Africa
session (Part 13.2.3) was organized by the Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa (FARA)
and the main focal points were Monty Jones and Walter Alhassan (both FARA, Ghana).
The Asia-Pacific session (Part 13.2.4) was organized by the Asia-Pacific Association of
Agricultural Research Institutions (APAARI) and the main focal points were Raj Paroda
(APAARI, Thailand) and Jawahir Karihaloo (APAARI, India). The Europe and Central
Asia session (Part 13.2.5) was organized by the FAO Regional Office for Europe and
Central Asia (REU) and the main focal point was Nevena Alexandrova (REU, Hungary).
xx B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS
AARINENA Association of Agricultural Research Institutions in the Near East and North Africa
AATF African Agricultural Technology Foundation
ABDC-10 FAO international technical conference on Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries
ACIAR Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research
AFLP Amplified fragment length polymorphism
AGORA Access to the Global Online Research in Agriculture
AI Artificial insemination
AIA Advance informed agreement
APAARI Asia-Pacific Association of Agricultural Research Institutions
ARC Agricultural Research Council (South Africa)
ARS Agricultural Research Service (USDA)
ASARECA Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern and Central Africa
ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations
AVRDC Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center
AW-IPM Area-wide integrated pest management
BCH Biosafety Clearing House
BecA Biosciences eastern and central Africa
BFA Biotechnologies in food and agriculture
BMP Better management practice
BRAC Building Resources Across Communities (an NGO in Bangladesh)
Bt Bacillus thuringiensis
CARICOM Caribbean Community and Common Market
CBD Convention on Biological Diversity
CBOL Consortium for the Barcode of Life
cDNA Complementary DNA
CGIAR Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
cGRASP Consortium for genomics research on all salmon project
CIAT International Centre for Tropical Agriculture
CIMMYT International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center
CIP International Potato Center
CIRAD Centre de Coopration Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Dveloppement
CMVD Cassava mosaic virus disease
COMESA Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa
CPB Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety
CSF Classical swine fever
CSO Civil society organization
DADF Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying and Fisheries (India)
DBT Department of Biotechnology (India)
DFID Department for International Development (United Kingdom)
DIVA vaccine Vaccine that differentiates infected from vaccinated animals
ELISA Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
EM Ectomycorrhizae
EMBL European Molecular Biology Laboratory
EMBRAPA Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation
EST Expressed sequence tag
ET Embryo transfer
EU European Union
FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations
FARA Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa
FDA U.S. Food and Drug Administration
FMD Foot-and-mouth disease
FPR Farmer participatory research
FTAI Fixed-timed artificial insemination
B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo p m e n t xxi
FTO Freedom to operate
GC Gas chromatography
GDP Gross domestic product
GEF Global Environment Facility
GFAR Global Forum on Agricultural Research
GHP Good hygienic practice
GIS Geographic information systems
GMM Genetically modified micro-organism
GM(O) Genetically modified (organism)
GMP Good manufacturing practice
GREP Global Rinderpest Eradication Programme
GRFA Genetic resources for food and agriculture
GURTs Genetic use restriction technologies
HACCP Hazard analysis and critical control point
HPAI Highly pathogenic avian influenza
HPLC High performance liquid chromatography
IAASTD International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development
IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency
IAH Institute for Animal Health (United Kingdom)
ICAR Indian Council of Agricultural Research
ICARDA International Center for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas
ICGEB International Centre for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology
ICRISAT International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics
IDB Inter-American Development Bank
IDWGB FAO Interdepartmental Working Group on Biotechnology
IFAD International Fund for Agricultural Development
IFPRI International Food Policy Research Institute
IHHNV Infectious hypodermic and haematopoeitic necrosis virus
IICA Inter-American Institute for Cooperation on Agriculture
IITA International Institute of Tropical Agriculture
ILRI International Livestock Research Institute
INIFAP Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrcolas y Pecuarias (Mexico)
IP Intellectual property
IPGRI International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (now called Bioversity International)
IPM Integrated pest management
IPNV Infectious pancreatic necrosis virus
IPPC International Plant Protection Convention
IPR Intellectual property rights
IRRI International Rice Research Institute
ISAAA International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications
ISH In situ hybridization
ITPGRFA International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture
IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature
IVEP In vitro embryo production
IVF In vitro fertilization
JECFA Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives
KARI Kenya Agricultural Research Institute
LMO Living modified organism
MAS Marker-assisted selection
MDG Millennium Development Goal
MNC Multinational corporation
MOET Multiple ovulation and embryo transfer
MS Mass spectrometry
MSSRF M S Swaminathan Research Foundation
MSV Maize streak virus
MTA Material transfer agreement
NARI Nimbkar Agricultural Research Institute (India)
NARS National agricultural research systems
xxii B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t
NBS National biotechnology policy/strategy
NCBI National Center for Biotechnology Information (United States)
N e Effective population size
NEPAD New Partnership for Africas Development
NERICA New Rice for Africa
NGO Non-governmental organization
NWS New World screwworm
OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
OIE World Organisation for Animal Health
OWS Old World screwworm
PBR Plant breeders rights
PCR Polymerase chain reaction
PPB Participatory plant breeding
PPP Public-private partnership
PPR Peste des petits ruminants
PVP Plant variety protection
qPCR Quantitative PCR (also known as real-time PCR)
QTL Quantitative trait locus
R&D Research and development
RAPD Random amplified polymorphic DNA
rBST Recombinant bovine somatotropin
REDBIO Technical Cooperation Network on Agricultural Biotechnology in Latin America and the Caribbean
REDD Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation
RFLP Restriction fragment length polymorphism
RT-PCR Reverse transcriptase PCR
S&T Science and technology
SAGARPA Secretara de Agricultura, Ganadera, Desarrollo Rural, Pesca y Alimentacin (Mexico)
SAGPyA Secretara de Agricultura, Ganadera, Pesca y Alimentos (Argentina)
SC Steering Committee (of ABDC-10)
SCNT Somatic cell nuclear transfer
SE Somatic embryogenesis
SIT Sterile insect technique
SME Small and medium enterprise
SNP Single nucleotide polymorphism
SPF Specific pathogen-free
SPS Agreement WTO Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures
SWOT Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats
TILLING Targeting induced local lesions in genomes
TLC Thin layer chromatography
TRIPs Agreement WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights
TSV Taura syndrome virus
TTO Technology transfer office
TWAS Academy of Sciences for the Developing World
UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
UNDAF United Nations Development Assistance Framework
UNECE United Nations Economic Commission for Europe
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organization
UPOV International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
VAM Vesicular-arbuscular mycorrhizae
VITAA Vitamin A for Africa
WHO World Health Organization
WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization
WSSV White spot syndrome virus
WTO World Trade Organization
YHV Yellow head virus
B i ot e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo p m e n t xxiii
SECTION 1
Background
to ABDC-10
Chapter 1
Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in
Developing Countries
Chapter 2
Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in
Developing Countries
Chapter 3
Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies
in Developing Countries
Chapter 4
Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in
Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries
Chapter 5
Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food
Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries
Chapter 6
Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with
Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries over
the Last 20 Years - An E-Mail Conference
Chapter 7
Targeting Agricultural Biotechnologies to the Poor
Chapter 8
Enabling R&D for Agricultural Biotechnologies
Chapter 9
Ensuring Access to the Benefits of R&D
Chapter 10
Agricultural Biotechnologies for Food Security and
Sustainable Development: Options for Developing Countries
and Priorities for Action for the International Community
1
1
chapter
Summary
2 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
The major breeding and crop management applications to date have come from non-
transgenic biotechnologies encompassing the full range of agronomic traits and practices
relevant to developing countries farmers. For example, mutagenesis is widely used in
developing countries and more than 2700 mutation-derived crop varieties have been
obtained worldwide in the last sixty years, mainly in developing countries. Interspecific
hybridization allows the combination of favourable traits from different species and has been
used successfully in, for instance, the development of interspecific disease-resistant Asian
rice and New Rice for Africa (NERICA) varieties. However, interspecific hybridization
programmes can be slow and require a great deal of scientific expertise and skilled labour.
MAS is still at a relatively early stage in its application for key subsistence crops in many
developing countries, although it has begun to produce some significant results such as the
development of a pearl millet hybrid with resistance to downy mildew disease in India. The
costs and technical sophistication required for MAS, however, remain major challenges for
developing countries. Micropropagation is used for the mass clonal propagation of elite
lines or disease-free planting material. Many developing countries have significant crop
micropropagation programmes and are applying it to a wide range of subsistence crops.
Biotechnology also offers important tools for the diagnosis of plant diseases of both viral
and bacterial origin, and immuno-diagnostic techniques as well as DNA-based methods
are commercially applied for this purpose in many developing countries. Biofertilizers are
also being used in developing countries both to augment the nutritional status of crops and
as alternatives to chemical supplements.
Biotechnologies such as cryopreservation, artificial seed production, somatic embryogenesis,
and other forms of in vitro cell or tissue culture are also extensively used for the conservation
of genetic resources for food and agriculture in developing countries.
The uptake of biotechnologies in developing countries is increasing gradually but
remains patchy. Many biotechnological advances were made in industrialized countries
in the private sector, leading to development of proprietary technologies that are often
unavailable to scientists in developing countries. Farmers in developing countries, especially
small farmers, cultivate crops and face problems that are particular to their cultural and
environmental conditions, and have often limited purchasing power to access proprietary
technologies. The spillover of research results obtained in industrialized countries by the
private sector has therefore had only a limited impact on the livelihoods of subsistence
farmers in developing countries. In fact, the most enduring successes to date have come from
indigenous public-sector crop research programmes addressing farmer-relevant problems.
Even when there has been strong development of biotechnologies within the public sector
in developing countries, they have not always been directed towards or made available for
improving smallholder livelihoods. In fact, an inclusive process of decision-making about
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 3
the allocation of resources for the development of appropriate crop biotechnologies was
rarely adopted, undermining the successful development of crop biotechnologies. In some
cases, even though the technology was sound and the products were potentially beneficial
to farmers, there was limited or no adoption due to often-predictable infrastructure or
market deficiencies. A promising approach to address such problems is farmer participatory
research but this must be coupled with measures to address a wide range of cross-sectoral
issues from extension services to seed multiplication programmes.
Biotechnology programmes have been effective where they complemented well-structured
conventional plant breeding and agronomy research and development (R&D) programmes.
Key factors in the successful development of crop biotechnologies in developing countries
have been: appropriate policy development, strengthened research and extension institutions,
and enhanced capacities for researchers and technicians. The establishment of cross-sectoral
regulatory measures has also been important.
1.1 Introduction
Despite great advances in agricultural productivity and economic well-being in much of
the world over the past 50 years, food insecurity and poverty continue to be serious issues
in many regions (FAO, 2008a; 2009a). Moreover, in 2008, the world entered a period of
deepening uncertainty and economic downturn that impacted significantly on the future
security of food production and distribution systems (Nellemann et al., 2009). The current
economic downturn plus the effects of climate change both reinforce the need to extend
the effectiveness of crop improvement and management programmes. The key role of
crop improvement in increasing food production and in minimizing agricultural land use
in developing countries is shown by estimates that, in the 1990s alone, yield gains saved
about 80 Mha (million hectares) of land (Nelson and Maredia, 2007). However, if current
food production per capita is to be maintained in the face of population growth and climatic
uncertainty, 120 Mha (or 12 percent) of additional land might be needed by 2050, mainly
in sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America (FAO, 2009b).
Clearly, in developing countries there is a need for continued focus on optimizing
agricultural output, together with preserving the natural resources base through improved
crops and management systems. The various biotechnologies available will play a part in
this process, but there are difficult choices to be made concerning which methods to use
for a particular crop or trait in a particular country or region. So, what are the best options
for using biotechnological approaches to address global food security? There is no simple
one-size-fits-all answer to this question. In many developing countries, staple crops have
only recently started to benefit from the scientific plant breeding methods practised in
industrialized countries for almost a century. In other cases, some developing country crops
4 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
are already being improved using newer technologies such as MAS and genetic modification.
Thus, there is no straightforward recipe for the use of a particular group of breeding or
management methods for a particular crop or within a particular region. Moreover, the
rapid pace of scientific progress is making some hitherto relatively complex and expensive
technologies both cheaper and easier to access, even for some of the relatively resource-
limited breeding and management programmes involving subsistence crops.
Several removable constraints still impede the uptake of modern crop breeding and
management by developing countries. These include the privatization of agricultural R&D
in developed countries which restricts access to proprietary technologies and limits the
possibility of capturing research spillovers (IAASTD, 2009). While constraints relating
to intellectual property rights (IPR) are relatively new and apply mainly to advanced
biotechnologies, financial, institutional, socio-economical and political barriers have been
concerns for many decades. They include basic measures, such as seed supply, bank loans,
transport links and market regulations, and their combined effects can negate even the
most impressive technology gains (King and Byerlee, 1978; Limao and Venables, 2001).
For example, inadequate market infrastructure has limited fertilizer adoption by African
smallholders, leading to persistently poor crop yields, low profitability, and chronic food
insecurity (Nkonya et al., 2005).
The purpose of this Chapter is to examine options from crop biotechnologies to address
food insecurity in developing countries, particularly in the context of deepening economic
and environmental uncertainty. Its primary focus is on sector-specific issues relating to
biotechnology and their impact on crop breeding, management and genetic resources, but
it also considers relevant cross-sectoral aspects such as socio-economic, regulatory, and
public-good concerns.
The Chapter is divided into two main Sections Stocktaking: Learning from the Past
and Looking Forward: Preparing for the Future. Under Stocktaking, Part 1.2 provides
a brief definition of the biotechnologies covered here; Part 1.3 documents the current status
of application of crop biotechnologies, both traditional and new, in developing countries;
Part 1.4 provides an analysis of the reasons for successes/failures of application of crop
biotechnologies in developing countries; and Part 1.5 presents some relevant case studies.
The conclusions of the stocktaking exercise and a summary of lessons learned are presented
in Part 1.6. The Looking forward Section comprises three parts. Part 1.7 deals with key,
unsolved problems in the sector where the use of biotechnologies could be useful. Part
1.8 identifies a number of specific options to assist developing countries make informed
decisions regarding adoption of biotechnologies, while Part 1.9 proposes a set of priorities
for action for the international community (FAO, UN organizations, non-governmental
organizations [NGOs], donors and development agencies).
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 5
A. Stocktaking: Learning from the Past
1.2 Defining Biotechnologies
Plant biotechnology is a rapidly evolving area encompassing basic and strategic research
and its application in agriculture. While new methods and approaches are constantly being
developed, an equally important feature is the improvement of existing biotechnologies that
makes them cheaper and easier to use. This is especially relevant to developing countries
where hitherto expensive and complex techniques, such as MAS or transgenesis, are becoming
increasingly accessible. In this Chapter, the technologies are divided into three groups that
reflect the three stages of crop development, namely: (i) creation of new genetic variation;
6 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
(ii) screening and selection of favourable variants; and (iii) production/management systems
for crops or their derivatives. The last category includes plant propagation, nutrition,
protection, and genetic resource management/conservation.
For the past 10000 years, crop productivity has been improved via the processes of
breeding and management. Breeding involves the selection by humans of certain genetic
variants of a few chosen plant species according to their suitability for exploitation, whether
as edible or non-edible resources. The two key prerequisites to both breeding and evolution
are variation and selection. Novel genetic variations in wild populations arise from a relatively
slow process of naturally-occurring mutation, plus the mixing of genomes that occurs with
sexual reproduction. In contrast, science-based breeding as practised over the past century
is based on the creation of genetic variation via processes such as induced mutagenesis,
hybridization, controlled introgression of traits from diverse populations of the same or
different species, and transgenesis. This is followed by the highly regulated reproduction
or propagation of selected variants designed to minimize variation in favoured progeny
and hence to create a relatively uniform population that is then managed (i.e. cultivated,
harvested and processed) for human exploitation.
While so-called traditional methods of enhancing variation, e.g. the use of crop landraces,
still have great and often untapped potential, the use of newer biotechnologies to create
even wider genetic diversity has given breeders unprecedented opportunities for additional
crop improvement. This greatly increased potential to create additional genetic variation has
been matched in recent years by a revolution in the screening, identification and selection of
potentially useful variants using methods such as biochemical and genomic screening, plus
molecular MAS. Thanks to continued advances in basic plant research and in genomic and
related technologies, there is great scope for further progress in plant breeding, especially in
developing countries, during the coming years (Jauhar, 2007; Moose and Mumm, 2008). The
major impacts of biotechnologies relate both to breeding new crop varieties and to areas of
crop cultivation and management such as the production of propagation materials especially in
vegetatively propagated crops (FAO, 2009c); aspects of plant nutrition such as the production
and use of biofertilizers (Odame, 2002; FAO, 2005a); the use of symbiotic nitrogen-fixing
bacteria and mycorrhizal fungi (Kohler et al., 2008; FAO, 2009c; Yang, Kloepper and Ryu,
2009); aspects of plant protection, including diagnostics and biopesticides (Carpenter et al.,
2002; FAO, 2005a; Pender, 2007); and, finally, the conservation and management of crop
genetic resources, both in situ and ex situ (FAO, 2006a).
Here follows a survey of crop biotechnologies, many of which were initially developed
in industrialized countries but are now being adapted and increasingly used in developing
countries where they are used mainly for commercial crops though in a few cases they
are also being applied to some subsistence crops.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 7
1.3.1 Creation of new genetic variation
The ability of plant breeders to create new genetic variation was enormously increased in
the mid-twentieth century by the invention of tissue culture and use of growth regulators
(Thomas, Murphy and Murray, 2003). The creation of new genetic variation includes wide
crossing with the assistance of methods such as embryo rescue, asymmetric cell fusion,
nuclear implanting and somatic embryogenesis. Attempts at wide crossing between distantly
related species are frequently frustrated by the incompatibility of their genomes.
Chromosome doubling: This is one of the most important technologies for the creation
of fertile interspecific hybrids. Wide-hybrid plants are often sterile so their seeds cannot be
propagated. This is due to differences between chromosome sets inherited from genetically
divergent parental species, which prevent stable chromosome pairing during meiosis.
However, if the chromosome number is artificially doubled, the hybrid may be able to
produce functional pollen and eggs and therefore be fertile. Colchicine has been used for
chromosome doubling in plants since the 1940s and applied to more than 50 plant species,
including the most important annual crops. It has also been used to create seedless fruits and
to produce wide crosses and somatic hybrids. More recently, other chromosome doubling
agents, all of which act as inhibitors of mitotic cell division, have been used successfully in
plant breeding programmes. In some plant species, tissue culture techniques have been used
to induce chromosome doubling (Sonnino, Iwanaga and Henestroza, 1988; Cardi, Carputo
and Frusciante, 1992). As well as making much wider genetic crosses possible, chromosome
doubling has enabled the use of powerful methods such as somatic hybridization and haploid
breeding, which have been especially useful in developing countries. To date, dozens of
important crops have been improved and hundreds of new varieties produced around the
world thanks to chromosome doubling technology.
8 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
be treated with colchicine to induce chromosome doubling, or they spontaneously double
the chromosome number during the in vitro regeneration process, hence stabilizing the new
genome. Finally, the hybrid cells are induced to divide and differentiate into new hybrid
plants. Somatic hybridization was introduced into crop breeding programmes in the early
1980s and has been attempted with several developing country crops (Murphy, 2007a).
The main technical hurdle at present is the instability of the new genome combinations
from two dissimilar species. To a great extent, somatic hybridization has been replaced over
the past decade by transgenesis, which has greater precision, fewer problems with genome
instability and a higher overall success rate. However, transgenesis is only of use when there
is a known useful gene (or genes) to be transferred. Many useful traits are controlled by
as yet unknown sets of genes and can only be transferred into a crop by adding an entire
donor genome, or at least a substantial portion thereof. In recent years, breeders have started
to return in greater numbers to explore the potential of somatic hybridization, especially
in some fruit crops. The reasons for this are threefold. First, transgenesis is not always a
quick and easy option for enhancing variation in crops. Second, tissue culture and molecular
marker techniques have improved considerably over the past decade, which has increased
the rate of success in regenerating genetically stable progeny from such hybridizations.
Third, unlike transgenesis, somatic hybridization is not regarded by regulatory authorities
as genetic modification. Therefore, varieties produced by this technology are not subject
to the same regulatory testing and approval requirements as transgenic varieties, which
has created new commercial opportunities for breeders. Although somatic hybridization
has not yet been used to a great extent for public-good purposes in developing country
crops, this often-overlooked technology has considerable potential and should be kept in
mind for the future.
Haploids and doubled haploids: Haploid plants can be produced using anther culture
which involves the in vitro culture of immature anthers (i.e. the pollen-producing structures
of the plant). As the pollen grains are haploid, the resulting pollen-derived plants are also
haploid (FAO, 2009c). Doubled haploid plants were first produced in the 1960s using
colchicine and today several treatments can be used, including thermal shock or mannitol
incubation (Kasha et al., 2001). Doubled haploids may also be produced from ovule culture.
Breeders value doubled haploid plants because they are 100 percent homozygous and
any recessive genes are therefore readily apparent. The time required after a conventional
hybridization to select pure lines carrying the required recombination of characters is
consequently drastically reduced (Smith et al., 2008). The application of this technique to
plant breeding is hindered by the investments in facilities and human resources necessary to
produce and to test large populations of doubled haploids. The need to test large numbers
of lines can add significantly to the skilled labour requirement and hence lead to increased
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 9
costs. In the developing world, a major centre of such breeding work is China, where
numerous doubled haploid crops have been released and many more are being developed
(FAO, 1995). By 2003, China was cultivating over 2 Mha of doubled haploid varieties, the
most important of which were rice, wheat, tobacco and peppers (Maluszynski et al., 2003).
Improved varieties of durum and bread wheat have also been obtained by applying anther
culture techniques in Tunisia and Morocco, respectively (FAO, 2005a).
Sterile plant varieties: Manipulations by plant breeders frequently result in sterile
varieties that cannot readily be propagated. Sometimes this is a useful trait and is deliberately
engineered by breeders, e.g. in watermelon and citrus crops where consumers demand
seedless fruits. Seed sterility is analogous to F1 or F2 hybrids or other non-propagable
plant types in its utility to commercial seed companies because the farmer cannot use
saved seed and therefore needs to repurchase it each year for replanting. One of the most
rapid and cost-effective approaches for inducing sterility in a plant is to create polyploids,
especially triploids. In most cases, triploid plants will grow and develop normally except
for their inability to set seed and therefore cannot be reproduced or propagated, except by
the company that owns the parent lines through the use of embryo culture. Alternatively,
triploid plants can be regenerated from endosperm tissue, which is naturally triploid. This
method has been used to create triploid varieties of numerous fruit crops including most
of the citrus fruits, acacias, kiwifruit (Actinidia chinensis), loquat (Eriobotrya japonica),
passionflower (Passiflora incarnata) and pawpaw (Asimina triloba) (Lee, 1988).
Mutagenesis
This involves the use of mutagenic agents such as chemicals or radiation to modify DNA and
hence create novel phenotypes (Donini and Sonnino, 1998). It includes somatic mutagenesis
whereby tissue or cell cultures may undergo useful epigenetic modifications provided the
resultant traits are stable in future generations. Induced mutagenesis has been practised
with great success in crop breeding programmes in developing countries since the 1930s
(Ahloowalia, Maluszynski and Nichterlein, 2004), but its scope and utility have recently been
greatly enhanced and extended by the new molecular-based technology of targeting induced
local lesions in genomes (TILLING, see below). An apparent limitation of mutagenesis
versus wide crossing or transgenesis methods is that breeders can manipulate only genes
already present in the genome. No new genes can be added by this method. Furthermore,
nearly all mutations result in a loss of gene function, meaning that mutagenesis is concerned
more with reducing the effects of unwanted genes than increasing the expression of desirable
genes. At first sight, this might seem like a serious limitation to the creation of useful new
agronomic traits. However, recent genomic studies reveal the surprising fact that during
the 10000-year history of agriculture, loss-of-function alleles were associated with nine
10 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
out of 19 key episodes in crop improvement and/or varietal divergence (Doebley, Gaut and
Smith, 2006; Burger, Chapman and Burke, 2008). Therefore, the past and future potency
of mutagenesis for crop improvement cannot be underestimated.
Somaclonal mutagenesis is caused by changes in DNA induced during in vitro culture
(Durrant, 1962). Somaclonal variation is normally regarded as an undesirable by-product
of the stresses imposed on a plant by subjecting it to tissue culture. These stresses include
abiotic factors, such as cold, water deficiency, or high salt concentrations; excess or dearth
of nutrients; the effects of chemical growth regulators; and infections by pathogens. The
stresses of tissue culture can result in single-gene mutations; the deletion or transposition of
larger lengths of DNA, including chromosome segments; methylation or de-methylation of
genes; and even the duplication or loss of entire chromosomes. Provided they are carefully
controlled, somaclonal changes in cultured plant cells can potentially provide a powerful new
tool to generate variation for crop breeders (Sala and Labra, 2003). Somaclonal mutagenesis
has been used to manipulate traits such as disease resistance, insect resistance, nutritional
value, drought and salt tolerance in crops ranging from sugar cane to banana.
Mutagenesis is currently one of the few biotechnologies used much more in developing
countries than elsewhere. Both radiation and chemical mutagenesis have been used for
crop improvement since the 1930s. During the 1950s, FAO began working with the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to make irradiation technology more widely
available to developing countries in a collaboration that is now known as the Atoms for
Food global partnership (FAO and IAEA, 2008). More than 2700 mutation-derived
varieties have been obtained world-wide, generating benefits worth billions of dollars,
mainly in developing countries (Ahloowalia, Maluszynski and Nichterlein, 2004; FAO
and IAEA, 2008).
TILLING can be viewed as an updated high-tech version of mutation breeding (McCallum
et al., 2000a; 2000b). First, mutagenic agents such as alkylating agents or radiation are used
as normal to create a population of thousands of mutagenized plants. Next, the second
(or M2) generation of these mutants is screened using a semiautomated high-throughput
DNA-based method to detect mutations in genes of interest. Screening involves use of
the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to amplify gene fragments of interest, plus rapid
identification of any mutation-induced lesions by looking for mismatches in duplexes
with non-mutagenized DNA sequences. The third step is to evaluate the phenotypes of
a limited number of selected mutant plants. TILLING is also amenable to automation
including high-throughput robotic screening systems, making it especially suitable for
large and complex polyploid genomes found in several major crops. As well as screening
mutagenized populations, TILLING can be used to screen variation in natural populations
in what has been termed EcoTILLING (Henikoff, Till and Comai, 2004).
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 11
As with other technologies, TILLING will eventually get cheaper and more accessible,
so it can be applied more readily by developing countries. However, the wider applications
of this and other new biotechnologies depend critically on how and where they have been
developed. For example, chemical/radiation mutagenesis was pioneered in the public sector
and was subsequently disseminated around the world. In contrast, other biotechnologies
such as maize F1 hybrids and transgenesis were commercialized by the private sector and,
outside the arena of globally traded commodity crops, they have spread more slowly and
less widely. In the case of TILLING, it will be important to maintain a balance between
protecting the legitimate commercial interests and research investments of the exploiting
companies while making the technology available for non-profit, public-good applications
in developing countries.
Genetic modification
This is the use of exogenous DNA or RNA sequences to create transgenic organisms that
express novel and useful traits in agriculture. It may involve the insertion of copies of
endogenously derived DNA or RNA sequences into the same species, e.g. as part of gene
amplification or RNA interference (RNAi) based manipulation of gene expression. Unlike
other methods for creating variation, there is no limit to the source of the added DNA or
RNA; this can be derived from animals, viruses, bacteria, or even from totally man-made
sequences. In transgenesis, DNA for stable, inherited transformation is normally added to
cells by biolistics or biological vectors (Slater, Scott and Fowler, 2008). In biolistics, DNA
is attached to small particles that are propelled into plant tissues. This technique is useful
because it can be applied to any plant species, but is relatively inefficient and does not always
result in the incorporation of the transgenes into the plant genome (Kikkert, Vidal and
Reisch, 2005). Alternatively, DNA can be added in a more controlled fashion by means of
vectors such as Agrobacterium tumefaciens which are able to insert DNA directly into the
genome of a plant cell (Chilton, 1988). Exogenous genes can also be delivered for transient
expression using viral vectors, which is faster but less versatile than stable transformation
(Marillonnet et al., 2005).
Despite their limitations, each of these methods of DNA transfer can sometimes be
more efficient in delivering genes into crops than the non-transgenic biotechnologies such as
induced mutations or wide crosses. Tissue culture methods have also been vital in enabling
transgenesis. Indeed, even today, more than 25 years after the first transgenic plants were
produced, the efficiency of gene transfer in many species (and especially some of the less
well studied developing country crops) is still often limited more by the capacity of a plant
species/genotype to be cultured and regenerated in vitro than by the ability to transfer
exogenous genes per se.
12 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
In some respects, transgenesis is simply a more precise form of wide crossing. The
major difference is that the transferred DNA can be derived from a multiplicity of sources.
One disadvantage of transgenesis is that for complex multigenic traits, such as drought
or salinity tolerance, the genes involved (of which there may be many) have yet to be
conclusively identified. This means that breeders currently have relatively few candidate
genes available for transfer, although the list of potential genes will continue to grow with
further advances in genomics. A further limitation for transgenesis in crop breeding is the
current IPR system, whereby several key underpinning technologies are owned by a few
commercial companies. As discussed below, this can inhibit the wider development of
transgenic crops and is a particular disincentive to their deployment in developing countries
(Murphy, 2007a). Additional limitations to the wider adoption of transgenesis include
complex and still-unresolved regulatory regimes for the release of transgenic crops plus
uncertain public responses in developing countries and/or in potential customer countries
(Stein and Rodrguez-Cerezo, 2009; Ramessar et al., 2009).
In response to the problem of restricted ownership of IPR relating to first-generation
transgenic crops, there are numerous local initiatives for developing countries to develop their
own proprietary biotechnologies, many of which emanate from public-private partnerships
(PPPs). For example, in 2009, EMBRAPA, the Brazilian agricultural research organization,
applied for final regulatory approval of transgenic herbicide-tolerant soybean varieties, as
an alternative to the Roundup Ready technology owned by Monsanto. In this PPP with
the BASF Corporation, EMBRAPA developed locally adapted soybean varieties which are
planned for release to farmers in 2011. In addition to its longstanding and successful non-
transgenic breeding programmes, the Malaysian Palm Oil Board has a number of partnership
programmes, including PPPs, where some of the objectives include the development of
transgenic oil palm varieties expressing traits such as improved oil quality and yield, and pest
resistance (Murphy, 2007b; Sambanthamurthi et al., 2009). In India, locally-bred transgenic
eggplant (Solanum melongena) varieties carrying the Bt trait i.e. containing genes derived
from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) coding for proteins that are toxic to insect
pests are nearing the final stages of development (Choudhary and Gaur, 2009). The original
Bt hybrid stock was donated by its developer, Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company, to public
research institutes in India, Bangladesh, and the Philippines for use in smallholder targeted
breeding programmes in a PPP and North-South partnership (NSP) with Cornell University.
Transgenic crops were first grown on a fully commercial scale in the mid 1990s. The
first-generation transgenic crops which were grown on an estimated 125 Mha in 2008,
are almost exclusively private-sector goods developed in industrialized countries (James,
2008) and tailored to satisfy the needs of their farmers. For over a decade, large-scale
commercial transgenesis has been effectively restricted to four commodity crops (maize,
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 13
soybean, canola/rapeseed and cotton) that collectively accounted for over 99.5 percent of
transgenic crop production in 2008. These four crops expressed two transgenic trait classes,
i.e. herbicide tolerance (63 percent of genetically modified [GM] crops planted in 2008)
or insect resistance (15 percent), while 22 percent had both traits (James, 2008). Although
the very narrow range of existing transgenic crops and traits was developed by the private
sector primarily for commercial use in industrialized countries, some of them have also
been adopted by developing country farmers including many smallholders (Glover, 2007,
2008). For example, the vast majority of soybean output in South America is transgenic
and is grown on commercial farms while Bt cotton is grown by an estimated 12 million
small and resource-poor farmers in India and China (James, 2008).
One factor that should be taken into consideration with transgenic varieties is that
while their transgenic status is normally due to the presence of one or a few exogenous
genes, the background genotype is still the product of non-transgenic biotechnologies. For
example, the background genotype of Bt cotton grown in India was created by conventional
hybridization and backcrossing; and Roundup Ready soybeans grown in South America
have improved yield and quality traits thanks to decades of mutagenesis and wide-crossing
programmes. In some cases, such as soybean in Argentina and hybrid maize in South Africa,
farmers will be using these varieties not just because of their transgenic traits, but equally
(or possibly more) because the varieties also contain other useful agronomic features such
as disease resistance or heterosis that were incorporated using non-transgenic breeding
methods (Burke, 2004). In other cases, such as Bt cotton in India, the transgenic trait is
probably the primary reason for farmer interest in the varieties (Pender, 2007).
Both soybean and cotton are cash crops, and despite their higher prices, transgenic
varieties have been widely cultivated in some developing countries. In India, the price
of Bt hybrid cottonseed was initially almost triple that of non-transgenic counterparts
(Qaim, 2003), but it was nevertheless popular with farmers. However, the high prices led
to increased demand for transgenic seed that had been illicitly crossed with local Indian
varieties and was available to farmers on the black market. Illicit Bt cotton hybrids were
already being sold on the black market across significant areas of the Indian cotton belt
for several seasons before the officially approved hybrids were commercialized in 2002
(Scoones, 2005). By 2005, there were reports of black market seeds capturing over 70
percent of Bt cotton sales thanks in part to their being 1540 percent cheaper than official
varieties (Herring, 2006, 2007). Several years later, there were an estimated 200 unofficial Bt
cotton varieties, but these were losing popularity due to steep falls in seed prices for official
Bt seed (Herring, 2009). Similarly, in China, fully IPR-protected Bt cottonseed imported
from the United States initially commanded a price premium of 333 percent in 2001. By
2006, however, non-enforcement of IPR and illicit seed marketing had eroded the price
14 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
premium to virtually nil (Tripp, Louwaars and Eaton, 2007). Finally, in Argentina, Qaim
and de Janvry (2003) report that Bt cotton initially cost from upwards of four to six times
more than non-transgenic varieties, resulting in an adoption rate of only 5.4 percent. Within
a few years, black market seed was available at one third the official price and these IPR
had become virtually unenforceable in Argentina (Qaim and Traxler, 2005).
Therefore, while these examples underscore the popularity of some first generation
transgenic crops in developing countries, they also highlight serious problems associated
with near-monopoly ownership, anti-competitive IPR regulations and the enforced payment
of licence fees (Qaim and Traxler, 2005; Murphy, 2007a). High price differentials and/or
licence fees can drive farmers to black-market seed (Qaim and de Janvry, 2003; Perrin and
Fulginiti, 2008), or to refuse fee payments as happened with herbicide tolerant soybean in
South America (Murphy, 2007a). A possible solution is for developing countries to develop
indigenous proprietary biotechnologies which can be made available to farmers at lower cost
(Cohen, 2005). Another possibility is for developing countries to invest in the infrastructure
to develop extension and seed distribution systems that can provide objective, independent
information to farmers regarding the on-farm economic benefits and drawbacks from
these and other agricultural technologies originating in developed countries and, if farmers
are interested, explain how they can gain legal access to such innovations.
Following over a decade of first generation transgenesis which has been restricted to virtually
four globally traded commodity crops, the emerging second-generation of transgenic crops
includes several examples aimed specifically at subsistence farmers in developing countries.
In sub-Saharan Africa, despite relatively low capacity for the indigenous development of
transgenesis, several such crops are currently being trialled in joint ventures such as PPPs
and/or NSPs (Hartwich, Janssen and Tola, 2003; Smale, Edmeades and De Groote, 2006;
Anandajayasekeram et al., 2007). For example, banana is primarily a subsistence crop in
rural areas in Uganda, providing some seven million people with food and income. The
highest yielding varieties are susceptible to diseases, but since they are sterile, there is
limited potential for crossbreeding. In a recent NSP, the National Agricultural Research
Organization of Uganda imported transgenic disease-resistant sweet banana plants from
the University of Leuven, Belgium (Kikulwe, Wesseler and Falck-Zepeda, 2008). The
plants are being field trialled at the Kawanda Agricultural Research Institute for resistance
to bacterial wilt and black sigatoka fungal disease. While initial results are promising, the
ultimate success of this and similar ventures depends critically on the response of local
growers and consumers (Smale, Edmeades and De Groote, 2006).
Other transgenic varieties are at even earlier stages of research and face many years of
further development and complex regulatory hurdles before they can be even considered for
release. For example, in South Africa the replication-associated protein gene of the severe
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 15
pathogen maize streak virus (MSV) was used to transform maize plants. Transgenic plants
displayed a significant delay in symptom development, a decrease in symptom severity
and higher survival rates than non-transgenic plants after MSV challenge (Shepherd et al.,
2007). Also, a United States based group funded partially by the Rockefeller Foundation
and the Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical (CIAT) is developing transgenic
cassava containing a bacterial ADP-glucose pyrophosphorylase gene for enhanced starch
production (Ihemere et al., 2006). Other examples currently in the pipeline include: maize
for insect resistance and improved protein content; potatoes for viral disease and pest
resistance; and rice for disease and pest resistance.
Interspecific hybridization
Wide crossing, or interspecific hybridization, involves hybridizing a crop variety with a distantly
related plant from outside its normal sexually compatible gene pool. The usual purpose of
wide crossing is not to produce true hybrids, i.e. progeny containing significant parts of
both parental genomes, but rather to obtain a plant that is virtually identical to the original
crop except for a few genes contributed by the distant relative. In some cases, it may even be
possible to use wide crossing to obtain a plant that is almost identical to an elite variety of a crop
except for the presence of a single new trait or gene transferred from a different species. The
strategy of obtaining useful genes from other species via wide crosses was greatly enhanced
by advances in plant tissue culture. A particular challenge was to circumvent the biological
mechanisms that normally prevent interspecific and intergenus crosses. The spontaneous
rejection of hybrid embryos is normally an important mechanism to ensure the reproductive
isolation of populations and to avoid non-viable or debilitated hybrid progeny. Therefore, a
high proportion of wide hybrid seeds either does not develop to maturity, or does not contain a
viable embryo. To avoid spontaneous abortion, the breeder removes embryos from the ovule at
the earliest possible stage and places them into culture in vitro (Chi, 2003). Mortality rates can
be high, but enough embryos normally survive the rigours of removal, transfer, tissue culture,
and regeneration to produce adult hybrid plants for testing and further crossing.
First generation, wide hybrid plants are rarely suitable for cultivation because they
have only received half of their genes from the crop parent. From the other (non-crop)
parent they will have received not only the few desirable genes sought by the breeder but
also thousands of undesirable genes that must be removed by further manipulation. This
is achieved by re-crossing the hybrid with the original crop plant, plus another round
of embryo rescue, to grow up the new hybrids. This backcrossing process is repeated
for about six generations (sometimes more) until the breeder ends up with a plant that is
99.9 percent identical to the original crop parent except that it now contains the desirable
gene from the donor parent plant. Particularly useful for gene and quantitative trait locus
16 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
(QTL) discovery and breeding are the so-called introgression libraries, namely collections
of backcrossed families each carrying an introgressed segment (about 10-20 cM) from the
donor parent and covering, as a collection, the entire genome (Zamir, 2001). Wide crossing
programmes can take more than a decade to complete although MAS and anther culture
can also be used to speed up the process. They involve thousands of plants, a great deal
of scientific expertise and skilled labour, and success is never guaranteed. Nevertheless,
wide crosses have been largely successful in enabling breeders to access genetic variation
beyond the normal reproductive barriers of their crops. Some case studies of successes
with interspecific crops, including disease-resistant Asian rice and New Rice for Africa
(NERICA) varieties are discussed in Part 1.5.
One concern for the future of wide crossing is that many potentially beneficial donor
species or local populations of wild plants are being destroyed every year by habitat
degradation, industrialization and agricultural expansion. This illustrates the need for an
inventory and/or the improved conservation of wild plants that could possibly contribute
useful genes to major crops such as those influencing disease resistance. Threats to potentially
useful wild relatives of the major Asian crops are particularly serious. Gurdev Khush,
former principal breeder at the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), developer of
wide crosses of rice, and 1996 World Food Prize laureate, has described wild relatives as
truly priceless seeds (Barclay, 2004). Using wide crosses, IRRI has produced new rice
varieties that are resistant to the grassy stunt virus, bacterial blight, and blast and tungro
diseases. Wide crossing with the wild species Oryza officinalis has produced four new rice
varieties, each carrying resistance to the brown planthopper which is a particularly serious
pest (as well as being a viral vector) in Vietnam (Murphy, 2007a). The new rice varieties
reduce pesticide use and also contain resistance to the grassy stunt virus.
The use of the hybrid-plant technologies listed above has been one of the cornerstones
of modern crop breeding and is set to benefit further from advances in plant biotechnology.
For example, new chromosome engineering techniques are being translated into a greatly
improved capacity to effect wide hybridization and hence enable the recruitment of
important agronomic traits from wild species into developing country crops (Gupta and
Tsuchiya, 1991; Jauhar, 2003; Ceoloni et al., 2005; Singh, 2007). Like TILLING, chromosome
engineering can be viewed as a modern high-tech form of an earlier biotechnology.
It will be important for developing countries to be in a position to participate in and
capitalize on such research advances in the future. This is a good argument for much
greater investments in human and physical resources. Indeed, even in a major agricultural
research centre like China, there have been recent concerns that insufficient resources
are being channelled into R&D to underpin future advances in crop breeding (Chinese
Academy of Sciences, 2008).
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 17
1.3.2 Screening and selection
In addition to creating new genetic variation, breeders need effective and efficient methods
to identify, select and propagate useful variants, and there has been striking recent progress
in this area. Examples include the many improvements in efficiency and accuracy in
screening and selecting the huge numbers of genetic variants, often numbered in the tens
of thousands, created by technologies such as hybridization or mutagenesis. From tandem
gas chromatography/mass spectroscopy to automated sequencing and robotized PCR, a
host of new analytical and screening technologies can enable breeders to progress from the
laborious processing of a few dozen samples per day to routine, rapid, automated, round-
the-clock, in-depth analyses of the detailed molecular characteristics of many thousands
of plants. Genomics, and genome sequencing/annotation in particular, is a core technology
group that is already underpinning improvement in an increasing range of species, including
rice, sorghum and oil palm (Kovach and McCouch, 2008; Sakamoto and Matsuoka, 2008;
Bolot et al., 2009; Skamnioti and Gurr, 2009).
18 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
MAS technologies have also benefited from more efficient screening methods including PCR,
DNA/DNA hybridization, and DNA sequencing (Varshney and Tuberosa, 2007a). Today,
most MAS technologies use PCR-based methods, such as sequence-tagged microsatellites
and single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Molecular marker technology is now being
applied to an increasing range of crops and even to domesticating entirely new crops. As well
as annual crops such as cereals and legumes (Garzn, Ligarreto and Blair, 2008), MAS has
been useful in perennial crops, including subsistence and cash crops in developing countries.
Examples include oil palm, coconut, coffee, tea, cocoa, and many tropical fruit trees such
as bananas and mangoes. By using DNA markers in conjunction with other new breeding
technologies such as clonal propagation, it should be possible to make rapid strides in the
creation and cultivation of greatly improved varieties of many of these important tropical crops.
In the medium term, MAS could well evolve into what has been termed genomics-
assisted breeding (Varshney, Graner and Sorrells, 2005; Varshney and Tuberosa, 2007b).
Here bioinformatics-supported genomic and metabolomic resources are key parts of breeding
programmes. For example, the immediate wild ancestor of rice, Oryza rufipongon, is a
genetically diverse species containing alleles that confer agronomically useful unexpected
(transgressive) variation when crossed with elite cultivars of O. sativa. However, there
is currently no way of predicting where to look for such wild alleles. The integration of
whole-genome mapping and marker analyses coupled with QTL cloning and EcoTILLING
would greatly facilitate a targeted use of wild relatives in breeding (Kovach and McCouch,
2008). Of course, this assumes that such resources and infrastructure are available for the
crop in question, which is complex enough in the case of rice despite its small and much
studied genome, but may be even more challenging for more genetically complex and less
well studied subsistence crops such as cassava or millet.
Despite improvements over the past decade, a major challenge in developing MAS is
still the cost and technical sophistication of the initial investment. For each crop, mapping
populations must be created, genomic markers assembled, and genetic maps compiled.
A cost/benefit analysis by the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center
(CIMMYT) on using MAS in resource-limited public breeding programmes has concluded
that each case for developing MAS technology needs to be assessed separately and depends
critically on: the nature of the crop including its genomic organization; the availability
of requisite technical infrastructure and know-how; and the availability of capital for
set-up costs (FAO, 2007b). Such calculations are especially important when developing
countries are deciding whether to invest scarce resources in such technologies. Although
MAS is becoming progressively cheaper, it is still often relatively expensive compared with
alternative approaches for many developing country crops. Prospects for MAS in African
breeding programmes have been reviewed by Stafford (2009).
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 19
Marker-assisted selection is beginning to produce significant results in the relatively few
crop breeding programmes in which it has been deployed, and future prospects here are
very good. One example is the development using MAS of HHB 67 Improved, a pearl
millet hybrid with resistance to downy mildew disease, which was approved for release
in India in 2005. In 2008, F1 hybrid seed was produced to sow at least 300000ha with
HHB 67 Improved, while the 2009 area could exceed 500000ha if sowing conditions are
favourable (Hash, 2009). Other examples where MAS has been used in the development
of new products for farmers include new rice varieties with resistance to bacterial blight
in India (Gupta, 2009) and with submergence tolerance in the Philippines (Rigor, 2009).
Although most crop research centres of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural
Research (CGIAR) and many national organizations are increasingly using MAS in crop
improvement programmes, it is still at a relatively early stage in its rollout for key subsistence
crops in many developing countries (FAO, 2007c).
Micropropagation
In crops where sexual reproduction is problematic or impractical, vegetative propagation
has been used for a long time. More recently, biotechnologies have been developed for
mass clonal propagation of elite lines or disease-free planting material by culturing in vitro
explants such as shoot tips, tuber sections or other cuttings. The regenerated plantlets are
subcultured, often on a massive scale, until thousands or millions have been produced for
transfer to the field. In this way, cuttings from a single elite tree or disease-free plant can be
used for rapid large-scale cultivation. These methods are especially useful for subsistence
root and tuber crops such as cassava, potato, and sweet potato as well as for fruit tree crops
such as banana and oil palm because they facilitate the production of healthy planting
materials at reasonable costs (FAO, 2009c). In the past few decades, the technique of mass
propagation has become increasingly useful in breeding programmes, especially for tree
20 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
crops most of which are too long-lived to be amenable to the approaches developed for
annual crops. Mass clonal propagation can be a fast and cheap method for multiplying the
best genetic stock in such perennial species.
Today, in vitro propagation including micropropagation and somatic embryogenesis, is
widely used in a range of developing country subsistence crops, including banana, cassava,
yam, potato, sweet potato (Ipomoea batatas), frafra potato (Solenostemon rotundifolius)
and cocoyam; commercial plantation crops, such as cocoa, coffee, oil palm, sugarcane and
tea; niche crops, such as artichoke, cardamom, garlic, ginger, and vanilla; and fruit trees,
such as almond, cactus, citrus, coconut, date palm, ensete, granadilla, grape, lemon tree,
mango, olive, pistachio, pineapple, and plantain (Sharma, 2001; Blakesley and Marks, 2003;
Pender, 2007; Smale and Tushemereirwe, 2007; FAO, 2009c). Some of the many countries
with significant crop micropropagation programmes include Argentina, Gabon, India,
Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, the Philippines, Uganda and Vietnam.
Micropropagation is especially useful for vegetatively propagated root crops and it is here
that the greatest successes have been demonstrated. For example, disease-free sweet potatoes
based on tissue culture have been adopted on 0.5 Mha in Shandong Province in China, with
yield gains of 3040 percent (Fuglie et al., 1999). By 1998, more than 80 percent of local
farmers had adopted the technology, generating productivity increases of US$145million
and increasing agricultural income for the seven million sweet potato growers by 3.6 and 1.6
percent, in relatively poor and better-off districts respectively. In India, a scheme enabled
potato breeders to integrate micropropagation and virus detection into the initial stages
of seed production, leading to an estimated two- to three-fold increase in seed health, and
generating more than US$4 million in revenues (Naik and Karihaloo, 2007).
In Kenya, micropropagated disease-free bananas were adopted by more than 500000
farmers over a 10-year period (Wambugu, 2004). It had been predicted that these new varieties
would offer higher financial returns in Kenya than traditional bananas (Qaim, 1999), and
this was later empirically verified (Mbogoh, Wambugu and Wakhusama, 2003). In the late
1990s, the Uganda National Banana Research Programme sought to address the decline of
cooking banana production in Bamunanika subcounty by introducing micropropagated,
high-yielding cultivars. The new cultivars generated socio-economic benefits for the adopters.
However, notwithstanding the use of a participatory farmer-to-farmer extension approach,
the relatively high capital and recurrent costs of these new cultivars have prevented less
endowed households from benefiting (FAO, 2009c).
The use of micropropagated planting materials in Hwedza District (Zimbabwe) enhanced
crop yield and economic returns of sweet potato compared with traditionally propagated
planting materials (Mutandwa, 2008). In this case the innovation was adopted by 97 percent
of the farmers, including both the worst-off and better-off farmers, and contributed to
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 21
household food security and produced cash surplus (FAO, 2009c). In Vietnam, farmers
participated in the micropropagation of new high yielding late-blight resistant potatoes,
resulting in a doubling of yields from 10 to 20 T/ha. By producing their own plantlets,
farmers have increased yield and incomes, and have set up rural microenterprises specializing
in the commercial production of disease-free seed (Uyen et al., 1996).
22 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
organophosphate pesticides over about 13 Mha. While there were no reported instances
of serious animal or human health problems, the cost of safety measures was high and
there was significant environmental damage (FAO, 2007d). For these reasons, FAO and
other partners have been developing alternative bio-based control strategies. These have
involved a combination of Metarhizium fungi which are existing pathogens of locusts and
grasshoppers, plus the biocontrol agent phenyacetonitrile which is a hormone that affects
the swarming behaviour of locusts. One particular isolate of Metarhizium anisopliae has
been formulated as the proprietary agent Green Muscle and is produced commercially
by a South African company. Recent assessments of these biopesticides underlined the
kinds of challenges that also confront the wider deployment of many other biotechnologies
(FAO, 2007d and 2007e). These include further R&D to improve product formulation
and efficacy in the field; improved production and quality assurance methods; accelerated
registration for environmental release; improved awareness, capacity building and training
for all stakeholders; and formal incorporation into crop protection strategies. Metarhizium
strains have been used also as effective control agents against rhinoceros beetle and the
Metarhizium Technology Centre in Malaysia has produced nearly 0.5 tonnes of pure
Metarhizium spores for future crop treatments (Moslim et al., 2006).
Plant nutrition
This category includes the production and use of biofertilizers and the use of nitrogen-fixing
bacteria and/or mycorrhizal fungi to improve plant performance. Recent studies have shown
that there are numerous plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria that not only enhance nutrient
uptake by crops but also induce systemic tolerance to other abiotic stresses such as drought
and salinity (Yang, Kloepper and Ryu, 2009). As with biopesticides, the use of bionutrition
strategies carries the double benefit of reducing input costs for farmers and preventing nitrate
and phosphate accumulation within soils and run-off into sensitive watercourses.
There are numerous examples of the use of these strategies in developing countries both
to augment the nutritional status of crops and as alternatives to chemical supplements. For
example, it was shown in Thailand that rhizobial inoculants can effectively replace chemical
fertilizers for the production of soybean, groundnut and mung bean crops (Boonkerd,
2002). The use of Rhizobia in Thai soybean, groundnut and mung bean production
between 1980 and 1993 produced estimated accumulated benefits of US$100, US$17 and
US$4 million, respectively, for crop producers. However, the performance of inoculants
can vary with micronutrient conditions in the field and according to the persistence of
bacterial populations in different soils. Some studies have revealed the widely differing
effects of inoculants in different locations, even within small areas, and significant variations
in their performance over time (Hall and Clark, 1995). Therefore, in addition to agronomic
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 23
factors, the knowledge and experience of local farmers is important in ensuring the effective
application of biofertilizers. In Kenya, the UNESCO Microbiological Resources Centre
(MIRCEN) developed a Rhizobium inoculant known as Biofix for sorghum crops that has
been in use since 1981 (Odame, 2002). Elsewhere in Africa, biofertilizers are being developed
for cowpea, groundnut, bambara groundnut and rice (FAO, 2005a).
In Mexico, a Rhizobium-based biofertilizer developed by the National University of
Mexico for the common bean (Peralta et al., 2004) was commercialized in 2003 under the
name of Rhizofer. It is sold either on its own or together with spores of the mycorrhizal
fungus Glomus intraradices, to help the plant acquire soil nutrients and to solubilize
phosphates. This commercial package also includes printed material and technical assistance.
The biofertilizer has been used mainly in the central and northern regions of Mexico. To
date, 20000ha from a total of 2 million sown in the country have been biofertilized with
reportedly very satisfactory results. The use of this biofertilizer offers important savings in
the cultivation of the common bean, and costs significantly less than chemical fertilization.
Moreover, it improves soil biodiversity and promotes soil biological activity (Peralta, 2009).
The nutritional status of the soil can also be enhanced by using fungal inoculants to
accelerate the breakdown of organic fertilizer. In the Philippines, inoculation of rice straw
with the fungus Trichoderma reduced composting time to as little as 2145 days depending
on the type of plant residue used (FAO, 2009c). Following the success of this rapid
composting technology (RCT), the Philippines government set up production units for
the fungal agent and actively promoted the production and use of organic fertilizer by
farmers cooperatives, private enterprises and NGOs. An impact study concluded that
rice and sugarcane farmers adopting RCT used significantly less chemical fertilizer and
had higher yields and higher net incomes (Rola and Chupungco, 1996). For example, rice
farmers using both organic fertilizer made via RCT and chemical fertilizer produced 15
percent more than farmers using chemical fertilizer only. Net income gains perha were
about US$171. The main advantages of the substitution of chemical with organic fertilizer
were the positive effect on soil nutrient content as well as on soil tilth and texture, making
organic fertilizer superior to the chemical fertilizers (Cuevas, 1997).
24 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
goes hand-in-hand with conservation because it is fundamental both to our understanding
of what is being conserved and to choosing which genetic resources should be conserved.
Characterization can also play an important role regarding issues of ownership as well as
access to and the benefit-sharing of agricultural genetic resources.
The key role of biotechnologies in the acquisition, management, conservation, protection,
characterization and exchange of plant genetic resources is becoming ever more apparent
(Karp, 2002; Peacock and Chaudhury, 2002; FAO, 2006a). Many biotechnologies already
discussed here are being employed for germplasm management in the widespread network
of public sector seed banks and resource centres across the world (Engels et al., 2002; FAO,
2005a; Hunter and Taylor, 2007; Murphy, 2007a). For example, relatively well established
technologies such as cryopreservation, artificial seed production, somatic embryogenesis,
and other forms of in vitro cell or tissue culture are extensively used for the conservation of
genetic resources for food and agriculture in developing countries, especially for vegetatively
propagated plants which can easily get contaminated with pathogenic micro-organisms.
Whereas phenotypes (e.g. yield, growth rate) and morphological traits (coat colour, seed
shape) are influenced by both genetic and environmental factors, the use of molecular
markers and genomics reveals differences at the DNA level that are not influenced by
the environment. These molecular tools are having an increasing impact on the study and
management of genetic resources.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 25
with measures to address a wide range of cross-sectoral issues from extension services to
civil society programmes. The uptake of biotechnologies is therefore gradually improving
but remains patchy.
Some of the main factors affecting the use of biotechnologies in developing countries
in the past are highlighted below.
26 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
by huge gains in agricultural productivity that enabled the country to remain self-sufficient
in many major crops despite steady increases both in population and in per capita food
consumption (IAASTD, 2008). Brazil and India each spend less than one tenth of the Chinese
agricultural biotechnology budget, but vastly out-spend the whole of sub-Saharan Africa
(e.g. for India, see Sharma, Charak and Ramanaiah, 2003). China, India and Brazil are now
recognized as significant global centres of emerging excellence in biotechnology that will
soon be on a par with the United States and the European Union (Dutton, 2009). A note
of concern here comes from a recent downward revision in estimates of global agriculture
R&D spending, especially in developing countries (Beintema and Stads, 2008).
The lack of adequate and sustained investments remains a major limiting factor in
most developing countries (IAASTD, 2009). This situation may be exacerbated by the
consequences of the current economic downturn.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 27
are part of private sector bodies with no explicit public good missions. A major challenge
is to find ways to facilitate the uptake of agricultural R&D discoveries into developing
countries and non-commercial crop staples without compromising the innovative processes
that often produce such discoveries. In some cases, this requires balancing the ability to
innovate, driven largely by the assurances that IPR provides, with ensuring that access to
these innovative technologies is provided to those who need it most.
Many crop biotechnologies originate from discoveries in the public sector but require
significant private sector involvement for effective reduction to practice (Hartwich, Janssen
and Tola, 2003). Moreover, several aspects of crop biotechnologies, including some key plant
transformation and regeneration steps, are subject to private sector IPR, which can significantly
limit the freedom to operate of public bodies wishing to develop new crop varieties. This has
led to the establishment of a range of PPPs with the broad objective of making the products
of existing biotechnologies available to smallholders in developing countries, normally in
areas where the private sector has little commercial interest. The private and public sectors
should establish a more inclusive intellectual property landscape that recognizes the special
needs of subsistence and commercial farmers alike in developing countries.
The rollout of GM crops has at times been inhibited by high transaction costs and complex,
inconsistent regulatory requirements (Stein and Rodrguez-Cerezo, 2009), sometimes leading
to IPR avoidance and piracy of traits. This could be regarded as a qualified market failure.
A comprehensive analysis of IPR and regulation is beyond the scope of this document, and
these aspects are covered in much greater detail in Chapters 8 and 9.
28 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
and technological constraints in agriculture and natural resource management. Research
participatory approaches are used in problem identification, planning, implementation and
research transfer and/or evaluation. Experiences using FPR for the improvement of crop
production have been made in the area of plant breeding and are known as participatory
plant breeding (PPB) (Murphy, 2007a), and in IPM, often using farmer field schools.
Recent evaluations of the effectiveness of FPR and PPB have been encouraging (Ashby
and Lilja, 2004; Scoones and Thompson, 2009). Small farmers often produce in marginal
areas with limited access to knowledge, improved technologies and inputs. Conventional
breeding has focused heavily on broad adaptability and major traits, resulting in high
yielding varieties with pest and disease resistance that produce well when input levels are
high, but poorly in the marginal conditions under which cash-poor farmers often operate
(Murphy, 2007a). Traits such as resilience to adverse conditions (e.g. water scarcity), ease of
harvest and storage, taste and cooking qualities, speed of crop maturation, and the suitability
of crop residues as livestock feed, can be of high relevance to small farmers. Involving them
in the breeding process from the beginning will help to develop new crop varieties and
agricultural practices that are better adapted to the areas where they produce and more
relevant to their farming conditions and needs. Examples of participatory approaches in plant
breeding are described by Ceccarelli et al. (1997 and 2000), Toomey (1999), Almekinders
and Elings (2001), Vernooy (2003), and Morris and Bellon (2004).
While participatory research can generate a range of direct and indirect benefits for
participants, careful attention needs to be paid to achieving equitable impacts. Participatory
approaches must consider power sharing and participant selection, or risk missing important
contributions from women and other marginalized groups (Johnson et al., 2004). Gender
issues can play an important role in many aspects of agriculture (Boserup, 1970), and have
been shown to be relevant also for plant breeding/management/processing and the uptake
of new technologies (Wambugu et al., 2000; Nguthi, 2007; Smale and Tushemereirwe, 2007;
CGIAR, 2008). For example, many traits relevant for the harvesting, threshing, milling and
cooking of grains can be more or less invisible even to the men in the local community, and
may be overlooked by scientist-breeders. However, these processing-related traits may be
of paramount concern to the women who actually carry out such tasks as they prepare
food from the crops on a daily basis. The importance of women in the outcome of breeding
projects has been shown in several case studies in Cte dIvoire, where the selection of
inappropriate traits by poorly-informed scientific breeders led to the rejection of new
varieties by women farmers (Lilja and Dalton, 1997; Dalton and Guei, 2003; Dalton, 2004).
Modern biotechnologies successfully applied in conventional plant breeding programmes
have recently also been introduced using participatory approaches. MAS has been used as
part of a PPB approach for developing rice with improved stress tolerance (Steele et al.,
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 29
2002 and 2004; Witcombe, Joshi and Goyal, 2003), for developing higher yielding maize
(Virk et al., 2003) and in small-scale potato crop systems in the Bolivian Andes (Puente-
Rodrguez, 2008). Participatory approaches have been used for varietal selection of NERICA
rice (see Part 1.5), and for the adaptation and diffusion of NERICA technologies for rice-
based production systems in Africa (Somado, Guei and Keya, 2008). Similar schemes are
being piloted for other crops and together with more effective extension services, should
be considered integral to the process of crop improvement (World Bank, 2007). FPR
approaches have also been applied to the production of micropropagated planting materials
in many countries including Colombia and Bolivia, and to the production of biofertilizers
and biopesticides in Colombia, Ecuador and Peru among other countries, leading to the
establishment of micropropagation laboratories managed by farmers.
Seed systems
One of the major hurdles to the wide-scale use of improved varieties obtained though
biotechnological approaches in developing countries is the weakness of the local seed systems.
In many developing countries, the vast majority of seeds used in agriculture are supplied
by informal seed systems which include farm-saved seeds, seed exchanges between farmers
and seeds purchased from local markets. The informal seed system can, in some instances,
play an important role in the conservation of local landraces and other precious genetic
resources, and satisfies the demand of low-cost inputs, but the seed supplies often do not
meet acceptable quality standards. Seeds of improved varieties obtained by biotechnological
means combined with conventional breeding approaches such as MAS-derived varieties, are
usually multiplied and distributed through formal seed production and distribution schemes
which offer high-standard propagation materials but which often lack the capacity to meet
the seed demand for these new varieties and to reach vast numbers of small-scale farmers.
30 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
For example, the current demand for seeds of NERICA varieties in West Africa exceeds
their supply. Also, the seeds offered by the formal production and distribution systems
are frequently more expensive and cannot be accessed by farmers with low purchasing
power. In addition to infrastructure, government support within developing countries may
consider providing financial incentives to farmers to plant higher yielding varieties that will
ultimately bring increased revenue back to the farmer.
Extension services
In a recent report on seed delivery systems in Africa, Guei, Somado and Larinde (2008)
stated that: Most extension services are characterized by a lack of information, technical
capacity and logistics for timely delivery of advice to farmers. They have inadequate
capacity in terms of personnel and are unable to formulate and implement good and sound
technology transfer approaches. Even in comparatively well developed and resourced
cropping systems such as oil palm in Malaysia, the effectiveness of extension services to
smallholders has come in for criticism (Jalani et al., 2002). Extension services are fundamental
to the success of agricultural development, including advice to farmers and local seed
production and distribution. Because they are an end-of-pipeline function, extension
services are frequently overlooked by researchers, policy-makers and in government budget
allocations. Importantly, the linkages between agriculture researchers, extensionists and
producers are quite weak, resulting in the poor uptake of innovations, research that fails
to reflect smallholder needs, and the delivery of the wrong type of extension education
programmes (FAO, 2001). And yet, without a good extension service the introduction
of even the best new crop varieties may be delayed or prevented (World Bank, 2007).
Some of the problems with extension services include poor human resources, inadequate
operational and transportation support, and inappropriate orientation and methodological
approaches. Extension agents also have a particularly difficult and often isolated role that
may be hampered by poor or inappropriate training, insufficient technical support, lack
of motivational incentives, unrealized expectations of farmers and external pressures from
third parties such as private seed merchants or NGO representatives.
A report from 39 African countries indicated that nine of them had no extension
services at all, while ten more relied on overseas development agencies (Guei, Somado
and Larinde, 2008). Even where extension services exist in a country, they are not always
able to respond to new crop introductions. For example, when Bt cotton was introduced
to India, there was a complete lack of government provision of such services and farmers
relied solely upon private seed companies for knowledge dissemination and advice
(Solution Exchange, 2007; Grure, Mehta-Bhatt and Sengupta, 2008). This is clearly
unsatisfactory and in the case of Bt cotton in India it contributed to public scepticism about
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 31
the technology. Clearly, there is a significant structural problem if so many countries do
not oversee the provision of national or local extension services to farmers. The case for
a qualitative improvement in the status and local management of extension services as an
integral aspect of crop development should be emphasized more strongly to governments
and policy-makers. The potential for better designed technologies and better technology
uptake via well managed and better linked research-extension-producer networks to lead
directly to increased food production is demonstrated by the case of potatoes in China.
Following a change in government policy in the 1980s, potato cultivation was encouraged
in the country. Advanced breeding materials were obtained from the International Potato
Center (CIP) in Peru and developed by the Crop Research Institute in Yunnan Province
into locally adapted varieties such as Cooperation 88 which greatly outperformed existing
varieties. A combination of vigorous extension services and expanding consumer markets
led to an increase in the potato-growing area from 2.45 to 4.7 Mha, and in yields from
9.7 to 16 T/ha between 1982 and 2002 (Reader, 2009). This made China the largest potato
producer in the world with output reaching 72 Mt or one quarter of the entire global output
by 2007 (FAO, 2009d). Improved seed and extension services able to respond to market
demand have been cited as factors in the positive economic impact of sweet potatoes at
village level in China (Fuglie et al., 1999).
This Part includes several brief case studies of experiences with biotechnologies in developing
country crops. In reality, most of them cannot be labelled as full successes or failures because
each case may present positive and negative consequences at the same time. Nevertheless, some
experiences have brought improved food security to large numbers of people in developing
countries such as the African-Asian rice hybrids (NERICA), rice interspecific hybrids in
Asia, and mutation breeding. The study of socio-economic impacts of biotechnological
innovations in developing countries is still very patchy or limited and few reports are solid
and scientifically sound (FAO, 2009c). In most cases it is therefore impossible to draw clear
conclusions. In many instances even the more negative experiences can be most accurately
described as temporary halts in progress rather than permanent setbacks.
32 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
led to yield increases of up to 50 percent in upland rice crops. These replaced low-yielding,
lodging and shattering-prone O. glaberrima. While rice tends to be a cash crop for small-
to-medium-scale farmers in East and Southern Africa, it is very much a subsistence crop
in West Africa where the majority of African rice is produced.
The NERICA lines were created by crossing O. glaberrima and O. sativa. As these two
species do not naturally interbreed, it was necessary to use a range of advanced tissue culture
technologies to enable the hybrid plants to survive. In particular, embryo rescue and anther
culture methods ensured that crosses survived to produce plantlets to grow on to full maturity.
As with many other hybrids of two relatively inbred lines, NERICA varieties display very good
degrees of heterosis. For example, they grow faster, yield more, and/or resist stresses better than
either parent. Some features of NERICA varieties include: an increase in grain head size from
75100 grains to 400 grains per head; yield gains from 1 T/ha to 2.5 T/ha and up to 67T/ha
with fertilizer application; 2 percent more protein than their African or Asian parents; plus
better pest and weed resistance and more tolerance of drought and infertile soils than Asian
rice. During the 1990s, about 3000 lines were developed, many of which have been released
and are already being grown by farmers in West African countries. The high-yielding new
rice varieties are drought and pest resistant. Their unique adaptation to the growing conditions
in West Africa has helped increase yields and has the potential to benefit 20 million farmers
(Sarla and Mallikarjuna Swamy, 2005; Kijima, Sserunkuuma and Otsuka, 2006).
The Africa Rice Center has reported the release of NERICA varieties in 30 African
countries, and these are now planted in about 0.2 Mha, mainly in Cte dIvoire, Guinea,
Nigeria and Uganda. Uptake is likely to expand as more varieties are released. In sub-
Saharan Africa, over 100 upland varieties are being field tested by the Africa Rice Center in
30 countries and 60 lowland/irrigated varieties are being field tested in 20 countries (FAO,
2009c). Many NERICA varieties are particularly suitable for use in the rainfed upland
agrisystems where smallholders lack the means to irrigate or to apply chemical fertilizers
or pesticides (Somado, Guei and Keya, 2008). In addition to benefiting rural economies,
NERICA has the potential to assist cash-strapped national economies by reducing the cost
of food imports. It has been estimated that the introduction of NERICA in Guinea alone
led to import savings of US$13 million in 2003 (Harsch, 2004). An evaluation by Obilana
and Okumu (2005) discussed the livelihood impacts of NERICA in Benin, Guinea and
Mali and concluded: NERICA rice impacts the whole spectrum of human life problems in
the areas of health, nutrition, education, female empowerment, environmental protection,
and improved collaboration and partnerships for enhanced development. The impacts in
all the three countries are hence the same although they vary in magnitude. By the 2008
season, NERICA varieties were playing a key role in the record rice harvests being enjoyed
across Africa (FAO, 2009e).
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 33
1.5.2 Wide crossing to improve Asian rice
In Asian rice, wide crosses have been especially effective in addressing serious viral diseases
such as the grassy stunt virus to which cultivated rice has little genetic resistance. The virus
is transmitted to the plant by a leaf-dwelling brown planthopper, Nilaparvata lugens. By
the 1960s and 1970s, grassy stunt virus had become endemic in rice crops throughout Asia
and threatened food supplies. During a collecting expedition, scientists from IRRI found
a tiny population of a wild rice relative from India, Oryza nirvara, resistant to the virus.
Normally, it would be impossible to cross these two rather different Oryza species, but
IRRI breeders used tissue culture to produce a crude wide hybrid of this wild Indian plant
and Asian rice. Eventually, after many years of repeatedly backcrossing this hybrid with
local rice varieties, three new virus-resistant varieties of Asian rice were released in 1974
to subsistence farmers (Barclay, 2004). Despite repeated searching, the original Indian
population of virus-resistant O. nirvara was never found again and may well have been
lost forever. Luckily, some of the useful Oryza nirvara genes have been saved by the IRRI
scientists, although these genes are now located in the genomes of the three new varieties
of Asian rice, O. sativa.
34 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
1.5.4 Mutation-bred crop varieties
Public agencies, including the Joint FAO/IAEA Division and universities have been effective
proponents of mutagenesis technology and there are essentially no IPR barriers to its deployment
for public good crop breeding. Hence, many mutagenized crop varieties have been produced
by and for developing countries. More than 2700 varieties of mutation-bred crop varieties
have been released worldwide, mainly in developing countries (FAO and IAEA, 2008). They
include all the major staple species (Ahloowalia, Maluszynski and Nichterlein, 2004) and
have been cultivated in at least 59 developing countries, mostly in Asia. The largest mutation
breeding programmes are in China and India but dozens of other countries are also using the
technology (Maluszynski, Szarejko and Maluszynska, 2003; for review see Kodym and Afza,
2003). Widely used mutagenized crops include: Soghat bread wheat in Pakistan, Zhefu rice
in Thailand, Shwewartun rice in Myanmar, and Bajra pearl millet in India. In Vietnam, three
new varieties of rice with improved food quality and salt tolerance have been developed since
1996. Since their release in the Mekong Delta region, they have increased smallholder incomes
by US$350/farmer/year and include some of the top export varieties (FAO and IAEA, 2008).
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 35
varieties were available on the market plus numerous unofficial varieties (SABP, 2007). It
is noteworthy that despite its undoubted commercial success in most states, Bt cotton in
India has been surrounded by controversy since its introduction in 2002 (Grure, Mehta-
Bhatt and Sengupta, 2008). Various groups have contested its effectiveness, reporting
that farmers have lost income due to lower yields and higher than expected pesticide use,
while some groups reported (albeit not in scientific journals and despite contradictory
evidence) alleged toxic effects of Bt cotton on livestock health. Others have objected to the
high prices for Bt cottonseed charged by seed companies and this has led to widespread
unofficial seed trading. It is also the case that the introduction of Bt cotton in India was
mediated by company advisors rather than government extension agents, which leaves
room to question the partiality of advice received. This has led to assertions of so-called
agricultural de-skilling as farmers followed their neighbours as part of a fad to buy
Bt cottonseed (Stone, 2007). However, as discussed above in case study 1.5.3 from Kenya,
the follow-my-neighbour strategy is regularly used by extension services in attempts to
disseminate new seed or agronomic methods among farmers.
According to other reports, Bt cotton has also been associated with allegations of
increased rates of farmer suicide. Although these reports seem to have been disproved,
with Grure, Mehta-Bhatt and Sengupta (2008) concluding that our analysis clearly shows
that Bt cotton is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for the occurrence of farmer
suicides, the association between farmer suicide and Bt cotton is still widely believed in
many quarters. Indeed, the whole topic of the performance and social context of Bt cotton
in India is characterized by polarized viewpoints and a dearth of unequivocally reliable
evidence. There appears to have been a tendency for supporters of Bt cotton to overstate its
benefits and for its many critics to exaggerate its shortcomings, whereas numerous articles
instead report a more complex and mixed situation (Qaim and Zilberman, 2003; Bambawale
et al., 2004; Rao, 2004; Morse, Bennett and Ismael, 2005; Shah 2005, 2008; Smale, Zambrano
and Cartel, 2006; Smale et al., 2006, 2009; Herring, 2007, 2008; Stone, 2007; Glover, 2009).
For example, there is little doubt that the performance of Bt cotton has varied significantly
in different regions of this vast country. Average national cotton yield improvements and
farmer revenue gains from the use of Bt varieties were in the region of 3040 percent, and
such values were found in the states of Maharashtra and Tamil Nadu. However, there was
a decline of 3 percent in both yield and revenue gains in Andhra Pradesh, while farmers
in Karnataka reported increases of 70 percent (Raney, 2006). In some cases, these wide
variations were due to climatic effects. For example, the initially negative performance of
the varieties in Andhra Pradesh was mainly due to severe drought conditions to which the
Bt hybrids were not optimally adapted (Qaim et al., 2006). An important indicator that
does not necessarily correlate with yield/revenue gains is overall profit margins, where
36 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
the national average increase was 69 percent, but Tamil Nadu reported 229 percent while
Andhra Pradesh suffered a decline of 40 percent. To quote Herring (2007): Bt cottons have
been in the field too short a time for definitive assessment of either biological or economic
success across so varied an agro-ecology as India; results vary with seasonal variations of
pests, weather and local agronomics.
