By Marjorie A. Stair, Bureau Chief
IN RECENT weeks, an official of INIBAP, the International Network for the Improvement of Banana and Plantain, a programme of the International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI), has raised the issue of the threat of the extinction of the Cavendish group of bananas.
This is the group of bananas exported to Europe and the USA, consumed by Europeans, Americans and the rest of the developed world, the bananas that constitute the lucrative international banana trade.
This export trade concerns only 12.5 million tonnes of bananas but some 500 varieties of bananas; approximately 100 million tonnes of bananas are grown all over the world. The Cavendish group is not cultivated in Africa or Asia.
The threat concerns fungicide resistance to the Black Sigatoka disease and the spread of a new form of Panama disease (Fusarium wilt) - known as race 4, not yet in this side of the world, which is threatening the Cavendish variety. Here in Jamaica, we have succeeded in implementing a relatively successful Black Sigatoka disease management programme that has minimised the threat of fungicide resistance.
INIBAP has stated that only five scientists, globally, are presently working to breed improved bananas and points to the alarmingly little investment in banana research compared to the global significance of the crop. They point out that biotechnology can speed up research dramatically and mention that classical plant breeding can use biotechnologies to see which varieties are worth pursuing and genetic modification is one biotechnology that could be used to breed improved varieties of bananas. It concludes that genetically manipulated bananas would be environmentally safe because bananas are sterile and modified genes would not be able to escape from the transformed crop.
The immediate threat to the banana industry, described as being in a precarious position by one banana official, has more to do with the market and less with disease but Jamaica has one major advantage, we consume a lot of bananas, both green and ripe and have a strong domestic market. Export banana volume has moved as follows:
YEAR BANANA EXPORT
VOLUME
1984 11,000 tonnes
1996 87,433 tonnes
2001 42,000 tonnes
2002 39,000 tonnes
A study, commissioned by the European Banana Support Programme, estimates the domestic market for bananas at 90,000 tonnes. FAO's 2001 estimate of banana and plantain production in Jamaica is 163,500 tonnes, and give 2000 banana consumption in Jamaica as 41.6KG/ca/year which is low, compared to Uganda which consumes 222.8 kg/ca/year.
I will be doing some other articles about the banana industry in the The Gleaner next week so I want to focus on the possibility of a genetically modified banana being consumed by Jamaicans and the rest of the world in the near future.
An article, 'How Altered', in the May 2002 National Geographic magazine's feature on Food, tells us that scientists continue to find new ways to insert genes for specific traits into plant and animal DNA. "A field of promise and a subject of debate genetic engineering is changing the food we eat and the world we live in."
The article tells us that the production of genetically engineered foods has literally exploded since the mid-1990's, moving from the greenhouse to 130 million acres in 13 countries including the USA, Argentina, Canada, China, South Africa, Australia, Germany and Spain. More than 60 per cent of all the processed foods on US supermarket shelves, and therefore ours to a lesser extent, including pizza, chips, cookies, ice cream, salad dressing, corn syrup and baking powder, contain ingredients from engineered soybeans, corn or canola.
The benefits of GM foods are listed as higher yields, the need for use of fewer pesticides, and better nutrition.
The risks are gene flow by which modified crops can spread their engineered genes to wild relatives making them hard to manage. Collateral damage (reminds you of the impending war don't you?) describes a situation in which the engineered crops hasten insect's resistance to Bt toxins. Toxin build-up in the soil could have a negative effect on soil ecosystems. Most importantly, health risk as allergens might be introduced into the foods.
Of course the most persuasive argument being used for genetically modified foods is to address the urgent problems of hunger in the world. Of course, there are those of us who believe that a more equitable world, and one at peace instead of war, which results in the redistribution of existing food supplies will more effectively solve the problem of hunger.
Access to the technology, even if it could solve the food and hunger problems of the poorer countries, is limited by the fact that big multi-national companies own key biotechnology methods and genetic information. The National Geographic article ends as follows:
"...the biggest mistake of all (in the debate about GM Foods) would be to blindly reject or endorse this new technology. If we analyse carefully how, where, and why we introduced genetically altered products, and if we test them thoroughly and judge them wisely, we can weigh their risks against their benefits to those who need them most."
