SO, Clearfield Rice has failed in Malaysia. For those who are new to Clearfield Rice, here is the background information. It is high-yielding and weed-resistance rice variety developed by BASF and further improved by the Malaysian Agricultural Research & Development Institute (MARDI) to suit local environment. MARDI took seven years to perfect it for local use with a grant of RM1.2 million.
Clearfield Rice is a non-transgenic (non-genetically modified) variety developed through traditional plant breeding techniques. It is tolerant to Newpath® herbicide, Clearpath™ herbicide and Beyond® herbicide. It provided a broad-spectrum control to some of the toughest rice weeds that translated into higher rice yield and easier weed management practice. With these traits, this superior rice variety gave a strong foothold to Malaysian farmers.
Released to the market in 2010 in Malaysia, farmers saw this as their saviour as they were battling “weedy rice”, a kind of weed that compete with rice for space and nutrients. Clearfield Rice produced nine tonnes of rice a hectare compared to the five tonnes produced by the common varieties planted previously by farmers.
Alas, all is in vain, thanks to farmers who failed to follow the recommendations. Seven years since its commercial cultivation, farmers have created an irreversible problem where the Clearfield Rice has cross bred with the weed, creating resistant weed.[ihc-hide-content ihc_mb_type=”show” ihc_mb_who=”2,3,5″ ihc_mb_template=”1″ ]
A check on the BASF website shows very precise and clear stewardship practices on how and when the recommended herbicides should be applied.
Additionally, it also gives instruction of planting pattern to prevent weed resistance. Farmers are advised to start planting on a clean land either by burning down or using residual herbicide (herbicides that are applied prior to planting or emergence of weeds). Clearfield rice is not to be planted in consecutive years and rotating herbicides with alternative modes of action is recommended.
Technology is certainly not to be blamed here. It is the abuse of technology by the users, in this case the farmers. Greedy farmers did not follow the stewardship practice and guideline set by the rice developer.
According to Dr Zainal Abidin Hassan, director for MARDI’s Rice Research Centre who spoke to The Star, Clearfield Rice should only be grown in two cycles in a year, with an interval of one planting season.
But because the variety has a shorter growing period, farmers went beyond the recommended guidelines and planted more frequently, resulting in weeds becoming resistant to the herbicides.
MARDI is now trying to modify the current Clearfield varieties to make them more resistant but this is not an easy feat.
Rice is our staple food and we are still below our self-sufficiency level. This devastating episode further paints bleak picture to our rice production. The question is how effective is our agriculture extension programme which are supposed to educate and create awareness among farmers and help them adopt new technologies?
In the same line of argument, do we blame the pharmaceutical companies for developing antibiotics and blame them for the rise of superbugs? It is clearly the failure to administer the technology in the way it is prescribed, the abuse of technology and low public awareness.
Another relevant example is the “failure” of Bt cotton in Burkina Faso. In 2008, Burkina Faso adopted Bt cotton resistant to bollworms and emerged as one of the largest cotton producers in Africa.
The average Bt cotton farming family gained 50% more profit than from conventional cotton. But their blessings were also short-lived. The planting of Bt cotton came to a halt in 2015 due to the marketability issues of the shorter fibre length of the cultivar.
The variety with the pest resistance trait was producing shorter and less desirable lint. It has nothing to do with the GM technology but it was due to the limited local varieties available in the country.
Burkina Faso was the first country in Africa to conduct Bt cotton field trial but upon adoption the breeding programme stopped.
While the Bt cotton variety was providing the benefits to the farmers, there were no improved varieties every year. In all these cases, technology has done what it is supposed to do – conferring herbicide tolerance to rice, antibiotics that can kill pathogens, cotton that is resistant to bollworms and increase the yield with reduced use of pesticide.
But the technology was not deployed properly and instruments and programmes are not in place to support the technology adoption.
[/ihc-hide-content]
