Detailed Seminar Report On BT COTTON

 

What are GMO (genetically modified organism)?

 When a gene from one organism is purposely moved to improve or change another organism in a laboratory, the result is a genetically modified organism (GMO). It is also sometimes called "transgenic" for transfer of genes.

What is Bt?

Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) is a spore forming (flash animation) bacterium that produces crystals protein (cry proteins), which are toxic to many species of insects.

Where is Bt found?

Bt can be found almost everywhere in the world. Surveys have indicated that Bt is distributed in the soil sparsely but frequently worldwide. Bt has been found in all types of terrain, including beaches, desert, and tundra habitats.

How many kinds of Bt are there?

There are thousands of different Bt strains, producing over 200 cry proteins that are active against an extensive range of insects and some other invertebrates.

What type of bacteria is Bt?

Bt belongs to the family of bacteria, Bacillus cerus (B. cerus). B. cerus strains produce toxins that cause gastroenteritis (food poisoning) in humans. Bt is differentiated from B. cerus because it contains a plasmid (flash animation) that produces the protein crystals that are toxic to insects. Bt does not cause food poisoning.

Where is Bt used?

Bt is largely used in agriculture, especially organic farming. Bt is also used in urban aerial spraying programs, and in transgenic crops.

How does Bt work?

Bt has to be eaten to cause mortality. The Bt toxin dissolve in the high pH insect gut and become active. The toxins then attack the gut cells of the insect, punching holes in the lining. The Bt spores spills out of the gut and germinate in the insect causing death within a couple days.

            

Even though the toxin does not kill the insect immediately, treated plant parts will not be damaged because the insect stops feeding within hours. Bt spores do not spread to other insects or cause disease outbreaks on their own.

1. Insect eats Bt crystals and spores. 2. The toxin binds to specific receptors in the gut and the insects stops eating. 3. The crystals cause the gut wall to break down, allowing spores and normal gut bacteria to enter the body. 4. The insect dies as spores and gut bacteria proliferate in the body.

Bt action is very specific. Different strains of Bt are specific to different receptors in insect gut wall. Bt toxicity depends on recognizing receptors, damage to the gut by the toxin occurs upon binding to a receptor. Each insect species possesses different types of receptors that will match only certain toxin proteins, like a lock to a key.

It is because of this that farmers have to be careful to match the target pest species with a particular Bt toxin protein which is specific for that insect. This also helps the benifical insects because they will usually not be harmed by that particular strain of Bt.

Animal Safety

Bt products are found to be safe for use in the environment and with mammals. The EPA (environmental protection agency) has not found any human health hazards related to using Bt. In fact the EPA has found Bt safe enough that it has exempted Bt from food residue tolerances, groundwater restrictions, endangered species labeling and special review requirements. Bt is often used near lakes, rivers and dwellings, and has no known effect on wildlife such as mammals, birds, and fish.

Humans exposed orally to 1000 mg/day for 3-5 days of Bt have showed no ill effects. Many tests have been conducted on test animals using different types of exposures. The results of the tests showed that the use of Bt causes few if any negative effects. Bt does not persist in the digestive systems of mammals.

Bt is found to be an eye irritant on test rabbits. There is very slight irritation from inhalation in test animals which may be caused by the physical rather than the biological properties of the Bt formulation tested.

Bt has not been shown to have any chronic toxicity or any carcinogenic effects. There are also no indication that Bt causes reproductive effects or birth defects in mammals.

Bt breaks down readily in the environment. Because of this Bt poses no threat to groundwater. Bt also breaks down under the ultraviolet (UV) light of the sun.

Even with such widespread use of Bt-based products in the past 50 years, only two incidents of repored allergic reaction have been reported to the EPA. In the first incident, it was concluded that the exposed individual was suffering from a previously diagnosed disease. The second involved a person that had a history of life-threatening food allergies. Upon investigation, it was found that the formulation of Bt also contained carbohydrate and preservatives which have been implicated in food allergy.

    

What are Bt crystals?

Bt crystals, sometimes referred to as insecticidal crystal proteins (ICP), are protein crystals formed during sporulation in some Bt strains. Bt produces proteins that aggregate to form a crystal.

These crystal proteins are toxic to very specific species of insects yet harmless to humans and the natural enemies of many crop pests (benenificial insects). There are more than 150 insects that are known to be susceptible in some way to Bt.

