Content uploaded by Suganya K Seed
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Suganya K Seed on Sep 22, 2020
Content may be subject to copyright.
10
KRISHI SCIENCE – eMagazine for Agricultural Sciences
Volume:01 Issue:03 – September 2020
Popular article
BT - COTTON FAILURE IN INDIA
K. Suganya*, M.S. Nagendra
Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore - 641 003, Tamil Nadu, India
*Corresponding author: suganyavkam1611@gmail.com
Received: Jul 07, 2020; Accepted: Sep 19, 2020
Introduction
Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum), the white gold is an important kharif cash and fiber
crop in India. Cotton (Gossypium sp.) popularly known as a major cash crop that exerts
considerable influence in the Indian economy. Before 2002, India had a larger area of cotton
cultivation but with less production and productivity because of severe bollworm infestation.
But after 2002, India had become the number one global exporter of cotton and the second
largest cotton producer in the world by surpassing the USA and China. This is due to the
introduction of “Miracle bean” - Bt cotton by GEAC (Genetic Engineering Approval
Committee) in 2002 against bollworm. Now, the “Miracle Bean” has failed to provide
livelihood security for farmers.
Bt cotton: Bt cotton is a genetically modified organism (GMO) or genetically modified pest
resistant cotton, which produces a toxin against bollworm. Bt cotton was engineered by the
insertion of genes encoding toxin crystals in cotton seeds. Cry1Ac protein from Bacillus
thuringiensis provides resistance to lepidopteran pests (Akhurst et al., 2003). Generally, Bt
toxin is a stomach poison. Bt spores present in plants, when ingested by insects get activated
in alkaline gut. Cry protein activates the toxin which attaches to the cadherin site of brush
border cells of mid gut epithelium. After binding, the toxin causes degradation of cells and
makes pores. Hence, gut contents get contaminated with body haemocoel by altering the pH,
thereby homeostasis is affected. Finally, worms get died off.
Monsanto - Monopoly giant: Bt cotton in India is introduced by MNC giant – Monsanto
which licensed its BG-1 and BG-2 traits in hybrids. Hybrids are more attractive to seed
companies because it offers a “value capture mechanism” which should be replaced every
year to avoid segregation.
So, Monsanto became monopoly control over Bt cotton seeds in India and ultimately resulted
in a higher cost of seeds.
https://krishiscience.in/
Suganya et al., 2020 KS-1381
11
KRISHI SCIENCE – eMagazine for Agricultural Sciences
Volume:01 Issue:03 – September 2020
High Cost of seeds: Bt cotton seeds are available for all the farmers but the seeds are not at
an affordable prices to purchase where Indian farmers are small and marginal. Hybrid seeds
are costly also insertion of Bt genes (trait value) adds to higher cost. This is a problem in
India whereas in other Bt cotton growing country like china, the government is producing its
own. Bt seeds without depending on MNC and avoids the monopoly situation.
Non - adoption of refuge plants:
A “refuge” is a strip of non-Bt plants that should be planted around the Bt field which
can act as a feed for bollworms. However, Indian farmers don’t follow this. The entire field
with Bt plants puts selective pressure on bollworm populations favouring worms with natural
resistance to Bt. Hence, resistant bollworms would thrive and spread the resistance trait. If
refuge plants are planted, Bt-sensitive worms are supposed to thrive there and mate with the
resistant worms and down the resistance.
Layout for cultivation of Bt cotton plants
Bt cotton fiasco in India
Bt cotton recorded higher yield upto six years from the introduction and upon years
the yield got reduced due to pink bollworm resistance. After that, Bollgard-II was developed
by Mahyco – Monsanto with Cry1Ac and Cry1Ab against bollworm. This too failed in India.
However, it is still effective against bollworms in the USA, China and Australia being
cultivated for long years. This is because, these countries have Bt technology in open
pollinated varieties, not in hybrids. But, India is the only country in the world that has the Bt
(Bacillus thuringiensis) gene incorporated in hybrids. “Hybrids are inherently designed to
perform best under high input conditions. Many hybrids available in India takes long duration
and are not ideally suited for rain-fed tracts, which suffer from severe soil moisture and
nutrient deficit during the inordinately long boll formation window of 120-180 days.” In the
case of Bt gene in varieties, the genes will be present in homozygous condition of two copies
of the gene in every cell which ensures that all seeds in bolls of the Bt-variety would contain
Bt genes. In contrast, Bt genes in Bt-hybrids are present only as one copy per cell in
heterozygous form. Because of this, about 25% of seeds in Bollgard ӏ hybrids and 6% in
12
KRISHI SCIENCE – eMagazine for Agricultural Sciences
Volume:01 Issue:03 – September 2020
Bollgard-II hybrids do not contain any Bt toxins. This reduces efficacy of bollworm control
and accelerates resistance development.
