Increasing productivity: Genome-edited rice varieties to boost yields

India’s recent release of two genome-edited rice varieties marks a significant milestone in agricultural innovation. Developed by using Site Directed Nuclease 1 (SDN1) genome-editing technology, DRR Dhan 100 (Kamala) and Pusa DST Rice 1 not only promise yield increases of up to 30 per cent but also offer a response to the country’s intertwined challenges of food security, environmental degradation, and regional agricultural imbalances. Both the rice strains promise results better than their parent varieties, Samba Mahsuri (BPT 5204) and Cottondora Sannalu (MTU-1010), respectively. What makes these genome-edited rice varieties particularly attractive is the host of agronomic advantages they offer. Requiring 15-20 days less to mature than conventional varieties, they enable quicker crop rotation and more efficient use of land.

 

More importantly, their reduced water requirement and higher nitrogen-use efficiency can potentially address one of the most pressing environmental concerns in Indian agriculture — unsustainable groundwater extraction, especially in Punjab and Haryana. These two states, while being major rice producers in the country, are also among the worst-affected by the depletion of underground aquifers, driven by decades of water-intensive paddy cultivation. By offering resilience to drought, salinity, and degraded soils, gene-edited rice varieties can be a game changer for eastern Uttar Pradesh, coastal West Bengal, and parts of Odisha and Maharashtra — the regions that have historically underperformed in rice productivity due to challenging soil and climatic conditions. Encouraging cultivation in these underutilised areas can diversify the geographical expanse of rice production, reduce ecological stress in overburdened regions, and contribute to a more equitable agricultural economy.

 

Critically, gene-editing technologies like SDN1 do not introduce foreign deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), distinguishing them from traditional genetically modified (GM) organisms. This means fewer regulatory and ethical hurdles, greater public acceptance, and faster adoption. At the same time, policy mechanisms need to evolve alongside science. State procurement agencies must recognise these varieties and integrate them in procurement and public distribution. Extension activities to train farmers and clear guidelines governing field-level deployment can mitigate biosafety concerns.

 

Given India’s needs, the country should also revisit its stance on genetically modified (GM) crops. Earlier, in 2022, the government approved the GM mustard hybrid, DMH-11. It was a landmark move away from previous ambivalence towards a more supportive stance on GM crops. With proper regulation and scientific transparency, GM varieties can boost productivity, improve resistance to biotic stress, and reduce input costs. The Union government was also directed by the Supreme Court to draft a national policy on GM crops for research, cultivation, and trade & commerce. The government must explore the possibilities. Further, to harness the potential of biotechnology, India should scale up investment in agricultural research and development, build institutional support for biotechnology deployment, and integrate climate resilience into its food-security strategies. The current budgetary allocation for agricultural research and development expenditure is only ₹10,466 crore, and needs to increase within the next 2-3 years. Agricultural biotechnology is now indispensable for ensuring food and nutritional security in the long term.