Revival of desi cotton

It has some innate advantages over the GM variety

The resurgence of desi cotton, which was shoved out of cultivation by the genetically modified (GM) Bt-cotton, is least surprising and highly welcome. Bt-cotton’s gradual loss of resistance against the devastating bollworm insects – also the main factor behind its meteoric ascent – coupled with the emergence of new enemies of this cotton, such as whiteflies, has spurred farmers to revert to desi cotton, which can withstand most of these pests, besides some common diseases. If this trend endures and is backed by public policies, it will bring about the much needed diversity in cotton farming that is sorely missing with GM cotton occupying nearly 95 per cent of the crop area. Lack of heterogeneity invariably leads to the development of immunity among pests and pathogens and facilitates their mutation into newer and relatively more virulent avatars. In any case, plant varieties or hybrids do not have an unlimited effective life span. They need to be replaced with newer, better-yielding and more pest-tolerant strains to face emerging challenges.

This, sadly, has not happened in the case of Bt-cotton thanks to the government’s misguided reluctance to approve new gene-engineered seeds with different pest-resistant traits. The revival of interest in desi cotton and, more so, the evolution of its new high-yielding hybrids and non-hybrid varieties – whose seeds need not be bought afresh by farmers every year – can end the unwarranted monopoly of the transgenic Bt-cotton. The resultant varietal diversity can help stabilise cotton production and prices to secure India’s position among the world’s top cotton producers and exporters.  

Desi cotton, indeed, has some innate advantages over GM cotton. Having evolved indigenously, it is better acclimatised to local agro-ecological conditions and is hardy enough to combat prevalent pests and diseases. It needs lower amounts of inputs like fertilisers and pesticides and is, on the whole, less costly to cultivate. Besides, because of the small staple length and absorbent nature of its fibre, desi cotton is in demand for surgical and medical use. It is also noteworthy that some Bt varieties of indigenous cotton, developed by public-funded research institutions, are now available that can outcompete the private sector’s Bt-hybrids. These, being early maturing, are harvested before pests like bollworms and whiteflies become active. Moreover, desi cotton is amenable to closer planting to accommodate more plants in a field — an easy way to raise crop yields and net profits.

The downfall of Bt-cotton is, indeed, attributable to the follies committed by almost all stakeholders in this sector — technology developers, technology appraisers and approvers, seed companies, farmers, and policy makers. None of them has meticulously observed the rules of the game.  Technology developers and seed companies have failed to diversify pest-repellent traits. Seed appraisers and policy planners are guilty of adopting discriminatory seed approval protocols that discouraged public sector research bodies from entering this field. All of them, collectively, failed to take due notice of the development of resistance among pests and take timely remedial action. Farmers, on their part, erred in not observing the recommended precautions in cultivating Bt-cotton. Such mistakes should be avoided in future to let desi cotton coexist with other kinds of GM and non-GM cottons to ensure a healthy varietal mix and to meet the divergent fibre quality demands of different end-uses.