The crystal proteins bind specifically to certain receptors in the insect's intestine. Not all insects carry the same receptors allowing for high species specificity. Humans and other vertabrates do not have these receptors in their bodies, so the toxin is unable to affect us.

Bt Cotton :-

For cotton growers, there was a lot of pressure from pests before the introduction of Bt cotton in 1996. Due to synthetic pesticide resistance, farmers were losing much of their cotton to tobacco budworms, cotton bollworms, and pink bollworms.

In 1995, attacks from these pests reduced U.S. cotton yields by over 4%, or by over a quarter billion dollars worth of cotton. In some states such as Alabama, budworm damage reduced Alabama yields by 29% despite growers applying the highest applications of insecticide in the US. 

Reduction in Pesticide Control Costs:

It is estimated that the average cost reduction in pesticides applied on Bt cotton fields from 1996 to 1998 is between $25 and $65 per acre. 

Increased Yield:

Bt cotton planted from 1996 to 1998 is estimated to have yielded 5% more on average than if traditional cotton would have been planted.

Price Effect:

It is estimated that prices are .8¢/lb. lower from increased production due to Bt technology.

               Combined, Bt Cotton and Non-Bt Cotton Comparisons:
                       (Combined includes both Bt and non Bt acreages)

Decrease in synthetic pesticide use on certain pests.

The use of Bt cotton has decreased the need for foliar spray on pink bollworm drastically.

Overall Bt cotton requires less foliar spray than acres with no Bt cotton and acres with combination of Bt cotton and non Bt cotton.

Decrease in Pest control cost.

Use of Bt cotton has significantly decreased the cost of insecticides in Arizona.

 Bt Crop Refuge Area :-

Fields with Bt crops are required to provide refuge areas to help control resistance. The refuge area supply a source of wildtype (non-mutant) insects to mate with possible resistant insects to produce nonresistant insects.

 Bt crops are planted with alternating rows of regular non-Bt crops. The insects that have developed resistance to Bt have more chances of mating with an insect that has not developed resistance to Bt. By the laws of genetics, the progenies produced will be insects that are not resistant to Bt.

In the US, the EPA requires Bt cotton farmers implement refuge areas to these guidelines.

1. Growers may plant up to 80% of their cotton acres with Bt corn. At least 20% must be planted with non-Bt cotton(refuge area)

2. Refuge area mush be within, adjacent to or near the Bt cornfields. it must be placed within 1/2 mile of the Bt field.

3. If refuge are strips within a file, the strips should be at least 4 rows.

Resistance

How do insects become resistant to pesticide?

Insects are known for their ability to develop resistance to insecticides. Currently there are insects resistant to every synthetic chemical insecticide used. There are many factors to developing resistance. In a population of insects there may be a few individuals that carry the genes for resistance. These genes arise from mutations and are rare. In the natural environment the mutant insect is typically compromised, weaker and produces less progenies. Upon exposure to insecticides, insects that do not carry the resistance genes die, thus allowing the individuals with the resistance genes to survive and reproduce, creating more resistant insects. With every generation the number of resistant insects increase.

Bt is a form of natural pesticide, as with any kind of pesticide the problem of resistance is almost unavoidable. Precaution must be taken and research must be done to understand and help prevent resistance with Bt.

Minimize Resistance(Bt spray):-

There are some steps Bt users apply to minimize resistance. Currently in the field, the diamondback moth is the only insect found to have developed resistance against Bt. The diamondback larvae feed on all plants in the mustard family, including canola, mustard, broccoli, and cabbage. The diamondback moth larvae is resistance to proteins made by the Bt strain kurstaki.

In the laboratory, scientists have found many species of insects to be resistant to Bt. These insects are currently studied to further our understanding of Bt resistance and prevention.

Farmers that use Bt are required by the EPA to take steps to help prevent further resistance by other insects. Some alternate Bt applications with synthetic insecticides so that any resistance to any one class of insecticide does not develop.

Crop rotation is also another method used to help combat resistance. Since different crops are attacked by different insect pests, different types of Bt will be used. By rotating crops, the pressure of one specific strain of Bt on an insect is minimized. The pest insect has less time to develop resistance before a new strain is used for a different insect.