On balance, the limited available evidence supports Bt cotton as a qualified success in
most, but not all, parts of India. In several states, it has been very successful and has greatly
increased overall national cotton yields and farmer/processor incomes. Moreover, as of
2008 more than 270 Bt cotton varieties were available in India including lines specifically
adapted to all the major cotton-growing regions of the country (James, 2008). On the
negative side, it has polarized some sections of Indian society and contributed to a somewhat
tarnished image of aspects of GM technology. Also, its high technology fees have led to
IPR transgressions that might adversely affect the future development of other commercial
crops. The wider negative image of Bt cotton in some circles in India might be associated
with the provenance of the technology, i.e. it comes from an overseas private-sector source
in contrast to many previous, less controversial, crop improvement biotechnologies that
have often come from indigenous public-sector sources (Murphy, 2007a). This contrasts
with the less controversial locally developed Bt cotton in China. The situation is less clear in
South Africa, where modest yield and profit gains were reported from a two-year survey of
smallholders (Thirtle et al., 2003), but a later study showed a more complex picture (Shankar
and Thirtle, 2005). More recent studies of Bt and herbicide-tolerant maize performance in
the KwaZulu Natal region of South Africa over the 2006/07 growing season also revealed
a complex picture (Gouse et al., 2009). Some farmers of the GM varieties had substantially
higher yields but both GM technologies had very little impact on efficiency, and it was
concluded that the tillage system was a key determinant of efficiency levels. As stated by
the authors: The results mostly serve to show how dangerous it is to make any inferences
from small sample surveys in one production season.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 37
in mature plantations that had been expensively maintained for several years. At the time,
this was a significant setback for Malaysian oil palm development and the desired increases in
production were only maintained by an expansion of plantation area. Varietal development
and yield gains were also impeded by the slower rates of alternative propagation methods.
More recently, prospects for mass clonal propagation of oil palm have improved
significantly. Several private and public sector research programmes have investigated the
causes of the mantling phenotype which appears to be due to genotype-dependent epigenetic
changes induced by altered patterns of DNA methylation that occur during tissue culture
(Tanurdzic et al., 2008). Thanks to this improved understanding of tissue culture/epigenetic
interactions, clonal propagation of oil palm has now resumed in some plantations (Wong,
Tan and Soh, 1997). Flowering abnormalities still occur, but can often be detected and
removed at an early stage leading to much higher success rates in the production of fertile
trees. While this technology was primarily developed for commercial plantations, over one
third of oil palm yield is generated by smallholders (Vermeulen and Goad, 2006). Globally,
there are more than two million independent smallholders cultivating 5 Mha who also stand
to benefit directly from such improved clonal lines. The Malaysian example illustrates
some of the problems that can arise from tissue culture when manipulations used for plant
regeneration cause developmental abnormalities. Despite these setbacks, tissue culture and
mass propagation remain immensely valuable for agriculture in developing countries. It
should also be stressed that apart from micropropagation, oil palm breeding is showing
impressive gains via other biotechnologies. For instance, novel germplasm from Africa and
South America is being integrated into Asian breeding lines with the assistance of gene
discoveries showing monogenic inheritance for shell thickness, while advanced genomic
and MAS methods are now being deployed to address the full range of agronomic traits
(Sambanthamurthi et al., 2009).
38 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
Timor-Leste (FAO, 2009f). A migratory locust outbreak which had developed since the
beginning of the year was threatening maize and rice crops in a huge, inaccessible (only a
few roads and no airstrip) and highly sensitive (many water bodies and rivers) area. Upon
the recommendation of FAO, the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFP)
of Timor-Leste agreed to use the biopesticide formulated with the spores of Metarhizium
anisopliae var. acridum (trade name Green Guard) in aerial and ground spraying operations.
Under the framework of an emergency project funded by the Central Emergency Response
Fund and implemented by FAO, the Metarhizium biopesticide was provided by FAO for
aerial spraying operations in May 2007 against in-flight swarms of the migratory locust
in the western part of Timor-Leste. They were supplemented in June by localized ground
spraying operations against smaller infestations.
The operations were successful and resulted in the quick control of the outbreak, with
no further spread of the locust populations (the locust adults were killed before egg laying)
and no damage to the rice crops. There were no side-effects on human health or on the very
sensitive environment of the Maliana area. It is also important to note that MAFP and FAO
carried out a public awareness campaign prior to the aerial spraying operations, providing
information about the locust situation and the use of a helicopter and a biopesticide to control
the locust populations. More recently, in 2009, similar biopesticides were deployed as part
of an international red locust emergency campaign in Eastern and Southern Africa. This
was the first time that biopesticides were used against locusts on a large scale in Africa and
a massive outbreak in Tanzania was successfully contained. This intervention is estimated
to have averted potentially serious damage to the food crops of over 15 million people in
the region (FAO, 2009g).
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 39
However, perhaps the most important sorghum hybrids were the Striga tolerant forms
developed in the 1990s and widely disseminated in Africa after 20022003. It is estimated that
Striga affects 40 percent of arable savannah land and the livelihoods of over 100 million people
in Africa (Gressel et al., 2004). Ejeta and colleagues used a broad-based research approach
involving molecular genetics, biochemistry and agronomy to identify genes for Striga resistance
which were then introgressed into both locally adapted and more modern sorghum varieties
(Ejeta, 2007). The new sorghum lines were thus broadly adapted to different African ecologies
and farming systems and are now grown from Sudan to Zimbabwe. Finally, an integrated Striga
management system was developed that has further increased sorghum productivity through
a combination of weed resistance, soil fertility enhancement, and water conservation (Ejeta and
Gressel, 2007). Meanwhile future research is focusing on identifying other yield-related genes
such as early-season cold tolerance (Knoll, Gunaratna and Ejeta, 2008; Knoll and Ejeta, 2008).
In 2009, the World Food Prize was awarded to Gabisa Ejeta in recognition of his achievements
in improving the prospects of African sorghum farmers (World Food Prize, 2009).
The preceding parts of this document have provided an overview of the current and past
experiences of applying biotechnologies in the crop sector in developing countries. Based
on these, a number of lessons can be learned that are summarized below.
40 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
private sector research in industrialized countries has therefore had limited impact on
the livelihoods of subsistence farmers in developing countries.
}} An analysis of the past shows that a wide range of existing and emerging problems
related to food security can be tackled using crop biotechnologies in combination with
other technologies.
Capacity development
Key factors in the successful development of crop biotechnologies in developing countries
are: appropriate policy development; strengthened research and extension institutions; and
enhanced capacities of researchers and breeders.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 41
Uptake of biotechnologies
}} Experience has demonstrated that the uptake of improved varieties or technologies by
smallholder farmers does not depend on their performance only, but also on equitable
access, adequate infrastructures, appropriate extension capacities and the involvement
of all relevant stakeholders.
}} There are indications that farmer participatory research, including participatory
plant breeding, is a useful approach for connecting high-tech scientists with the most
disadvantaged subsistence farmers in developing countries.
42 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
B. Looking Forward: Preparing for the Future
1.7 Key Unsolved Problems where Biotechnologies Can Help
One of the major concerns for the future is the potential impact of climate change on
agriculture. Changing temperatures and precipitation patterns will clearly affect the range
of crops that can be grown in different regions and their manner of cultivation. In some
cases, existing crops might continue to be grown but new varieties would be needed to cope
with the changed conditions. Examples might include heat, cold, salt, or drought tolerant
varieties of existing crop staples. In other cases, alternative crops may need to be grown or
entirely new species domesticated in order to adapt to changed environmental conditions.
The occurrence and severity of biotic stresses such as weeds, pests, and diseases will be
altered. Once again, breeders will need to develop new stress tolerant varieties, possibly
at relatively short notice. Related problems might arise from human impacts, and in some
cases these will have similar solutions to those caused by climate change. For example, the
lack of water in a region could be due to either drought or diversion by other people, and
increased soil salinity could be caused either by climate-related inundation by seawater or
by inappropriate irrigation practices.
In this Section, two principal topics are addressed: first, to identify a range of potentially
problematic issues that will be important in the future and, second, to examine the role that
different kinds of biotechnologies might play in dealing with them. Perhaps equally important
is the availability of such biotechnologies and the local capacity for their development
and/or exploitation in a particular country or region.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 43
with virus-resistance genes has already been approved in some tropical regions of developed
countries and may soon be extended to some developing countries. In the medium term,
the use of transgenesis and MAS to produce virus resistance in crops is a highly promising
area, and is one case where this approach may well be the best option for combating this
class of crop diseases.
As discussed previously, there are several effective biological strategies to replace or
complement the chemical control of bacterial, fungal and nematode pathogens. Examples
include IPM and biocontrol, and these approaches will benefit from new advances in
biotechnology. In many developing countries, and indeed elsewhere, there are increasing
financial, safety, and environmental advantages to such strategies especially given the
widespread need for increased sustainability in agricultural practices. Another future option
that could carry a similar range of benefits is the development of endogenous resistance
to pests and pathogens through genetic modification (Gressel et al., 2004) or conventional
breeding, possibly assisted by molecular genetics. Technically speaking, and although several
promising approaches have been demonstrated, this has been much more problematic to
address than viral or insect resistance where single-gene resistance traits are more common.
The broader question of engineering plants with increased disease resistance, regarding
both what genes to use and how to ensure that they are expressed in the right place at the
right time, has been examined by Gurr and Rushton (2005a, 2005b). The severe agronomic
impact of pathogens and the limitations of chemical control have stimulated a wide variety
of approaches to engineering resistance in crops. For example, in China, the Xa21 bacterial
blight resistance gene has been transferred to five rice varieties (Zhai et al., 2000). In India,
molecular MAS was successfully used in a backcross breeding programme to introgress
three genes (Xa21, xa13, and xa5) for bacterial blight resistance into a local susceptible rice
variety (Sundaram et al., 2009). Antifungal agents such as phytoalexins and chitinases have
also been expressed in plants (Shah, Rommens and Beachy, 1995). However, in developing
fungal resistance within crops it is difficult to produce broad-spectrum durable resistance
without transferring huge numbers of genes. In fact, fungi often evolve spontaneously in the
field, overcoming the resistance. It is possible that in the longer term, additional transgenic
crops resistant to bacterial, fungal and nematode pathogens will be developed but, at present,
non-transgenic approaches may often be the more pragmatic option.
As far as resistance to pest insects is concerned, current approaches focus on genes
conferring antibiosis or properties that adversely affect insect physiology. This type of
resistance may become futile in the long run because insects can develop mechanisms to
overcome the resistance. Another possible drawback of antibiosis-based pest resistance is
that it can affect target and non-target organisms, damaging the crop-associated diversity.
A promising research area is the development of pest resistance based on antixenosis, or
44 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
plant properties that deter or prevent pest colonization by interfering with their behaviour
(van Emden, 2002). Although generally under multigenic control and thus more difficult to
manipulate genetically, antixenosis mechanisms are more specific and more environmentally
benign. Antixenosis genes have been recently identified and mapped in several plant species,
for instance in wheat (Castro et al., 2005), but the pathway to practical applications seems
quite long.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 45
genome sequences will facilitate the development of control strategies based on previous
experience with related disease organisms. Such measures have already been of immense
benefit in the case of new human and animal pathogens such as the coronavirus that causes
severe acute respiratory syndrome and the virulent influenza A-type viruses. For example,
within days of the April 2009 outbreak of influenza A (H1N1) in Mexico, the entire genome
sequence of the virus was publicly available online (NIH, 2009).
46 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
context of lower input nutrient management systems that would be highly relevant to such
regions (Adesemoye, Torbert and Kloepper, 2008; Yang, Kloepper and Ryu, 2009).
It has been claimed that there is significant potential for transgenesis in modifying
stress related traits (Wang, Vinocur and Altman, 2003). However, as researchers in the
field have pointed out, our limited knowledge of stress associated metabolism in plants
still constitutes a major handicap to effect such manipulations in practice (Vinocur and
Altman, 2005). Another problem that farmers and breeders have long been aware of is the
synergistic effect of different stresses on crop performance. It is often the combination of
such stresses that is so deleterious to the crop in the field, rather than the effect of a single
category of stress. However, molecular biologists have tended to focus (for understandable
reasons) on single stresses applied in highly controlled environments. Unfortunately for
this piecemeal approach, recent studies have shown that the simultaneous application of
several stresses gives rise to unique responses that cannot be predicted by extrapolating
from effects of stresses given individually (Mittler, 2005). The simultaneous presence of
multiple stresses is the norm in open environments, so the success of molecular approaches
in addressing them in crops will probably require broader and more holistic approaches
than the somewhat reductive strategies employed until now.
Salinity
Salt and nutrient stresses together affect over 100 Mha of farmland, resulting in low outputs,
poor human nutrition and reduced educational and employment opportunities (Ashraf,
Ozturk and Athar, 2009). Salt tolerance was one of the earliest traits selected by breeders in
intensive farming systems. Indeed, in ancient Mesopotamia about 4200 years ago, Sumerian
farm managers switched from emmer wheat to intensive cultivation of more salt tolerant
forms of barley in an effort to combat increasing salinization and aridity (Murphy, 2007c).
Efforts to select salt tolerant crop varieties, while partially successful, have been hampered
by the complexity of the trait and the number of minor genes involved. One problem facing
breeders is that crop improvement is often negated by a lack of effective germplasm evaluation
during the full growth cycle of the plant (Munns, 2002, 2005; Munns and Tester, 2008). It
can also be difficult to ascertain which mechanism of salt adaptation is being expressed in
a particular species or developmental stage. Ashraf et al. (2008) have listed the following
reasons for limited success in tackling salt tolerance: 1) breeding is time consuming and
labour intensive, 2) deleterious genes are often transferred alongside desirable traits, and 3)
reproductive barriers obstruct the transfer of favourable alleles from wide crosses. In the
future, breeding technologies such as MAS and assisted wide crosses will enable breeders
to address these challenges with more success than previously. A concerted R&D focus on
breeding for salinity traits should be a priority during the next decade.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 47
Salt tolerance has been a particular focus of claims for significant results from transgenic
approaches. One of the key prerequisites for success in a transgenic strategy to develop salt
tolerance is that it should be regulated as a simple genetic trait, i.e. one involving a very small
number of genes. Although such apparently simple genetic regulation has been reported in
some laboratory studies (Yamaguchi-Shinozaki and Shinozaki, 2001), it seems more likely that
salt tolerance in most crops in the field is a rather complex multigene trait that has evolved
differently in several plant groups (Flowers, 2004; Rozema and Flowers, 2008). However,
there have been some promising successes in developing salt tolerance in model plants in
the laboratory. For example, transgenic tobacco engineered to accumulate elevated levels
of mannitol was able to withstand high salinity (Tarczynski, Jensen and Bonhert, 1992).
Laboratory and small-scale field studies have shown that the accumulation of compounds,
such as betaine or trehalose in transgenic plants may also enhance salt tolerance (Nuccio et
al., 1999). Rapeseed plants expressing an Arabidopsis vacuolar transport protein tolerated as
much as 250 mM sodium chloride (about half the concentration of sea water and enough to
kill most crops) without significant impact on seed yield or composition (Zhang et al., 2001).
A project to conserve mangrove genetic resources in India is studying and characterizing the
genes involved in salinity tolerance from these plants and their associated species which are
capable of surviving in highly saline environments. The genes thus isolated were transferred
to crops such as rice and initial laboratory analyses have been promising (FAO, 2006b).
Despite these encouraging reports, it is not clear whether such relatively simple
modifications will lead to a sustained effect on crop yields in more complex real world
cropping systems where osmotic stress is often linked with a combination of other factors
such as periodic aridity, mineral/salt buildup and/or erosion. This means that the jury
is still very much out on the amenability of salt tolerance in the field to modification by
transgenesis (Yamaguchi and Blumwald, 2005). It is known that salt tolerance must be an
especially complex physiological trait because there are so many tolerance mechanisms in
salt adapted plants in the wild. This should lead to some caution about claims in published
studies that the transfer of one or a few genes can increase the tolerance of a wide range of
field crops to saline conditions. As stated by Flowers (2004): It is surprising that, in spite
of the complexity of salt tolerance, there are commonly claims in the literature that the
transfer of a single or a few genes can increase the tolerance of plants to saline conditions....
After ten years of research using transgenic plants to alter salt tolerance, the value of this
approach has yet to be established in the field.
The way forward here is to investigate as many realistic strategies as possible. Nevertheless,
given the present state of knowledge it is probably more appropriate to focus limited breeding
resources on non-transgenic approaches while supporting research into the physiology and
molecular genetics of salt tolerance for potential future application.
48 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
Drought tolerance
Like salt tolerance, drought tolerance appears to be controlled by a complex set of traits
that may have evolved on numerous occasions as separate mechanisms in different plants
and according to the dynamics (i.e. timing and intensity) of water shortages. In the near
future, it is likely that aridity will increase in several parts of the world with FAO estimating
that by 2025, 1.8 billion people will be living in regions of water scarcity (FAO, 2009h).
This will be caused by factors such as localized lower rainfall due to climate change and the
diversion of upstream water supplies from rivers, e.g. for dams or irrigation, thus depriving
farmers in downstream regions. In the case of rice alone, over 70 Mha are already affected
by drought stress (Ashraf, Ozturk and Athar, 2009). Given the predicted increase in long-
term aridity, it is surprising that until relatively recently there have been few well resourced
attempts to produce drought tolerant crops, even by publicly funded organizations. Such
research is complicated by the sporadic nature and hugely varying intensity of drought or
aridity episodes in the affected cropping systems. This also highlights the importance of the
concept of genotype x environment x management, which is a crucial but highly complex
multifactorial relationship that affects all efforts to select for drought tolerance and other
abiotic stress traits. An integrated approach taking into consideration several aspects is
therefore advisable (FAO, 2008c).
Meanwhile, basic research using reverse genetics and other genomic approaches is beginning
to give a few clues about some aspects of drought tolerance mechanisms. For example, it was
recently reported that the erecta gene, involved in transpiration efficiency, might regulate
some of the genetic variation for drought tolerance in the model plant, Arabidopsis (Masle,
Gilmore and Farquhar, 2005). Although the data are still very preliminary in this case and
do not directly relate to major crop systems, the general approach merits further attention.
However, as with salt tolerance it may turn out that in a practical field situation many other
genes are involved in addition to erecta or its equivalents in other plant families.
As with salinity, advanced non-transgenic breeding methods are available to improve the
agronomic performance of existing drought tolerant crops in arid regions. Of such crops,
one of the most important is pearl millet which is grown on more than 40 Mha in Africa.
The similarity in gene order, or synteny, between the pearl millet genome and that of the
other major cereals (Moore et al., 1995; Bolot et al., 2009) means that once their loci are
identified, drought tolerance traits could potentially be introduced into local varieties via MAS.
Another option is to use wide crossing and tissue culture methods to cross millet with one
of the other high yielding cereal crop species to create a new drought tolerant, high yielding
hybrid species. Breeders have already used such a strategy to create the drought adapted
rye/wheat hybrid, triticale, which is a completely new man-made plant species. Further
breeding of triticale is now underway to extend its agronomic performance and drought
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 49
tolerance especially in arid regions (FAO, 2005b). A combination of breeding approaches
by ICRISAT and national organizations has generated significant varietal improvements
for pearl millet and sorghum. For example, in southern Africa these new varieties occupy
34 percent of the millet area and 23 percent of the sorghum area (CGIAR, 2005). In some
cases, farmer participation has been a key element in varietal improvement. One example
is the early maturing millets that can enable dryland communities to get through the
hungry season just prior to the main harvest when the previous years grain has already
been exhausted. Here, Namibian farmers selected a variety that matured 46 weeks earlier
than traditional millets. Within a few years, the new variety covered half the millet area of
Namibia. From an initial R&D investment of US$3 million, a sustainable annual return of
US$1.5 million in yield benefits has been achieved (CGIAR, 2005).
At present, the major transgenic work on drought tolerance is being done in the private
sector. In some cases, genes are being transferred from other species but companies are
reportedly using multipronged approaches involving both conventional breeding and
biotechnology. The resulting varieties are likely to carry very specific trait combinations
such as enhanced root growth for maize grown under high input conditions (Castiglioni
etal., 2008; Edgerton, 2009). These approaches may well highlight possible future breeding
strategies or target traits in developing country staples but may not be directly applicable to
some of the less intensively managed crops. Also, such approaches are not always realistic
in the less well funded context of public sector, public good orientated crop improvement,
especially in developing countries. One exception here might be the PPP between Monsanto,
the African Agricultural Technology Foundation and CIMMYT, which includes funding
from the Gates Foundation and is aimed at developing drought tolerant maize varieties
in Africa (Water Efficient Maize for Africa). Other approaches to drought tolerant maize
development at CIMMYT are focusing on using genomics and MAS to identify and introgress
drought related traits in existing germplasm.
1.7.3 Yield
Maximizing crop yield is probably the most desired aim of any farmer. By increasing
yield per ha, more people can be fed from the same area of land. Higher yields also mean
that less land is required for crop production, relieving pressure to develop pristine and
often environmentally sensitive habitats such as rain forests or species-rich wetlands. It
is a telling fact that the great majority of increased crop production over human history
has occurred due to the expansion of arable cultivation rather than increased yield per
ha. For example, prior to the introduction of scientific breeding techniques in the early
twentieth century, grain yields across the world rarely exceeded 2 T/ha, even in the most
favourable environments (Ruttan, 1999). The application of Mendelian genetics was an
50 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
important step forward in realizing yield gains, but some of the most spectacular progress
came from new hybrid technologies especially as applied to maize. Following the almost
universal adoption of hybrid varieties, US maize yields increased from 1.8 T/ha in the 1920s
to 7.8T/ha in the 1990s (Murphy, 2007c). It has been estimated that at least 60 percent of
the increase in maize yields was attributable to advances in breeding with the remaining
40 percent resulting from improved crop management including more effective inputs and
mechanization (Duvick, 1997).
These relatively recent biologically-attributable yield gains in commercial grain crops
should stimulate greater investment aimed at applying a combination of modern breeding
and management technologies to the broad range of developing country crops where yields
still remain well below their physiological limits. As noted by Ruttan (1999): In most
developing countries, yields are still so far below existing biological ceilings that substantial
gains can be realized from a strategy emphasizing traditional crop breeding combined with
higher levels of technical inputs, better soil and crop management, and first generation
biotechnology crop protection technology.
Yield traits are increasingly becoming priority targets in developing countries as breeders
improve their understanding of the genetics of indigenous crops, and hence their capacity
to manipulate these often complex characters. Yield gains of major temperate crops have
levelled off in recent years and genetic modification has so far made a limited contribution
to the increase in intrinsic yields and to the yield capacity of plants in standard conditions
(Gurian-Sherman, 2009). In contrast, the capacity for dramatic yield improvements of many
developing countries crops, especially orphan crops, remains largely unrealized (Qaim
and Zilberman, 2003). Semi-dwarf cereals were the basis of the Green Revolution of the
1960s and 1970s. However, the identification of these key traits involved the selection of
serendipitous variants with little understanding of the developmental processes underlying
the traits. Thanks to emerging knowledge of plant development and genomics it is now
becoming increasingly feasible to consider the rational redesign of crops (Sinclair, Purcell
and Sneller, 2004). For example, gibberellins are important regulators of plant height and
hence mutations or gene deletions that either reduce the activity of known gibberellin
biosynthetic enzymes or compromise signal transduction pathways involving gibberellins
can be confidently predicted to result in the kind of dwarf phenotype seen in modern cereals
(Hedden and Kamiya, 1997; Sasaki et al., 2002).
The new understanding of the genetic basis of domestication syndrome traits in many
crops, coupled with detailed genomic sequence data and genome synteny in major plant
groups, will allow breeders to move key traits between crops or to domesticate new species
(Motamayor and Lanaud, 2002; Murphy, 2007c; Weeden, 2007; Burger, Chapman and
Burke, 2008; Sang, 2009).
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 51
There is a great deal of basic research in industrialized countries of possible relevance
to future yield improvements, although robust mechanisms for the application of such
research are often lacking, especially in developing countries. Two basic approaches to
yield improvements of particular promise are the manipulation of seed development and
the manipulation of plant architecture. Crop yields can be increased by developing larger
seeds or by manipulating seeds to accumulate more of the desired edible products (e.g.
starch or oil) and less of the unwanted products.
Alternatively, plant architecture can be manipulated to maximize yield-bearing structures
such as seeds and fruits, and reduce non-productive structures such as excessive branching,
thick seed coats, or tall, slender stems. In principle, plant architecture could be redesigned
to give higher yielding wheat-like maize plants or dwarf banana, oil palm, or coconut
palm trees (Lev-Yadun, Abbo and Doebley, 2002). In order to exploit likely developments
in these and other areas of basic plant science for practical crop improvement it will be
crucial for research capacities to be built up further in developing countries, and for greater
use to be made of molecular markers especially among public sector crop researchers in
industrialized countries.
52 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
Biofortification
Almost all global crop staples are nutritionally deficient in some respect (Murphy, 2007c).
This means that when populations are forced to rely on a narrow range of food crops they
can suffer from varying degrees of malnutrition, with young children invariably faring the
worst. While an ideal solution to this problem is to reduce poverty, hence enabling farmers
to purchase a wider range of foods, another approach is to improve the nutritional value
of existing subsistence crops. The examples below illustrate some of the methods that are
beginning to be used by breeders to increase levels of key nutrients such as vitamins and
minerals, in a strategy known as biofortification (Nestel et al., 2006; Gilani and Nasim, 2007;
Hirschi, 2008; Mayer, Pfeiffer and Beyer, 2008; Stomph, Jiang and Struik, 2009). Several
vitamin-enhanced fruit varieties for Asia and Africa, including a high-carotene tomato for
adaptation to semi-arid areas of West Africa are being developed (AVRDC, 2009).
The HarvestPlus consortium focuses on the three dietary micronutrients recognized
by the World Health Organization (WHO) as particularly limiting in many subsistence
populations in developing countries, namely iron, zinc and vitamin A. HarvestPlus has
breeding programmes utilizing all available biotechnologies including MAS and genomics
for six of the most important staple food crops, i.e. rice, wheat, maize, cassava, sweet
potato and common beans (Cakmak, Graham and Welch, 2004). In addition to enhancing
micronutrient levels in selected crops, its objectives are to assess the bioavailability of
micronutrients in foods actually consumed by the population to facilitate farmer uptake
of the varieties and measure their long-term nutritional impacts (HarvestPlus, 2007). The
Vitamin A for Africa (VITAA) programme is focused on vitamin A in the sweet potato
(CIP-VITAA, 2008).
Sweet potato is the fifth most important global crop on a fresh weight basis and is
especially important in Africa. Traditional white varieties have little vitamin A and over 3
million children in the region suffer from vitamin A-related blindness. Vitamin A deficiency
is also a leading cause of early childhood death and a major risk factor for pregnant women.
New orange-fleshed varieties with high vitamin A levels obtained through conventional
plant breeding schemes could potentially replace white sweet potato varieties that had
previously been favoured by farmers throughout Africa (Low, Walker and Hijmans,
2001; Tumwegamire et al., 2004). One future challenge is to provide enough planting
material (normally as bundles of vine cuttings) to meet the high levels of farmer demand.
Micropropagation can assist in this respect. Other targets are to improve post-harvest
handling and food-preparation methods at community level to ensure retention of beta-
carotene (provitamin-A) levels, and to assess the impact of orange-fleshed sweet potatoes
on the health status of HIV/AIDS-affected communities.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 53
The best known transgenic approach to biofortification is golden rice, developed
in the 1990s by a Swiss/German public-sector group (Ye et al., 2000). This rice variety
has yellow rather than white grains due to the accumulation of beta-carotene, which is
normally absent from polished rice grains. More recently, an improved version of golden
rice has been developed with a reported 23-fold increase in provitamin-A levels (Paine
etal., 2005). The development of laboratory versions of golden rice was just the start of a
lengthy process of backcrossing into local varieties and field tests that has already lasted
a decade. In 200507, the original golden rice trait was crossed into the popular IR64
variety at IRRI, and outdoor field trials of 20 potential breeding lines started in 2008.
Field trials of the improved golden rice variety show five times more provitamin-A than
the original lines (IRRI, 2008). A further challenge will be to ensure that newly expressed
provitamin-A can withstand processing, storage, and cooking, while remaining bioavailable
after consumption.
54 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
of indigenous cultures, at least 1650 tropical forest species are potential horticultural
crops. Many of these plants are already adapted to areas unsuitable for existing crops
and could therefore extend local food-producing capacity without interfering with
existing crops.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 55
into cultivation. Clearly, many of these developments remain aspirational at present but
the fact remains that biotechnologies can play a greater role in enhancing the sustainability
and mitigating the environmental impact of farming. One emerging area that will become
increasingly important in the future is that of agro-ecological system dynamics as applied
to breeding strategies and technological interventions. This area relates especially to the
implications of climate change and the manner in which adaptation, uncertainty, vulnerability
and resilience are viewed. A useful critical discussion of this area with a commentary on
biotechnology-based strategies is provided by Thompson and Scoones (2009).
Decisions about introducing more sustainable and/or environmentally friendly crop
production methods have sometimes thrown up both threats and opportunities that can
be addressed via biotechnology. For example, the voluntary implementation in Malaysia
of a no-burn policy when replacing ageing oil palm trees led to an increase in infestation
rates by the virulent fungal pathogen, Ganoderma boninense, which causes basal stem rot
(Bridge et al., 2000).
Public sector researchers in Malaysia and Indonesia responded by developing new
molecular technologies for the early detection of this problematic disease and innovative
microbial agents for its effective treatment (Flood, Bridge and Holderness, 2000; Soepena,
Purba and Pawirosukarto, 2000; Panchal and Bridge, 2005; Brton et al., 2006; Paterson,
2007; Sundram et al., 2008).
1. 7. 7 Conclusions
}} There is a wide range of existing and emerging problems related to food security that
can be tackled by crop biotechnologies in combination with other technologies.
}} Key areas include pest/disease control, salt/drought tolerance, crop yield/quality, and
the sustainability and environmental impact of crop production.
}} The knowledge gained from basic plant research will underpin future crop improvements
but effective and robust mechanisms for the rapid and effective translation of research
discoveries into public good agriculture remain to be developed.
}} Maximum benefit will be derived if robust plant breeding and crop management
programmes have ready access to all the modern crop biotechnologies, both transgenic and
non-transgenic, to address food security issues. This will require additional investments
in capacity building for R&D in developing countries.
}} Technology implementation alone is not sufficient to address such complex questions
as food security. Biotechnologies will make new options available but their uptake and
effective exploitation will rely on an intricate web of cross-sectoral factors.
56 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
1.8 Identifying Options for Developing Countries
Based on the overview and previous analyses contained in this Chapter, a number of
specific options can be identified to assist developing countries make informed decisions
regarding the adoption of biotechnologies in the future, such as when and if they should
employ one or more crop biotechnologies and, if they decide to use them, how to ensure
the successful application of the chosen biotechnologies to enhance food security in the
future. The options identified are grouped under the same eight headings as the lessons
learned from the past (Part 1.6).
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 57
}} Decisions on crop biotechnology tools to address the problems of smallholders should
reflect the appropriateness and socio-economic impacts of the tools.
}} Independent public sector organizations should engage and communicate more
effectively with society at large about the role of all crop improvement/management
biotechnologies for food security.
Capacity development
Countries should develop the biotechnology capacities of national agricultural research
systems in their three dimensions (policy development, institutional set-up and human
capacities).
Uptake of biotechnologies
}} Biotechnology development strategies should be strongly linked with strategies for its
widespread dissemination.
}} Stronger extension services, with expertise in modern agronomy and linked with
participatory crop improvement programmes, should be an integral part of national/regional
agricultural support structures.
}} Seed production and distribution systems should be enhanced.
1 A cross-sectoral national approach to the management of biological risks associated with food and agriculture, including plant and animal health, food
58 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
1.9 Identifying Priorities for Action for the International Community
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 59
Capacity development
The international community should help developing countries enhance the biotechnology
capacities of national agricultural research systems in their three dimensions (policy
development, institutional set-up and human capacities).
Uptake of biotechnologies
}} Biotechnology knowledge and expertise should be included in extension, educational
and advisory services to facilitate uptake by farmers and the spread of reliable public
knowledge about crop biotechnologies.
}} Development agencies should assist developing countries in enhancing seed production
systems to facilitate farmers utilization of the fruits of crop biotechnologies.
60 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
1.10 References
AboEl-Nil, M.M. 1996. Tissue culture of native plants in the developing countries. Acta Hort., 447: 507514.
Adesemoye, A.O., Torbert, H.A. & Kloepper, J.W. 2008. Enhanced plant nutrition use efficiency with PGPR
and AMF in an integrated nutrient management system. Can. J. Microbiol., 54: 876886.
Ahloowalia, B.S., Maluszynski, M. & Nichterlein, K. 2004. Global impact of mutation-derived varieties.
Euphytica, 135: 187204.
Al-Hassan, R. & Diao, X. 2007. Reducing regional disparities in growth and poverty reduction in Ghana:
Policy options and public investment implications. In L. Zhang & S. Fan, eds. Poverty reduction strategy
in the new millennium: emerging issues, experiences, and lessons, pp. 221249. China, China Financial
Economic Press.
Almekinders C.J.M. & Elings, A. 2001. Collaboration of farmers and breeders: participatory crop improvement
in perspective. Euphytica, 122: 425-438.
Almekinders, C.J.M. & Struik, P.C. 2000. Diversity in different components and at different scales. In C.
Almekinders & W. de Boef, eds. Encouraging diversity: The conservation and development of plant
genetic resources, pp.1420. London, Intermediate Technology Publications.
Anandajayasekeram, P., Babu, S., Keswani, M., Liebenberg, F. & Rukani, C.L. 2007. Impact of science on
African agriculture and food security. Wallingford, UK, CABI Publishing.
Arcioni, S. & Pupilli, F. 2004. Somatic hybridization. In B. Thomas, D.J. Murphy & B. Murray, eds.
Encyclopedia Appl. Plant Sci., pp. 14231431. Oxford, UK, Elsevier Academic Press.
Ashby, J.A. & Lilja, N. 2004. Participatory research: Does it work? Evidence from participatory plant breeding.
Proceedings 4th International Crop Science Congress, Brisbane, Australia, September 2004. (available at
http://cropscience.org.au/icsc2004/symposia/4/1/1589_ashbyj.htm).
Ashraf, M., Athar, H.R., Harris P.J.C. & Kwon, T.R. 2008. Some prospective strategies for improving crop
salt tolerance. Adv. Agron., 97: 45110.
Ashraf, M., Ozturk, M. & Athar, H.R., eds. 2009. Salinity and water stress, improving crop efficiency. Tasks
for Vegetation Science, Volume 44, Netherlands, Springer. 246 pp.
AVRDC. 2009. Scoring high: high beta-carotene non-GE tomatoes for West Africa. Asian Vegetable Research
and Development Center, Tainan, Taiwan.
Ayliffe, M. Singh, R. & Lagudah, E. 2008. Durable resistance to wheat stem rust needed. Curr. Opin. Plant
Biol., 11: 187192.
Bambawale, O.M., Singh, A., Sharma, O.P., Bhosle, B.B., Lavekar, R.C., Dhandhapani, A., Kanwar, V.,
Tanwar, R.K., Rathod, K.S., Patange, N.R. & Pawar, V.M. 2004. Performance of Bt cotton (MECH-
162) under integrated pest management, in farmers participatory field trial in Nanded district, Central
India. Curr. Sci., 86: 162833.
Bnziger, M., Setimela, P.S., Hodson, D. & Vivek, B. 2006. Breeding for improved abiotic stress tolerance in
maize adapted to southern Africa. Agric. Water Manag., 80: 212224.
Barclay, A. 2004. Feral play. Rice Today, January 2004, pp. 1519.
Beintema, N.M. & Stads, G.J. 2008. Measuring agricultural research investments: A revised global picture.
ASTI Background Note. Washington, DC, IFPRI. (available at http://www.asti.cgiar.org/pdf/Global_
revision.pdf).
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 61
Bernardo, R. 2008. Molecular markers and selection for complex traits in plants: Learning from the past 20
years. Crop Sci., 48: 16491664.
Blakesley, D. & Marks, T. 2003. Clonal forestry. In B. Thomas, D.J. Murphy & B.G. Murray, eds. Encyclopedia
Appl. Plant Sci., Oxford, Elsevier/Academic Press.
Bolot, S., Abrouk, M., Masood-Quraishi, U., Stein, N., Messing, J., Feuillet, C. & Salse, J. 2009. The inner
circle of the cereal genomes. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol., 12: 119125.
Boonkerd, N. 2002. Development, of inoculant production and utilisation in Thailand. In D. Herridge, ed.
Inoculants and nitrogen fixation of legumes in Vietnam, pp. 95-104. Proceedings Workshop held in
Hanoi, Vietnam, February 1718, 2001.
Boserup, E. 1970. Womens role in economic development. Aberdeen, Aberdeen University Press.
Boyer, J.S. 1982. Plant productivity and environment. Science, 218: 443448.
Brton, F., Hasan, Y., Hariadi, Lubis, Z. & De Franqueville, H. 2006. Characterization of parameters for the
development of an early screening test for basal stem rot tolerance in oil palm progenies. J. Oil Palm Res.
Special Issue, April 2006: 2436.
Bridge, P.D., OGrady, E.B., Pilotti, C.A. & Sanderson, F.R. 2000. Development of molecular diagnostics for
the detection of Ganoderma isolates pathogenic to oil palm. In J. Flood, P.D. Bridge & M. Holderness,
eds. Ganoderma diseases of perennial crops, pp. 225235. Wallingford, UK, CABI Publishing.
Burger, J.C., Chapman, M.A. & Burke, J.M. 2008. Molecular insights into the evolution of crop plants. Am.
J. Bot., 95: 113122.
Burke, H. 2004. Monsanto exits Argentina soy biz despite soy boom. Reuters News Service, 18: January 2004.
Cai, S.B., Bai, G.H. & Zhang, D.D. 2008. Quantitative trait loci for aluminum resistance in Chinese wheat
landrace FSW. Theor. Appl. Genet., 117: 4956.
Cakmak, I., Graham, R.D. & Welch, R.M. 2004. Agricultural and molecular genetic approaches, to improving
nutrition and preventing micronutrient malnutrition globally. In I. Cakmak & R.M. Welch, eds. Impacts of
agriculture on human health and nutrition, Chapter 13.7, Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems, Oxford.
Cardi, T., Carputo, D. & Frusciante, L. 1992. In vitro shoot regeneration and chromosome doubling in 2 X
and 3 X potato clones. Am. J. Potato Res., 69: 112.
Carpenter, J., Felsot, A., Goode, T., Hammig, M., Onstad, D. & Sankula, S. 2002. Comparative environmental
impacts of biotechnology-derived and traditional soybean, corn, and cotton crops. Ames, Iowa, Council
for Agricultural Science and Technology.
Castiglioni, P., Warner, D., Bensen, R.J., Anstrom, D.C., Harrison, J., Stoecker, M., Abad, M., Kumar, G.,
Salvador, S., DOrdine, R., Navarro, S., Back, S., Fernandes, M., Targolli, J., Dasgupta, S., Bonin, C.,
Luethy, M.H. & Heard, J.E. 2008. Bacterial RNA chaperones confer abiotic stress tolerance in plants
and improved grain yield in maize under water-limited conditions. Plant Physiol., 147: 446455.
Castro, A.M., Vasicek, A., Manifiesto, M., Gimnez, D.O., Tacaliti, M.S., Dobrovolskaya, O., Rder, M.S.,
Snape, J.W. & Brner, A. 2005. Mapping antixenosis genes on chromosome 6A of wheat to greenbug
and to a new biotype of Russian wheat aphid. Plant Breed., 124: 229233.
Ceccarelli, S., Bailey, E., Grando, S. & Tutwiler, R. 1997. Decentralized-participatory plant breeding: A link
between formal plant breeding and small farmers. Proceedings international seminar on participatory
research and gender analysis for technology development: New frontiers in participatory research and
gender analysis, pp 6574. Cali, Colombia. (available at www.icarda.cgiar.org/Farmer_Participation/
PDF/Papers/3CALI96.pdf).
Ceccarelli, S., Grando, S., Tutwiler, R., Baha, J., Martini, A.M., Salahieh, H., Goodchild, A. & Michael, M.
2000. A methodological study on participatory barley breeding I. Selection phase. Euphytica, 111: 91104.
62 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
Ceoloni, C., Forte, P., Gennaro, A., Micali, S., Carroza, R. & Bitti, A. 2005. Recent developments in durum
wheat chromosome engineering. Cytogenet. Plant Breed., 109: 328334.
CGIAR. 2005. Drought-tolerant crops for drylands. Rome, CGIAR Science Council Secretariat. (available at
www.cgiar.org/impact/global/des_fact2.html).
CGIAR. 2008. Ethical challenges for the CGIAR: Report of three studies. Rome, CGIAR Science Council
Secretariat. (available at ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/011/i0501e/i0501e00.pdf).
Chakraborty, S., Chakraborty, N. & Datta, A. 2000. Increased nutritive value of transgenic potato by
expressing a nonallergenic seed albumin gene from Amaranthus hypochondriacus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA., 97: 372429.
Chi, H.S. 2003. The efficiencies of various embryo rescue methods in interspecific crosses of Lilium. Bot. Bull.
Acad. Sinica, 43: 139146.
Chilton, M.D. 1988. Plant genetic engineering: progress and promise. J. Agric. Food Chem., 36: 35.
Chinese Academy of Sciences. 2008. Scientists call for enhancing studies on chromosome engineering in plants.
(available at http://english.cas.cn/Ne/CASE/200811/t20081118_18911.shtml).
Choudhary, B. & Gaur, K. 2009. The development and regulation of Bt brinjal in India (eggplant/aubergine).
ISAAA Brief, No. 38. Ithaca, NY, ISAAA.
CIP-VITAA. 2008. Five years of VITAA (Vitamin A for Africa) 20012006. R. Kapinga, S. Tumwegamire & J.
Ndunguru, eds. International Potato Center, Kampala. (available at www.cipotato.org/vitaa/pubs2008/
VITAA.pdf).
Cohen, J. 2005. Poorer nations turn to publicly developed GM crops. Nat. Biotechnol., 23: 2733.
Collard, B.C.Y., Vera Cruz, C.M., McNally, K.L., Virk, P.S. & Mackill, D.J. 2008. Rice molecular breeding
laboratories in the genomics era: Current status and future considerations. Int. J. Plant Genomics, 524847.
(also available at www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2408710).
Collier, P. 2008. The politics of hunger: How illusion and greed fan the food crisis. Foreign Affairs 87, November/
December. (also available at www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/64607/paul-collier/the-politics-of-hunger).
Collins, N.C., Tardieu, F. & Tuberosa, R. 2008. QTL approaches for improving crop performance under
abiotic stress conditions: Where do we stand? Plant Physiol., 147: 469486.
Comis, D. 2007. World wheat supply threatened! Agricultural Research, 55: 4-6.
Corley, R.H.V. 2000. New technologies for plantation crop improvement. TAA Newsl., 20: 8-11.
Corley, R.H.V. & Tinker, P.B. 2003. The oil palm. 4th Edition, Oxford, Blackwell. 592 pp.
Cuevas, V.C. 1997. Rapid composting technology in the Philippines: Its role in producing good-quality organic
fertilizers. Food Fert. Techn. Center Extn. Bull., 444: 113. (available at www.agnet.org/library/eb/444/).
Dalton, T. 2004. A. household hedonic model of rice traits: Economic values from farmers in West Africa.
Agric. Econ., 31: 149159.
Dalton, T. & Guei, R. 2003. Productivity gains from rice genetic enhancements in West Africa: Countries and
ecologies. World Development, 31: 359374.
Diao, X., Fan, S., Headey, D., Johnson, M., Pratt, A.N. & Yu, B. 2008. Accelerating Africas food production
in response to rising food prices: Impacts and requisite actions. IFPRI Discussion Paper 825.Washington,
DC, IFPRI. (available at www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp00825.pdf).
Doebley, J., Gaut, B.S. & Smith, B.D. 2006. The molecular genetics of crop domestication. Cell, 127:
13091321.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 63
Donini, P. & Sonnino, A. 1998. Induced mutations in plant breeding: current status and future outlooks.
In S.M. Jain, D.S. Brar & B.S. Ahloowalia, eds. Somaclonal variation and induced mutations in crop
improvement, pp. 255291. Dordrecht, the Netherlands, Kluwer Academic Publisher.
Durrant, A. 1962. The environmental induction of heritable changes in Linum. Heredity, 17: 2761.
Dutton, G. 2009. Emerging biotechnology clusters. Genet. Eng. & Biotechnol. News, 29: 1.
Duvick, D.N. 1997. Genetic rates of gain in hybrid maize yields during the past 40 years. Maydica, 22: 187196.
Edgerton, M.E. 2009. Increasing crop productivity to meet global needs for feed, food, and fuel. Plant Physiol.,
149: 713.
Eilenberg, J., Hajek, A. & Lomer, C. 2001. Suggestions for unifying the terminology in biological control.
Biocontrol, 46: 387400.
Ejeta, G. 2007. Breeding for Striga resistance in sorghum: Exploitation of an intricate hostparasite biology.
Crop Sci., 47: S-216S-227.
Ejeta, G. & Gressel, J., eds. 2007. Integrating new technologies for Striga control. Towards ending the witch-
hunt. Singapore, World Scientific Publishing. 356 pp.
Engels, J.M.M., Ramanatha Rao, V., Brown, A.H.D. & Jackson, M.T., eds. 2002. Managing plant genetic
diversity. Rome, IPGRI. 481 pp.
FAC. 2009. Big farms or small farms: How to respond to the food crisis? Future Agricultures Consortium
E-debate report.
FAO. 1995. Agricultural biotechnology in the Asia-Pacific region, by R.B. Singh. FAO Research and Technology
Paper 6. (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/V4845E/V4845E07.htm).
FAO. 2001. Agriculture and rural extension worldwide: Options for institutional reform, by W. Rivera, M.
Qamar & L. Crowder, eds. Rome.
FAO. 2004. The state of food and agriculture agricultural biotechnology: Meeting the needs of the poor?
Rome. (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/006/Y5160E/Y5160E00.HTM).
FAO. 2005a. Status of research and application of crop biotechnologies in developing countries - preliminary
assessment, by Z. Dhlamini, C. Spillane, J.P. Moss, J. Ruane, N. Urquia & A. Sonnino. Rome. (also
available at www.fao.org/docrep/008/y5800e/y5800e00.htm).
FAO. 2005b. Triticale crop improvement: The CIMMYT program, by M. Mergoum, W.H. Pfeiffer, R.J. Pea,
K. Ammar & S. Rajaram, Plant Production and Protection Paper 179. Rome.
FAO. 2006a. The role of biotechnology in exploring and protecting agricultural genetic resources, by J. Ruane &
A. Sonnino, eds. Rome. (also available at: www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0399e/a0399e00.htm).
FAO. 2006b. The role of biotechnology in the conservation, sustainable use and genetic enhancement of
bioresources in fragile ecosystems, by P.S. Raghavan & A.K. Parida. In J. Ruane & A. Sonnino, eds.
Rome. The role of biotechnology in exploring and protecting agricultural genetic resources, pp. 6770.
(also available at www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0399e/A0399E08.htm#ch3.7)
FAO. 2007a. Marker-assisted selection: Current status and future perspectives in crops, livestock, forestry and
fish, by E.P. Guimares, J. Ruane, B.D. Scherf, A. Sonnino & J.D. Dargie, eds. Rome. (also available at
www.fao.org/docrep/010/a1120e/a1120e00.htm).
FAO. 2007b. Technical, economic and policy considerations on marker-assisted selection in crops: Lessons
from the experience at an international agricultural research centre, by H.M. William, M. Morris, M.
Warburton & D.A. Hoisington. In E.P. Guimares, J. Ruane, B. Scherf, A. Sonnino & J.D. Dargie, eds.
Marker-assisted selection: Current status and future perspectives in crops, livestock, forestry and fish, pp.
381-404. Rome. (also available at ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a1120e/a1120e09.pdf).
64 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
FAO. 2007c. An assessment, of the use of molecular markers in developing countries, by A. Sonnino, M.J.
Carena, E.P. Guimares, R. Baumung, D. Pilling & B. Rischowsky. In E.P. Guimares, J. Ruane, B.D.
Scherf, A. Sonnino & J.D. Dargie, eds. Marker-assisted selection: Current status and future perspectives
in crops, livestock, forestry and fish, pp.1530. Rome. (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/010/a1120e/
a1120e00.htm).
FAO. 2007d. The future of biopesticides in desert locust management. Report of International Workshop,
1215 February, Saly, Senegal. (available at www.fao.org/ag/locusts/en/publicat/meeting/topic/misc/
documents_1117.html).
FAO. 2007e. Review of the efficacy of Metarhizium anisopliae var acridum against the desert locust, by H. van
der Valk. FAO Desert Locust Technical Series. Rome (available at www.fao.org/ag/locusts/common/
ecg/1295/en/TS34e.pdf).
FAO. 2007f. Marker-assisted selection: Policy considerations and options for developing countries, by J.D.
Dargie. In E.P. Guimares, J. Ruane, B.D. Scherf, A. Sonnino & J.D. Dargie, eds. Marker-assisted
selection: Current status and future perspectives in crops, livestock, forestry and fish, pp. 441471. Rome.
(also available at www.fao.org/docrep/010/a1120e/a1120e00.htm).
FAO. 2008a. The state of food insecurity in the world 2008: High food prices and food security threats and
opportunities. Rome. (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/011/i0291e/i0291e00.htm).
FAO. 2008b. Urgent call for global fight against wheat killer. Press Release, Rome. (available at www.fao.org/
news/story/en/item/8479/icode/en/).
FAO. 2008c. Coping with water scarcity: What role for biotechnologies?, by J. Ruane, A. Sonnino, P. Steduto &
C. Deane. Land and Water Discussion Paper 7. Rome. (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/011/i0487e/
i0487e00.htm).
FAO. 2009a. Crop prospects and food situation. Global Information and Early Warning System on Food and
Agriculture No 1, February 2009. Rome. (also available at www.fao.org/giews/).
FAO. 2009b. How to feed the world in 2050. Issues brief presented at the High Level Expert Forum, Rome
1213 October 2009, 35 pp. Rome.
FAO. 2009c. Socio-economic impacts of non-transgenic biotechnologies in developing countries. The case of
plant micropropagation in Africa, by A. Sonnino, Z, Dhlamini, F.M. Santucci & P. Warren, eds. Rome.
(also available at www.fao.org/docrep/011/i0340e/i0340e00.htm).
FAO. 2009d. International year of the potato 2008 new light on a hidden treasure. Rome. (also available at
www.fao.org/docrep/011/i0500e/i0500e00.HTM).
FAO. 2009e. Rice market monitor, February 2009. Rome. (also available at ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/012/
ak407e/ak407e00.pdf).
FAO. 2009f. Report of the 39th Session of the FAO Desert Locust Control Committee. Rome, Italy, 1013
March 2009. Rome. (available at www.fao.org/ag/locusts/common/ecg/1665/en/DLCC39e.pdf).
FAO. 2009g. Red locust disaster in Eastern Africa prevented. Press Release, Rome (available at www.fao.org/
news/story/ en/item/21084/icode/).
FAO. 2009h. Hot issues: Water scarcity. Rome. (available at www.fao.org/nr/water/issues/scarcity.html).
FAO & IAEA. 2008. Atoms for food: A global partnership. Contributions to global food security by the Joint
Division of the Food and Agriculture Organization and the International Atomic Energy Agency. Report
to the IAEA General Conference, September 2008. (available at www.iaea.or.at/Publications/Booklets/
Fao/fao1008.pdf).
Figueiredo, M.V.P., Burity, H.A., Martnez, C.R. & Chanway, C.P. 2008. Alleviation of drought stress in the
common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris, L.) by co-inoculation with Paenibacillus polymyxa and Rhizobium
tropici. Appl. Soil Ecol., 40: 182188.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 65
Flood, J., Bridge, P.D. & Holderness, M., eds. 2000. Ganoderma diseases of perennial crops. Wallingford, UK,
CABI Publishing.
Flowers, T.J. 2004. Improving crop salt tolerance. J. Exper. Botany, 55: 307319.
Forster, B.P., Thomas, W.T.B., Newton, A.C., Tuberosa, R., This, D., El-Enein, R.A., Bahri, M.H., Ben
Salem, M. & Ellis, R.P. 2000. The development and application of molecular markers for abiotic stress
tolerance in barley. J. Exper. Botany, 51: 1927.
Fuglie, K.O., Zhang, L., Salazar, L.F. & Walker, T. 1999. Economic impact of virus-free sweet potato seed in
Shandong Province, China. Lima, Peru, International Potato Center.
Garzn, L.N., Ligarreto, G.A. & Blair, M.W. 2008. Molecular marker-assisted backcrossing of anthracnose
resistance into Andean climbing beans Phaseolus vulgaris, L. Crop Sci., 48: 562570.
Gilani, G.S. & Nasim, A. 2007. Impact of foods nutritionally enhanced through biotechnology in alleviating
malnutrition in developing countries. J. AOAC Int., 90: 14401444.
Glover, D. 2007. Monsanto and smallholder farmers: A case-study on corporate accountability. IDS Working
Paper 277. University of Sussex, UK, Institute of Development Studies.
Glover, D. 2008. Made by Monsanto: The corporate shaping of GM crops as a technology for the poor. STEPS
Working Paper 11. Brighton, STEPS Centre. (also available at www.steps-centre.org/PDFs/GM Crops
web final_small.pdf).
Glover, D. 2009. Undying promise: Agricultural biotechnologys pro-poor narrative ten years on. STEPS
Working Paper 15. Brighton, STEPS Centre. (also available at www.steps-centre.org/PDFs/Bt Cotton
web.pdf).
Goff, S. & Salmeron, J.M. 2004. Back to the future of cereals. Scientific American, 291: 4249.
Gold, E.R., Adams, W.A., Bernier, L. et al. 2008. Toward a new era of intellectual property: From confrontation
to negotiation. A report from The International Expert Group on Biotechnology, Innovation and
Intellectual Property, Montreal, Canada. (also available at www.theinnovationpartnership.org/en/ieg/
report/).
Gollin, D., Parente, S. & Rogerson, R. 2002. The role of agriculture in development. Am. Econ. Rev., 92:
160164.
Gouse, M., Piesse, J., Thirtle, C. & Poulton, C. 2009. Assessing the performance of GM maize amongst
smallholders in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. AgBioForum, 12: 7889. (also available at www.
agbioforum.org/v12n1/v12n1a08-gouse.htm).
Gressel, J., Hanafi, A., Head, G., Marasas, W., Obilanae, A.B., Ochandaf, J., Souissig, T. & Tzotzos, G. 2004.
Major heretofore intractable biotic constraints to African food security that may be amenable to novel
biotechnological solutions. Crop Prot., 23: 661689.
Grure, G.P., Mehta-Bhatt, P. & Sengupta, D. 2008. Bt cotton and farmer suicides in India: reviewing the
evidence. IFPRI Discussion Paper 808. Washington, DC, IFPRI. (available at www.ifpri.org/pubs/dp/
ifpridp00808.asp).
Guei, R.G., Somado, E.A. & Larinde, M. 2008. Improving the seed delivery system in sub-Saharan Africa.
In E.A. Somado, R.G. Guei & S.O. Keya, eds. NERICA: The New Rice for Africa a compendium, pp.
98105. Cotonou, Benin, Africa Rice Center.
Gupta, P.K. 2009. Bt cotton and MAS for crop improvement in India. Message 2 of the FAO e-mail conference
on learning from the past: successes and failures with agricultural biotechnologies in developing countries
over the last 20 years. (available at www.fao.org/biotech/logs/c16/100609.htm).
Gupta, P.K. & Tsuchiya, T., eds. 1991. Chromosome engineering in plants: Genetics, breeding, evolution.
Elsevier, Amsterdam. 629 pp.
66 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
Gurian-Sherman, D. 2009. Failure to yield: Evaluating the performance of genetically engineered crops.
Cambridge, MA, Union of Concerned Scientists. (also available at www.ucsusa.org/food_and_
agriculture/).
Gurr, S.J. & Rushton, P.J. 2005a. Engineering plants with increased disease resistance: What are we going to
express? Trends Biotechnol., 23: 275282.
Gurr, S.J. & Rushton, P.J. 2005b. Engineering plants with increased disease resistance: How are we going to
express it? Trends Biotechnol., 23: 283290.
Hall, A. & Clark, N. 1995. Coping with change, complexity and diversity in agriculture the case of Rhizobium
inoculants in Thailand. World Development, 23: 16011614.
Harris, P., ed. 2005. Abiotic stresses: Plant resistance through breeding and molecular approaches. Boca Raton,
Florida, CRC Press.
Harsch, E. 2004. Farmers embrace African miracle rice: High-yielding Nerica varieties to combat hunger
and rural poverty. Africa Recovery, 17: 1022. (available at www.un.org/ecosocdev/geninfo/afrec/
vol17no4/174rice.htm).
Hartwich, F., Janssen, W. & Tola, J. 2003. Public-private partnerships for agroindustrial research:
Recommendations from an expert consultation. ISNAR Briefing Paper 61. Washington, DC, IFPRI.
HarvestPlus. 2007. Medium-term plan: 2008-2010. Washington, DC, IFPRI.
Hash, C.T. 2009. MAS for downy mildew resistance in pearl millet for India. Message 44 of the FAO e-mail
conference learning from the past: successes and failures with agricultural biotechnologies in developing
countries over the last 20 years. (available at www.fao.org/biotech/logs/c16/170609.htm.
Hazell, P., Poulton, C., Wiggins, S. & Dorward, A. 2007. The future of small farms for poverty reduction and
growth. 2020 Discussion Paper 42. Washington, DC, IFPRI. (available at www.ifpri.org/sites/default/
files/publications/vp42.pdf).
Hedden, P. & Kamiya, Y. 1997. Gibberellin biosynthesis: Enzymes, genes and their regulation. Annu. Rev.
Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol., 48: 431460.
Henikoff, S., Till, B.J. & Comai, L. 2004. TILLING. Traditional mutagenesis meets functional genomics.
Plant Physiol., 135: 630636.
Herring, R.J. 2006. Why did operation cremate Monsanto fail? Science and class in Indias great terminator
technology hoax. Crit. Asian Stud., 38: 467493.
Herring, R.J. 2007. Stealth seeds: Biosafety, bioproperty, biopolitics. J. Dev. Stud., 43: 130-157.
Herring, R.J. 2008. Whose numbers count? Probing discrepant evidence on transgenic cotton in the Warangal
district of India. Int. J. Multiple Res. Approaches, 2: 145159.
Herring, R.J. 2009. Persistent narratives: Why is the failure of Bt cotton in India story still with us?
AgBioForum, 12: 1422.
Hirschi, K. 2008. Nutritional improvements in plants: Time to bite on biofortified foods. Trends Plant Sci., 13:
459463.
Hodson, D.P., Singh, R.P. & Dixon, J.M. 2005. An initial assessment of the potential impact of stem rust (race
UG99) on wheat producing regions of Africa and Asia using GIS. Abstract from the 7th International wheat
conference, Mar del Plata, Argentina. (available at http://apps.cimmyt.org/gis/pdf/UG99postH.pdf).
Hunter, D. & Taylor, M. 2007. Networking and learning together for taro conservation and improvement. A
list of publications from TaroGen and partners. Report for the TaroGen project, 11 pp.
IAASTD. 2008. Global report. International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology
for Development. Washington, DC, Island Press. (also available at www.agassessment.org/).
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 67
IAASTD. 2009. Synthesis report. International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology
for Development. Washington, DC, Island Press. (also available at www.agassessment.org/).
Ihemere, U., Arias-Garzn, D., Lawrence, S. & Sayre, R. 2006. Genetic modification of cassava for enhanced
starch production. Plant Biotechnol. J., 4: 453465.
IRRI. 2008. Nutritionally enhanced rice germplasm developed by 2009. IRRI Annual Report, Los Baos,
Philippines. (available at http://beta.irri.org/images/stories/programs/Program 4 output 1.pdf ).
ISAAA. 2006. Fact sheet on approved Bt cotton hybrids in India. Ithaca, NY, ISAAA.
Jalani, B.S., Basiron, Y. Darus, A., Chan, K.W. & Rajanaidu, N. 2002. Prospects of elevating national oil palm
productivity: A Malaysian perspective. Oil Palm Ind. Econ. J., 2: 19.
Jama, B. & Pizarro, G. 2008. Agriculture in Africa: Strategies to improve and sustain smallholder production
systems. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci., 1136: 218232.
James, C. 2008. Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2008. ISAAA Brief No 39. Ithaca, NY,
ISAAA.
Jauhar, P. 2003. Cytogenetics and crop improvement: Chromosome engineering. In B. Thomas, D.J. Murphy
& B.G. Murray, eds. Encyclopedia Appl. Plant Sci., pp. 167179. Oxford, UK, Elsevier/Academic Press.
Jauhar, P. 2007. Modern biotechnology as an integral supplement to conventional plant breeding: the prospects
and challenges. Crop Sci., 46: 18411859.
Jena, K.K. & Mackill, D.J. 2008. Molecular markers and their use in marker-assisted selection in rice. Crop
Sci., 48: 12661276.
Johnson, N., Lilja, N., Ashby, J.A. & Garcia, J. A. 2004. The practice of participatory research in natural
resource management research. Nat. Resour. Forum, 28: 189200.
Jones, M.P. 1999a. Basic breeding strategies for high yielding rice varieties at WARDA. Jpn. J. Crop Sci., 67:
133-136.
Jones, M.P. 1999b. Food security and major technological challenges: the case of rice in sub-Saharan Africa.
Jpn. J. Crop Sci., 67: 57-64.
Jones, M.P., Dingkuhn, M., Aluko, G.K. & Semon, M. 1997a. Interspecific O. sativa L. x. O. glaberrima
Steud. progenies in upland rice improvement. Euphytica, 92: 237246.
Jones, M.P., Dingkuhn, M., Johnson, D.E. & Fagade, S.O. 1997b. Interspecific hybridization: progress
and prospect. Proceedings workshop Africa/Asia joint research, interspecific hybridization between the
African and Asian species, Oryza sativa, L. O. glaberrima Stued. M.b, Bouak, Cte dIvoire, 1618
December 1996. Cte dIvoire, WARDA.
Kaplan, K. 2009. Collectively facing an ugly rust. Agric. Res. Mag., 57: 2223.
Karp, A. 2002. The new genetic era: Will it help us in managing genetic diversity? In J.M.M. Engels, V. Ramanatha
Rao, A.H.D. Brown & M.T. Jackson, eds. Managing plant genetic diversity, pp. 4356. Rome, IPGRI.
Kasha, K.J., Hu, T.C., Oro, R., Simion, E. & Shim, Y.S. 2001. Nuclear fusion leads to chromosome doubling
during mannitol pretreatment of barley (Hordeum vulgare, L.) microspores. J. Exp. Bot., 52: 12271238.
Khoo, H.E., Ismail, A., Mohd-Esa, N. & Idris, S. 2008. Carotenoid content of underutilized tropical fruits.
Plant Foods Hum. Nutr., 63: 170175.
Kiers, E.T., Leakey R.R.B., Izac, A-M., Heinemann, J.A., Rosenthal, E., Nathan, D. & Jiggins, J. 2008.
Agriculture at a crossroads. Science, 320: 320321.
Kijima, Y., Sserunkuuma, D. & Otsuka, K. 2006. How revolutionary is the Nerica Revolution? Evidence
from Uganda. Dev. Econ., 44: 252267.
68 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
Kikkert, J.R., Vidal, J.R. & Reisch, B.I. 2005. Stable transformation of plant cells by particle bombardment/
biolistics. Methods Mol. Biol., 286: 6178.
Kikulwe, E., Wesseler, J. & Falck-Zepeda, J. 2008. Introducing a genetically modified banana in Uganda:
social benefits, costs, and consumer perceptions. IFPRI Discussion Paper 767. Washington, DC, IFPRI.
(available at www.ifpri.org/pubs/dp/ifpridp00767.asp).
King, R.P. & Byerlee, D. 1978. Factor intensities and locational linkages of rural consumption patterns in
Sierra Leone. Am. J. Agric. Econ., 60: 197206.
Knoll, J. & Ejeta, G. 2008. Marker-assisted selection for early-season cold tolerance in sorghum: QTL
validation across populations and environments. Theor. Appl. Genet., 116: 541553.
Knoll, J., Gunaratna, N. & Ejeta, G. 2008. QTL analysis of early-season cold tolerance in sorghum. Theor.
Appl. Genet., 116: 577587.
Kodym, A. & Afza, R. 2003. Physical and chemical mutagenesis. In E. Grotewold, ed. Plant functional
genomics, pp. 189203. New York, Springer.
Koebner, R.M.D. & Summers, R.W. 2003. 21st century wheat breeding: Plot selection or plate detection.
Trends Biotechnol., 21: 5963.
Kohler, J., Hernndez, J.A., Caravaca, F. & Roldn, A. 2008. Plant-growth-promoting rhizobacteria and
arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi modify alleviation biochemical mechanisms in water-stressed plants. Funct.
Plant Biol., 35: 141151.
Korth, K.L. 2008. Genes and traits of interest for transgenic plants. In C.N. Stewart, ed. Plant biotechnology
and genetics: Principles, techniques and applications, pp. 193-206. Hoboken, NJ, Wiley.
Kovach, M.J. & McCouch, S.R. 2008. Leveraging natural diversity: back through the bottleneck. Curr. Opin.
Plant Biol., 11: 193200.
Kuchel, H., Ye, G., Fox, R. & Jeffries, S. 2005. Genetic and economic analysis of a targeted marker-assisted
wheat breeding strategy. Mol. Breed., 16: 6778.
Langridge, P., Paltridge, N. & Fincher, G. 2006. Functional genomics of abiotic stress tolerance in cereals.
Brief. Funct. Genomic Proteomic., 4: 343354.
Lee, L.S. 1988. Citrus polyploidy origins and potential for cultivar improvement. Aust. J. Agric. Res., 39:
735747.
Lee, T.T.T., Wang, M.M.C., Hou, R.C.W., Chen, L.J., Su, R.C., Wang, C.S. & Tzen J.T.C. 2003. Enhanced
methionine and cysteine levels in transgenic rice seeds by the accumulation of sesame 2S albumin. Biosci.
Biotechnol. Biochem., 67: 16991705.
Lev-Yadun, S., Abbo, S. & Doebley, J. 2002. Wheat, rye, and barley, on the cob? Nat. Biotechnol., 20: 337338.
Lilja, N. & Dalton, T. 1997. Developing African public goods: Rice varietal selection in Cte dIvoire. Discussion
paper presented at American Agricultural Economics Meeting, 1997, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Limao, N. & Venables, A.J. 2001. Infrastructure, geographical disadvantage, and transport costs. World Bank
Econ. Rev., 15: 451479.
Lipton, M. 2006. Can small farms survive, prosper, or be the key channel to cut mass poverty? Electron. J.
Agric. Devel. Econ., 3: 5885.
Low, J., Walker, T. & Hijmans, R. 2001. The potential impact of orange-fleshed sweetpotatoes on vitamin A
intake in sub-Saharan Africa. Paper presented at a regional workshop on food-based approaches to human
nutritional deficiencies: The VITAA project vitamin A and orange-fleshed sweet potatoes in sub-Saharan
Africa, 911 May 2001, Nairobi, Kenya.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 69
Maluszynski, M., Kasha, K.J., Forster, B.P. & Szarejko, I., eds. 2003. Doubled haploid production in crop
plants: A manual. New York, Springer. 480 pp.
Maluszynski, M., Szarejko, I. & Maluszynska, J. 2003. Mutation techniques. In B. Thomas, D.J. Murphy & B.
Murray, eds. Encyclopedia of applied plant sciences, pp. 186201. Oxford, UK, Elsevier Academic Press.
Marillonnet, S., Thoeringer, C., Kandzia, R., Klimyuk, V. & Gleba, Y. 2005. Systemic Agrobacterium
tumefaciens mediated transfection of viral replicons for efficient transient expression in plants. Nat.
Biotechnol., 23: 718723.
Masle, J., Gilmore, S.R. & Farquhar, G.D. 2005. The ERECTA gene regulates plant transpiration efficiency
in Arabidopsis. Nature, 436: 866870.
Mayer, J.E., Pfeiffer, W.H. & Beyer, P. 2008. Biofortified crops to alleviate micronutrient malnutrition. Curr.
Opin. Plant Biol., 11: 166170.
Mbogoh, S.G., Wambugu, F.M. & Wakhusama, S. 2003. Applications: some lessons from the pilot tissue
culture (tc) banana production promotion project in Kenya, 1997-2002. Proceedings 25th international
conference on agricultural economics, pp. 10841094. IAAE.
McCallum, C.M., Comai, L., Greene, E.A. & Henikoff, S. 2000a. Targeted screening for induced mutations.
Nat. Biotechnol., 18: 455457.
McCallum, C.M., Comai, L., Greene, E.A. & Henikoff, S. 2000b. Targeting induced local lesions IN genomes
(TILLING) for plant functional genomics. Plant Physiol., 123: 439442.
Mittler, R. 2005. Abiotic stress, the field environment and stress combination. Trends Plant Sci., 11: 1519.
Moore, G., Devos, K.M., Wang, Z. & Gale, M.D. 1995. Cereal genome evolution. Grasses line up and form a
circle. Curr. Biol., 5: 737739.
Moose, S.P. & Mumm, R.H. 2008. Molecular plant breeding as the foundation for 21st century crop
improvement. Plant Physiol., 147: 969977.
Morris, M.L. & Bellon, M.R. 2004. Participatory plant breeding research: opportunities and challenges for the
international crop improvement system. Euphytica, 136: 2135.
Morse, S., Bennett, R. & Ismael, Y. 2005. Comparing the performance of official and unofficial genetically
modified cotton in India. AgBioForum, 8: 16.
Moslim, R., Wahid, M.B., Kamarudin, N., Ahmad, S.R. & Hamid, N.H. 2006. Research into the
commercialization of Metarhizium anisopliae (Hyphomycetes) for biocontrol of the rhinoceros beetle,
Oryctes rhinoceros (Scarabaeidae) in oil palm. J. Oil Palm Res., Special Issue April 2006, 3749.
Motamayor, J.C. & Lanaud, C. 2002. Molecular analysis of the origin and domestication of Theobroma cacao,
L. In J.M.M. Engels, V. Ramanatha Rao, A.H.D. Brown & M.T. Jackson, eds. Managing plant genetic
diversity, pp. 7788. Rome, IPGRI.
Munns, R. 2002. Comparative physiology of salt and water stress. Plant Cell Environ., 25: 239250.
Munns, R. 2005. Genes and salt tolerance: Bringing them together. New Phytol., 167: 645663.
Munns, R. & Tester, M. 2008. Mechanisms of salinity tolerance. Annu. Rev. Plant Biol., 59: 651681.
Murphy, D.J. 2002. Novel oils from plants genes, dreams and realities. Phytochem. Rev., 1: 6777.
Murphy, D.J. 2006. Molecular breeding strategies for the modification of lipid composition. In Vitro Cell.
Devel. Biol.-Plant, 42: 8999.
Murphy, D.J. 2007a. Plant breeding and biotechnology: Societal context and the future of agriculture.
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. 423 pp.
Murphy, D.J. 2007b. Future prospects for oil palm in the 21st century: Biological and related challenges. Eur,
J. Lipid Sci. Technol., 109: 296306.
70 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
Murphy, D.J. 2007c. People, plants, and genes: The story of crops and humanity. Oxford, Oxford University
Press. 401 pp.
Mutandwa, E. 2008. Performance of tissue-cultured sweet potatoes among smallholder farmers in Zimbabwe.
AgBioForum, 11(1): 4857.
Naik, P.S. & Karihaloo, J.L. 2007. Micropropagation for production of quality potato seed in Asia Pacific. New
Delhi, Asia-Pacific Consortium in Agricultural Biotechnology.
Nellemann, C., MacDevette, M., Manders, T., Eickhout, B., Svihus, B., Prins, A.G. & Kaltenborn, B.P.,
eds. 2009. The environmental food crisis the environments role in averting future food crises. A UNEP
Rapid Response Assessment. United Nations Environment Programme, GRID-Arendal. (also available
at www.grida.no/publications/rr/food-crisis/ebook.aspx).
Nelson, M. & Maredia, M.K. 2007. International agricultural research as a source of environmental impacts:
Challenges and possibilities. J. Environ. Assess. Policy Manag., 9:103119.
Nestel, P., Bouis, H.E., Meenakshi, J.V. & Pfeiffer, W.H. 2006. Biofortification of staple food crops. J. Nutr.,
136: 10641067.
Newell-McGloughlin, M. 2008. Nutritionally improved agricultural crops. Plant Physiol., 147: 939-953
Nguthi, F.N. 2007. Adoption of agricultural innovations by smallholder farmers in the context of HIV/AIDS:
The case of tissue-cultured banana in Kenya. Netherlands, University of Wageningen. (PhD thesis).
NIH. 2009. GenBank sequences from pandemic (H1N1) 2009 viruses. Washington, DC, National Institutes of
Health. (available at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genomes/FLU/SwineFlu.html).
Nkonya, E., Pender, J., Kaizzi, C., Kato, E. & Mugarura, S. 2005. Policy options for increasing crop productivity
and reducing soil nutrient depletion and poverty in Uganda. IFPRI Discussion Paper 134. Washington,
DC, IFPRI. (available at www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/eptdp134.pdf).
Nuccio, M.L., Rhodes, D., McNeil, S.D. & Hanson, A.D. 1999. Metabolic engineering for osmotic stress
resistance. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol., 2: 128134.
Obilana, A.B. & Okumu, B.N. 2005. INT/00/922 Africa-Asia Joint Research: Interspecific hybridization
between African and Asian rice species. Evaluation study report prepared for UNDP SU/SSC and Africa
Rice Center. Cotonou, Benin, Africa Rice Center.
Odame, H. 1999. Biotechnology and smallholders. Institutional rigidity and change in agriculture. Paper
prepared for the regional workshop on biotechnology assessment: regimes and experiences. ACTS. Nairobi,
September 2729, 1999.
Odame, H. 2002. Smallholder access to biotechnology: case of Rhizobium inocula in Kenya. Econ. Polit. Wkly.,
37: 274855.
OECD. 2009. The Bioeconomy to 2030: Designing a policy agenda. International Futures Programme. (available
at www.oecd.org/futures/bioeconomy/2030)
Paine, J.A., Shipton, C.A., Chaggar, S., Howells, R.M., Kennedy, M.J., Vernon, G., Wright, S.Y., Hinchliffe,
E., Adams, J.L., Silverstone, A.L. & Drake, R. 2005. Improving the nutritional value of Golden Rice
through increased pro-vitamin A content. Nat. Biotechnol., 23: 482487.
Panchal, G. & Bridge, P.D. 2005. Following basal stem rot in young oil palm plantings. Mycopathologia, 159:
123127.
Paterson, R. 2007. Ganoderma disease of oil palm A white rot perspective necessary for integrated control.
Crop Prot., 26: 13691376.
Peacock, C., Jowett, A., Dorward, A., Poulton, C. & Urey, I. 2004. Reaching the poor: A call to action.
Investment in smallholder agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa. Project report. FARM-Africa; Harvest
Help. London, Imperial College, Centre for Development and Poverty Reduction. (available at http://
eprints.soas.ac.uk/5141/).
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 71
Peacock, J. & Chaudhury, A. 2002. The impact of gene technologies on the use of genetic resources. In J.M.M.
Engels, V. Ramanatha Rao, A.H.D. Brown & M.T. Jackson, eds. Managing plant genetic diversity, pp.