Bollworm affected bolls
Minor pest evolved as a major pest
Bt cotton had engineered against bollworms but resulted in an upsurge of sucking pest
which leads to overuse of pesticide. This resulted in decline of cotton yield.
Negative Long Term Effects:
The continuous use of Bt cotton without refuge plants has failed to give higher yield
due to increased resistance. Vandana et al., 2017 concluded that the bollworm susceptibility
fell to 30% after 17 th generations under continuous selection with a diet of Bt cotton leaves
and also the resistance increased to 1000 times at 40th generation under laboratory conditions.
Adverse environmental impacts of Bt cotton
Bt cotton cultivation had an adverse impact on parasitic natural enemies of cotton
bollworm. Consequently, the populations of parasitic natural enemies in Bt cotton fields are
significantly reduced. Secondly, the transfer of pollen grains from Bt to Non-Bt cotton plants
which contaminates the traditional varieties due to its pollination behaviour and finally it
replaced the desi varieties. However, Bt cotton remains as an environment polluter to India.
Socio-economic effects
India's agriculture is mainly rain-fed and low-tech. If a farmer loses his crop due to
drought or other extraneous factors, there is no mechanism to help pay back loans and
interest. This can lead to the farmer committing suicide. Though the government may on
paper have some mechanism of supporting a farmer whose crop has failed, many farmers are
not compensated due to corruption, bureaucracy, and the sheer volumes of farmers that need
help.
Conclusion
India’s dependence on MNC for Bt technology should be reduced and further public
sector should come up with its own technology in open pollinated varieties to reduce the
price. The sucking pest evolved as a bioterror which resulted in higher usage of insecticide
which causes environmental pollution. Hence, technology should be developed not only
against bollworms also against sucking pests. However, Bt cotton also entered in the food
chain. So, the regulatory authority FSSAI (Food Safety and Standards Authority of India),
13
KRISHI SCIENCE – eMagazine for Agricultural Sciences
Volume:01 Issue:03 – September 2020
should act upon to frame guidelines for the detection of genetic contamination in the food
chain to avoid human health risk.
References
Dilip kumar Jha. (2018). Bt cotton to cover even larger area this year. Business standard,
17 th June.
Priyanka Pulla. (2018). Why India is the only cotton growing country facing the problem of
pink bollworm infestation. The Hindu, 28 th March.
Snehlata Shrivastay. (2016). Experts want Bt technology in varieties and not in hybrids.
Times of India. 9 th March.
Padidam, M. (1992). The insecticidal crystal protein Cry1Ac from Bacillus thuringiensis is
highly toxic to Helicoverpa armigera. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology 59:109 -
111.
Akhurst RJ, James WJ, Bird LJ, Beard C. (2003). Resistance to the Cry1Ac delta - endotoxin
of Bacillus thuringiensis in the cotton bollworm Helicoverpa armigera (Lepidoptera:
Noctuidae). Journal of Economic Entomology 96: 1290 -1299.
Bennett RM, Ismael Y, Kambhampati U, Morse S. (2016). Economic impact of genetically
modified cotton in India. Journal of Agrobiotechnology Management and Economics
7 : 1.
Glenn Davis Stone. (2013). Bt cotton is failing; blame the farmers. Food farming and
Biotechnology, 26 th December.
Indra Shekhar Singh. (2017). Thanks to Monsanto’s reckless practices, Bt toxins in adulterant
cotton seed oil may be seeping your samosas. India News, 29 th October.
Vandana Shiva, Afsar H. Jafri. (2017) Failure of GMOs in India, Research foundation for
Science, Technology and Ecology.
Kesavan PC, MS. Swaminathan, (2018). Modern technologies for sustainable food and
nutrition security. Current Science 115: 10.