(Bt Transgenic Crop)

Farmers that use transgenic crops have to follow resistance management requirements set by the EPA. Refuge planting is a big part of resistance management in transgenic farming.

 Popular Bt Strains used

Bt Strain	Effective against
Bt kurstaki (Btk)	types of lepidopterous insects gypsy moth cabbage looper
Bt aizawai (Bta)	wax moth larvae in honeycombs
Bt israelensis (Bti)	mosquitoes, blackflies, midges
Bt san diego	certain beetle species, bool weevil

  Bt is effective only when eaten by the insect as a larva, Bt is ineffective against most adult insects. Since Bt is applied topically, insects that attack the roots or the insides of a plant will not be affected.

                                   Safety with Bt urban areial spraying

Bt has been found through rigorous testing to be harmless to humans, other mammals, fish, birds, or basically all vertebrates. Many countries in the world have incorporated Bt aerial spraying into their pest control program. Bt products are used on millions of acres of wooded areas and agricultural crops. These spays are used to control for gypsy moths, blackflies, mosquitoes, and many other pests in forestry and urban areas.

Tests conducted during spraying over urban areas in Canada and the US showed no negative effects on humans. There was no correlation between the aerial application of Bt and the short-term health effects in the adult population, or in aggravation of asthma symptoms in children.

There are several advantages in expressing Bt toxins in transgenic Bt crops:

• The level of toxin expression can be very high thus delivering sufficient dosage to the pest.
• The toxin expression is contained within the plant system and hence only those insects that feed on the crop perish.

The toxin expression can be modulated by using tissue-specific promoters, and replaces the use of synthetic pesticides in the environment. The latter observation has been well documented worldwide.

Why was it introduced?       

When cotton farming was introduced as a lucrative alternative to food crops in the 1980s, farmers invested in expensive varieties of seeds and pesticides. This put small farmers in conditions of severe indebtedness, often driving them to suicide. The spate of suicides that began from Andhra Pradesh, first in 1987 and then again in 1998-99, have so far taken a heavy toll, spreading to Karnataka, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan, Haryana and Punjab. This desperate situation was caused basically by the resistance the American bollworm insect developed, to all kinds of pesticides and pesticide cocktails. Farmers found themselves on a “pesticide tread mill' where higher pesticide use led to greater resistance which in turn led to even higher pesticide use, an so on. Today we find 55% of all pesticide use in India is used on the cotton crop! The intial claims that Bt cotton plant would be resistant to the bollworm, leading to decreased pesticide use have been proved false.

Remarkable Adoption and Benefits:-

Dr.T.M.Manjunath  India made its long-awaited entry into commercial agricultural biotechnology in March 2002 with the approval of three Bt-cotton hybrids for commercial cultivation. The Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC), Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India granted the approval, at its 32nd meeting held in New Delhi. The transgenic hybrids were developed by MAHYCO (Maharashtra Hybrid Seed Company Limited) in collaboration with Monsanto. These contained Monsanto’s lepidopteron specific Bt gene, cry1Ac with Event MON 531 (Bollgard®) which offers protection against all the major species of Indian bollworms - Helicoverpa armigera (Old world bollworm), Pectinophora gossypiella (Pink bollworm), Earias vittella (Spottedbollworm) and E. insulana (Spiny bollworm). These bollworms, especially H. armigera, have been responsible for heavy yield losses and frustrating the cotton growers for more than three decades. Annual losses caused by bollworms alone are estimated at about US$ 300 million despite repeated spraying of insecticides (6 to 20 times for each crop). It is estimated that insecticides valued at $700 million are used on all crops annually in India of which about 50% is sprayed on cotton crop alone, especially to control bollworms. This reflects the economic importance of bollworms. Therefore, the introduction of Bt-cotton, designed to control bollworms, has brought a great deal of hope, curiosity and expectations.

The approval of Bt-cotton or Bollgard® (Bollgard® is the registered brand name for Monsanto’s Bt-cotton) in India was preceded by about 500 field trials carried out in different agro-climatic regions between 1998 and 2001 to assess its efficacy against bollworms and the concomitant agronomic benefits. Experimental data on the bio-safety (such as toxicity, allergenicity, effect on non-target beneficial organisms, pollen flow etc.) of Bt-cotton were generated by several public funded research institutions as per the direction of the Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Ministry of Science & Technology, Government of India. The approval by GEAC was based on the reports of such scientific studies, which indicated Bt-cotton to be safe and beneficial.

