The Tribune, Chandigarh, India - Agriculture Tribune

Apiculture, a major foreign exchange earner
By K. Sarangarajan

Honey industry in the country can well become a major foreign exchange earner if international standards are met. Bee-keeping is an age-old tradition in India but it is considered a no-investment-profit giving venture in most areas. Of late it has been recognised that it has the potential to develop as a prime agri-horticultural and forest-based industry. Honey production is a lucrative business and it generates employment. Kanyakumari district in Tamil Nadu is a pioneer in honey production and the bee-keepers depend solely on the flow season for improving their economic condition.

Among the southern states, Tamil Nadu ranks first in honey production followed by Kerala and Karnataka. Kanyakumari district has record number of bee-keepers (over 3,000) and bee-colonies (accounting for two lakh). natural vegetation, agro-horticulture crops available, tropical flora found in abundance and the proximity of the district to the Western Ghats make bee-keeping a viable trade in Kanyakumari. Apis Cerana, a domesticated bee species, found in south India is the most preferred as it produces 8 kg to 10 kg of honey on an average .

Since honey production is the lifeline for numerous families, drastic decline in the number of bee colonies ruined the prospects of beekeepers and many of them have been rendered jobless. The government introduced measures to revive the trade. An intensive survey showed that 40 per cent of bee colonies were affected with disease and death of bees varied from 5 per cent to 20 per cent. As hot weather is favourable for honey production, a good flow is expected during summer. The beekeepers are trained to give artificial feeding by administering sugar syrup to the bees during the lean season at lest once a week. The yield per box would be 15 kg to 20 kg.

Sources at the beekeepers cooperative society claim that a beekeeper who invests Rs 1 lakh for raising colonies (each colony consists of 10,000 to 25,000 worker bees, a queen bee and a few drones) and towards the cost of providing artificial feeding, can realise the entire amount, in addition to profit, within a year. The society has registered moderate sales ranging from Rs 60 lakh to Rs 65 lakh in the past three years. The society finds marketing a Herculean task and has pitched its hopes on the government. A lot depends on the government’s move as about 10,000 persons are either directly or indirectly involved in the industry. The government has to set up a research institute to find a cure for the virus that may hit the bee colonies. Apart from beeping and marketing, money could be promoted under the self-employment scheme among the rural youth in a big way to improve the rural economy, especially when national resources are available in Kanyakumari district.

Honey is also a sweet base for a number of medicines and the bee venom is used in many pharmaceutical applications, especially to cure rheumatic diseases. It is a natural dehydrant and excellent for those on slimming diets. As a proven anti-ageing agent and natural rejuvenator, honey has no equal.

In India, production of honey is very low compared to China — the highest producer — which exports 80,000 tonnes annually compared to India’s 7,000 tonnes. Its consumption is also very low in India. Honey production in the country is only about 27,000 tonnes a year. It is estimated that 9,000 of honey is produced from six bee colonies. Only about 20 per cent to 25 per cent of the bees is being exploited at present. Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and West Bengal are the major honey-producing states. Germany is the world’s largest consumer, importing 90,000 tonnes of honey products annually. The per capita consumption of honey in Germany is 1.5 kg compared to a dismal 3 gm in India. According to a survey, there is Rs 1,500 crore world market for health foods and India’s share is stated to be negligible. In the world market the demand for honey is around one million tonnes. The is an immense possibility for India to increase its export share from 7,000 tonnes to three lakh tonnes if more people invest in bee colonies.

The present trend in the bee keeping industry gives hope for raising the number of colonies to around four million and, thereby, increasing the honey production to one lakh tonnes in another decade. A major portion of the honey produced in the country is used in medicines and only a small quantity finds place on the table as food. Bee sting has been used as a medicine for many decades in Europe and Russia, especially in the treatment of muscular diseases. Bee wax is a high value product and its consumers are cosmetics, candles and paint industries. Quality testing facilities are also not easily available to beekeepers and packers in India. The European Union will not import honey from countries where the use of pesticides is not regulated and where samples are not specifically tested for insecticidal residues. Some honey importing countries also insist on a certificate to the effect that the honey has been procure from disease-free colonies. However, there is no arrangement for diseases surveillance. Honey is often stored in undesirable and inappropriate containers which deteriorate the quality.

