Skip Navigation

Agriculture & Environment: GM crops

News

GM potato gets roasting in South Africa

Munyaradzi Makoni

4 November 2009 | EN | 中文

Potatoes in hand

Potatoes in South Africa are vulnerable to tuber moth

Flickr/Dr. Hemmert

[CAPE TOWN] South Africa's Agricultural Research Council has appealed against the government's decision to reject a genetically modified (GM) potato it was hoping to release to farmers.

The Executive Council for Genetically Modified Organisms dismissed the application for a permit to release the potato on safety and economic grounds.

The potato, SpuntaG2, contains a gene from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis which acts like a built-in pesticide against the tuber moth (Phthorimaea operculella). The moth causes 40 million South African rand (US$5 million) of losses to the potato industry each year.

Scientists had hoped the potato would allow farmers to use fewer pesticides, reducing costs and helping the environment.

At a meeting held in Cape Town last week (29 October) to discuss the ban, Gurling Bothma, a scientist at the ARC-Roodeplaat Vegetable and Ornamental Plant Institute, described the government's decision as frustrating.

"I think they did not understand our results," Bothma told the meeting.

The Department of Agriculture, Forests and Fisheries has expressed concerns about the damage the modified potatoes would do to trade, as South Africa does not have the means to segregate GM crops from non-GM.

Another worry is that farmers would still need to spray SpuntaG2 to counter other pests. Moreover, the industry's biggest problems relate to a lack of water and fertiliser, not pests.

Julian Jafta, director of genetic resources at the department, says inadequate toxicity information is another factor in the rejection of SpuntaG2. Little information is available on the effects of inserting the new gene on potato allergen content .

Also opposing the introduction of the modified vegetable is Potatoes South Africa, an organisation representing commercial and smallholder potato farmers.

Ben Pieterse, research and development manager, said: "We support biotechnology and the future benefits it can bring. We will, however, not support any products that can cause health risks".

In addition, Pieterse fears consumer resistance to GM potatoes would reduce consumption — South Africans currently eat 35 kilograms of potatoes per person annually. Exports would also suffer, he says.

But he argued for the continuation of GM potato research "in case a time will come in future when this technology is needed — then we should be ready," he told SciDev.Net.

But Bothma told SciDev.Net that there was a strong possibility that the GM potato research will now cease due to lack of funding.

South Africa is the only country in Africa to have commercially released GM food crops (maize and soya) and the only country in the world to have allowed the genetic modification of the staple food, maize, according to the African Centre for Biosafety, which campaigned against the potato.

The appeal decision is expected within three months.

Comments

Winston Hide ( United States of America )

9 November 2009

Every point made in the article by the Council for GM organisms is valid. Indeed, SA will not be able to export its produce to EU or other sites that demand clear evidence of purity from GM. The response of the Roodeplaat team "I think they did not understand our results," - Bothma is in fact insulting the intelligence of the council. It's a consistent example of the Agricultural researchers who have strived to perform biotech innovations that are feasible, as opposed to innovations that are actually directly in need. The latter has been a problem - as there is an apparent good relationship between the agricultural research group and the crop companies. It is excellent to see that the SA government has put in place a clearly well constituted, solid thinking GM review panel. The GM researchers have had it 'easy' in terms of polarising views for some time. That's why it is so interesting to see that they are using the possibility of confusion "they don't understand out results" which is a reflection on the communication of the results, not the results themselves. Awesome.

Eugene Viljoen ( South Africa )

11 November 2009

GM altered food means Insidious World food Contol its a pestilence similar to out Water contamination by the Mines, The Soya and maize in RSA is bad enough

Add your comment

All comments are subject to approval and we reserve the right to edit comments containing inappropriate/unsuitable language. SciDev.Net holds copyright for all material posted on the website. Please see terms of use for further details.

You need to be signed in to post a comment or to email a consenting comment author. Please sign in or sign up.

Back to News
To the top