India makes rapid progress:

Only three Bt-cotton hybrids were approved in the first year (i.e., 2002) and these were marketed by Mahyco-Monsanto Biotech Limited (MMB), a joint venture of Mahyco and Monsanto. Realizing the potential of Bt-cotton, more Indian seed companies have shown interest in this technology and by 2007-end about 22 companies have become sub-licensees of MMB. Besides, an improved version of Bt-cotton (Bollgard® II), stacked with two Bt genes, namely cry 1Ac and cry 2Ab2 with Event 15985, also developed by MMB, was approved by GEAC in 2006. Two more versions of Bt-cotton, one developed by J. K. Agri Genetics Ltd., incorporated with cry 1Ac with Event I (different from MMB’s), and another version developed by Nath Seeds stacked with two genes, cry 1Ab and cry 1Ac with Event GFM, were also approved in 2006. Thus, as of now, three genes (cry 1Ac, cry 2Ab2 and cry 1Ab) and four events have been approved for Bt-cotton in India. These have been incorporated into various hybrids developed for different agro-climatic regions by various seed companies. By December 2007, GEAC has approved altogether 131 Bt-cotton hybrids (with different genetic background) developed by 24 companies.

Rapid adoption:

Bt-cotton was first planted in India in 2002. Following its success, the area under this crop and the number of farmers who adopted this technology increased significantly from year to year as shown in the table below:

Area under Bt-cotton in India, 2002 to 2007

Year	Total cotton area in hectares	Bt-cotton area in hectares	Bt-cotton   area in acres	% area occupied by Bt-cotton	No. of Bt-farmers
2002	87,30,000	29,000	72,000	0.3	20,000
2003	76,70,000	86,000	2,13,000	1.1	75,000
2004	76,30,000	5,53,000	13,66,000	7.3	3,50,000
2005	89,20,000	12,67,000	31,31,000	14.2	10,00,000
2006	91,58,000	38,00,000	94,00,000	41.5	23,00,000
2007	94,00,000	62,00,000*	153,20,000	66.0	38,00,000

Thus, in about 6 years, the area under Bt-cotton has increased by more than 210 times to record 6.2 m ha and the number of Bt-farmers by 190 times to reach 3.8 m in 2007. Further, Bt-cotton has occupied 66% of the 9.4 m ha of the total cotton area in India in 2007.

Bt-cotton has so far been commercialized in 9 countries – the USA (first introduced in 1996), Mexico (1996), Australia (1996), China (1997), Argentina (1998), South Africa (1998), Colombia (2002), India (2002) and Brazil (2005). In 2007, it occupied globally 15 m ha which comprised 43% of the total cotton area of 35 m ha. With 6.2 million hectares under Bt-cotton, India occupied, the first position in terms of area occupied followed by China with 3.8 m ha.

Significant benefits:

A number of studies carried out on Bt-cotton both before and after commercialization have clearly shown the following benefits: a) Higher cotton yield owing to effective control of bollworms, b) drastic reduction in the application of chemical insecticides for bollworm control, c) higher profit to farmers and d) conservation of biological control agents and other beneficial organisms. The results of five studies conducted by public institutions and published recently are summarized in the table below to exemplify the benefits.

Results of studies carried out by neutral agencies on the performance of Bt-cotton in India:-

Publication / Parameters	Bennett et al., 2006	Gandhi & Namboodiri (IIMA), 2006	Qaim, 2006	ICAR, 2006	Ramgopal (Andhra Univ.) 2006
Period studied	2002 & 2003	2004	2002-03	2005	2005
Yield increase	45 - 63%	31%	34%	30.9%	46%
Reduction in chemical sprays	3 to 1	39%	6.8-4.2(50%)	-	55%
Increased profit	50%	88%	69%	-	110%
Average profit / hectare	-	$250/ha	$118/ha	-	$223/ha

The results reveal that a) increase in cotton yield ranged from 30.9 to 63%, b) reduction in chemical sprays was from 39 to 55% and c) increase in profit to farmers ranged from 50 to 110% equivalent to about US$ 250 (Rs.10, 000) per hectare over the non-Bt cotton.

