An edited version of this commissioned article by Bruce Knight was published in Crop Production Magazine, March 2008

IF GM CROPS ARE EVER ACCEPTED, HOW WILL THEY HELP THE BRITISH FARMER ?

Could the UK be ready for a change ?

Just before he retired last December, after serving seven years as government chief scientific adviser, Sir David King, gave a valedictory speech. He covered many issues affecting agriculture and food, but most of the publicity following the speech centred on his stance on GM crops.

Sir David stated that "By 2050 we will need to feed over 9 billion people on the planet - We will, I believe, only do this with the assistance of a third green revolution, and GM technologies will be crucial in delivery of this." He also pointed out that as Britain is a world leader the science of molecular biology we should be encouraging the formation of companies that "will lead the world in this green revolution".

To date Government has taken a broadly neutral approach to GM issues with priorities to protect human health and the environment and provide choice for the consumer over whether or not to purchase GM food. Sir David's message was now: "I believe that it's now time to revisit this issue".

A similar message was conveyed by his successor, Professor Beddington, as reported in The Times he told MPs: "That he saw no safety reasons for opposing GM crops, which could help to boost farm yields and keep down food prices. Although GM technology would not be the right solution for every agricultural problem, and it would be important to assess the environmental impact, he said that the new crops should be considered on their merits, case by case".

In the UK one of the main barriers preventing the introduction of GM food and therefore GM crops has been the stance taken by supermarkets. A BBC radio interview given by Mark Price, the managing director of Waitrose, last October, gave some indication of a softening of attitudes: "We've always found ourselves in a leadership position, we were the first to take GM out and we may well be in a place where we have to explain to our customers why now it has to go back in. We are not at that point now; we may be in a few years' time."

Sir David King's claim that GM technology will be important as a means of increasing yields, is however questioned by the Soil Association. Gundula Azeez, Policy Manager, makes the point that in managing plant biochemistry. "There is no such thing as a free lunch"....introduction of a single trait gene will inevitably result in the plant compensating such that potentially negative responses in some other characteristic of the plant's growth will occur." The Soil Association's position is that alternative crop management systems would be a more fruitful route to follow. Gundula Azeez said that "To meet the yield objectives referred to by Sir David King, through GM technology, one would have to consider complex and lengthy multi-gene approaches, good for research scientists but a potential waste of resource"

What goes on overseas

In February, Dr Clive James, Chairman, International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, ISAAA, reported that in 2007 the global area of biotech crops had reached 114 million hectares, an increase of 12% over 2006. This area now represents 8% of the global area of cropped land. Clive James predicts that by 2015 the total area will have doubled.

90% of the GM crop area is in the Americas: USA, Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Paraguay. However important recent advances have been with insect resistant cotton in India and China, 6.2 and 3.8 million hectares respectively. GM crops were grown commercially in 23 countries, in which are living about 55% of the global population, and by 12 million farmers, of which 90% are small scale farmers in developing countries.

The European Union has now started growing insect resistant maize. The total area planted in 2007 exceeded 100,000 hectares, mainly in Spain and France. In France however, President Sarkozy took the step in December to formally suspend commercial use of GM maize until a biotech safety study had reported. In January he took it a step further and confirmed the ban for the 2008 season. It was admitted that this was a purely political decision. Small areas were also grown last year in Germany, Portugal, Czech Republic and Slovakia.

GM crops grown commercially. ISAAA 2007

The technology so far has been dominated by just four crops. These crops are core to American agriculture, which is where the first commercial introductions took place in 1996. Molecular scientists achieved the necessary genetic modifications in these crops early on, and there was relatively little public concern over the technology.

But the real reason that these crops remain so dominant is down to the fact that farmers, are satisfied that they do a good job. Usage has continued to expand despite the high cost of seed and the associated technology fee that may be called for.

Weed control in soya beans with conventional herbicides is a chancy operation. Late flushes of weeds often call for application of post emergent herbicides which can result in some shock to the crop and risk of yield loss. With glyphosate tolerant beans selectivity is total. Furthermore the flexibility of herbicide application has encouraged a major trend to minimum tillage production.

One of the major pests of maize in North America, and central Europe, is the European corn borer. It is a sporadic problem but if it occurs it can dramatically reduce yields. Emergency control has to be by costly helicopter application, dropping insecticide granules into the whorls of the crop. So breeding insect resistance into the maize as an insurance is a real advantage.

Cotton is notorious for its insect pests. Genetically modified Bt cotton can replace the need for many aerial applications of insecticide to control different bollworm pests.

With canola, in Canada, the conventional herbicides available are soil acting. The crop is planted in the Prairies in the spring and if, as is often the case, there is not enough rain the herbicides fail. Consequently the arrival of glyphosate or glufosinate tolerant canola has been a god send. Over 80% of canola grown in Canada is now herbicide tolerant, most of it GM.