Above all, the processing of honey has to be of high standards so that quality deterioration is minimal. Imports from China and Argentina, the two large exporters, are now being avoided due to the poor quality of honey and many counties are turning towards new exporters like India. Europe, the USA and Japan are the major honey importers. India needs to build the confidence of world buyers.

The price, supply, purity and service are the major determinants in the honey industry. The sale price of honey by beekeepers in India varies from Rs 25 to Rs 45 per kg whereas in countries like the USA, Argentina and Brazil, the price varies from Rs 55 to Rs 80 a kg. the beekeepers are thus getting a lesser price for their produce in India as compared to other countries.

Protection of plant varieties
By Dr P.K. Vasudeva

According to the TRIPS agreement, while “plants and animals other than micro-organisms” may be excluded from patentability, the member countries shall provide “for the protection of plant varieties by patents or by an effective sui generis system or by any combination thereof”. Thus the choice of the system of protection of plant varieties by patents is left to each country. There is no compulsion that plant varieties (seeds and any other form of propagating material) must be patented. However, if the patent protection is not given, it is obligatory to provide a sui generis system for the protection of plant varieties and it must be “effective”. The criteria for judging the “effectiveness” of the sui generis system has not been specified in the TRIPS agreement. It only covers nine types of IPRs, namely copyright, trademarks, trade secrets, industrial designs, geographic appellations, integrated circuits, patents, micro-organisms and plant varieties. It is only in the case of micro-organism and plant varieties, norms and the standards for protection have not been specifically stipulated in the agreement. That is why Article 27.3 (b) of the agreement dealing with the micro-organism and plant varieties says that the provisions in these cases will be reviewed after five years of the establishment of WTO (i.e. 2000). Such review will now examine the implications of laying down uniform and stringent standards of protection in these areas.

Breeders' rights

The most well known and internationally recognised sui generis system for the protection of plant varieties is the system of Plant Breeders Rights (PBR). Under the PBR system the breeder of a “new variety” of a plant that satisfies the basic four criteria of novelty, distinctiveness, uniformity and stability is conferred certain exclusive rights for specified duration in relation to that new variety. There is a misunderstanding among the farmers, agriculturists and the politicians that IPR will encompass all existing material, i.e., all existing seeds and genetic material will be patented of protected by MNCs and the farmers will be forced to buy their seeds from the MNCs every year. This is far from truth. A PBR system will apply only to those “new” varieties developed by the plant breeder that satisfy the four criteria. We have to establish our PBR system by 2000. All existing plant varieties and the new that come into force until the new system comes into play, these varieties will not be affected by any PBR system. It is worthwhile to understand that a farmer will buy a new variety only if he finds the new variety to be economically valuable to him.

There is an international convention for the protection of new varieties of plants known by its French acronym, The UPOV Convention. This was established in 1961, but came into force in 1968 and has been revised in 1972, 1978 and 1991. Only about 20 industrialised countries are the members of this convention. The basic right conferred on the plant breeder by the UPOV convention in its 1972 and 1978 versions was “exclusive commercial” rights (for sale and marketing of the propagating material of new variety). The 1991 version of UPOV has shifted the exclusive right from “commercial right” to “exploitation right” that is more akin to patents right. The rights of the plant breeder under the 1991 version extend to “production or reproduction, conditioning for propagation, offering for sale, selling or other marketing importing or exporting and stocking for any of these purposes”.

