The Indian Council of Agricultural Research has come out with DRR Dhan 100 (KAMALA), developed from Samba Mahsuri, and Pusa DST Rice 1, developed from Maruteru 1010 or MTU1010 (Cottondora sannalu).
How is it an improvement on the existing varieties?
DRR Dhan 100 (KAMALA) has more grains per panicle (a loose branch containing a cluster of rice). Scientists developed the genome-edited version, also known as Gn 1, to increase grain number per panicle in Sambha Mahsuri.
Pusa DST Rice 1 has been derived from MTU1010 through the genome-edited SDNI mutant of the drought and salt tolerance (DST) gene. SDN1 is a method using an enzyme that breaks down nucleic acids such as DNA and RNA like a scissor, resulting in a change in the gene actvity. It has a superior yield over the parent when grown under highly alkaline conditions. SDN1
What is the impact on yield, irrigation needs, etc?
DRR Dhan 100’s yield is 19 per cent higher than Samba Mahsuri at 5.37 tonnes per hectare, against 4.5 tonnes of the parent variety.
The average yield of Pusa DST Rice 1 is 3.5 tonnes a hectare, against 3.199 tonnes of its parent under inland salinity stress. Under coastal salinity stress, the yield is over 30 per cent higher at 2.49 tonnes a hectare against MTU’s 1.91 tonnes. Under alkalinity conditions, the yield is 14.66 per cent higher at 3.73 tonnes against 3.25 tonnes of the parent.
Both varieties mature 15-20 days earlier than their parents. Three rounds of irrigation will be saved, resulting in the saving of 7,500 million cubic meters of water that can be used for other crops.
How are genome-edited crops different from genetically modified crops?
According to Navjot Kaur, Assistant Professor of Plaksha University, Punjab, when a foreign gene from a bacteria or another plant or another species is added to express a particular characteristic, the plant is genetically-modified. In the case of gene editing, most often there will be no foreign DNA.
“You will only play with the DNA, which is natural to that crop. You are either adding or deleting some sequences which are already in the natural variants of that crop,” she says.
What are the regulations governing the genome-edited crop varieties?
The Centre has established a specific regulatory framework for genome-edited crops, distinguishing them from genetically modified (GM) organisms. The regulation falls under the “Rules for the Manufacture, Use, Import, Export and Storage of Hazardous Microorganisms, Genetically Engineered Organisms or Cells, 1989” (Rules 1989), framed under the Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change is the primary enforcing body. On March 30, 2022, the Ministry exempted certain categories of genome-edited plants, specifically those developed using Site-Directed Nuclease (SDN) type 1 (SDN-1) and type 2 (SDN-2) techniques, from some stringent provisions of the Rules 1989. This exemption applies if the final crop variety is free of any foreign or exogenous DNA.
How did the two genome-edited rice varieties get regulatory approval?
Only SDN1 genome editing has been done in these rice varieties. The mutants created by the SDN1 methods are free of any foreign DNA. Hence, they are exempted from biosafety regulation of Rules 7-11 of the Rules 1989 under the Environment (Protection) Act 1986.
What are the risks posed by this clearance? Why are some sections worried?
Activists of the GM-Free Coalition argue that the SDN1 technology is not precise in rice. They point to a research paper by Sukumar Biswas and 10 other scientists, which said gene-edited varieties have to be monitored for many generations before their commercial introduction. The paper said that in many cases, large insertions, deletions and rearrangements of DNA had been found, raising the possibility that genes other than the targeted one could have been altered. No safety testing has been done, the coalition activists allege.