Gmo Wheat???

[charliep]

Maybe someone can help me with a stupid question I have.

Why is it canola can bring new varieties forward that deal issues (club
root, black leg, etc.) within 2 to 3 years of becoming a bigger
problem and yet fusarium graminearium/mycotoxins associated with
it have been around for 20 years with limited to no varietal solutions
(are fungicide and agronomic solutions but limited effectiveness in a
year like the current one).

What makes cereals different than canola?

[hlg]

Charlie.... could it be that most of our canola seed is patented ownership, so seed companys can charge us whatever we will pay to recover costs of development.. As for gmo wheat, maybe the right way is customer first, farmer second, seed company third. Or let`s flood the market with a product they don`t want. Has triffid taught us nothing....The customer is always right..

[charliep]

Then why are canola acres expanding and wheat stable to
shrinking? My thoughts (you can correct me) is that the farmer
votes with their seed drill based on market signals and profit
potential. If canola seed cost outweighed it benefits, then farmers
would shift acres. If use of plant breeding technology were a major
issue to markets, then western Canadian canola crush and exports
wouldn't be growing. Way off you theme but I suspect Canadian
canola production will be in the 13 to 14 MMT area in 2011.

For what it is worth, the rotation in Alberta is canola, wheat,
canola, wheat, etc. Lots of risks but I suspect the rotation that
pays the bills.

Off your topic of GMO wheat which everyone assumes is round up
ready only. Issues are not just the issue about genetic engineering
and herbicide tolerance. The issues in my mind are determining
where wheat breeding needs to go and what is the best way/tools
to get there.

[farmaholic]

Charlie....

Maybe we could use the old cliche; Wheat is 15% protein and 85% politics. As I posted earlier how do the developers of this new product extact a premium out of an already low margin crop.
If today's GM technology was available in World War 2, I wonder if Europe would have refused several cargoes of wheat/flax/canola then? Unfortunately hunger has a way of easing the GM concern. So with GM we produce more of what well fed people don't want and what the hungry can't afford to buy anyway. Don't get me wrong I am not totally against this but is the jury still out on the opening of Pandora's box. I think we may still be in the infant stage of gene manipulation and unsure of the consequences as this thing matures. Who really knows?

[farmaholic]

Charlie....

Maybe we could use the old cliche; Wheat is 15% protein and 85% politics. As I posted earlier how do the developers of this new product extact a premium out of an already low margin crop.
If today's GM technology was available in World War 2, I wonder if Europe would have refused several cargoes of wheat/flax/canola then? Unfortunately hunger has a way of easing the GM concern. So with GM we produce more of what well fed people don't want and what the hungry can't afford to buy anyway. Don't get me wrong I am not totally against this but is the jury still out on the opening of Pandora's box. I think we may still be in the infant stage of gene manipulation and unsure of the consequences as this thing matures. Who really knows?

[charliep]

Perhaps to ask the question again ( I know off the topic of GMO), is fursarium graminearium an issue in western Canada?

Are the only tools western Canadian farmers should be looking at the deal with the issue agronomics and fungicides?

Could there be planting breeding solutions starting with conventional techniques?

Are issues around mycotoxins/molds likely to come more to the forefront in consumers and food regulators minds in the future?

Improved ability to measure mycotoxins in food at lower levels? A trend that ties mycotoxins to a human health issue?

[farmaholic]

Charlie...

I don't think your off topic at all.

In my humble opinion I will answer your questions as I see it.

Yes, Fusarium Graminearium is an issue in western Canada. Agrinomics supposedly help when a proper crop rotation is adhered to and staggered seeding(seeding susceptible crops throughout the seeding window-sounds like fun, eh!) is used. As for fungicides, correct me if I am wrong, none of the registered products actually claim control-just suppression and we know what that can mean. I think conventional plant breeding techniques can achieve resistance in time but that is the problem, what can be done in the lab would reduce the time to achieve resistance. I agree also that consumers will be more vigilant when it comes to their food. In the end they will have to decide. How much is their food going to cost them, if we as producers don't have the tools to produce it at a reasonable cost, the costs will be passed on, simply because no one will grow it. We all see the trend already in wheat, simply based on net returns. The consumer will have to decide.

[Jagfarms]

"Is fursarium graminearium an issue in western Canada?"  

I think it is becoming an issue in Western Canada.

There is Goodeve and Unity Spring wheat now. They are not GMO. Can't they breed new varieties with out Gmo technology?


My guess is Monsanto will produce some Gmo Wheat that has some kind of health benefit like the Golden rice to try to gain world acceptance.

I do not know a whole lot about plant breeding or the Gmo technology.

My wife is a Scientist and she understands and can explain it a lot better than me.