There is apprehension that our PBR system will be considered “effective” only if it fulfils the criteria of the 1991 version of the UPOV Convention. This is, however is not well founded. Where an international convention is to be followed, it is specifically mentioned in the TRIPS agreement, and there are only three of them, namely the Paris Convention 1967 on industrial property, Berne Convention 1983 on copyright and the Washington Treaty 1989 on integrated circuits. In respect of plant varieties, has it been stipulated neither that UPOV Convention in any of its versions is to be followed nor has any specific substantive norm been indicated to judge the effectiveness of a sui generis system. It is therefore not obligatory for India to follow any of the versions of UPOV.

We are free to evolve a PBR system that confers on the plant breeder “exclusive marketing rights” in relations to protected varieties. We are free to start the system with a reasonable number of species and genera and expand them progressively to cover all species and genera over a period. We can fully provide for “farmer’s privilege” and “researcher’s privilege” so that he can use farm-saved seeds for growing subsequent crops on his own or leasehold land or for traditional exchanges in the village community. The “researcher privilege” would permit the use of one protected variety to breed another new variety without the authorisation of the original plant breeder. The provisions of the 1978 UPOV Convention version provide us with a good basis for formulating our own PBR system.

India is facing a new problem of environmental protectionism over transgenic plants that may harm Indian farming. The area under transgenic crops is expanding the world over. Genetic engineering has created tantalising new opportunities for modifying plants to produce good, fibre and other made-to-order products. India is already lagging behind in this field. A further neglect will only enhance its dependence on MNCs.

Plant breeders have been using genetic manipulations to develop better crop varieties. This used to be done through conventional methods and involved only plants as donors and receivers. Modern biotechnological tools have made it possible to take a gene from an animated entity and put it into plant. The transgenic Bt cotton (controversy) is an example of planting a selected gene from a bacterium, Bacillus thuriengientsis, into the cotton plant. This gene produces a protein in the plant that kills the cotton pest Holiothis that has been ravaging the crop year after year, driving the farmers to commit suicide.

The terminator, gene that makes the seed infertile is another much maligned, little understood, concept. The country’s, top agriculturist scientists and biotechnologist feel that such a gene though; conceptually possible, but does not existus in a commercially exploitable form yet. The argument that companies bringing transgenic crops and seeds with terminator gene will exploit farmers seems to be unteanable. A farmer will buy high-priced seeds year after year only if he finds it profitable. He always has the option to buy the seeds from the public sector.

FAO recommendations

The Government of India on August 22, 1989, requested the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) of the UN to study the demand for introduction of PBR legislation. The technical consultant was Dr David Wood and the legal consultant was Mr Luis M Bombin of the FAO.The FAO consultants in their report stated that if there is the political will to introduce some form the PBR legislation in India, it should be on the following lines.

(1) Any future legislation should conform as far as Indians allow the UPOV Convention.

(2) The right of free access to protected varieties for research and further development should be included in any future Indian PBR legislation.

(3) Samples of all protected varieties should be deposited in the BBPGR.

(4) Emphasis should be given by public breeders to minor crops, to varieties for marginal. Conditions and to promote within crop diversity.

(5) Future development in plant breeding be monitored for their effect on introduction of pests and diseases.

(6) For registration of PBR, parentage declaration should be mandatory and.

(7) Farmer’s right to produce his own seed should be retained.

India is one of the signatories of the 135-member multilateral trade agreement of TRIPS under the WTO Article 62 says “members may require, as a condition of the acquisition or maintenance of the intellectual property rights provided for under Section 2-6 of Part II of this agreement, compliance with reasonable procedures and formalities. Such procedures and formalities shall be consistent with the provisions of this agreement.”

Also Article 4 of the Paris Convention 1967 shall apply mutatis mutandis to service marks.

Management of onion, garlic diseases
By M.S. Yadav and J.S. Dhiman

ONION and garlic are important bulb crops grown almost all over India. Onion is consumed extensively as a vegetable and almost daily in Indian diets in the form of condiments and flavouring agents. Garlic is chiefly used for flavouring and seasoning of soups, pickles and sauces. It is also known to be of certain medicinal value. Onion and garlic are vulnerable to several diseases, some of which could reduce the yield considerably. Important diseases of these two crops are briefly discussed here together with their control measures.