33-42. Rome, IPGRI.
Pender, J. 2007. Agricultural technology choices for poor farmers in less-favored areas of south and east Asia.
IFPRI Discussion Paper 709. Washington, DC, IFPRI.
Peralta, H. 2009. Biofertilizer - common bean - Mexico. Message 50 of the FAO e-mail conference on learning
from the past: successes and failures with agricultural biotechnologies in developing countries over the last
20 years. (available at www.fao.org/biotech/logs/c16/180609.htm).
Peralta, H., Mora, Y., Salazar, E., Encarnacin, S., Palacios, S. & Mora, J. 2004. Engineering the nifH promoter
region and abolishing poly--hydroxybutyrate accumulation in Rhizobium etli enhance nitrogen fixation
in symbiosis with Phaseolus vulgaris. Appl Environ. Microbiol., 70 (6): 32723281.
Pereira, N. 2008. Is gene modification a panacea for the world hunger? Curr. Sci., 95: 1112.
Perrin, R.K. & Fulginiti, L.E. 2008. Pricing and welfare impacts of new crop traits: The role of IPRs and
Coases conjecture revisited. AgBioForum, 11: 134144. (also available at www.agbioforum.org/v11n2/
v11n2a07-fulginiti.htm).
Popelka, J.C., Terryn, N. & Higgins T.J.V. 2004. Gene technology for grain legumes: Can it contribute to the
food challenge in developing countries. Plant Sci., 167: 195206.
Puente-Rodrguez, D. 2007. Redesigning the production of the Bacillus thuringiensis bio-pesticide within the
context of subsistence agriculture in Andhra Pradesh, India. Asian Biotechnol. Dev. Rev., 9: 5783.
Puente-Rodrguez, D. 2008. The wiphala genomics: The deployment of molecular markers in small-scale
potato crop systems in the Bolivian Andes. Eur. J. Dev. Res., 20, 377398.
Qaim, M. 1999. A socioeconomic outlook on tissue culture technology in Kenyan banana production.
Biotechnol. Dev. Monit., 40: 1822.
Qaim, M. 2003. Bt cotton in India: Field trial results and economic projections. World Dev., 31: 21152127.
Qaim, M. & de Janvry, A. 2003. Genetically modified crops, corporate pricing strategies, and farmers
adoption: The case of Bt cotton in Argentina. Am. J. Agric. Econ., 85: 81428.
Qaim, M. & Traxler, G. 2005. Roundup ready soybeans in Argentina: Farm level and aggregate welfare effects.
Agric. Econ., 32: 7386.
Qaim, M., Subramanian, A., Naik, G. & Zilberman, D. 2006. Adoption of Bt cotton and impact variability:
Insights from India. Rev. Agric. Econ., 28: 4858.
Qaim, M. & Zilberman, D. 2003. Yield effects of genetically modified crops in developing countries. Science,
299: 900902.
Ramessar, K., Capell, T., Twyman, R.M., Quemada, H. & Christou, P. 2009. Calling the tunes on transgenic
crops: The case for regulatory harmony. Mol. Breed., 23: 99112.
Raney, T. 2006. Economic impact of transgenic crops in developing countries. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol., 17: 15.
Rao, C.K. 2004. One swallow does not make the summer Bt cotton in India. Foundation for Biotechnology
Awareness and Education. Bangalore, India.
Reader, J. 2009. The untold history of the potato. London, Vintage.
Ribaut, J-M. & Betrn, J. 1999. Single large-scale marker-assisted selection (SLS-MAS). Mol. Breed., 5, 531541.
Ribaut, J-M., Edmeades, G., Perotti, E. & Hoisington D. 2000. QTL analyses, MAS results, and perspectives
for drought-tolerance improvement in tropical maize. In J-M. Ribaut & D. Poland, eds. Molecular
approaches for the genetic improvement of cereals for stable production in water-limited environments,
pp. 131136. Mexico, CIMMYT.
72 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
Rigor, A. 2009. Experiences from Philippines - rice. Message 42 of the FAO e-mail conference on learning from
the past: successes and failures with agricultural biotechnologies in developing countries over the last 20
years. (available at www.fao.org/biotech/logs/c16/170609.htm)
Rola, A.C. & Chupungco, A.R. 1996. Socio-economic evaluation and policy analysis of the commercialization
of the rapid composting technology Phase II. Unpublished document, Philippine Council for
Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research and Development (PCARRD). Los Baos,
University of the Philippines.
Rozema, J. & Flowers, T. 2008. Crops for a salinized world. Science, 322, 14781479.
Ruttan, V.W. 1999. Biotechnology and agriculture: A skeptical perspective. AgBioForum, 2: 5460. (available
at www.agbioforum.org/v2n1/v2n1a10-ruttan.pdf).
SABP. 2007. Bt cotton hybrids for release by GEAC MayJuly 2007. SABP Newsletter 3. South Asia Biosafety
Program.
Sakamoto, T. & Matsuoka, M. 2008. Identifying and exploiting grain yield genes in rice. Curr. Opin. Plant
Biol., 11: 209214.
Sala, F. & Labra, M. 2003. Somaclonal variation. In B. Thomas, D.J. Murphy & B. Murray, eds. Encyclopedia
Appl. Plant Sci., pp. 14171422. Oxford, UK, Elsevier Academic Press.
Sambanthamurthi, R., Singh, R., Kadir, A., Abdullah, M. & Kushari, A. 2009. Opportunities for oil palm
via breeding and biotechnology. In S.M. Jain & P.M. Priyadarshan, eds. Breeding plantation tree crops:
Tropical species, pp. 377420. New York, Springer.
Sang, S. 2009. Genes and mutations underlying domestication transitions in grasses. Plant Physiol., 149: 6370.
Sarla, N. & Mallikarjuna Swamy, B.P. 2005. Oryza glaberrima: A source for the improvement of Oryza
sativa. Curr. Sci., 89: 955963.
Sasaki, A., Ashikari, M., Ueguchi-Tanaka, M., Itoh, H., Nishimura, A., Swapan, D., Ishiyama, K., Saito, T.,
Kobayashi, M., Khush, G.S., Kitano, H. & Matsuoka, M. 2002. Green revolution: A mutant gibberellin-
synthesis gene in rice. Nature, 416: 701702.
Scoones, I. 2005. Science, agriculture and the politics of policy: The case of biotechnology in India. Hyderabad,
Orient Longman. 401 pp.
Scoones, I. & Thompson, J., eds. 2009. Farmer first revisited: Innovation for agricultural research and
development. UK, Practical Action Publishing. 384 pp.
Shah, D.M., Rommens, C.M.T. & Beachy, R.N. 1995. Resistance to diseases and insects in transgenic plants:
progress and applications to agriculture. Trends Biotechnol., 13: 362368.
Shah, E. 2005. Local and global elites join hands: Development and diffusion of Bt cotton technology in
Gujarat. Econ.Polit. Wkly., 40: 462939.
Shah, E. 2008. What makes crop biotechnology find its roots? The technological culture of Bt cotton in
Gujarat, India. Eur. J. Dev. Res., 20: 43247.
Shaharoona, B., Naveed, M., Arshad, M. & Zahir, Z.A. 2008. Fertilizer-dependent efficiency of pseudomonads
for improving growth, yield, and nutrient use efficiency of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Appl. Microbiol.
Biotechnol., 79: 147155.
Shankar, B. & Thirtle, C. 2005. Pesticide productivity and transgenic cotton technology: The South African
smallholder case. J. Agric. Econ., 56:97116.
Sharma, M. 2001. India. In G.J. Persley & L.R. MacIntyre, eds. Agricultural biotechnology: Country case
studies, p.51. Wallingford, CABI.
Sharma, M., Charak, K.S. & Ramanaiah, T.V. 2003. Agricultural biotechnology research in India: Status and
policies. Curr. Sci., 84: 297302. (also available at www.ias.ac.in/currsci/feb102003/297.pdf)
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 73
Shepherd, D.N., Mangwende, T., Martin, D.P., Bezuidenhout, M., Kloppers, F.J., Carolissen, C.H.,
Monjane, A.L., Rybicki, E.P. & Thomson, J.A. 2007. Maize streak virus-resistant transgenic maize: A
first for Africa. Plant Biotechnol. J., 5: 759767.
Sinclair, T.R., Purcell, L.C. & Sneller, C.H. 2004. Crop transformation and the challenge to increase yield
potential. Trends Plant Sci., 9 (2): 70-75.
Singh, K.B., Ocampo, B. & Robertson, L.D. 1998. Diversity for abiotic and biotic stress resistance in the wild
annual Cicer species. Genet. Resour. Crop Evol., 45: 917.
Singh, R.J. 2007. Oilseed crops. Genetic resources, chromosome engineering, and crop improvement. Boca
Raton, Florida, CRC Press.
Skamnioti, P. & Gurr, S.J. 2009. Against the grain: Safeguarding rice from rice blast disease. Trends Biotechnol.,
27: 141150.
Slater, A., Scott, N.W. & Fowler, M.R. 2008. Plant biotechnology. The genetic manipulation of plants. Oxford,
Oxford University Press. 400 pp.
Smale, M., Edmeades, S. & De Groote, H., eds. 2006. Genetic resource policies, promising crop biotechnologies
for smallholder farmers in East Africa: bananas and maize. Briefs 19-26, Washington, DC, IFPRI.
Smale, M., Zambrano, P. & Cartel, M. 2006. Bales and balance: a review of the methods used to assess the
economic impact of Bt cotton on farmers in developing countries. AgBioForum, 9: 195212.
Smale, M., Zambrano, P., Falck-Zepeda, J. & Grure, G. 2006. Parables: Applied economics literature about
the impact of genetically engineered crop varieties in developing economies. EPTD Discussion Paper 158.
Washington, DC, IFPRI.
Smale, M. & Tushemereirwe, W.K. 2007. An economic assessment of banana genetic improvement and
innovation in the Lake Victoria Region of Uganda and Tanzania. IFPRI Research Report 155.
Washington, DC, IFPRI.
Smale, M., Zambrano, P., Grure, G., Falck-Zepeda, J., Matuschke, I., Horna, D., Nagarajan, L.,
Yerramareddy, I. & Jones, H. 2009. Measuring the economic impacts of transgenic crops in developing
agriculture during the first decade: Approaches, findings, and future directions. IFPRI Food Policy Review
10, Washington, DC, IFPRI.
Smith, J.S.C., Hussain, T., Jones, E.S., Graham, G., Podlich, D., Wall, S. & Williams, M. 2008. Use of doubled
haploids in maize breeding: implications for intellectual property protection and genetic diversity in
hybrid crops. Mol. Breed., 22: 515.
Smith, S. 2008. Intellectual property protection for plant varieties in the 20th century. Crop Sci., 48: 12771290.
Soepena, H., Purba, R.Y. & Pawirosukarto, S. 2000. A control strategy for basal stem rot (Ganoderma) on oil
palm. In J. Flood, P.D. Bridge & M. Holderness, eds. Ganoderma diseases of perennial crops, pp. 8388.
Wallingford, UK, CABI Publishing.
Solution Exchange. 2007. Query: Impact of Bt cotton experiences. Consolidated reply of messages posted on
the topic by the Solution Exchange for the Food and Nutrition Security Community.
Somado, E.A., Guei, R.G. & Keya, S.O., eds. 2008. NERICA: the New Rice for Africa a compendium.
Cotonou, Benin, Africa Rice Center. (also available at www.africarice.org/warda/guide-compend.asp).
Sonnino, A. Iwanaga, M. & Henestroza A. 1988. Chromosome number doubling of 2x potato lines with
diverse genetic background through tissue culture. Potato Res., 31: 627631.
Spielman, D.J., Hartwich, F. & von Grebmer, K. 2007. Sharing science, building bridges, and enhancing
impact, public-private partnerships in the CGIAR. IFPRI Discussion Paper 708. Washington, DC,
IFPRI. (available at www.ifpri.org/sites/default/files/publications/ifpridp00708.pdf).
Stafford, W. 2009. Marker assisted selection (MAS): Key issues for Africa. The African Centre for Biosafety.
(also available at www.biosafetyafrica.org.za/images/stories/dmdocuments/MAS-Booklet.pdf).
74 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
Steele, K.A., Singh, D.N., Kumar, R., Prasad, S.C., Billore, M., Virk, D.S., Shashidhar, H.E. & Witcombe,
J.R. 2004. Marker-assisted selection of four root QTL and aroma to improve Kalinga III: Evaluation
of pyramid lines and advanced bulks from backcrossing. Proceedings Indian national conference on
increasing rice production under water limited environment, 3-4 December 2004, Birsa Agricultural
University, Ranchi, India.
Steele, K.A., Virk, D.S., Prasad, S.C., Kumar, P., Singh, D.N., Gangwar, J.S. & Witcombe, J.R. 2002.
Combining PPB and marker-assisted selection: strategies and experiences with rice. Extended abstract
for workshop on the quality of science in participatory plant breeding. Rome, Italy, IPGRI, September
30October 4, 2002.
Stein, A.J. & Rodrguez-Cerezo, E. 2009. The global pipeline of new GM crops: implications of asynchronous
approval for international trade. JRC Scientific and Technical Report. Seville, EU Joint Research Centre
(also available at http://ipts.jrc.ec.europa.eu/publications/pub.cfm?id=2420).
Stokstad, E. 2007. Deadly wheat fungus threatens worlds breadbaskets. Science, 315: 17861787.
Stomph, T.J., Jiang, W. & Struik, P.C. 2009. Zinc biofortification of cereals: rice differs from wheat and barley.
Trends Plant Sci., 14: 123124.
Stone, G.D. 2007. Agricultural deskilling and the spread of genetically modified cotton in Warangal. Curr.
Anthropol., 48: 67103.
Sundaram, R.M., Vishnupriya, M.R., Laha, G.S., Rani, N.S., Rao, P.S., Balachandran, S.M., Reddy, G.A.,
Sarma, N.P. & Sonti, R.V. 2009. Introduction of bacterial blight resistance into Triguna a high yielding,
mid-early duration rice variety. Biotechnol. J., 4(3): 400407.
Sundram, S., Abdullah, F., Ahmad Z.A.M. & Yusuf, U.K. 2008. Efficacy of single and mixed treatments of
Trichoderma harzianum as biocontrol agents of ganoderma basal stem rot in oil palm. J. Oil Palm Res.,
20: 470483.
Tanurdzic, M., Vaughn, M.W., Jiang, H., Lee, T.J., Slotkin, R.K., Sosinski, B., Thompson, W.F., Doerge,
R.W. & Martienssen, R.A. 2008. Epigenomic consequences of immortalized plant cell suspension
culture. PLoS Biol., 6(12): e302.
Tarczynski, M.C., Jensen, R.G. & Bonhert, H.J. 1992. Expression of a bacterial mtlD gene in transgenic
tobacco leads to production and accumulation of mannitol. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA., 89: 26002604.
Thirtle, C., Beyers, L., Ismael, Y. & Piesse, J. 2003. Can GM-technologies help the poor? The impact of Bt
cotton in Makhathini Flats, KwaZulu-Natal. World Development, 31: 717732.
Thomas, B., Murphy, D.J. & Murray, B.G., eds. 2003. Encyclopedia Appl. Plant Sci., pp. 13411431. Oxford,
Elsevier Academic Press.
Thompson, J. & Scoones, I. 2009. Addressing the dynamics of agri-food systems: An emerging agenda for
social science research. Environ. Sci. Policy, 12: 386397.
Toomey, G. 1999. Farmers as researchers: The rise of participatory plant breeding. IDRC Project No 950019.
Ottawa, Canada, International Development Research Centre.
Trigo, E.J. & Cap, E.J. 2006. Ten years of genetically modified crops in Argentine agriculture ArgenBio.
(available at www.inta.gov.ar/ies/docs/otrosdoc/resyabst/ten_years.htm).
Tripp, R. 2001. Can biotechnology reach the poor? The adequacy of information and seed delivery. Food
Policy, 26: 249264.
Tripp, R., Louwaars, N. & Eaton, D. 2007. Plant variety protection in developing countries. A report from
the field. Food Policy, 32, 354371.
Tschirley, D. & Benfica, R. 2001. Smallholder agriculture, wage labour and rural poverty alleviation in land-
abundant areas of Africa: Evidence from Mozambique. J. Mod. Afr. Stud., 39: 333358.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 75
Tumwegamire, S., Kapinga, R., Zhang, D., Crissman, C. & Agili, S. 2004. Opportunities for promoting
orange-fleshed sweetpotato among food based approach to combat vitamin A deficiency in sub-Saharan
Africa. Afr. Crop Sci. J., 12: 241253.
USDA. 2005. Indian cotton production continues its upward climb. USDA-Foreign Agricultural Service
Commodity Intelligence Report.
USDA. 2008. Controls over importation of transgenic plants and animals. United States Department of
Agriculture Report. (also available at www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/50601-17-TE.pdf).
Uyen, N.V., Ho, T.V., Tung, P.X., Vander Zaag, P. & Walker, T.S. 1996. Economic impact of the rapid
multiplication of high-yielding, late-blight-resistant varieties in Dalat, Vietnam. In T.S. Walker & C.C.
Crissman, eds. Case studies of the economic impact of CIP-related technologies. Lima, International
Potato Center.
van Emden, H. 2002. Mechanisms of resistance: antibiosis, antixenosis, tolerance, nutrition. In D. Pimerntel,
ed. Encyclopedia of pest management, 483486.
Varshney, R.K., Graner, A. & Sorrells, M.E. 2005. Genomics-assisted breeding for crop improvement. Trends
Plant Sci., 10: 621630.
Varshney, R.K. & Tuberosa, R., eds. 2007a. Genomics-assisted crop improvement Volume 1. Genomics
approaches and platforms. Berlin, Springer. 386 pp.
Varshney, R.K. & Tuberosa, R., eds. 2007b. Genomics-assisted crop improvement. Volume 2 Genomics
applications in crops. Berlin, Springer. 509 pp.
Vermeulen, S. & Goad, N. 2006. Towards better practice in smallholder palm oil production. London,
International Institute for Environment and Development. (available at www.iied.org/pubs/
pdfs/13533IIED.pdf).
Vernooy, R. 2003. Seeds that give: Participatory plant breeding. Ottawa, Canada, International Development
Research Centre.
Vinocur, B. & Altman, A. 2005. Recent advances in engineering plant tolerance to abiotic stress: Achievements
and limitations. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol., 16: 123132.
Virk, D.S., Singh, D.N., Prasad, S.C., Gangwar, J.S. & Witcombe, J.R. 2003. Collaborative and consultative
participatory plant breeding of rice for the rainfed uplands of eastern India. Euphytica, 132: 95108.
Wambugu, F. 2004. Food, nutrition and economic empowerment: the case for scaling up the tissue culture
banana project to the rest of Africa. Paper presented at the NEPAD/IGAD regional conference agricultural
successes in the Greater Horn of Africa. Nairobi, Kenya, November 2225, 2004.
Wambugu, F., Karembu, M., Njugunaand, M. & Wanyangu, S.W. 2000. Biotechnology to benefit small-scale
banana producers in Kenya. Annual Progress Report. Nairobi, Kenya Agricultural Research Institute.
Wang, T.L., Domoney, C., Hedley, C.L., Casey, R. & Grusak, M.A. 2003. Can we improve the nutritional
quality of legume seeds? Plant Physiol., 131: 886891.
Wang, W., Vinocur, B. & Altman, A. 2003. Plant responses to drought, salinity and extreme temperatures:
Towards genetic engineering for stress tolerance. Planta, 218: 114.
Weeden, N.F. 2007. Genetic changes accompanying the domestication of Pisum sativum: Is there a common
genetic basis to the domestication syndrome for legumes? Ann. Bot., 100: 10171025.
Witcombe, J.R., Joshi, A. & Goyal, S.N. 2003. Participatory plant breeding, in maize: A case study from
Gujarat, India. Euphytica, 130: 413422.
Wong, G., Tan, C.C. & Soh, A.C. 1997. Large scale propagation of oil palm clones experiences to date. Acta
Hortic., 447: 649658.
76 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
World Bank. 2007. World development report 2008: Agriculture for development. Washington, DC, World
Bank Publications. (also available at http://go.worldbank.org/LBJZD6HWZ0).
World Food Prize. 2009. Laureate Gebisa Ejeta. (available at www.worldfoodprize.org/en/laureates/20002009_
laureates/2009_ejeta/).
Xu, Y. & Crouch, J.H. 2008. Marker-assisted selection in plant breeding: From publications to practice. Crop
Sci., 48: 391407.
Yamaguchi, T. & Blumwald, E. 2005. Developing salt-tolerant crop plants: Challenges and opportunities.
Trends Plant Sci., 10: 615620.
Yamaguchi-Shinozaki, K. & Shinozaki, K. 2001. Improving plant drought, salt and freezing tolerance by
gene transfer of a single stress-inducible transcription factor. Novartis Found. Symp., 236: 176186.
Yamanaka, M. 2008. A nail in the coffin for DNA sequence patents. Nat. Biotechnol., 26: 1085
Yang, J., Kloepper, J.W. & Ryu, C.M. 2009. Rhizosphere bacteria help plants tolerate abiotic stress. Trends
Plant Sci., 14: 14.
Ye, X., Al-Babili, S., Kloti, A., Zhang, J., Lucca, P., Beyer, P. & Potrykus, I. 2000. Engineering the provitamin
A (-carotene) biosynthetic pathway into (carotenoid-free) rice endosperm. Science, 287: 303305.
Zamir, D. 2001. Improving plant breeding with exotic genetic libraries. Nat. Rev. Genet., 2: 983989.
Zhai, W., Li, X., Tian, W., Zhou, Y., Pan, X., Cao, S., Zhao, X., Zhao, B., Zhang, Q. & Zhu, L. 2000.
Introduction of a rice blight resistance, Xa21, into five Chinese rice varieties through an Agrobacterium-
mediated system. Sci. China C Life Sci., 43: 361368.
Zhang, H., Kim, M.S., Sun, Y., Dowd, S.E., Shi, H. & Par, P.W. 2008. Soil bacteria confer plant salt tolerance
by tissue-specific regulation of the sodium transporter HKT1. Mol. Plant Microbe Interact., 21: 737744.
Zhang, H.X., Hodson, J.N., Williams, J.P. & Blumwald, E. 2001. Engineering salt-tolerant Brassica plants:
Characterization of yield and seed oil quality in transgenic plants with increased vacuolar sodium
accumulation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA., 98: 1283212836.
chapte r 1 Current Status and Options for Crop Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 77
chapter 2
Current Status and Options
for Forest Biotechnologies
in Developing Countries
Summary
The forestry sector differs from the crop or livestock sectors in a number of important
ways. First, forest trees are highly heterozygous long-lived perennials with late sexual
maturity and a lengthy regeneration cycle which places high priority on retaining genetic
diversity as an insurance policy against rapid change. Second, most forest tree species have
narrow regional adaptation so the numbers of species used for planting are much higher
than for food crops. Third, forest trees serve as keystone species in dynamic ecosystems so
managing against loss translates into more than tree survival. Fourth, forest trees are largely
undomesticated although a few species have had some population-level improvement for
one to four generations.
For management of naturally regenerated forests, DNA-based and biochemical markers
are available for a growing number of tropical species. Today, findings are available to guide
operational forest management plans including in developing countries, but only for a very
limited number of the hundreds of tree species that are managed in naturally regenerated
tropical forests. This area of forest biotechnology continues to expand, moving from tools
development into more hypothesis-driven knowledge acquisition. Such research inquiry is
a powerful source of pertinent knowledge for protecting tropical forests. This research is
also moving from molecular markers into genomics. Biotechnology tools such as molecular
markers and the field of genomics are therefore providing important knowledge about
naturally regenerated tropical forests and important insights into the nature of the entire
tropical forest ecosystems including the relationship between forest trees and the microbial
communities with which they interact, which can influence the strategies employed for
managing tropical forests.
78 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
For planted forests, although there is some overlap the range of biotechnologies used
is generally quite different from that used for naturally regenerated forests. Plantations
can have different types of management systems (e.g. intensive, semi-intensive) and use
different types of genetic material (e.g. wild material, genetically improved trees). Depending
on the level of management intensity and the genetic material used in the planted forest,
different groups of biotechnologies can be used. For simplicity, three different groups of
biotechnologies can be identified according to the type of planted forests, ranging from
the least sophisticated to the most advanced.
A first group of biotechnologies is suitable for the least intensively managed planted
forests, and includes a range of vegetative propagation methods (including micropropagation
based on tissue culture), biofertilizers and genetic fingerprinting using molecular markers.
It could also be complemented by conventional technologies, such as early-stage tree
improvement programmes.
A second group of biotechnologies can be used for planted forests that provide
industrial raw materials on a large planting scale. The single species used for plantations
may be indigenous or exotic, but these plantations are intensively managed. This group
of biotechnologies includes somatic embryogenesis (a tissue culture technique), molecular
markers and quantitative trait locus (QTL) analyses, whole genome sequencing and
functional genomics. A third and most sophisticated group of biotechnologies includes
backward and reverse genomics approaches, whole-genome sequencing, low-cost vegetative
propagation and genetic modification of forest trees. To date, the only report of commercial
plantings with genetically modified (GM) trees is for poplar on 300 to 500ha in China.
However, most tree species used in planted forests have been successfully modified at
the experimental level, and traits that have been the subject of extensive research include
stem shape, herbicide resistance, flowering characteristics, lignin content, insect and
fungal resistance.
Many developing countries currently have biosafety regulations for agricultural crops,
including fruit-trees, although many others lack such frameworks and the capacity to
implement them. There are no regulations, however, specific to the use of GM forest trees.
Although policies and regulations adopted for agricultural crops are also likely to be used for
forest trees, they present special challenges (long time frames and life spans, wild resource,
major constituents of an ecosystem). Forests are not only trees, and forest ecosystems are
more fragile, longer-lived and less closely controlled than crop fields. Decision-making is
complicated by the fact that while agriculture is primarily viewed as a production system,
forests are generally viewed as a natural system, important not only for the conservation
of biodiversity but also for social and cultural values. Thus, the use of GM forest trees is
viewed more as a political and environmental issue than as a technical or trade issue.
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 79
2.1 Introduction
In recent decades, forest biotechnology has grown into a dynamic portfolio of tools, moving
beyond research into global trade and development. This portfolio concept is consistent
with the sensu lato definition of biotechnology put forth in Article 2 of the UN Convention
on Biological Diversity (CBD) any technological application that uses biological systems,
living organisms, or derivatives thereof, to make or modify products or processes for specific
use. This is the definition used in this and the other FAO background documents prepared
for ABDC-10. The following is a brief description of the state of the worlds forests and
some factors shaping forestry and forest biotechnology.
2.1.1 Forest and tree resources management - state of the worlds forests
Forests and other wooded areas perform key economic and ecological functions. Not
only do they provide goods and livelihoods but they also protect soils, regulate water
and absorb carbon. Forests also shelter much of the worlds biodiversity. FAOs most
recent review on the overall status of forest resources, the Global Forest Resources
Assessment (FAO, 2006), indicate that the world has just under 4 billion hectares (ha) of
forests, covering about 30 percent of the worlds land area. It also reveals that production
of wood and non-wood forest products is the primary function for 34 percent of the
worlds forests and that more than half of all forests are used for wood and non-wood
production in combination with other functions such as soil and water protection,
biodiversity conservation and recreation.
Only 5 percent of forests in the world are in plantations, with the balance found in
natural or semi-natural, largely unmanaged and undomesticated forest stands. Planted
forests are expanding and their contribution to global wood production is approaching
50 percent of the total. In 2004, the production of industrial roundwood was 1.6 billion
cubic meters, representing some 45 percent of the global wood production, and forest
products trade reached a total value of US$327 billion. More than half the wood biomass
consumed globally and well over 80 percent in developing countries is burned as fuel.
About 1.6 billion people rely heavily on forest resources for their livelihoods (World
Bank, 2001). Sixty million indigenous people living in the rain forests of Latin America,
Southeast Asia and West Africa depend heavily on forests; 350 million people living in,
or next to, dense forests rely on them for subsistence or income; and 1.2 billion people
in developing countries use trees on farms to generate food and cash. Forest and tree
resources are managed in different main types of systems, which are presented in Table1.
The intensity of management varies very much between primary natural forests and
productive industrial plantations.
80 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
FAO (2006) indicates that the worlds forested area is shrinking, particularly at tropical
latitudes (Table 2). Only a few countries have seen a net increase in forested land area, and
these include China, Vietnam, Cuba, Uruguay, Chile, United States and most of Europe,
west and east. Forested land area is not increasing in tropical regions where biodiversity
and growth rates perha (not shown) are highest. This table points to a few of the factors
shaping forest biotechnology opportunities.
Table 1
Table 2
Forested areas and annual rates of change for the worlds forested land cover by region
Forest area Land area Land area Annual change Forested countries with highest net increase
(1 000 ha) (percent) 2000-2005
(percent)
Africa 635 412 21.4 -0.62 Rwanda, Egypt
Asia and Pacific 734 243 25.8 +0.09 China, Vietnam, New Zealand
Europe 1 001 394 44.3 +0.07 Bulgaria, Spain
Latin America and 859 925 47.3 -0.51 Uruguay, Chile, Cuba
Caribbean
North America 677 464 32.7 -0.01 United States
West and Central Asia 43 588 4.0 +0.03 Uzbekistan
World 3 952 025 30.3 -0.18
Source: FAO (2006)
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 81
Rapid loss of forested areas is coming from changes in land use. In addition to deforestation,
existing forests are being degraded by pathogens and pests, fire, atmospheric pollution,
extreme weather events, climate change and unsustainable forest management practices.
Against this context, the purpose of this Chapter is to review the state of biotechnology
and its impact on forest activities. It addresses this first by looking at the past and then
by looking forward. In looking at the past, Part 2.2 provides an overview of the history
and status of application of conventional technologies in forestry with special attention
to developing countries. Part 2.3 documents the current status of application of forest
biotechnologies in developing countries. Part 2.4 provides an analysis of successes and
failures of forest biotechnologies in developing countries, while Part 2.5 presents a small
number of case studies. In looking forward, Part 2.6 addresses key issues in the sector where
forest biotechnologies could be useful, Part 2.7 identifies options for developing countries
and Part 2.8 presents priorities for action for the international community.
82 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
A. Stocktaking: Learning from the Past
2.2 Overview of Conventional Technologies in Developing Countries
Oddly, planted forests are not domesticated forests. To explain this, consider the definition
of domestication put forth by Allard (1960): Domestication is the bringing of a wild species
under the management of humans. Another definition of domestication is when a plant or
animal is modified for human use to the point where it relies solely on human intervention
for its survival. Under either definition, even the most intensively managed forests are
only semi-domesticated (Figure 1). This is seen as an opportunity by many authors, who
advocate using advanced biotechnologies to accelerate domestication for the benefit of
wood production (Robinson, 1999; Campbell et al., 2003; Boerjan, 2005; Tuskan, 2007).
In any case, forest biotechnology applications have historically been developed for the
benefit of planted forests. But today forests are still planted from undomesticated reproductive
material, as explained below. Planted forests compose 5 percent of the worlds forested areas
and a few forest tree species are in the early stages of domestication (Nelson and Johnsen,
2008) but even so, they are semi-domesticated at best (Figure 1). Forest biotechnology
applications are specific to each type of forest.
figure 1
Early-generation seeds
Improved Seed source Indigenous species
Typically long rotations in temperate, boreal regions
R e l at i v e a r e a o f p l a n t e d f o r e sts w i t h d i f f e r e n t d e g r e e s o f d o m e st i cat i o n
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 83
A brief overview follows of some main applications of conventional technologies in
the forestry sector in developing countries.
84 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
Southern Hemisphere tree improvement was founded on naturalized introductions,
imported exotic species and a few indigenous species. Its link to markets and manufacturing
grew with global trade. Multinational timber corporations could grow timber more
cheaply in some Southern Hemisphere countries and this spurred closer connections
between forest research initiatives in developed and developing countries. Planted forests
and tree improvement programmes have reaped considerable benefits from globalization.
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 85
stages of development is a critical step for conifer plantations because higher quality wood
in the early rings would lower the age of harvest or the rotation age. The rotation age is
the earliest age in the trees lifespan at which harvest becomes profitable. Most forest trees
can live decades or even centuries beyond the rotation age.
Even in the most intensively managed forest tree programmes, tree improvement has not
followed the same path as the crop sector. Genetic gain is carefully balanced against genetic
diversity. Unlike their crop counterparts, forest tree breeders attach great importance to
maintaining genetic diversity for population level improvement. Genetic diversity is seen
as an insurance policy against catastrophic loss beyond a single generation. Forest tree
breeding programmes, so integral to molecular applications of forest biotechnology, work
on long timelines as a biological necessity.
This biological imperative to balance genetic gain against genetic diversity has not only
given rise to forest tree programmes that do not resemble those for crops or livestock, but also
to novel solutions. One common approach in tree improvement programmes is to safeguard
genetic diversity (Tanaka, Tsumura and Nakamura, 1999; FAO, 2001). Grafted archives are
often established at multiple locations. Unlike agricultural crops, these are needed because
there are no repositories to insure against the loss of indigenous forest tree species. The
payoff for these backup collections often comes when these archives provide germplasm for
disease resistance, catastrophic weather events or a change in market demands. Another and
more cost-efficient method has been the multiple population breeding strategy which uses
divergent selection and multiple populations for a 2-for-1 programme conserving genetic
diversity at the same time as making genetic gain (Eriksson, Namkoong and Roberds, 1995;
Williams, Hamrick and Lewis, 1995). In this respect too, the forest biotechnology portfolio
follows a separate path from crops and livestock.
86 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
2.3.1 Naturally regenerated tropical forests
Today, most molecular marker systems are DNA-based systems such as microsatellites (Brondani
et al., 1998; Yazdani et al., 2003) or amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs) (Cervera
et al., 2000), although biochemical markers such as isozymes continue to provide important
insights into tropical forest ecosystems (e.g. Brown and Moran, 1981; Hamrick, 2004). Molecular
markers have been used for decades and are extensively reviewed in FAO (2007).
Molecular marker methods are available for a growing number of tropical hardwood
species such as Aucoumea klaineana, Bagassa guianensis, Entandrophragma cylindicum, Hopea
odorata, Hymenea courbaril, Dryobalanops aromatica, Neobalanocarpus heimeii, Koompasia
malaccense and the endangered Shorea lumutensi (Born et al., 2006, 2008; Garcia et al., 2004;
Hamrick and Murawski, 1990; Lacerda, Kanashiro and Sebbenn, 2008; Lee et al., 2000, 2002,
2003, 2004a, 2004b, 2006; Lee and Krishnapillay, 2004; Lim et al., 2002; Naito et al., 2005; Ng,
Lee and Koh, 2004; Ng et al., 2006; Sebbenn et al., 2008; Silva et al., 2008). Today, findings
are available to guide operational forest management plans in developing countries, but
only for a very limited number of the hundreds of tree species that are managed in naturally
regenerated tropical forests. This area of forest biotechnology continues to expand, moving
from tools development into more hypothesis-driven knowledge acquisition (Table 3). Such
research inquiry is a powerful source of pertinent knowledge for protecting tropical forests.
Table 3
Hypothesis-driven molecular marker applications for indigenous tropical forests which are
naturally regenerated
The hypotheses were tested using DNA-based forest biotechnology tools in combination with other information sources such as
meteorology, ecology and/or taxonomy
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 87
Table 4
This research community is also moving from molecular markers into genomics.
Genomics refers to sequencing DNA either from the nuclear genome or from plastid and
mitochondrial organelles. Unlike other areas of forest biotechnology, genomics data are often
found in the public domain, usually internet databases (see review in Dean, 2006) and this
affords the opportunity for DNA-based computational biology research. This availability of
DNA sequencing data brings a distinct advantage to worldwide research on tropical forests.
To date, genomics data are yielding new insights into comparative biology for tropical
forests (Table 4). Perhaps the application of most immediate use is an international plant
barcoding project under the Consortium for the Barcode of Life (CBOL) to identify genes
that can be used to distinguish between plant species1.
More recent applications from DNA sequencing are emerging for the study of naturally
regenerated tropical forests. This emerging use of genomics has been applied to several areas
of inquiry, including phylogeny, which refers to comparing two or more DNA sequences
from related forest trees with their near relatives to infer past divergence and speciation
events. DNA sequences can be assumed to diverge in a steady-state, linear manner such that
they serve as a molecular clock (Table 3). A closely related area of inquiry is phylogeography,
which refers to using DNA-based sequence data to infer the history and formation of one
or more taxa (Table 4).
Genomics has yet to provide its full benefit: it is a growth area for the forest biotechnology
portfolio. DNA sequencing can encompass well-characterized genes, entire chromosomes
or even entire genomes. Not only are related taxa being compared but interrelationships
among components of entire forest ecosystems can be studied. Taxonomy, complemented
by phylogeny, has now given way to phylogeography and phylogenomics, where functional
genes are compared across taxa (Eisen and Fraser, 2003; Burleigh and Matthews, 2004).
DNA sequence data are available for comparative analyses via Internet databases (Table 5).
1 http://barcoding.si.edu/plant_working_group.html
88 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
Biotechnology tools such as molecular markers and genomics can therefore provide
important knowledge about naturally regenerated tropical forests and important insights
into the nature of the entire tropical forest ecosystems, including the relationship between
the forest trees and the microbial communities with which they interact, which can influence
the strategies employed for managing tropical forests.
Mycorrhizae are symbiotic associations that form between the roots of plant species
and fungi. The hyphae (thread-like structures that are part of the body of the fungi)
spread through the soil, taking up nutrients such as phosphorus and absorbing water, and
transporting them to the plant root. In return, the fungi receive sugars from the plant (FAO,
2008a). Trees colonized with fungal symbionts are therefore likely to be more resistant to
microbial pathogens and less stressed by drought. These benefits hold particular relevance
for tropical forest ecosystems, given that drought and pathogen increases are predicted
under climate change.
Genomics-based research is elucidating how this symbiotic complex functions. First,
not all fungal symbionts have the same mechanisms, as genomics knowledge is confirming.
The two major types of associations are ectomycorrhizae (EM) and vesicular-arbuscular
mycorrhizae (VAM). While both buffer the tree host against diseases and abiotic stress,
EM is more desirable for slowing forest degradation (Connell and Lowman, 1989) and for
hastening re-colonization of abandoned land (Viera, Holl and Peneireiro, 2009). To this
end, Connell and Lowman (1989) hypothesized that EM would confer a greater advantage
to their host species than VAM.
Table 5
Database URL
NCBI www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
Taxonomy Browser www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Taxonomy/taxonomyhome.html/
Entrez www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Entrez/
Site Map www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Sitemap/
EMBL-EBI www.ebi.ac.uk/
UniProt www.ebi.ac.uk/uniprot/index.html
Site Map www.ebi.ac.uk/services/index.html
EMBL-Heidelberg www.embl.de/services/bioinformatics/index.php
Bioinformatics Tools
DENDROME http://dendrome.ucdavis.edu/
Treegenes http://dendrome.ucdavis.edu/treegenes/
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 89
The symbiont complex is more than the forest trees roots and the fungal symbiont.
Symbiont EM fungi also have specific bacterial associates which together form complexes with
the host trees roots (Bonfante and Anca, 2009). Together, this fungal-bacterial complex with
the trees roots confers benefits within the roots and surrounding area. Genomic sequencing
of some fungal symbionts has been completed (Kuhn, Hijri and Sanders, 2001) and this is
leading the way towards an emerging field known as community genomics which uses DNA
sequencing tools to unravel these and other complex interactions within an entire forest
ecosystem (Whitham et al., 2006). This plethora of DNA sequencing methods not only
applies to a single species or its near relatives, but also can provide insights into a tropical
forest ecosystem. Its potential is already emerging for testing ideas about paleoecology
and community ecology.
90 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
Vegetative propagation of forest tree species
This covers a wide range of techniques which are useful for the rapid multiplication of
genotypes. This has been useful for species which produce few or recalcitrant seeds or
seedlings and for multiplying selected genotypes in a short period of time. It is also among
the most ancient of forest applications, dating back eight centuries in China (Minghe
and Ritchie, 1999). In India, there are about 8.9 millionha of teak forest, much of which
is propagated by tissue culture (Tiwari, Tiwari and Siril, 2002). The National Chemical
Laboratory in Pune and the Tata Research Institute in Delhi produce up to a few million
teak plantlets annually. Phytosanitary measures also require tissue culture when moving
germplasm from one country to another. This reduces the spread of plant viruses. Some of
the disadvantages are the high costs of maintaining a tissue culture laboratory and quality
control. Without quality control, one often sees the occurrence of somaclonal variations
and deformed plantlets.
Micropropagation is the development of clonal lines from small tissue samples such
as buds, roots or embryos extracted from seeds (Yanchuk, 2001) and some examples are
provided in Table 6. The principles and achievements relating to plant tissue culture and
micropropagation have been well reviewed by FAO (1994, 2004) and Yanchuk (2001).
Thorpe, Harry and Kumar (1991) listed over 70 angiosperm and 30 gymnosperm tree species
for which successful methods for the production of plantlets have been reported. Almost
two decades ago, Le Roux and van Staden (1991) listed over 25 species of Eucalyptus alone.
This, therefore, is a maturing part of the forest biotechnology portfolio.
Table 6
A few of the many forest tree plantation species which have been multiplied through tissue
culture on a commercial scale in developing countries
Countries Species
India Tectona grandis,
Anogeissus latifoglia
Bamboo spp.
Indonesia, Malaysia and Acacia mangium and
Vietnam Acacia mangium x Acacia auriculiformis hybrids
India, Vietnam and South America Eucalyptus spp.
Chile Pinus radiata
Brazil, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand Tectona grandis
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 91
Between 2002 and 2004, FAO commissioned four studies to investigate the extent
and patterns of research and application in biotechnologies in forest trees worldwide.
Results from the studies indicate that Asia accounts for 38 percent of the activities in forest
tree micropropagation, followed by 7 percent in South America, 3 percent in Africa and
2percent in Oceania (FAO, 2004). As expected, micropropagation of tree species is active
mostly in countries with significant tree planting programmes (Galiana et al., 2003; Watt
et al., 2003; Goh and Monteuuis, 2005; Goh et al., 2007). While a large number of tree
species (78 to 80) have been used for vegetative propagation research, little of this effort
continues. Most halt at the laboratory stages (94 percent), so few even get as far as the
field-testing stage (5 percent). Less than just 1 percent of the species developed clonally
and tested have reached the commercial application stage (FAO, 2004).
Biofertilizers
Soils are dynamic living systems that contain a variety of micro-organisms such as bacteria,
fungi and algae. Maintaining a favourable population of useful microflora is important
from a fertility standpoint. The most commonly exploited micro-organisms are those that
help in fixing atmospheric nitrogen for plant uptake or in solubilizing/mobilizing soil
nutrients such as unavailable phosphorus into plant available forms, in addition to secreting
growth promoting substances for enhancing crop yield. As a group, such microbes are
called biofertilizers or microbial inoculants.
The use of biofertilizers has yielded positive results for indigenous forest species
in the eastern Madagascar littoral forests as well as for exotic forest species including
eucalypts, acacia and cypress (Kisa et al., 2007; Duponnois et al., 2007, 2008; Ouahmane
et al., 2007; Remigi et al., 2008). Other symbionts that are being considered include
nitrogen-fixing bacteria such as Rhizobium, and Azolla, blue-green algae and mycorrhizal
fungi (Caesar, 2009). In addition to the least intensively managed planted forests in
developing countries, biofertilizers have also proved useful in forests under more
intensive management.
92 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
Intermediate forest biotechnologies
2.3.2.2
The second group of biotechnologies can be used for planted forests that provide industrial
raw materials on a large planting scale. The single species used for plantations might be
indigenous or exotic, but the plantations are intensively managed.
Somatic embryogenesis
Somatic embryogenesis (SE) is a tissue culture technique that can also be used for the
micropropagation of forest trees, where a small group of vegetative cells which are stem-
cell like, are induced on culture media to undergo tissue differentiation to form a somatic
embryo. The somatic embryo goes through a maturing process before being germinated
for planting (Tartorius, Fowke and Dunstan, 1991).
Regeneration through SE has been reported for over 50 woody species encompassing
over 20 angiosperm families, and at least a dozen conifer species (Wann 1988; Attree and
Fowke, 1991; Tartorius, Fowke and Dunstan, 1991; Watt et al., 1991; Park, Barret and Bonga,
1998). Potential multiplication rates particularly from cell suspension cultures are very high.
Additional advantages include the amenability of the process to handling in automated
bioreactors and the possibility for mechanized delivery of the emblings (plants propagated
from SE) through synthetic seed technology. SE is also ideally suited for efficient genetic
transformation procedures because of the single cell origin of embryos. The advantages of
SE in comparison with micropropagation by in vitro cuttings, especially with regards to
multiplication rate and genetic modification, explain why large research investments have
been made towards developing this technique. Although successes have been reported in some
commercial species, there are still major obstacles to the large-scale operational application
of the technique to forest trees. Most of the reports (Table7) demonstrate that the results
obtained are still in the experimental stages and are yet to reach the commercialization phase.
Table 7
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 93
Moreover, SE is a costly high-precision operation usually funded through multinational
timber companies which own or lease land. Only the most elite selections are propagated
using SE, where the genetic gains from recurrent breeding are maximized through the
high-volume propagation of a single genotype.
figure 2
Place Quantitative
Trait Loci On Linkage Map
Pedigree analyses
Map each molecular
Marker to linkage groups
on chromosomes
Wood quality
Stem straightness
Disease resistance
Metabolite production Check marker intervals
Carbon storage against change in a traits value
Growth rate
94 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
Finding QTL for forest trees is more costly and more computationally demanding than
for most crop and livestock species because forest tree pedigrees are outcrossing and highly
heterozygous (Devey et al., 2003; Williams and Reyes-Valdes, 2007; Williams, Reyes-Valds
and Huber, 2007). Large pedigrees are rare with few generations and the populations have
no breed structure or strong degrees of differentiation. However, numerous reports have
cited the identification of QTL for major traits ranging from growth to wood quality and
disease resistance in both Northern and Southern Hemisphere countries for a cadre of forest
tree species. Moving from the genetic map to the physical map is more feasible with small
hardwood genomes such as poplar and eucalypts. For species with large genomes, molecular
cytogenetics technology or placement of dye-tagged DNA segments from known genes on a
fixed chromosome squash is proving to be a useful bridge technology (Doudrick et al., 1995).
Translating QTL identification into marker-assisted selection (MAS) is moving into
the realm of commercial applications. Choosing MAS requires a cost-benefit analysis as
described for Pinus radiata (Wilcox et al., 2001) and this is used for poplars, Eucalyptus
spp., Pinus radiata and a few cases of temperate-zone Pinus spp. especially those planted
as an exotic. MAS has led to some novel breeding strategies when applied to forest trees
(e.g. El-Kassaby and Lstiburek, 2009).
The selection of QTL haplotypes is not straightforward because a given pedigree can
be segregating for more than one or even two QTL haplotypes of interest, which can
result in ambiguous genetic models for QTL inheritance. But MAS is operational, lending
yet another level of forest biotechnology precision to plantation forestry. Figure 2 shows
how large numbers of molecular markers are assayed on gels for segregation patterns, then
placed on a genetic map. Each individual now has a known genetic fingerprint, a collection
of marker intervals or haplotypes and some trait measurements. QTL haplotypes can be
identified from these elements.
However, as mentioned earlier, finding QTL in single pedigrees is an arduous process
for forest trees. Other methods for identifying QTL have since been developed or borrowed
from other biological systems. These include association genomics which was developed for
humans and other mammals (reviewed by Darvasi and Shifman, 2005) but these methods are
well suited for forest trees (Brown et al., 2004). Association genomics is a population level
QTL detection method that is only effective if enough gametic disequilibrium is present in
the population. This has indeed been the case for several intensively managed forest trees
in both Northern and Southern Hemisphere regions.
Trait measurements constitute the phenotypic value of an individual tree. Trait-based
genomics approaches such as QTL mapping are known as forward genomics (Figure 2).
The trait measurements for each individual can be compared with its marker haplotypes.
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 95
figure 3
Ph e notypic Valu es Forward Genomics G e nom ics G e n e Ide ntity & Vali dation
Reverse Genomics
Large-insert DNA
segments (BACs)
500 to 1000 bp
10 cM
Gene expression
Transcriptional sequencing
Candidate genes
< 0.1 cM
Linkage Functional screening
Map
Wood quality
Stem straightness
Disease resistance Fine Whole-genome
Metabolite production Linkage sequencing,
Carbon storage Map assembly and
Growth rate annotation
Source: modified from Grattapaglia and Kirst (2008) and Grattapaglia et al. (2009)
This is known as co-segregation between linked molecular markers and a putative QTL
haplotype. While forward genomics is trait-based, the reverse genomics approach (Figure 3)
is gene-based. Reverse genomics identifies, tests and validates specific genes controlling the
trait of interest. Together, they provide an integrated picture of which genes or chromosomal
segments are influencing the trait of interest and the degree of independence among these
genes. The most sophisticated forest biotechnology portfolios at this time use both forward
and reverse approaches but these are limited to Eucalyptus spp, Populus spp. and Pinus spp.
96 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
The impetus for sequencing these forest tree genomes tends to come from large-scale
wood production in intensively managed plantations worldwide, but forest health has
also provided an equally compelling case. One of the side benefits of a large-scale DNA
sequencing project is a rich store of new molecular markers such as single nucleotide
polymorphisms (SNPs).
Functional genomics
In recent years, sequencing entire genomes has shifted emphasis from analyzing sequence
data to the elucidation of gene function, also referred to as functional genomics. Gene
function is inferred by using sequence alignment-based comparisons, identifying homologues
between and within organisms, transcript profiling to determine gene expression patterns
for small numbers of transcripts and yeast two-hybrid interaction analysis for identifying
metabolic pathways, gene networks and protein complexes.
It is often conducted using microarrays which refer to the parallel assessment of
gene expression for tens of thousands of genes. It works on the principle of competitive
hybridization between complementary DNA (cDNA) strands. This approach can identify
candidate genes for quantitative traits in forestry, a form of reverse genomics. As an example,
cDNA microarray technology generated a transcript-level profile of wood forming tissues
(differentiating xylem) for a pedigree composed of individuals from a Eucalyptus grandis
x E. globulus F1 hybrid x E. grandis backcross population (Kirst et al., 2004). Microarrays
are information rich sources of information about genes controlling the trait of interest.
Proteomics
Just as a genome describes the genetic content of an organism, a proteome defines the
protein complement of the genome. Proteomics includes the identification of proteins in
cells or tissues and the characterization of their physio-chemical properties such as post-
translational modifications, function and expression level. Proteomics is a powerful tool
for studying proteins and their modifications under different developmental stages and/or
in response to various environmental stimuli.
In the cell, proteins form transitory or stable complexes as part of pathways and act
within protein networks. These protein-protein interactions can be used to unravel the
various interactions. After processing and modifications, a single gene may express between
one and a few dozen different protein products. A combination of methods is required to
characterize expressed proteins (or proteomes) fully.
A standard procedure is two-dimensional gel electrophoresis as the separation method
followed by mass spectrometry analysis of the separated and enzymatically digested proteins.
The peptide mass fingerprints typically obtained by mass spectrometry are matched against
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 97
sequence databases using dedicated bioinformatics tools. The whole procedure can be
automated and robotized for high throughput purposes. The aim of this technique is to
evaluate the modifications of protein expression with respect to genetic, environmental
and developmental factors. The question is which quantitative variation of proteins is
responsible for which quantitative phenotypic variation. The application of two-dimensional
gel electrophoresis coupled with mass spectrometry in forest tree genomics to map the
expressed genome has been well reviewed by Plomion, Pionneau and Baillres (2003).
98 B i o t e c h n o lo g i e s f o r A g r i c u lt u r a l D e v e lo pm e n t SECTION 1: BACKGROUN D TO
The first successful transformation was done on Populus nigra with the Cry1Ac gene in
1993. This tree was used in field testing as early as 1994 and was subsequently deployed in
further pilot plantings. In 2000, the Chinese regulatory authority permitted the establishment
of about one million trees on 300ha (Hu et al., 2001). This was followed by a smaller
release with a hybrid poplar clone transformed with both Cry1Ac and PI genes (Xiao-hua
et al., 2003). The toxicity of this transformed clone was greatly enhanced as the GM plants
contained two insect resistance genes. Subsequently, the transformation of poplars for
disease resistance and tolerance to environmental stresses has been achieved, though these
are still at the laboratory stage (Xiao-hua et al., 2003).
Genetic modification is part of the reverse genomics approach that is used to evaluate
gene function but its commercialization is shifting investment from the public domain
into proprietary areas. As noted by FAO (2004), a notable trend is that the numbers of
publicly funded projects appear to be waning, while privately funded projects appear to be
increasing, judging by field trials established in recent years. This is a capital intensive effort
requiring long-term continuity of funding, scientists and infrastructure. Developing a GM
genotype on a commercial scale first requires a well established gene transfer technology
(Walter et al., 1998). Each GM genotype must then be vegetatively propagated on a large
scale before shareholders can expect a return on the steep initial investment.
The issue of GMOs has received considerable attention over the last decade in scientific
and non-scientific circles and from policy-makers worldwide. The focus of attention has
been on the crop sector which is where most GMOs have been commercialized. In 2008,
an estimated 125 millionha were cultivated with GM crops compared with just 400ha of
Bt poplars in China, with 20000 seedlings prepared for planting in 2009 (James, 2008). If
or when further GM forest trees are released commercially this situation may change. A
regulatory framework to govern research and the applications of GM forest trees is essential.
The issue goes beyond the country level because pollen flow and seed dispersal do not respect
national boundaries. National and international regulatory systems should contain provisions
for preliminary risk assessments, monitoring and control and for liability and redress.
Many countries currently have regulations for agricultural crops including fruit trees,
although many developing countries lack such frameworks and the capacity to implement
them. There are, however, no regulations specific to the use of GMOs in forestry. Although
policies and regulations adopted for agricultural crops are also likely to be used for forest
trees, forest trees present special challenges (they have long time frames and life spans, they
form a wild resource and are major constituents of an ecosystem). Forests are not only
trees, and forest ecosystems are more fragile, longer-lived and less closely controlled than
crop fields. Decision making is complicated by the fact that while agriculture is primarily
viewed as a production system, forests are generally viewed as natural systems, important
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 99
not only for the conservation of biodiversity but also for social and cultural values. Thus
the use of GM forest trees is viewed more as a political and environmental issue than as a
technical or trade one (El-Lakany, 2004).
2.3.3 Summary
Based on the current analysis, Table 8 attempts to summarize and compare the current
status, key issues and future perspectives for a number of conventional approaches and
biotechnologies in developing countries. The different technologies differ in respect of
public acceptance, the technical capacity and infrastructure/materials required for their
use and costs. For the near future, it is predicted that the potential impact is high for tree
improvement, genomics, DNA barcoding and biofertilizers. To complement this information,
Table 9 summarizes the anticipated contribution of forest biotechnology applications to
natural and planted forests for developing and developed countries based on the worldwide
survey commissioned by FAO (2004).
Table 8
Emerging Extent of Public and Current Current Infrastructure Relative Skills Potential for
forest use government technical technical and/or cost required generating
biotechnology acceptance capability capability for materials for impact
applications for using adapting or and tools application (time frame
technology developing available < 10 years)
new for using
technology technology
Tree High High High Low Medium Medium Medium High
improvement
Recurrent tree Low High Low High Medium High High Medium
breeding
Molecular Medium High Medium Medium Low Medium Medium Medium
markers
Genomics Low High Low Low Low Medium High High
Bioinformatics Medium High Medium Medium Medium Medium High Low
Genetic Low Low to Low Low Low High High Low
modification medium
Biofertilizers High High High High Low Low Low High
Regeneration
component
Bioinformatics
Diversity measurement
Gene discovery
Genetic modification
Biosensors
Product verification
Treepopulation Genetic resources characterization X X X
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 101
2.4 Analysis of Successes and Failures of Forest Biotechnologies in
Developing Countries
To date, the use of biotechnologies has been beneficial only at very advanced stages of
selection and improvement programmes. Unlike crops, where the number of species
to choose from is relatively limited, an immense diversity at both the interspecific and
intraspecific level is used in forestry. Thanks to this important diversity, the early stages of
classical selection (exploration, collection, testing of genetic resources) provide important
gains. By way of example at the species level, Acacia crassipcarpa, which is currently the
main plantation species in swamp areas was unknown as a plantation species only 20
years ago. At intraspecific level, coordinated, multilocational provenance trials have shown
sometimes 200 percent variation in adaptive traits among populations across the natural
range of distribution of the same species. Individual variation within populations is also
very important, and selection at this level also yields important initial gains in particular
through clonal development (the traditional rooting of cuttings).
For most species and forest tree management systems, advances registered in developing
countries until now have been made without any incorporation of biotechnologies. There
are very good examples of advanced tree breeding programmes using biotechnology tools
in developing countries too, but they refer to a small part only of the forest area (although
their share of timber production is relatively high).
One main reason for failure is an inadequate assessment of the real costs and benefits of
using biotechnology tools in given conditions (the level of improvement and the intensity
of management), often under pressure from providers. As a result, expectations are not met
and unjustified costs are high. This is a common risk in the early stages of development of
new technologies. The same problem occurred during the development of clonal forestry
a few decades ago. The development of protocols for the mass vegetative propagation of
eucalyptus (rooting cuttings) was a real breakthrough in the 1970s, making it possible to
take advantage of outstanding individuals from highly heterogenous interspecific hybrid
progenies (the genetic gain could not be captured otherwise). The first large-scale plantations
and gains in the Congo and Brazil were very impressive. But a perverse side-effect was
that insufficiently informed programmes (or projects that were under pressure from active
clonal forestry promoters) overestimated the benefit from vegetative propagation and
neglected all the necessary but time consuming and demanding basic work (systematic
species and provenance exploration and testing, individual selection and breeding, etc).
This resulted in disappointments and misconceived strategies in some cases.
Much still needs to be done along the lines of upgrading the skills of researchers
by ensuring that they receive higher education or appropriate higher level training to
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 103
Forest biotechnology has advanced over the past decade during favourable economic
conditions. This is expected to change. The next decade may see slower progress because
the forestry industry itself has some inherent problems which may be accentuated by the
global financial crisis. Like other research and development (R&D) areas, this downturn
could reduce forest biotechnology investment at a critical time and shape how developing
countries choose to invest in forest biotechnology. These problems are unique to the forestry
context, as summarized by Robinson (1999).
Plantation forestry has less flexibility in tailoring its raw materials delivery due
to long lead times
This means that tailoring raw materials for markets that are years or even decades into
the future is a high-risk proposition. Historically, this is a point which has not been well
understood by biotechnology leaders in the agricultural biotechnology or pharmaceutical
industries (Robinson, 1999).
This suggests that it might be timely to re-examine the role of biotechnology within
the wood manufacturing processes rather than modifying the raw material supply years
in advance of market demand. This emerging field of science is known as molecular wood
biotechnology. Biotechnology benefits to date have included energy savings, waste reduction,
remediation of toxic chemicals (see reviews by Breen and Singleton, 1999; Mansfield and
Esteghlalian, 2003; Ahuja, Gisela and Moreira, 2004). Perhaps the best known example
is the use of microbial (fungal) enzymes that degrade lignin, a component of the plant
cell wall. The use of microbial enzymes is a time-honoured method that has been applied
in pulping processing since 1975. Economic feasibility studies have shown that recent
microbial biotechnology applications can raise mill productivity by 30 percent (Mansfield
and Esteghlalian, 2003). The genetic improvement of fungi, bacteria and other microbes is
a faster way of improving the efficacy of pulping processes and degraded mill waste than
attempting to modify the raw materials of forest trees.
The private forestry sector is cautious about investing in forests and forest
biotechnologies on lands which are not wholly owned
This holds true both for forest biotechnology and for intensive plantation management. As
noted earlier, most forests are not privately owned. A related issue is that for-profit licensing
for genetically enhanced forest trees tends to have been a tricky business model in the past
due to long timelines, low investment rates and public ownership of forests as a worldwide
norm (Robinson, 1999). Thus forestry and its research, including tree breeding, are now
more vulnerable to funding reductions and loss of continuity than before the financial crisis.
In most developing countries, the industrial sector is dominated by foreign firms that
do not often solicit or require research input from local research establishments, as they
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 105
Infrastructure and capacity constraints
In most developing countries, the use of biotechnology has been mostly limited to
using tissue culture for the multiplication of selected clones. While some form of master
plan for the development of biotechnology is present, there have been no real efforts to
popularize this technology in the countries, mainly because of socio-economic factors.
The introduction of biotechnology to developing countries has been by means of
multilateral or bilateral collaboration. Experts from the collaborating (often developed)
countries have visited and worked in the developing countries as short- or long-term
experts and counterparts. They have helped establish laboratories and equip them with
the relevant facilities to carry out research. While work continues during the period of
collaboration, it slows down considerably once the collaboration phase is over. There
are several reasons for this:
}} The local counterparts are not adequately trained to continue the work independently
once the collaboration ends.
}} Once the collaboration period is over and the experts have returned home, the work
in the laboratories slows down considerably as a result of financial constraints or the
lack of technical knowledge.
}} When equipment breaks down, it takes a long time to be repaired or purchased due to
lack of funds.
}} The purchase of chemicals needed for the work can be delayed as a result of a shortage
of funds or the need to wait for them to be imported into the country.
In spite of these shortcomings, countries such as Vietnam have successfully developed elite
clonal hybrids of Acacia mangium x Acacia auriculiformis for planting programmes. There
are currently 127 000 hectares under clonal acacia hybrids cultivation (van Bueren, 2005)
and the planted area continues to increase each year. With the recent rapid growth of the
economy in the country, the situation looks poised to change as the government commits
more funds towards education, training, research, skilled manpower development and
infrastructure development. The biotechnology agenda is also being given priority in the
national development plans of countries like Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia.
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 107
2.5.3 Micropropagation applied to tree breeding of fast-growing forest tree species
in Latin America
Biotechnology was introduced in Latin America in the 1980s. Networking has been very
important for the research community there. By December 2008, there were 5 467 researchers
in 738 agricultural biotechnology laboratories in 32 countries in the Technical Co-operation
Network on Agricultural Biotechnology in Latin America and the Caribbean (REDBIO),
based at the FAO Regional Office in Chile. The network has been in operation since 1991
to develop biotechnology for the sustainable use of regional genetic resources, promote the
safe and responsible application of the technologies especially in fragile environments,
and enhance the regional development of new strategic technologies such as molecular
genomics. It also encourages the application, whenever feasible, of advanced biotechnology
tools in integrated crop management and sustainable production systems.
In terms of planted forests, the largest areas are in Brazil (7 million ha, 4.1 million of
which are industrial man-made forests). Chile has 2.25 millionha of planted forest areas,
practically all for industrial purposes; Uruguay has about 0.75 million ha; Argentina has
0.7 million ha; Venezuela, 0.5 million ha; Cuba, 0.4 million ha; Peru, 0.3 million ha; and
Colombia and Mexico have about 0.2 millionha each. In the other countries of Latin
America and the Caribbean the reforested area is less than 100 000ha per country. The
estimates of the current yearly forestation rate vary from 386 000 to 520 000ha (FAO,
2006). Practically all the planted forests have been established on abandoned agricultural
lands where erosion is prevalent, with the overwhelming majority being established with
fast-growing exotic species in the Eucalyptus and Pinus genera. Many of these planted
forests have been established by clonally propagated elite plants in the case of Eucalyptus
or through somatic embryogenesis in the case of the Pinus species.
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 109
B. Looking Forward: Preparing for the Future
2.6 Key Issues where Forest Biotechnologies Could be Useful
Figure 4
Climate-Mediated
Species Range Shifts
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 111
2.7 Identifying Options for Developing Countries
Based on the stocktaking exercise carried out here, a number of specific options can be
identified for developing countries to help them make informed decisions regarding the
adoption of biotechnologies in the forestry sector in the future.
The international community, including FAO and other UN organizations as well as NGOs,
donors and development agencies, can play a key role in supporting developing countries
by providing a framework for international cooperation as well as funding support for the
generation, adaptation and adoption of appropriate biotechnologies. A set of Priorities for
Action is given below that will help the international community fulfil this role.
2 www.aginternetwork.org.
3 www.oaresciences.org.
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 113
countries. This skill set provides capacity for testing hypotheses using available information
from DNA sequences and related databases. In addition to educational workshops, this
action will also require upgrades of computing infrastructure and perhaps bandwidth
in some cases. A wealth of data is being produced by whole genome DNA sequencing
consortia, the Tree of Life project, the Consortium for the Barcode of Life and a host of
other independent initiatives.
Review the status and potential of forest biotechnologies for developing countries
It is clear from this Chapter that the forestry sector in developing countries is in a very
dynamic situation and facing a number of important challenges and opportunities for which
biotechnologies can play a significant role. FAO commissioned a series of studies in 20022004
to investigate the extent and pattern of research and application of forest biotechnologies
worldwide (FAO, 2004). These studies have informed and influenced policy-making in
developing countries, providing good indicators and possible predictions of trends in forest
biotechnologies around the world. Such global surveys are important, and the international
community should continue to provide periodic reviews of the status and potential of
forestry biotechnologies in developing countries. The reviews should cover synergies with
other biotechnology sectors such as applications of biotechnology to micro-organisms to
improve wood manufacturing processing, as well as with other fields of technology that
may be useful such as nanotechnology, information technology and synthetic genomics
that may converge to the benefit of wood products manufacturing. Another potential
area for convergence is the combination of genomics tools with geographic information
systems (GIS). Using GIS to track rare alleles, gene flow or expressed proteins is another
area that deserves a closer look. Technology advances are delivering finer resolution at both
the landscape and molecular ends of this molecule-to-landscape spectrum, and this will no
doubt provide interesting ways to study all forest ecosystems.
Agrawal, A., Chattre, A. & Hardin, R. 2008. Changing governance of the worlds forests. Science, 320: 14601462.
Ahuja, S.K., Gisela, M. & Moreira, A.R. 2004. Utilization of enzymes for environmental applications. Crit.
Rev. Biotechnol., 24: 125154.
Aitken, S.N., Yeaman S., Holliday, J.A., Wang, T. & Curtis-McLane, S. 2008. Adaptation, migration or
extirpation: Climate change outcomes for tree populations. Evol. Appl., 1: 95111.
Allard, R.W. 1960. Principles of plant breeding. New York, John Wiley & Sons.
Aracruz Celullose. 2008. Annual Report 2007.
Attree, S.M. & Fowke, L.C. 1991. Micropropagation through somatic embryogenesis in conifers. In Y.P.S.
Bajaj, ed. Biotechnology in agriculture and forestry 17. High-tech and micropropagation I, pp. 5370.
Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, Springer-Verlag.
Balocchi, C.E. 1997. Realised versus operational gain: The role of propagation strategies. In R.D. Burdon &
J.M. Moore, eds., Proceedings IUFRO97 Genetics of radiata pine. FRI Bulletin 203, pp. 253255.
Bishop-Hurley, S.L., Zabkiewicz, R.J., Grace, L., Gardner, R.C., Wagner, A. & Walter, C. 2001. Conifer
genetic engineering: Transgenic Pinus radiata (D. Don) and Picea abies (Karst) plants are resistant to the
herbicide Buster. Plant Cell Rep., 20: 235243.
Boerjan, W. 2005. Biotechnology and the domestication of forest trees. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol., 16: 159166.
Bonfante, P. & Anca, I.-A. 2009. Plants, mycorrhizal fungi and bacteria: A network of interactions. Ann. Rev.
Microbiol., 63: 363383.
Born, C., Hardy, O.J., Chevallier, M.H., Ossari, S., Attk, C. Wickings, E.J. & Hossaert-McKey, M. 2008.
Small-scale spatial genetic structure in the Central African rainforest tree species Aucoumea klaineana:
A stepwise approach to infer the impact of limited gene dispersal, population history and habitat
fragmentation. Mol. Ecol., 17: 20412050.
Born, C., Vignes, H., Muloko, N., Wickings, E.J., Hossaert-McKey, M. & Chevallier, M.H. 2006. Isolation
and characterization of polymorphic microsatellite loci from Aucoumea klaineana Pierre (Burseraceae),
a tropical rainforest tree of Central Africa. Mol. Ecol. Notes, 6: 10541056.
Borralho, N.M.G. 2001. The purpose of breeding is breeding for a purpose. IUFRO Symposium: Developing
the Eucalypt for the future. Valdivia, Chile, 1015 September 2001.
Boshier, D. H., Chase, M.R. & Bawa, K.S. 1995. Population genetics of Cordia alliodora (Boraginaceae), a
neotropical tree. 2. Mating system. Am. J. Bot., 82: 476483.
Breen, A. & Singleton, F.L. 1999. Fungi in lignocellulose breakdown and biopulping. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol.,
10: 252258.
Brondani, R.P.V., Brondani, C., Tarchini, R. & Grattapaglia, D. 1998. Development and mapping of
microsatellite based markers in Eucalyptus. Theor. App. Genet., 97: 816829.
Brown, A.H.D. & Moran, G.F. 1981. Isozymes and the genetic resources of forest trees. In M.T. Conkle ed.
Proceedings symposium on isozymes of forest trees and forest insects. USDA Forest Service Gen. Tech.
Rep., pp. 110. PSW-48.
Brown, G.R., Gill, G.P., Kuntz, R.J., Langley, C.H. & Neale, D.B. 2004. Nucleotide diversity and linkage
disequilibrium in loblolly pine. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA., 101: 1525515260.
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 115
Burdon, R.D. 1992. Tree breeding and the new biotechnologies: In damaging conflict or constructive
synergism? Paper to IUFRO S2.0208 conference: Breeding tropical trees, pp. 17. Cali, Colombia.
Burleigh, J.G. & Matthews, L. 2004. Phylogenetic signal in nucleotide data from seed plants: implications for
resolving the seed plant tree of life. Am. J. Bot., 91: 1599-1613.
Caesar, J. 2009. Experiences regarding agricultural biotechnology in Guyana. Message 121 of the FAO e-mail
conference on learning from the past: Successes and failures with agricultural biotechnologies in developing
countries over the last 20 years. (available at www.fao.org/biotech/logs/c16/090709.htm).
Campbell, M., Brunner, A., Jones, H. & Strauss, S. 2003. Forestrys fertile crescent: The application of
biotechnology to forest trees. Plant Biotechnol. J., 1: 141154.
Cavers, S., Navarro, C. & Lowe, A.J. 2003. Chloroplast DNA phylogeography reveals colonization history
of a Neotropical tree, Cedrela odorata L., in Mesoamerica. Mol. Ecol., 12: 14511460.
CBOL Plant Working Group. 2009. A DNA barcode for land plants. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., USA, 106: 12794
12797 (also available at www.barcoding.si.edu/plant_working_group.html).
Cervera, M.T., Remington, D., Frigerio, J.M., Storme, V., Ivens, B., Boerjan, W. & Plomion, C. 2000.
Improved AFLP analysis of tree species. Can. J. For. Res., 30: 16081616.
Chazdon, R.L. 2008. Beyond deforestation: Restoring forests and ecosystem services on degraded lands.
Science, 320: 14581460.
Clark, D.A. 2004. Tropical forests and global warming: Slowing it down or speeding it up? Front. Ecol.
Environ., 2: 7380.
Connell, J. H. & Lowman, M.D. 1989. Low-diversity tropical rain forests: Some possible mechanisms for
their existence. Am. Nat., 134: 88119.
Cruz, A. 1981. Bird activity and seed dispersal of a montane forest tree (Dunalia arborescens) in Jamaica.
Reprod. Bot., 3444.
Darvasi, A. & Shifman, S. 2005. The beauty of admixture. Nat. Genet., 37: 118119.
Dean, J. 2006. Genomics resources for conifers. In C.G. Williams, ed. Landscape, genomics and transgenic
conifers, pp. 5574. New York, Springer.
Devey, M., Carson, S.D., Nolan, M., Matheson, C., Te Riini, C. & Hohepa, J. 2003. QTL associations for
density and diameter in Pinus radiata and the potential for marker-aided selection. Theor. Appl. Genet.,
108: 516524.v
Doudrick, R.L., Heslop-Harrison, J.S, Nelson, C.D., Schmidt, T., Nance, W.L. & Schwarzacher, T. 1995.
Karyotype of slash pine (Pinus elliottii var. elliottii) using patterns of fluorescence in situ hybridization
and fluorochrome banding. J. Hered., 86: 289296.
Duponnois, R., Plenchette, C., Prin, Y., Ducousso, M., Kisa, M., Moustapha B, A. & Galiana, A. 2007.
Use of mycorrhizal inoculation to improve reafforestation process with Australian Acacia in Sahelian
ecozones. Ecol. Eng., 29: 105112.
Duponnois, R., Kisa M., Prin Y., Ducousso, M., Plenchette, C., Lepage, M. & Galiana, A. 2008. Soil
factors influencing the growth response of Acacia holosericea A. Cunn. ex G. Don to ectomycorrhizal
inoculation. New Forests, 35: 105117.
Eisen, J. A. & Fraser, C.M. 2003. Phylogenomics: Intersection of evolution and genomics. Science, 300: 17061707.
El-Kassaby, Y.A. & Lstiburek, M. 2009. Breeding without breeding. Genet. Res. Camb., 91: 111120.
El-Lakany, M.H. 2004. Are genetically modified trees a threat to forests? Unasylva, 217: 4547. (available at
www.fao.org/docrep/007/y5507e/y5507e14.htm).
Eriksson, G., Namkoong, G. & Roberds, J.H. 1995. Dynamic gene conservation for uncertain futures. For.
Ecol. Manage., 62: 1537.
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 117
Gwaze, D.P., Zhou, Y., Reyes-Valds, M.H., Al-Rababah M.A. & Williams, C.G. 2003. Haplotypic QTL
mapping in an outbred pedigree. Genet. Res., 81: 4350.
Hamrick, J.L. 2004. Response of forest trees to global environmental changes. For. Ecol. Manage., 197: 323335.
Hamrick, J.L. & Murawski, D.A. 1990. The breeding structure of tropical tree populations. Plant Species Biol.,
5: 157165.
Hu, J.J, Tian, Y.C., Han, Y.F., Li, L. & Zhang, B.E. 2001. Field evaluation of insect-resistant transgenic
Populus nigra trees. Euphytica, 121: 123127.
Hufford, K.M. & Hamrick, J.L. 2003. Viability selection at three early-life stages of the tropical tree,
Platypodium elegans (Fabaceae, Papilionoideae). Evolution, 57: 518526.
Hughes, C.E, Eastwood, R.J. & Bailey, C.D. 2006. From famine to feast? Selecting nuclear DNA sequence loci
for plant species-level phylogeny reconstruction. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci., 361: 211225.
James, C. 2008. Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2008. Brief No 39. New York, ISAAA.
Jones, N. 2002. Somatic embryogenesis as a tool to capture genetic gain from tree breeding strategies: Risks and
benefits. S. Afr. For. J., 195: 93101.
