Commercial applications of GM potato crops
Global sales for transgenic crops were estimated at $75 million in 1995,
increasing to $235 million in 1996 and $670 million in 1997 (James, 2000). In
1999 the estimated value was approximately two billion dollars (a 30-fold
increase in five years). In descending order of cropping area the ranking order
for GM crops is soybean (54% of total), maize (24%), cotton and canola
(rapeseed; 9%), potato, squash and papaya (1% or less). The USA has the
highest proportion of GM crops with 74% of the world total, followed by
Argentina (15%), and Canada (10%). Herbicide-tolerant crops occupy 71% of
the area grown, insect-resistant
Bt)(crops 28%. Romania and the Ukraine have
grown introductory areas of
Bt potato (less than 1000 ha) but the majority of
commercial potato crops have been grown in North America. No potato crop
currently has European Union approval for commercial release into the
environment.
This section is primarily aimed at the commercial applications of GM potato.
When the section was conceived the only company to have this crop in the
commercial market place was Monsanto, a St Louis-based agricultural
biotechnology and herbicide company of which the Pharmacia Corporation
now owns 85%. Monsanto markets GM potato through its NatureMark
® biotechnology unit. The potato lines developed by NatureMark
® will be
outlined later. According to a Reuters report on 21 March 2001, the Monsanto
Company stated that it would no longer be marketing genetically modified potatoes as part of a streamlining of its biotechnology crop portfolio to focus on
wheat, corn, soybeans and cotton. This decision was no doubt influenced by
statements from some leading processing and fast-food outlet companies that
consumer concerns over GM potato products had affected their GM purchasing
policy. Since the processing market is the major one for potato in North
America, the GM potato business becomes non-viable as a result.
Today’s reliable, cheap, potatoes are a testimony to the ingenuity of
scientists, agronomists and farmers over the past 100 years, and a tremendous
success story by any standards. However, even with all the advances in
agricultural science some 40% of potato harvests are lost world-wide to diseases,
pests and weeds, a figure which might reach 75% if it were not for crop
protection products (Rhodes, 2000). NatureMark
® commercialised its potato
GM lines through the NewLeaf
TM brand name and the first-generation targets
were aimed at resolving some of these key production issues. The current
regulatory status of NatureMark
® potato lines is shown in Table 9.2. The lines
developed are described below.
| |
Table 9.2 Current regulatory status of New LeafTM potato lines |
| |
|
|
USA |
|
Canada |
|
Mexico |
|
Japan |
|
Russia |
|
Romania |
|
Australia |
| |
NewLeafTM |
|
P |
|
|
|
P |
|
I |
|
I |
|
I |
|
PU |
| |
NewLeafTMY |
|
P |
|
P |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U |
| |
NewLeafTM Plus |
|
P |
|
P |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U |
| |
P - production approval
I - import approval
U - under review (expected for food import by end of 2001) |