[Jagfarms]

Found the info below
10 reasons we do not want Gmo wheat

1. Market loss The international customers that buy 82% of Canada's wheat crop say that they will stop buying if Canada introduces GM wheat. They are clear: they will stop buying all wheat from us: GM and non-GM alike. One customer, Warburtons (a large British bakery), received 6,000 customer inquiries in 2001 regarding food safety and GM wheat. GM wheat kills markets. 2. The end of organic agriculture GM wheat threatens to destroy organic agriculture in much of Canada. GM canola has made it nearly impossible for organic farmers to grow that crop: seed supply contamination and pollen drift mean that organic farmers cannot be sure that their canola will be free of GM seeds. The introduction of GM wheat and subsequent GM crops will leave organic farmers fewer and fewer crops to grow. Organic crop production will become nearly impossible and Canadians will lose access to locally-grown, organic food. GM wheat yes = organic no! 3. Lower prices for farmers GM wheat will dramatically decrease demand for Canadian wheat. Lower prices to farmers are easy to predict. On the other hand, producing GM-free Canadian wheat will give our farmers a marketing advantage if the U.S. and other nations introduce GM wheat. High-quality, GM-free Canadian wheat could be our competitive advantage, our premium product. Stopping GM wheat means higher prices for farmers. 4. Health concerns Many Canadians, like citizens around the world, question the safety of GM foods. Further, Canadians have grave doubts about Canada's food safety regulatory system-a system based, not on independent testing in government labs, but on reviewing data from Monsanto and similar companies. Finally, farmers and consumers cannot trust the government to regulate because it is too busy promoting the GM food industry. Why take a risk on GM foods? 5. Environmental damage GM wheat, once released, cannot be hauled back in. Once this life form is in the environment, it is there forever. Not only can we not recall GM wheat, we cannot contain or control it. GM canola is flow cross-pollinating with non-GM canola and with related wild species. Monsanto's wheat genes will similarly "flow" through the environment. Again, Canadians know that there has not been sufficient, independent testing done on the long-term ecosystem effects of genetically-modifying the planet's food crops. This is a completely unneccessary threat to the environment. 6. Agronomic costs Some farmers now grow GM Roundup Ready Canola. Spray that canola with Roundup, and the weeds die and the canola is unscathed. But introduce GM Roundup Ready wheat and the equation changes. Farmers will need additional chemicals to control volunteer Roundup Ready wheat in their RR canola and to control volunteer RR canola in their RR wheat. One agronomist estimated the additional weed control costs at up to $400 million annually. 7. Segregation won't work monsanto says that segregation systems are the solution to market rejection: keep GM and non-GM wheat separate from field to customer. But segregation systems will fail because GM varieties will soon contaminate our wheat seed supply. Tests on canola show that most 'non-GM' certified seed contains GM varieties. The same will happen to wheat. With Contaminated seed, it's impossible to run a segregation system. Further, our bulk, high-throughput grain handling system is ill-designed to segregate: with thousands of points where grain could be misrepresented, mixed, or mislabelled. Just one or two mistakes, just one or two customers demanding non-GM wheat and getting GM, could cost Canada its reputation for grain quality and cost farmers hundreds-of-millions of dollars annually. And even without mistakes, many customers regardless of whether we try to segregate. Ironically, the way that segregation will work in practice is that international wheat customers will segregate the world's wheat exporters into those who plant segregation systems will cost farmers millions. Segregation is costly and will fail. 8.Labelling Most Canadians want GM food ingredients labelled. But governments, processors and retailers, and corporations such as Monsanto oppose labelling. They oppose your right to know if you are eating GM food. These companies claim that the fate of GM foods should be left to "the market", and then simultaneously deny us the information with which we could make an informed decision at the grocery store. It is totally illegitimate, until we have mandatory labelling and an informed public, to introduce new AGM foods. What are they afraid of? 9. Corporate control Transnationals such as Monsanto, Cargill, and ConAgra are increasing their control over our food supply. Worse, Monsanto and others are taking control, not only of our seeds, but of the genes- the building blocks of life. And they use patents and courts to enforce that control. The tremendous market power that agri-biz transnationals already have, and their attendant ability to suck the profits out of farmers' pockets, is the real cause of the farm income crisis. GM wheat offers no net benefits to farmers or consumers but it dramatically increases corporate control of the global food system. Should Monsanto control our seeds and our food? 10. We don't need it. Farmers are told, rightly or wrongly, that there is too much grain in the world: we don't need GM wheat in order to grow more. Consumers will see no benefit from GM wheat: with or without it, bread prices wil still go up. GM wheat brings no benefits. GM wheat is not a solution: it creates problems reather than solving them. Let's say no to this turkey. One reason why you would want GM wheat 1. If you're a Monsanto shareholder Independent economists report that the financial benefits from GM wheat will go to Monsanto: farmers' costs will rise and consumers will not see lower bread prices. Monsanto lost $2.5 billion [Cdn.$] in 2002, mostly because of lower Roundup sales. Monsanto needs to return to profitability. Thus, it is pushing its GM Roundup Ready wheat. With GM wheat, the profits go to consumers and farmers.

[Jagfarms]

Wheat pollen is even more pervasive than that of canola.