Kirst, M., Myburg, A.A., Basten, C.J., Zeng, ZB. & Sederoff, R.R. 2004. Transcript mapping by quantitative
(QTL) analysis of microarrays in Eucalyptus. Proceedings 12th plant & animal genome conference, San
Diego, CA. January 1014.
Kisa, M., Sanson A., Thioulouse J., Assigbetse K., Sylla S., Spichiger R., Dieng L., Berthelin J., Prin Y.,
Galiana A. & Lepage, M. 2007. Arbuscular mycorrhizal symbiosis can counterbalance the negative
influence of the exotic tree species Eucalyptus camaldulensis on the structure and functioning of soil
microbial communities in a sahelian soil. FEMS Microbiol. Ecol., 62: 3244.
Krishnadas, K.R. & Muralidharan, E.M. 2008. Repetitive somatic embryogenesis from zygotic embryos of
teak (Tectona grandis L.) cultured in vitro. In S.A. Ansari, C. Narayanan & A.K. Mandal, eds. Forest
biotechnology in India, pp.149155. Delhi, Satish Serial Publishing House.
Kuhn, G., Hijri, M. & Sanders, I.R. 2001. Evidence for the evolution of multiple genomes in arbuscular
mycorrhizal fungi. Nature, 414: 745748
Lacerda, A.E.B., Kanashiro, M. & Sebbenn, A.M. 2008. Effects of reduced impact logging on genetic diversity
and special genetic structure of a Hymenea courbaril population in the Brazilian Amazon. For. Ecol.
Manage., 255: 10341043
Le Roux, J.J. & van Staden, J. 1991. Micropropagation and tissue culture of Eucalyptus. A review. Tree
Physiol., 9: 435477.
Ledig, F.T., Conkle, M.T., Bermejo. B., Eguiluz, T., Hodgskiss, P., Johnson, D.R. & Dvorak, W.S. 1999.
Evidence for an extreme bottleneck in a rare Mexican pinyon: genetic diversity, disequilibrium, and the
mating system in Pinus maximartinezii. Evolution, 53(1): 9199.
Lee, C.T., Lee, S.L., Ng, K.K.S., Siti Salwana, H., Norwati, M. & Saw, L.G. 2003. Effective population size
of Koompassia malaccensis for conservation based on isozyme analysis. In M.K. Thong, M.Y. Fong, M.E.
Phipps, U.R. Kuppusamy, M. Ameen, M. Zulqarnain, K.A.R. Suzainur & M.N. Suzita, eds. Proceedings
5th national congress of genetics from peas to CHIPS: The globalization of genetics, pp. 159161. Genetic
Society of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Lee, S.L., Wickneswari, R., Mahani, M.C. & Zakri, A.H. 2000. Genetic diversity of Shorea leprosula Miq.
(Dipterocarpaceae) in Malaysia: Implications for conservation of genetic resources and tree improvement.
Biotropica, 32: 213224.
Lee, S.L., Ng, K.K.S., Saw, L.G., Norwati, A., Siti Salwana, M.H., Lee, C.T. & Norwati, M. 2002. Population
genetics of Intsia palembanica (Leguminosae) and genetic conservation of virgin jungle reserves (VJRs)
in Peninsular Malaysia. Am. J. Bot., 89: 447459.
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 119
Ng, K.K.S., Lee, S.L. & Koh, C.L. 2004. Spatial structure and genetic diversity of two tropical tree species with
contrasting breeding systems and different ploidy levels. Mol. Ecol., 13: 657669.
Ng, K.K.S., Lee, S.L., Saw, L.G., Plotkin, J.B. & Koh, C.L. 2006. Spatial structure and genetic diversity of
three tropical tree species with different habitat preferences within a natural forest. Tree Genet. Genomes,
2: 121131.
Ouahmane, L., Hafidi, M., Thioulouse, J., Ducousso, M., Kisa, M., Prin, Y., Galiana, A., Boumezzough, A.
& Duponnois R. 2007. Improvement of Cupressus atlantica Gaussen growth by inoculation with native
arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi. J. Appl. Microbiol., 103: 683690.
Park, Y.S. 2002. Implementation of conifer somatic embryogenesis in clonal forestry: Technical requirements
and deployment considerations. Ann. For. Sci., 59: 651656.
Park, Y.S., Barret, J.D. & Bonga, J.M. 1998. Application of somatic embryogenesis in highvalue clonal
forestry: Deployment, genetic control, and stability of cryopreserved clones. In Vitro Cell. Dev. Biol.
Plant, 34: 231239.
Pautasso, M. 2009. Geographical genetics and the conservation of forest trees. Perspect. Plant Ecol. Evol. Syst.,
11: 157189.
Pinto, G., Santos, C., Neves, L. & Arajo, C. 2002. Somatic embryogenesis and plant regeneration in
Eucalyptus globulus Labill. Plant Cell Rep., 21: 208213.
Plomion, C., Pionneau, C., Brach, J., Costa, P. & Bailres, H. 2000. Compression woodresponsive proteins
in developing xylem of maritime pine (Pinus pinaster Ait.). Plant Physiol., 123: 959969.
Plomion, C., Pionneau, C. & Baillres, H. 2003. Identification of tension-wood responsive proteins in the
developing xylem of Eucalyptus. Holzforschung, 57: 353358.
Punja, Z.K. 2001. Genetic engineering of plants to enhance resistance to fungal pathogens a review of progress
and future prospects. Can. J. Plant Path., 23: 216235.
Quesada, M., SanchezAzofeifa, G. A., Alvarez-Aorve, M., Stoner, K.E., Avila-Cabadilla, L., Calvo-
Alvarado, J., Castillo, A., Esprito-Santo, M.M., Fagundes, M., Fernandes, G.W., Gamon, J.,
Lopezaraiza-Mikel, M., Lawrence, D., Cerdeira Morellato, L.P., Powers, J.S., de S. Neves, F., Rosas-
Guerrero, V., Sayago, R. & Sanchez-Montoya, G. 2009. Succession and management of tropical dry
forests in the Americas: review and new perspectives. For. Ecol. Manage., 258(6): 10141024.
Rathore, T.S., Rangaswamy, M., Goyal, B., Dubey, A.K. & Rao, P.S. 2008. Micropropagation through axillary
shoot proliferation and somatic embryogenesis in Sandal wood (Santalum album L.) from mature trees.
In S.A. Ansari, C. Narayanan & A.K. Mandal, eds. Forest biotechnology in India. Delhi, Satish Serial
Publishing House.
Remigi, P., Faye, A., Kane, A., Deruaz, M., Thioulouse, J., Cissoko, M., Prin, Y., Galiana, A., Dreyfus, B. &
Duponnois, R. 2008. The exotic legume tree species Acacia holosericea alters microbial soil functionalities
and the structure of the arbuscular mycorrhizal community. Appl. Environ. Microbiol., 74 (5): 14851493.
Richardson, D.M. & Petit, R.J. 2006. Pines and invasive aliens: Outlook on transgenic pine plantations in the
southern hemisphere. In: C.G. Williams, ed. Landscapes, genomics and transgenic conifer forests. New
York, Springer.
Richardson, J.E., Pennington, R. T., Pennington, T.D. & Hollingsworth, P.M. 2001. Rapid diversification of
a species-rich genus of neotropical rain forest trees. Science, 293: 22422245.
Robinson, C. 1999. Making forest biotechnology a commercial reality. Nat. Biotechnol., 17: 2730.
Roy, S., Islam, M. & Hadiuzzaman, S. 1998. Micropropagation of Elaeocarpus robustus Roxb. Plant Cell Rep.,
17: 810813.
Sarker, R.H., Islam Rafiqul, M. & Hoque, M.I. 1997. In vitro propagation of neem (Azadirachta indica A.
Juss) plants from seedlings explants. Plant Tissue Cult., 7: 125133.
chapte r 2 Current Status and Options for Forest Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 121
Whitham, T.G., Bailey, J.K., Schweitzer, J.A., Shuster, S.M., Bangert, R.K., LeRoy, C.J., Lonsdorf, E.,
Allan, G.J., DiFazio, S.P., Potts, B.M., Fischer, D.G., Gehring, C.A., Lindroth, R.L., Marks, J., Hart,
S.C., Wimp, G.M. & Wooley, S.C. 2006. A framework for community and ecosystem genetics: From
genes to ecosystems. Nat. Rev. Genet., 7: 510523.
Wilcox, P. L., Carson, S.D., Richardson, T.E., Ball, R.D., Horgan, G.P. & Carter, P. 2001. Costbenefit
analysis of marker based selection in seed orchard production populations of Pinus radiata. Can. J. For.
Sci., 31: 22132224.
Williams, C.G. & Reys-Valdes, M.H. 2007. Estimating a founders genomic proportion for each descendant
in an outbred pedigree. Genome, 50: 289296.
Williams, C.G., Reyes-Valds, M.H. & Huber, D.A. 2007. Validating a QTL region characterized by multiple
haplotypes. Theor. Appl. Genet., 116: 8794.
Williams, C.G., Hamrick, J.L. & Lewis, P.O. 1995. Multiplepopulation versus hierarchical conifer breeding
programmes: A comparison of genetic diversity levels. Theor. Appl. Genet., 90: 584594.
World Bank. 2001. A revised forest strategy for the World Bank Group. Draft. Washington, DC, World Bank.
Xiao-hua, S., Bing-yu, Z., Qin-Jun, H., Lie-jian, H., & Xiang-hua, Z. 2003. Advances in tree genetic
engineering in China. Paper submitted to the XII world forestry congress, 2003, Quebec City, Canada.
(available at www.fao.org/docrep/article/wfc/xii/0280-b2.htm).
Yanchuk, A.D. 2001. The role and implications of biotechnological tools in forestry. Unasylva, 204: 5361.
(also available at www.fao.org/docrep/003/x8820e/x8820e10.htm).
Yazdani, R., Scotti, I., Jansson, G., Plomion, C. & Mathur, G. 2003. Inheritance and diversity of simple
sequence repeat (SSR) microsatellite markers in various families of Picea abies. Hereditas, 138: 219227.
Young, A.G. & Clarke, G.M., eds. 2000. Genetics, demography and viability of fragmented populations.
Cambridge, UK., Cambridge University Press.
Summary
123
imported germplasm rather than for breeding with males of local breeds due to the
paucity of animal identification, recording and evaluation programmes. Lack of systems
for identifying superior animals together with weak technical capacity precludes the use
of more advanced technologies such as embryo transfer or MAS. Application of molecular
markers has generally being limited to genetic characterization studies, usually through
international cooperation.
Biotechnologies for animal nutrition and production are often based on the use of
micro-organisms including those produced through recombinant DNA technology.
Fermentation technologies are used to produce nutrients such as particular essential amino
acids or complete proteins or to improve the digestibility of animal feeds. Microbial cultures
are used to increase the quality of silage or to improve digestion, when fed as probiotics.
Recombinant bacteria have been developed to produce specific enzymes and hormones that
improve nutrient utilization, which can increase productivity (e.g. somatotropin) and/or
decrease environmental impact (e.g. phytase). Fibre-degrading enzymes are also used to
increase animal productivity and decrease environment pollutants. Although data are scarce,
amino acids and enzymes appear to be the most prominent and widespread nutrition-
related biotechnology products used in developing countries, and India and China have
developed local industries to produce them. Various factors have limited the use of many
other biotechnologies. For example, silage production is not common, thus precluding
the use of microbial cultures. The uptake of recombinant somatotropin has been affected
by low public acceptance, inadequate good quality feed and the low genetic potential of
animals in developing countries. Fermentation of lignocellulosic materials to improve the
quality of crop residues and forages has not been very effective.
Biotechnologies in animal health are used to increase the precision of disease diagnosis as
well as for disease control and treatment. Monoclonal antibodies are used in immunology-
based diagnostic methods including enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Since these
methods may not allow the distinguishing of vaccinated from infected animals, molecular
approaches that detect specific DNA sequences and that rely mainly on PCR are now often
preferred although their use is mainly restricted to the laboratories of research institutions
and larger governmental diagnostic laboratories. Vaccination is widely used as a cost-
effective measure to control livestock diseases as exemplified by the soon-to-be-confirmed
eradication of rinderpest. Recombinant vaccines offer potential advantages over traditional
vaccines in terms of specificity, stability and safety but few recombinant vaccines are being
produced commercially and their use in developing countries is negligible. The sterile insect
technique is usually applied as part of an area-wide integrated pest management approach
and has played a vital role in the eradication of the tsetse fly population in Zanzibar and in
the control of screwworms in several countries.
The challenges facing the global community in food and agriculture are enormous. According
to the most recent report on the State of Food Insecurity in the World, there are now about one
billion undernourished people (FAO, 2009a). Livestock contribute directly to the livelihoods
of nearly one billion of the worlds population. Livestock provide protein and minerals for
human consumption, manure for crop production, fibre and leather for industrial uses, and
draught power. Beyond their roles in providing food and inputs for agriculture and industry,
livestock provide security to farmers in developing countries, especially in emergencies such
as crop failures. To many of the resource-poor smallholder farmers and landless livestock
keepers, animals are a living bank, facilitating both income distribution and savings. In addition,
by consuming crop residues and by-products and through well-managed grazing, livestock
production contributes positively to the environment, particularly in mixed crop-livestock
production systems. Thus, livestock are important sources of income and employment,
contributing thereby to poverty alleviation and enhancing the household food security of farmers.
Livestock production is one of the fastest growing agricultural sectors in developing
countries, where it accounts for more than a third of agricultural GDP. It is projected soon
to overtake crop production as the most important agricultural sector in terms of added
value (FAO, 2006a). Many developing and transition countries have realized high economic
growth in recent years. This, coupled with an increasing population, an expanding urban
population and growth in personal incomes, is altering the lifestyle and purchasing patterns
with respect to food products. Global food protein demand is shifting from plant proteins
to animal proteins. Using data from 2000 as a baseline, it is projected that the demand for
animal products will nearly double by 2030 and that a large proportion of this increase will
be in developing countries and from monogastric animals (FAO, 2002).
This increasing demand for livestock products, termed the Livestock Revolution, is
creating opportunities for improving the welfare of millions of poor people who depend on
livestock for their livelihoods and could become a key means of alleviating poverty. It has been
observed that in addition to providing benefits to farmers and the animal product industry, the
rapid growth in livestock production has stimulated demand for, and increased the value of,
labour, land, and non-agricultural goods and services, resulting in overall economic growth.
However, increasing land degradation, global warming, erosion of animal and plant genetic
resources, livestock-mediated environmental pollution, severe water shortages and the threat
of emerging infectious diseases pose several new challenges to sustainable animal production
and food security, particularly in developing countries (FAO, 2006a; Belk and Gay, 2007;
World Bank, 2009). Meeting the increasing demand for animal products, while protecting
natural resources and the wider environment, is therefore one of the major challenges today.
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 125
Technological innovations have been drivers of social and economic change. They have
played a pivotal role in enhancing the quality of life and the safety of animals and humans.
In the last four decades there has been an unprecedented surge in the development of
biotechnology in animal production and health, with gene-based biotechnologies becoming
most prominent in the last decade. While the vast majority of these technologies has been
developed and utilized in developed countries, they have the potential to alleviate poverty
and hunger, reduce the threats of diseases and ensure environmental sustainability in
developing countries. Some of the technologies have a long history of successful use, others
have been used with varied success, and many more are at different stages of development
and commercialization.
A number of fundamental questions can be asked about livestock biotechnologies in
developing countries: To what extent are they being used today?; what are the reasons
for their success (or failure)?; what emerging challenges can be addressed through their
application?; what options do individual developing countries and the international
community have for enabling developing countries to make informed decisions on the use
of appropriate biotechnologies to enhance food security? This Chapter tries to address
these critical questions.
Since the Second World War, all branches of the animal sciences animal reproduction,
genetics and breeding; animal nutrition and production; and animal health have benefited
substantially from the application of various technologies in developing countries. Although
the benefits of technologies in the fields of animal genetics and breeding and animal health
have produced large economic benefits induced primarily by the adoption of artificial
insemination (AI), disease diagnostics and vaccines the role played by advances in
animal nutrition should not be underestimated. Indeed, without the provision of adequate
nutrition, the benefits of animal improvement programmes could not have been realized.
Good nutrition is also necessary for the proper functioning of the immune system which
helps keep animals healthy and productive.
The technologies used in animal nutrition have been diverse, much more so than in the
other two sectors. In the early 20th century, locally available resources mainly a mixture
of crop residues, grasses and some easily available low-cost protein sources such as brans,
kitchen waste and oil cakes were used for feeding ruminants. Since the 1960s, with increased
knowledge of mineral, protein and energy metabolism, concepts of balanced animal feeding
emerged and several new technologies were developed. In developing countries the focus
has been on enhancing the efficiency of utilizing crop residues and other roughages through
urea ammoniation treatment and optimizing rumen fermentation by ameliorating nutrient
deficiencies (mainly nitrogen and minerals) in low quality roughage. Approaches used
included adding minerals, nitrogen in the form of non-protein nitrogen and tree leaves to
roughage based diets; chopping and soaking roughages in water, which increases intake,
is also being practised.
Productivity in peri-urban dairying and other commercial livestock units has been
increased by using compound balanced rations of locally available ingredients; mineral
mixture supplementation including the use of urea-molasses mineral blocks; the production,
conservation and use of green fodder; the enrichment and densification of crop residues; the
production of by-pass proteins, by-pass fat and chelated amino acids. For poultry and pigs,
the nutritional provisions have shifted from the use of backyard feed resources to balanced
feeding using conventional feed resources, especially on commercial farms. However,
improving animal productivity has also hinged on striving for greater environmental stability.
Imbalanced feeding results in the release of excess nitrogen, phosphorus and other nutrients
into the environment, thereby causing pollution. Environmental pollution due to excessive
feeding is particularly serious in intensively managed farms.
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 127
In the area of animal reproduction and breeding, cytogenetics has played an important
role. Karyotyping technology is used to screen animals for chromosomal aberrations to
assess subfertility and infertility in dairy animals. In some developing countries, open
nucleus breeding systems and progeny testing programmes involving proper recording
and analysis of necessary information for reliable decision making along with population
and quantitative genetics have led to the development of highly productive animals when
provided with the proper nutritional inputs and suitable housing and management. The
basis of these systems is predicting the breeding values of the animals using phenotypic
and genealogical information. Technologies such as AI and pregnancy diagnosis have
been extensively used to transfer the improved germplasm to developing countries
although natural mating is still the most common practice for breeding farm animals in
such countries.
Since the early 20th century, the focus in animal health has been on the eradication of
infectious diseases by slaughtering infected animals and in some cases, also associated animals.
Recently vaccination has been used. Vaccination is the introduction (often by injection) of
biological material into an individual to increase its immunity to a given disease. Its first use
is attributed to Edward Jenner in the late 1700s. The biological material typically resembles
the disease pathogen and prepares the immune system to react to subsequent infections.
In the 1940s, the advent of antibiotics revolutionized the treatment of common diseases
and these also encouraged surgical interventions. During the last decades, productivity-
reducing subclinical diseases such as those caused by internal parasites have been treated
with various antibiotics and drugs. For some livestock species, antimicrobials were also
used as growth promoters. This last practice has not been without controversy and it is
believed that misuse has contributed to drug resistance in parasites and bacteria.
The concepts and analytical techniques of epidemiology and their careful application
have been a very significant factor in disease prevention in the last four decades. The
availability of statistical methods, software and computing power allowed handling a large
body of datasets, resulting in effective and fast decision-making and a better understanding
of diseases. Epidemiology allowed for the simultaneous evaluation of the effects of various
environmental, host and pathogen-related factors on disease incidence and transmission.
Information on the effectiveness of vaccines under field conditions was also assessed by
epidemiological methods. Other conventional techniques such as the clinical pathological
analysis of specimens for the diagnosis or confirmation of diseases in farm animals and
serological screening for various infectious agents have contributed significantly to monitoring
and control programmes for many transboundary animal diseases. Traditional diagnostic
tools such as virus neutralizing tests and virus isolation have a long history and remain the
gold standards for serological and virological investigations. These have been invaluable
Biotechnology has been practised since the beginning of animal husbandry. The evaluation
and selection of different breeds started with the domestication of animal species around
12000 years ago which was led by the wish to obtain traits dictated by social, nutritional
and environmental needs with no understanding of the molecular processes involved. In
1919, Karl Ereky, a Hungarian engineer coined the term biotechnology and described
it as the process by which products could be synthesized from raw materials with the aid
of living organisms. In this and the other FAO background documents for ABDC-10,
the definition of biotechnology follows that of the Convention on Biological Diversity
(CBD), i.e. any technological application that uses biological systems, living organisms,
or derivatives thereof, to make or modify products or processes for specific use. A brief
history now follows of the biotechnologies identified for discussion in this Chapter and
their definition.
Artificial insemination: Semen is collected from donor male animals, diluted in suitable diluents
and preserved in liquid nitrogen. Fresh or frozen diluted semen is manually inseminated
into the reproductive tract of an ovulating female to achieve pregnancy.
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 129
Sperm sexing: Depending on the species, X chromosome-bearing sperm contain 25 percent
more DNA than sperm bearing the Y chromosome. Different sperm have distinct emission
patterns when stained with a fluorescent dye and exposed to light. This difference allows
the sperm to be separated by a flow cytometry machine. The sorted sperm can subsequently
be used for AI to obtain offspring of the desired sex.
Oestrus synchronization: This is the process of bringing female animals into oestrus at a
desired time by using a progesterone-releasing intravaginal device, intravaginal progesterone
sponges, progesterone ear implant or prostaglandin treatment. The systematic administration
of a combination of hormones such as gonadotrophins, prostaglandins, progesterone or
oestradiol is also used. It assists in large-scale use of AI and can decrease the amount of
labour used to monitor cattle for oestrus.
Embryo transfer: ET is the transfer of an embryo from one female to another. A donor animal
is induced to superovulate through hormonal treatment. The ova obtained are then fertilized
within the donor, the embryos develop and are then removed and implanted in a recipient animal
for the remainder of the gestation period. The embryos can also be frozen for later use. Multiple
ovulation and embryo transfer (MOET) increases the scope to select females whereas AI
limits selection to males but its success depends upon the accurate identification of superior
females and its application requires greater technical expertise and infrastructure than AI.
Embryo sexing: Heifers are preferred by the dairy industry and bulls by the beef industry.
The pig industry generally prefers females due to higher quality and lower cost of production.
Y chromosome probes are used for sexing the embryos. Karyotyping antibodies specific
for male antigens and X-linked activity enzymes are also used for embryo sexing, but the
use of Y chromosome specific probes seems to be the most reliable and practical method.
In vitro fertilization (IVF): Unfertilized eggs (oocytes) from ovaries of live donor animals
are gathered by a technique referred to as ovum pickup. The oocytes are matured in
an incubator and then fertilized with sperm. The resulting zygotes are incubated in the
Cryopreservation: This refers to the storage of valuable genetic material (e.g. sperm, oocytes,
embryos, somatic cells) in deep-frozen form in liquid nitrogen (-196 oC) for preservation
and later use.
Cloning: The replication of DNA and other molecules and of genetically identical cells to
produce an identical organism are all examples of cloning. Clones of entire organisms can
be produced by embryo splitting or nuclear transfer including nuclei from blastomeres,
somatic cells and stem cells.
Molecular markers: A DNA marker is an identifiable DNA fragment or sequence that can
be used to detect DNA polymorphism. Molecular markers have a number of uses including
estimation of population histories and genetic relationships within and between animal
breeds (molecular characterization), as well as the determination of parentage. Markers that
have a statistical association with a phenotypic trait can be used to select animals for the
desired phenotype (MAS). Molecular markers may also be used to increase the efficiency
of the introduction (introgression) of genes from one breed into another through repeated
backcrossing of a recipient breed. Finally, although not an application for reproduction and
breeding, DNA markers can be used to follow production streams containing particular
components of interest, such as tracing animal products to their site of origin.
Different types of markers are available, including: a) restriction fragment length
polymorphisms (RFLPs), in which DNA is cut with a specific nucleotide sequence using
bacterial restriction enzymes yielding fragments of different lengths which are then separated
on a gel; b) random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) and amplified fragment length
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 131
polymorphisms (AFLPs) involving the use of restriction enzymes and the polymerase chain
reaction (PCR); c) minisatellites, which are regions of DNA with polymorphisms in the
number of repeated nucleotide sequences of around 25 bases in length; d) microsatellites,
which are DNA repeats in tandem at each locus, the tandem repeats usually being two to
five bases long; and, e) single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), which are single base
changes in DNA. SNPs are the basis of DNA chips which have thousands of complementary
DNA fragments arranged on a small matrix and are capable of scoring large numbers of
loci simultaneously. Sequence analysis of either specific DNA fragments or entire genomes
can also be carried out.
Nutrients: L-amino acids produced through fermentative processes are used for correcting
amino acid imbalances in diets. Industrial production of amino acids using biotechnological
approaches began in the middle of the last century. The biotechnological processes
fermentation and enzymatic catalysis led to a rapid development of the market for amino
acids due to the economic and ecological advantages these biotechnologies offered. Essential
amino acids such as L-lysine, L-threonine, L-tryptophan, L-phenylalanine and L-cysteine
are produced either using high performance mutants of Corynebacterium glutamicum or
recombinant strains of Escherichia coli.
Single cell protein: This is the microbial biomass or extracted proteins obtained from
processes in which bacteria, yeasts, fungi or algae are cultivated in large quantities. It can
be used as protein supplements in animal feed.
Probiotics and prebiotics: Probiotics are live micro-organisms which may confer health
and production benefits to the host animal when administered in adequate amounts. These
are usually from the Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium families for monogastric animals,
while Aspergillus oryzae and Saccharomyces cerevisiae are generally used for ruminants.
Since the 1920s, foods containing probiotic microbes (Lactobacillus acidophilus) for human
consumption have been marketed in Japan. Lactobacillus acidophilus use in the United States
reached its peak around the middle of the1930s and then faded. Since the late 1950s there
has been steady interest in the study of probiotics for animals and humans. Prebiotics are
non-digestible food ingredients that beneficially affect the host by selectively stimulating
the growth and activity, or both, of specific microbial flora in the colon. Examples are
inulin, fructo-oligosaccharide and resistant starch.
Silage additives: The nutritional quality of ensiled forages depends in part on the success
of the fermentation process. Microbial inoculants and enzymes have been developed for
addition into the silage at the time it is put into storage. These additives generally function
by stimulating the fermentation process.
Recombinant metabolic modifiers: Since the 1920s, it has been known that injecting
hypophyseal extracts stimulates tissue growth and milk secretion, and growth hormone was
eventually identified as the primary source of this effect. During the 1990s, recombinant
somatotropin produced by bacteria was licensed in various countries for the stimulation
of production in dairy cows, swine and horses. Many countries have not approved its use.
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 133
3.3.3 Biotechnologies in animal health
Before the advent of recombinant DNA technology, the diagnosis and immunological
prevention of infectious animal diseases was largely based on the use of whole pathogens or
their physically resolved fractions. In many instances these crude methods were inefficient.
Great improvements were obtained with the development of the ELISA, which has been the
most popular diagnostic tool for animal diseases. Many ELISA systems now use recombinant
antigens for detection of antibodies, which impart higher sensitivity, specificity, safety and
acceptance compared with the use of whole pathogens. Additional major strides were made
in pathogen detection after the discovery of PCR. Monoclonal antibodies and PCR have
played an important role in the development of a number of diagnostic kits.
Diagnostics
Monoclonal antibody-based diagnostics: Monoclonal antibodies are produced by fusing
two kinds of cells. One is an immune system cell that produces antibodies, the other a
cancer cell. The fused cell inherits the ability to produce antibodies from the immune cell
and the ability to reproduce indefinitely from the cancer cell. Kohler and Milstein were the
first to develop a technique for the production of monoclonal antibodies in 1975 and were
awarded the Nobel Prize in 1984. Monoclonal antibodies have a number of applications
such as in diagnostic tests for animal diseases and progesterone assays for the reproductive
management of livestock. Monoclonal antibodies have become common and essential tools
for applying ELISA-based methodologies (e.g. antigen-capture ELISA and competitive
ELISA), as well as Western blotting and immunochemistry techniques.
Polymerase chain reaction: PCR was developed in 1985 by Kary Mullis who received the
Nobel Prize in 1993 for discovering the chemistry of this reaction. PCR increases the
number of DNA molecules in a logarithmic and controlled manner. It results in the in
vitro production of a large quantity of a desired DNA fragment from a complex mixture
of heterogeneous sequences. PCR can amplify a selected region of 50 to several thousand
base pairs into billions of copies. Molecular biology has been revolutionized by PCR.
After amplification, the target DNA can be identified by many techniques such as gel
electrophoresis or hybridization with a labelled nucleic acid (a probe). Real-time PCR, or
quantitative PCR (qPCR), detects and measures the accumulation of a replicated DNA
fragment during the amplification reaction. It enables quantification of the DNA and RNA
(through cDNA production) present in a sample. For detection of RNA (for example the
RNA of viruses), a cDNA copy of the RNA must first be made using reverse transcriptase.
The cDNA then acts as the template for amplification by PCR to produce a large number
of copies of cDNA. This method is called reverse transcriptase PCR (RT-PCR).
Recombinant vaccines
Recombinant vaccines are produced from cloned genes via recombinant DNA technologies,
and can generally be assigned to one of three types: DNA vaccines, marker vaccines and
virus-vectored vaccines.
DNA vaccines: This refers to the direct inoculation of a eukaryotic expression vector
encoding antigenic protein into an animal, resulting in the in situ production of the encoded
antigen with the hosts tissue to produce an immune response. It also involves the delivery
of pathogen-specific antibodies (intracellular antibodies) into the host to express antibody
fragments inside the cell that can bind with and inactivate a pathogen.
Marker vaccines: A marker vaccine (live or inactivated vaccine) is either based on deletion
mutants or on isolated antigenic proteins that enables differentiation between infected and
vaccinated animals (DIVA). A DIVA vaccine is used in conjunction with a companion
diagnostic test that detects antibodies against a protein that is lacking in the vaccine strain.
Originally, the term DIVA was applied to gene-deleted marker vaccines but it can be applied
to subunit vaccines, heterologous vaccines or some killed whole pathogen vaccines such as
the highly purified FMD vaccine that is used in conjunction with non-structural protein-
based serological tests. It can also be used for recombinant-based vaccines.
Virus-vectored vaccines: Many virus species including the vaccinia, fowlpox and canarypox
viruses are used as vectors (delivery systems) for exogenous genes to deliver vaccine antigens.
These viruses can accommodate large amounts of exogenous genes and infect mammalian
cells, resulting in the expression of large quantities of encoded protein. An example of a
virus acting both as a vector and a self-vaccine is the recombinant capripox virus expressing
a peste des petits ruminants (PPR) virus antigen.
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 135
Sterile insect technique (SIT)
The SIT for control of insect pests (in the present context, screwworm and tsetse flies, which
cause widespread disease in livestock with enormous economic consequences for livestock
keepers and governments) relies on the introduction of sterility in the females of the wild
population. The sterility is produced following the mating of females with released males
carrying dominant lethal mutations in their sperm that have been induced by ionizing
radiation. It is an environment-friendly method of insect control and is usually applied as
part of an area-wide integrated pest management (AW-IPM) approach.
3.3.4 Trends
Some clear trends were seen in this Section. Fermentation-based animal biotechnologies were
developed prior to the 1950s. From 1950 to 1980, the livestock industry reaped substantial
benefits from biotechnologies such as AI and oestrus synchronization. Since the 1980s,
DNA-based technologies have played an increasingly important role in making animal
production more efficient, economical and sustainable. Tremendous growth in molecular
genetics and genomics research has taken place since the 1980s and may revolutionize the
way animal genetic resources are managed and used in the future.
A common theme in the brief historical perspective presented here is that the biotechnologies
have generally become progressively more complex over time, usually requiring increasingly
well-trained and skilled human resources and often greater investment in laboratory
infrastructure. Opportunities and risks have both tended to increase over time and approaches
for analysing potential costs and benefits are becoming increasingly necessary. An important
lesson that can be learned from past trends is that future biotechnologies will require an
even higher degree of preparedness if their full potential is to be exploited. Biotechnology
will undergo even more dramatic changes in the years to come than in the past.
Artificial insemination
Among this set of biotechnologies, AI is the most widely used both in developing and in
developed countries. A large number of AIs are performed globally each year, more than
100 million cattle, 40 million pigs, 3.3 million sheep and 0.5 million goats (FAO, 2006b).
In India alone, 34 million inseminations were carried out in 2007 (DADF, 2008). The total
number of inseminations in Brazil in 2008 was 8.2 million (ASBIA, 2008). According to
FAO (2007), of the 42 African countries that submitted reports, 74 percent reported using
AI. This proportion was smaller for Southwest Pacific countries (55 percent) and greater for
Asia (86 percent), Latin America and the Caribbean (95 percent) and the Near and Middle
East (100 percent). Nearly all countries in Europe and the Caucasus region (97 percent)
reported using AI and in North America the figure was 100 percent.
Of the African countries that responded, 17 percent reported using ET and 14 percent
molecular genetic technologies. For Asian and Latin American and Caribbean countries the
numbers were considerably greater, with 47 percent and 50 percent respectively using ET,
and 86 percent and 73 percent using molecular genetic technologies. The relative use of these
biotechnologies was: AI followed by ET and then molecular genetic technologies. The gap
in the application of these technologies between developed and developing countries was
greatest for molecular genetic technologies, followed by ET and then AI. A large number
of countries in developing regions did not apply these biotechnologies routinely, and their
use in small-scale or low-input systems is very limited.
In respect of Africa, Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean, the following conclusions
can be drawn about AI (FAO, 2007):
}} It is mostly used for cattle production systems, especially in the dairy sector. In Africa
and Asia its use is concentrated in peri-urban areas. Other species for which AI is
used in all three regions are sheep, goats, horses and pigs, with use more common for
sheep and pigs than goats and horses. In addition to these species, AI is used in Asia
for chickens, camels, buffaloes and ducks, and in Latin America and Caribbean regions
for rabbits, buffaloes, donkeys, alpacas and turkeys.
}} Semen for AI is mostly from exotic breeds and used in the expectation of increasing the
production of local livestock populations. Semen from local breeds is also used for this purpose,
but to a lesser extent. In Cte dIvoire, semen from trypanotolerant cattle has been used and
exotic semen has also been used for crossbreeding with naturally trypanotolerant cattle.
}} Most AI services are provided by the public sector but the contribution of the private
sector, breeding organizations and NGOs is also substantial (Table 1).
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 137
Table 1
Number of public and private sector organizations in Africa, Asia and Latin America and the
Caribbean providing artificial insemination services
}} Concerns have been raised regarding the loss of biodiversity due to inappropriate and
poorly planned use of AI to inseminate locally adapted cattle with imported semen for
increased production.
}} Most developing countries in Africa and Latin America do not have a clear breeding
policy in place.
The country reports also indicate that nations such as Bhutan, the Democratic Republic of
the Congo, the Gambia, Guinea and Laos wish to initiate AI activities but need to build the
necessary infrastructure and capability required for initiating sustainable programmes. Cape
Verde, Chad, the Cook Islands, Ghana and the Sudan all reported having started AI in the
past but having stopped due to financial constraints. The AI infrastructure has subsequently
deteriorated in these countries (FAO, 2006b). The availability of economically priced liquid
nitrogen for the cryopreservation of semen is a particular constraint.
Progesterone measurement
Radioimmunoassay for measuring the hormone progesterone provides information both
on the problems in breeding management by farmers and on the deficiencies in the AI
services provided to them by government, cooperatives or private organizations. FAO
cooperates with the International Atomic Agency (IAEA) in assisting countries to use
nuclear techniques and related biotechnologies for developing improved strategies for
sustainable agriculture through the activities of the Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear
Techniques in Food and Agriculture, based in Austria. Progesterone radioimmunoassay
based on 125I has been one of the cornerstones of the support provided by the Joint
FAO/IAEA Division for improving the productivity of livestock in many developing
Oestrus synchronization
The use of oestrus synchronization in developing countries is generally limited either to
intensively managed farms that are under the supervision of government livestock development
departments, or to smaller farms with links to farmers associations and cooperatives where
AI is routinely used. Protocols for oestrus synchronization often include the administration
of oestradiol which has been banned in the EU since 2006. This ban has implications for
developing countries exporting, or aspiring to export, meat into the EU. Alternative options
for synchronization do exist and these have been reviewed by Lane, Austin and Crowe
(2008). However, amongst the various options available, oestrogenic compounds seem to
be the most efficient and cost effective. Since the benefits of using oestrus synchronization
will vary depending upon the production system, the potential benefits have to be weighed
against the cost before specific recommendations can be made regarding its use.
Embryo transfer
An evaluation of country reports (FAO, 2007) shows that only five of the African countries
providing information (Cte dIvoire, Kenya, Madagascar, Zambia and Zimbabwe) use
ET technology, all on a very limited scale. The use of ET has also been independently
reported in South Africa (Greyling et al., 2002). Eight out of the 17 Asian countries that
provided information on the issue reported some use of ET technology, but this was largely
confined to research stations. However, the demand for establishing this technology was
highlighted by many countries. The animal species in which the technology has been applied
are cattle, buffaloes, horses and goats. In the Latin America and the Caribbean region, ET
is increasingly being used by commercial livestock producers. Twelve out of the 14 Latin
America and the Caribbean countries that provided information mention the use of this
technology. All reported its use with cattle, two with goats, three with horses, two with
sheep, one with llamas, one with alpacas and one with donkeys. Exotic embryos were used
for cattle and the dairy sector was the main beneficiary. Private sector organizations are
involved in providing ET in Brazil and Chile (FAO, 2007).
Each year, the Data Retrieval Committee of the International Embryo Transfer Society
provides a summary of worldwide statistics of ET in farm animals. Table 2 summarizes
these figures for cattle in 2007 (Thibier, 2008), and shows that about 820000 embryos were
transferred, of which 70 percent were produced in vivo and 30 percent in vitro.
1 www-naweb.iaea.org/nafa/aph/index.html
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 139
TABLE 2
Number of in vitro produced and in vivo produced bovine embryos transferred in 2007
About 1 percent of the total was from Africa, mostly from South Africa. About 32 percent
were from South America, dominated by Brazil which was responsible for almost 30 percent
of all embryo transfers worldwide in 2007. Among developing countries, a large number
of embryos were also transferred in China and Argentina. While the majority of embryo
transfers carried out worldwide are in cattle, Thibier (2008) also reported on ET use in other
species, showing that South Africa is an important player for ET in small ruminants and that
the three main countries involved in equine ET are Argentina, Brazil and the United States.
Alarcon and Galina (2009) reported that government organizations in Mexico have
initiated programmes to popularize ET, particularly in small-scale enterprises not bigger than
50 cows per unit. However, based on their analysis which considered the costs of preparing
the donor and recipient, embryo recovery and the resulting gestation, ET is not profitable
enough for farmers to sustain such programmes on their own. These programmes had a
high degree of acceptability only when the organizations provided substantial subsidies
since once the subsidized programmes stopped, ET was no longer sustainable.
Cloning
Since the birth of Dolly in 1996, cloning has been achieved for various species. Up to 2004,
about 1500 calves had been produced through somatic cell nuclear transfer (SCNT), mainly
in Europe, North America, Japan and New Zealand, but also in South America and Asia
(Heyman, 2005). China produced the first cloned buffalo in 2004 and India followed suit
in February 2009. At present the production of cloned animals is at the experimental stage
in most developing countries. From a research standpoint, cloning makes possible the
efficient evaluation of genotype x environment interactions. At the farm level, it has the
advantage of increasing the rate of dissemination of tested superior genotypes in commercial
populations and possibly also of increasing the uniformity of a given livestock product for
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 141
market. A chapter in the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) Terrestrial Animal
Health Code is dedicated to SCNT in production livestock and horses, aiming to provide a
scientific basis and recommendations on animal health and welfare risks to animals involved
in SCNT cloning compared with other assisted reproductive technologies2.
Transgenesis
Although at present no transgenic livestock have been commercialized for food production,
a number of transgenic animals producing therapeutic proteins in milk are at different
stages of commercial development. These proteins include lactoferrin, fibrinogen and a
malaria vaccine (see Table 2 in Niemann and Kues, 2007). In 2006, the European Medicines
Agency approved the commercialization of the first recombinant protein (antithrombin
III, ATryn) produced in milk of transgenic animals (goats). The United States Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) approved ATryn in 2009. It is being used for the prophylactic
treatment of patients with congenital antithrombin deficiency. A number of other transgenic
farm animals have been produced but not yet commercialized, including: 1) phytase
transgenic pigs which enable the better use of phytate-phosphorus and decrease manure-
based environmental pollution; 2) cows that express a lysostaphin gene construct in the
mammary gland to increase resistance to mastitis; and 3) pigs containing a desaturase gene
derived from spinach that makes pork better for human consumption by increasing the ratio
of polyunsaturated to saturated fatty acids in muscle (Karatzas, 2003; Nieman and Kues,
2007). The first approvals for transgenic animals have been for biomedical applications but
it is likely that food and/or environmental applications will increase over time.
According to a survey conducted by the OIE in 2005 (MacKenzie, 2005) in which 91 countries
participated (60 percent from developing countries), 4 percent of the respondents in Africa and
23 percent of the respondents is Asia reported having cloning capabilities. For transgenesis,
the corresponding numbers were 8 percent and 23 percent. No Near Eastern country claimed
cloning or transgenesis capability at the time of the report, but in the intervening period camels
have been successfully cloned in Dubai and sheep and goats in Iran. In Europe, 18 percent
and 26 percent of countries claimed cloning and transgenesis capability respectively. Asian
countries lag only slightly behind Europe in their capability to produce transgenic animals.
Molecular markers
According to FAO (2007), four countries in Africa (Cameroon, Chad, Nigeria, and Togo)
reported using molecular markers to characterize genetic resources. In addition, molecular
characterization of livestock has been undertaken in South Africa and in other countries
2 www.oie.int/eng/normes/mcode/en_sommaire.htm
3 www-naweb.iaea.org/nafa/aph/crp/aph-livestock-phase1.html
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 143
The recent development of DNA chips that can simultaneously type tens of thousands
of SNPs has opened up the possibilities of genomic selection (Meuwissen, Hayes and
Goddard, 2001). This approach is already being used for commercial species in developed
countries and may potentially be a useful option in some developing countries. However,
because few genetic analysis programmes currently exist in developing countries to provide
the data needed to underpin any type of MAS, the capability for genomic analyses for the
short to intermediate term will remain centred in developed countries.
Amino acids
The amino acids in feed, L-lysine, L-threonine, L-tryptophan and DL-methionine constitute
the largest share (56 percent) of the total amino acid market, which amounted to around
US$4.5 billion in 2004. Amino acids are mostly produced by microbial fermentation and in
the world market for fermentation products, after ethanol and antibiotics, amino acids are
the most important category and demand for them is increasing rapidly (Leuchtenberger,
Huthmacher and Drauz, 2005). Most grain-based livestock feeds are deficient in essential
amino acids such as lysine, methionine and tryptophan and for high producing monogastric
animals (pigs and poultry) these amino acids are added to diets to increase productivity.
Balancing of diets using amino acids also decreases excretion of nitrogen from the animals
into the environment. Lysine is the first limiting amino acid for pigs and, after methionine,
it is the second limiting amino acid for poultry. In 2005, the estimated demand for lysine
as lysineHCl was 850000 tons while for L-threonine (the second limiting amino acid
for pigs) and L-tryptophan (third limiting amino acid for pigs) it was 70000 tons and
3000 tons respectively. Whereas fermentation methods for producing lysine, threonine
and tryptophan are well established, cost-effective production of L-methionine has not
yet been successful (Leuchtenberger, Huthmacher and Drauz, 2005). The production of
methionine has been through a synthetic process or through the use of enzymes obtained
from microbes. L-cysteine, generally needed for feeding to wool-producing animals, is
also produced by enzymatic processes. Rumen-protected methionine and its analogues
Enzymes
The use of phytase in pig and poultry feeds in intensive production systems in developing
countries is significant. Phytase addition can reduce phosphorus excretion by up to 50 percent,
contributing significantly to environmental protection. It also increases profitability (phosphorus
resources are limited and expensive) by decreasing the amount of phosphorus added to the diet
and increasing productivity by improving the availability of minerals, trace elements and nutrients
for the animal. In 2007, animal feed enzymes had a market of US$280 million worldwide, with
phytase making the largest contribution. The animal feed enzyme sector grew at a rate of 4 percent
per year between 2004 and 2009 and it is expected to grow annually by 6 percent from 2007 to
2012 (Thakore, 2008). The phytase market in China amounts to 5500 tons per year.
At present, there are over 100 companies producing feed enzymes in China (Yu, Wang
and Zhang, 2008). According to the China Fermentation Industry Association, feed enzyme
production was 10000 tons in 2001, forming 3 percent of Chinas enzyme production and
4 percent of its feed additive production (Deng, Chen and Deng, 2008). In India, the use of
phytase in monogastric diets is approximately 500 tons/year (CLFMA, 2007). Other exogenous
enzymes such as xylanases, glucanases, proteases and amylases and their mixtures are also
added to the diets of monogastric animals in commercial farms in some developing countries.
In India, 625 tons of these enzymes were used in monogastric diets in 2007 (CLFMA, 2007).
Their use in developed countries is widespread. They improve digestion, remove antinutritional
factors and improve productivity. The use of cellulases and xylanases has the added advantages
of increasing digestibility, thereby reducing the amount of manure and possibly methane
emissions from ruminants. However, the response to the addition of enzymes in ruminants
appears to be variable (Rode et al., 2001). The reasons for this variability are not yet fully
understood. Due to a ban on the use of growth promoters in animal diets in the EU since 2006
and increasing pressure for a ban in North America, new agents for promoting growth are
being investigated. The potential use of enzymes such as cellulases, xylanases and other fibre-
degrading enzymes in ruminant diets is likely to increase both in developing and developed
countries provided a consistent and large response is achieved and their cost is low.
Ionophores
The use of monensin is banned in the EU, although it is used in some industrialized
countries. In China, monensin can only be used as an anti-coccidian for chicken and as a
growth promoting additive for beef cattle, whereas it is prohibited for use during lactation
in dairy cows and laying chickens (MOA, 2001).
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 145
Single cell protein
From the 1970s to the 1990s extensive research was conducted on single cell proteins. With
the exception of some algae, however, they are not being incorporated in livestock diets
in either developing or developed countries. Algae such as azolla and lemna are used to a
limited extent as feed for pigs by small-scale farmers in Vietnam and Colombia.
Solid-state fermentation
The degradation of wheat and rice straws and other lignocellulosic materials using white
rot fungi that degrade lignin was also extensively researched from the 1970s to the 1990s.
In general, however, the nutrient availability from the treated material is decreased due to
the consumption of carbohydrates present in the lignocellulosic materials by the fungi for
their growth and metabolism. The nitrogen content of the treated material is higher but
a large proportion of this nitrogen is contributed by nucleotides which do not increase
productivity. Probably for these reasons, this technology has never got off the ground but
solid-state fermentation for producing enzymes, especially phytase for animal feeding is
being employed commercially (Vats and Banerjee, 2004).
Silage additives
The use of bacteria such as Lactobacillus plantarum, L. buchneri, L. acidophilus, Streptococcus
bovis, Pediococcus pentosaceus, P. acidilacti, and Enterococcus faecium and yeasts such
as Saccharomyces cerevisiae alone or their mixtures, and the use of enzymes (cellulases,
hemicellulase, amylase etc.) alone or as a mix with microbial inoculants in silage production
is restricted to few intensively managed commercial dairy and beef production farms in
developing countries. However, the extent of their use in developed countries is higher.
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 147
for production is usually low compared with animals in developed countries, giving lower
absolute response to the administration of somatotropin, and thus decreasing the benefit
to cost ratio. Therefore, the use of recombinant somatotropin in developing countries could
be expected to be commercially viable only in intensive livestock production systems.
However, before adopting this technology, an economic analysis of the production unit
should be available. Regular administration of recombinant somatotropin could also
become a constraint under some production conditions. The risks of increasing mastitis
or latent viral or other pathogenic infections (the elimination of xenobiotics is slower in
animals receiving rBST) and the negative effects of rBST on fecundity and fertility when
administered before breeding must also be taken into consideration before introducing this
technology (Chilliard et al., 2001).
4 www-naweb.iaea.org/nafa/aph/crp/aph-molecular-techniques.html
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 149
incidences of emerging and re-emerging transboundary animal diseases have resulted in
huge economic losses. Since 2005, the OIE has reported the occurrence of FMD in Africa,
Asia and South America; classical swine fever (CSF) in Africa, Asia and Europe; and highly
pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) in Africa, Asia and Europe. The Secretariat of the Global
Framework for the Progressive Control of Transboundary Animal Diseases (GF-TADs),
a joint FAO/OIE initiative, carried out regional consultations to identify priority diseases
and the best ways for their administration, prevention and control. From this, it was noted
that FMD was the first global priority (Domenech et al., 2006). Rift Valley fever and HPAI
were ranked as major zoonotic diseases. PPR, contagious bovine pleuropneumonia. African
swine fever and CSF were also regionally recognized as top priorities (Domenech et al.,
2006). The specific detection of agents causing such diseases and establishment of early
warning systems are major tasks since timely action could prevent their spread to large
animal populations and many countries.
The widespread occurrence of animal diseases in developing countries is one of the
major factors responsible for decreasing livestock productivity in these countries. Generally,
these diseases mostly affect resource-poor livestock farmers and hence their effective
control is essential for poverty alleviation. Vaccination and molecular-based diagnostics are
increasingly being used to improve control strategies. The application of inactivated or live
attenuated vaccines offers a cost-effective measure to control or even eradicate an infectious
disease as exemplified by the near-eradication of rinderpest. During the last two decades
these vaccines have played a more prominent role in enhancing livestock production in
developing countries. In 2003, the estimated market value of animal diagnostics was around
US$0.5 billion while that of animal therapeutics such as vaccines, pharmaceuticals and feed
additives was US$15.1 billion (Elder, 2004). The number of licenced animal products is 105,
most of them biological, including veterinary vaccines and diagnostic kits. The animal health
industry invests over US$400 million annually in research and development (R&D) and
the value of animal health biotechnology-based products is US$2.8 billion (Belk and Gay,
2007), while the contribution of veterinary vaccines to this global market is approximately
23 percent (Meeusen et al., 2007).
Diagnostics
Molecular-based serological techniques, for example those using monoclonal antibodies
and recombinant antigens in ELISA, as well as PCR-based diagnostics, are widely used
in developing countries. Information on their application for specific diseases, as well
as detailed descriptions of the methods involved, are provided by the OIE Manual of
Diagnostic Tests and Vaccines for Terrestrial Animals (OIE, 2008), whose objective is to
provide internationally agreed diagnostic laboratory methods and requirements for the
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 151
Increased use of molecular-based diagnostics in developing countries has been possible
due to the availability of reliable and affordable laboratory equipment and the increased
support of international organizations such as FAO, IAEA and OIE, in providing training
and post-training support services, regular proficiency testing, and giving increased emphasis
on validation, standardization and quality control of diagnostic techniques.
Lately, the emphasis in training programmes and developmental projects, for example,
those sponsored by FAO and IAEA, has been on quantitative or qPCR which requires
less hands-on time than conventional PCR, is less labour intensive and more accurate, has
a higher rate of throughput, obviates the need to handle post-PCR products, has a higher
sensitivity and lower risk of contamination, allows quantitative estimation and uses multiplex
diagnostics (multiple primers allowing amplification of multiple templates within a single
reaction). The Joint FAO/IAEA Division has technical cooperation projects in 23 countries
where qPCR is used as part of diagnostic services, and has held a number of training courses
on biotechnology-based disease diagnostics tools for participants from many developing
countries. The training has covered the diagnosis of brucellosis, fascioliasis and HPAI.
An EU-funded Consortium, FLUTRAIN, is also active in providing training to East
European, Asian and African scientists in diagnostics and disease management tools. In
January 2009, it provided training on diagnosis of HPAI to participants from Bangladesh,
India, Morocco, Egypt and the Philippines. Currently, the National Veterinary Institute5,
Uppsala, Sweden, an OIE Collaborating Centre, is planning hands-on training focusing on
HPAI sequencing, bioinformatics and phylogeny to participants from Bulgaria, Hungary,
Iran, Iraq, Macedonia, Namibia, Romania, Syria, Turkey, and Ukraine. WHO and FAO
have also trained developing country scientists in molecular diagnostics in zoonotic and
transboundary animal diseases.
Through a Joint FAO/IAEA Division Coordinated Research Project on the examination
of methods to differentiate infected and vaccinated animals with FMD6, kits from many
sources were examined in a network of laboratories. Thousands of sera were evaluated
from many sources in order to validate the practical use of the kits. Such kits are now
used routinely and are important in epidemiological decision making concerning whether
countries or areas within countries are FMD virus free. This project also highlighted the
cooperation between public institutions and commercial companies producing kits using
non-structural proteins of FMD as target antigens.
The area of diagnostics is beset with problems of validation. Many competent diagnostic
assays that are fit for their intended purpose exist, but to varying degrees may need
to be validated and harmonized. International staff providing training on PCR-based
5 www.sva.se/oie-cc
6 www-naweb.iaea.org/nafa/aph/crp/aph-fmdv.html
Recombinant vaccines
Immunization can be one of the most effective means of preventing and hence managing animal
diseases. In general, vaccines offer considerable benefits at a comparatively low cost, which is a
primary consideration for developing countries. Molecular techniques can be used to produce
a variety of different constructs of pathogenic agents and offer several advantages over more
conventional vaccines such as: the deletion of the gene(s) responsible for causing disease and
thus greater safety; increased stability (which is an advantage for their effective use in developing
countries); the possibility of developing vaccines against protozoan and helminth parasites;
and differentiating between infected and vaccinated animals through detecting antibodies
either against the peculiar proteins elicited by the vaccine or failing to detect antibodies against
the deleted gene/protein (DIVA vaccines). However, few recombinant vaccines are being
commercially produced (Table 3), and so far their use in developing countries is negligible.
7 www-naweb.iaea.org/nafa/aph/stories/2009-avian-influenza.html
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 153
TABLE 3
The successful application of a recombinant DNA vaccine for the elimination of foot-
rot disease in Nepal and Bhutan has been described, but was done on an experimental basis
only (Egerton, 2005). In 1994, recombinant vaccines against Boophilus microplus were
produced in Australia (TickGUARD vaccine) and Cuba (Gavac vaccine). Both vaccines
TABLE 4
8 www.iah.bbsrc.ac.uk/
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 155
The DIVA technology has been applied successfully to HPAI and pseudorabies (Aujeszkys
disease) eradication campaigns, and has been proposed for use in the eradication of CSF
and FMD (Pasick, 2004). The DIVA-based vaccines for infectious bovine rhinotracheitis
(IBR) and pseudorabies have been available commercially since the 1980s (Meeusen et al.,
2007). Work to develop marker vaccines against PPR and rinderpest is also in progress
(Mahapatra et al., 2006; Parida et al., 2007; Diallo et al., 2007). For CSF, the first DIVA-
based vaccines were based on baculovirus-expressed E2 glycoprotein of CSF virus and have
been marketed since 1993. However, these have the disadvantage of inducing a delayed
immune response and are therefore not as effective as the conventional live attenuated
vaccine. Various possibilities for the development of effective DIVA-based vaccines for
CSF are discussed by Beer et al. (2007).
The first plant-based vaccine (recombinant viral hemagglutinin neuraminidase (HN)
protein generated in plant cell lines via Agrobacterium transformation) for Newcastle disease
virus in poultry could successfully protect chickens from viral challenge, but no product is
yet on the market (Meeusen et al., 2007). Recombinant vaccines have been developed that are
highly effective in preventing infection with tapeworms: Taenia ovis in sheep, Taenia saginata
in cattle, Taenia solium in pigs and Echinococcus granulosus in livestock (Lightowlers, 2006;
Eddi et al., 2006). Since farmers must destroy meat from animals infested with tapeworm,
the new vaccines could save farmers from huge economic losses.
In addition to validated, robust, specific and sensitive diagnostic tools and safe and effective
vaccines, control and eradication of animal diseases requires a complete package of good
veterinary infrastructure, reporting systems, laboratories with skilled staff, epidemiological
units able to execute surveys, and a carefully designed plan with clear objectives. Regional and
intergovernmental cooperation is also vital since many of animal diseases are transboundary.
9 www-naweb.iaea.org/nafa/ipc/field-projects-ipc.html
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 157
Papua New Guinea in the southeast. The SIT has been successfully tested against this species
in Papua New Guinea and Malaysia. In late 2007, an outbreak of OWS flies was observed in
Yemen that is threatening the livelihoods of people, either directly or through their livestock.
Biotechnological tools such as molecular markers are being used to study the degree
of gene flow between various pest insect populations and provide indications on their
relationship and potential isolation. This useful information about particular pest populations
can lead to better planning of AW-IPM campaigns that may integrate a SIT component.
At present, there are many uncertainties surrounding the production and use of transgenic
insects due to instability of the insertion and expression of the transgene. In addition, it
requires addressing public concerns and putting in place a regulatory mechanism to properly
conduct a risk assessment (Robinson, 2005).
Bioinformatics
Bioinformatics is the comprehensive application of statistics, biology and a core set of
problem-solving methods for helping to understand the code and evolution of life as well
as their implications. It deals with the use of information technology in biotechnology for
data storage and warehousing and DNA sequence analysis. Bioinformatics has overarching
implications in the areas of animal health, reproduction and nutrition.
The design of diagnostic tools, drugs and vaccines will rely increasingly on bioinformatic
data through sequence analysis. Gene prediction and functional annotations play an essential
role in this process. Developing countries can benefit hugely through such studies because
much sequence information and many bioinformatic tools are publicly available and freely
accessible. Furthermore, molecular immunoinformatic tools also have the potential to help
scientists in developing countries to produce epitope-driven multigene synthetic vaccines.
However, developing-country scientists are not skilled in this rapidly expanding area of
biology, with the exception of very few countries. In India, web-accessible databanks such as
the Animal Virus Information System, and tools to store and analyse information generated
by molecular and genomic projects in livestock research are available. Strong linkages
exist between information technology and the biotechnology sector. The Biotechnology
Information System Network, a division of the Department of Biotechnology of India, has
covered the entire country by connecting to more than 50 key research centres. India also
has programmes to upgrade the skills of agricultural scientists from other Southeast Asian
countries. The contribution of bioinformatics research is of growing importance in the study
of life sciences in China and Brazil, while in Africa, ILRI is building capacity in this field
through various training programmes. In addition to training, access to improved search
engines, data mining programs and other tools to improve access through the Internet to
a vast body of biomedical literature and sequence data is required in developing countries.
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 159
in developing countries. Although the production and use of prebiotics, probiotics and
silage enzymes are relatively simple, technical constraints, especially insufficient knowledge
about how to create the conditions that result in consistent positive responses are the
limiting factors for their wide application, even in intensive production systems. Quality
control systems and regulatory oversight of the products are non-existent. Silage making
is common in developed countries, but has not been popular in developing countries due
to a variety of factors including insufficient technical skills of farmers, extension activities
and infrastructure and tools; also, in many countries the timing of silage making conflicts
with other farm activities that are rated as more important. Silage additives will not be used
in developing countries if silage preparation is not practised.
Although technologies such as single cell protein production and solid-state fermentation
of lignocellulosic materials can be categorized as low-tech, they have practically not been used
at all. The main reason for the failure in adoption of single cell technology is the high cost
of production. The amount of biomass produced is small and the liquid volume in which it
is produced large; the equipment required for removing water is expensive and the methods
are time-consuming; and the energy needed for drying the isolated biomass also increases the
cost. Furthermore, the biomass produced has a high nucleic acid content which limits its use
in the diets of monogastric animals. The presence of high levels of nucleic acids in single cell
protein also makes it a poor protein supplement for ruminants. The reasons for the failure
of solid state fermentation of lignocellulosic materials such as straw are also the high cost
involved in transport and processing of the straw before inoculation with white rot fungi,
considerable loss in energy from lignocellulosic material during fermentation and difficulty in
upscaling the process. The quality of the feed obtained after fermentation is not commensurate
with the efforts and money spent. In short, the technology does not seem to be profitable.
Among the animal biotechnologies, modest success has been achieved only in the
application of AI, molecular diagnostics and conventional vaccines, feed additives and the SIT.
Artificial insemination
AI has played an important role in enhancing animal productivity, especially milk yields,
in developing countries that have a well defined breeding strategy and a sound technical
base to absorb and adapt the technology to meet their needs. Such countries also have:
1)an effective technology transfer mechanism for AI; 2) effectively integrated international
assistance into their national germplasm improvement programmes; 3) built and maintained
the infrastructure required; 4) complemented AI with improvements in animal nutrition
and veterinary services; and 5) provided adequate economic incentives to their farmers by
giving them access to markets and making sure that they get the right price for their products.
Many other developing countries lack one or more of these requirements.
Feed additives
The addition of nutrients and feed additives such as amino acids, enzymes and probiotics
to the diets of monogastric animals is driven mainly by the increased benefit to cost ratio
of these interventions, leading to greater profit of commercial livestock enterprises. The
companies producing additives usually have skilled workers to advise farmers in preparing
diets, as well as access to software for balancing protein requirements through the addition
of amino acids. These factors have also been important for the success of these technologies.
Another reason is that the production of additives is based on fermentation technology
which has a long history of use in developing countries and is a low-cost intervention. The
technologies have the added advantage of making the farms more environmentally sustainable
by reducing pollution. In the near future, regulations on the release of nutrients such as
nitrogen and phosphorus into water channels will increasingly be enforced in developing
countries, which will further increase the adoption of the technology.
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 161
projects supported by the Joint FAO/IAEA Division in Zanzibar and Libya were highly
successful, as were many SIT projects in the area of crop pest control. On the other hand,
the NWS programme in Jamaica showed that success cannot be taken for granted and that
several prerequisites need to be in place. On the technical side, particularly important success
ingredients are: the accurate and adequate collection of baseline data through the involvement of
experts; the timely analysis of data; the development of sound operational plans and strategies;
the delivery of extensive training to improve local expertise; the use of sterile males that are
capable of competing with wild males for mating with wild females, and the availability of
backup strains in case of loss of competitiveness in the field; the use of sound monitoring
methods to evaluate the competitiveness of sterile insects; the availability of sound monitoring
methodologies and their consistent use (use of different methods at the time of baseline data
collection and during the SIT execution and monitoring phase could lead to wrong decisions
being made). Equally important are meeting sound managerial and operational requirements
which include: the presence of a flexible and independent management structure; the consistent
availability of funds and trained staff; the presence of adequate expertise in the biology of the
target insects and in the management of integrated projects; the strong commitment of all
stakeholders, including though public awareness and education initiatives; an independent
peer review system; consistency and continuity in the implementation of various components.
Many of these are also critical to the success of applying other biotechnologies.
TABLE 5
Biotechnology Extent Public and Current Current Infrastructure Relative Skills Potential for
of use government technical technical and materials cost required for generating
acceptance capability capability for and tools application impact
for using it adapting or available for (time frame
developing it its use < 10 years)
AI Moderate High Moderate Low Moderate Moderate Moderate High
Progesterone Low High Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate
measurement
Oestrus Low High Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate
synchronization
IVF and ET Low High Low Low Low High High Moderate
Molecular Low High Low Low Low Moderate High Low
markers
Cryopreservation Low High Moderate Low Low Moderate High High
Semen and Low High Low Low Low High Moderate High
embryo sexing
Cloning Low Low Low Low Low High High Low
Transgenesis None Low Low Low Low High High Low
Biotechnology Extent Public and Current Current Infrastructure Relative Skills Potential for
of use government technical technical and materials cost required for generating
acceptance capability capability for and tools application impact
for using it adapting or available for (time frame
developing it using it < 10 years)
Feed additives: Moderate in High Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate High
amino acids, intensively
enzymes & managed
probiotics commercial
monogastric
farms; low
in ruminant
production
systems
Prebiotics Low High Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate
Silage additives Low High Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Low
Monensin Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Moderate Moderate
Single cell Low High Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Low
protein
Solid state None High Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Low
fermentation of
lignocellulosics
Recombinant Low Moderate Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate
somatotropin
Molecular gut Low High Low Low Low Moderate High Moderate
microbiology
TABLE 7
Biotechnology Extent of Public and Current Current Infrastructure Relative Skills Potential for
use government technical technical and materials cost required for generating
acceptance capability capability for and tools application impact
for using it adapting or available for (time frame
developing it using it < 10 years)
Molecular Moderate High Moderate Low Moderate Moderate High High
diagnostics
Recombinant None Moderate Moderate Low Low High High High
vaccines
Conventional Moderate High Moderate Low Moderate Moderate Moderate High
vaccines
SIT Moderate High Moderate Low Moderate Moderate High High
Bioinformatics* Low High Low Low Low Moderate High High
* This field is also relevant to animal reproduction, genetics, breeding, nutrition and production
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 163
3.6 Case Studies of the Use of Biotechnologies in Developing Countries
10 Contributed by Chanda Nimbkar, Animal Husbandry Division, Nimbkar Agricultural Research Institute, Phaltan, Maharashtra, India - April 2009;
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 165
desired by smallholders. Smallholders were given free veterinary care and sheep insurance
for the first four years. Training in ewe and lamb management and health care has been an
integral part of the projects since the beginning.
The phenotype of FecBB carriers (increased number of ovulations and lambs) cannot be
measured in males nor in females before the age of puberty, and is not completely associated
with genotype in females (a female with two lambs is more likely to carry the FecBB mutation
but often will not be a carrier and carrier ewes do not have twins at every lambing). The
DNA test for FecBB detection was therefore established under the project at NCL.
There are now 13 homozygous and 240 heterozygous adult ewes in 16 smallholder flocks
which were born in these flocks. Some shepherds have retained heterozygous rams born in
their flocks for further breeding. NARI will continue disseminating FecBB carrier rams in
these and other flocks under a newly funded project from the Indian Governments Ministry
of Science and Technology. Under the new project, the DNA test for FecBB detection will
be set up at NARI and cost-effective management techniques for ewes and lambs will be
investigated under smallholder flock conditions.
Twinning was thus introduced successfully into non-prolific Deccani sheep from the
Garole breed by introgressing the FecBB mutation with the help of the direct DNA test
for detecting the animals genotype at the FecB locus. NARI is the agency maintaining the
nucleus flock and carrying out the genotyping and extension in smallholder shepherds
flocks. Genetic improvement is permanent and is therefore the best technology to improve
the productivity of smallholder flocks in remote areas. For additional discussion of this
case study, see Nimbkar (2009b).
11 Sources: www-naweb.iaea.org/nafa/aph/stories/2005-iaea-rinderpest.html and John Crowther, Joint FAO/IAEA Division; April 2009
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 167
PPR, or ruling out rinderpest, in cases where clinical signs were compatible with presence
of either disease. Along with ELISA for antibody detection there were developments of
pen-side tests for detecting rinderpest and PPR antigens from eye swabs.
The combined technologies of serology and PCR produced a battery of tests able to
specifically assess vaccine efficacy and to differentiate true rinderpest from PPR. Sampling
frames were also important as they provided the statistical framework on which success was
measured, and these were developed by FAO and IAEA with support from the Swedish
International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA). Along with the supply of tests
came quality assurance methods (charting) to allow continuous assessment and external
validation of methods (both vital in the long term for laboratory assurance). Such an armoury
has permitted many countries to obtain official recognition of freedom from rinderpest
according to the provisions of the OIEs international standards. Rinderpest disease is now
no longer observed in the world. This status is assured through serosurveillance and other
monitoring and by well trained personnel using methods which are of the correct diagnostic
sensitivity and specificity to allow the results to be assessed statistically.
Although the cost of vaccination, blood sampling and testing have been high for both
developing and developed nations, their effectiveness is demonstrated by the fact that there is
only one small focus of virus with the potential to generate disease outbreaks left in the world.
By contrast, in 1987, the disease was present in 14 African countries as well as in western
Asia and the Near East. The economic impact of these efforts is already clear. Although the
costs and benefits have varied considerably from country to country, the figures for Africa
mentioned above illustrate the cost-effectiveness of the control measures implemented.
12 Contributed by P.S. Brar and A.S. Nanda, Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Ludhiana, Punjab, India; April 2009
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 169
}} Linkages with NGO: The Dr A.S. Cheema Foundation Trust, Chandigarh, India,
is actively involved in the promotion of livestock production in rural areas in north
India. The Trust is also bringing the technology to a large number of farmers in various
districts of Punjab and the adjoining States of Haryana and Himachal Pradesh through
its well established outreach activities.
}} Extension services of the Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences University,
Ludhiana, India: The extension services of the University are disseminating this
technology through the Lab-to-Land Programme, which consists of field services,
field days and other animal health programmes. A conservative estimate would suggest
that around 1000 farmers and 5000 buffalo have benefited from this programme to
date. Of these, 6075 percent of the buffaloes would have remained unbred for a variable
period of 612 months in the absence of these efforts. A close follow-up of about 100
heifers produced through this programme at some of the pilot farms revealed that the
female buffaloes produced under this study attain puberty at <28 months, compared
with an average of >36 months for the state. The intervention led to an increase in milk
production and provided additional calves of improved genetic potential to farmers by
decreasing the calving interval and the age of first calving in heifers.
13 Contributed by Mohammed Shamsuddin, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Mymensingh, Bangladesh; July 2009
figure 1
3000
N u m b e r o f i n s e m i n a t i o n ( x 10 0 0 )
2450
2500 2304
2085
1905
2000
1654
1495
1317 1371
1500
1162
1000
500
0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Year
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 171
Crossbred animals generally perform well, assuming that veterinary services are included
in the AI programme and milk marketing opportunities are made available. Veterinary
services are required because the crossbred cattle tend to suffer more from health and
reproductive problems than local animals. Crossbred cows also require more inputs in
feed and health care, so an available market is necessary to allow the farmer to obtain the
revenue to cover these increased costs.
The impacts of such comprehensive AI programmes were evaluated in two districts of
Bangladesh, Satkhira and Chittagong. In Satkhira, farmers were offered the opportunity
to crossbreed their local cows with semen from a local AI programme. At the same time, a
community-based dairy veterinary service (CDVS) was offered. Finally, a milk processor,
BRAC Dairy and Food Projects, installed milk chilling tanks in the community. The CDVS
is delivered through farmers groups and associations which have laid the foundation
towards operating the programme as self-financed. Three such associations collect about
7000 litres milk per day and transport it to five BRAC milk chilling centres. BRAC also
pays 1.65 Bangladeshi taka (approximately US$0.024) for each litre of milk to the CDVS
in addition to the milk price paid to producers, yielding a yearly income of approximately
US$62000 enough to pay the salary of three veterinarians, one field assistant, rents for
three veterinary offices and the cost of vaccines and anthelmintics for all animals of the
farm community. In addition, 69 men are employed to collect the milk and transport it to
the BRAC chilling centres. Each man works two to three hours a day and earns at least
US$20 a month. The programme generates a large amount of off-farm employment, which
is very important in a country like Bangladesh where unemployment is high.
A typical pattern observed is for farmers to use crossbreeding and improved veterinary
services initially to increase the milk yield per cow. Over time, this allows farmers to
accumulate funds and increase the number of cows. This has led to increases on single
farms ranging from 35 to 90 times in total milk production and allowed farmers to become
solvent members in the community. According to a recent economic analysis, the CDVS
has tended to increase net income as well (Figure 2). More than 75 percent of farm families
benefited from an increase in net income by using the services of the CDVS, with increases
ranging from US$1.0US$19.2 per cow per month.
A similar programme was established in Chittagong in 2002. At the beginning, there
were 70 farmers producing about 1500 litres of milk per day. Currently, the programme
involves 210 farm families that collectively produce about 6000 litres per day. In addition,
the CDVS developed a farmers association that negotiates the milk price with the dairy
sweetmeat industries. Prior to this, farmers used to be exploited by middlemen and
sweetmeat producers. Now that productivity veterinary services and AI are available and
the associations guarantee a reasonable price for milk, both the number of dairy farmers
and milk production per farm have increased.
60 100%
Farms
Cumulative % 90%
50
Number of farms
80%
40 70%
60%
30 50%
40%
20
30%
10 20%
10%
0 0%
-3 -2 -1 0 1 3 6 9 12 15 >15
c h a n g e s i n i n c o m e ( u s $ ) / c a t t l e / 3 0 day s
minimum and maximum differences were US$-8.0 and 19.2 (number of farms = 213)
14 Contributed by Jos Fernando Garcia, Animal Production and Health Department, So Paulo State University, UNESP, Araatuba, Brazil
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 173
1930s and then again in the 1960s), led to the establishment of several AI centres dedicated
to the collection and distribution of semen from better adapted breeds, especially Nellore
and Guzerat for beef production and Gir for dairying. In parallel, breeding programmes
through breeders associations and agribusiness groups were established, which played a
pivotal role in the dissemination and monitoring of germplasm.
In the 1980s, when AI was increasingly being used, a second phase started, namely the
use of multiple ovulation and embryo transfer (MOET) methods. Since then, Brazil has
become one of the major users of this biotechnology (Garcia, 2001).
Recent data from the International Embryo Transfer Society indicate Brazils leading
position in South America in the use of embryo technology (Thibier, 2008; Table 2 earlier).
In the 1990s, in vitro embryo production (IVEP) was taken from the laboratory to the field
and emerged as one of the advanced technologies to solve specific bottlenecks in the use of
bovine embryos for breeding purposes, namely, the lower response of zebu cows to ovarian
stimulation with hormones and the rapid increase in market demand for high quality animals.
This method can exploit the best of both male and female genetic potential and produce
large numbers of descendents from the same specific artificial mating. One superior cow
can have both ovaries submitted to monthly transvaginal ultrasound follicle aspiration,
generating a large number of oocytes and producing on average more than 50 descendents
per year. Of the approximately 820000 bovine embryos transferred in the world in 2007,
almost 30 percent were from Brazil, with about 46000 being produced through MOET
and 200000 through IVEP. More than 90 percent of these were from zebu beef breeds. The
use of IVEP was non-existent in Brazil until only ten years ago, but the current production
represents about 95 percent of the total transferrable embryos produced in vitro in South
America and about 50 percent in the world (Thibier, 2008).
Another recent development has been the increased application of FTAI, which has allowed
large-scale application of AI in the beef sector. During the last decade, Brazilian scientists and
pharmaceutical industries working in close partnership, developed a method consisting of the
treatment of beef heifers or cows with specific hormone combinations to synchronize ovulation,
allowing their insemination at one time. This revolutionized the use of AI even in areas where the
infrastructure is not well developed and there is a dearth of highly skilled technicians because AI
can be performed on a large number of animals in a single day by a qualified technician without
oestrus detection (Baruselli et al., 2004). The cost of the entire procedure is low (between US$710
per treated cow). According to data from the Brazilian Association of Artificial Insemination,
around eight million doses of semen were sold in 2007, with consistent growth during the last
five years as FTAI has spread year after year and largely replaced conventional AI.