We import but we do not grow

Apart from the recent plantings of Bt maize in Spain and France, the EU has steadfastly kept away from registering GM crops for production in the EU. However we are importing vast quantities of genetically modified staple crops for livestock feed. Soya beans, a basic source of protein, comes from both North and South America. Initially the European supermarkets encouraged poultry and pork producers to rely on non GM beans. But with Brazil, Argentina and the USA all predominantly converted to GM, supplies of non-GM options are simply not available except at a very high price.

he same is true with corn gluten from the USA. In fact, for a period last autumn it looked as if poultry producers would have to consider closing European operations altogether. American plantings of higher yielding GM corn varieties, notably Pioneer's Herculex, had jumped, responding to demand for biofuels, and at the expense of conventional varieties. EU registration, and therefore import clearance, for gluten from these GM varieties had not been granted, even although applications had been made as early as 2004. The consequence was that the price of corn gluten from conventional varieties had sky rocketed. EU registration of Herculex was eventually granted in November.

The extent to which the UK livestock feed industry is using GM was highlighted by a report published by the Soil Association, published last November. It stated that around 60% of the maize and 30% of the soya used in dairy and pig feed in the UK is GM. It also suggests that, contrary to the assurances from the Food Standards Agency, small amounts of GM DNA end up in milk and animal tissues of GM-fed animals. Gundula Azeez therefore considers that: "There are important safety issues which livestock farmers should be aware of."

Colin Merritt, External Affairs and New Business Development, Monsanto UK Ltd takes the view: "That Herculex was just a drop in the ocean compared with what will happen when a raft of new GM crops are commercialised in soya and maize over the next 2-3 years."

"From my perspective we are entering a new phase in the global biotech saga. There was a time, around 1999-2000, when it appeared that the GM crisis in Europe might stall this development internationally. The fact is it hasn't. And now the rest of the world has basically turned the page and is progressing, leaving Europe increasingly isolated from world agricultural progress, and risking a food supply crisis here within a few years."

"Soya beans and corn gluten are never going to be UK produced commodities but it seems totally scandalous that we are importing GM crops but not able to grow them."

Paul Temple, deputy President of the NFU, is concerned that both the livestock sector and the arable sector is threatened due to the delays in EU registrations. "Faced with the escalating feed prices, the European Commission has reported that up to 40% of the pig and poultry production industry could be lost from the EU. And this sector is the largest outlet for our cereals so the arable producer could also be affected."

Where are the opportunities in Britain ?

A number of crop traits have been evaluated in the UK:

Farm scale trials remain vital

As a consequence of concerns on the environmental impact of GM herbicide tolerant crops the establishment of a Farm Scale Evaluation, FSE, programme was commissioned by Defra, with the first trials planted in the spring of 1999. In this respect the UK was ahead of other EU countries in choosing to evaluate the environmental impact and demonstrate the agronomic benefits under practical farming conditions.

Dr Julian Little is now Chairman of the Agricultural Biotechnology Council, abc, the UK industry association. His regret is that despite the clear agronomic and economic advantages shown, it was the possibility of negative impacts on the ecosystem, in a very worst case scenario, that dominated the decision process at the time.

Julian Little, says of the FSEs, "The concept was good but perhaps they were ahead of their time. There were no concerns then about food security, biofuels were not part of the equation nor was the concept of climate change and carbon footprint so prominent."

He does not claim that GM technology is the only way forward and recognises the need of organic growers aiming to add value to their produce in response to a particular sector of the market. "But it should be horses for courses, giving the consumer a clear choice."

Paul Temple, Deputy President of the NFU, explained that the NFU support choice for the consumer and that it is not their role to dictate to farmers what they should grow or to promote one agricultural system in favour of another."Ultimately the market will rule."

He personally has had the opportunity to see the benefits of GM crops from trials in the UK and elsewhere in the EU. He now believes that, and despite the loss of the Experimental Husbandry Farms, it is important that members have the opportunity to see trials, under UK conditions, for themselves.

What for the future ?

Colin Merritt lists some of the next wave of GM crops which will begin commercialisation over the coming 5 years: "These include drought tolerance, improved animal feeds, healthier vegetable oils and improved nitrogen utilisation. The latter alone has the potential to reduce nitrogen use per tonne of crop produced by up to half "

Mike May believes there are many more potential benefits for the sugar beet grower yet to come: "We do not know for sure what is 'sitting on lab shelves' waiting for GM cropping to start in Europe. I know of genes that will improve rhizomania resistance in beet, there is another that could be used to suppress rots."

For British farming it is unlikely that there will be either uncontrolled adoption or, in the long run, total rejection. Sir David King referred to the UK's research skills in molecular biology. To this should be added the scientific and practical experience gained in developing, demonstrating and managing efficient, and environmentally sound, crop production systems. With new traits yet to come there is every opportunity for UK scientists and farmers to adopt a fresh approach and to exploit the technology for the benefit of all.