Damping off

It is responsible for poor germination and stand of onion seedlings in nursery beds. The disease may manifest itself either before or after germination of the seed. In pre-emergence damping off phase, the young seedlings are killed before they emerge through the soil surface. The post-emergence damping off of seedlings is characterised by the toppling over of infected seedlings. The tissue appears soft and water soaked at the point of infection making the stems constricted at the base, unable to bear the weight of the growing seedlings which, therefore, get collapsed. The most common fungi responsible for damping off of the onion seedling are soil-borne species of pythium, rhizoctonia and fusarium etc. In garlic the cloves which are sown, may rot in soil due to the attack by these soil-borne fungi.

Management

Onion seed before sowing should be treated with 3 g of Thiram or captan per kg seed. Thin planting, receiving light but frequent irrigation often gets less incidence of the disease. Soil around the seedlings should be drenched with 200 g of Captan per 100 litres of water twice, viz., on a week and fortnight after sowing.

Purple Blotch

This is most devastating disease of onion and garlic prevalent in different parts of the country. Infection by a pathogenic fungi, alternaria porri is responsible for this disease. The pathogen is seed, soil and air borne making it difficult to manage the disease.

The symptoms appear as small, purplish, sunken spots on the leaves of bulb crop of onion and garlic and inflorescence bearing stalk of the onion seed. Outermost lower leaves are the first to show the signs of disease in the field. In wet weather, the spots may get covered with brown or black sporulation of the fungus. The seed crop of onion at bolting stage is more vulnerable to the disease. The infloescences bearing stalks become weak, unable to bear the growing umbles and often bend down leading to poor seed filling. If the seed crop of onion is left unprotected, the disease may cause shortage of onion seed production.

Management

Disease free seed of tolerant varieties should be used for sowing. Seed should be treated before sowing with Thiram or Captan @ 3 g per kg seed. Crop should be sprayed thrice with 600 litres water per acre at 10 days interval starting with disease appearance. Since the onion and garlic stalks are glossy, a sticker (Triton) may be added to the spray solution at the @ 200 ml per 200 litres of water for proper sticking of the fungicide.

Stemphylium blight

Stemphylium blight (Stemphylium vesicarium) has also been considered a menace to onion and garlic cultivation in North India. The disease sometimes seriously damages the transplanted seedlings. The main symptoms appear in the middle of leaf as small, yellow to pale orange flecks or streaks which later develop into elongated spindle shaped diffused spots surrounded by characteristics pinkish margins. The spots turn grey at the centre and later become brown to dark brown with the appearance of the fungal structures. Gradually, the entire foliage gets blighted. Early infection of foliage is more damaging in term of production of shrivelled, non-viable and diseased seeds.

Quite often this disease appears synchronously with purple blotch. Therefore, control measures are the same as for both the diseases.

Downy mildew

The disease is caused by a fungus, peronospora destructor which affects onion as well as garlic. The main sources of the disease are the diseased bulbs used for propagation. The pathogen is seed, soil and air-borne. The disease spreads faster in rainy weather and dense plantation of the crops.

In local infections, caused by a wind-borne conidia, oval to cylindrical spots of paler than green colour are formed on leaves. In humid weather the fungus develops a white to purplish downy growth on these spots. Usually the older leaves are attacked first and the infection gradually spreads to the sheath. The infected weak stalks may break and the severely affected crop look blighted. In systemic infection, plants remain stunted, become distorted and pale green often with impaired seed formation.

Management

Bulbs used for propagation should be disease-free. Seed should be treated before sowing with Thiram or Captan @ 3g/kg seed. The crop can be protected by spraying thrice with 600 g of Indofil M-45 and 200 ml of Malathion 50 EC in 200 litres of water per acre at 10 days interval, starting with the disease appearance.