The combined use of AI, MOET, IVEP and FTAI in Brazil coupled with infrastructural
development and overall nutrition, health and sanitary improvement has allowed fast
distribution of animals having superior genetic attributes and opened new avenues for putting
TABLE 8
Cattle meat and milk production records and facts from Brazil (1970-2007)
Meat production Consumption Meat Price Meat Exports Milk Production Milk Price
(ton)*/** (kg/person/yr)* (US$/ton)* (US$Mio)** (ton)* (US$/ton)*
Year 1970 1970 1994 1994 1970 1994
1 845 182 17 1 800 573 7 353 143 254.97
Year 2007 2003 2006 2008 2004 2006
9 296 700 33 1 550 5 500 24 202 409 221.81
Change +500 +94 20 +960 +350 10
(percent)
Sources: *FAOSTAT (http://faostat.fao.org/) and the **Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE, www.ibge.gov.br/home/)
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 175
B. Looking Forward: Preparing for the Future
3.7 KeyUnsolved Problems in the Livestock Sector where
Biotechnologies Could be Fundamental to their Solution
Continued population growth and urbanization, global warming, globalization of trade and
the ongoing intensification of livestock production systems and value chains, in addition
to providing opportunities for development, have given rise to a number of new challenges
in animal production and these trends and new challenges will continue in the future. The
challenges include the occurrence of new diseases, such as HPAI caused by virus of the
H5N1 sub-type and, more recently, influenza A/H1N1, the re-occurrence of many old
transboundary animal diseases, the release of pollutants such as methane, nitrogen and
phosphorus into the environment, water scarcity, land degradation, the erosion of animal
biodiversity and the scarcity of feed (due to the need to feed a growing population or because
of diversion to other uses, such as biofuels). Animal biotechnologies provide opportunities
for addressing new challenges and solving upcoming problems.
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 177
in alleviating the impact of livestock on the environment. In the area of animal nutrition,
the ongoing efforts to sequence the genomes of predominant rumen bacteria and assign
functions to genes provide the opportunity to extend our understanding of gastrointestinal
microbiomes beyond the degradative and metabolic characteristics relevant to both host
animal health and nutrition. This facilitates acquiring the knowledge of a bacteriums
competitiveness and colonization potential in the rumen and of the nutrient requirements
of microbes, underpinning the roles of microbes in the process of feed digestion, and
understanding better the mechanism of fibre degradation in the rumen. This knowledge
may provide new opportunities for using roughages and crop residues more effectively and
for developing strategies to achieve sustainable decreases in methane production through
new means, one of which could be through the establishment of acetogens in the rumen.
Better utilization of tree leaves and agro-industrial by-products through identification of
antinutritional factor(s) degrading microbes and their establishment in the rumen may
also be possible. Similarly, the genomic information of cattle and other ruminants could
assist in identifying animals that are low methane emitters and have better feed conversion
efficiency (Hegarty et al., 2007). Potential applications of studies on farm animal genomes,
including rumen microbial genomes, are innumerable.
The plant kingdom in the tropics is full of diversity. Tropical plants contain a large
number of bioactive phytochemicals, the activity and diversity of which in tropical regions
is considered greater than in temperate regions (Makkar, Francis and Becker, 2007). Local
knowledge of using herbal products is also rich in many developing countries. With the
ban on antibiotic growth promoters in the EU and increasing pressure on North American
countries to follow suit, efforts are underway to identify natural plant growth promoters.
The PCR and oligonucleotide probing methods for studying gut microbial ecology
are affordable and within the capacity of molecular biology laboratories in developing
countries. The application of these tools along with conventional tools could give an edge
to developing countries over developed countries by identifying compounds from their
rich and diverse flora that could be useful for the manipulation of rumen fermentation.
They might, for example, be used to decrease methane emissions and increase the uptake
of nitrogen and carbon by rumen microbes, and thus improve gut health while conserving
the environment. The demand for natural products that enhance livestock productivity
and animal welfare and make animal agriculture environmentally friendly will increase
substantially in the future. The potential exists for developing countries to capture a large
segment of the business in this area.
The use of enzymes and other additives in feeds, the development and use of genetically
improved crops for animal feeds including forages having higher water use efficiency,
salt and drought tolerance, high quality, and low lignin; the development of animals with
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 179
3.8 Identifying Options for Developing Countries
With reference to the stock-taking exercise that has been central to this Chapter, a number
of specific options can be identified that should assist developing countries make informed
decisions regarding the adoption of appropriate biotechnologies in the livestock sector in
the future.
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 181
Policy-makers in developing countries should be aware that there will be practical,
financial and legal obstacles that will preclude the full-scale adoption of many livestock
biotechnologies. In such instances, strategies for adoption and use must be based on
realistic expectations. Many biotechnologies are biased with respect to scale, so that their
application is only economically feasible in large enterprises. The building of infrastructure
(laboratories, equipment etc.) will not be possible in every country, so that North-South,
South-South and public-private partnerships will be required, meaning that countries may
have to accept the loss of some autonomy in exchange for access to certain biotechnologies.
In such cases, capacity building in developing countries should be directed at understanding
the technology and financial investments involved and should emphasize adapting and
using the technology to meet livestock development goals unique to the country, rather
than replicating an entire system at the local level.
With the SIT, for example, there is a strong positive correlation between the research
capabilities of in-country biotechnologists and the scale of its application in the field. The
translation of research into commercial enterprises requires solid science, long-term resource
commitments and extensive steps of validation to reach the thresholds of reproducibility
and profitability. Therefore, strong scientific drive, vision and entrepreneurial skills are
needed for contributing to progress in animal biotechnologies. The capacity to conduct
research in biotechnology and develop products cannot just be turned on. It requires
prior nurturing over many years with an adequate and uninterrupted provision of funds,
which is possible only through strong commitment from science and policy managers in
developing countries.
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 183
be supported by both international organizations and the nations concerned and they
should ensure that internationally recognized standards such as those published in the
OIE Animal Health Code are implemented.
}} Training programmes for establishing quality assurance methods such as those published
by OIE allow continuous assessment of the assays used, and network programmes for
validation of diagnostic methods should be organized by international funding agencies
as the area of disease diagnostics is beset with problems of validation.
}} Reference laboratories for conventional and newer technologies including biotechnologies
provide useful services in the diagnostic and vaccine control areas and should work in
collaboration with national veterinary services. The proper establishment of reference
laboratories to implement international standards (e.g. standards approved by OIE
or the International Organization for Standardization [ISO]) should be supported by
international organizations through training, advice and political negotiations to secure
sustainable funding. The exact role of any reference laboratory has to be defined from
the beginning. National and regional acceptance and support is vital to sustaining them.
}} The early and accurate detection and efficient monitoring and control of transboundary
animal diseases, particularly zoonoses, are of great international interest. Therefore,
international cooperation in the development, uptake and adaptation for use of the
associated biotechnologies is essential.
}} The international community should help developing countries to integrate animal
biotechnologies within the context of national livestock development programmes and
overall developmental needs. Furthermore, the formulation of programmes should be
based on solving specific problems rather than imposing specific solutions to these
problems. Initiatives that aim to reconstruct (or tailor) animal biotechnologies to specific
needs and localities as part of a comprehensive and holistic solution to a given problem
are important and need encouragement as well as tangible support.
}} International and national institutions alike should identify ways of improving cooperation
to address issues pertaining to animal biotechnology. Firm and committed North-South
and South-South collaborative programmes and partnerships should be developed and
fostered through the consistent and long-term provision of sufficient funds.
}} Short-sighted worldwide research policies have neglected animal research in recent
years. The amount spent by developing nations on animal research should be increased.
The international donor agencies should also designate increased funds for R&D in the
area of animal science in developing countries.
}} International funding agencies should support the training of people to perform quality
research. Research competence is a prerequisite for harnessing the benefits of animal
biotechnologies. The training programmes should be directed at young scientists and
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 185
3.10 References
Alarcon, M.A. & Galina, C.S. 2009. Is embryo transfer a useful technique for small community farmers? In
Proceedings FAO/IAEA international symposium on sustainable improvement of animal production and
health, Synopsis: IAEACN17490, pp. 152153, Vienna, IAEA Press.
Alphey, L., Benedict, M., Bellini, R., Clark, G.G., Dame, D.A., Service, M.W. & Dobson, S.L. 2010. Sterile-
insect methods for control of mosquito-borne diseases: An analysis. Vector-Borne Zoonotic Dis., 10(3):
295311.
ASBIA. 2008. Relatrio estatstico de produo, importao e comercializao de smen. Associao Brasileira
de Inseminao. (available at www.asbia.org.br/novo/relatorios/).
Baruselli, P.S., Reis, E.L., Marques, M.O., Nasser, L.F. & B, G.A. 2004. The use of hormonal treatments
to improve reproductive performance of anestrous beef cattle in tropical climates. Anim. Reprod. Sci.,
8283: 479486.
Beer, M., Reimann, I., Hoffmann, B. & Depner, K. 2007. Novel marker vaccines against classical swine fever.
Vaccine, 25: 56655670.
Belk, S. 2007. Experiences of an OIE collaborating center in molecular diagnosis of transboundary animal
diagnosis: A review. Dev. Biol. Basel, 128: 109118.
Belk, S. & Gay, C. 2007. Advances in biotechnology and future impact on animal health. OIE Bulletin, 2007-
4: 3-7.
Chauvet, M. & Ochoa, R.F. 1996. An appraisal of the use of rBST in Mexico. Biotechnol. Devel. Monitor, 27:
67. (also available at www.biotech-monitor.nl/2703.htm)
Chilliard, Y., Lerondelle, C., Disenhaus, C., Mouchet, C. & Paris, A. 2001. Recombinant growth hormone:
Potential interest and risks of its use in bovine milk production. In R. Renaville & A. Burny, eds.
Biotechnology in animal husbandry, Volume 5, pp. 6597. The Netherlands, Springer Publishing Company.
CLFMA. 2007. Livestock Industry Survey Report. India. Compound Livestock Feed Manufacturers
Association of India.
Cowan, T. & Becker, G.S. 2006. Biotechnology in animal agriculture: Status and current issues. CRS Report for
Congress RL33334, pp.112, Washington, DC.
Cyranoski, D. 2005. Bird flu spreads among Javas pigs. Nature, 435: 390391.
DADF. 2006. Basic animal husbandry statistics. Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries. New
Delhi, Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.
DADF. 2008. Annual report 20072008. Department of Animal Husbandry, Dairying & Fisheries. New Delhi,
Ministry of Agriculture, Government of India.
Deng, D., Chen, Y.J. & Deng, Y.L. 2008. Exploitation and utilization of enzyme and microecological products.
Jiangxi Feed, 1: 1526.
Diallo A., Minet, C., Le Goff, C., Berhe, G., Albina, E., Libeau, G. & Barrett, T. 2007. The threat of peste des
petits ruminants: Progress in vaccine development for disease control. Vaccine, 25: 55915597.
Djemali, M., Bedhiaf-Romdhani, S., Iniguez, L. & Inounou, I. 2009. Saving threatened native breeds by
autonomous production, involvement of farmers organization, research and policy makers: The case of
the Sicilo-Sarde breed in Tunisia, North Africa. Livest. Sci., 120: 213217.
Domenech J., Lubroth J., Eddi C., Martin V. & Roger F. 2006. Regional and international approaches on
prevention and control of animal transboundary and emerging diseases. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci., 1081: 90107.
Eddi, C., de Katalin, B., Juan, L., William, A., Andrew, S., Daniela, B. & Joseph, D. 2006. Veterinary public
health activities at FAO: Cysticercosis and echinococcosis. Parasitol. Int., 55: S305S308.
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 187
Heyman, Y. 2005. Nuclear transfer: A new tool for reproductive biotechnology in cattle. Reprod. Nutr. Dev.,
45: 353361.
Hodges, J. 2005. Role of international organizations and funding agencies in promoting gene-based technologies
in developing countries. In H.P.S. Makkar & G.J. Viljoen, eds. Applications of gene-based technologies for
improving animal production and health in developing countries, pp. 1821. The Netherlands, Springer
Publishing Company.
Jousan, F.D., Paula, L., Block, J. & Hansen, P.J. 2007. Fertility of lactating dairy cows administered
recombinant bovine somatotropin during heat stress. J. Dairy Sci., 90: 341351.
Juma, C. & Serageldin, I., co-chairs. 2007. Freedom to innovate. Biotechnology in Africas development.
Report of the High-Level African Panel on Modern Biotechnology. Addis Ababa and Pretoria. African
Union and New Partnership for Africas Development.
Karatzas, C.N. 2003. Designer milk from transgenic clones. Nat. Biotechnol., 21: 138139.
Krehbiel, C.R., Rust, S.R., Zhang, G. & Gilliland S.E. 2003. Bacterial direct-fed microbials in ruminant diets:
Performance response and mode of action. J. Anim. Sci., 81(E. Suppl. 2): E120E132.
Kuiken, T., Rimmelzwaan, G., van Riel, D., van Amerongen, G., Baars, M., Fouchier, R. & Osterhaus, A.
2004. Avian H5N1 influenza in cats. Science, 306: 241.
Lane, E.A., Austin, E.J. & Crowe, M.A. 2008. Oestrous synchronisation in cattle current options following
the EU regulations restricting use of oestrogenic compounds in food-producing animals: A review.
Anim. Reprod. Sci., 109: 116.
Leuchtenberger, W., Huthmacher, K. & Drauz, K. 2005. Biotechnological production of amino acids and
derivatives: Current status and prospects. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 69: 18.
Lightowlers, M.W. 2006. Cestode vaccines: Origins, current status and future prospects. Parasitology, 133:
S27S42.
Long, J.A. 2008. Reproductive biotechnology and gene mapping: Tools for conserving rare breeds of livestock.
Reprod. Dom. Anim., 43 (Suppl. 2): 8388.
MacKenzie, A.A. 2005. Applications of genetic engineering for livestock and biotechnology products. Technical
Item II, 73rd General Session, Paris, International Committee, OIE. (available at ftp://ftp.fao.org/codex/
ccfbt5/bt0503ae.pdf)
Madan, M.L. 2005. Animal biotechnology: Applications and economic implications in developing countries.
Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz., 24(1): 127-139.
Mahapatra, M., Parida, S., Baron, M. D. & Barrett, T. 2006. Matrix protein and glycoproteins F and H of
peste-des-petits-ruminants virus function better as a homologous complex. J. Gen. Virol., 87: 20212029.
Makkar, H.P.S, Francis, G. & Becker, K. 2007. Bioactivity of phytochemicals in some lesser-known plants
and their effects and potential applications in livestock and aquaculture production systems. Anim., 1(9):
13711391.
Meeusen, E.N.T., Walker, J., Peters, A., Pastoret, P-P. & Jungersen, G. 2007. Current status of veterinary
vaccines. Clin. Microbiol. Rev., 20: 489510.
Meuwissen, T.H.E., Hayes, B.J. & Goddard, M.E. 2001. Prediction of total genetic value using genome-wide
dense marker maps. Genetics, 157: 1819-1829.
MOA. 2001. Feed additive drug use norms. Ministry of Agriculture Bulletin, P.R. China No. 168.
Niemann, H. & Kues, W.A. 2007. Transgenic farm animals: An update. Reprod. Fertil. Dev., 19: 762770.
Nimbkar, C. 2009. India - sheep - FecB gene. Message 55 of the FAO e-mail conference on Learning from the
past: Successes and failures with agricultural biotechnologies in developing countries over the last 20 years.
(available at www.fao.org/biotech/logs/c16/220609.htm).
chapte r 3 Current Status and Options for Livestock Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 189
Vreysen, M.J.B., Gerardo-Abaya, J. & Cayol, J.P. 2005. Lessons from area-wide integrated pest management
(AW-IPM) programmes with an SIT component: An FAO/IAEA perspective. In M.J.B. Vreysen, A.S.
Robinson & J. Hendrichs, eds. Area-wide control of insect pests. From research to field implementation,
pp. 723744. Vienna, IAEA.
Willadsen, P. 2005. Vaccination against ticks and the control of ticks and tick-borne disease. In H.P.S. Makkar
& G.J.Viljoen, eds. Applications of gene-based technologies for improving animal production and health
in developing countries, pp. 313321. The Netherlands, Springer Publishing Company.
World Bank. 2009. Minding the stock: Bringing public policy to bear on livestock sector development. Report
No. 44010-GLB. Washington, DC.
Yu, L., Wang. Y.Q. & Zhang, S.Y.I. 2008. Function and quality status of feed enzyme. Shanghai Anim. Husb.
Vet. Med., 3: 5455.
Summary
The rapid growth of aquaculture has significantly benefited from both conventional
technologies and biotechnologies and it is expected that advanced biotechnologies will
further help the sector in meeting the global demand for aquatic food in the coming decades.
While biotechnologies are being applied in fisheries management, their use is very limited
compared with aquaculture. The four main areas where biotechnologies have been used
in aquaculture and fisheries include genetic improvement and control of reproduction;
biosecurity and disease control; environmental management and bioremediation; and
biodiversity conservation and fisheries management.
One of the main reasons for the success of aquaculture is the diversity of species
currently in culture (over 230) and the genetic diversity that can be exploited through
captive breeding and domestication. However, the rearing of many newly cultured species
is to a large extent based on juveniles and/or broodstock obtained from the wild. In order
to establish practical breeding programmes to produce seed in hatcheries, it is necessary to
have a detailed understanding of the complete production cycle. Such knowledge is also
required to disseminate breeding improvements to the production sector. Improvements that
allow the wider application of appropriate genetic and reproduction biotechnologies will
undoubtedly increase aquaculture production, thus contributing to global food production.
These biotechnologies include polyploidy, gynogenesis and androgenesis, the development
of monosex populations and cryopreservation.
Disease outbreaks are a serious constraint to aquaculture development. Disease control
and health management in aquaculture are different from the terrestrial livestock sector,
particularly due to the fluid environment. Disease occurs in all systems, from extensive
191
to intensive, and losses are possible in all types of production systems. There is a need
for better management of intensive systems, and biotechnologies are being used for this
purpose. Immunoassay and DNA-based diagnostic methods are currently used to screen
and/or confirm the diagnosis of many significant pathogens in aquaculture in developing
countries. Also, one of the most important factors leading to reduced antibiotic use
by the aquaculture sector is the availability of good prophylactic measures for diseases
causing severe mortalities in cultured fish and shellfish. The use of vaccines provides good
immunoprophylaxis for some of most important infectious diseases of finfish. As molecular-
based vaccine production procedures rely heavily on biotechnological tools, vaccines are
being produced mainly in developed countries.
Reducing the environmental impacts of aquaculture is a significant task. Aquaculture
is often accused of being unsustainable and not environmentally friendly. Reducing the
impacts of effluent discharge, improving water quality and responsible use of water are key
areas to be considered in aquaculture development. Some biotechnologies are being used
to address these areas, including bioremediation for the degradation of hazardous wastes
and use of DNA-based methodologies for the early detection of toxin-producing algae.
In capture fisheries, the sustainable management and conservation of fisheries is a
priority. Better understanding of the population structure of the fishery is therefore of
paramount importance. Some biotechnologies have already been applied but there is ample
scope for the greater use of biotechnologies in fisheries management worldwide. The use of
molecular markers and the principles of population genetics have proved very effective for
assessing the actual levels of genetic variability within single populations and for measuring
the extent of differentiation between populations.
4.1 Introduction
Capture fisheries and aquaculture supplied the world with over 113 million tonnes of food
fish in 2007, providing an apparent per capita supply of 17.1 kg (live weight equivalent),
which is among the highest on record. Global production of fish from aquaculture has
grown rapidly during the past four decades, contributing significant quantities to the worlds
supply of fish for human consumption. Aquaculture currently accounts for nearly half (44.3
percent) of the worlds food fish (Figure 1). With its continued growth, it is expected that
aquaculture will in the near future produce more fish for direct human consumption than
capture fisheries (FAO, 2009).
Started as primarily an Asian freshwater food production system, aquaculture has
now spread to all continents, encompassing all aquatic environments and utilizing a range
of aquatic species. From an activity that was principally small-scale, non-commercial and
family-based, aquaculture now includes large-scale commercial or industrial production
FIGURE 1
120 50%
45%
100
40%
million tonnes
35%
80
30%
60 25%
20%
40
15%
10%
20
5%
0 0%
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 193
It is important to note that aquaculture has a long tradition in the developing countries of the
Asia-Pacific region, supplying most of the worlds aquaculture production (over 90 percent),
and making important contributions to the livelihoods and subsistence of small-scale farmers
and coastal populations in many countries in the region. In Latin America, small-scale
aquaculture has yet to be widely developed; however, there are several examples of newly
established industries based on intensive aquaculture practices, especially using exotic species.
Salmon farming in Chile is one of the best examples, but there are also expanding aquaculture
industries for shrimp and tilapia culture in Ecuador, Costa Rica and Honduras. While Europe
and North America import significant quantities of farmed aquatic animals, they also produce
fish and shellfish both from freshwater and marine environments. Africas contribution to global
aquaculture is still small; however, the region is moving forward and increasing production.
Aquaculture covers a wide range of species and methods. It is practised from the cold
waters of the far north and south, where fish like salmon, Arctic char and sturgeon are
grown in ponds, flowing raceways and cages in the sea, and through the latitudes as far as
the tropics, where carp and tilapia flourish in freshwater and shrimp and sea bass are farmed
along the coasts. It ranges from the production of fish in naturally occurring ponds in rural
areas to the intensive culture of ornamental fish in plastic tanks in the middle of a city. It
is practised by the poorest farmers in developing countries as a livelihood and supply of
much needed protein for their families, and by urban sports shop owners in Europe and
North America producing baitfish for weekend anglers.
Aquaculture systems can range from an intensive indoor system monitored with high
tech equipment through to the simple release of fry and fingerlings to the sea, but the aim
remains the same: to improve production. Some of the simplest production systems are the
small family ponds in tropical countries where carp are reared for domestic consumption.
At the other end of the scale are high technology systems such as the intensive indoor closed
units used in North America for the rearing of striped bass or the sea cages used in Chile
and Europe for growing salmon and bream.
All products and systems are geared to produce animals for market and are much
governed by market demand at all levels. Regardless of whether it is a high value commodity
like shrimp, salmon or grouper, or a low-value commodity such as carp and Tra catfish, all
products are destined for markets, be they local, regional or international. All production
systems contribute to food security and human development although small-scale rural
production systems provide more support to improving or maintaining livelihoods and
generating employment and income for many around the world.
It is important to note that most of these small-scale aquaculture activities occur in
developing countries, especially in regions or rural areas where food supply is at risk.
For example, tilapia has become a globally important aquatic species that is produced in
FIGURE 2
70
60 ASIA
REST OF WORLD
million tonnes
50
40
30
20
10
0
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000
Year
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 195
Aquaculture practice is an example of a strong continuum of production systems. From
the simplest production system with absolutely no inputs and with minimal interventions,
aquaculture ranges up to highly sophisticated, fully automated, industrial production
systems comprising submerged offshore cages producing large quantities of fish from a
single unit. Intensive or extensive aquaculture requires good quality seed for farming. Seed
quality is not only dependent on good hatchery technology, but also on good broodstock
with improved genetic quality. The genetic quality of the broodstock and seed used in
aquaculture can be improved using biotechnological tools and procedures. There have been
some interventions, and good results have been reported.
Modern aquaculture, through the intensification of culture systems and the diversification
of both the species cultured and the culture methods employed, often creates an ideal
environment for disease-causing organisms (pathogens) to flourish. The expanded and
occasionally irresponsible global movement of live aquatic animals has been the cause of
transboundary spread of many pathogens, which have sometimes resulted in serious damage
to aquatic food productivity. Some of these pathogens have become endemic in culture
systems and in the natural aquatic environment, thus making them difficult to eradicate.
Since they have become endemic, recurrent pathogen incursions and disease outbreaks occur
in farms making it difficult for the farmers to effectively manage farm health. Instead of
implementing effective health management strategies and practices, many farmers opt to use
antimicrobials as treatments. There is therefore a need to develop alternate methodologies
and tools for maintaining aquatic animal health in aquaculture systems. Such tools and
methodologies are generally the result of biotechnological research and several success
stories exist. Similarly, biotechnological research has also helped in the improvement of
feeds, feeding and nutrition as well as of water quality and the environmental impacts of
aquaculture.
This paper is divided into two main Sections: Stocktaking: Learning from the Past
and Looking Forward: Preparing for the Future. For the first one, Part 4.2 provides a
brief overview of the main areas where biotechnologies are currently been applied; Part
4.3 documents the current status of application of biotechnologies in developing countries;
and Part 4.4 presents two relevant case studies. For the second Section, Part 4.5 examines
a couple of key issues for the future where biotechnologies could be useful; Part 4.6
identifies a number of specific options for developing countries to help them make informed
decisions regarding adoption of biotechnologies; and Part 4.7 proposes a set of priorities
for action for the international community (FAO, UN organizations, NGOs, donors and
development agencies).
FIGURE 3
120
100
million tonnes
80
60
40
20
0
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 197
Despite the current trend towards the intensification of production systems, aquaculture
has not made full use of conventional technologies such as genetic selection and breeding
improvement programmes to increase production as have other food production sectors.
The rearing of many newly cultured species is to a large extent based on juveniles and/or
broodstock obtained from the wild. In order to establish practical breeding programmes to
produce seed in hatcheries it is necessary to have a detailed understanding of the complete
production cycle. Such knowledge is also required in order to disseminate breeding
improvements to the production sector.
One of the best examples is the inability to fully domesticate Penaeus monodon, the
black tiger prawn which is arguably the most valuable species produced globally. Although
specific pathogen-free (SPF) hatchery stocks bred for improved growth have become
available recently, production still depends on broodstock collected from the wild. As a
result, production of this species has been replaced over the last few years by that from the
white shrimp, L. vannamei. Improved SPF L. vannamei have been readily available for
some time and now supply essentially all farmed white shrimp and more than 60 percent of
all farmed penaeid shrimp world wide. The shrimp aquaculture sector therefore illustrates
the benefits of genetic improvement for increasing production and the competitiveness of
aquaculture industries.
The P. monodon example illustrates how a lack of knowledge concerning some phases of
the life cycle such as reproduction or metamorphosis may be a limiting factor in developing
domesticated stocks. Certain species of tuna, a marine resource that is being harvested
under a quota system, are now produced in considerable quantities in captivity or culture.
The aquaculture production of this valuable species will undoubtedly increase once the life
cycle is closed and the hatchery production of tuna fry becomes a reality. This scenario is
also applicable to the hatchery production of mollusc species. There is a huge demand for
spats (fertilized shellfish larvae) but most spats are still coming from the wild.
The use of hormones for the control of reproduction has been primarily developed for
inducing the final phase of ova production, i.e. for synchronizing ovulation and for enabling
broodstock to produce fish in the first part of the season or when environmental conditions
suppress the spawning timing of females. These procedures began with the pioneering work of
Houssay (1930), who demonstrated that extracts of the hypophysis (pituitary gland) can have
an effect on sexual maturation of fish and reptiles (Zohar and Mylonas, 2001). These results
allowed the development of a relatively simple procedure consisting of injecting hypophyseal
extracts purified by chromatography that contain products such as inductive hormones
related to sexual maturation. Human chorionic gonadotrophin and the gonadotrophin-
releasing hormone (GnRH) were also used to control the maturation of many fish species
without limitations due to species-specific effects (Zohar and Mylonas,2001). GnRHa, an
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 199
polymerase chain reaction (PCR) technology (described later) has become an important
tool for pathogen assessment in developing countries, for example in the shrimp industries
of Asia and Latin America.
In fisheries and aquaculture, although perhaps not as much as in livestock and crop production,
some biotechnologies have been used in developing countries. As mentioned earlier, use
of biotechnologies in fisheries is very limited whilst in aquaculture biotechnologies are
represented in a few fields such as genetic improvement, disease control, feeds and nutrition
and environmental improvement.
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 201
skin colour and modified body conformation), courtship behaviour and develop an
endocrine profile similar to that of diploid males. Spermatogenesis, however, appears to
be somewhat reduced in comparison with diploid males (Benfey et al., 1986). Although
triploid males are to a great extent sterile, fertilization has been reported to occur. In the
salmon aquaculture industry, sexual maturity and the associated gonadal development is
generally an economic drawback as metabolic energy is diverted from somatic cell growth
to reproduction, resulting in the deterioration of flesh quality and appearance. In this
situation, the advantages of triploidy occur primarily after the onset of maturation when
triploid female fish may show an extension of growth (Thorgaard, 1986) and the inhibition
of maturation prevents the normal degradation in carcass quality that is observed during the
spawning season (Asknes, Gjerde and Roald, 1986). Furthermore, female salmon triploids
show a significantly higher dress-out percentage (Thorgaard and Gall, 1979) and higher
pigment (canthaxanthin) retention (Choubert and Blanc, 1989), but concomitantly, there
is an increase of fat deposition surrounding the viscera.
In developing countries, the practical implementation of triploidy in fish production has
not been very successful. Most of the research on the application of this biotechnology has
been experimental, without extensive testing under practical conditions that consider the wide
range of environments in which aquaculture takes place. In species such as tilapia and carp,
testing of triploidy is a very important issue considering that there is intraspecies variation
in the rate of triploidization due to the size and quality of the eggs. For this reason, it is
not possible to ensure 100 percent triploidy when applying this technique on a commercial
scale. Also, an increased mortality rate at the beginning of the life cycle and the detrimental
effect of triploidy on growth and fitness could be significant constraints to the commercial
production of triploids in some species (Basant et al., 2004). The lack of knowledge about
the effects of competition between triploids and diploids in large extensive conditions in
species such as tilapia could also be a disadvantage, since triploids sometimes lack robustness
compared with normal diploids, but this expression varies among species (Benfey, 1999). In
many cases, the variation in performance between diploid and triploid stocks has not been
fully estimated, and thus it may not be possible to accurately predict the relative performance
of triploids in commercial conditions, which may be a problem in conventional breeding
programmes of many fish and shellfish species (Pechsiri and Yakupitiyage, 2005).
In developing countries, for various reasons, these techniques are not currently used
for commercial purposes. Tilapia, for example, cannot be easily reproduced using external
fertilization which is a prerequisite for shock treatment. Furthermore, when a very small
number of eggs are obtained per spawn, it is not possible to ensure a constant rate of triploidy
per spawning. In rainbow trout, it is only profitable to use triploid females since males show
some degree of reproductive onset. For developing such female triploid populations, neomales
Gynogenesis/androgenesis
4.3.1.2
Gynogenesis is the production of an embryo from an egg after penetration by a spermatozoon
that does not contribute genetic material. Androgenesis is the production of an embryo
from an egg whose DNA was inactivated and which was fertilized using normal sperm. In
both cases, the diploidy is restored using heat/cold shocks. In gynogenesis, if diploidy is
restored soon after fertilization, the procedure is called meiotic gynogenesis due to the fact
that the second polar body is retained, and this procedure is similar to what is expected under
autofertilization in terms of inbreeding. If shocks are applied later or in androgenesis where
the ova were DNA-irradiated for DNA inactivation, the same chromosome is duplicated and
thus the embryo is a double haploid individual which is completely inbred for every locus.
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 203
Several papers have discussed the usefulness of this type of reproduction for genetic
analysis in carp, tilapia and rainbow trout breeding programmes. In some cases, the use of
gynogenetic individuals has been suggested for capitalizing on non-additive genetic effects
to increase additive genetic variance and for product uniformity (Bijma, van Arendonk and
Bovenhuis, 1997). However, the production of gynogenetic lines is not without problems.
After a first round of gynogenesis from an outbred population, deleterious and/or lethal
effects can be fully expressed in the double haploid progeny, which may be a problem
when implementing a breeding programme from this source. Furthermore, phenotypes
cannot actually be a direct reflection of the same trait measured on normal progeny due to
developmental instability. Therefore, the utility of this type of reproduction for practical
use in breeding programmes is seen as risky in most cases. Nonetheless, they can be used
effectively for developing powerful quantitative trait locus (QTL) mapping experiments using
the surviving clonal lines of this sort obtained from an outbred population, but this requires
having available the gynogenetic lines that are needed for further assessment (FAO, 2007a).
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 205
However, the great expansion of tilapia aquaculture in Asia has been due to mixed-sex
tilapia culture which addresses the high demand for relatively small fish (i.e. fish less than
300 g) that can be obtained by rearing the highly selected genetically improved farmed
tilapia and other strains.
Cryopreservation
4.3.1.5
The aim of the cryopreservation of gametes is related to:
}} disseminating semen from males obtained from selection programmes showing significant
response;
}} refreshing commercial populations in order to avoid the negative impact of bottlenecks;
}} directly assessing the rates of genetic gain in ongoing breeding programmes;
}} making semen available across the reproduction window when asynchrony of reproduction
exists between males and females (usually males mature earlier than females).
Sperm cryopreservation has been successfully implemented for a number of cultured finfish
and shellfish species, and modest success has been achieved in the cryopreservation of
shellfish embryos and early larvae. Cryopreservation of finfish ova and embryos has not
been successful, which is a major difference with respect to terrestrial animals. This is mainly
due to the size of the ova which are usually large and have thick chorionic membranes that
do not facilitate the inclusion of cryoprotectors.
The use of cryopreserved gametes for commercial purposes is still very limited in
developing countries. One explanation is that this biotechnology may require specialized
labour and automated procedures to decrease variability in success rates among batches of
sperm. Furthermore, it is still uncertain whether this method is economically advantageous
compared with disseminating improved broodstock using larval material. In spite of this,
the technology has been used for disseminating improved Jayanti rohu in India and for
the dissemination of improved semen in Sri Lanka (P. Routray, personal communication).
In rainbow trout, cryopreservation has been used for storing semen from neomales, but
the problem of highly variable fertilization success remains.
Genomics
4.3.1.6
Genomics is the study of the genomes of organisms. It includes the intensive efforts to
determine the entire DNA sequence of organisms via fine-scale genetic mapping.
Genome sequencing
One of the major constraints in the rearing of many different aquaculture species is the
lack of adequate genomic information. This is because sequencing all the species currently
Functional genomics
The recent availability of massive amounts of information from functional genomics
such as microarrays that are used to assess gene expression or sequence polymorphisms
has contributed significantly to the genomic biotechnology in aquaculture. Two colour
microarrays have been developed for salmonid species that are publicly available and are
currently used to assess disease resistance traits in salmon and for candidate gene discovery.
In shrimp, several platforms have been devised in China, Australia, Taiwan Province of
China, Singapore and also the United States (Wilson and de la Vega, 2005).
The main use of this resource has been to study differential expression of the transcriptome
after viral or bacterial acute infection, but also as bioindicators for assessing chronic disease
response. Microarrays are being applied to the fields of ecotoxicology and nutrigenomics.
For example, gene expression analysis has been used for assessing the effect of pre-
challenging white spot syndrome virus (WSSV) on different genes in order to investigate
the immunological mechanisms behind the genetic resistance and to assess potential genes
explaining disease resistance at the experimental level in the culture of Pacific whiteleg
shrimp (Litopenaeus vannamei) in Colombia. In Chile, the salmon microarray available
for the consortium for genomics research on all salmon project (cGRASP1) in Canada has
been used in collaboration with the University of Victoria for assessing disease resistance
of piscirickettsia and infectious pancreatic necrosis virus (IPNV) in Atlantic salmon.
Genetic modification
4.3.1.7
A genetically modified organism (GMO) is one whose genetic material has been altered
through genetic engineering techniques with DNA molecules from different sources that are
combined into one molecule to create a new set of genes. Typically, it involves introduction of
a single gene from an unrelated species. After about two decades of very intensive research, the
1 http://web.uvic.ca/grasp/
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 207
technology has reached the stage where it is possible to produce GM carp, tilapia and salmon.
However, no aquatic GMOs have yet been approved for commercial release for food and
agriculture purposes in any country. There are potential concerns about the environmental
impact of raising such fish (e.g. effects of possible interbreeding with native populations)
and the greater amount of feed required for sustaining the increased growth rates, as well as
problems with consumer acceptance, which may be one of the most important reasons that
transgenic technology has not developed beyond the experimental phase. Many developing
countries have yet to develop a clear policy on the use of transgenic fish.
Marker systems
Molecular markers are identifiable DNA sequences found at specific locations of the genome,
transmitted by standard Mendelian laws of inheritance from one generation to the next. They
rely on a DNA assay and a range of different kinds of molecular marker systems exist, such
as restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLPs), random amplified polymorphic
DNAs (RAPDs), amplified fragment length polymorphisms (AFLPs) and microsatellites.
The technology has improved in the past decade and faster, cheaper systems like SNPs are
increasingly being used. The different marker systems may vary in aspects such as their technical
requirements, the amount of time, money and labour needed and the number of genetic markers
that can be detected throughout the genome (reviewed in detail in FAO, 2007b). RAPDs and
AFLPs have been used extensively in aquaculture due to their relatively easy development,
i.e. they do not require construction of genomic libraries. Microsatellite markers are used
increasingly in aquaculture species (see the review by Liu and Cordes, 2004), due to their higher
polymorphic information content, codominant mode of expression, Mendelian inheritance,
abundance and broad distribution throughout the genome (Wright and Bentzen, 1994).
Molecular markers are being applied in developing countries in both aquaculture and
fisheries management. Here, an overview is provided on their use for parentage analysis
and genetic selection in aquaculture and for fisheries management and stock enhancement.
Parentage analysis
Molecular markers can be used successfully to trace alleles inherited by progeny from a
group of candidate parents, thus providing a means of parentage analysis. In many fish and
shellfish species, reproduction cannot be fully controlled and thus natural mating is the only
way to produce offspring for the next generation of a breeding programme. For example,
tilapia and carp breeding typically involves mass spawning where males and females are
stocked in large hapas suspended in ponds, where a relatively large number of parents
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 209
For most breeding programmes, physical tagging will prove efficient both in economic
and biological terms to achieve acceptable rates of genetic gain while minimizing rates
of inbreeding. Genetic marker technology can still be costly in developing countries for
routine assignment of parentage, although these costs can be reduced using multiplex PCR
technology in which more than one marker can be genotyped simultaneously in a single
gel lane or capillary (Paterson, Piertney and Knox, 2004). This is especially the case when
only DNA markers are used without physical tagging, since individuals must be re-typed
when records for multiple traits are included in the selection criteria (Gjerde, Villanueva
and Bentsen, 2002). When it is possible to isolate families, multistage selection offers the
possibility of first selecting individuals on a within-family basis directly from tanks or hapas
(for traits influenced by common environmental effects) and then selecting at a second
stage for traits measured at harvest. This alternative would maintain the rates of gain while
decreasing the costs associated with tagging, or even increase rates of gain, when recording
traits such as body weight from tanks (within families) that can be carried out relatively
inexpensively (Martinez et al., 2006).
Marker-assisted selection
Molecular markers can also be used in genetic improvement through MAS, where markers
physically located beside (or even within) genes of interest (such as those affecting growth
rates in salmon) are used to select favourable variants of the genes (FAO, 2007b). MAS
is made possible by the development of molecular marker maps, where many markers of
known location are interspersed at relatively short intervals throughout the genome and
the subsequent testing for statistical associations between marker variants and the traits of
interest. In this way, genes (called QTLs) thought to control quantitative traits (traits of
agronomic importance controlled by many genes and many non-genetic factors, such as
growth rate in fish) can be detected.
MAS can enhance rates of genetic gain compared with conventional breeding for traits
that are difficult or expensive to measure or when the heritability is relatively low. So far,
many QTLs have been identified in different experiments involving trout, salmon, carp and
tilapia, but the main problem with the actual use in MAS is to have enough replications or
powerful experiments to validate that the QTLs detected in a given experiment are actually
real, and are segregating across populations or crosses. Furthermore, many of the QTLs
detected were discovered using dominant markers such as RAPDs which are very difficult
to replicate in different laboratories, basically due to the use of insufficient sample sizes and
failure to account for the presence of false positives. This outcome is explained by the fact
that there is a lack of complete genome sequences for many of the species currently used in
aquaculture in developing countries such as tilapia, carp and shrimp. This is an important
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 211
the F2 design and a four-way cross between different species of Oreochromis have been
used for detecting QTLs affecting cold tolerance and body weight (Cnaani et al., 2003). In
outbred populations of salmonids, QTLs that influence body weight have been mapped
(Reid et al., 2005).
Studies seeking linkage of markers to traits amenable to MAS, such as disease resistance,
have begun to appear in the literature over the past few years. For example, QTLs for
resistance have been mapped for IPNV in salmonids (Ozaki et al., 2001; Houston et al.,
2008), infectious salmonid anaemia (Moen et al., 2007), infectious haematopoietic necrosis
virus (Rodriguez et al., 2004; Khoo et al., 2004) and stress and immune response (Cnaani et
al., 2004) and cold tolerance in tilapia (Moen et al., 2003). Also, Somorjai, Danzmann and
Ferguson (2003) reported evidence of QTLs for upper thermal tolerance in salmonids, with
differing effects in different species and genetic backgrounds. To date, there are no examples
of the application of these QTLs in practical fish and shellfish breeding programmes in
developed or developing countries.
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 213
Bonamia ostreae, Marteilia refringens and Herpes virus). Immunoassays and nucleic acid
assays provide quick results with high sensitivity and specificity at relatively low cost, and
are particularly valuable for infections that are difficult to detect (e.g. subclinical infections)
using standard histology and tissue culture procedures. Molecular tools are also useful for
research into the pathology and immunology of specific infections. They can be used with
non-lethal sampling and are valuable for monitoring challenge experiments under controlled
laboratory conditions. Further development of these technologies is likely to speed up the
detection (field monitoring and laboratory examination) and diagnosis of disease, which
is crucial for early and effective control of emergent disease situations.
Antibody-based techniques
A variety of antibody-based tests and molecular tests have been developed to detect
mainly bacterial and viral fish pathogens, although tests have also recently been reported
for parasites and fungal agents. The antibody-based tests include slide agglutination,
co-agglutination/latex agglutination, immunodiffusion, direct and indirect fluorescent
antibody tests, immunohistochemistry and ELISA, dot blot/dip-stick and Western blot.
The antibody-based test selected for the identification of pathogens depends on a variety
of factors since each method has its merits and disadvantages. Although such methods are
useful for the detection of pathogens in pure culture or/and in infected fish tissue, their
sensitivity thresholds limit their use in environmental samples, especially where pathogen
levels are extremely low. DNA detection methods, however, such as PCR and ISH are
ideally suited.
DNA-based techniques
Molecular technologies are also widely used for the detection of fish pathogens (Adams
and Thompson, 2006 and 2008). They have been successfully utilized for the detection
and identification of low levels of aquatic pathogens. Such methods are also particularly
useful for micro-organisms that are difficult to culture, may exist in a dormant state, are
involved in zoonosis, or in the elucidation of pathogen life cycles. In addition, molecular
methods can be used for the identification of pathogens to the species level (Puttinaowarat,
Thompson and Adams, 2000) and in epidemiology for the identification of individual strains
and differentiating closely related strains (Cowley et al., 1999). Because of the general
unavailability of the traditional pathogen isolation methods and immunodiagnostics for
molluscs and crustaceans, molecular techniques have increasingly been used (Lightner,
1996; Lightner and Redman, 1998; Berthe, Burreson and Hine, 1999).
DNA-based methods such as PCR are extremely sensitive. However, false positive
and false negative results can cause problems due to contamination or inhibition (Morris,
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 215
and certification of production and facilities and consignments for freedom from specific
pathogens; achieving recognition of a country as having disease-free status; and implementing
disease zoning programmes and effective quarantine measures etc. (Bernoth, 2008).
The Manual of Diagnostic Tests for Aquatic Animals, regularly published by the World
Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), validates the use of traditional diagnostic methods
such as evaluation of clinical signs, necropsy, histopathology, parasitology, bacteriology,
virology, mycology etc., as well as immunological tests such as ELISA for the presumptive
and confirmatory identification of OIE-listed diseases. The introduction to the Manual
notes that For the most part, molecular methods for fish diseases are recommended for
either direct detection of the pathogen in clinically diseased fish or for the confirmatory
identification of a disease agent isolated using the traditional method. With one or two
exceptions, molecular techniques are currently not acceptable as screening methods to
demonstrate the absence of a specific disease agent in a fish population for the purpose of
health certification in connection with international trade of live fish and/or their products.
There is a need for more validation of molecular methods for this purpose before they can
be recommended in the Aquatic Manual (OIE, 2009; see also Adams and Thompson, 2008).
This highlights the importance of further validating these diagnostic tools for serious and
emerging diseases across a range of different laboratories worldwide.
4.3.2.2Vaccines
Adams et al. (2008) reviewed the vaccine technologies in aquaculture. Vaccination is the
action in which a host organism is exposed to organic (biological) molecules that allow
the host to mount a specific immune reaction through which it has a better capability to
fight subsequent infections of a specific pathogen compared with genetically similar non-
vaccinated hosts. It has also been shown to be cost-effective and has led to the reduction
in use of antibiotics. In Norway, for example, antibiotic use has decreased from 47 tons to
approximately one ton annually (Markestad and Grave, 1997 and Figure 4).
A wide range of commercial vaccines is available against bacterial and viral pathogens
and many new vaccines are under development. Most target salmon and trout, and there are
expanding opportunities for marine fish (Thompson and Adams, 2004). Traditionally, the
organic molecules used for vaccination are directly derived from the pathogen in question.
The most straightforward approach is to culture the pathogen after it has been inactivated
and presented to the host. So far, vaccines containing more than ten bacterial pathogens and
five viral pathogens have been produced based on such inactivated antigens (Sommerset
et al., 2005). Alternatively, the pathogen is not inactivated but chemically or genetically
weakened so as to survive only for a limited period in the host where it induces a specific
immune response without causing disease and mortality. Such vaccines are generally described
FIGURE 4
900
800
100 Use of antibiotics in fish
700
Fish production
80 600
500
60
400
40 300
200
20
100
0
0
1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
Year
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 217
As molecular-based vaccine production procedures rely heavily on biotechnological tools,
vaccines are produced mainly in developed countries. A DNA vaccine is a circular DNA
plasmid that contains a gene for a protective antigenic protein from a pathogen of interest
(Kurath, 2008). Considerable industrial research has been conducted towards developing
DNA vaccines for species such as salmonids against pathogens (generally viruses) for which
traditional methods have not been successful. As many strains and varieties of a single
pathogen are generally present in the tropics, unlike in temperate pathogens, monovalent
vaccines are not practical under tropical conditions. Such difficulties, together with the lack
of adequate biotechnological knowledge and financial resources, have led to fewer advances
in vaccine development in the tropics, and for tropical species. Commercial vaccines using
inactivated bacterial pathogens are available for some species: channel catfish, European
seabass and seabream, Japanese amberjack and yellowtail, tilapia, Atlantic cod, salmon
and trout (Sommerset et al., 2005). Fewer commercially available viral vaccines have been
produced, and no commercially available parasite vaccines exist.
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 219
red tide episodes have recently become more common (Jessup et al., 2009). Warm episodic
currents also play a key role in causing large economic losses through mass mortalities of
fish (Kedong et al., 1999).
To date, the detection of toxins due to algal blooms is carried out using mouse bioassays
and high performance liquid chromatography, but new methodologies are being developed
for detection of Alexandrium catenella (Uribe and Espejo, 2003). Expressed sequence tag
(EST) libraries are now publicly available (Uribe et al., 2008), so that it may be possible
to develop molecular diagnostic techniques. To improve the prevention of impacts on
aquaculture, PCR techniques and EST libraries can be used also to assist the early detection
of toxin-producing algae in vast marine areas.
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 221
4.3.5 Concluding remarks
Compared with livestock and crop production, aquaculture is a novel production system
in many developing and developed countries. As shown above, biotechnologies are being
applied in fisheries management but their use is very limited compared with aquaculture.
The use of successful and effective biotechnologies in aquaculture is very much confined
to genetic manipulations and improvements, and to health management.
The success or failure in using biotechnologies in developing countries depends to a
large extent on: 1) the markets for each of the products within the production sectors, and
2) the investment and acquisition capacity for the fisheries and aquaculture sectors. In the
case of aquaculture, the latter is very important considering that the largest proportion of
world production comes from developing countries and from small farmers (specifically in
Asia). Most biotechnological interventions have been developed for improved production
and the better management of aquaculture. Most have been targeted towards high value
commercial aquaculture species generally produced for international markets. Although
many small-scale farmers are producing for export markets, the significant uptake of many
biotechnological interventions and innovations has generally been restricted to commercial
or industrial aquaculture operations. This is certainly due to the cost of the technologies
as well as the organized nature of industrial aquaculture.
Recently, however, as a result of better organization in the small-scale farming sector,
certain biotechnologies have been effectively taken up by the small farmers in many parts
of the developing world. They include DNA probes for detecting pathogens in some
species (mainly PCR detection of major viral pathogens of shrimp), the use of SPF shrimp
broodstock or postlarvae, the use of certain DNA vaccines, the all-male (genetically male)
tilapia and, in some cases, markers for pedigree evaluation in salmon worldwide. In fact,
almost everywhere in the world, shrimp farmers, whether small or large, currently use
only PCR-tested postlarvae for stocking. For example, in India there are more than 90
laboratories providing PCR services for the shrimp sector mainly for the screening of
seed and broodstock. In Vietnam, there are over 40 laboratories. This pattern holds true in
many countries of the region as the cost of using such biotechnologies has declined over
the years and the benefits have increased tremendously.
As mentioned above, the majority of aquaculture produce comes from the small-scale
farming sector, in many instances comprising low-input extensive production systems.
Although there is scope for biotechnologies, and although they are already being employed by
small-scale farmers, classical environmental improvements and better management practices
such as conventional genetic selection of broodstock, conventional health management
through the avoidance of pathogens etc., can also contribute significantly towards improving
small-scale aquaculture production and sustainability.
Biotechnologies are used in aquaculture for reducing losses due to diseases and improving
production through genetic manipulation. These technologies are regularly used in almost
all countries at different rates and levels based on the intensity and commerciality of the
production system. Here, two case studies are presented, outlining specific successful
applications of biotechnological tools in aquaculture in developing countries.
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 223
small- and marginal-scale farmers located in the remote villages of the country. They are
largely unorganized, scattered and poorly educated. The farmers mostly opt for traditional
methods for operating their farms and do not have access to technological innovations or
scientific applications. A joint MPEDA-NACA (Marine Products Export Development
Authority Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific) project assisted by FAO
was initiated in 2002 to support shrimp farmers in disease control and coastal management,
leading to the participatory development of BMPs that provided significant improvements
in profits and reduced shrimp disease risks for farmers. One of the key interventions that
the farmers adopted in applying BMPs in their quest to reduce losses due to disease was
the use of PCR-screened postlarvae for stocking.
The project supported farmers in the implementation of BMPs through the formation
of self-help groups around local clusters. An economic analysis of 15 farmer groups in
Andhra Pradesh clearly demonstrated that farmers adopting BMPs including the use of
PCR-screened postlarvae for stocking had higher profitability, lower production costs and
were able to produce quality and traceable shrimp without using any banned chemicals.
The project has been highly successful in forming a self-help movement of farmers
across India through a grassroots approach. From a mere five farmers who first adopted
the cluster-farm approach and BMPs in 2002, the programme had swelled to more than
1000 farmers in 30 aquaculture societies in five coastal states by 2007. Beginning in 2007,
the MPEDA-NACA project became the National Centre for Sustainable Aquaculture
(NaCSA). NaCSA is an outreach organization of MPEDA established to service the small-
scale aquaculture sector and provide technical support to farmer groups. It aims to empower
and build the capacity of small-scale farmers to produce quality shrimps in a sustainable
and more profitable manner.
Perhaps one of the keys to the above success is the ability to reduce losses due to disease
in production systems, and to a large extent this has been possible through the use of PCR
technology for screening and detecting major viral pathogens in broodstock and postlarvae.
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 225
Creating an enabling public sector environment is essential to improve governance
at all levels of aquaculture development. There have been many regulatory rebounds in
the aquaculture sector, in particular in shrimp farming in some countries. Uncontrolled
and unregulated development of the sector has outstripped the carrying capacity in some
locations, causing significant production losses mainly due to disease and resulting in the
complete abandonment of farms. Significant improvements have been made in mitigating
such catastrophic problems, and the negative environmental and social impacts of shrimp
farming throughout the world have been significantly reduced. The use of wild-caught
postlarvae in shrimp culture, which has a significant impact on aquatic biodiversity, has
almost stopped or is little practised. The recent development of SPF broodstocks of some
species of shrimp has reduced reliance on wild-caught postlarvae to a minimum.
SPF shrimp if produced and maintained under good biosecurity have proved successful.
The success of SPF stocks may be more pronounced in large-scale industrial shrimp culture
facilities where maintaining stringent biosecurity is possible. The use of this successful
biotechnological approach in the rather disorganized small-scale shrimp aquaculture
production sector poses another challenge (FAO, 2004b).
Environmental sustainability
Aquaculture is the fastest growing food producing sector in the world. It is poised to
expand, diversify and intensify over the coming decades to bridge the increasing global
gap between the supply and demand of aquatic food. Responsible production through
sustainable practices is the key to achieving this massive task. In the effort to maximize the
contribution from aquaculture it is inevitable that many constraints and hurdles need to be
overcome. The biggest hurdle is to maintain environmental sustainability,
Conventional methods of controlling diseases such as chemotherapeutants are ineffective
for many new pathogens (notably viruses). Molecular techniques have therefore received
increasing attention for pathogen screening and identification. In addition, these biotechnologies
are providing significant insights into pathogenesis (disease development) and show strong
potential for disease control and prevention programmes (e.g. DNA vaccines), as well as
for treatments of diseases. The increased sensitivity and specificity conferred by DNA- or
RNA-based probes has provided significant inroads for the early detection of diseases and
identification of subclinical carriers of infections. This has had a direct effect on enhancing
preventative management and control of disease in cultured species. Concomitant with this
has been a decrease in the need for reactive treatments using traditional methodologies such
as antibiotics or culling and disinfection. This has been particularly successful for shrimp
broodstock selection and has broken the infection cycle perpetuated for years by accidental
broodstock transmission of viral pathogens to developing offspring.
Biotechnologies can provide much assistance to improve aquatic animal health management
in aquaculture in developing countries, in particular through the development of sensitive
and accurate molecular diagnostic methods and tools as well as vaccines for tropical diseases.
Bioremediation and probiotics also provide some further opportunities.
Climate change
In the future, one of the greatest constraints could be the impact of climate change on
aquaculture. Climate change threatens fisheries and aquaculture through higher temperatures
and changes in weather patterns, water quality and supply. Important differences in the
magnitude and types of impacts on aquaculture are predicted for different regions. The ability
to adapt will confer a major advantage and should be developed by countries and regions.
There is a need for the aquaculture sector to join other economic sectors in preparing to
address the potential impact of global warming. One of the practical responses to climate
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 227
change for aquaculture could be to strengthen the adaptive capacity and resilience of the
sector, particularly those of small farmers and aquatic resources users. Increased resilience
is a desirable feature of any sector. It can mitigate the future impact of unforeseen events
(e.g. economic change, disease epidemics, tsunamis, etc.), including those related to climate.
There is some knowledge and experience from aquaculture itself, and from the broader
area of agriculture and natural resource management, which could be used. Aquaculture,
and particularly mariculture, could in fact provide adaptation opportunities to produce
good quality protein when freshwater may become scarce. On the other hand, freshwater
aquaculture can produce protein with higher water saving than other animal production
sectors. Certain biotechnologies, particularly those dealing with genetic improvement, health
and environmental mitigation should be of significant value for the discovery of adaptive
technologies and interventions to counter the ever-present menace of climate change.
To bridge the future gap between demand and supply of aquatic food, production needs to
be almost double in less than three decades. In the quest to meet this unprecedented demand,
the aquaculture sector will face serious constraints. Four major constraints are inevitable:
1) disease prevention and health management, 2) genetic improvement and domestication,
3) environmental management and 4) food safety. These constraints are not new. They
have been constantly addressed during the development of aquaculture over the past two
decades, including through the use of biotechnologies.
Over the years, aquaculture biotechnologies and other technological innovations
have had a positive impact on aquaculture diversification, investment potential, and
international technology exchange. The development of biotechnologies in aquaculture
should therefore provide a means of producing healthy and fast-growing animals by
environmentally friendly means. However, this development will largely depend on the desire
and willingness of producers to work hand-in-hand with scientists, and on the international
donor communitys readiness to assist developing counties in the related research, capacity
building and infrastructure development. Improved exchange of information and discussion
between scientists, researchers and producers from different regions about their problems
and achievements will undoubtedly help this important sector to develop with a view to
increasing sustainable global aquatic animal production.
Based on the overview and analysis contained in this Chapter, a number of specific
options can be identified for developing countries to help them make informed decisions
regarding the adoption of biotechnologies in the future, such as when and if they should
deploy one or more biotechnologies and, if they decide to do so, how they can ensure the
successful application of the chosen biotechnologies to enhance food security in the future.
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 229
appropriate biotechnologies that can help the development of sustainable aquaculture
in this area. National governments embarking on aquaculture development should
also recognize that there is ample evidence for positive aquatic environmental impacts
using various biotechnological interventions, and therefore the use of biotechnology
for improving the aquatic environment should be considered.
}} Until recently, perhaps because the application of biotechnologies in fisheries and
aquaculture has been mainly restricted to the commercial and industrial aquaculture
of temperate species, there has been little evidence in many developing countries of
national-level efforts to prioritize the development and application of biotechnologies
in aquaculture. Even when efforts were made to develop such technologies in the
public sector of developing countries, they were not always directed towards or
made available to improve small-farmer livelihoods. There is a need to create national
policy environments in developing countries, including suitable investment and
funding opportunities, to allow the development and application of appropriate
biotechnologies in support of aquaculture development. National governments
should pay special attention to the small-scale aquaculture sector. Preferential
treatment of the sector towards capacity building in appropriate biotechnologies
should also be considered.
}} The funding required in developing countries for aquatic biotechnological research
and applications should be found through national budgets or through extra budgetary
resources. An integral part of funding should be directed towards investment in
capacity building in the relevant fields of the aquaculture sector. A suitable investment
environment and funding opportunities should be created to allow the development
and application of appropriate biotechnologies in support of aquaculture development.
The appropriate involvement of the relevant stakeholders in decision-making processes
should be assured.
}} The establishment of efficient institutional structures and enforceable legal frameworks
are important for the responsible use of biotechnologies in aquaculture at the
national level. Such institutional arrangements should also strengthen research
and extension needs and enhance relevant human and infrastructural capacities.
National legal frameworks in aquaculture biotechnologies should be developed
within an integrated national biotechnology framework, which also complies with
the legal or voluntary requirements of international treaties and agreements that
the country has ratified.
}} National biotechnology programmes in developing countries should include a special
committee to oversee the aquatic biotechnology programme and research. Such committees
should be formed in all countries and regional cooperation should be sought.
The international community, including FAO and other UN organizations, NGOs, donors
and development agencies, can play a key role in supporting developing countries by
providing a framework for international cooperation and funding support for the generation,
adaptation and adoption of appropriate biotechnologies. Here, a set of Priorities for Action
is identified that can assist the international community in playing this role.
}} Relevant international institutions, donors and development partners should recognize
that biotechnological interventions can contribute to sustainable aquaculture development
worldwide.
}} Relevant international agencies should assist developing countries to collect, collate and
analyse information about the biotechnologies in use in fisheries and aquaculture, and
their contributions to national food security, poverty alleviation and social development.
}} Relevant international agencies should make efforts to maintain databases and information
systems to assist countries access information for national biotechnology development
programmes relating to fisheries and aquaculture.
}} Donors and international funding agencies supporting sustainable aquaculture
development for food security and poverty alleviation should dedicate an appropriate
share of their assistance projects to promoting and strengthening aquatic biotechnology
R&D in developing countries. International research efforts should focus on developing
interventions that are accessible to small-scale farmers.
}} When supporting the application of biotechnologies in fisheries and aquaculture, the
international community should consider that technical assistance in biotechnology R&D
should not be done at the expense of funding for other key research fields and that it
should support effective and intimate links to strong breeding and extension programmes.
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 231
}} The international community assisting developing countries towards aquaculture
sustainability should consider biotechnological advancement as an important area to
be supported, and should assist developing countries in strengthening capacities for
biotechnology policy development and long-term planning.
}} The international community should assist developing countries to develop the capacities
of their national agricultural research systems, which include aquaculture, to involve
relevant stakeholders in decision-making processes.
}} The international community should assist developing countries in establishing adequate
institutional capacities for the development and enforcement of regulations related to
use of biotechnologies in fisheries and aquaculture.
Adams, A. & Thompson, K.D. 2006. Biotechnology offers revolution to fish health management. Trends
Biotechnol., 24: 201205.
Adams, A. & Thompson, K.D. 2008. Recent applications of biotechnology to novel diagnostics for aquatic
animals. Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz., 27: 197209.
Adams, A., Aoki, T., Berthe, F.C.J., Grisez, L. & Karunasagar, I. 2008. Recent technological advancements on
aquatic animal health and their contributions toward reducing disease risks - a review. In M.G. Bondad-
Reantaso, C.V. Mohan, M. Crumlish & R.P. Subasinghe, eds. Diseases in Asian aquaculture VI. Manila,
Philippines, Fish Health Section, Asian Fisheries Society.
Agnse, J.F., Adpo-Gourne, B., Abban, E.K. & Fermon, Y. 1997. Genetic differentiation among natural
populations of the Nile tilapia Oreochromis niloticus (Teleostei, Cichlidae). Heredity, 79: 88-96.
Agustin, L.Q. 1999. Effects of population bottlenecks on levels of genetic diversity and patterns of differentiation
in feral populations of Oreochromis mossambicus. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane,
Australia. (PhD thesis).
Aoki, T., Hirono, I., de Castro, T. & Kitao, T. 1989. Rapid identification of Vibrio anguillarum by colony
hybridization. J. Appl. Ichthyol., 5: 6773.
Asknes, A., Gjerde, B. & Roald, S.O. 1986. Biological chemical and organoleptic changes during maturation
of farmed Atlantic salmon. Aquaculture, 53: 720.
Basant, K., Tiwary, R., Kirubagaran & A.K. Ray. 2004. The biology of triploid fish. Rev. Fish Biol. Fish., 14:
391-402.
Basavaraju, Y., Mair, G.C., Mohan Kumar, H.M., Pradeep Kumar, S., Keshavappa, G.Y. & Penman D.J.
2002. An evaluation of triploidy as a potential solution to the problem of precocious sexual maturation
in common carp, Cyprinus carpio, in Karnataka, India. Aquaculture, 204: 407418.
Bell, J.D., Bartley, D.M., Lorenzen, K. & Loneragand, N.R. 2006. Restocking and stock enhancement of
coastal fisheries potential, problems and progress. Fish. Res., 80: 18.
Benfey, T.J. 1999. The physiology and behavior of triploid fish. Res. Fish. Sci., 7: 3967.
Benfey, T.J., Solar, I., De Jong, G. & Donaldson, E.M. 1986. Flow-cytometric confirmation of aneuploidy in
sperm from triploid rainbow trout. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc., 115: 838840.
Benmansour, A. & de Kinkelin, P. 1997. Live fish vaccines: History and perspectives. In R. Gudding, A.
Lillehaug, P.J. Midtlyng, & F. Brown, eds. Fish Vaccinol. Dev. Biol. Stand., pp. 279289. Basel, Karger.
Bernoth, E. 2008. The role of OIE aquatic standards and OIE Reference Laboratories in aquatic animal disease
prevention and control. Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz., 27: 3954.
Berthe, F., Burreson, E. & Hine, M. 1999. Use of molecular tools for mollusc disease diagnosis. Bull. Euro.
Ass. Fish Pathol., 19: 277278.
Bijma, P., van Arendonk, J.A.M. & Bovenhuis, H. 1997. Breeding value and variance component estimation
from data containing inbred individuals: Application to gynogenetic families in common carp. (Cyprinus
carpio L.). Genetics, 145: 12431249.
Bondad-Reantaso, M.G., Subasinghe, R.P., Arthur, J.R., Ogawa, K., Chinabut, S., Adlard, R., Tan, Z. &
Shariff, M. 2005. Disease and health management in Asian aquaculture. Vet. Parasitol., 132: 249272.
Brown, C.R., Woolliams, J.A. & McAndrew, B.J. 2005. Factors influencing effective population size in
commercial populations of gilthead seabream, Sparus aurata. Aquaculture, 247: 219225.
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 233
Carnegie, R.B., Meyer, G.R., Blackbourn J., Cochennec-Laureau, N., Berthe, F.C.J. & Bower, S.M. 2003.
Detection of the oyster parasite Mikrocytos mackini by PCR and fluorescent in situ hybridization, and a
preliminary phylogenetic analysis using SSU rDNA. Dis. Aquat. Org., 54(3): 219227.
Choubert, G. & Blanc, J. 1989. Dynamics of dietary canthaxanthin utilization in sexually maturing female
rainbow trout (Salmo gairdneri Rich.) compared to triploids. Aquaculture, 83: 359366.
Cnaani, A., Hallerman, E.M., Ron, M., Weller, J.I., Indelman, M., Kashi, Y., Gall, G.A.E. & Hulata, G. 2003.
Detection of a chromosomal region with two quantitative trait loci, affecting cold tolerance and fish size,
in an F2 tilapia hybrid. Aquaculture, 223: 117128.
Cnaani, A., Zilberman, N., Tinman, S., Hulata, G. & Ron, M. 2004. Genome-scan analysis for quantitative
trait loci in an F2 tilapia hybrid. Mol. Genet. Genom., 272: 162172.
Cochennec, N., Le Roux, F., Berthe, F. & Gerard, A. 2000. Detection of Bonamia ostreae based on small
subunit ribosomal probe. J. Invertebr. Pathol., 76: 2632
Coimbra, M.R., Kobayashi, M.K., Koretsugu, S., Hasegawa, O., Ohara, E., Ozaki, A., Sakamoto, T.,
Naruse, K. & Okamoto. N. 2003. A genetic linkage map of the Japanese flounder, Paralichthys olivaceus.
Aquaculture, 220: 203218.
Cowley, J.A., Dimmock, C.M., Wongteerasupaya, C., Boonsaeng, V., Panyim, S. & Walker, P.J. 1999. Yellow
head virus from Thailand and gill-associated virus from Australia are closely related but distinct prawn
viruses. Dis. Aquat. Org., 36: 153157.
Cunningham, C.O. 2004. Use of molecular diagnostic tests in disease control: Making the leap from laboratory
to field application. In K.Y. Leung, ed. Current trends in the study of bacterial and viral fish and shrimp
diseases. Mol. Aspects Fish Marine Biol., 3: 292312. World Scientific Publishing Co.
Doyle, W. & Herbinger C.M. 1994. The use of DNA fingerprinting for high-intensity, within-family selection
in fish breeding. Proceedings 5th world congress on genetics applied to livestock production Vol. 19, pp.
36437. Ontario, Canada, Department of Animal and Poultry Science, University of Guelph.
Falconer, D.S. & Mackay, T.F.C. 1996. Introduction to quantitative genetics, 4th Edn. Harrow, Essex, UK, Longman.
FAO. 1995. Selective breeding programmes or medium-sized fish farms, by D. Tave. FAO Fisheries Technical
Paper Series 352. Rome. (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/field/009/v8720e/V8720E00.htm).
FAO. 2000. DNA-based molecular diagnostic techniques: Research needs for standardization and validation
of the detection of aquatic animal pathogens and diseases, by P. Walker & R.P. Subasinghe. Report and
proceedings of the expert workshop on DNA-based molecular diagnostic techniques: Research needs for
standardization and validation for the detection of aquatic animal pathogens and diseases. Bangkok,
Thailand, 79 February 1999. FAO Fish Technical Paper 395. Rome. (also available at www.fao.org/
DOCREP/005/X4946E/x4946e00.htm)
FAO. 2003. Recent technological innovations in aquaculture, by R.P. Subasinghe, D. Curry, S.E. McGladdery
& D. Bartley. In Review of the state of world aquaculture, pp. 5974. FAO Fisheries Circular No. 886.
Rome. (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/005/y4490e/y4490e00.HTM).
FAO. 2004a. Tilapias as alien aquatics in Asia and the Pacific: A review, by S.S. de Silva, R.P. Subasinghe, D.M.
Bartley & A. Lowther, A. FAO Fisheries Technical Paper No. 453. Rome. (also available at www.fao.org/
docrep/007/y5728e/y5728e00.htm).
FAO. 2004b. Introductions and movement of Penaeus vannamei and Penaeus stylirostris in Asia and the Pacific, by
M. Briggs, S. Funge-Smith, R.P. Subasinghe & M. Phillips. RAP Publication 2004/10. FAO Regional Office
for Asia and the Pacific, Bangkok. (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/007/ad505e/ad505e00.htm).
FAO. 2005a. Fisheries issues. Impact of aquaculture on biodiversity, by D. Bartley, H. Naeve & R.P. Subasinghe.
In FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Department [online]. Rome. Updated 27 May 2005. Rome. (available
at www.fao.org/fishery/topic/14853/en).
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 235
Houssay, B.A. 1930. Accin sexual de la hipfisis en los peces y reptiles. Revista de la Sociedad Argentina de
Biologa, 106: 686688.
Houston, R.D., Haley, C.S., Hamilton, A., Guy, D.R., Tinch, A.E., Taggart, J.B., McAndrew, B.J. & Bishop
S.C. 2008. Major quantitative trait loci affect resistance to infectious pancreatic necrosis in Atlantic
Salmon (Salmo salar). Genetics, 178: 11091115.
Hulata, G., Wohlfarth, G. & Moav, R. 1985. Genetic differences between the Chinese and European races of
the common carp, Cyprinus carpio L. IV. Effects of sexual maturation on growth patterns. J. Fish. Biol.,
26: 95103.
IFOP. 1996. PROYECTO FIP N 9615: Migracin de jurel desde y hacia la ZEE de Chile central. Instituto
de Fomento Pesquero.
Jessup, D.A., Miller, M.A., Ryan, J.P., Nevins, H.M., Kerkering, H.A., Mekebri, A., Crane, D.B., Johnson,
T.A. & Kudela, R.M. 2009. Mass stranding of marine birds caused by a surfactant-producing red tide.
PLoS ONE, 4(2): e4550.
Karunasagar, I. & Karunasagar, I. 1999. Diagnosis, treatment and prevention of microbial diseases of fish and
shellfish. Curr. Sci., 76: 387399.
Kedong, P., Harrison. J., Chen, J. & Huang, W. 1999. Red tides during spring 1998 in Hong Kong: Is El Nino
responsible? Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser., 187: 289294.
Khoo, S.K., Ozaki, A., Nakamura, F., Arakawa, T., Ishimoto, S., Nickolov, R., Sakamoto, T., Akutsu, T.,
Mochizuki, M., Denda, I. & Okamoto, N. 2004. Identification of a novel chromosomal region associated
with infectious hematopoietic necrosis (IHN) resistance in rainbow trout. Fish Path., 39: 95102.
Kocher, T.D., Lee, W.J., Sobolewska, H., Penman, D. & McAndrew, B. 1998. A genetic linkage map of a
cichlid fish, the tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus). Genetics, 148: 12251232.
Kurath, G. 2008. Biotechnology and DNA vaccines for aquatic animals. Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz., 27:
175196.
Lallias, D., Lapegue, S., Hecquet, C., Boudry, P. & Beaumont, A.R. 2007. AFLP-based genetic linkage maps
of the blue mussel (Mytilus edulis). Anim. Genet., 38(4): 340349.
Le Roux, F., Audemard, C., Barnaud, A. & Berthe, F.C.J. 1999. DNA probes as potential tools for the
detection of Marteilia refringens. Marine Biotechnol., 1 (6): 588597.
Lee, B.Y., Lee, W.J., Streelman, J.T., Carleton, K.L., Howe, A.E., Hulata, G., Slettan, A., Stern, J.E., Terai,
Y. & Kocher, T.D. 2005. A secondgeneration genetic linkage map of tilapia (Oreochromis spp). Genetics,
170: 237244.
Lightner, D.V. 1996. A handbook of shrimp pathology and diagnostic procedures for diseases of cultured penaeid
shrimp. Baton Rouge, LA, USA, World Aquaculture Society.
Lightner, D.V. & Redman, R.M. 1998. Shrimp disease and current diagnostic methods. Aquaculture, 164:
201220.
Liu, Z.J. & Cordes, J.F. 2004. DNA marker technologies and their applications in aquaculture genetics.
Aquaculture, 238: 137.
Lo, C.F., Chang, Y.S. & Chen, C.T. 1998. PCR monitoring of cultured shrimp for white spot syndrome virus
(WSSV) infection in growth ponds. In T.W. Flegel, ed. Advances in shrimp biotechnology, pp. 281 286.
Bangkok, National Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology.
Mair, G.C. 1999. Genetic improvement of tilapias: application in aquaculture and future prospects. The 5th
Roche aquaculture conference, pp. 86107. Bangkok, August 26, 1999. Rovithai, Bangkok, Thailand.
Markestad, A. & Grave, K. 1997. Reduction of antibacterial drug use in Norwegian fish farming due to vaccination.
In R. Gudding, A. Lillehaug, P.J. Midtlyng, & F. Brown, eds. Fish Vaccinol. Dev. Biol. Stand. Basel, Karger.
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 237
Purdom, C.E. 1983. Genetic engineering by the manipulation of chromosomes. Aquaculture, 33: 287300.
Puttinaowarat, S., Thompson, K.D. & Adams, A. 2000. Mycobacteriosis: Detection and identification of
aquatic Mycobacterium species. Fish Vet. J., 5:621.
Reid, D.P., Szanto, A., Glebe, B., Danzmann, R.G. & Ferguson, M.M. 2005. QTL for body weight and
condition factor in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar): Comparative analysis with rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus
mykiss) and Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus). Hered., 94: 166172.
Rodriguez, F.M., LaPatra, S., Williams, S., Famula, T. & May, B. 2004. Genetic markers associated with
resistance to infectious hematopoietic necrosis in rainbow and steelhead trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss)
backcrosses. Aquaculture, 241: 93115.
Routray, P., Verma, D.K., Sarkar S. & Sarangi N. 2007. Recent advances in carp seed production and milt
cryopreservation. Fish Physiol. Biochem., 33: 413427.
Sakamoto, T., Danzmann, R.G., Gharbi, K., Howard, P., Ozaki, A., Khoo, S.K., Woram, R.A., Okamoto,
N., Ferguson, M.M., Holm, L.-E., Guyomard, R. & Hoyheim, B. 2000. A microsatellite linkage map
of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) characterized by large sex-specific differences in recombination
rates. Genetics, 155: 13311345.
Smith, P. 2008. Antimicrobial resistance in aquaculture. Rev. Sci.Tech. Off. Int. Epiz., 27(1): 243-264.
Sommerset, I., Krossoy, B., Biering, E. & Frost, P. 2005. Vaccines for fish in aquaculture. Expert Rev. Vaccines,
4: 89101.
Somorjai, I.M., Danzmann, R.G. & Ferguson, M.M. 2003. Distribution of temperature tolerance QTL in
Arctic charr (Salvelinus alpinus) and inferred homologies in rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss).
Genetics, 165: 14431456.
Snsteb, J.H., Borgstrm, R. & Heun, M. 2006. Genetic structure of brown trout (Salmo trutta L.) from the
Hardangervidda mountain plateau (Norway) analyzed by microsatellite DNA: A basis for conservation
guidelines. Conserv. Genet., 8: 3344.
Starkey, W.G., Millar, R.M., Jenkins, M.E., Ireland, J.H., Muir, K.F. & Richards, R.H. 2004. Detection
of piscine nodaviruses by real-time nucleic acid sequence based amplification (NASBA). Dis. Aquat.
Organ., 59: 93100.
Stokes, N.A. & Burreson, E.M. 1995. A sensitive and specific DNA probe for the oyster pathogen
Haplosporidium nelsoni. J. Eukaryot. Microbiol., 42: 350357.
Subasinghe, R.P. 2009. Aquaculture development and blue revolution. In Fisheries, sustainability and
development. Royal Swedish Academy of Agriculture and Forestry, pp. 281301. Stockholm, Sweden.
Subasinghe, R.P., Soto, D. & Jia, J. 2009. Global aquaculture and its role in sustainable development. Rev.
Aquac., 1: 29.
Tang, K.F.J. & Lightner, D.V. 1999. A yellow head virus gene probe: application to in situ hybridization and
determination of its nucleotide sequence. Dis. Aquat. Organ., 35: 165173.
Tang, K.F.J., Pantoja, C.R., Poulos, B.T., Redman, R.M. & Lightner, D.V. 2005. In situ hybridization
demonstrates that Litopenaeus vannamei, L. stylirostris and Penaeus monodon are susceptible to
experimental infections with infectious myonecrosis virus (IMNV). Dis. Aquat. Organ., 63: 261265.
Tenesa, A., Navarro, P., Hayes, B.J., Duffy, D.L., Clarke, G.M., Goddard, M.E. & Visscher, P.M. 2007. Recent
human effective population size estimated from linkage disequilibrium. Genome Res., 17: 520526.
Thompson, K.D. & Adams, A. 2004. Current trends in immunotherapy and vaccine development for bacterial
diseases of fish. In K.Y. Leung, ed. Molecular aspects of fish and marine biology Vol. 3 Current trends in
the study of bacterial and viral fish and shrimp diseases. Chapter 13.
chapte r 4 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Aquaculture and Fisheries in Developing Countries 239
chapter 5
Current Status and Options for
Biotechnologies in Food Processing and
in Food Safety in Developing Countries
Summary
Food processing converts relatively bulky, perishable and typically inedible raw materials
into more useful, shelf-stable and palatable foods or potable beverages. It also contributes
to food security by minimizing waste and loss in the food chain and by increasing food
availability and marketability. Food is also processed to improve its quality and safety.
Biotechnology makes use of microbial inoculants to enhance properties such as the taste,
aroma, shelf-life, texture and nutritional value of foods through fermentation which is also
widely applied to produce microbial cultures, enzymes, flavours, fragrances, food additives
and a range of other high value-added products. Fermentation processing in most developing
countries is more art than science and, in low income economies, it often makes use of
a rudimentary technological base with poor process control resulting in low yields and
products of variable quality. Spontaneous fermentations and those which use appropriate
starter cultures produced largely through backslopping (a process which uses samples of a
previous batch of a fermented product as inoculants) are widely applied at the household
and village levels in developing countries. With increasing research and development (R&D),
a number of pre-cultured single or mixed strains of micro-organisms, called defined
starter cultures, have been developed and are being used by small manufacturers in their
fermentation processing operations. Defined starter cultures are also imported by a number
of developing countries for use in processing operations.
Traditional methods of genetic improvement such as classical mutagenesis and conjugation
can be applied to improve the quality of microbial cultures. Hybridization is also used for
the improvement of yeast strains. Molecular biology techniques are widely employed in
R&D for strain improvement. While these techniques are common in developed countries,
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 241
5.1 Introduction
Food processing makes use of various unit operations and technologies to convert relatively
bulky, perishable and typically inedible raw materials into more useful shelf-stable and
palatable foods or potable beverages. Processing contributes to food security by minimizing
waste and losses in the food chain and by increasing food availability and marketability.
Food is also processed in order to improve its quality and safety. Food safety is a scientific
discipline that provides assurance that food will not cause harm to the consumer when it
is prepared and/or eaten according to its intended use1.
Biotechnology as applied to food processing in most developing countries makes use of
microbial inoculants to enhance properties such as the taste, aroma, shelf-life, texture and
nutritional value of foods. The process whereby micro-organisms and their enzymes bring
about these desirable changes in food materials is known as fermentation. Fermentation
processing is also widely applied in the production of microbial cultures, enzymes, flavours,
fragrances, food additives and a range of other high value-added products. These high value
products are increasingly produced in more technologically advanced developing countries
for use in their food and non-food processing applications. Many of these high value products
are also imported by developing countries for use in their food processing applications.
This Chapter describes the prospects and potential of applying biotechnology in food
processing operations and to address safety issues in food systems with the objective of
addressing food security and responding to changing consumer trends in developing countries.
It is important to note that food safety evaluation or risk assessment is not covered here,
the Chapter instead focusing on the context of biotechnologies as applied to food safety.
Technologies applied in the processing of food must assure the quality and safety of
the final product. Safe food is food in which physical, chemical or microbiological hazards
are present at a level that does not present a public health risk. Safe food can therefore be
consumed with the assurance that there are no serious health implications for the consumer.
Recent food scares such as mad cow disease and the melamine contamination of food
products have increased consumer concern for food safety. As incomes rise, consumers are
increasingly willing to pay a premium for quality, safety and convenience.
A range of technologies are applied at different levels and scales of operation in food
processing across the developing world. Conventional or low-input food processing
technologies include drying, fermentation, salting, and various forms of cooking including
roasting, frying, smoking, steaming and oven baking. Low income economies are likely
to employ these as predominant technologies for the processing of staple foods. Many of
1 Recommended International Code of Practice - General Principles of Food Hygiene (Codex Alimentarius Commission, 2009)
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 243
A. Stocktaking: Learning from the Past
5.2 Biotechnology: Definition and Scope
For the purpose of this Chapter, biotechnology is defined in accordance with the Convention
on Biological Diversity (CBD), i.e. any technological application that uses biological
systems, living organisms, or derivatives thereof, to make or modify products or processes
for specific use.
Biotechnology in the food processing sector uses micro-organisms for the preservation
of food and for the production of a range of value-added products such as enzymes,
flavour compounds, vitamins, microbial cultures and food ingredients. Biotechnology
applications in the food processing sector, therefore, target the selection and manipulation
of micro-organisms with the objective of improving process control, product quality, safety,
consistency and yield, while increasing process efficiency.
Biotechnological processes applicable to the improvement of microbial cultures for use in
food processing applications include traditional methods of genetic improvement (traditional
biotechnology) such as classical mutagenesis and conjugation. These methods generally focus
on improving the quality of micro-organisms and the yields of metabolites. Hybridization is also
used for the improvement of yeasts involved in baking, brewing and in beverage production.
Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains have, for example, been researched for improved fermentation,
processing and biopreservation abilities, and for capacities to increase the wholesomeness and
sensory quality of wine (Pretorius and Bauer, 2002). Methods employed in genetic R&D of
wine yeasts are described in detail in Pretorius (2000) and some are summarized in Table 1.
TABLE 1
Method Comments
Hybridization Cannot generally be used directly, but the method is not entirely obsolete. Has been used to study the genetic control
of flocculation, sugar uptake and flavour production. Cross-breeding and hybridization of spore-derived clones of
S.cerevisiae have also been accomplished.
Mutation and For example, to induce autotrophic and de-repressed mutants for efficient sugar fermentation and ethanol tolerance.
selection
Rare mating Mixing of non-mating strains at high cell density (ca. 10 8 cells/ml) results in a few true hybrids with fused nuclei.
Cytoduction (introduction of cytoplasmic elements without nuclear fusion) can also be used to impart killer activity
(using karyogamy [nuclear fusion] deficient mutants).
Spheroplast fusion Spheroplasts from yeast strains of one species, the same genus, or different genera can be fused to produce
intraspecific, interspecific or intergeneric fusants, respectively. The possibility exists to introduce novel characteristics
into wine yeast strains which are incapable of mating.
Single-chromosome Transfer of whole chromosomes from wine yeast strains (using the karyogamy mutation) into genetically defined strains
transfer of S. cerevisiae.
Transformation Introduction of genes from other yeasts and other organisms.
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 245
Current literature documents the many research reports on the characterization
of microbes associated with production of traditional fermented foods in developing
countries. Relatively few of these studies document the application of diagnostic tools
of modern biotechnology in developing and designing starter cultures. The development
and improvement of microbial starters have been driving forces for the transformation of
traditional food fermentations in developing countries from an art to a science. Microbial
starter culture development has also been a driving force for innovation in the design of
equipment suited to the hygienic processing of traditional fermented foods under controlled
conditions in many developing countries.
Starter culture improvement, together with the improvement and development of
bioreactor technology for the control of fermentation processes in developed countries, has
played a pivotal role in the production of high-value products such as enzymes, microbial
cultures and functional food ingredients. These products are increasingly produced in more
advanced developing economies and are increasingly imported by less advanced developing
countries as inputs for their food processing operations.
TABLE 2
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 247
Raw Local Region/country Type of Micro-organisms Methods of State of
material product fermentation associated with the inoculation development*
name fermentation process
B. Gruels and beverages
Maize Ogi West Africa, Nigeria Submerged Lactobacillus plantarum, Appropriate 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7
Corynebacterium specie, starters produced
Aerobacter, by backslopping
yeasts Candida mycoderma,
Saccharomyces cerevisiae
and Rhodotorula and
moulds Cephalosporium,
Fusarium, Aspergillus and
Penicillium
Maize Kenkey, West Africa, Ghana Solid state Enterobacter cloacae, Spontaneous 1, 2
Koko, Akasa Acinetobacter sp.,
Lactobacillus plantarum,
L. brevis,
Saccharomyces cerevisiae,
Candida mycoderma
C. Alcoholic beverages
Palm Palm wine, West Africa Submerged Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Spontaneous 1, 2, 7
Emu Schizosaccharomyces pombe,
Lactobacillus plantarum,
L. mesenteroides
Melon Ogiri, Ogili West, East and Central Bacillus subtilis, Spontaneous 1, 2
seeds, Africa B. pumilus,
castor oil B. licheniformis,
seeds, Staphylococcus
pumpkin saprophyticus,
bean, Lactobacillus plantarum
sesame
F. Animal products
Goat milk Ayib East and Central Africa Canida spp., Saccharomyces Spontaneous 1, 2
spp., Lactobacillus spp.,
Leuconostoc spp.,
Cow milk Leben, Lben North, East Central Candida spp., Saccharomyces Spontaneous 1, 2, 3
Africa spp., Lactobacillus spp.,
Leuconostoc spp.,
Source: compiled from Odunfa and Oyewole (1997)
* Personal assessment of data, literature, Internet search and other information by O.B. Oyewole as at March 2009. Key to the codes is 1 = micro-organisms involved
known; 2 = roles of individual micro-organisms known; 3 = genetic improvement carried on organisms; 4 = starter cultures available for the fermentation; 5 = varieties
of raw materials that are best suited for the product known; 6 = improved technology available and adopted; 7: pilot plant production; 8 = industrial plant production.
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 249
TABLE 3
Substrate Indigenous Country Type of technology Inoculum Bioreactor Nature of Food safety
material fermented production of starter techniques
food starter used in
quality control
Defined starter Natural Solid Liquid Dry Liquid and quality
culture fermentation powder assurance
Soybean Soy Sauce China Koji Aspergillus ELISA for
oryzae detection of
toxigenic fungi
and mycotoxins
TABLE 4
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 251
Iku, also referred to as iru, is another example of an appropriate starter culture produced
by backslopping. This starter culture is produced from concentrated fermented dawadawa
(a fermented legume product) mixed with ground unfermented legumes, vegetables such
as pepper, and cereals, such as ground maize. It is stored in a dried form and is used as an
inoculant in dawadawa fermentations in West Africa (Holzapfel, 2002).
A range of appropriate starter cultures either in a granular form or in the form of a pressed
cake are used across Asian countries as fermentation inoculants. These traditional mould starters
are generally referred to by various names such as marcha or murcha in India, ragi in Indonesia
and Malaysia, bubod in the Philippines, nuruk in Korea, koji in Japan, and Loog-pang in
Thailand. They generally consist of a mixture of moulds grown under non-sterile conditions.
GM starter cultures
To date, no commercial GM micro-organisms exist that would be consumed as living
organisms. Products of industrial GM producer organisms are, however, widely used in
food processing and no major safety concerns have been raised against them. Rennet which
is widely used as a starter in cheese production across the globe is produced using GM
bacteria. These are discussed in more detail below. Thailand currently uses GM Escherichia
coli as an inoculant in lysine production. Many industrially important enzymes such as
alpha-amylase, gluco-amylase, lipase and pectinase and bio-based fine chemicals such as
lactic acid, amino acids, antibiotics, nucleic acid and polysaccharides, are produced in China
using GM starter cultures. Other developing countries which currently produce enzymes
using GM micro-organisms include Argentina, Brazil, Cuba and India.
Enzymes
Enzymes occur in all living organisms and catalyze biochemical reactions that are necessary
to support life (Olempska-Beer et al., 2006). They are commonly used in food processing
and in the production of food ingredients. The use of recombinant DNA technology
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 253
has made it possible to manufacture novel enzymes that are tailored to specific food
processing conditions. Alpha-amylases with increased heat stability have, for example, been
engineered for use in the production of high-fructose corn syrups. These improvements
were accomplished by introducing changes in the alpha-amylase amino acid sequences
through DNA sequence modifications of the alpha-amylase genes (Olempska-Beer et
al.,2006). Bovine chymosin used in cheese manufacture was the first recombinant enzyme
approved for used in food by the US Food and Drug Administration (Flamm, 1991). The
phospholipase A1 gene from Fusarium venenatum is expressed in GM Aspergillus oryzae
to produce the phospholipase A1 enzyme used in the dairy industry for cheese manufacture
to improve process efficiencies and cheese yields.
Considerable progress has been made in recent times toward the improvement of
microbial strains used in the production of enzymes. Microbial host strains developed for
enzyme production have been engineered to increase enzyme yields. Certain fungal producing
strains have also been modified to reduce or eliminate their potential for producing toxic
metabolites (Olempska-Beer et al., 2006). Food processing enzymes in the United States
derived from GM micro-organisms are listed in Table 5.
Table 5
5.3.3 Current status of the application of traditional and new biotechnologies in food
safety and quality improvement in developing countries
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 255
oligosaccharides and cyanogenic glucosides are naturally occurring components of raw
materials commonly used in food fermentations in developing countries. Contamination
of the fermentation process can pose a major health risk in the final fermented product.
Methodologies for identifying and monitoring the presence of chemical (pesticide residues,
heavy metals, trace elements) and biochemical (aflatoxins) hazards in fermented foods are
therefore a critical need. Furthermore, with growing consumer interest in the credence
attributes of the products that they consume, and the premium currently being placed on
quality linked to geographical origin, the traceability of foods with selected properties is
of increasing importance.
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 257
TABLE 6
II. Processing raw Improper handling Chemical TLC, GC, HPLC Mass spectrometry (MS) Low, lower
material (time/temperature) yyUndeclared methods for additives middle and
additives and middle income
supplements economies
yyEconomic
adulteration
Fermentation Microbial Growth in culture media Chromogenic/fluorogenic Middle income
procedures indicator culture media
involving micro- ELISA,
organisms
Antibody based
biosensors
PCR detection of specific
genes
Quality parameters Consistency
yy Biochemical and enzyme Biosensing of
Composition
yy assays fermentation-related
pH measurements enzymes
Monitoring of sugars,
alcohol, organic and
inorganic ions
Surface plasmon
resonance
III. Packaging and Contamination Chemical Chromatography GC-MS Some lower
end product from packaging yyUndeclared middle and
TLC, GC, HPLC, fast protein
analysis material allergens and middle income
liquid chromatography
additives economies
Microbial Growth in culture media Chromogenic/fluorogenic
yyNon-sterile indicator culture media
conditions leading ELISA
to microbial
growth PCR detection of specific
genes
Physical Inspection and sampling Metal detection systems Middle income
yyPieces, fragments economies
of materials
Socio-economic factors have played a major role in the adoption and application of
microbial inoculants in food fermentations. In situations where the cost of food is a major
issue, uptake and adoption of improved biotechnologies has been generally slow. Demand
for improved inoculants and starter culture development has been triggered by increasing
consumer income, education and new market opportunities.
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 259
Socio-economics of the consumer base
The consumer base of traditionally fermented staple foods in most developing countries
is largely poor and disadvantaged. Price, rather than food safety and quality, is therefore a
major preoccupation of this group when purchasing food. Fermented foods provide that
target group with an affordable source of food and make a substantial contribution to their
food and nutritional security. These foods are generally produced under relatively poor
hygienic conditions at the household and village levels. Fermentation processing is practised
largely as an art in such contexts.
Interventions designed to upgrade processes used in the production of these traditionally
fermented staples have been largely carried out through donor-funded projects and have focused
primarily on reducing the drudgery associated with the fermentation processes. Improvements
have also targeted the upgrading of hygienic conditions of fermentation processes and the
introduction of simple and appropriate methodologies for the application of inoculants
such as the use of backslopping. While the uptake of simple backslopping technologies at the
household level has, in general, been very good by that target group, the uptake of defined
starter cultures has been less successful owing to cost considerations. Case Study 5.5.3 on the
household level production of Som Fug in Thailand highlights the poor uptake of improved
starter culture technologies by household-level processors, primarily on the basis of cost.
With growing incomes and improved levels of education in urban centres across a number
of developing countries, dietary habits are changing and a wider variety of foods is being
consumed. Fermented foods are no longer the main staples but are still consumed as side dishes
or condiments by that target group. The demand of that target group for safe food of high
quality has begun to re-orient the traditional fermented food sector and led to improvements
in the control of fermentation processes through the development and adoption of defined
starter cultures, the implementation of GHPs and HACCP in food fermentation processing,
and the development of bioreactor technologies, coupled with appropriate downstream
processing to terminate fermentation processes and thus extend the shelf-life of fermented
foods. The packaging of fermented products has also improved. Case Study 5.5.1 on soy sauce
production in Thailand highlights an example of how starter culture development coupled
with bioreactor technology has improved yields and the efficiency of fermentation processes,
while Case Study 5.5.2 highlights how consumer demand for safe food led to R&D into
starter culture development designed to improve the safety of nham in the marketing chain.
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 261
associated with fermented African foods as a basis for starter culture development, and
results of this work led to improvements in the production of gari, a fermented cassava
product, and dawadawa, a fermented legume product.
Issues related to the protection of intellectual property rights (IPR) are of growing
concern with respect to starter culture development. Case Study 5.5.4, describing flavour
production using alkaline-fermented beans highlights the critical importance of IPR in
reference to processes applied in the production of traditional fermented foods.
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 263
occurs during transportation from the manufacturer to the point of retail. The product is
generally retailed under ambient conditions. Traditionally produced nham is considered
high risk by the Thai health authorities, who require a warning label on the package stating
that the product must be cooked before consumption.
The first step in the transition to science-based technology for nham fermentations
was the development of a starter culture. This starter was subsequently adopted by a nham
manufacturer who also implemented HACCP in his operation to assure safety and to satisfy
the compulsory standard requirements of GMP in the food processing industry imposed by
the Thai Food and Drug Administration. A microbiological hazard profile was developed
for nham by the manufacturer in collaboration with scientists from the Ministry of Science,
who established that the prevalent pathogens in nham were Salmonella spp. (16 percent),
Staphylococcus aureus (15 percent) and Listeria monocytogenes (12 percent) (Paukatong
and Kunawasen, 2001). Nitrite, an additive used in nham production, was identified as a
chemical hazard and the metal clips used for closing the package were identified as physical
hazards. A HACCP plan which included four critical control points was developed for
nham (Table 7).
The critical control point on nitrite was monitored by checking the pre-weighed nitrite
prior to adding it to the product formulation. Scientific data from studies on starter cultures
showed that a rapid increase in acidity within 3648 hours of fermentation inhibited
the growth of bacterial pathogens such as Staphylococcus aureus and Salmonella spp.
(Paukatong and Kunawasen, 2001; Chokesajjawatee et al., 2009). With the application of
these starter cultures, the final product was sent to retailers after the fermentation reached
its end-point (pH< 4.5). An innovative pH indicator which undergoes a colour change
on attainment of the end-point of the fermentation process (pH<4.5) was included in the
package. With these innovations and the implementation of a HACCP plan, local health
authorities waived the requirement for the warning must cook before consumption
on the package. This authorization was seen by the public as an endorsement of product
quality and safety by the health authority. Subsequently, three medium-sized manufacturers
followed suit in adopting the improved technology. Recognition of the starter culture
technology as a food safety measure by the health authority was, of itself, an effective
public awareness campaign.
RAPD markers were used for molecular typing of approximately 100 bacterial strains
at 12-hour intervals during nham fermentations. These studies resulted in the development
and commercialization of three different starter formulae for use by larger manufacturers of
nham. These starter cultures are marketed in a liquid form which requires refrigeration. Dried
starter cultures have a shelf-life of one month at ambient temperature. Further innovations
TABLE 7
Process step Hazard Critical limits Monitoring Corrective actions HACCP records
procedures
Weighing nitrite Improper nitrite 100 ppm < initial The quality control Supervisor reweighs nitrite weighing
yy
weight: if too high - nitrite level < 200 (QC) supervisor every bag of records
chemical hazard, if ppm randomly checks nitrite since last deviation records
yy
too low - may result the pre-weighed satisfactory check; balance calibration
yy
in microbiological nitrite according to record deviation; records
hazard appropriate sampling recalibrate the
frequency weighing balance
Stuffing Failure to remove No metal in product Line worker to Line worker notifies visual inspection
yy
metal clips may visually inspect each supervisor; separate log
contaminate product nham product during contaminated deviation records
yy
stuffing. Change product; segregate
worker every 30 metal; and record
minutes deviation
Labelling Failure to provide Label to contain Line worker randomly Line worker notifies visual inspection
yy
microbiological information such checks the label on supervisor; recheck log
safety information to as safe if cooked nham products nham product; label deviation records
yy
the consumer before consumption product; and record
on each nham deviation
product
Fermentation Inadequate The pH of nham QC worker randomly QC worker notifies monitoring pH
yy
fermentation product lower than monitors pH of nham supervisor; hold lot; records
resulting in growth of 4.6 in each lot prolong fermentation; holding records
yy
pathogens and record deviation deviation records
yy
Source: Paukatong and Kunawasen (2001)
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 265
Compositionally, Som Fug consists of minced freshwater fish (mud carp, Cirrhina
microlepis) 84 percent (by weight), garlic 8 percent, water 4 percent, salt 2 percent, boiled
rice 1 percent, sucrose 0.1 percent and black pepper. It is fermented for about 24 days at
ambient temperature. Lactic acid bacteria are the dominant microflora associated with the
fermentation (Paludan-Muller, Huss and Gram, 1999). RAPD-PCR analyses determined
that the garlic-fermenting lactic acid bacteria associated with Som Fug fermentations
belonged to Lactobacillus pentosus and Lact. plantarum (Paludan-Muller et al., 2002).
Furthermore, the studies concluded that fructans from garlic are important carbon sources
which catalyze the fermentation. The studies on Som Fug illustrate the high discriminatory
power of biotechnology in differentiating lactic acid bacteria at the strain level. The Som
Fug industry did not see the benefit of implementing starter culture technology. Although
the important micro-organisms for Som Fug fermentation had been identified, there were
no attempts to develop starter cultures. One major reason for the lack of development of
starter culture technology was the widespread production of Som Fug at the household
level. Household manufacturers do not see the benefit of starter culture technology but
rather view starter cultures as a burden to the cost of production. Moreover, there is no
scientific information to substantiate the nutritional value of Som Fug and hence there is
very little public awareness of the nutritional value of the product.
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 267
B. Looking Forward: Preparing for the Future
5.6 EmergingPathogens: A Key Issue where the Application of
Biotechnologies Could be Useful
The identification of infectious agents requires high-end technologies which are not usually
available in developing countries. Developing countries must therefore seek assistance
from countries with higher calibre technologies in order to characterize infectious agents,
put in place surveillance and monitoring systems and develop strategies to contain the
disease(s). Biotechnology can play a key role in facilitating the characterization of new
emerging pathogens.
Traditional cultural methods for the detection and enumeration of microbial pathogens
are tedious and require at least 1218 hours for the realization of results. By that time,
the food products would have been distributed to retailers or consumers. Immunoassay
diagnostic kits facilitate near-real-time monitoring, sensitivity, versatility and ease of use. The
emergence of multi-antibiotic resistance traits is prevalent in intensive farming in developing
countries due to the abuse of antibiotics. The spread of multi-antibiotic resistant micro-
organisms poses public health concerns because pathogens exhibiting such resistance would
be difficult to control with the use of currently available antibiotics. The rapid detection of
these pathogens with high sensitivity is one way of monitoring and containing the spread
of multi-antibiotic resistant traits. A strategic approach being employed by some is the
development of affinity biosensors with an antibiotic resistant nucleotide sequence as the
detection probe.
It is important that countries recognize the potential of fermented foods and prioritize
actions to assure their safety, quality and availability. Based on the stocktaking exercise in
this Chapter, a number of specific options can be identified for developing countries to help
them make informed decisions regarding adoption of biotechnologies in food processing
and in food safety for the future.
Education policy
While the consumption of fermented foods is growing in popularity among higher income
consumers thanks to increasing interest in wellness through diet, the consumption of
fermented foods by lower income consumers in many developing countries is perceived
to be a backward practice.
}} Strategies should therefore be developed for the dissemination of knowledge about
food biotechnology and particularly fermented foods. Targeted consumer education
on the benefits of consuming fermented food products and on applying good practice
in their production is required.
}} Food biotechnology should be included in educational curricula in order to improve
the knowledge base in countries on the contribution of fermented foods to food and
nutritional security and to generate awareness of the growing market opportunities for
fermented foods and high-value products derived from fermentation processes.
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 269
Information-sharing
Access to specialized technical information on biotechnology and biotechnological
developments in the food processing sector are critical and necessary inputs and support
systems for guiding and orienting the research agendas of countries. The necessary
information systems should therefore be developed to facilitate rapid access to information
on biotechnological developments across both the developed and the developing world.
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 271
}} Research and infrastructural development to enable the cost-effective production of
defined starter cultures in a stable format (i.e. cultures which do not require refrigeration
and have prolonged shelf-lives under ambient conditions) should be prioritized.
}} Infrastructure development to facilitate the transfer and adaptation of fermentation
technologies developed at the laboratory level to the household and village and, where
necessary, the enterprise level should be prioritized.
}} Appropriate levels of equipment will also be required to facilitate the downstream
processing of these products.
}} Traceability systems that facilitate the differentiation and identification of food products
should be prioritized in order to broaden market opportunities for these products.
}} A food-chain approach to assuring food safety should be prioritized by governments.
}} Food safety management systems should be strengthened by implementing systematic
food safety measures such as GHP, GMP and HACCP in food fermentation operations.
Diagnostic kits are important tools for monitoring and verifying the level of sanitation
in processing plants.
Highly sensitive and rapid diagnostic kits are invaluable for monitoring and rapidly
detecting chemical and microbiological hazards with high precision and sensitivity
that pose threats to human health. The development of low-cost diagnostic kits
suitable for use by small processors would greatly facilitate food safety monitoring.
Development should target the realization of multiplex diagnostic systems with the
capacity to detect several pathogens or many chemical contaminants using a single
diagnostic kit. The development of diagnostic kits at a national level could further
reduce their cost of production. Given the regional specificity of bacterial pathogens
at the species and subspecies levels, such diagnostic kits should be developed with
specificity and sensitivity to the species or subspecies that are prevalent in a specific
region. Investment is therefore needed for the development of expertise, facilities
and infrastructure for the mass production of antibodies, cell culture technology and
for the formation of technical know-how on assembling the requisite components
of diagnostic kits.
The development of national hazard profile databases that document the prevalent
pathogens in different regions will be critical. Such information would be useful for further
research into the development of diagnostic kits with high precision and sensitivity and
in implementing HACCP as well as risk assessment research. The culture collection
of identified infectious agents in the hazard profiles could play an important role for
producing specific antibodies for use in developing immunoassay diagnostic kits.
The last decade has witnessed considerable change with respect to the applications of
biotechnology in food processing and food safety. Market forces have been the major
drivers of change in the food sector of developing countries. Modern biotechnological
tools are likely to play a greater role in the development of efficient science-based processes
for food processing and safety in order to respond to consumer demand. The production
of high-value fermented products such as enzymes, functional food ingredients and food
additives is likely to continue to increase in developing countries.
The international community (FAO, UN organizations, NGOs, donors and development
agencies) can play a major role in assisting developing countries to maximize the benefit to
be derived from food bioprocessing. The adoption of biotechnology-based methods in food
processing and for food safety and quality monitoring is dependent on several factors that
include capacity building in technical and regulatory areas, policy formulation, regulatory
frameworks and regional networks.
Based on the analysis in this Chapter, a number of priority areas are identified for
support by the international community. These are:
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 273
}} establish and strengthen the research and infrastructural support base for work on
starter culture development, bioreactor design and for the development of diagnostic
tests and equipment for monitoring food safety and traceability. This infrastructural
support base would include laboratories, laboratory equipment and cell bank facilities
for the proper preservation and storage of microbial culture preparations;
}} develop scientific data to examine the nutritional, health and health-benefit claims
associated with fermented foods;
}} establish pilot processing facilities for the scaling-up and testing of technologies to
facilitate their adoption.
Barrett, T., Fang, P. & Swaminathan, B. 1997. Amplification methods for detection of food-borne pathogens.
In H. Lee, S. Morse & O. Slovak, eds. Nucleic acid amplification techniques: Application to disease
diagnosis, pp. 171181. Boston, USA, Eaton Publishing.
Bauer, F.F., Ns, T., Esbensen, K., Young, P.R., du Toit, M. & Vivier, M.A. 2007. Functional wine-omics. In
R.J. Blair & I.S. Pretorius, eds. Proceedings 13th Australian wine industry technical conference, 29 July2
August 2007, Adelaide, Australia, pp 178183.
Beaumont, M. 2002. Flavouring composition prepared by fermentation with Bacillus spp. Int. J. Food
Microbiol., 75: 189196.
Berger, R.G. 2009. Biotechnology of flavours the next generation. Biotechnol. Lett., 31: 16511659.
Bolotin-Fukuhara, M., Toffano-Nioche, C., Artiguenave, F., Duchateau-Nguyen, G., Lemaire, M.,
Marmeisse, R., Montrocher, R., Robert, C., Termier, M., Wincker, P. & Wsolowski-Louvel, M. 2000.
Genomic exploration of the hemiascomycetous yeasts: 11. Kluyveromyces lactis. FEBS Lett., 487: 6670.
Chokesajjawatee, N., Pornaem, S., Zo, Y-G., Kamdee, S., Luxananil, P., Wanasen, S. & Valyasevi, R. 2009.
Incidence of Staphylococcus aureus and associated risk factors in Nham, a Thai fermented pork product.
Food Microbiol., 26: 547551.
Codex Alimentarius Commission. 2009. Food hygiene (basic texts). Fourth Edition. Secretariat of the Joint
FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme, Rome, FAO. (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/012/
a1552e/a1552e00.htm).
de Vos, W.M. 2001. Advances in genomics for microbial food fermentation and safety. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol.,
12: 493498.
FAO. 1998. Fermented fruits and vegetables: A global perspective, by M. Battcock & S. Azam-Ali. FAO
Agricultural Services Bulletin No.134. Rome (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/x0560E/x0560E00.
htm).
FAO. 1999. Fermented cereals: A global perspective, by N.F. Haard, S.A. Odunfa, C-H. Lee, R. Quintero-
Ramirez, A. Lorence-Quiones & C. Wacher-Radarde. FAO Agricultural Services Bulletin No. 138.
Rome. (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/x2184e/x2184e00.htm).
FAO. 2006. FAO/WHO guidance to governments on the application of HACCP in small and/or lessdeveloped
food businesses. FAO Food and Nutrition Paper 86. Rome. (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/009/
a0799e/a0799e00.htm).
FDA. 2003. Bacteriological analytical manual. US Food and Drug Administration.
Flamm, E.L. 1991. How FDA approved chymosin: A case history. Biotechnol., 9: 349351.
Goffeau, A., Barrell, B.G., Bussey, H., Davis, R.W., Dujon, B., Feldmann, H., Galibert, F., Hoheisel, J.D.,
Jacq, C., Johnston, M., Louis, E.J., Mewes, H.W., Murakami, Y., Philippsen, P., Tettelin, H. & Oliver,
S.G. 1996. Life with 6000 genes. Science, 274: 546-567.
Hayashi, T., Makino, K., Ohnishi, M., Kurokawa, K., Ishii, K., Yokoyama, K., Han, CG., Ohtsubo, E.,
Nakayama, K., Murata, T., Tanaka, M., Tobe, T., Iida, T., Takami, H., Honda, T., Sasakawa, C.,
Ogasawara, N., Yasunaga, T., Kuhara, S., Shiba, T., Hattori, M. & Shinagawa, H. 2001. Complete
genome sequence of enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli O157:H7 and genomic comparison with a
laboratory strain K12. DNA Research, 8: 1122.
Holzapfel, W.H. 2002. Appropriate starter culture technologies for small-scale fermentation in developing
countries. Int. J. Food Microbiol., 75: 197212.
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 275
Hutkins, R.W. 2006. Microbiology and biotechnology of fermented foods. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing.
JECFA. 2006. Combined compendium of food additive specifications Volume 4. Analytical methods, test
procedures and laboratory solutions used by and referenced in the food additive specifications. Joint FAO/
WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives. FAO JECFA Monograph 1. Rome (also available at www.
fao.org/docrep/009/a0691e/a0691e00.htm)
JECFA. 2008. Asparaginase from Aspergillus niger expressed in A. niger: Chemical and technical assessment
(CTA), by Z.S. Olempska-Beer. Paper prepared for the 69th Meeting of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert
Committee on Food Additives. Rome, 17-26 June 2008. 7 pp.
Koch, W.H., Payne, W.L. & Cebula, T.A. 1995. Detection of enterotoxigenic Vibrio cholerae in foods by
the polymerase chain reaction. FDA Bacteriological Analytical Manual, 8th Edition, pp. 28.0128.09.
Gaithersburg, AOAC International.
Kuroda, M., Ohta, T., Uchiyama, I. et al. 2001. Whole genome sequencing of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus
aureus. Lancet, 357: 12251240.
Leuchtenberger, W., Huthmacher, K. & Drauz, K. 2005 Biotechnological production of amino acids and
derivatives: Current status and prospects. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 69: 18.
Mengu, M. 2009. Overview of FP and Africa FP lessons learnt and success stories: Research on traditional
African fermented foods. Proceedings science and technology Europe-Africa project workshop, Nairobi,
Kenya, pp. 16-18. (available at www.st-eap.org/pdfs/report_st-eap_ws_mar2009.pdf).
Merican, Z. & Quee-Lan, Y. 2004. Tapai processing in Malaysia: A technology in transition. In K.H. Steinkraus,
ed. Industrialization of indigenous fermented foods. New York, Marcel Dekker, pp.169190.
Odunfa, S.A. 1981. Micro-organisms associated with fermentation of African Locust bean during iru
preparation. J. Plant Foods, 3: 245250.
Odunfa, S.A. & Oyewole, O.B. 1986. Identification of Bacillus species from iru, a fermented African Locust
bean product. J. Basic Microbiol., 26: 101108.
Odunfa, S.A. & Oyewole, O.B. 1997. African fermented foods. In B.J.B. Wood, ed. Microbiology of fermented
foods, 2nd Edition, Vol. II, pp. 713715. London, Blackie Academic and Professional.
Ogbadu, L.J. & Okagbue, R.N. 1988. Bacterial fermentation of soya bean for daddawa production. J. Appl.
Bacteriol., 65: 353356.
Ogbadu, L.J., Okagbue, R.N. & Ahmad, A.A. 1990. Glutamic acid production by bacillus isolates from
Nigerian fermented vegetable proteins. World J. Microbiol. Biotechnol., 6: 377382.
Olempska-Beer, Z.S., Merker, R.I., Ditto, M.D. & DiNovi, M.J. 2006. Food-processing enzymes from
recombinant microorganisms a review. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol., 45: 144158.
Paludan-Muller, C., Huss, H.H. & Gram, L. 1999. Characterization of lactic acid bacteria isolated from a
Thai low-salt fermented fish product and the role of garlic as substrate for fermentation. Int. J. Food
Microbiol., 46: 219229.
Paludan-Muller, C., Valyasevi, R., Huss, H.H. & Gram L. 2002. Genotypic and phenotypic characterization
of garlic-fermenting lactic acid bacteria isolated from som-fak, a Thai low-salt fermented fish product. J.
Appl. Microbiol., 92: 307314.
Parkhill, J., Wren, B. W., Mungall, K., Ketley, J.M., Churcher, C., Basham, D., Chillingworth, T., Davies,
R.M., Feltwell, T., Holroyd, S., Jagels, K., Karlyshev, A.V., Moule, S., Pallen, M.J., Pennk, C. W.,
Quail, M. A., Rajandream, M-A., Rutherford, K. M., van Vliet, A.H.M., Whitehead, S. & Barrell,
B.G. 2000. The genome sequence of the food-borne pathogen Campylobacter jejuni reveals hypervariable
sequences. Nature, 403: 666668.
chapte r 5 Current Status and Options for Biotechnologies in Food Processing and in Food Safety in Developing Countries 277
chapter6
Learning from the Past: Successes
and Failures with Agricultural
Biotechnologies in Developing
Countries over the Last 20 Years
An E-Mail Conference
6.1 Introduction
The FAO Biotechnology Forum is an e-mail-based mechanism which was launched in 2000
with the aim of providing access to quality balanced information and to make a neutral
platform available for all interested stakeholders to openly exchange views and experiences
on agricultural biotechnology in developing countries. It covers applications in the crop,
forestry, livestock, fisheries and agro-industry sectors. The Forum covers the broad range
of tools included under the general term biotechnology. Some of these technologies, such
as the use of molecular markers or genetic modification, may be applied to all food and
agricultural sectors, while others are more sector-specific, such as tissue culture (in crops
and forest trees), embryo transfer (livestock) or sex-reversal (fish).
Each conference takes one particular theme that is relevant to agricultural biotechnology
in developing countries and opens it up for debate for a limited amount of time. From 2000
to 2008 the Forum hosted 15 moderated e-mail conferences, with messages coming roughly
equally from participants living in developing and developed countries.
For each conference, two key documents are produced. Firstly, before the conference
takes place, a Background document is prepared to give a good overview of the conference
theme, in a balanced neutral way, and written in easily-understandable language so that
people with little knowledge of the area may understand what the theme is about. The
document also highlights any particular issues of special relevance to developing countries.
In this e-mail conference, as well as in the context of ABDC-10, the term agricultural
biotechnology encompasses a variety of technologies used in food and agriculture for
a range of different purposes such as the genetic improvement of plant varieties and
animal populations to increase their yields or efficiency; genetic characterization and the
conservation of genetic resources; plant or animal disease diagnosis; vaccine development;
and the improvement of feeds. Note, the term agriculture here includes the crop, livestock,
fisheries and aquaculture, forestry and food processing sectors, and so the term agricultural
biotechnologies encompasses their use in any of these sectors.
This Background document aims to provide information that participants will find useful
for the e-mail conference. In Part 6.2.1 an overview is provided of the different agricultural
biotechnologies to be considered, while Part 6.2.2 presents some specific guidance about
the e-mail conference.
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 279
6.2.1 Overview of agricultural biotechnologies in developing countries
A short overview is provided below of the main kinds of agricultural biotechnologies that
have been used in developing countries over the past 20 years and that should be covered
in the e-mail conference. They are described separately, although in practice more than one
may be used in certain situations (e.g. in wide crossing programmes, see later). Note, new
biotechnologies that are still at the research level, be it in the laboratory or at the field trial
stage, but have not yet been applied (i.e. used for commercial production by farmers) in
developing countries are not included.
This overview also indicates what the biotechnologies are used for, the food and
agricultural sectors involved, and gives some examples of their applications in specific
developing countries. Regarding the examples, their inclusion in the document does not
imply that these applications have been a partial or complete success (or, conversely, that
they have been any kind of a failure). Indeed, these are the kind of issues to be addressed
by participants during this e-mail conference. Although not the subject of this conference,
it should also be kept in mind that the path from research, for example in the laboratory, to
the eventual application of a product in the field (e.g. farmers cultivating a new genetically
improved plant variety or using a new vaccine against an animal disease) can be long,
resource-demanding and unsuccessful. Many biotechnologies of seemingly high promise
at the experimental stage have had limited applications in developing countries so far.
As many of the biotechnologies described below are related to molecular biology and
genetic material, some basic terminology is introduced here. Living things are made up of
cells that are programmed by genetic material called deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA). A DNA
molecule is made up of a long chain of nitrogen-containing bases. Only a small fraction of
this DNA sequence typically makes up genes, i.e. that code for proteins, which are molecules
essential for the functioning of living cells, made up of chains of amino acids. The remaining
and major share of the DNA represents non-coding sequences whose role is not yet clearly
understood. The genetic material is organized into sets of chromosomes (e.g. five pairs in
Arabidopsis thaliana a model plant species; 30 pairs in cattle), and the entire set is called the
genome. In a diploid individual (i.e. where chromosomes are organized in pairs), there are two
alleles of every gene one from each parent transmitted by gametes (reproductive cells) that
are normally haploid (having just one of each of the pairs of chromosomes). A typical genome
contains several thousand genes, e.g. about 30 000 genes in grasses like rice and sorghum
(Paterson et al., 2009). Definitions of technical terms used below can be found in FAO (2001).
6.2.1.1 Molecularmarkers
Molecular markers are identifiable DNA sequences found at specific locations of the
genome and transmitted by standard Mendelian laws of inheritance from one generation
to the next. They rely on a DNA assay, and a range of different kinds of molecular marker
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 281
6.2.1.2 Genetic modification
A genetically modified organism (GMO) is an organism in which one or more genes (called
transgenes) have been introduced into its genetic material from another organism. The genes
may be from a different kingdom (e.g. a bacterial gene introduced into plant genetic material),
a different species within the same kingdom or even from the same species. For example,
so-called Bt crops are crops containing genes derived from the soil bacterium Bacillus
thuriengensis coding for proteins that are toxic to insect pests that feed on the crops. The
issue of GMOs has been highly controversial over the past decade. Many countries have
introduced specific frameworks to regulate their development, release and commercialization.
GM crops were first grown commercially in the mid 1990s. While the majority continues
to be grown in developed countries, an increasing number of developing countries are reported
to be cultivating them. Recent estimates (James, 2008) indicate that 10 developing countries
planted over 50 000 hectares (ha) of GM crops in 2008: Argentina (21.0 millionha), Brazil
(15.8), India (7.6), China (3.8), Paraguay (2.7), South Africa (1.8), Uruguay (0.7), Bolivia
(0.6), Philippines (0.4) and Mexico (0.1). For comparison, in 1997 the only developing
countries reported were Argentina (1.4 million ha), China (1.8) and Mexico (less than 0.1).
Almost all GM crops grown commercially are genetically modified for one or both of two
main traits: herbicide tolerance (63 percent of GM crops planted in 2008) or insect resistance
(15percent), i.e. Bt crops, while 22 percent have both traits (James, 2008).
The commercial release of GM forest trees has been reported in one country, China. In
2002, approval was granted for the environmental release of two kinds of Bt trees, the European
black poplar (Populus nigra) and the hybrid white poplar clone GM 741, together representing
about 1.4 million plants on 300500ha (FAO, 2004). Regarding GM livestock or fish, there
has been no reported commercial release for food and agricultural purposes in any country.
Although documentation is generally quite poor, the use of GM micro-organisms (GMMs)
in agro-industry and for animal feeds is routine in developed countries and is also a reality
in many developing countries. In agro-industry, the use of enzymes (proteins that catalyze
specific chemical reactions) is important. Many of the enzymes used in the food industry are
commonly produced using GMMs. For example, since the early 1990s, preparations containing
chymosin (an enzyme used to curdle milk in the preliminary steps of cheese manufacture)
derived from GM bacteria have been available commercially (FAO, 2006b). Similarly, many
colours, vitamins and essential amino acids used in the food industry are also from GMMs.
In animal nutrition, feed additives such as amino acids and enzymes are widely used in
developing countries. The greatest use is in pig and poultry production where intensification
has increased over the last decade, further accelerating the demand for feed additives. For
example, most grain-based livestock feeds are deficient in essential amino acids such as
lysine, methionine and tryptophan. For high-producing monogastric animals (pigs and
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 283
Its usual purpose is to obtain a plant that is virtually identical to the original crop except
for a few genes contributed by the distant relative. The technique has enabled breeders to
access genetic variation beyond the normal reproductive barriers of their crops (Chapter1).
For example, the New Rice for Africa (NERICA) hybrids are derived from crossing two
species of cultivated rice, the African rice and the Asian rice, combining the high yields
from the Asian rice with the ability of the African rice to thrive in harsh environments.
Wide-hybrid plants are often sterile so their seed cannot be propagated due to differences
between the sets of chromosomes inherited from genetically divergent parental species
that prevent stable chromosome pairing during meiosis. However, if the chromosome
number is artificially doubled, the hybrid may be able to produce functional pollen and
eggs and be fertile. Colchicine has been used for chromosome doubling in plants since
the 1940s and has been applied to more than 50 plant species including most important
annual crops. More recently, several additional chromosome doubling agents, all of which
act as inhibitors of mitotic cell division, have been used in plant breeding programmes.
To date, with the help of chromosome doubling technology hundreds of new varieties
have been produced worldwide.
In crops and forest trees, chromosome doubling has also been used, as for fish, to
generate doubled haploids. The haploid plants can be produced using anther culture
which involves the in vitro culture of immature anthers (i.e. the pollen-producing organs
of the plant). As the pollen grains are haploid, the resulting pollen-derived plants are also
haploid (FAO, 2009a). Doubled haploid plants were first produced in the 1960s using
colchicine and today, thermal shock or mannitol incubation can be used. They may also
be produced from ovule culture. Breeders value doubled haploid plants because they are
100 percent homozygous, so any recessive genes are readily apparent. The time required
after a conventional hybridization to select pure lines carrying the required recombination
of characters is thus drastically reduced. Since the 1970s, doubled haploid methods have
been used to create new varieties of barley, wheat, rice, melon, pepper, tobacco and several
Brassicas. In the developing world, a major centre of such breeding work is China where
numerous doubled haploid crops have been released and many more are being developed.
By 2003, China was cultivating over two millionha of doubled haploid varieties, the most
important being rice, wheat, tobacco and peppers (Chapter1).
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 285
operating in developing countries (e.g. in shrimp production) and these companies
commonly use PCR-based diagnostic systems where the analyses are either carried
out by the laboratories of the companies themselves or are outsourced to specialized
private laboratories.
Biotechnology-based diagnostics are also important in food analysis. Many of
the classical food microbiological methods used in the past were culture-based, with
micro-organisms grown on agar plates and detected through biochemical identification.
These methods are often tedious, labour-intensive and slow. Genetic-based diagnostic
and identification systems can greatly enhance the specificity, sensitivity and speed of
microbial testing. Molecular typing methodologies, commonly involving PCR, ribotyping
(a method to determine homologies and differences between bacteria at the species or
subspecies/strain level using RFLP analysis of ribosomal RNA genes) and pulsed-field
gel electrophoresis (a method of separating large DNA molecules on agarose gels), can
be used to characterize and monitor the presence of spoilage flora (microbes causing
food to become unfit for eating), normal flora and microflora in foods (FAO, 2006b).
RAPD or AFLP molecular marker systems can also be used for comparing genetic
differences among species, subspecies and strains depending on the reaction conditions
used. The use of combinations of these technologies and other genetic tests allows the
characterization and identification of organisms at the genus, species, subspecies and even
strain levels, thereby making it possible to pinpoint sources of food contamination, trace
micro-organisms throughout the food chain or identify the causal agents of food-borne
illnesses (FAO, 2006b).
Of the countries that responded to a recent World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE)
survey, four out of 23 and seven out of 14 African and Asian countries respectively indicated
that they produce or use animal vaccines derived from biotechnology, including experimental
use as well as commercial release (MacKenzie, 2005).
Artificial insemination
In artificial insemination (AI), semen is collected from donor male animals, diluted in
suitable diluents and manually inseminated into the female reproductive tract during oestrus
(heat), to achieve pregnancy. The semen can be fresh or preserved in liquid nitrogen and
then thawed. The efficiency of AI can be increased by monitoring progesterone levels, e.g.
using ELISA, to identify non-pregnant females, and/or by oestrus synchronization where
females are treated with hormones to bring them into oestrus at the desired time.
AI is widely used in developing countries (Chupin, 1992; FAO, 2007b). For example, in
India 34 million inseminations were carried out in 2007 while about eight million were carried
out in Brazil (Chapter3). For Africa, Asia and Latin America and the Caribbean regions, AI
is mostly used for cattle production (dairy). Other species for which AI is used in all three
continents are sheep, goats, horses and pigs. In addition, in Asia, AI is used for chickens, camels,
buffaloes and ducks, and in Latin America and Caribbean regions for rabbits, buffaloes, donkeys,
alpacas and turkeys. For the most part, semen from exotic breeds is used in local livestock
populations. To a lesser extent, semen from local breeds is also used for this purpose. Most AI
services are provided by the public sector but the contribution of the private sector, breeding
organizations and NGOs is also substantial. In Africa and Asia, AI use is concentrated in
peri-urban areas (FAO, 2007b). Progesterone monitoring and oestrous synchronization have
been applied in a number of developing countries. Applications of oestrous synchronization
have been limited to some intensively managed farms where AI is routinely used.
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 287
Embryo transfer
Embryo transfer (ET) involves the transfer of an embryo from a superior donor female
to a less valuable female animal. A donor is induced to superovulate (produce several ova)
through hormonal treatment. The ova obtained are then fertilized within the donor, the
embryos are allowed to develop and then removed and implanted in recipient females for
the remainder of the gestation period. Alternatively, the embryos can be frozen for later use.
FAO (2007b) reports that five, eight and twelve countries respectively in Africa, Asia
and the Latin America and the Caribbean regions provided information on use of ET in
their countries. In Latin America and the Caribbean, ET is increasingly used by commercial
livestock producers and the species involved are cattle (in all twelve countries) and alpacas,
donkeys, goats, horses, llamas and sheep (in one to three of the twelve countries). In Brazil
and Chile, private sector organizations are involved in providing the technology.
Sperm/embryo sexing
In livestock, to obtain offspring of a desired sex (e.g. females are preferred for dairy animals,
males for beef animals), the separation of X and Y sperm (e.g. based on staining DNA with a
fluorescent dye) for AI and sexing of embryos (e.g. using specific DNA probes) can be used.
These technologies are being developed and refined in a number of research institutions,
but are not widely used by farmers or breeders in developing countries.
Micropropagation
Micropropagation is the laboratory practice of rapidly multiplying stock plant material
to produce a large number of progeny plants using plant tissue culture methods. For
instance, the shoot tips of banana or potato are excised from healthy plants and cultivated
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 289
on gelatinized nutrient media in sterile conditions (in test tubes, plastic flasks, or baby-
food jars), so that contamination with pests and pathogens is avoided. The plantlets
obtained can be multiplied an unlimited number of times by cutting them into single-
node pieces and cultivating the cuttings in similar aseptic conditions. Millions of plantlets
can be produced in this manner in a very short time. The plantlets are then transplanted
in the field or nurseries where they grow and yield low-cost, disease-free propagation
materials ready to be distributed to farmers (FAO, 2009a). Even if healthy plants are not
available initially, specific in vitro techniques can also be applied to produce disease-free
propagation material.
Today, micropropagation is widely used for a range of developing country subsistence
crops including banana, cassava, potato and sweetpotato; for commercial plantation crops,
such as oil palm, coffee, cocoa, sugarcane and tea; for niche crops such as cardamom and
vanilla; and for fruit trees such as almond, citrus, coconut, mango and pineapple. Some of
the many countries with significant crop micropropagation programmes include Argentina,
Cuba, Gabon, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, Philippines, South Africa, Uganda and
Vietnam (Chapter1).
6.2.1.9 Mutagenesis
This involves the use of mutagenic agents such as chemicals or radiation to modify DNA
and hence create novel phenotypes. Induced mutagenesis has been used in crop breeding
programmes in developing countries since the 1930s. It also includes somaclonal mutagenesis,
involving changes in DNA induced during in vitro culture. Somaclonal variation is normally
regarded as an undesirable by-product of the stresses imposed on a plant by subjecting it
to tissue culture. However, provided they are carefully controlled, somaclonal changes in
cultured plant cells can generate variation that is useful to crop breeders (Chapter1).
Almost 3 000 new crop varieties have been developed and released by countries using
mutation-assisted plant breeding strategies and an estimated 100 countries currently use
induced mutation technology (FAO/IAEA, 2008; IAEA, 2008). Case studies from Kenya
(wheat), Peru (barley), sub-Saharan Africa (cassava) and Vietnam (rice) are described in
IAEA (2008).
In the livestock sector, mutagenesis has also been used in developing countries. The
sterile insect technique (SIT) for control of insects (e.g. screwworm and tsetse flies)
relies on the introduction of sterility in the females of the wild population. The sterility
is produced following the mating of females with released males carrying in their sperm
dominant lethal mutations that have been induced by ionizing radiation. This method is
usually applied as part of an area-wide integrated pest management (AW-IPM) approach
and has been applied in developing countries in the livestock sector as well as for the
control of crop pests. An estimated 30 countries use the SIT against insect pests, including
Chile and Peru (FAO/IAEA, 2008).
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 291
Mutagenesis is also extensively used to improve the quality of micro-organisms and
their enzymes or metabolites used in food processing. The process involves the production
of mutants through the exposure of microbial strains to mutagenic chemicals or ultraviolet
rays. Improved strains thus produced are selected on the basis of specific properties such
as improved flavour-producing ability or resistance to bacterial viruses (Chapter5).
Fermentation
6.2.1.10
Fermentation is the process of bioconversion of organic substances by micro-organisms
and/or enzymes of microbial, plant or animal origin. During fermentation, various biochemical
activities take place leading to the breakdown of complex substances into simple substances
and resulting in the production of a diversity of metabolites including simpler forms of
proteins, carbohydrates, fats, such as sugars, amino acids, lipids, as well as new compounds
such as antimicrobial compounds (e.g. lysozyme, bactericins); organic acids (e.g. lactic acid,
acetic acid, citric acid); texture-forming agents (e.g. xanthan gum); and flavours (esters and
aldehydes). Apart from the various new products that are yielded during fermentation, the
process is widely known for its preservative benefits (FAO, 2006b).
The new products that emerge following fermentation have been found to have potential
for longer shelf-lives, and they have characteristics quite different from the original substrates
from which they are formed. Fermentation is globally applied to preserve a wide range
of raw agricultural materials (cereals, roots, tubers, fruit and vegetables, milk, meat and
fish, etc.). Commercially produced fermented foods which are marketed globally include
dairy products (cheese, yogurt, fermented milks), sausages and soy sauce (FAO, 2006b).
Fermentation of sugars is also central to the production of bioethanol from agricultural
feedstocks (FAO, 2008a).
Certain micro-organisms associated with fermented foods, in particular strains of
the Lactobacillus species, are probiotic i.e. used as live microbial dietary supplements or
food ingredients that have a beneficial effect on the host by influencing the composition
and/or metabolic activity of the flora of the gastrointestinal tract (FAO, 2006b). They
can also be used as feed additives for monogastric and ruminant animals, and have been
applied for this purpose in China, India and Indonesia (Chapter3).
In developing countries, fermented foods are produced generally at the household
and village level using traditional processes that are uncontrolled and dependent on
spontaneous chance micro-organisms from the environment. Modern fermentation
processes employ the use of well-constructed vessels (fermenters/bioreactors), with
appropriate mechanisms for controlling temperature, pH, nutrient levels, oxygen tension,
among others, and also use selected micro-organisms and/or enzymes for their operations
(FAO, 2006b; Chapter5).
Biopesticides
6.2.1.12
Living organisms that are harmful to plants and cause biotic stresses are collectively called pests,
and they cause tremendous economic damage to plant production worldwide. Biopesticides
are mass-produced, biologically-based agents used for the control of plant pests. They can be
living organisms such as micro-organisms or naturally occurring substances such as plant
extracts or insect pheromones. Micro-organisms used as biopesticides include bacteria,
protozoa, fungi and viruses and they are used in a range of different crops (Chandler et al., 2008).
For example, different biopesticides are available for controlling locusts. In one example
of their application, a biopesticide containing spores of the fungus Metarhizium anisopliae
was used to control a migratory locust infestation in 2007 in Timor-Leste, supported by
FAO. Surveys revealed that an area of about 20 000ha was infested with gregarious nymphs
and that there was a serious threat to the rice crop. The target area was considered unsuitable
for chemical spraying because of high density human settlement and many water courses.
The infestation was therefore treated with the biopesticide which was targeted at flying
swarms using a helicopter, with spraying in a time period of over one month (FAO, 2009b).
Note that since biopesticides generally have a slower action than conventional chemicals,
the latter are preferred if crops are under immediate threat.
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 293
success or failure (whether partial or total) of their application, and determine and evaluate
the key factors that were responsible for success or failure. The conference does not cover
experiences in developed countries.
The number of factors that could potentially influence the overall assessment of the
biotechnology as a success or failure (partial or complete) is therefore quite large and for any
given case, some factors might be negative and others positive. Thus, the fact that a certain
biotechnology has been used (and perhaps continues to be used) does not in itself mean it
has been a success, although in certain cases it may be considered as an indicator of success.
A major hurdle to determining fully whether a specific application of biotechnology
has been a success or failure is that there is normally a lack of solid, scientifically sound
data and documentation about the impacts of its application on peoples livelihoods
and their socio-economic conditions etc. (FAO, 2009a). Indeed, one of the aims of this
e-mail conference is to try and get a better insight into and more information about
such areas.
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 295
etc. For this reason, participants are asked to ensure that all the biotechnologies and all
the food and agricultural sectors are covered adequately. In addition, regarding GMOs,
discussion should not consider the issues of whether GMOs should or should not be used
per se or the attributes, positive or negative, of GMOs themselves. Instead, the goal is to
bring together and discuss specific experiences of applying biotechnologies (including
genetic modification) in the past in developing countries.
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 297
In forestry, most discussion was about micropropagation with the remainder dedicated
to biofertilizers, biopesticides and molecular markers. Clear messages emanating from the
contributions are that there is a big gap between research developments and their use in the
field; and that enhancing collaboration and understanding between researchers in the laboratory
and forestry professionals in the field will enhance the application of forestry biotechnologies.
Several contributions were dedicated to the production and importance of traditional fermented
foods in developing countries. There was general consensus about the need to develop defined
starter cultures for indigenous fermented foods and to transform fermentation from being an
art to a technology-driven process, and successful examples from Thailand were provided.
Cross-sectoral discussions covered four main reasons for failures of agricultural
biotechnologies in developing countries. The first was the lack of funds, facilities and
trained professionals, where their negative impacts were highlighted. The second was brain
drain which weakened national capacities, although some participants argued that it should
not always be considered in a negative light. The third was inappropriate research focus,
where it was argued that researchers were increasingly focusing on basic rather than applied
research. The fourth was the lack of political will, where it was considered that there was
government apathy to research in general, as well as biotechnology research in particular,
while the positive enabling roles that government policies could play was underlined.
Cross-sectoral discussions also included four main suggestions for increasing the success
of agricultural biotechnologies in the future. The first was that research should be focused
on the real problems of the farmers, where discussions included practical recommendations
to make this possible. The second was that extension systems should be strengthened, as
they can ensure that relevant R&D results actually reach the farmer. The third was that
regional and sub-regional cooperation should be increased, and establishment of sub-regional
centres of excellence was proposed. The fourth was that public-private partnerships (PPPs)
be formed, and participants described some recent examples and discussed the potential
advantages and disadvantages of PPPs.
6.3.2 Introduction
This Summary document presents a concise account of the major issues discussed by the
participants. A total of 834 people subscribed to the moderated conference and 121 e-mail
messages were posted by 83 participants from 36 different countries. Most contributors
discussed whether applications of one or more biotechnologies had been a success or a failure
in a given sector, including the factors that determined their success or failure. Greatest
attention was given to crops and least to the fishery sector. Although each sector has its
specificities, some of the discussions, especially on the features that determined success or
failure, are also of general relevance.
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 299
and the Philippines; insect resistant cotton in Colombia; and herbicide tolerant soybeans
in Bolivia. Results showed that the impact of adopting GMOs in developing countries
had been overall positive, but it masks significant outcome variability between countries,
regions, households, crops and traits. Furthermore, we have seen that the level of economic
benefits tend to be more dependent on the institutional context than on the technology
itself. In essence, issues such as access to credit and complementary inputs, availability
of knowledge and information flows about using the technology and about markets; are
critical for determining the level of benefits.
Regarding individual case studies, there was considerable discussion about the cultivation of
Bt cotton in India, i.e. containing genes derived from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuriengensis
coding for proteins toxic to insect pests that feed on the cotton plants. For Gupta (2), Banerjee
(15) and Prakash (28), it was a clear success story. For example, Prakash (28) wrote: since
its introduction in 2002, Bt technology in cotton is a huge success in India. Looking at the
speed of adoption of this technology, now India has become the second largest producer
of cotton in the world. Gupta (2), similarly, described it as a major success and looked
forward to other GM crops benefiting farmers in India.
Glover (51) felt that the situation was more complex. Based on his own research
and that of IFPRI, he argued that the overall picture regarding Bt cotton was of broadly
beneficial impacts but that the general overview masked considerable variation between
farms, farmers, regions and seasons. He suggested that at the aggregate level there is good
evidence that the overall productivity of cotton had increased following the introduction
of Bt technology but that, at the microscale, the picture was much more complicated, as
the performance of Bt cotton depended on favourable growing conditions especially good
soils and reliable water, farmer skills and the presence/absence of supportive institutional
frameworks. He concluded: to label Bt cotton as a great success would be just as crude as
to dismiss it as a disastrous failure. We also cannot assume that Bt cotton must be a success
merely because it has spread rapidly.
Banerjee (53) agreed with Glover (51) that the rapid spread of a technology should
not be considered as the sole factor for deciding its success or failure, but argued that it
was an important factor. Banerjee (53), supported by Glover (58), also underlined that the
performance of Bt cotton depended not only on the Bt gene but also on the performance of
the hybrid background. Responding to the comment of Glover (51) about the dependence
of Bt cotton performance on favourable growing conditions, Banerjee (53) stated that this
was true for all crops. Glover (58) agreed with Banerjees comments and concluded that
it was important to consider the specific local circumstances (bio-physical, social and
institutional) under which biotechnologies need to perform and to evaluate the positive
and negative outcomes in developmental terms (e.g. their effects on labour, incomes,
2 Presentations by Zambrano and by Fonseca & Zambrano on GM cotton in Colombia were given at ABDC-10, available at www.fao.org/fileadmin/
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 301
in other countries. Indeed, Tchouaff (75), in the context of dissemination of low-cost
micropropagation, underlined the role that fora to exchange views between researchers
and local populations could play and that governments could act as a facilitator in
establishing such fora. Sharry (25) also pointed out the importance of REDBIOs role in
communication in Argentina.
Echenique (41, 64, 73) agreed with Trigo (33) about the economic benefits of GM
soybean in Argentina, stating: it is a highly profitable extremely recent technology which
has been widely accepted by farmers in a very short time period (64). However, she also
highlighted the need to consider environmental and social aspects related with adoption
of the technology, focusing on two main issues. The first is the move towards soybean
monocultures, strongly accentuated in some provinces, leading to nutrient loss and soil
fertility problems unless appropriate measures are taken (such as crop rotation and application
of fertilizers to replace nutrients taken from the soil). The second is the expansion of land
areas dedicated to soybean cultivation at the expense of forest areas, horticulture, milk
production, cattle and forage (41).
Echeniques comments evoked a number of responses, most of which generally agreed
with her while arguing that the problem was not the technology per se but the related
policy environment. Thus, Trigo (47) and Parrott (52) both pointed out that there were
more economic incentives for farmers to grow soybean than maize, which triggered the
monoculture problem, and that the social and environmental impacts in Argentina would
be totally different if the incentives were different (52). Escandon (70) agreed in general
terms with Echenique (64) and called for government policies to encourage farmers to
practise crop rotation. Parrott (52) also noted there was growing recognition among farmers
that current practices were not sustainable and that there was now a strong movement to
implement more sound agronomic practices such as crop rotation. Regarding deforestation,
Trigo (47) noted that while availability of herbicide tolerant soybeans may have contributed
to the process and even sped it up, the problem existed before GM soybeans were released
and was the result of policy failure in terms of forest protection and land use planning and
was independent of GMOs. Echenique (73) concluded by stating that the problem was
not the technology, but that planning of agriculture was needed when any new technology
was introduced.
There was also discussion about the success or failure of two GM crops that had not been
commercialized. The first was GM sweetpotato in Kenya, resistant to the feathery mottle
virus, where GMOs developed in the United States were imported by the Kenya Agricultural
Research Institute in 2000 for field testing, but they were not later commercialized. For
Gurian-Sherman (26), the project was a failure as it involved substantial financial and scientific
inputs over a decade without resulting in any product, whereas there had been a reported
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 303
Many participants also argued that GM crops were over-regulated, which was negatively
impacting their adoption in developing countries. In India, Gupta (2) and Dudhare (24)
considered that the regulatory process was too slow, discouraging work in this area (Gupta, 2),
and was very costly (Gupta, 2; Keshavachandran, 82). Sharry (25) warned about the dangers
of excessive bureaucratic delays, which can limit investment and technology transfer. Van
der Meer (115), noting the challenges of preparing and conducting GM crop field trials,
proposed that a support network for public researchers be established so that they could
help each other in this work. Roca (74, 119) wrote that regulation is often not science-based,
which had dire consequences for public sector research. Trigo (71) argued that there was a
very thin red line between being careful and over-regulation; that these were the most
watched-over technologies in agricultural history; and that regulation should evolve based
on the accumulation of scientific evidence. C.S. Prakash (107) agreed, and concluded that over-
regulation was leading to excessive costs and needless delays in commercialization of GM crops
for both the private and public sectors. Similarly, Giddings (118) argued that scientifically
unsupportable regulatory burdens were blocking wider dissemination of GM crops.
6.3.3.2 Tissueculture
As described earlier, tissue culture refers to the in vitro culture of plant cells, tissues
or organs in a nutrient medium under sterile conditions. There are a number of tissue
culture-based technologies and they can be employed for different purposes. They include
micropropagation, involving the rapid multiplication of stock plant material to produce
disease-free propagation materials for dissemination to farmers; in vitro embryo rescue to
enable wide crossing; anther culture and ovule culture to produce haploid plants; and in
vitro slow growth storage to conserve plant genetic resources.
Discussions on tissue culture focused on its use for micropropagation, although its use
for wide crossing, creation of doubled haploids and conservation of genetic resources were
also briefly considered. The messages illustrated that application of micropropagation has
been successful in realizing substantial benefits in countries such as Sri Lanka, India, the
Philippines and Venezuela, although in some other cases it was seen to have failed. Important
factors which influenced its success or failure included the degree of involvement of the
extension system or the private sector.
Pathirana (81) informed participants that micropropagation together with the technique
of mutation induction had resulted in successful development of early flowering, high-
yielding banana clones in Sri Lanka, which were also free of banana bract mosaic virus, which
significantly reduces yield in infected plants. An estimated 25 percent increase in annual
income had been attributed to intensification of the production cycle through use of the early
maturing mutant banana cultivars and Pathirana (81) stated that micropropagated bananas
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 305
that there was a well established structure for tissue culture work in Honduras. Caesar
(121) reported that in Guyana, successes had been achieved in tissue culture of pineapple,
sweetpotato and plantain among others.
For Tonjock (9), the provision of tissue cultured seedlings at low cost was a success in
Cameroon, although she noted that some farmers were still unable to afford them. Similarly,
Loquang (97) argued that the production of disease-free banana planting material by tissue
culture could be considered a success in Uganda as the clean planting material boosted food
and income security. In Nigeria, micropropagation had also been used for the production of
disease-resistant varieties of crops but doubts were expressed about its success (Chikezie, 48;
Echereobia, 78; Oselebe, 57). Chikezie (48) argued that disease-resistant varieties of staple
root crops resulting from research in Southeast Nigeria had not benefited many farmers
in that part of the country, which could be because of inadequate funding to enable large-
scale micropropagation of these staple root crops or the lack of well-developed agricultural
extension networks. Echereobia (78) also mentioned the need for training and provision of
technical support to sustain the technology.
Oselebe (57) reported on progress with micropropagation in plantains and bananas,
noting also its potential as it could lead to rapid multiplication of disease-free plantlets for
farmers. However, she concluded: it is highly technical, can only be employed in very few
research institutes (in most cases for other crops) and is not amenable to the resource-poor
farmers who are the main producers of plantain and banana. Infante (85) noted that research
activities may be carried out without focusing on eventual applications, reporting that some
laboratories in Venezuela had carried out micropropagation work for years without it ever
resulting in the release of plant materials to farmers.
In the Sudan, Gama (54) wrote that a tissue culture laboratory had been established
under a long-term project and it had been extensively used for banana tissue culture and
wheat doubled haploid production. He noted that the laboratory had been able to provide
banana planting materials during critical times of post-flood devastation of banana plantations
along the Nile banks and that anther culture techniques for production of doubled haploid
wheat had yielded good results leading to the release of several cultivars.
Also in Africa, Manneh (35) described the successful combination of conventional
breeding and biotechnology to produce the NERICA varieties by crossing Asian (Oryza
sativa) with African rice (Oryza glaberrima Steud.), mentioning in particular the role of
anther culture to create doubled haploids and fix desirable genotypes. While noting that
upland NERICAs are now widely cultivated (over 200 000 ha) by farmers in Africa, he
argued that one of the major impediments to the widescale use of these biotechnological
products is the weak seed system in many developing countries especially those in Africa
and that the present demand for NERICA seeds in developing countries surpassed their
3 A presentation of the NERICA case study was given at ABDC-10, www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/abdc/documents/nerica.pdf and further details on
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 307
15 years); long-term collaboration of the partners; and reasonably strong linkage of the
upstream biotechnology end of the projects to the more applied plant breeding product
development, testing and delivery ends.
In India, Gupta (2) maintained that MAS had been used successfully in crop improvement,
with the development of products that were already commercially available or being field
tested, namely superior hybrids of pearl millet and quality protein maize, high protein
wheat cultivars, wheat resistant to rust, rice resistant to bacterial blight and rice tolerant to
submergence. Nevertheless, he felt that the pace of work and adoption of marker technology
was slow, attributing this to lack of expertise and motivation among those involved in
breeding, lack of cooperation between molecular biologists and plant breeders and high costs
of the technology compared with conventional plant breeding. Singh (60) agreed, arguing
that the lack of interest of plant breeders had meant that few populations for molecular
mapping and tagging had been developed for field crops in India. Predeepa (111) agreed
that a lack of collaboration/interaction between breeders and molecular biologists was a
hurdle in India. Murphy (100) felt it was not just an Indian phenomenon but also applied
to developed countries to some extent although his impression was that it was much more
serious in developing countries, possibly due to the more recent development/introduction
of some biotechnologies there. Indicating that he had experienced the same phenomenon
in Malaysia, he concluded: it needs to be addressed by improved education of agricultural
science graduates in ways that emphasize the unity of the discipline and especially the role
of biotechnology as the servant of breeders and agronomists rather than their master (100).
Based on his own experience, Jordan (83) argued that marker technology works well
if breeders have the appropriate skills, understand the technology well and are involved in
developing the technology for a particular application; biotechnologists have some understanding
of plant breeding; there is appropriate balance between investments in traditional disciplines
and marker technologies; skills in statistics and informatics are sufficiently advanced to
support the use of molecular technology by breeders; and rational decisions are made
regarding resource allocation in applied programmes based on true costs and returns. From his
limited experience of plant breeding programmes in developing countries, he suggested that
investments in conventional plant breeding and related disciplines often seem insufficient to
allow technologies like markers to be used effectively and that, in many cases, much greater
genetic improvements could be made by enhancing the conventional breeding programme
rather than investing in markers. Trigo (93) agreed with Jordan (83) that appropriate and
intelligent investment is essential. However, he argued: molecular biology applications are
the way of the future to make breeding more efficient and effective and we should push in
that direction and that strengthening conventional breeding alone is not the solution even
when we accept that there is still a lot to be achieved through conventional breeding (93).
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 309
by the farmers (108). He reported that they were the only mutant cultivars of oilseed crops
released in Sri Lanka and that they had been cultivated for almost two decades (108). Both
Pathirana (81) and Gama (54) reported on the successful application of mutation breeding
in bananas in combination with tissue culture in Sri Lanka and the Sudan respectively. The
projects were supported by the Joint FAO/IAEA Division of Nuclear Techniques in Food
and Agriculture and led to the release of new varieties in both countries.
6.3.3.5 Biofertilizers
The application of biofertilizers has met with some success. For example, Tababa (67) stated
that in the Philippines, biofertilizers for corn and rice had been successful, which could be
attributed to the farmers education on their use and benefits, inclusion of their use in the
package of technologies adopted by the National Corn Programme, and the governments
uninterrupted financial support to their production. Peralta (22) reported that in Mexico a
Rhizobium-based biofertilizer for the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) had been developed
by the university and was now successfully commercialized by a private company. Initial
efforts to involve government agencies in promoting and using the product were unsuccessful.
The biofertilizer is used mainly in central and northern Mexico (Peralta, 50) and he (22) felt
that this is the beginning of the common bean fertilizer era in Mexico. He pointed out
that much educational/promotional work is required (22) and that the farmers who bought
the biofertilizers also received access to printed material, sessions with agronomists and
further assistance (50)4. Sangar (56) appreciated this example from Mexico and wondered
whether biofertilizers had helped poor farmers in India, which suggests that documentation
of such cases in India is weak.
Roca (74) stated that in Honduras, biofertilizers had also been used successfully, with
strong programmes for Rhizobium and mycorrhizal fungi. Listing a selection of ongoing
biofertilizer programmes in her country, Dvila (109) noted that biofertilizers are increasingly
being used in Peru. She emphasized the need for training and that farmers need to have
evidence that biofertilizers enhance crop performance, are more economical than chemical
fertilizers, and are environmentally-friendly. Seshadri (113) argued that, despite long-term
research and the fact that many products are already on the market, much more could be
done regarding biofertilizers and biopesticides in India. Farmers were seldom convinced
by them, primarily due to issues of profitability, and he urged that, with concerted efforts,
biofertilizers and biopesticides could be presented in a better way. He highlighted that
there was room for improvement in areas such as formulation, shelf-life, number of cells,
packaging quality and price (113).
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 311
micropropagation still had a long way to go in India and that key issues to be addressed were
the existing gap between research and the field; limited funds and inadequate infrastructure;
and the lack of trained professionals.
From his own experience, Muralidharan (63) indicated that low-cost and simple
micropropagation technology for bamboo, teak and several medicinal plants now appeared
feasible and he was looking at the possibility of training small groups, consisting mainly
of rural women, and setting up small production units. In response to Muralidharans (63)
request for information on aspects to consider when transferring such technology to the
field, Tchouaff (75) suggested that it could be disseminated and transferred through capacity
building and networking with communicators and the local population.
Regarding more advanced biotechnologies, Sharry (106) indicated that Brazil and
Chile have developed a strong forest industry and are using all available biotechnologies
including genomics. In her own country, Argentina, she reported that genetic maps and
molecular markers had been developed to support eucalyptus breeding programmes;
molecular markers had been used to identify areas of protection for native forest species;
and research on GM poplar was ongoing. However, she argued that compared with the
crop sector, these biotechnologies had not yet had a major impact at the forest chain
level in Argentina. Similarly, Muralidharan (89) noted that molecular markers were
increasingly used in studying the provenances and the breeding behaviour of some of
the important tree species of India, but the results were not assimilated into ongoing
breeding programmes.
Regarding microbial-based biotechnologies, Caesar (121) noted that the use of
biofertilizers for inoculation of seedlings of the local forest species Eperua grandiflora
ssp. guyanensis had met with partial success in Guyana. Rajalakshmi (104) also mentioned
the importance of biofertilizers in India as they could boost agriculture and reduce the
debt burden on farming communities. Muralidharan (114) presented a case study of the
development of a biopesticide for the biological control of a serious insect pest of teak,
the teak defoliator (Hyblaea purea). Based on a virus isolated from natural populations
of the insect larvae, a biopesticide was successfully developed in India after nearly two
decades of research, culminating in an elegant solution to a serious problem (114).
However, the technology had not yet been applied in the State Forest Departments, and
he underlined that biotechnology research had a much better chance of producing results
when conceived, developed and implemented in a broader framework consisting not just
of scientists and technologists but also involving at every stage the forestry professionals
who work at the field level and, also at some level, the policy-makers who eventually have
to give the green signal.
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 313
while retaining their larger size, local adaptation and meat-producing ability. The FecB
mutation increases ovulation rate considerably and a PCR-RFLP test was used to detect
the mutation while backcrossing. She concluded (55) that the gene had provided farmers
with the opportunity for moderate and sustainable intensification of production, which
was a step towards raising the efficiency of resource use. She noted that it was possible to
use the patented gene and DNA test without paying a royalty because those patents were
not valid in India6.
Lack of proper animal recording systems in developing countries was seen as one of the
major constraints to using biotechnologies for genetic improvement. Moro (40) highlighted
the importance of keeping accurate records and based on his experiences with dual-purpose
cattle in Mexico, he stated that the lack of phenotypic recording was a reason for failure
of the research/technology transfer programmes for genetic improvement (involving AI,
planned crossbreeding, genetic selection). For farmers that might eventually join a milk
recording scheme, he underlined the importance of enabling them to make quick and
practical use of the records, e.g. to assist them with daily management issues (Moro, 40). In
a similar vein, Satish Kumar (31) bemoaned the fact that in India good-quality phenotypic
performance records are lacking and was critical of the fact that in this situation most of
the animal breeding researchers have gone high-tech. Unless some basic animal genetics
experiments were carried out and there was collection of quality data, he argued that research
into molecular markers would have no impact, concluding: let us count our sheep before
worrying about genes!
For Africa, Adebambo (72) also highlighted the difficulties of animal improvement.
Rather than importing poorly adapted exotic breeds, he urged that more attention be
give to African livestock, and that issues of description and census of African livestock
needed to be addressed first. Like Adebambo (72), Kumarasamy (29) argued that the use
of biotechnology in the animal sector was far behind the crop sector. The reasons he cited
for this included the lack of coordination between agencies and between the laboratory
and the field; excessive bureaucracy and lack of encouragement from the administration;
and short-term project funding (34 years), which is too short for animal breeding schemes
because of the long generation intervals in animals (29).
A small number of messages were dedicated to biotechnologies applied to animal health.
Pathirana (110) noted that R&D in biotechnology had progressed at a very slow pace in
Sri Lanka, and that only plant micropropagation, AI in cattle and ELISA techniques for
disease diagnosis in cattle and buffalo had made any impact at the field level. Roca (74)
6 The Deccani sheep case study was presented by Nimbkar at ABDC-10, www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/abdc/documents/chanda.pdf and further
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 315
led to anything concrete and concluded by advocating the production of starter cultures
for traditionally fermented foods in Africa. Raheem (1) commended recent initiatives to
diversify the industrial utilization of cassava such as the production of dried yeast, alcohol,
L-lactic acid and phytase through fermentation, and wrote that cottage industries should
be established to commercialize them.
Edema (79) argued that fermentation could also be considered a failure in Nigeria
because more advanced biotechnologies had not been applied, as back-slopping (rather than
application of defined starter cultures) was used at the household level. Highlighting the need
to move production of indigenous fermented foods in developing countries from an art
to a technology-driven process, Olusegun (61) noted that starter culture development
is one of the steps in this transition, mentioning the successful use of starter cultures in
production of fermented pork sausage (nham) and soy sauce in Thailand7.
Nevertheless, Olusegun (61) noted that although important micro-organisms for
fermentation might have been identified, starter cultures had not been developed for most
indigenous fermented foods in Africa and for some in Asia. He argued (61) that one of
the reasons was that the industry was still at the household level and manufacturers view
starter culture technology as a burden to the cost of production.
To improve traditional fermentation processes and products in developing countries,
Olusegun (61) concluded that the way forward involved more research on process
standardization and controls and on the nutritional benefits of fermented foods; capacity
building in biotechnology, especially in starter culture technology; development of fermenters
(bioreactors) with control parameters (to overcome the tedious and time consuming nature
of traditional processing); and promoting public awareness of the potential of biotechnology
and the need to improve traditional food biotechnology with modern knowledge.
7 A presentation of the soy sauce case study was given at ABDC-10, www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/abdc/documents/soysauce.pdf and further details
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 317
Several messages, including Sharry (25), Rajalakshmi (104) and Pathirana (110) pointed to
the lack of trained professionals. For example, Manneh (35) stated that the lack of sufficient
trained manpower was most acute in Africa where there is a serious shortage of breeders
and biotechnologists in many national research programs. For sub-Saharan Africa, Danquah
(99), supported by Gama (103), emphasized the importance of education, stating: we
have to go back to basics and develop not only the post-graduate schools in sub-Saharan
Africa but the entire plant science programmes in institutions of higher learning. Today, a
number of universities in Africa are struggling and many cannot run a good practical class
for science students and many people graduate without the necessary skills to confront the
challenges of any workplace. Its important for us to recognize that many of these half-baked
students are those who end up in higher offices, some as politicians who never appreciate
the application of science to development. Similarly, Driss (117) concluded that training
should be the priority, while both Chikezie (48) and Oselebe (57) urged that donors provide
funding for training. Caesar (121) proposed that a global biotechnology capacity building
project be established, possibly spearheaded by FAO and UNEP.
Brain drain
Another important reason cited for failures of biotechnology was brain drain. For example,
Yifru (23) reported that in the past decade or so, a number of prominent African agricultural
researchers and policy analysts had left their respective national agencies, which had weakened
the capacity of national agricultural research organizations and created knowledge gaps.
For Caesar (121), human capacity sustainability and brain drain in developing countries
were a threat to effective biotechnology development. Specific examples of brain drain were
mentioned with Caesar (121) naming two key professionals that had migrated from his
country, Guyana, in the past decade and Rigor (42) reporting that many trained biotechnology
staff in his institute in the Philippines stayed only a short time before migrating/moving,
which normally led to their projects being suspended or prematurely terminated.
Some participants felt, however, that brain drain need not be only negative, and that
the professionals who migrated from developing countries could still contribute to solving
problems back home. Thus, Murphy (100) felt that brain drain was real but need not
be catastrophic. He cited the case of the 2009 World Food Prize winner, Gabisa Ejeta,
an Ethiopian-born scientist who worked in the United States and who developed Striga-
tolerant sorghum hybrids that were widely disseminated in Africa, noting that he had been
able to leverage know-how from the United States for the direct benefit of subsistence
farmers in Africa. Caesar (121) noted that this model of brain gain could be explored as
a way to lever the knowledge and support of citizens of developing countries who are
fully established in developed countries. Predeepa (111) thought that brain drain was a
necessary evil, which made it possible to learn about science, share resources and transfer
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 319
research in general. Oyewole (36) also highlighted the challenge in developing countries
of governmental apathy towards research including biotechnology research, as did Gama
(103) who wrote that development of indigenous biotechnology capacity was damaged by
the lack of awareness or willingness of policy-makers to support biotechnology projects.
Yifru (23) noted that Africa was still far behind in the development and dissemination
of appropriate agricultural technologies and products and urged that governments should
give utmost priority to reinvigorating their educational systems and institutions and
creating a conducive environment for biotechnology R&D in agricultural colleges and
universities. The positive enabling role that government policies could play for application
of biotechnologies was mentioned in several messages (Tchouaff, 5; Olusegun, 61; Edema,
79: Traor, 81; C.S. Prakash, 107; Muralidharan, 114). Danquah (99) also emphasized the
importance of policy development, mentioning that most countries in sub-Saharan Africa
did not have a science policy or a biotechnology policy, and that international organizations
such as FAO needed to place policy development high on their agenda. Some developing
countries have, nevertheless, prepared national biotechnology policies, including Nigeria
(Usman, 37) and Sri Lanka (Pathirana, 110).
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 321
high quality and cost-effective marker data could be established at sub-regional hubs.
Agreeing with Danquah (99), Caesar (121) stressed the need for capacity building and
outlined the key features of a potential global biotechnology capacity building project,
building on regional and sub-regional groupings of developing countries and including a
comprehensive scholarship/fellowship programme for developing countries. Commenting
on the many messages describing the lack of facilities and capacity for biotech R&D in
developing countries, Murphy (100) felt it might be unrealistic for each country, however
small, to have its own research programme and he advocated increased collaboration with
neighbouring countries and with centres in developed countries. Gama (103), however,
disagreed that it was unrealistic to have a national programme.
Regional collaboration can be promoted through South-South cooperation programmes
and a number of UN and non-UN international organizations provide assistance for South-
South cooperation. McGrath (69) described one such example from the Academy of Sciences
for the Developing World (TWAS), which supports young scientists from developing
countries to carry out research in centres of excellences in other developing countries.
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 323
Here below, the names are provided of participants with referenced messages,
as well as the country in which they are living:
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 325
6.4 References
Adams, A. & Thompson, K.D. 2008. Recent applications of biotechnology to novel diagnostics for aquatic
animals. Rev. Sci. Tech. Off. Int. Epiz., 27: 197209.
Chandler, D., Davidson, G., Grant, W.P., Greaves, J. & Satchel, G.M. 2008. Microbial biopesticides for
integrated crop management: an assessment of environmental and regulatory sustainability. Trends Food
Sci. Technol., 19: 275283.
Chauvet, M. & Ochoa, R.F. 1996. An appraisal of the use of rBST in Mexico. Biotechnol. Dev. Monitor, 27:
67. (available at www.biotech-monitor.nl/2703.htm).
Chupin, D. 1992. Rsultats dune enqute sur ltat de linsmination artificielle dans les pays en dveloppement.
Elevage et Insmination, 252: 126.
FAO. 2001. Glossary of biotechnology for food and agriculture, by A. Zaid, H.G. Hughes, E. Porceddu & F.
Nicholas. FAO Research and Technology Paper 9. (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/004/y2775e/
y2775e00.htm).
FAO. 2004. Preliminary review of biotechnology in forestry, including genetic modification. Forest Genetic
Resources Working Paper FGR/59E. Rome. (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/008/ae574e/
ae574e00.htm).
FAO. 2006a. Background document to the e-mail conference on the role of biotechnology for the
characterization and conservation of crop, forest, animal and fishery genetic resources in developing
countries, by J. Ruane & A. Sonnino. In J. Ruane & A. Sonnino, eds. The role of biotechnology in
exploring and protecting agricultural genetic resources. pp. 151172. Rome. (available at www.fao.org/
docrep/009/a0399e/A0399E09.htm#ch4.1).
FAO. 2006b. Results from the FAO biotechnology forum: Background and dialogue on selected issues, by
J. Ruane & A. Sonnino. FAO Research and Technology Paper 11. Rome. (available at www.fao.org/
docrep/009/a0744e/a0744e00.htm).
FAO. 2006c. The potential of cryopreservation and reproductive technologies for animal genetic resources
conservation strategies, by S.J. Hiemstra, T. van der Lende & H. Woelders. In J. Ruane & A. Sonnino,
eds. The role of biotechnology in exploring and protecting agricultural genetic resources. Rome. (available
at www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0399e/A0399E06.htm#ch2.1).
FAO. 2006d. Status of cryopreservation technologies in plants (crops and forest trees), by B. Panis & M.
Lambardi. In J. Ruane & A. Sonnino, eds. The role of biotechnology in exploring and protecting agricultural
genetic resources. pp. 6178. Rome. (available at www.fao.org/docrep/009/a0399e/A0399E06.htm#ch2.2).
FAO. 2007a. Marker-assisted selection: Current status and future perspectives in crops, livestock, forestry and
fish. E.P. Guimares, J. Ruane, B.D. Scherf, A. Sonnino & J.D. Dargie, eds. Rome. (also available at www.
fao.org/docrep/010/a1120e/a1120e00.htm).
FAO. 2007b. The state of capacities in animal genetic resources management: Reproductive and molecular
biotechnology. In B. Rischkowsky & D. Pilling, eds. The state of the worlds animal genetic resources
for food and agriculture. Chapter3.D. Rome. (also available at ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/a1250e/
a1250e13.pdf)
FAO. 2008a. The role of agricultural biotechnologies for production of bioenergy in developing countries.
Background document to conference 15 of the FAO biotechnology forum (10 November to 14 December
2008). Rome. (available at www.fao.org/biotech/C15doc.htm).
FAO. 2008b. Guide to laboratory establishment for plant nutrient analysis, by M.R. Motsara & R.N. Roy. FAO
Fertilizer and Plant Nutrition Bulletin 19. Rome. (also available at www.fao.org/docrep/011/i0131e/
i0131e00.htm).
chapte r 6 Learning from the Past: Successes and Failures with Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries 327
7
chapter
Targeting Agricultural
Biotechnologies to the Poor
Summary
Designing and implementing policies for targeting agricultural biotechnologies to the poor
requires holistic or joined up analyses of proposed interventions to identify their possible
direct and indirect, immediate and longer-term ramifications and to foster coherence with
overarching national policies for economic and social development, including agriculture and
food security, as well as for science and technology (S&T). Doing so requires taking account
of the institutional arrangements for developing new agricultural technologies into tangible
products and the social contexts that influence the incentives for farmers and markets to
adopt these, and fostering collective and transparent processes for decision-making. Policies
for agriculture itself now have to deal with a multitude of new and emerging issues, and
decision-making is further complicated by influential legally-binding instruments negotiated
globally, regionally and bi-nationally. This plethora of cross-cutting considerations cannot
be tackled effectively by an individual ministry and different interests will drive negotiations
towards particular outcomes and priorities. Competing economic and social interests do
not favour targeting biotechnologies in food and agriculture (BFA) towards small-scale and
often poor farmers living in resource-challenged areas only strong and persistent political
commitment can achieve this.
This Chapter begins by outlining some of the broader considerations within which
national agricultural and wider rural development policies and policy-making operate
nowadays, and some principles that should be followed for formulating a national policy or
strategy for BFA including the critical issue of deciding on the distribution of benefits from
introducing technological change through biotechnologies (i.e. direct and indirect effects).
A rationale is provided for establishing a national biotechnology policy/strategy
(NBS) framework something which few countries actually have in place as well as
7.1 Introduction
ABDC-10 takes place against the backdrop of global food, energy and financial crises,
and a number of worrying statistics and trends concerning hunger, food insecurity, the
state of the worlds climate, and its resources of land, water and biodiversity upon which
everyone ultimately depends for their livelihood and very existence. It benefits from the
comprehensive and thought-provoking insights provided by the World Development
Report on agriculture for development (World Bank, 2007), the International Assessment
of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD, 2009)
and the State of Food Insecurity in the World (FAO, 2008) into the challenges faced and
1 For the purposes here a policy refers to a documented plan of action announced by a Head of State and/or agreed by a Government, Ministry,
legislature, regulatory authority and national and international standard setting or other legally recognized body e.g. research institution, university, funding
agency. Policy instruments can include laws, regulations, rules, standards, and politically and legally authorized funding instruments and programmes.
A strategy refers to an integrated package of policies for the sector, a sub-sector, technology or issue. Policies may or may not be legally binding.
Agricultural policies that address a single issue (e.g. BFA) in a piecemeal manner without
considering the totality of its dimensions will not contribute positively to meeting the challenges
faced by the sector or the people whose livelihoods depend directly and indirectly upon it.
This is because each policy initiative (e.g. using semen or embryos to upgrade livestock as
Table 1
Added to this are globally and regionally agreed commitments to tackle hunger, poverty,
environmental degradation and trade disparities urgently and in a concerted manner through
a combination of national and international private and public goods (e.g. the MDGs, the Plan
of Implementation from the World Summit on Sustainable Development, the New Partnership
for Africas Development [NEPAD] and the Doha Development Round of trade negotiations).
2 The CPB uses the term living modified organism (LMO), defined as any living organism that possesses a novel combination of genetic material
obtained through the use of modern biotechnology, where modern biotechnology is defined as the application of in vitro nucleic acid techniques,
including recombinant deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) and direct injection of nucleic acid into cells or organelles, or fusion of cells beyond the
taxonomic family, that overcome natural physiological reproductive or recombination barriers and that are not techniques used in traditional breeding
and selection. Technically, there are differences between a GMO and an LMO but for the purposes here the more commonly used term GMO is
used, although reference may be made to an LMO. It is also questionable technically, whether some products referred to as GMOs are in fact GMOs
since processing has removed all traces of the organism from which the product was obtained. Clear definitions are, however, essential when making
laws and regulations transparent and predictable, and differences in these can lead also to misunderstandings between nations; this aspect is not
expanded upon further here.
3 The CPB does not define biosafety. Judging by the scope of their primary laws and regulations on biotechnology, countries surveyed for Chapters
7-9 employed the term variously in relation to protecting agricultural or agricultural and wild biodiversity, or the environment as a whole (i.e. both
the biotic and abiotic components of landscapes or ecosystems); they may or may not include human health in all its dimensions or one particular
aspect e.g. food safety. For the purposes of these Chapters, the term biosafety refers to assessing and managing the potential risks to the environment
and human health, including food and feed safety arising from R&D, use (contained and not contained), and marketing for food and feed uses of GM
products and the processed materials derived from them.
Introducing any technique and product into the research mix is one thing introducing it
into the marketplace is quite another. Both require careful consideration and priority-setting.
However, in view of the costs and the legal, scientific, managerial and other complexities
involved, using some modern biotechnologies to develop products that will be released
into the wider environment for producing foods and feeds for marketing nationally, and
particularly internationally, does raise the bar very substantially in terms of identifying
opportunity and justifying need.
Countries have many options for tackling these challenges through public policy. The
instruments they choose will be determined by the prevailing macro-economic environment,
the structure of the sector, the legal and regulatory environment within which it operates, and
the strength of their innovation systems (scientific, technological, marketing) including the
regional and global links that support them. But choices will also be determined by vision,
i.e. belief based on realistic analysis that if biotechnology is integrated appropriately with
other science-based and traditional knowledge, then it will make R&D more efficient and
farming more productive and competitive while not by-passing the most vulnerable in society.
While there is general agreement within scientific establishments and international bodies
regarding the scientific principles underpinning most biotechnologies, positions between
and within countries differ on a variety of issues connected primarily with applying genetic
modification and using GMOs for agriculturally important species. These include their potential
4 www.fao.org/biotech/country.asp
How the countries concerned proposed to deal, or have actually dealt, with each of these
issues forms the basis of much of the remainder of this Chapter and the two following
Chapters. An attempt has also been made to identify gaps or areas in need of further
attention within each of these themes both nationally and internationally (regionally and
globally). However, although many countries have established biosafety frameworks (see
Chapter8), very few countries have actually prepared NBS frameworks and even fewer
have done so for BFA, leaving considerable scope for the remainder to consider their
options on both fronts.
Horizontal coordination
While the options for a horizontal coordinating mechanism include a national working group,
commission, council or task force with a coordinator, the most important consideration is that
its composition is organizationally sound i.e. interministerial and engages those ministries
that form the nucleus of competencies involved in a coordinated response. Inclusion of the
Economic Ministry would improve understanding of biotechnology and the role it plays,
or could play, in economic development and for maintaining dialogue on budgetary issues.
These links would also be vital for advocating increased budgetary allocations.
One issue that has an important influence on the effectiveness of a horizontal coordinating
mechanism is its reach. Irrespective of the number or identities of the ministries involved,
the officials serving on a horizontal coordinating mechanism will only have some of the
competencies, jurisdiction and expertise needed to successfully coordinate biotechnology
efforts, and it is therefore important to determine how to involve others who are not at the
table. This will be a major challenge since jurisdictions and competencies among and within
ministries may overlap while at the same time being highly specialized and compartmentalized.
Another factor to be considered is the scope of its work. The distinction between
working at policy and at the operational level is a significant one, although the lines
between the two are often blurred. The policy level relates to establishing, strengthening
and coordinating the overall legal, regulatory, institutional and strategic frameworks used
to plan and implement biotechnology. The operational level, on the other hand, is geared
towards building or enhancing the professional capacities and effective implementation of
service providers, e.g. NARS, universities, regulatory bodies, NGOs, CSOs.
While countries have the option of separating these roles and responsibilities, a fully
functioning horizontal coordinating mechanism should be able to develop, support and
advance both policy and operational elements of the governments NBS framework. This
makes the structural challenge all the more demanding since the coordinating body needs
to be able to accommodate and bridge distinct but overlapping policy and operational
activities even though these may be organized in different ways in the relevant offices by
different nations (for example, when agriculture is covered by separate Ministries for
Agriculture, Livestock, Fisheries and Forestry and, as noted earlier, when Ministries of
Environment, Trade, Natural Resources etc. engage on specific issues).
Vertical coordination
Setting up working sub-groups to incorporate some of the broader range of expertise needed
is one mechanism. Since efforts to promote responsible development of biotechnology
centre on planning and delivery at the sectoral level, an appropriate action by government
would be to direct sector ministries to work with their stakeholders and other interested
parties by setting up a vertical coordination mechanism based on sub-groups to refine or
develop sectorspecific strategies and plans. As noted earlier, only two developing countries
appear to have done so for BFA, although it is possible that others have embedded these
in national S&T frameworks.
Because not all of the relevant competencies, expertise and perspectives that are needed
to respond most effectively and appropriately to the opportunities and challenges posed
by biotechnology reside within government or a particular ministry, there are important
roles to be played by NGOs, the business community and other partners from civil society
within coordination mechanisms. Recognizing this, some relevant international treaties
(e.g. the CBD) contain specific provisions calling for coordination, cooperation or strategic
partnerships with NGOs and CSOs in the process of developing national coordination
mechanisms, strategies and other components necessary for pulling together measures and
activities. This aspect is expanded upon later, but it is part and parcel of engaging all relevant
stakeholder groups in providing inputs to the development and implementation of both a
NBS and a strategy for BFA that is consistent with the NBS.
5 http://impact.cgiar.org/
NBS scope
While a number of countries (e.g. Jamaica, Kenya, Malawi and Uganda), emphasized that the
policy/strategy applied to both conventional and modern biotechnologies, in the majority
of cases, and although not specifically stated (except in the case of Namibia and Peru), the
thrust was clearly toward modern biotechnology and particularly the governance of R&D
and diffusion of GMOs and their products.
NBS content
Despite the wide differences between countries in terms of population, economic strength,
scientific and technological capabilities and cultures, there was a remarkable consistency
to their vision of biotechnology as contributing to social and economic development by
improving productivity, creating jobs, promoting health and a better environment. However,
a specific vision statement was provided by only five countries, namely India, Malawi,
Malaysia, Thailand and Uganda.
In terms of overarching principles, virtually every country stressed the importance or
essentiality of protecting health and sustaining the environment as pre-conditions for success
in applying biotechnology, and many stressed public participation. Malaysia stressed the
importance of strong IPR protection while the precautionary principle or approach was
mentioned as a cornerstone to regulation by many countries as was liability and redress
(e.g. Malawi, Namibia, Uganda and Zambia). Many included labelling of GMOs and their
products (e.g. Malawi, Thailand), and Namibia put a moratorium on the use of GURTs. Brazil,
Kenya, Peru and Uganda mentioned the importance of integrating and protecting indigenous
knowledge, resources and practices, and of benefit-sharing. The priority sectors identified by
the majority of the countries were health, agriculture, industry (and trade) and the environment.
R&D and communication were cross-cutting themes included by all countries. Many
countries included bio-resources (specifically biodiversity in only a few), education (also
of the general public), and ethical, cultural and socio-economic issues, although little or no
While the advantages of the first of the three options include wider debate, greater political
and possibly financial commitment and level of enforcement, and up front agreement on
the roles and responsibilities of governments and legislatures, one disadvantage would be the
significantly longer timeframe between preparation and initiating implementation. The second
option would lead to earlier implementation of activities requiring regulatory action and
oversight, but in some jurisdictions it may not have the same level of enforcement. The third
option would most likely be ineffective and even counter-productive in terms of moving forward,
particularly on the many regulatory matters associated with some modern biotechnologies.
7.6.2 Oversight
}} Brazil established a high level National Biotechnology Ministerial Council/Committee
within the Prime Minister/Presidents office to coordinate implementation of their
strategy/law;
}} India set up a Department of Biotechnology within its Ministry of S&T to promote
and coordinate all aspects of biotechnology development in the country;
}} Malaysia established a Biotechnology Corporation overseen by an Implementation
Council and advised by an international Advisory Panel, both under the leadership of
the Prime Minister;
}} Peru established an Interministerial Commission to harmonize sectoral policies, and
a National Executive Committee on Biotechnology (CONEBIO) within its National
Council for Science, Technology and Innovation Technology (CONCYTEC) to deal
specifically with biotechnology;
}} In Thailand, the National Biotechnology Policy Committee was chaired by the Prime
Minister and assisted by seven sub-committees including one dealing with genetic
engineering and biosafety policy development;
}} Kenya proposed the setting up of a National Biotechnology Enterprise Programme
consisting of a National Commission to oversee implementation of the policy framework
and a National Education Centre to coordinate and facilitate training, develop databases
and a national culture collection, but whether an interministerial mechanism will be
created to oversee these initiatives is unclear.
Summary
The planning, conduct, financing and organization of research and development (R&D),
including its interplay with local traditional and indigenous knowledge, are necessary parts
of national development policies and strategies for harnessing the potential of agricultural
biotechnologies. Technical options for using biotechnologies in food and agriculture (BFA)
and the accompanying legal and institutional policies to support their implementation
should be founded on inventories and analyses of existing national capacities for science
and technology (S&T) and biotechnologies generally, and for agricultural S&T and BFA in
particular. Countries considering developing genetically modified organisms (GMOs), or
using GMOs and their products developed by others, have to consider also both the S&T and
the wider legal and institutional support needed by regulatory agencies before authorizing
their marketing. Examples include the capacity to conduct risk assessments for environmental
releases, to determine food and feed safety, and to test products for GMO content.
Most developing countries wishing to pursue biotechnology applications in food and
agriculture meaningfully need to consider policy options for addressing three inter-related issues.
First, the pervasive under-investment in human and infrastructural capacities within public
agricultural research organizations and universities something that can only be remedied by
political commitment to raise both awareness and the financial investments needed to build
and maintain the human capacities and infrastructure for planning and implementing the kind
of R&D appropriate to meet the needs of smallholders. Second, the generally fragmented and
uncoordinated manner in which biotechnology R&D is often pursued, reflecting insufficient
rigour in priority-setting, and leading to reduced effectiveness and efficiency of the public
R&D enterprise. This calls for exploring alternative institutional arrangements for both setting
priorities and funding agricultural S&T. Third, policy-makers must determine the appropriate
371
balance between modern biotechnology and other technical approaches for addressing the
constraints faced by smallholders, and in particular the balance between phenotype-based and
genotype-based solutions, especially where inadequate capacities already exist for evaluating
and improving genetic resources for food and agriculture.
Most options for increasing financial commitments and the efficiency and effectiveness
of R&D involve moving away from traditional institutional instruments and arrangements,
and the linear paradigm of planning and implementing R&D. The options generally involve
changing the division of labour in R&D between public and private entities and between
national and regional or state entities; improving coordination between academia, public
sector institutions, the private sector and non-governmental and civil society organizations
(NGOs and CSOs); and putting in place mechanisms or institutions that sit between the
funding bodies and beneficiaries of R&D to influence the research agenda and who carries
it out. They also put a premium on collective responsibility for funding (e.g. through levies
from producers, tax and other concessions for private firms and grants from foundations),
and on the areas of early stage capital funding and addressing the commercialization gap.
To illustrate some of the options available to countries, the Chapter provides an analysis
of 15 selected developing countries. Examples are provided of national funding policies and
initiatives in these countries to achieve these aims, as well as policies to build scientific and
technical capacities relevant to the pursuit of agricultural biotechnologies. Admittedly, what
remains unclear is whether the inevitable increases in transaction costs and downstream
movement of research agendas arising from some of these initiatives will actually improve
the efficiency and effectiveness of national R&D enterprises in terms of delivering a more
diverse and pro-poor relevant suite of biotechnologies in the years ahead.
A regulatory system responsive to national needs and priorities, consistent with
international agreements, and that ensures the safe and efficient development and use of
biotechnology methods, processes and products is also part and parcel of a national and
international enabling environment for BFA. Indeed, regulation itself should be seen as
a positive development demonstrating responsibility and oversight by governments
as well as collaboration between governments and developers of biotechnologies to
ensure that only products that are as safe as their conventional counterparts are released
into the environment and consumed. On the other hand, developing and implementing a
regulatory framework can be a complex and resource-intensive exercise and, irrespective
of the established structures, regulatory functions place enormous scientific, technical
and administrative demands on national institutions.
This Chapter also covers general principles and specific aspects requiring consideration
when developing and implementing a national regulatory system. Before deciding on
an appropriate regulatory structure and the legal and political means by which it can be
Science, technology and innovation underpin every one of the Millennium Development
Goals. It is inconceivable that gains can be made in health and environmental concerns without
a focused science, technology and innovation policy (UN Millennium Project, 2005).
This quotation does not mean that the solution to the worlds food insecurity, poverty
and other sustainable development challenges lies only in S&T, but that S&T, and particularly
the benefits from innovations in its planning, conduct, financing and organization, including
its interplay with local traditional and indigenous knowledge, are necessary parts of national
development policies and strategies. History shows that technological, institutional,
organizational, trade and other innovations relating to the use of natural resources have
played a critical role in agricultural productivity growth and reductions in food insecurity
and poverty in industrial and some advanced developing countries. Yet, few developing
countries have up-scaled overall S&T as a policy focus. The almost total neglect of S&T
in the Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers1 (PRSP) currently available for a number of
developing countries emphasizes again the need for more joined-up S&T management.
The same can be said about policy and strategy frameworks for BFA. Although all
of the 15 selected developing countries (listed in Table 1 of Chapter7) put the agrifood
sectors among or at the top of their priorities for national development, the overwhelming
emphasis to date of most of these countries is on establishing biosafety laws, regulations
and structures. Little consideration has been given either to non-GMO biotechnologies
1 The PRSP approach was initiated by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in 1999. Country PRSP are available at www.imf.org/
external/np/prsp/prsp.aspx
2 www.icgeb.org/~bsafesrv/pdffiles/%20ICGEB_Gates.pdf
3 www.nepadst.org/newsroom/pdfs/news_brs.pdf
4 Most of the NBS documents of the selected developing countries are available at www.fao.org/biotech/country.asp
increasingly concentrated, with just four industrialized countries (United States, Japan,
France and Germany) accounting for around 65 percent of the publicly-funded agricultural
R&D conducted in developed countries, and five developing countries (Brazil, China,
India, South Africa and Thailand) accounting for half of developing country expenditures.
In 2000, around US$17 billion was spent by private sector entities in agricultural
R&D, but developing countries captured only 6 percent of this investment (i.e. less than
US$1billion), most of which was in the Asia-Pacific region where 8 percent of agricultural
R&D was private compared with only 2 percent in sub-Saharan Africa, almost two thirds
of which was in South Africa. Many developing countries, and particularly the low-income
food deficit countries, have failed to increase their investments for decades.
This disparity between advanced and developing countries in their financial commitments
to fostering agricultural R&D is starkly illustrated by comparing their research funding
intensities. In 2000, developing countries on aggregate spent 56 cents on R&D for every
5 http://hub.africabiosciences.org.
Securing appropriate and consistent levels of funding for agricultural S&T has consistently
been hugely problematic for most developing countries. With its additional requirements
for infrastructure and organizational, scientific, technical and legal skills, and the challenge
of addressing the many other priorities that have surfaced in recent years, introducing
biotechnology makes that task all the more daunting.
Even so, a number of options can be considered to both increase levels of funding and
to move away from traditional instruments that often involve little if any consideration
of priorities or planning (see examples from a number of selected developing countries in
Annex 1, Part 8.5.2). Most of these options involve changing the division of labour in R&D
between public and private entities and between national and regional or state entities,
improving coordination between academia, public sector institutions and the private sector,
and putting in place mechanisms or institutions that sit between the funding bodies and
beneficiaries of R&D to influence the research agenda and who carries it out. They also put
a premium on collective responsibility for funding (e.g. through levies from producers, tax
and other concessions for private firms and grants from foundations), and on the areas of
early stage capital funding and addressing the commercialization gap. The options include:
}} redirecting part of the total public support package for agriculture (e.g. through
subsidies and other policy instruments) to innovative technological packages directed
to tackling priority constraints to sustainable production within disadvantaged regions
with minimum economic potential;
}} introducing commodity levies and tax check-offs, and likewise directing a proportion
of the income to support pro-poor agricultural R&D; The case for special purpose
levies to fund agricultural development is reviewed in FAO (2005).
}} encouraging commercialization of agricultural R&D; On the other hand, if the goal
is to simply increase funding, the tendency of governments to substitute commercial
funds for public investments should be noted (see e.g. Rozelle et al., 1999).
}} developing much closer partnerships with, and alignment between, policies, programmes,
projects and funding mechanisms linked to R&D supported by other ministries and
their donor communities (particularly with Ministries of S&T and the Environment);
}} moving progressively away from traditional arrangements whereby block grants
provided by the Ministry of Finance and supplemented by donor contributions
are provided individually or collectively through the Ministry of Agriculture to a
centrally-based national agricultural research organization; Instead, through progressive
decentralization which provides an opportunity to adapt research to local contexts, to
grant fiscal autonomy to state or regional governments and legal status to producer
As described in Annex 1 (Part 8.5.2), quite dramatic changes are taking place in some developing
countries in terms of the manner in which they plan, fund and organize biotechnology
R&D and innovation, with considerable emphasis being placed on public-private sector
partnerships. These countries have taken advantage of wider productive development policies
8.4 Regulation
8.4.1 Context
Having a regulatory framework or system that ensures the safe and efficient development and
use of biotechnology methods, processes and products is part and parcel of a national and
international enabling environment for BFA. The objective of such a system is to ensure that
any potential risks to human health (e.g. FAO, 2009b) and the environment are identified and
that they are properly assessed and managed by identifying and putting in place appropriate
mechanisms and measures throughout the processes of research, product development and
use as well as through trade, based on the countrys stated appropriate level of protection.
Since uncertainty is an inescapable reality with any technology and not unique to food and
agriculture, designing and enforcing the primary laws, secondary regulations and the many
guidelines and standards that constitute regulatory frameworks, while never easy for legislatures,
government policy-makers and their regulatory agencies, are nevertheless fundamental
elements of sustainable agriculture and rural development and wider development.
The main challenges faced by policy-makers are first of all deciding what should
constitute a trigger for regulatory action, and then finding the right balance between
the potentially important benefits of undertaking a particular activity and the safeguards,
if needed, that should be put in place to realize the benefits. In fact, government decision-
makers may conclude from the safety review process that there is no new risk from a
particular technology and therefore safeguards are not needed. Nevertheless, finding that
balance is fraught with difficulties and trade-offs, because (1) the desirability of a particular
activity depends on societal values which themselves can vary greatly within and between
particular societies, and (2) national regulatory frameworks themselves increasingly have to
be adapted both to the rules of the game imposed by international, regional and bilateral
agreements, as well as to new developments in technology and to other changes at national
and global levels, e.g. climate change, emergence of new pests and diseases etc.
6 www.unep.org/biosafety/
7 http://bch.cbd.int/
8 www.fas.usda.gov/info/factsheets/reports.asp
8.4.3.1 Legalauthority
When developing these systems, countries should establish clear legal authorities and
responsibilities for implementing them. They have two, but not mutually exclusive
options for doing so. The first is using their existing primary laws and the delegated legal
authorities within these, to promulgate regulations for dealing with activities involving
genetic modification. This provides a basis for regulating GMOs within a short time. At
the same time, to create or strengthen inter-institutional linkages voluntarily. The second
is to introduce a new primary law. This is a longer-term undertaking, but one that might
be justified on several grounds, e.g. many primary laws are very old, lack or provide
questionable authority to regulate biotechnology or make such authority weak, and/or
are confusing and lack transparency and coordination by being scattered among different
ministries. The pros and cons of these options and an analytical tool for assessing wider
biosecurity legislation are described by FAO (2007c).
While the majority of developing countries surveyed have introduced new biosafety
or GMO acts/laws, Argentina, Chile and China regulate GM applications within the
framework of existing general legal authorities and specific regulations that have evolved
with experience gained over more than 20 years. Brazil and South Africa are examples of
countries that have successfully regulated GM applications through amendments to their
original GMO-specific laws, while India does so through rules for implementing its 1986
Environment Protection Act.
In other cases (e.g. Peru and essentially all the African countries covered), the relevant
laws are very recent and therefore few of the regulations, and particularly the administrative
requirements that flow from them, may have been completed. It is therefore premature for
these countries to judge whether their regulatory systems will stand the test of time or,
as in the case of Brazil, have to be re-negotiated by national legislatures or simply adjusted
through changes/additions to the regulations and procedures that are initially put in place.
Jamaica, Thailand and Uganda presently oversee biotechnology through voluntary
guidelines developed through their S&T agencies which do not have regulatory mandates
except perhaps for laboratory work. Thailand, on the other hand, has amended all its
fundamental laws dealing with sanitary and phytosanitary measures, fisheries, food and
feed etc. to cover modern biotechnology.
8.4.3.3 Transparency: Establishing clear criteria and standards for safety - baselines,
comparators, thresholds and indicators for environmental and food safety
As Parties to the CBD and CPB and Members of the WTO, most developing countries
have to establish and implement (including enforce) regulatory measures to protect human
health and the environment while not unnecessarily restricting trade. Establishing assessment
12 www.oecd.org/biotrack
13 http://www2.oecd.org/biotech/
14 Information documents from Africa, Latin America and Asia are available at www.cbd.int/doc/?meeting=MOP-04
8.5 Annex 1: Building and funding biotechnology R&D and innovation capacities
in selected developing countries
15 http://www.dbtindia.nic.in/proposals/Areas/HRD/Star/star_colleges_in_life_sciences.htm
16 www.fao.org/biotech/
Brazil: Federal funds for financing S&T, including BFA, come from the Ministry for S&Ts
National Fund for Scientific and Technological Development (FNDCT) which is channelled
through its National Council of Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq), whose
main goals are to support human resource training and research infrastructure, and a
specialized public company FINEP which addresses innovation. In 2001, the government
introduced Sectoral Funds as a way of targeting research at particular sectors, with agrifood
and biotechnology being two of the beneficiaries. As in Argentina, funding is competitive,
not restricted to public sector institutions and promotes public-private sector partnerships.
17 www.wipo.int/sme/en/documents/brazil_innovation.htm
Different financing and management models are foreseen for these facilities including,
for example, government supported (100 percent grant-in-aid), joint ownership, located
in an existing national laboratory managed by a consortia of industries; public-private
partnership (50 percent grant-in-aid), shared profits, and differential fees for public and
private use, specialized facility for discovery and innovation, soft loan, differential fee for
public and private users, and certain percent of time devoted to education and training of
DBT-identified people for capacity building. Intellectual property, technology transfer
and licensing arrangements would vary with the model of partnership and cost-sharing.
Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda: With joint funding from the Rockefeller Foundation and
the Gatsby Charitable Foundation, the Maendeleo Agricultural Technology Fund was
established in 2002 and since then it has helped different organizations and institutions in
Kenya, Tanzania and Uganda to move innovative agricultural technologies from research
into farmers fields. With an advisory panel of local experts from these three countries and
donor representatives, and supported by the Ministries for Agriculture and local governments
and NARS, this Trust provides grants on a competitive basis to projects identified through
value chain priority-setting. In Kenya and Uganda, tissue culture derived banana planting
materials were acquired by large numbers of small farmers through a micro-credit scheme.
FARM Africa, a UK charity, provides support and strategic direction to the management of
the fund. In Uganda, supplies of plantlets come from a large commercial laboratory which
has also set up nurseries and demonstration gardens in different parts of the country to
distribute plantlets and train farmers.
Malaysia: Various initiatives and mechanisms have been introduced by the government to
promote the development of biotechnology. These include:
}} grants to support both R&D and commercialization of research findings in specific areas
of national importance to the Malaysian industry, BFA being a high priority. There is
a range of schemes available which have a fund allocation to biotechnology and these
South Africa: An Innovation Fund was set up to promote technological innovations and South
Africans seeking IP protection, with the aim of establishing new enterprises and expanding
existing industrial sectors, including biotechnology. The main funding instruments are:
}} a Technology Advancement Programme (TAP) which offers public venture capital
support for projects in the late stages of R&D (i.e. where proof-of-science already
exists) and which is open to higher education institutions, science councils, SMEs and
consortia of these entities;
}} a Missions in Technology (MiTech) TAP which invests in public-private partnerships aiming
to develop technological platforms that will improve entrepreneurial competitiveness,
and where the co-investments are with industry players on projects identified and
driven by that industry;
}} a seed fund which supports early commercialization or business start-ups in order
to take a novel and inventive technology that is at the prototype stage through to
the market. The Commercialization Office administering this fund also engages in
strategy formulation, development of commercial routes to market, due diligence and
deal-structuring;
}} Patent Support Funds which are instruments targeted at SMEs and techno-entrepreneurs to
assist with the costs associated with IP support and protection, and supported by an IP office.
Argentina: One of only two developing countries to develop a specific BFA strategy,
Argentina mentioned as priorities the need to strengthen the legal and institutional
framework through laws on regulation and development of a communication plan and
18 www.mavcap.com/v2/
Brazil would ensure safety to human health and the environment in compliance with
obligations under the CBD and CPB, and specifically strengthen implementation of
legislation related to research, production and marketing of GMOs and promote training
in risk assessment, management and communication. It would also promote monitoring of
GMOs released into the environment and strengthen institutional biosafety management.
Chiles NBS gives high importance to the environmental and food safety aspects of GMOs
and the need to take protective measures. Of the 23 actions outlined in the policy, nearly
half relate to an overall goal of establishing a regulatory framework that guarantees a safe,
sustainable and responsible development of biotechnology. These include recommendations
to draft a framework law on biotechnology; provide training of staff in public institutions;
develop regulations for foods derived from GMOs; labelling; procedures for release into
the environment; certification of GMO products for export, including mechanisms of
traceability; reviewing, and where necessary amending, legislation on the environment,
agriculture, aquaculture and health as well as CONICYTs (Comision Nacional de
Investigacin Cientifca y Tecnolgica) Manual on Biosecurity Standards which includes
technical standards for laboratory safety. Other recommendations include the creation of
a Committee on Biotechnological Regulations to ensure appropriate coordination between
public regulatory authorities and review proposals for regulation from different agencies,
and a Biotechnology Forum for public participation and information allowing for the
development of informed public opinion.
India would reinforce its regulatory framework, create a National Biotechnology Regulatory
Authority (now called the Biotechnology Regulatory Authority of India) within the DBT
which would be set up as an independent, autonomous and professionally led body to
provide a single window mechanism for safety clearance of GM products and processes.
Jamaicas biotechnology policy includes addressing the environmental and food safety aspects
of GMOs through promoting research on risk assessment and management. The NBS notes
that prior to beginning GM trials in 1997, a National Biosafety Committee was legislated
[through the Plants (Importation) Control Regulations, under the Plants (Quarantine) Act]
Kenya: Ensuring safety is one of the key objectives in its biotechnology strategy, a critical
requirement being to enhance mechanisms to adequately assess safety and to develop and
identify appropriate management practices to minimize potential risks to human health and the
environment. The Government intended to institutionalize risk assessment and management
at the stages of research, field trials and commercialization, as well as introduce an efficient
monitoring system. Any non-science issues would be separated from the risk assessment
process, and a precautionary approach would be taken to ensure the safe transfer, handling
and use of GMOs. All activities would be subject to approval by an assigned authority in
addition to fulfilling requirements of the 1999 Environmental Management and Coordination
Act, and other existing laws and standards governing the environment, phytosanitary and
sanitary measures. The need was expressed for new legislation to address all aspects of modern
biotechnology, and therefore the statutory mandates of existing institutions would be reviewed
with a view to enhancing implementation of the policy. New legislation on biosafety would
take into account international regulations and treaties, and it would apply to all experiments,
field trials and commercial activities involving GMOs. The law would also define a liability
regime. Flexibility would be achieved by investing relevant authorities with regulatory powers
to promulgate subsidiary legislation addressing specific issues. A National Biosafety Authority
would be established as a central coordinating and implementing body, working together with
the relevant government regulatory institutions to ensure adherence to laws and regulations
and provide guidance on biosafety and related legal matters. It would establish linkages with
institutions and institutional biosafety committees according to guiding principles and it
would work closely with the National Commission on Biotechnology.
Malawi: Biosafety is one of the key issues covered in the countrys biotechnology policy
document which includes descriptions of: (1) a clear goal, i.e. promote and ensure the safe
transfer, development, handling and use of biotechnology and products that may have adverse
effects on the environment and human and animal health, (2) an objective to provide
safety measures for the above and establish acceptable standards for risk assessment and
management, and (3) a series of six strategies including establishing facilities for testing and
monitoring GM products, instituting a system of risk assessment, monitoring and enforcement,
The preamble to Namibias national biotechnology policy reaffirms its commitment to the
principles of the Rio Declaration and especially to those on liability and compensation for
damage and precaution. It then describes overarching principles for biosafety, including
controlling applications which could harm its biological diversity and the health of its
citizens; that the use, import, export, sale and transit of applications and products must
conform to its existing laws; and that regulation will be through a competent body advised
by a technical body independent of both government and industry. This body would be
transparent in its decision-making and take full account of environmental, public health,
social, economic and cultural concerns. All costs in the decision-making process including
field trials would be met by the applicant; there would be cooperation with other States
to ensure safe use within its borders; and pending the outcome of global and regional
assessments of the severe potential social, economic and environmental risks associated
with genetic use restriction technologies (GURTs), the country would impose a five-year
moratorium on the use of any material using this technology. Its policy provides for
the establishment of a permanent participatory planning process to feed into regulatory
decision-making; for the development of regulatory capacity to assess, test, monitor and
control applications in accordance with agreed biosafety guidelines; support for research
to safely apply biotechnology techniques; and an institutional framework for national
decision-making and international cooperation.
Malaysia: Its national biotechnology policy is underpinned by nine policy thrusts, one of
which is dedicated to legislative and regulatory framework development, i.e. to create an
enabling environment through continuous reviews of the countrys regulatory framework
and procedures in line with global standards and best practices.
Perus stated principles for national regulations regarding biosafety include: guaranteeing
an adequate level of protection of human health, the environment, biological diversity and
its sustainable use during R&D, production, transport, storage, conservation, exchange,
commercialization, confined use and intentional release into the environment of GMOs
and products derived from them; their application on a case-by-case and step-by-step
basis; labelling decided by a Competent National Authority; but enforcement should not
limit the development of modern biotechnology or act as a technical obstacle or concealed
restriction to its commercialization; the concept of reserves with high agro-biodiversity
to be promoted as a way to minimize the erosion of agro-biodiversity and related cultural
diversity; research directed towards defining the potential risks associated with gene flow
to be promoted; the evaluation, management and communication of potential risks to be
based on scientific and technical knowledge, the characteristics of the biological entity, its
environment, non-target biological entities, food safety and cultural, social and economic
considerations; in risk analysis and management, the Competent National Authority would
consider the harmony and co-existence between traditional, conventional, organic and
transgenic agriculture; and oversight and risk assessment would focus on the characteristics
of the GMO or its product rather than the techniques used for its production.
Thailands policy contains little on safety, stating only that a key strategy will be introducing
a law on the protection of biological resources and policies for the development of safe
GMOs. On detail, it states only that it: will develop and use the potential of biotechnology
for quick, precise, and specific detection and diagnosis in managing food and seed safety by
setting up a biotechnology laboratory to certify quality and standards for export products, as
well as for inspection of imported products; and it will conduct research to collect scientific
data needed for risk assessment of food and agricultural products for export.
Ugandas policy on Biotechnology and Biosafety gives safety high priority within its vision
and all its proposed strategic actions for pursuing the subject (e.g. human resources and
infrastructure development, R&D, public awareness and participation, commercialization,
biodiversity conservation and utilization, and bioethics and biosafety), and that strategies
for pursuing these would be placed in the context of the CPB and the African Model Law
on Biosafety. It records that the Uganda National Council for Science and Technology
(UNCST) established a National Biosafety Committee in 1996 to provide technical advice
to the Government and that it developed guidelines for conducting research into genetic
modification at laboratory and confined field trial levels, as well as guidelines for containment
of GMOs and microbes. Also, institutional biosafety committees have been established in
some institutes. All the same, it notes that the UNCST Act is inadequate to regulate the
overall development of biotechnology and commercialization of its products, and that legally
binding instruments to regulate applications relevant to the conservation and sustainable
utilization of genetic resources are scattered in the provisions of several sectoral laws. There was
therefore a need for an explicit policy and law on biotechnology/biosafety. No new structures
are proposed to implement the policy, but a National Biosafety Act would be introduced to
Zambia: The policy is biosafety-focused and aims to guide the judicious use and regulation
of modern biotechnology for the sustainable development of the nation, with minimum
risks to human and animal health, as well as the environment, including Zambias biological
diversity. It describes how the country would implement obligations under the CPB and
contains guiding principles that include precaution, working through an advance informed
agreement (AIA) system, use of risk assessment, inclusion of socio-economic impacts in
decision-making, public participation and a scheme for liability and redress. It envisages
the formulation of a biosafety regulatory legal framework that includes creating a National
Biosafety Authority (NBA), a Biosafety Advisory Committee to advise the NBA and
government and institutional biosafety committees for local and national decision-making
and international cooperation. The NBA would be responsible for formulating and later
implementing and enforcing the legislation and guidelines to be drawn up, and would
prescribe laboratory facilities capable of verifying the presence of GMOs and products. The
Biosafety Advisory Committee would advise the NBA on prohibition, authorization and
the exercise of necessary control of imports, on authorization or notification of contained
uses, authorization of trials or general releases, and on control measures to be taken where
an intentional release of GMOs may occur.
There would be strengthening of human and infrastructural capacities to support the
development of regulations to assess, test, monitor and control research, development,
application and commercialization of biotechnology in accordance with agreed legislation
and guidelines, and to ensure effective control of transboundary movements of GMOs
or products thereof through the exchange of information and risk assessment as well as a
transparent AIA system.
Transfer, use and release of GMOs would be on the basis that there is firm and sufficient
evidence that the GMOs or their products pose no risk to human and animal health, biological
diversity or the environment. There should be no research, development, application,
release and commercialization of GMOs or combinations of GMOs and their products
without a risk assessment report and the prior approval of the NBA. The risk assessment
should include the direct or indirect effects to the economy, social and cultural practices,
livelihoods, indigenous knowledge systems, or indigenous technologies as a result of the
import, contained use, deliberate release or placing on the market of GMOs or products
thereof. Also, the NBA would provide the public with information about applications for
Summary
9.1 Introduction
Other Chapters of this book clearly demonstrate the significant and ever-increasing interest
shown by the scientific and research communities in developing and developed countries
alike in using biotechnologies to both understand and improve how biophysical resources are
transformed into food and other products to enhance agricultural productivity and the quality
and safety of products. As also noted earlier, the success of these efforts clearly depends on
having a solid scientific and technical skills base and infrastructure as well as a wider enabling
environment that includes a sound regulatory framework. Clear and transparent policies
for accessing and using both the necessary research tools and tangible end products is also an
essential component of the enabling environment for fostering biotechnology innovation and
diffusion. Increasingly, these materials and associated information have become the subject
matter of grants of intellectual property (IP) protection. Consequently, a further critical
dimension of a national biotechnology policy/strategy (NBS) is that it describes how the
country intends to deal with the associated IP issues. Policies for accessing genetic resources
for food and agriculture (GRFA) and sharing the benefits from using biotechnology to
develop useful products from these resources have likewise become increasingly important.
Against this background, it is instructive to examine how the same 15 developing
countries surveyed in the companion Chapters 7 and 8 intended to deal with the IP and
(related or unrelated) genetic resources/biodiversity issues associated with BFA. It is
also useful to highlight the principal considerations that need to be taken into account
by countries in designing and managing IP policies that balance their needs to generate
and access biotechnology tools and techniques and the genetic materials for research and
producing tangible products, while promoting the diffusion of these products to small-
1 Most of the NBS documents of the selected developing countries are available at www.fao.org/biotech/country.asp
These Agreements differ in terms of eligibility and scope of protection, and it is beyond
the scope of this Chapter to deal with these differences in detail or to dwell on the many
creative interpretations by individuals concerning definitions, commitments (or lack
thereof) and inter-relationships. See Tansey and Rajotte (2008) for more details.
In designing and managing national IPR systems, countries should be aware of a number
of key issues. One is that the core assumptions of the TRIPS Agreement, and indeed of the
UPOV Acts, are that IPR will stimulate international transfer of technology and therefore
(bio) technology-related R&D in developing countries as well as the wider exchange of
improved breeding lines and varieties. However, the relationship between the strength of IP
protection and all these factors is highly complex and, as noted by FAO (2003a) and others
in relation to biotechnology, IP is only one factor influencing technological innovation,
transfer and diffusion. Others include S&T capacity and wider infrastructure, structure of the
agricultural sector, potential market size, ecological similarities between countries, the subject
matter of protection (e.g. hybrid or open pollinated crops; poultry, pigs or cattle), national
policies concerning foreign direct investment, trade, and the macroeconomic environment.
Another issue is the inter-relationships between international IP agreements (specifically
the UPOV Acts and TRIPS Agreement) and (1) the core aims of the CBD and the ITPGRFA
namely, access to and fair and equitable sharing of benefits from using genetic resources,
conservation and sustainable use of GRFA, and preservation of and respect for knowledge,
innovations and practices of indigenous and local communities/farmers rights and (2) the
goal of national food security.
Each of these has been, and remains, the subject of much contentious debate within and
between countries (see, e.g. Gehl Sampath and Tarasofsky, 2002; FAO, 2002a; UNCTAD-
ICSTD, 2003; Gepts, 2004). This only serves to emphasize the need for further empirical
work to clarify the relationship between IPR, the protection of agricultural biodiversity
and wider biodiversity and food security at national and global levels.
A further issue concerns inclusions and exclusions to patentable subject matter namely,
standards of patentability, rights granted, conditions of disclosure, what constitutes an
invention, novelty, an essential biological process and a variety. Also, what constitutes
an effective sui generis system and the procedures in place for enforcement of both patenting
and UPOV or UPOV-type PVP laws. National patent and sui generis PVP laws and regional
Using the research and experimental use exemption within national legislation
The generality of the criteria and the vagueness regarding the scope and nature of exceptions
in IP laws for using other peoples proprietary technologies, make it difficult to interpret
rights and obligations. For example, defining the scope of a research tool or the cut-off
between basic and applied research or between research and development is
fraught with difficulties. A rice line with resistance to a bacterial pathogen is a research tool.
It can be used as a breeding tool by some, but to biotechnologists it is source material for
mapping, sequencing and cloning the gene coding for the resistance trait, and subsequently
for the grant of a patent on the gene sequence. Through an exclusive license negotiated with
the patent owner to a company it then becomes a research tool for a commercial company
to develop pest-resistant GM crops (and to gain access to the gene, the developers of the
original rice-resistant line would have to negotiate conditions for using the gene sequence
for furthering their own applied research).
In some jurisdictions, the present position is that experimental use exception to
patent rights is very narrow and that even projects undertaken without direct commercial
application may be perceived in law as furthering an institutes legitimate business interests
through undertaking projects that, by using proprietary IP, serve to increase its status
and thereby attract research grants and students. Most national laws permit private, non-
commercial/industry and experimental uses, although there is lack of clarity about whether
experimental uses include work done for commercial and industrial purposes.
Licensing agreements
The main difference between licensing agreements and MTAs is that usually the recipient
(licensee) is granted the right to make, use and/or sell the technology in question. However,
they are also widely used for obtaining access rights to bioinformatics databases and for
using computer software. Like MTAs, these agreements define the property to be licensed,
field(s), and sometimes the territories of use. They can also define use within regions of
countries, type of farms by size, products and income levels and therefore (in theory at least)
provide access or preferential access to small-scale and subsistence farmers. If the technology
is covered by a patent, the subject matter of the licence can be for the product (e.g. a new
micro-organism) and/or for the method of using it to manufacture/process something, e.g.
an enzyme, biopesticide etc. Although access to public bioinformatics databases may be
free or based on a modest subscription, payment of royalties to the licensor is the norm,
the cost of which varies enormously depending on the status of the licensee (public, SME,
MNC), and the perceived value of the invention or data.
Purchasing outright
This needs skills in technology valuation. Although there are models available for valuing
some BFA (Nadolnyak and Sheldon, 2003), the high volatility in returns from marketing
many biotechnologies renders this option less appropriate than MTAs and licensing
agreements for obtaining tools and products, especially for smallholder farming situations.
Patent pools
These are agreements between two or more patent owners to license one or more of their
patents to one another or to third parties. They can reduce problems caused by blocking
patents, and lower significantly the transaction costs associated with licensing, e.g. by providing
a one-stop-shop for obtaining licenses essential to a core technology. At present, patent
pools are of greatest relevance to commercial organizations holding bundles of patents.
Nevertheless, it would be surprising if there were not greater opportunities for public sector
organizations to pool or combine their IP portfolios (proprietary and non-proprietary)
based on mutually complementary assets, with a start being made by the CGIAR and by
some groups of developing countries.
2 www.bios.net/daisy/bios/home.html
3 www.generationcp.org/
4 www.harvestplus.org/content/about-harvestplus
5 www-naweb.iaea.org/nafa/index.html
6 www.crawfordfund.org/conference/2009.html
(a) Negotiating royalty-free access to proprietary genes, genetic constructs, and germplasm
There is increasing evidence of the willingness of MNCs to donate proprietary biotechnology
with no, or limited, restrictions on FTO. This should be recognized as a step in the right
direction. Recent examples include Syngenta, which has committed to provide its technology
royalty-free to benefit subsistence farmers in developing countries. It has also stated that it
will not pursue patent protection for any plant biotechnology or seeds invention for private
and non-commercial use in least developed countries. Furthermore, IPR related to the
rice genome will not be enforced in least developed countries for non-commercial use by
subsistence farmers7. Monsanto and Syngenta have also provided royalty-free licenses to the
Golden Rice Humanitarian Board for technologies that can help further the development
of pro-vitamin A (beta carotene) enhanced rice.
In addition, Monsanto and BASF are partners in a large project on water efficient
maize for Africa (WEMA), funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates and Howard Buffet
Foundations, with the participation of the International Maize and Wheat Improvement
Center (CIMMYT) and a number of NARS in Africa 8. These companies will provide
7 www2.syngenta.com/en/media/positionstatements_full.html#ip
8 www.aatf-africa.org/wema
9 http://aatf-africa.org/
10 www.isaaa.org/
11 www.pipra.org/
12 www.galvmed.org/
9.2.5 Options for national and international research funding and development agencies
National and international S&T funding agencies and donors are essential catalysts of
agricultural R&D and development. With the advent of the genomics and proteomics era
in BFA, the policies adopted by these organizations, including the question of disposition
of rights to IP arising from the R&D supported by them, play a critical role in determining
the policies, practices and behaviour of the research institutes and individual scientists
that rely on them for funding. Some of these organizations have also proven to be highly
influential in intervening on behalf of the public sector to obtain tools, technologies and
data of value or potential value to developing countries either free or on preferential terms
from MNCs and other private sector entities.
At the national level, funding bodies have different roles in R&D. For example, through
their in-house programme they can be leading producers and suppliers of new tools as
well as users. Also, as sponsors of research in external institutes they have interests in how
the recipients of their grants and their contractors obtain research tools from others and
how they disseminate the tools developed through the work they support. As government
agencies, they may also have unique legal authorities over how they manage their own IPR
and what agreements they enter into to obtain research tools for their own programmes.
Administrators in many funding agencies, research institutes and universities and many
scientists themselves have noted the increasing complexity of the patent landscape and
the burden that this is placing on the scientific endeavour in the fields of structural and
Another challenge with all these approaches is deciding who participates and the manner
and extent of their involvement. In setting up participatory priority-setting, decision-makers
have to establish criteria. These should be guided by research objectives and proposed target
groups which, in turn, will depend on whether the exercise is purely national or part of a
wider regional or global programme with involvement of one or a number of regional research
organizations, CGIAR centres, bilateral donors, banks and philanthropic organizations. In
14 www.unece.org/env/pp/treatytext.htm
15 www.unece.org/press/pr2005/05env_p06e.htm
9.3.3.1 In
NBS documents
The survey of NBS documents of selected developing countries showed that scientific
and technical capacity building in biotechnology from undergraduate through to PhD
levels was a key element of essentially all national plans, and that in a few countries efforts
would be made to initiate awareness-building among schoolchildren. But apart from that,
9.3.3.2 In
national regulatory frameworks
Analysis of national regulatory frameworks provided little further insight on these
issues. As noted in Chapter 8, in the majority of countries the main link between public
awareness/information and biosafety lies in the reference by many countries to labelling
The term agricultural extension covers public and private sector activities relating to
technology transfer, education, attitude change, human resource development, and dissemination
and collection of information (FAO, 2009). Over the last two decades, national agricultural
extension systems have undergone dramatic changes, driven by forces such as the growth
of the commercial farm sector, particularly in developed countries; trade liberalization,
contributing to a rapidly developing global food system; as well as the perceived lack of
success of public agricultural extension systems in many countries. National agricultural
extension systems have therefore been in transition worldwide, with the major trends
including the movement from single main public systems to pluralistic systems involving the
private sector, public sector and CSOs; from centralized top-down systems to decentralized
systems where decision-making is delegated to the district or field level; from systems that
are entirely publicly funded to those in which an increasing amount of the financial support
comes from the farmers themselves and where specific advisory activities/services are
effectively privatized (FAO, 2008). Further, extension systems are now focusing on being
demand-driven and market-oriented. In practice, this means that farmers are not passive
recipients of technology developed by researchers. Rather, it is the farmers demand that
should partially drive the research agenda and the educational and organizational work of the
extension agents (Neuchatel Group, 2007). Similarly, research and extension interventions
should respond to market conditions and market signals (Neuchatel Group, 2008).
In this dynamic situation, a shift of power may take place in some countries, but the role of
government and government policy still remain significant. When and if the decision is made
to reform agricultural extension, the government is faced with significant policy and strategy
choices that will also indirectly impact the issue of farmers access to the fruits of biotechnology
R&D. As highlighted in Chapter 7, the paradigm now in vogue for describing the process of
agriculture development is that of an agricultural innovation system. It calls for rethinking
the respective roles of those intimately involved in the agriculture knowledge information
sub-system, namely research, extension, education and training. Fundamental questions raised
by this evolving context include: how do farmers specific demands for agricultural assistance
impact biotechnology research and delivery?; what should be the goal of the extension services
(e.g. production, transfer of new technologies, linking farmers to markets or helping farmers
organize themselves into special interest groups around marketable products)?; and what should
the government do to coordinate institutions that provide extension services (FAO, 2009).
Specific national agricultural extension policies have been drawn up in a number of
developing countries in recent years. China and India are two countries where major
extension policy changes have occurred (FAO, 2008 and 2009). Common features of the
extension changes in these and other countries are:
The changes to extension systems and the new opportunities from biotechnology call for
bringing researchers, extension agents, smallholder producers and their organizations closer
together. They also call for upgrading the skills of extension staff so they are both more
capable of understanding the implications of biotechnology and of facilitating interactions
between farmers and others involved in the agricultural knowledge information system. Yet,
the role of agricultural extension in enabling access to the products of biotechnology and
necessary policy changes to facilitate that role is almost totally neglected in the biotechnology
policy/strategy documents of the 15 selected developing countries consulted.
Lack of information and skills is one of the main reasons for the gap between potential
and actual productivity/profitability of smallholder farmer systems, constraining the
adoption of available technologies and practices and reducing their efficiency if eventually
adopted (World Bank, 2007). For example, Guei, Somado and Larinde (2008) noted
that farmers in sub-Saharan Africa do not use improved seed because very often it is
not available to them or they are not aware of its advantages. Good quality seed is also
not accessible to smallholders because there is often a weak linkage between farmers,
extension systems, research institutions and the market. In the e-mail conference organized
as part of the build up to ABDC-10 (see Chapter 6), the weakness of the extension
system was identified by participants as one of the reasons for the failure in adoption of
biotechnologies like artificial insemination in developing countries. Indeed, one of the
four main suggestions for increasing the success of agricultural biotechnologies in the
future that emerged from cross-sectoral discussions during the e-mail conference was
that extension systems should be strengthened, as they can ensure that relevant R&D
results actually reach the farmer.
9.5 Annex: Coverage of IPR and genetic resources issues in national biotechnology
policy/strategy frameworks of selected developing countries
The following summarizes the coverage given to these issues in NBS documents:
Chile intended to update and upgrade its IP system, design and implement a programme
to train decision-makers on biotechnology-related IP issues, and encourage patenting in
national research institutes.
Indias National Biotechnology Development Strategy notes that a new bill on protection,
utilization and regulation of IP for public funded R&D has been prepared through inter-
ministerial consultation, its aim being to optimize the potential of public R&D, encourage
innovation in SMEs, promote collaboration between government and non-government
organizations and catalyze commercialization of IP generated through public R&D. The
Jamaicas NBS included a number of key strategies, one of which was to protect IP. Here,
the government would play a proactive role in creating awareness of the importance of IPR
issues in research and innovation, and through the development of databases and assistance
to scientists and entrepreneurs through the national IP Office.
Malawi proposed to use biotechnology to conserve and sustain the use of its biological diversity
by enacting legislation to regulate access and benefit-sharing, setting up a national database
on, and clearing house for, facilitating access and sharing of benefits, facilitating adherence
to the terms of technology transfer agreements, providing copyright and patent protection
in respect of all conventions to which it is a signatory. It noted that it did not have an IPR
policy and that its present legislation dating back to 1948 did not address biotechnology and
community rights. It intended therefore to establish an IPR policy and legislation that would
conform to its international legal obligations without undermining national development
opportunities, to strengthen domestic legislation to ensure that IPR protected indigenous
knowledge systems and genetic resources while at the same time attracting investment and
development in biotechnology. It would formulate regulations that protected biotechnology
innovations through IPR by harmonizing national implementation of biotechnology, trade
and IPR agreements, and it would develop sui generis legislation to protect farmers and
community rights. It would also develop appropriate guidelines for accessing and sharing
the benefits from the products of biotechnology and establish mechanisms to facilitate
access by Malawians to IPR-protected products of modern biotechnology.
Namibia stated that national legislation relating to community or individual IPR will include
contractual arrangements to share financial and other benefits arising from biotechnology, and
that the State would facilitate community access to advice for negotiating such agreements.
No details were provided on roles, responsibilities or mechanisms.
Peru specifically provided for the granting of patents except for whole organisms or parts
thereof that exist naturally or have been modified by modern biotechnology, and for IP
certificates for plant varieties developed with or without modern biotechnology. It also
expressly recognizes and protects the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities
in furthering biotechnology.
South Africa noted that it had many Acts relevant to biotechnology but since these provide
conflicting legislation they would be reviewed and harmonized. It intended to update its
Plant Breeders Right Act to include DNA fingerprinting to distinguish between phenotypes
and it would consider introducing legislation for animal breeders. It would also introduce
a search and examination capacity into its IP Office and develop standard guidelines on
IPR of inventors for science councils and universities.
Uganda made no specific mention of IPR, but intended to integrate indigenous knowledge
with modern biotechnology to develop a vibrant biotechnology-based industry while
promoting equitable access and benefit-sharing of indigenous knowledge.
Zambia described the need to ensure fair and equitable access and benefit-sharing from
using genetic resources and by transfer of technologies, taking account of all rights over
these resources and technologies. The NBS document did not elaborate further on how
this would be achieved.
Context
1 Agricultural biotechnologies encompass any technological applications that use biological systems, living organisms, or derivatives thereof, to make
or modify products or processes for specific use in food and agriculture. There is a wide range of agricultural biotechnologies available, one of which
is genetic modification. For the purpose of this document, the term agriculture includes the crop, livestock, fisheries and aquaculture, forestry and food
processing sectors.
467
}} To develop and deploy biotechnologies for food security and poverty reduction in
rural areas.
}} To promote public and private sector investment in agricultural biotechnologies for
greater impact on food security and rural livelihoods.
}} To develop science-based policies, regulation and standards which promote sustainability
and enable the positive impacts of agricultural biotechnologies on food security.
}} To develop national capacities for generating, adapting and adopting agricultural
biotechnologies that address the needs of poor rural producers and contribute to
agricultural sustainability.
}} To facilitate the access of smallholder farmers to agricultural biotechnologies that can
contribute to food security and agricultural sustainability.
}} To foster improved communication, information sharing and public participation
practices regarding agricultural biotechnologies for food security.
10.1 Introduction
2 For example, the G8 LAquila Joint Statement on Global Food Security (2008) stated that Effective food security actions must be coupled with
adaptation and mitigation measures in relation to climate change, sustainable management of water, land, soil and other natural resources, including the
protection of biodiversity. It was further highlighted that sustained and predictable funding and increased targeted investments are urgently required to
enhance world food production capacity if sustainable global food security is to be achieved. See also the 2009 Declaration of the World Summit on Food
Security (ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/Meeting/018/k6050e.pdf).
chapte r 10 Options for Developing Countries and Priorities for Action for the International Community 469
technologies developed within the past decade) have, as yet, had little impact in most
developing countries or, with few exceptions, on the farming systems and incomes of the
rural poor. Such a lack of access by poor rural producers to advanced technologies exists
within a broader context of lack of access to more basic science and technology (S&T)
innovations, including electricity, healthcare and sanitation.
6. Building on the five sector-specific documents, and a sixth FAO document prepared for
ABDC-10 on policy options (presented in three separate chapters, 7 to 9, of this book), this
FAO document synthesizes the lessons learned and options available to developing countries
for making informed decisions regarding adoption of agricultural biotechnologies within
their national food security and rural development plans and policies. It also presents a set of
Priorities for Action for the international community regarding agricultural biotechnologies
for food security in developing countries, organized in three categories covering policy,
capacity development and coordination.
10.2.2 Development
of integrated and coordinated national plans on agricultural
biotechnologies for food security
12. Need for a clear vision for the role of agricultural biotechnologies in relation to national
development needs, including food security. It is important for governments to clarify and
decide what role they envisage for agricultural biotechnologies in helping to meet national
needs (both short- and long-term).
13. Planning for agricultural biotechnologies is of cross-cutting relevance to national
development plans and strategies. It is essential that policies and plans regarding agricultural
biotechnologies are coherent with other national policies and plans, and also support agreed
international policies and targets. Some goals and objectives of National Development
Plans (including long-term visions and 10-year plans), Poverty Reduction Strategies and
sector programmes (e.g. in Agriculture, Health, Education) can be supported by harnessing
agricultural biotechnologies for national needs.
14. Promote biotechnologies as a common platform to leverage cross-sectoral innovations
that meet national needs, including food security needs. To maximize the impacts of using
existing biotechnology capacity across all sectors, planning for the development and
utilization of biotechnologies should be integrated across all planning processes leading
to national development plans as well as processes leading to sector-specific plans for
agriculture, food/nutrition, health, education, economic development, poverty reduction
and the environment.
chapte r 10 Options for Developing Countries and Priorities for Action for the International Community 471
15. Establish a National Biotechnology Policy/Strategy Framework. A National Biotechnology
Strategy should provide a shared long-term vision and a coherent integrated framework
describing clear principles, priorities, objectives and actions. Objectives should be specific,
measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound, with performance indicators against which
progress can be measured. All sectors should be represented in the National Biotechnology
Strategy, including the crop, livestock, fish, forestry and food sectors. In some instances,
regional frameworks may be an appropriate option to harmonize biotechnology strategies
and maximize the utilization of capacity, particularly in poorer or resource-limited regions.
16. National S&T policies/strategies which include biotechnology must also address the food
and agriculture sector. There is a tendency for biotechnology to be narrowly equated with
the biomedical (pharmaceutical) and industrial sectors. Where biotechnology is a component
of an overall national S&T strategy, it is important that all sectors and subsectors (for which
biotechnology innovations are a cross-cutting issue) are represented in terms of their needs.
17. Ensure that agricultural biotechnologies are not considered in isolation from broader
agricultural advancement efforts. Agricultural biotechnologies need to be built upon
existing agricultural research systems and capacities. Biotechnologies in any sector (including
agriculture) are typically not stand-alone alternatives to existing research, and cannot
substitute existing agricultural research programmes. To deliver positive food security
impacts for poor rural producers and consumers, agricultural biotechnologies need to be
integrated within well-functioning agricultural research and innovation systems.
10.2.3 Priority-setting
to enable agricultural biotechnologies to better meet national
needs regarding food security
18. Priority-setting and monitoring mechanisms are needed for the development, adoption
and impact of agricultural biotechnologies. Priority-setting mechanisms are necessary to
identify areas of focus where interventions involving agricultural biotechnologies could have
maximum impact. Decision-making regarding research and innovation priorities should be
based on needs (demand-driven), be transparent and evidence-based. Regular foresight and
horizon-scanning systems regarding agricultural biotechnologies should be used to inform
national strategies, plans and sector-specific plans, along with frequent consultations with
intended beneficiaries.
19. Clear targets and performance indicators are required to measure uptake and the
impact of agricultural biotechnologies on meeting food security needs. For strategic
planning, impact-assessment targets and indicators for agricultural biotechnologies can
be mainstreamed across multiple national and sector-specific plans. Indicators should
not only include typical S&T metrics such as numbers of skilled personnel, publications,
innovations developed, etc., but also include broader metrics to measure socio-economic
chapte r 10 Options for Developing Countries and Priorities for Action for the International Community 473
on national priorities and available resources, there are strategic pros and cons in decisions
to become originators or early, intermediate or late adopters of new technologies including
agricultural biotechnologies.
10.2.4 Promote
public and private investments in agricultural research, including
biotechnologies for food security
25. National-level investments in agricultural research, including biotechnologies, need
to be increased in order to contribute to food security in developing countries. National
investment plans for agricultural biotechnologies should focus on contributing to meeting
well-defined needs and aim to leverage a range of national and international financing,
including both public and private funding, and funding from donors, non-governmental
organizations (NGOs), farmers and trade organizations, and philanthropic organizations.
26. A national policy vision defining the relative roles of the public and private sector is
necessary for developing and deploying innovations in agricultural biotechnologies for
different clients. Specific responsibilities must be mapped out to identify which sectors
and stakeholders are to address the needs of poor rural producers in order to ensure that
positive food security impacts are achieved from capacity development and the deployment
of agricultural biotechnologies. The limited purchasing power of the poor makes it unlikely
that private sector investments in agricultural biotechnologies will meet their immediate
needs. Each country needs to promote an appropriate mix of public, private and public-
private partnership (PPP) financing that best meets its needs, and effectively communicate
the underlying rationale to all stakeholders.
27. Need to consider the role of intellectual property rights (IPR) in promoting innovation
and restricting (unlicensed) access to proprietary agricultural biotechnologies. IPR recognize
the creativity of inventors by providing a temporary exclusive property right over inventions.
As legal instruments, IPR promote private sector investment while also requiring disclosure
and dissemination of new innovations. IPR predominantly relate to the use of proprietary
technologies in commercial markets. The effect of IPR systems in stimulating research investment,
invention and innovation in each country and sector is a strategic issue, particularly in relation
to what forms of innovation IPR promote and which stakeholders benefit from proprietary
technologies. Lack of comprehensive and updated national IPR regulatory systems can limit
the import of biotechnologies developed abroad.
28. Determine whether and how IPR are likely to limit the freedom to innovate or trade
in relation to agricultural biotechnologies. Because many biotechnology innovations (and
enabling technologies/tools) are subject to IPR, countries need to have the capacity to assess
their freedom to operate (nationally and internationally) in terms of the IPR landscape
for different biotechnology innovations. For IPR, this can apply to freedom to export
10.2.5 Facilitate
national and international linkages in agricultural biotechnologies
that can strengthen food security
31. Successful governance of biotechnologies requires well coordinated policies and strategies
that address all stages of the innovation chain. For agricultural biotechnologies to impact on
meeting national development needs, approaches that consider the entire agricultural innovation
system can have advantages over a fragmented project/programme-based approach (operating
independently across different sectors and ministries). Such an approach considers national
agricultural innovation systems, including the complete network of institutions across the
public, private and informal sectors whose activities and interactions initiate, develop, import,
modify and diffuse new technologies and innovations.
32. Successful governance of biotechnologies requires horizontal and vertical systems of
coordination. Horizontal coordination is needed to ensure that different ministries can agree
on the goals and objectives of a national system of innovation, including the role of agricultural
biotechnologies, while vertical coordination is needed to ensure that the different sectors and
subsectors (e.g. animal breeding, animal nutrition, forestry) are included in the process. Both
horizontal and vertical coordination should occur across all levels from policy, institutional and
field levels. Coordination mechanisms should include stakeholders from farmers organizations,
the business sector and NGOs representing poor rural producers.
33. Lack of policy coherence and consistency across ministries and sectors can be a barrier
to harnessing agricultural biotechnologies. Lack of coherence in national and international
chapte r 10 Options for Developing Countries and Priorities for Action for the International Community 475
policies and regulatory systems creates uncertainty, and can lead to reduced investments
(public or private) in agricultural research and biotechnologies. For policy coherence,
intersectoral policies in the scientific, economic, environmental and trade areas need to be
mutually supportive and well coordinated.
34. Foster links with other countries that can strengthen capacities for policy and regulatory
analysis, planning, research and institutional development and technology flows in
agricultural biotechnologies. Improved North-South and South-South collaborations (e.g.
using regional biotechnology centres such as the Biosciences eastern and central Africa
[BecA] hub) to facilitate capacity development and innovation are crucial. The nurturing
of scientific, policy, administrative, NGO and business network building is essential for
promoting strong national innovation systems that can effectively develop and adopt
agricultural biotechnologies that contribute to food security.
35. Leverage the capacity and knowledge in the agricultural biotechnologies of other
countries in order to meet national needs. When resources are scarce, it does not make sense
to attempt to develop all innovations within one country. Strategies regarding agricultural
biotechnologies that focus on adopting and adapting existing innovations to local needs
require more effective international linkages, as do strategies based on the regional pooling
of expertise and capacity.
10.2.6 Foster
linkages between agricultural biotechnologies and other areas within
national innovation systems
36. Promote stronger linkages between national research institutes and universities.
Disconnects can occur between higher education and training conducted in universities,
and research conducted in national research institutes. Staff and student secondments and
exchanges, and joint research projects between universities and research institutes (nationally
and internationally) will promote mutual-learning, build networks and enhance training,
research and the impact of agricultural biotechnologies on food security.
37. Consider infrastructure development as a platform for technological learning and
innovation. Infrastructure development projects can be used as platforms for research
and technological learning. Government procurement (tenders) can be made conditional
on research, development and innovation occurring within the infrastructural project.
This approach can be used to foster capacity development for research and innovation in
agricultural biotechnologies.
38. Share biotechnology platforms, resources and tools across agriculture, health and other
sectors. The cost efficiency of using expensive biotechnologies can be improved by using
the same/similar biotechnology techniques and equipment across multiple countries,
sectors or subsectors (e.g. the BecA facility, Kenya). Greater integration of publicly-funded
10.2.7 Promote
evidence-based and multi-stakeholder policy development in
agricultural biotechnologies for food security
40. Involvement and constructive engagement of key stakeholder groups in development
of policy and capacity in agricultural biotechnologies is important. The engagement of
multiple stakeholders in the identification of key needs and the development of policies can
lead to mutual learning and understanding regarding where agricultural biotechnologies
can play a role in strengthening food security and agricultural sustainability.
41. Evidence-based policy development is essential for decision-making regarding
agricultural biotechnologies for food security. While it is important to engage a broad range
of stakeholder groups in policy-development processes, this should not lead to an erosion
of the role of scientific (and other, including socioeconomic) expertise and evidence in the
policy-development process.
42. Policy and regulatory development regarding agricultural biotechnologies needs to
balance both risks and benefits for the poor. More emphasis and activity have been focused
on developing policies and regulations related to preventing risks arising from GMOs
than to facilitating the use of agricultural biotechnologies for the benefit of poor rural
producers. Strengthening the voice of stakeholders representing poor rural producers
to make informed (and independent) decisions regarding which biotechnologies they
consider could benefit their livelihoods remains a critical need for developing pro-poor
agricultural biotechnologies.
43. Over-emphasis on and polarization within the GMO debate has distracted and
diverted scientific and policy resources from focusing on the needs of poor rural producers.
The controversy regarding GMOs in food and agriculture over the past decade has had
significant effects in stalling, reducing and redirecting some public sector research efforts
in agricultural biotechnologies, including non-GMO biotechnologies, from addressing the
needs of the poor rural producers, in addition to diverting significant scientific resources
from research to regulation. The portfolio of investment across different types of agricultural
biotechnologies (including GMOs) has to be assessed with reference to the needs of the poor
rural producers and the speed and cost of delivering benefits to them.
chapte r 10 Options for Developing Countries and Priorities for Action for the International Community 477
44. Integrate the biosecurity approach across agricultural biotechnology policies and
regulations. The biosecurity approach is defined by FAO as a strategic and integrated
approach to analysing and managing relevant risks to human, animal and plant life and
health and associated risks to the environment. Biosafety regulations for agricultural
biotechnologies should be coherent and in harmony with other national regulations and
relevant international agreements, regional frameworks and standards, especially those
related to plant and animal health, and food safety. The biosecurity approach can allow
efficiency gains for regulatory bodies.
45. Promote transparency and participation in all processes involving policy development
and regulation regarding agricultural biotechnologies. To build overall trust in policy-making
and regulatory processes regarding agricultural biotechnologies, it is important to ensure
transparency and participation in the decision-making processes of relevant stakeholder
groups and organizations that represent the public at large. Appropriate communication
strategies are needed to ensure informed and meaningful participation.
chapte r 10 Options for Developing Countries and Priorities for Action for the International Community 479
advisory mechanisms for politicians and other decision-makers are critical for ensuring
that decision-makers are aware of technological opportunities, limitations and timescales
and are better enabled to take informed decisions.
55. Communication is critically important for increasing public and political understanding
and engagement regarding the role of different agricultural biotechnologies in relation to
food security. Knowledge and information are essential for people to respond successfully
to the opportunities and challenges of technological changes. However, to be useful,
knowledge and information must be communicated effectively. A number of international
policy instruments (e.g. Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, Aarhus Convention) consider
some issues about public awareness and participation regarding GMOs. It is critical that
communication regarding all agricultural biotechnologies be accurate, balanced, participatory
and science-based. Communication for Development (ComDev) methods and tools, which
facilitate active participation and stakeholder dialogue, could be considered an essential
component of any national innovation system.
56. In the context of ABDC-10, the term international community encompasses FAO
and other United Nations (UN) organizations and bodies, non-UN intergovernmental
and non-governmental organizations, international and regional organizations, including
donors, development agencies, the private sector, philanthropic foundations and academic
or scientific institutions3.
57. FAO Members can consider at ABDC-10 the following Priorities for Action by the
international community regarding agricultural biotechnologies for food security. These
Priorities for Action are intended to provide a framework for international cooperation and
funding support for the generation, adaptation and adoption of agricultural biotechnologies
in developing countries. At ABDC-10, Members can provide guidance on these Priorities for
Action. A recent international policy gap analysis study4 on agricultural biotechnologies
prepared for the FAO Commission on Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture
highlighted the lack of an international policy instrument providing guidance on how
agricultural biotechnologies can be better harnessed for poverty reduction and food security.
58. These Priorities for Action should support the broader objectives of key internationally
agreed policies. Governments have already adopted a series of resolutions and declarations
in support of science and technologies, including on some occasions explicit references to
biotechnologies in food and agriculture5. The most recent occasion was the World Summit
3 This definition is derived from Agenda 21, Chapter 16 on Environmentally Sound Management of Biotechnology (http://earthwatch.unep.ch/agenda21/16.php).
4 Working Document CGRFA-11/07/13 (www.fao.org/nr/cgrfa/cgrfa-meetings/cgrfa-comm/eleventh-reg/en/)
5 See www.fao.org/biotech/abdc/about-abdc/rationale/
chapte r 10 Options for Developing Countries and Priorities for Action for the International Community 481
10.3.1.2 Supporting public and private sector investment in agricultural biotechnologies
for greater impact on food security
64. Action: Donors and international funding agencies may wish to highlight the importance
of public sector research in agricultural biotechnologies for food security and agriculture
sustainability, and consequently consider dedicating an appropriate share of their assistance to
promoting and strengthening public sector research capacity in agricultural biotechnologies
in developing countries.
65. Action: The international community can continue to recognize the crucial role of the CGIAR
as a provider of international public goods in research for development, including agricultural
biotechnologies for food security, and continue its support for the CGIARs work in this regard.
66. Action: The international community can consider promoting policies that facilitate
increasing (or redirecting) public and private sector investment in agricultural biotechnologies
towards the targets of reducing poverty, increasing food security and agricultural sustainability.
67. Action: The international community may wish to recognize the possible contribution
of private sector investment, including in research and development, to food security
programmes and endeavour to provide policy advice on good practice models for public
sector engagement in PPPs regarding agricultural biotechnologies.
68. Action: The international community may consider providing policy advice on establishing
mechanisms and tools that assist the public sector and small to medium-scale enterprises
in meeting regulatory requirements for the deployment of agricultural biotechnologies for
food security.
69. Action: Relevant organizations can develop criteria and tools to better identify those
areas where additional public sector support is needed for agricultural biotechnologies for
the poor (e.g. areas relevant to non-commercial markets, food security, minor and orphan
crops, poverty reduction).
70. Action: Relevant international organizations can consider providing assistance (with
appropriate monitoring) to strengthen agricultural biotechnologies for food security
and environmental sustainability in sectors such as forestry and fisheries that tend to be
somewhat neglected.
71. Action: The international community can consider developing models to assist countries
establish Orphan crop, breed and farming systems Acts (akin to Orphan Drug Acts)
to promote greater investment in agricultural research on the crops, breeds and farming
systems relevant for poor rural producers.
72. Action: The international community can consider within climate change adaptation
frameworks, funding mechanisms to support, inter alia, innovations in agricultural
biotechnologies that can help both counteract and mitigate the adverse effects of climate
change, in order to better protect poor rural producers and consumers from the negative
effects of climate change on their food security.
chapte r 10 Options for Developing Countries and Priorities for Action for the International Community 483
10.3.1.4Facilitating access for poor rural producers and consumers to agricultural
biotechnologies for food security
81. Action: Relevant intergovernmental fora can consider promoting policies to facilitate greater
access for poor rural producers to products and processes of agricultural biotechnologies
essential to food security.
82. Action: The international community can encourage the private sector, and its
representative umbrella organizations, to endeavour to develop transparent mechanisms to
facilitate low- and no-cost humanitarian access to proprietary biotechnologies, specifically
for strengthening food security in developing countries.
83. Action: Relevant intergovernmental bodies can consider whether there are creative ways
to use international policy instruments to ensure that internationally agreed IPR policies
better meet the needs of the poor.
84. Action: The international community can encourage private and public sector research
institutions (including PPPs) to consider modifying terms of access to their proprietary
agricultural biotechnologies so that such technologies can be better harnessed to meet the
needs of poor rural producers in developing countries.
85. Action: Donors can consider supporting organizations and programmes that can
provide strategic advice and capacity development to developing countries regarding IPR
and agricultural technologies, including biotechnologies.
86. Action: The international community can consider further promoting access for developing
countries to essential tools and enabling biotechnologies relevant for food security6.
87. Action: The international community can continue to recognize the role of the CGIAR
in facilitating the access of poor rural producers to agricultural biotechnologies, and continue
its support for the CGIARs work in this regard.
6 e.g. through policy clauses regarding ordre public and morality in relation to protecting human, animal or plant life or health or to avoid serious
prejudice to the environment (Article 27.2 of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights).
chapte r 10 Options for Developing Countries and Priorities for Action for the International Community 485
Support for strengthening national expertise and increasing international
10.3.2.3
cooperation programmes and action plans for agricultural biotechnologies
97. Action: FAO and other specialized agencies can continue to provide support to developing
countries to better assess their needs and priorities for agricultural biotechnologies, and
to develop strategic action plans and programmes in agricultural biotechnologies for
food security.
98. Action: FAO and other specialized agencies can meet requests from developing
countries to assist their national agricultural research and extension systems to strengthen
their policies, institutions and human capacities in relation to generation, adaptation and
adoption of agricultural biotechnologies for food security.
99. Action: The international community can provide support for regional groups of
developing countries to build indigenous research, development, and advisory capacities
for generating, assessing and adopting agricultural biotechnologies to address their food
security needs.
100. Action: The international community can consider supporting the development of
international cooperation programmes in specific areas identified to be of long-term
strategic importance to the least developed countries (which may currently lack even the
basic infrastructure to initiate such programmes in the immediate future).
7 For example, the FAO initiative on Access to Global Online Research in Agriculture (AGORA) (www.aginternetwork.org)
chapte r 10 Options for Developing Countries and Priorities for Action for the International Community 487
112. Frameworks between UN agencies that can be harnessed to improve the coordination
of support to agricultural biotechnologies at the national level include the UNs Delivering
as One pilot initiatives launched in 2007 in eight pilot countries, and the UN Development
Assistance Framework (UNDAF), the strategic programme framework for the UN
country teams.
113. More specific to biotechnology, the 2003 UN General Assembly Resolution 58/200 took
note of the Secretary Generals proposal for an integrated framework for biotechnology within
the UN system and the need to strengthen coordination between relevant organizations and
bodies of the system in the area of biotechnology. The interagency cooperation network
on biotechnology UN-Biotech resulted from this recommendation. UN-Biotech is
coordinated by the UN Conference on Trade and Development and involves all UN
agencies undertaking biotechnology-related activities.
114. Action: Donors may wish to consider improving aid effectiveness in the area of
agricultural biotechnologies through coordination of assistance projects and programmes
in agricultural biotechnologies at the national (and regional) level.
115. Action: The international community can promote greater use of the UN-Biotech
coordination framework to enhance this interagency framework to ensure that agricultural
biotechnologies can better contribute to food security.
116. Action: The international community can enhance their coordination efforts at the
country level for integrated agricultural biotechnologies capacity development to support
sustainable development.
117. Action: The international community can explore the wider use of the Delivering as
One pilot initiative as a basis for working with governments to develop integrated planning
systems for agricultural biotechnologies for sustainable development.
118. Action: The international community can explore and promote measures to use and
coordinate biotechnologies for national development through UNDAF to achieve national
food security objectives.
OUTCOMES
of ABDC-10
Chapter 11
Summary Reports of Sector-Specific Parallel Sessions
Chapter 12
Summary Reports of Cross-Sectoral Parallel Sessions
Chapter 13
Summary Reports of Regional Parallel Sessions
Chapter 14
Keynote Presentations
Chapter 15
ABDC-10 Report
491
11
chapter
11.1 Introduction
During the ABDC-10 conference, 27 parallel sessions were held over the first three days.
Ten of these were dedicated to sector-specific issues and were organized by FAO, each
lasting one hour and 45 minutes. Short summary reports were prepared after the sessions
were terminated and each one was presented to the Plenary Session by a Rapporteur the
following morning. This Chapter presents the summary reports of the ten sector-specific
parallel sessions, five of which were dedicated to background documents and five to case
studies of successful applications of biotechnologies in developing countries.
Before the conference, FAO published five sector-specific documents, covering the current
status and options for biotechnologies in developing countries in crops, livestock, forestry,
fisheries and aquaculture and, finally, in food processing and food safety. Each of the
documents, published in Chapters 1 to 5 of these proceedings, was organized in two parts,
the first focusing on learning from the past and the second on preparing for the future. These
five parallel sessions were dedicated to the presentation and discussion of these documents.
The proposed structure for each session was as follows: presentation of the document by an
FAO staff member (15 minutes); reflections on the document by discussants (10minutes
each); and open facilitated discussion (70 minutes). The five presentations of the document, plus
any presentations provided by discussants, are available at www.fao.org/biotech/abdc/parallel/en/.
There were more than 100 participants and the following key issues for developing countries
emerged from the background document:
These points were further discussed, first by the three discussants and then in a general
audience session, during which the following additional topics emerged:
Roles of governments
}} address declining R&D investments in public sectors;
}} form and/or support regional groupings, especially of smaller countries to achieve
critical mass;
}} target investments to small farmers;
Participants were then invited to prioritize the options for developing countries, provided earlier,
in an informal poll. The highest scores were for the following options in order of priority:
}} build up indigenous research programmes;
}} shared access to technologies;
}} policy development;
}} development of regulation frameworks.
11.2.2 Forestry
Facilitator:
Sandra Sharry, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Argentina
Presenter of the document:
Oudara Souvannavong, FAO Forest Conservation Service, Italy
Discussants:
Jeff McNeely, International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Switzerland
Milton Kanashiro, Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (EMBRAPA), Brazil
Rapporteur:
Moiss Cruz, Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrcolas y Pecuarias (INIFAP), Mexico
In this session, the background document was first presented, two discussants then gave
their reflections on the document and the floor was subsequently opened to the whole
group for further discussion.
In considering the general topic of applying biotechnologies to forestry, an important
point made in discussions was that national trade-offs in forest cover must be recognized,
especially for those countries which are conserving their own forest cover while using
This session was attended by 32 people, in which the background document was presented
and then two discussants gave their reflections on it. The floor was subsequently opened
for a full facilitated discussion.
The group expressed appreciation for the comprehensive coverage of the livestock
biotechnologies, their extent of application in developing countries and their usage in
addressing emerging challenges. The participants agreed to the Priorities for Action for the
international community listed in the document, and noted capacity building and enhancing
quality of research as the most important Priorities for Action.
The gaps identified were lack of: 1) integration of traditional-, conventional- and bio-
technologies, 2) capabilities and infrastructure for the conventional technologies upon which
biotechnologies can be built, 3) appreciation for proper animal nutrition on which the success of
animal reproduction and health programmes rests, 4) integration of biotechnologies in livestock
development programmes, and 5) biotechnological options for pastoral production systems.
The future promising animal biotechnologies identified were: genome-wide marker-
assisted selection, although, for this, phenotype and pedigree recording systems need to be
first put in place and capacity in bioinformatics would need to be built to take full advantage;
genome sequencing of host animal and rumen microbes and assigning the function to
genes for increasing the utilization of fibrous feed and decreasing methane emissions from
ruminants; development of strategies, for example, development of improved pastures and
their introduction in grass and range lands for increasing livestock production and reducing
methane emissions from pastoral production systems, and for increasing carbon sequestration;
development of on-site cost effective, simple-to-use and interpret dip-stick or pen-side
animal disease diagnosis tools; development and use of natural products as growth promoters;
and development of enzymes and probiotics suitable for tropical feeds and tropical animals
and better understanding of the situations for consistently eliciting increased productivity
and decreased environmental pollution. Several participants also indicated that non-transgenic
approaches for genetic modification of animals would soon be available, although there was no
consensus on whether this technology would greatly impact farmers in developing countries
The quality of the document was appreciated but more comprehensive treatment of some
areas was recommended. These included: population genetics for fisheries; molecular markers
for sex, species or population identification; the use of cryopreservation for restocking; feed
alternatives for carnivorous species; and the need to pay more attention to native species
11.2.5 Agro-industry
Facilitator:
Masami Takeuchi, FAO Nutrition and Consumer Protection Division, Italy
Presenter of the document:
Rosa Rolle, FAO Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Thailand
Discussants:
Morven McLean, International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Research Foundation, United States
Marilia Nutti, Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation (EMBRAPA), Brazil
Rapporteur:
Sridhar Dharmapuri, FAO Nutrition and Consumer Protection Division, Italy
In this session, which was attended by 25 people, the importance of upgrading fermentation
bioprocessing through the improvement of starter cultures and bioreactor technology, was
emphasized in presentation of the background paper. Schematic steps of an ideal fermentation
process were outlined, following which the case of tempe fermentations was highlighted
to illustrate that fermentation is only one step of a series of processing operations in the
production of traditional fermented foods. Examples of appropriate and defined starter
cultures applied in developing country food fermentations, and innovations in bioreactor
technology were highlighted to illustrate the gradient of technologies that exist across
the developing world. Lessons learnt and priority actions for governments and for the
As part of the learning from the past exercise at ABDC-10, the five sector-specific
parallel sessions included the presentation of a small number of case studies of successful
applications of biotechnologies in developing countries, followed by facilitated discussions.
These provided an opportunity to evaluate the key factors responsible for the successful
application of the biotechnologies concerned and thereby assist developing countries
to learn from the past and empower them to implement appropriate biotechnologies
more successfully in the future. Some of the case studies presented were described in
the sector-specific documents (Chapters 1 to 5). The proposed structure of each session
was as follows: introduction by the Facilitator (maximum five minutes); case studies of
11.3.1 Crops
Facilitator:
Karin Nichterlein, FAO Office of Knowledge Exchange, Research and Extension, Italy
Case studies presented:
1. Rhizobium-based biofertiliser for the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) in Mexico
By Humberto Peralta, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico.
2. New Rice for Africa (NERICA)
By Sidi Sanyang, West and Central African Council for Agricultural Research and Development (CORAF/WECARD), Senegal
Rapporteur:
Denis Murphy, University of Glamorgan, United Kingdom
There were more than 100 participants and two case studies on biotechnology adoption
in developing country crops were first presented. Additional cases of biotechnologies,
already largely adopted, were then presented by participants from the floor and included:
}} Mutation breeding cassava in Ghana, rice in Vietnam;
}} Micropropagation in sugar cane in India, banana in Ghana and Malaysia;
}} Marker-assisted selection (MAS) in pearl millet in India, rice and water melon in Malaysia;
}} Biofertilizers and entomopathogens in Cuba;
}} Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) pesticide sprays by local groups in India.
11.3.2 Forestry
Facilitator:
Sandra Sharry, Universidad Nacional de La Plata, Argentina
Case studies presented:
1. Tissue culture production of clonal teak in Malaysia
By Doreen Goh, Sabah Foundation Group, Malaysia
2. Use of molecular tools for the management and conservation of forest trees in Central Africa
By Dyana Ndiade-Bobouro, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique et Technologique (CENAREST), Gabon
Rapporteur:
Moiss Cruz, Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrcolas y Pecuarias (INIFAP), Mexico
Two studies were presented, on the use of tissue culture for the large-scale production of
elite planting materials of teak in Sabah, Malaysia; and on the use of molecular markers
to study the population structure, diversity between and within individual species and
to understand the population structure and dynamics of two native species in Gabon for
conservation. Following the presentations, and based on them, the participants made the
following observations and recommendations:
The participants supported the fact that North-South collaboration is one good approach
for ensuring success of a project. Under such an approach, appropriate technology transfer
is ensured, human resources are adequately trained and the projects adequately funded,
and they generally are very focused with achievable targets. Participants also stated that
the new tools of biotechnology should be integrated with conventional technologies,
and that techniques like molecular markers and mass propagation could only be useful
when a stable conventional forest breeding programme is already in place. Further, they
were of the opinion that strong public-private partnership should be forged to ensure
commercialization of the final products from the collaboration. This was clearly shown
in the first case study by Doreen Goh on the commercialization of elite teak plantlets by
the private sector.
Participants also agreed that there has to be a strong support by the government of each
developing country towards including biotechnology in their science policies to encourage
11.3.3 Livestock
Facilitator:
Gigi Manicad, Oxfam International, the Netherlands
Case studies presented:
1. Introduction of the FecB mutation to Deccani sheep in India
By Chanda Nimbkar, Nimbkar Agricultural Research Institute, India
2. Community-based artificial insemination, veterinary and milk marketing services in Bangladesh
By Mohammed Shamsuddin, Bangladesh Agricultural University, Bangladesh (presented on his behalf by Paul Boettcher, FAO
Animal Production and Health Division, Italy)
Rapporteur:
Harinder Makkar, University of Hohenheim, Germany
Thirty delegates attended the session, in which two case studies were first presented. There was
general consensus that both were good examples of how biotechnologies could help improve
the incomes and quality of life of smallholder farmers. The commonalities between both case
studies were that: 1) biotechnologies played a vital role but their impact at the farmers levels
could not have been generated without support mechanisms such as marketing, veterinary
services, feeding, capacity building, and management; and 2) 1015 years were needed to
generate substantial impact at the end-users level. Based on this, it was recommended that
biotechnologies should not be used in isolation, but integrated with conventional technologies
and complemented by the provision of adequate logistic, infrastructural and institutional
support. National and international donor agencies should have a long-term vision for the
livestock sector and they should realize the need to support and fund programmes for a longer
duration, although they should integrate activities to eventually aim for their self-sustainability.
Additional recommendations were:
}} Farmer participation in the development and adaptation of a biotechnology must be
considered.
}} Mechanisms should be put in place to sustain biotechnologies.
}} Governments need to develop national breeding policies to reap the benefits of cross
breeding programmes. However, it was realized that such programmes may endanger
local genetic resources, and proper measures must be taken to avoid this.
Three case studies covering cryopreservation, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) based
technologies, and genetic improvement of farmed tilapias provided examples where
biotechnologies delivered key solutions for small farmers. They demonstrated that clear
goals, sufficient time (several years) and long-term government support (to allow effective
technology development, demonstration of value and uptake by farmers), the involvement
of user groups from an early stage, and effective integration of the biotechnology with other
aspects of the production system, were key factors behind their success.
In general, biotechnology uptake in fisheries and aquaculture has been limited, partly
because of the relatively low biotechnology activity in the field, but where work has
been done, because of the lack of involvement of end-users (industry, farmers) in project
development and lack of effective extension efforts. Additional impediments are costs
of research, intellectual property issues, lack of public sector investment, confusion of
biotechnology with corporate agriculture, and concerns for environmental impact. However,
the large potential for applying biotechnologies was identified.
The development of suitable national policies and legal frameworks to provide
clarity for investors (private or public sector) will help adoption of biotechnologies, their
downstream application and market acceptance. National policies can assist by providing
11.3.5 Agro-industry
Facilitator:
Ruth Frampton, Critique Limited, New Zealand
Case studies presented:
1. Pozol - a Mexican fermented maize dough
By Carmen Wacher, Universidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, Mexico
2. Mab a fermentated beverage in the Dominican Republic
By Bernarda Castillo, Institute for Innovation in Biotechnology and Industry, Dominican Republic
3. Soy sauce production in Thailand
By Ruud Valyasevi, National Center for Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology (Biotec), Thailand and Rosa Rolle (presenter), FAO
Regional Office for Asia and the Pacific, Thailand
Rapporteur:
Sridhar Dharmapuri, FAO Nutrition and Consumer Protection Division, Italy
This session was attended by around 25 people. Three presentations were given related to
traditional fermented products from developing countries. While pozol production has
yet to be commercialized in Mexico, starter culture development in which a new strain of
yeast isolated from the traditional beverage Mab has been patented and licensed with the
branded product, Bejuking, was seen as a local success story in the Dominican Republic.
In contrast, soy sauce is internationally known and there is increasing market demand for
this product. This has led to technological innovation through the development of starter
cultures and bioreactor technology, leading in turn to improved consistency, quality and
safety of the product as well as improved efficiency of the fermentation process. The drivers
of innovation in this case were market demand and the support provided by international
organizations, the Thai Government and the Thai Soy Sauce Consortium.
The case studies highlighted the potential of biotechnologies for improving traditional
products produced in developing countries. It was recognized that without local and/or
international market demand for fermented foods that are safe and of good quality, relatively
little use would be made of the tools of biotechnology to upgrade fermentation processes.
Another option would be to explore new market trends and create demand for fermented
12.1 Introduction
During the ABDC-10 conference, a total of 27 parallel sessions were held over the first
three days, the majority of which were organized by different inter-governmental and
non-governmental organizations. Each session lasted one hour and 45 minutes, except
for three double sessions which lasted three and a half hours. Each organization
arranging a session was asked to produce a short summary report from its session,
which was presented to the Plenary Session by a Rapporteur the following morning.
This Chapter presents the summary reports of the twelve parallel sessions dedicated to
cross-sectoral issues.
For these sessions, FAO invited relevant inter-governmental and non-governmental
organizations to organize sessions on a specific issue of cross-sectoral importance. For
each one, the programme was developed by the organizers, with guidance from FAO. The
structure that FAO suggested for each session was one with 23 speakers/panellists, each
of whom would present for 15 minutes (providing a brief background on the topic and
setting the scene) followed by an open discussion moderated by a facilitator. Presentations
from the different sessions are available at www.fao.org/biotech/abdc/parallel/en/.
Approximately 50 people attended this session, in which the three Panel Members provided
background information on the availability of genomics resources in cereals, legumes, trees
and animals. It was clear that access to low-cost, next generation sequencing technology
will be, or is already, available for many cereal, legume, tree and animal species. To properly
utilize this technology, major investments will be required in bioinformatics and data
management. For the main cereal crops (wheat, rice, maize and barley), there is good
availability of genomic resources and genomic platforms to identify genes/quantitative trait
loci (QTLs) for target traits. New strategies such as association mapping have increasingly
been deployed. Comparative genomics will play an increasing role for identifying and
validating candidate genes following the availability of the sequences of important species
such as rice, maize and sorghum, and many more species given the rapid increase in
sequencing technology.
In legumes, due to coordinated efforts at national and international levels, a significant
amount of genomic resources such as molecular markers, genetic maps, physical maps,
genome sequence, and trait-linked markers have been developed in several important species.
Tree breeding is challenging given the long breeding cycle, heterozygous germplasm and
self-incompatibility. Currently, genetic maps for some fruit tree species such as apple are
available and contain the location of various types of molecular markers and QTLs for
important traits. Published genome sequences are available for grape and in an advanced
stage for apple and peach. For cattle/animal breeding, high-throughput genotyping using
the latest advances in genome sequencing is available and genome re-sequencing, de novo
assembly, and mutation discovery are almost routine.
During the discussion, it was made apparent that developing countries should strongly
consider investing in strategic partnerships with advanced research institutes to be in the
Approximately 60 people attended the session, which started with the Facilitator reminding
the participants that molecular breeding is perhaps not the most appropriate terminology
since it sounds technology-driven and appears in conflict with conventional breeding.
Therefore, it was suggested to use modern breeding to describe the use of genomic
tools in breeding. Three presentations were given to provide background information and
stimulate discussion. The first (by Roberto Tuberosa) laid out the overall strategies and
options for applying molecular technologies in breeding. The second (by Dave Hoisington,
Jean-Marcel Ribaut and Segenet Kelemu presented by Dave Hoisington) discussed
opportunities for providing molecular technology to research and breeding programmes
via technology platforms and regional genotyping/biotechnology laboratories located in
developing countries. The third (by Carmen de Vicente) presented studies on the potential
impacts of molecular-based breeding and examples for capacity building and communities
of practice toward the use of genomics in breeding.
This session, with around 45 participants, was started by the Facilitator noting that 2010
is the Year of Biodiversity and that safeguarding biodiversity is a recurring theme in the
Conference, but that it was even more important to better understand and use biodiversity.
The first presenter (Tom Payne) noted that many plant genetic resources are conserved and
now biotechnology is helping to determine if a crops gene pool is adequately conserved and
how to better access that information. The second presenter (William Roca), on clonally
propagated genetic resources, reported that biotechnology is revealing new information on
potato species diversity and strengthening efforts to conserve farmer (native) genebanks.
The third presenter (Arthur da Silva Mariante) noted that animal genetic resources are
under-conserved and diversity is being lost due to the cross-breeding nature of animals.
Thus, more conservation of animal semen and in situ conservation of breed animals are
needed. The fourth presenter (Jean-Marcel Ribaut) described molecular methods to identify
valuable subsets of genetic resources, to develop new diverse genetic resources using wide-
hybridization and genomics, and to improve the use of genetic resources in crop improvement.
From the presentations it was clear that biotechnology is revealing even more value in
conserving genetic resources and providing new tools to use biodiversity. The need now
is to build the capacity of scientists/breeders in developing countries to better conserve
their unique biodiversity and better access all available genetic resources. Participants,
especially from Mexico, reported significant progress in developing a new genebank and
in situ conservation. Several recognized that national priorities need to be determined
and valuable resources used to conserve unique biodiversity and that genetic resources
are in danger of being lost. It was also mentioned that the strategy for conservation and
management of those resources might be quite different depending on the purpose. The
conservation of species that are in danger of extinction is not the same as the species that
have strong potential for large distribution on a regular basis.
About 44 people attended the session in which three presentations were made, focusing on
the role of small producers (fishers and farmers) in R&D programmes to develop appropriate
technologies. The group identified the following gaps:
1. R&D is not sufficiently addressing small farmers needs; lack of public investment in R&D
2. Lack of:
}} opportunities for farmers to participate in R&D priority-setting;
}} national level consultative mechanism for farmers participation in R&D work;
}} information in local languages at the rural level, enabling informed decision-making
by farmers;
}} involvement of young people in identifying R&D programmes;
}} recognition of farmers knowledge and needs by researchers and policy-makers;
}} skills with researchers to effective communicate with the farmers.
The group decided that the following steps should be taken to address these gaps:
}} formulate national policies to address needs of small farmers and enable their active
participation in R&D programmes.
In many farming communities worldwide, quite simply, no seeds mean no food. To examine
the factors for the equitable generation and access of technologies with focus on women,
the participants considered the following factors:
}} role of international and national agriculture research systems in facilitating the
steady and constant supply of genetic materials (parent breeding lines) so that farming
communities can select and develop their own seeds under their specific conditions,
which are constantly changing;
}} complementary role of the formal seed systems for the supply of finished varieties,
which farmers can test and select from;
This double session looked at the stresses and resilience of farmer seeds systems through
three regional case studies: introduction of Bt cotton in Colombia (by Luz Amparo Fonseca
and Patricia Zambrano); up-scaling and mainstreaming of participatory plant breeding of
rice in Asia (by Ditdit Pelegrina); and ensuring farmers access and control of technology
in Africa (by Andrew Mushita).
To ensure equitable access to technology, including women, the participants identified
and recommended the following:
5. Enabling Environments
Markets:
}} affordable price of seeds/technology;
}} assure market access, where appropriate;
}} create opportunities for farmers-researchers to develop their products and add value
to them.
Policies:
}} access to credit by small-scale farmers;
}} regulatory systems that enhance exchange of seeds and other practices:
yy non-restrictive intellectual property rights for small-scale farmers;
yy broaden scope of seed registration beyond yield;
yy seed and marketing laws that recognize farmers varieties;
yy crop insurance policies that cover farmers varieties.
Institutions:
}} ensure a rich multi-stakeholder environment.
}} build solid institutions (credit, market, research).
}} enable the generation and access to a diversity of technologies, crop varieties.
}} strengthen farmers organizations to access credit, demand research agenda.
This session discussed cross-cutting issues, gaps and needs for successful agricultural public-
private partnerships (PPPs) for smallholder farmers and highlighted successful PPPs, key
constraints and needs. Case studies were presented on (1) development of herbicide tolerant
soybean and virus resistant beans (BASF and EMBRAPA, Brazil); (2) development of water
efficient maize for Africa (AATF); and (3) a wide range of agricultural biotechnology PPPs in
the Malaysian oil palm sector. Other examples highlighted were agricultural biotechnology PPPs
Some weeks before the session took place, the organizers contributed a short Issue paper1,
focusing on the key topics to be discussed during the session, which was attended by 40
1 Available at www.fao.org/fileadmin/user_upload/abdc/documents/biosecurity.pdf
National and international agencies and organizations invest in the production of biotechnologies
for the improvement of agriculture with high expectations as to accessibility of research
results and products. Property rights establish ownership and influence access to, and the
distribution and use of, the products and processes of biotechnological applications.
It remains to be established what kind of intellectual property (IP) legislation optimizes
innovation and the dissemination of products. The current regulatory framework is complex.
Several international instruments are relevant, such as TRIPS (the WTO Agreement on
Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights), UPOV (International Union for
the Protection of New Varieties of Plants), CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity),
ITPGRFA (International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture) and
a WIPO instrument under discussion. The flexibility within international instruments may
build opportunities for national options to deal with different sorts of IP. Several countries
have formulated IP protection systems based on their social and commercial needs. They
include: Common knowledge varieties in national lists under Mexican seed law; the
Brazilian Agricultural Research Cooperation (EMBRAPA) benefited from the existence of
a comprehensive national IP policy since 1996 in negotiations with international providers
of IP; and Cubas IP law to protect national investments in biotechnology in the health and
food security sectors. Equally important might be a pragmatic treatment of technology
transfer using best practices and sound contracts.
New public-private partnerships are appearing that combine public sector research
with private sector resources and development expertise, e.g. EMBRAPA-BASF. Similarly,
there are initiatives to overcome difficulties in developing countries to access protected
technologies, e.g. the African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF). There are also
increasing opportunities for collaboration and augmentation of capacities by joining global
(e.g. ICGEB) or regional networks.
There is a development away from seeing technology transfer from research institutions
as simply a means of generating revenue, to ensuring product development that is of benefit
12.2.10 Policy
coherence in biotechnology at the national and regional levels:
The experience of COMESA, ASEAN and CARICOM regions
Organizer:
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD)
Facilitator:
Thomas Dubois, International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), United Kingdom
Panel Members:
Walter Alhassan, Forum for Agricultural Research in Africa, Ghana
Banpot Napompeth, Kasetsart University, Thailand
Wendy Hollingsworth, Policy NetWorks International Inc, Barbados
Rapporteur:
Gregory Jaffe, Center for Science in the Public Interest, United States
This session presented the experiences of the COMESA (Common Market for Eastern
and Southern Africa), ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) and CARICOM
(Caribbean Community and Common Market) in developing regional and national
biotechnology policies in agriculture.
The first presentation was given by Walter Alhassan, on behalf of Charles Mugoya and
Michael Waithaka from the Association for Strengthening Agricultural Research in Eastern
and Central Africa (ASARECA) in Uganda. He discussed the regional activities that have
been conducted by COMESA to harmonize biosafety policies related to genetically modified
organisms (GMOs). COMESA has drafted guidelines and policies for handling commercial
plantings of GMOs, trade in GM products, and emergency food aid with GM content. The
regional work has also involved a biosafety roadmap to help national government establish
biosafety frameworks, a communications strategy, and an analysis of the economic impacts
on trade if the region grows GMOs.
The second presenter, Banpot Napompeth, provided the participants with a discussion
of the current status of biotechnology development and biosafety regulation in the ten
ASEAN countries. He explained that the countries ranged from having functional biosafety
systems with commercial GMOs to countries with only an outline of their biosafety system
and no research into GMOs. He also reported no regional activities in this area.
The participants then discussed the hurdles to establishing regional guidelines. The points
raised included:
}} the fact that different countries are at different stages of development;
}} countries want to maintain autonomy in the decision process;
}} potential conflict with pre-existing laws and regulations;
}} cooperation needed by different ministries;
}} lack of a GMO product to test the system; the need for political commitment;
}} the establishment of a regional secretariat to carry out the policy/guidelines (regional
infrastructure).
Finally, the participants addressed which priorities that need tackling at the regional level.
The interventions focused on:
}} capacity building - human resources and also infrastructure;
}} financial sustainability of the regional guidelines;
}} an effective regional body;
}} education of national decision-makers;
}} quantitative (cost-benefit) analysis related to the value of the regional guidelines.
There were 45 participants for this session. Ivan Ingelbrecht and Luis Herrera Estrella
provided a general overview of non-food uses for plants, the former discussing the
perspectives of the bioeconomy to address global challenges such as population growth
and environmental degradation both in the OECD countries and sub-Saharan Africa,
while the latter discussed the present and future applications of transgenic plants for non-
food/feed uses. He highlighted added-value applications such as production of molecules
of pharmaceutical and industrial uses, biodegradable polymers, biofuels, specialty oils, and
also environmental sanitation applications such as bioremediation.
Jonathan Gressel and Antonio Paes de Carvalho are entrepreneurs in the field and
presented two cases studies. The former presented the case study of genetic engineering
marine microalgae for meeting global needs for feed and energy. He concluded that marine
microalgae are excellent fishmeal substitutes; do not compete for land and water; can
sequester industrial carbon dioxide; are efficient fertilizers; have high productivity; and
can generate multiple products. However, to be used, microalgae need domestication for
reliability, productivity and composition and this can be achieved via gene engineering. The
latter presented the case study of the development of a biodiversity-related bioenterprise
in Brazil. He discussed the different steps to adding pharma value to biodiversity from
the regulatory background to market and return of benefits. He expressed the opinion
that biodiversity-related biotechnology projects are an excellent mechanism to operate
the transfer of technologies to farmers and to local biotechnology enterprises, and that
biotechnology companies arising as spin-offs of academia in developing countries should
be regarded as prime targets for high-tech biotechnology transfer to these countries.
In this way, research, technological development and appropriate innovation would
actually reach developing countries. He concluded that small biotechnology enterprises
in developing countries share similar problems of growth with small farmers and should
be treated accordingly by international organizations that purport to make biotechnology
a tool to help the poor.
Although not explicitly referred to in this session, a recent initiative of UNIDO addresses
the constraints and recommendations raised during the discussion. The International
Industrial Biotechnology Network (IIBN) is dedicated to assisting countries in accessing
and developing biotechnologies for sustainable industrial development. The goals of IIBN
will be achieved by developing demand-driven projects; offering institutional capacity
building through specialized training in research and areas deemed critical for product
development and technology adoption; and raising awareness of governments and industry
of the opportunities and challenges posed by the emergence of bio-based industries.
This double session, attended by close to 70 participants, aimed to address some of the
most urgent needs for building capacities in agricultural biotechnologies in developing
countries, taking stock from past experience and looking into a new perspective determined
by a number of scientific, socio-economic and cultural changes that have deeply affected
the scientific environment.
Roger Beachy opened the session by providing the audience with some of the issues that
in his opinion needed to be addressed, such as the need to educate more young scientists
using, wherever feasible, the best tools available. He also emphasized that in the case of the
developing world, it is essential that scientists apply the knowledge they acquire to solve
the problems affecting their countries and that in the case of agriculture there must be a
direct relationship between discovery and its relevant application in the field. Presentations
by the Panel Members then followed.
Godelieve Gheysen provided a description of the training activities implemented by
the Institute of Plant Biotechnology for Developing Countries (IPBO), and in particular
the e-biosafety training which was developed in conjunction with the UN Industrial
Development Organization (UNIDO). This programme is proving to be very successful,
although it now needs some revision to maintain its attractiveness and overcome some
challenges faced in the first years of operation.
Idah Sithole-Niang presented the MSc course in biotechnology developed in the
last 20 years in her University, as well as the biosafety training activities implemented
in collaboration with other regional and international entities, and in particular those
developed in partnership with the Program for Biosafety Systems (PBS), with the mission
of empowering countries for science-based biosafety.
Jorge Allende introduced the training programmes of his University. He then elaborated
on some aspects relevant to the three major changes that, in his opinion, are influencing
training of biotechnologists in the second decade of the 21st century namely, a drastic
13.1 Introduction
During the ABDC-10 conference, a total of 27 parallel sessions were held over the first
three days. Five of them were region-specific and, for these, FAO invited relevant regional
organizations to organize parallel sessions for their region. The scope of each regional session
was to address the potential role of biotechnologies for agricultural development in the region
and to cover the entire range of biotechnologies across all the food and agricultural sectors.
In addition, FAO suggested that it would be important to address both cross-sectoral and
sector-specific themes and that, in this context, the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities
and threats (SWOT) analysis method should be used to evaluate the SWOT in terms of
the generation, adaptation and adoption of appropriate biotechnologies in the region. The
organizers of each session were also invited to contribute an Issue paper providing a brief
overview and potential analysis of the current SWOT to facilitate discussions during the
session, with analysis in the paper covering three levels: strategy/policy options, institutional
and human resources. The five Issue papers were made available on the web some weeks
before the Conference, at www.fao.org/biotech/abdc/backdocs/en/.
Each regional session lasted one hour and 45 minutes and took place on 3 March
2010. The structure that FAO suggested to the organizers for each session was one
with 12 speakers/panellists, each of whom would speak for 10 minutes (providing a
brief background on the topic and setting the scene) followed by an open discussion
moderated by a facilitator. All presentations from these five parallel sessions are available at
www.fao.org/biotech/abdc/parallel/en/.
The organizers then prepared a short summary report from their session, which was
presented to the Plenary Session by a Rapporteur on the morning of 4 March 2010. This
chapter presents the summary reports of these five parallel sessions.
An Issue paper was prepared prior to the meeting, and is available at: www.fao.org/fileadmin/
user_upload/abdc/documents/iicaredbio.pdf. During this parallel session, attended by over
65 people, three presentations were made in the first part of the session by experts in crop
breeding and biotechnology, biosafety, and animal research. For the second part of the session,
guidelines for SWOT analysis and priorities were provided for discussion.
Rodomiro Ortiz opened the session with a summary of the relevant advances made
in traditional and modern crop genetic improvement assisted by biotechnology in Latin
America. He noted that agro-biotechnology implies a direct relationship between the private
sector, government and researchers; and that human resources, technology and expertise
should be shared and optimized through national and regional integration including research
networks, in order to maximize the potential of the region.
Moiss Burachik emphasized that biosafety regulation needs to be understood as a
scientific process, and that the expertise and proficiency of human resources are essential
to accomplish this task. To be strong as a region it is important to define harmonized
regulatory processes that will have to include all the most relevant aspects that are within
the regions best interests without overlooking national interests, but of course some
concessions need to be made. Also reaching a workable consensus as a region before the
international community and international fora is as important.
Arthur da Silva Mariante highlighted the importance of traditional biotechnology over
transgenesis in the field of animal breeding. Artificial insemination is probably the most
widely used biotechnology in animal science for Latin America. Moreover, some countries
have had great advances in embryo transfer and cryogenesis. However, the lack of equipment,
information about breeds, and trained technicians are still the greatest challenges.
During the second part of the session, the group concluded that Latin America is
rich in biodiversity and natural resources (including aquatic and animal resources); is a
SWOT analysis
Strengths Weaknesses
Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) has greater biodiversity and
yy There is still a need for capacity development of human resources
yy
natural resources than other regions in the world. It is also rich in and institutions working in biotechnology.
aquatic resources. There are difficulties in performing monitoring after field release,
yy
REDBIO/FAO is a consolidated network functioning in LAC.
yy mainly in countries that are centres of origin.
Regional and sub-regional networks in LAC are an important
yy Different opinions in Ministries of Agriculture and Environment
yy
asset to share knowledge and expertise in genetic resources make it difficult to reach agreement in developing biotechnology for
management and biotechnology. the region.
LAC has a significant critical mass of experts in biotechnology.
yy English-speaking Caribbean countries do not participate in most of
yy
The Southern region is a major supplier for GM cereals and oil
yy the networks functioning in Latin America
seeds and food/feed products.
Opportunities Threats/Challenges
There is opportunity for horizontal cooperation between countries,
yy Avoiding the potential for transgene flow, especially in centres of
yy
including South-South cooperation. origin and mega diverse countries.
The Southern region is in a strong position to negotiate in the GM
yy Transgenic seeds are being controlled by a few companies.
yy
oil seeds and cereal markets. High costs of the technologies make it difficult for poor farmers to
yy
There is an aquaculture network that can be used to explore the
yy acquire them.
possibilities of using biotechnologies in aquatic resources. Disagreements within the scientific community hinder the
yy
There is willingness to work towards the development of
yy development of biotechnologies.
biotechnologies. Over-regulation of modern biotechnology can raise the costs or
yy
To advance in participatory communication/information of
yy even block research and release of products developed by the
biotechnology and biosafety public sector.
Priorities
Before concluding the session, the group decided what actions should be priorities of FAO
for Latin America and the Caribbean, in order to advance biotechnology. The following
were identified:
}} strengthen existing knowledge sharing and research networks and platforms in
biotechnology;
An Issue paper was prepared prior to the meeting, and is available at www.fao.org/fileadmin/
user_upload/abdc/documents/aarinena.pdf. This session was attended by 17 participants
and the speakers set the scene for discussions. The session presentation was divided into
three parts.
The first part, by Osama Momtaz, dealt with the characteristics of the West Asia and
North Africa (WANA) region with several development problems, among them poverty,
lack of gainful livelihoods, shortage of water, droughts and desertification, and conflicts. It
also included the AARINENA mission in contributing to the enhancement of agricultural
and rural development in the WANA region through fostering agricultural research and
technology development and promoting the exchange of scientific and technical experience
and information, as well as strengthening collaboration within and outside the region to
achieve a greater degree of self-reliance in food and agriculture. It also reported on the
geographical distribution of the AARINENA Networks and reviewed the current status
of biotechnology application in the WANA region. The second part of the presentation
was delivered by Ahmad Abdul Kader and dealt with the SWOT analysis for agricultural
biotechnology in the region. The third part of the presentation was delivered by Michael
Baum and dealt with the SWOT analysis for livestock biotechnology in the WANA region.
Strengths Weaknesses
The region has some well-equipped laboratories and some trained
yy In the region, there is a general lack of public awareness and poor
yy
personnel. communication about biotechnology.
An agri-biotechnology network exists.
yy There is a lack of regional cooperation in this very heterogeneous
yy
The region has several centres of biodiversity.
yy region.
The region also has some centres of excellence.
yy There is a lack of harmonization of biosafety regulations and a lack
yy
of risk assessment and management expertise.
Livestock and fisheries are increasing in demand but there is a lack
yy
of focus on these sectors.
There is a lack of integration of technologies into breeding
yy
programmes
There is a lack of product development skills.
yy
Opportunities Threats
International organizations are in a strong position to contribute.
yy Political instability and the socio-economic situation may be a
yy
There is a considerable potential for private sector involvement.
yy threat in the region.
Similar problems within the region mean that solutions may be
yy The region is the centre of origin for many species, therefore there
yy
shared. Developing regional projects to address shared constraints is a risk posed by genetically modified organisms (GMOs) on
such as water scarcity, would strengthen the region. biodiversity.
Develop a regional biosafety regulatory framework tailored to
yy Intellectual property rights are a matter of concern.
yy
national priorities. There is an absence of regional policy and national strategies,
yy
More R&D is required based on demands from broad stakeholder
yy setting priorities addressing the use and integration of
groups. biotechnology in the agricultural sector with lack of cooperation,
Integrating the best outputs of agricultural biotechnology into
yy dialogue among the different stakeholders including academia,
conventional national breeding programmes should remain the research, industry, private sectors and government.
major direction. Biosafety systems are not fully operational in many countries and
yy
are not harmonized in the region.
There is a lack of national and international funding.
yy
Tools for technology transfer are inadequate and often inaccessible.
yy
The SWOT analysis was then translated into an outline for a priority action plan.
An Issue paper was prepared prior to the meeting, and is available at www.fao.org/fileadmin/
user_upload/abdc/documents/fara.pdf. There were around 80 participants in the session.
An Issue paper was prepared prior to the meeting, and is available at www.fao.org/
fileadmin/user_upload/abdc/documents/apaari.pdf. Two presentations were given that
provided background to the session topic. The first was on Harnessing crop biotechnology
for food security in the Asia-Pacific region by Jawahir Karihaloo. The second was on
Biotechnologies in livestock, poultry, fisheries & aquaculture in the Asia-Pacific region
by Chanda Nimbkar (presented on behalf of Oswin Perera, University of Peradeniya, Sri
Lanka and Chanda Nimbkar). These highlighted some successes at the field level application
of biotechnology in crops, livestock, and fish and aquaculture in the region. They included
application of micropropagation, marker-aided selection, mutation and haploidy breeding, and
GM technology in crops with proven benefits to farmers and other stakeholders. Similarly,
in the livestock sector, cryopreservation and artificial insemination have been adopted with
success in several countries and have resulted in improved milk yields. Biotechnological
tools are being used extensively in the production of vaccines and diagnostics.
During the discussion, the participants recounted more success stories, also mentioning
that there are considerable strengths in biotechnology R&D in some Asia-Pacific countries,
including region-based international centres, which need to be harnessed for the benefit
of the entire region.
The SWOT analysis revealed the following constraints:
}} policy support not very conducive in many countries;
}} limited and unsustained funding for biotechnology R&D;
}} limited capacity (technology, technology adaptation and adoption, regulatory and
intellectual property (IP) issues, communication) in many countries, especially in small
island nations;
}} less attention being paid to livestock and fishery biotechnology;
}} limited public awareness and difficulty in dealing with IP issues;
}} regulatory management systems need streamlining
Build capacity
}} strengthen, with support from FAO and other donor agencies, some existing national
institutions to serve as Regional Hubs for sustained capacity building, especially in
education;
}} collaborate in regional and interregional capacity building through support of national
agricultural research systems, CGIAR (Consultative Group on International Agricultural
Research) centres, ICGEB, and regional fora like APAARI.
Strengthen linkages
}} foster regional linkages within the Asia-Pacific region; South-South linkages; North-
South linkages; public-private linkages; public-public linkages;
An Issue paper was prepared prior to the meeting, and is available at www.fao.org/
fileadmin/user_upload/abdc/documents/eca.pdf. Although having experienced a similar
historical past under the former centralized political system, the countries of the Eastern
European and Central Asian (ECA) region are now facing considerable divergence with
regard to development and implementation of their national biotechnology and biosafety
strategies, policies and, when necessary, regulatory frameworks. These biosafety policies,
drafted or officially adopted and existing often only on paper but not implemented, are
hardly embedded in a larger context of a sustainable biotechnology strategy. Almost all
ECA countries failed in developing or enforcing functional frameworks that allow taking
advantage of a wide range of biotechnologies and particularly to bring locally developed
biotechnology inventions into farms and on the market.
The countries from ECA have traditionally good secondary and higher education systems,
which address different aspects of biotechnology research in crops, forestry, livestock, fisheries
and food. The transition period in their economies, however, severely influenced the process of
depletion or loss of intellectual and technical personnel, especially in the young generation. The
disinclination of policy-makers to implement adequate strategies for prioritizing biotechnology
research, or adopting too restrictive, over-regulated biosafety legislation caused additional
reflux of highly qualified young experts from a biotechnology vocation.
During the session a priority list of actions for the Region, the European Union (EU) and
international organizations was developed and discussed. Some actions defined are specific
for the region, the EU or international organizations, while others may concern all players.
For the EU
}} the EU is seen as a role model by many countries of the region. Therefore, attention
should be paid to base political decisions on verifiable scientific data; to implement
agricultural biotechnology developments; and to execute regulatory procedures in a
consistent and timely manner.
}} support technology transfer, coupled with capacity building on intellectual property
rights.
}} support the establishment of public-private/public-public partnerships in biotechnology
research and innovations in agriculture by exploring existing technology platforms like
Plants for the future.
}} improve the awareness and participation of research institutions and SMEs (small and
medium sized enterprises) located in the region in EU-funded research programmes
on agricultural biotechnology.
Keynote Presentations
14.1 Introduction
This Chapter contains four keynote presentations prepared for the ABDC-10 conference.
The first two are the introductory remarks made by the representatives of FAO and the
Government of Mexico respectively at the Opening Ceremony on 1 March 2010. They were
presented by Mr. Modibo Traor, Assistant Director-General, Agriculture and Consumer
Protection Department, for FAO and by Mr. Mariano Ruiz-Funes Macedo, Sub-Secretary of
the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Rural Development, Fisheries and Food (SAGARPA),
for Mexico. The statements are provided in the original language in which they were presented.
The third presentation is the keynote address prepared by Mr. M.S. Swaminathan, Chairman
of the M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation (Chennai, India) and Honorary Chair of the
ABDC-10 Conference Steering Committee, which was read by a representative of FAO at the
Opening Ceremony. The fourth presentation is the paper prepared by Mr. Rodney Cooke,
Director of the Operational Policy and Technical Advisory Division of the International
Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD). The paper is entitled Investing in agricultural
research and agricultural biotechnologies and was presented to the Plenary on 2 March 2010.
It is my great pleasure to be with you today and to welcome you all to the FAO International
Technical Conference on Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries. I want
to begin by thanking the Government of Mexico for hosting this event in such a beautiful
1 ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/Meeting/018/k6050e.pdf
The Millennium Development Goal to reduce hunger and extreme poverty by half cannot be
met five years from now with a business as usual approach. Appropriate biotechnologies,
if aimed at problems and needs of smallholders in developing counties and supported by
the necessary investments in strengthening national technical and policy capacities, can
contribute toward meeting that goal. The future for agriculture implies a complex set of
challenges, but the battle against hunger must be won.
I wish you a very productive meeting, and look forward to the results of your deliberations.
Thank you for your kind attention.
It is essential that rural people are provided with the means to adapt to climate change.
They need seeds that are more resistant to drought or to floods and they need cutting-edge
agricultural technologies. This must be linked to rural financial services to allow them to
invest in the future and to help tide them over in lean times.
Increased funding
}} redirecting part of the total public support package for agriculture to innovative
technological packages;
}} developing much closer partnerships with R&D supported by other ministries and
their donors;
}} encouraging commercialization of agricultural R&D;
}} introducing commodity levies and tax check-offs to support pro-poor agricultural R&D.
3 idem
4 Chapter 1 in this book
Capacity development
Countries should develop biotechnology capacities of the National Agricultural Research Systems.
Uptake of biotechnologies
Biotechnology development should be strongly linked with strategies for its widespread
dissemination. Stronger extension services involving participatory crop improvement
programmes should be an integral part of national/regional agricultural support structures,
including enhanced seed production and distribution systems.
IPR and traditional knowledge and germplasm: The role of the CBD
The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) mandates that the contracting Party shall:
respect, preserve and maintain knowledge, innovations, and practices of indigenous
ABDC-10 Report
15.1 Introduction
Participation at the ABDC-10 conference was by invitation and it brought together about
300 policy-makers, scientists and representatives of intergovernmental and international
non-governmental organizations. This included delegations from 42 FAO member countries,
namely Algeria, Argentina, Bhutan, Brazil, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, the Cook
Islands, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Gabon, the Gambia, Grenada,
Guatemala, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Lesotho, Malawi, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco,
the Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Qatar, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Suriname,
United Republic of Tanzania, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, United States of
America, Uruguay, Zambia and Zimbabwe. On the afternoon of the final day, the member
countries adopted the conference report, which is provided in this Chapter. Note, when
references are made in the report to FAO background documents, keynote presentations
or parallel session summary reports, the appropriate chapter in this book is now cited.
15.2 Report
2. Mr Alvaro Garca Chvez, Secretario de Desarrollo Rural del Gobierno del Estado de
Jalisco (Mexico), welcomed delegates and observers to the beautiful city of Guadalajara, noting
that the state of Jalisco is a leading agriculture producer. He stressed the importance of this
timely global Conference indicating that agriculture needed improved technologies and tools to
meet the challenges imposed by global food insecurity and poverty. Mr Garca Chvez stated
that the tools and products of biotechnologies had to be used and produced in a responsible
manner to achieve food security while ensuring biosafety and protection of the environment.
6. Mr Jeffrey McNeely was elected as Chair. Ms Marilia Regini Nutti (Brazil) and Ms
Priyanjalie K.M. Wijegoonawardane (Sri Lanka) were elected as Vice-Chairs. Mr Fernando
Gmez Merino (Mexico) was elected as Rapporteur.
8. The FAO Secretariat presented Section A5 of the background document, Policy options
for agricultural biotechnologies in developing countries, which provided a framework for
targeting biotechnologies to the poor, emphasizing the importance of placing biotechnologies
9. The International Technical Conference thanked the Secretariat for the informative
document. The Conference noted that the use and adoption of biotechnologies in developing
countries is affected by a number of factors, such as the existence or absence of policy and
regulatory frameworks for biotechnology, costs, farmer and public awareness of potential
benefits of biotechnologies, consumer concerns for food safety and environmental protection,
market conditions and product demand and capacity to access and use new biotechnologies.
It noted that discussions regarding biotechnologies had often focused on genetically modified
organisms, when there were many other biotechnology products in use by farmers, such
as biofertilizers and biopecticides, as well as many tools and applications being employed
within the agriculture sector.
10. The Conference stressed that diverse situations occur among and within countries as
do issues, and that situation analysis of the current use and application of biotechnologies
would greatly assist targeting of biotechnologies in developing countries. It also noted that
sound biotechnology policies, regulations, management strategies, risk assessments, cost-
benefit analysis and communication strategies would contribute to the further development
and application of biotechnologies, and that national biotechnologies strategies should be
prepared within the overall development strategy context of the country.
11. The Conference noted the need for participatory approaches in advancing consideration
of the development and use of biotechnologies. Farmers, farmer organizations, producers,
local communities and other stakeholders needed to be fully involved in the processes,
and scientists needed to better understand farmer needs and production conditions in
undertaking biotechnology research. The Conference stressed that the engagement of
smallholder farmers and producers in developing countries was necessary to understand
their particular challenges and needs, and to determine appropriate use of biotechnologies
to assist small-scale farmers.
12. The Conference noted the importance of integrating modern biotechnologies with
traditional knowledge and practices, and that new tools, policies and approaches should
help farmers and producers to remain resilient and independent, and to continue their
ecologically sustainable practices. It also noted that farmer willingness to adopt new tools
and practices depended on their understanding of, and participation in, the resulting benefits,
13. The Conference agreed that the further development and application of biotechnologies
in many developing countries would benefit from international and regional cooperation
and technical and other assistance from international organizations. It noted the need
for public research to continue to be supported in order to develop biotechnology tools,
products and best sustainable practices, and that national and regional centres of excellence
were potential mechanisms for collaboration, and to better focus biotechnology research
on the needs of farmers.
14. The Conference received summary reports of the results of sector-specific roundtables
on case studies of successful applications of biotechnologies in developing countries in crops,
livestock, forestry, fisheries and aquaculture, and agro-industry. It also received summary
reports of the results of parallel sessions on sector-specific background documents describing
the current status and options from biotechnologies in developing countries6.
15. Mr Rodney Cooke, Director, Operational Policy and Technical Advisory Division,
International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD), presented a paper on investing
in agricultural research and agricultural biotechnologies7. He stressed that the world can
ill afford to continue under-investing in agriculture given the levels of food insecurity
and poverty and the need for effective adaptation strategies for agriculture in light of the
challenges of climate change. Mr Cooke noted the need to focus attention on increasing
productivity of smallholders and producers, including women farmers.
16. Mr Cooke stated that while investments in agriculture have proven to be highly effective
in reducing poverty, securing consistent levels of funding for agricultural science and
technology had been problematic for most developing countries, and this situation needed
to be addressed. He stressed that agricultural investment plans must be coherent with overall
national plans for economic development and poverty eradication. Mr Cooke called for
6 Summary reports from the sessions are available in Chapter 11 of this book
7 His paper is in Chapter 14.5 of this book
17. The Conference considered Section B8 of the background document, Policy options for
agricultural biotechnologies in developing countries, which dealt with public policies for
fostering appropriate applications of agricultural biotechnologies, including: scientific and
technical capacity building; approaches to, and mechanisms for, planning and funding; and
requirements to ensure the safe use of agricultural biotechnologies through environmental
and food/feed safety regulation. A number of delegates indicated that their countries had
already established biotechnology policies and legal frameworks, which included biosafety.
18. The Conference stressed the need for capacity building to enable further development of
biotechnology policy and legal frameworks in developing countries. Since many developing
countries already have significant experience in developing and implementing biotechnology
policies and legal frameworks, the Conference called for further collaboration among
developing countries in particular, to share experiences and approaches. The Conference also
requested that support be provided by FAO and other relevant international organizations
in preparing biotechnology policy and legal frameworks, as requested.
19. The Conference noted that policy and legal frameworks could establish clear approval
and monitoring procedures and the responsibilities and competencies for developing
and using biotechnology, provide clarity and certainty for developers and users of
biotechnology, as well as investors. The Conference noted that biotechnology is rapidly
advancing and evolving, and biotechnology policies and regulatory frameworks would
require ongoing review and updating to ensure they remain current and enabling.
20. The Conference stressed the need for communication strategies in the preparation and
implementation of biotechnology policies and legal frameworks to promote involvement
in the preparatory processes and awareness of regulatory and other requirements and
responsibilities, and the benefits of biotechnologies.
The Conference emphasized the critical need for ongoing scientific training and
21.
education to advance biotechnologies in developing countries. Training to update scientists
The Conference also saw the need for long-term educational investments to develop the
22.
next generation of biotechnology scientists and agriculture extension workers. Incentives
might be required to encourage young scientists to undertake research in developing
countries to reduce the flow of scientists to developed countries.
23. The Conference indicated that biotechnology capacity building initiatives should take
into account existing expertise and facilities, and strategically target country needs and
challenges. Delegates indicated several areas for capacity building, including: to enhance legal
expertise to prepare, administer and enforce biotechnology laws and regulations; to build
capacity in risk assessment and risk management; to better respond to disease outbreaks
affecting agriculture production; to advance sustainable agriculture and meet the needs of
smallholder farmers and producers; to better utilize endemic species and develop aquaculture
resources; and to enhance support for genebanks to assist in conserving genetic diversity
as a basic resource for further development of biotechnologies.
24. Taking into consideration a proposal from a representative from civil society, the concern
was expressed that genetically modified organisms should not be imposed on farmers in
developing countries, in particular if these genetically modified organisms could adversely
impact the livelihoods of smallholder farmers.
25. The Conference received summary reports on the results of parallel sessions on the
following cross-cutting issues: Development of genomic resources: Current status and future
prospects; Genomic applications: Molecular breeding in developing countries; Enhancing
human capacities: Training and education; Ensuring equitable access to technology, including
gender issues; Empowering public participation in informed decision-making; Prioritising
the role of the farmer; and Public-private partnerships9.
9 Summary reports from the sessions are available in Chapter 12 of this book
26. Mr Thomas Lumpkin, Director General, International Maize and Wheat Improvement
Center, of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), began
his presentation by noting the important contributions of the late Norman Borlaug in the
Green Revolution and in establishing global agriculture research networks. He provided
a brief overview of biotechnology application in CGIAR research, stressing that much
more investments in agriculture research and technology are required if we are to meet the
challenge of feeding a growing human population, with less land and water, and reduced
impacts to the environment.
27. Mr Lumpkin stated that a range of biotechnologies were already in use helping to conserve
and characterize genetic resources, enhance agriculture production and productivity, produce
vaccines and improve food safety, as examples. He also noted that the further development
and use of biotechnologies would need to address a number of issues, such as the use of
genetically modified organisms in developing countries, cost effectiveness, and establishing
public-private partnerships. Given the potential benefits to agriculture, Mr Lumpkin noted
that we must work to address challenges and concerns.
28. The Conference considered Section C10 of the background document, Policy options
for agricultural biotechnologies in developing countries, which dealt with ensuring access to
the benefits of biotechnology, and covered the issues of intellectual property rights, public
awareness and participation and the roles of extension services. The Conference reiterated the
need for effective communication with all stakeholders in advancing the development and use of
biotechnologies. Dialogue was essential in order to avoid one-way communication, and various
means of communication would need to be employed to reach out to rural people.
29. However, a number of delegates noted that while they had in place biotechnology
policies and regulatory frameworks, which include biosafety, ensuring the participation of
smallholder farmers and producers in decision-making processes is often difficult, and that
empowering local people and identifying community leaders will promote and support effective
participation. Lack of access to modern communication means, such as the Internet, and lack
of education were cited as challenges to effective involvement in decision-making processes.
Lack of resources is also a key impairment to the participation of poor farmers and producers.
31. Mr Shakeel Bhatti, Secretary of the International Treaty on Plant Genetic Resources
for Food and Agriculture, presented an overview of the International Treaty, which entered
into force in 2004. He described the scope of the International Treaty and progress made
in its implementation, including the use of a Standard Material Transfer Agreement that is
being widely used. Mr Bhatti also reported on technology transfer under the Multilateral
System of the International Treaty, and other accomplishments to date. Transfer of
germplasm within the system is growing and operational procedures are well established,
and a number of local level plant genetic resources projects are being supported through
the Funding Strategy of the Treaty.
32. Mr Bhatti noted that the International Treaty provides for the transfer of technologies
and associated human capacity building. He stated that implementation of the Treaty would
contribute to efforts to adapt to climate change by enhancing the conservation of plant
genetic resources, facilitating transfer of technology and by providing funding to developing
countries. Mr Bhatti outlined some of the needs to further advance the operation of the
International Treaty.
33. The Conference received summary reports on the results of parallel sessions on specific
regions: Latin America and the Caribbean; Near East and North Africa; Sub-Saharan Africa;
Asia and the Pacific; and Eastern Europe and Central Asia. A number of issue papers were
considered in these sessions. Summary reports were also received from parallel sessions dedicated
to the following cross-cutting issues: Utilization of plants for non-food use: Challenges
34. The Conference considered the background document, Agricultural biotechnologies for
food security and sustainable development: Options for developing countries and Priorities for
Action by the international community12. The Secretariat introduced the document, noting that
the conclusions of the Conference would greatly assist in advancing discussions on agricultural
biotechnologies within the governing bodies of FAO. The Chair of the Conference had
prepared Chairs Text with key conclusions from the Conference to facilitate discussion on
options for developing countries as well as priorities for action for the international community.
35. The Conference requested that consideration be given to starting a discussion on the
establishment of an international agreement on sharing and using animal genetic resources
for food and agriculture.
36. The Conference re-emphasized one of the conclusions of the UN Millennium Project,
i.e. that science, technology and innovation underpin every one of the Millennium
Development Goals.
key conclusions
11 Summary reports from the cross-cutting and regional sessions are available in Chapters 12 and 13 respectively of this book
12 Chapter 10 of this book
13 The definition is broad and is based on that in Article 2 of the Convention on Biological Diversity, which states that biotechnology is any technological
application that uses biological systems, living organisms, or derivatives thereof, to make or modify products or processes for specific use. The specific
kinds of biotechnologies encompassed by the term agricultural biotechnologies are described in the sector-specific documents Chapters 1 to 5.
40. Mr Traor thanked the delegates and observers for their advice and constructive inputs
during the Conference, which resulted in clear and practical conclusions. He noted that the
Conference had confirmed that the use of biotechnologies in the crop, livestock, forestry,
fishery and agro-industry sectors can contribute to alleviating hunger and poverty and in
promoting rural development in developing countries. Mr Traor observed that the Conference
had also underlined that countries are committed to assisting poor smallholders, fishers and
forest-dependent populations in developing countries by ensuring that they have access to
appropriate biotechnologies that focus on their problems and that they are fully involved in
the decision-making processes regarding their development and use.
42. Mr Villalobos stressed that much of agriculture production was not currently sustainable
and that this situation must change. Employing sound biotechnologies, he stated, could
assist in addressing the global challenges of feeding a growing human population with less
inputs and less adverse impacts on the environment. He reminded the Conference that we
had faced many other challenges in our past, and now needed to work together to resolve
current issues.
v. plenary session 2
8. Summary - output of Day 1
9. Investing in agricultural research and agricultural biotechnologies
10. Enabling research and development in agricultural biotechnologies
x. plenary session 4
16. Summary - output of Day 3
17. Moving beyond business-as-usual: Options for developing countries
18. Moving beyond business-as-usual: Priorities for Action for the international
community
19. Adoption of the conference Report
20. Closing remarks
21. Closure of the conference
d e s i gn a n d l ayo ut:
p i e tr o ba rto le s c h i a n d a r i a n n a g u i da
stu d i o@ba rto le s c h i . c o m
This book represents the proceedings of the FAO international technical conference dedicated to
Agricultural Biotechnologies in Developing Countries (ABDC-10 ) that took place in Guadalajara,
Mexico on 1-4 March 2010 . A major objective of the conference was to take stock of the
application of biotechnologies across the different food and agricultural sectors in developing
countries, in order to learn from the past and to identify options for the future to face the
challenges of food insecurity, climate change and natural resource degradation.
The proceedings are organized in two main sections. The first section contains ten
chapters with an extensive series of FAO background documents prepared before
ABDC-10. They focus on the current status and options for biotechnologies in
developing countries in crops, livestock, forestry, fisheries/aquaculture and food
processing/safety, as well as on related policy issues and options, in particular about
targeting agricultural biotechnologies to the poor; enabling research and development
(R&D) for agricultural biotechnologies; and ensuring access to the benefits of R&D.
The second section contains five chapters dedicated to the outcomes of ABDC-10,
namely the reports from 27 parallel sessions of sectoral, cross-sectoral and regional
interest, most of which were organized by different intergovernmental and non-
governmental organizations and regional fora; keynote presentations; and the
conference report adopted by delegates in Guadalajara on the final day.
ISBN 978-92-5-106906-6
9 7 8 9 2 5 1 0 6 9 0 6 6
I2300E/1/06.11