It is reported that the average cotton yields in India which was 308kg/ha in 2002, prior to introduction of Bt-cotton, increased to 560kg/ha in 2007 (at least 50% of increase is attributed to Bt technology). Similarly, the national cotton production increased from mere 15.8 million bales in 2002 to 31.0 m bales in 2007. Exports of raw cotton, which was 0.9 m bales in 2005, increased to 4.7 m bales in 2006 and touched 4.8 m bales in 2007. Further, Bt-cotton contributed US$840 million or more to National farm economy.

Thus, there have been social and economic benefits and intangible environmental benefits. The ever-increasing demand for Bt-cotton seeds is a clear reflection of farmers’ confidence in this technology and its benefits.

Chronology of Bt Cotton in India:-

March 10, 1995: Department of Biotechnology (DBT) of the Government of India permits import of 100 gm of transgenic Cocker-312 variety of cottonseed cultivated in the United States by Mahyco. This variety contained the Cry 1 Ac gene from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis.

April 1998: Monsanto-Mahyco tie up. Monsanto given permission for small trials of Bt cotton 100 g per trial by Department of Biotechnology (DBT).

July 13,1998: LOI by DBT wihtout involving GEAC, 15th MAHYCO agrees to LOI.

July 27, 1998: Impunged permission by DBT for trials at 15 locations, in August another 15 locations approved

November 16, 1998: news broke of trials being carried out by Monsanto on Bt-cotton without permission of regional governments and without consent of local communities.

November 28, 1998: Thousands of farmers occupied and burned down Bt cotton trial fields in Karnataka as part of Operation Cremation Monsanto.

December 2, 1998: about 200 farmers of Andhra Pradesh have set fire to the experimental field of the "Bollgard" cotton crop raised by Monsanto in Urugonda village of Warangal district. The Andhra Pradesh government has asked the Mahyco Monsanto Biotech (I) Private Limited to stop forthwith the field trials of Bollgard gene seeds of cotton going on in seven districts in the State.

December 16, 1998: The "Monsanto, Quit India" Campaign by various groups. Monsanto has sued the Andhra Pradesh Rytha Sangha (Federation of all the Farmers Organisations of Andhra Pradesh) through its President Shri Malla Reddy

January 6, 1999: Vandana Shiva's Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology goes to the Supreme Court challenging the "illegality" of the field trials authorized by the DBT.

January 8, 1999: RCGM expresses satisfaction over the trial results at 40 locations and on April 12th directs MAHYCO to submit applications for trials at 10 locations before MEC.

May 25, 1999: Revised proposal top RCGM submitted to Mahyco

June – November, 1999: Permission granted for different field trials. Oct- Nov. Shiva’s group undertakes field visits.

May 2000: Mahyco writes to GEAC seeking approval for ‘release for large scale commercial field trials and hybrid seed production of indigenously developed Bt cotton hybrids’.

July 2000: GEAC clears for large scale field trials on 85 hectares and seed production on 150 hecatares. Mahyco allowed to conduct large-scale field trials including seed production at 40 sites in six states. The permission was granted based on the "totally confidential" data from the small trials that allowed regulators to infer that Bt Cotton was "safe." The DBT sets up Committee to "independently" monitor evaluate large scale field trials.

October 2000: RFSTE files application to ammend petition challenging fresh clearance.Geeta Bharathan writes in Current Science on the controversy that evokes responses from scientists and Mahyco in subsequent issues.

Jan 5, 2001: A 10-member delegation comprising U.S. judges and scientists meet Supreme Court Chief Justice A.S. Anand to educate him -- and other members of the judiciary -- on biotechnology.

June 18, 2001: An open dialogue held between Monsanto and Greenpeace to discuss Bt cotton with scientists, Ministry of Environment representatives and farmers. No data on field trials was presented, though farmers vociferously demanded Bt cotton be commercialized. Technical questions and concerns raised by Greenpeace remain unanswered.

June 2001: PAN AP and others took urgent action at the request of activists both within India and abroad in protesting Mahyco/ Monsanto's aggressive attempt to fast-track governmental approval for Bt cotton commercialisation. “. Some 300 emails were received from all over the world by the Indian government.

June 19, 2001: Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) extends field trials of Bt Cotton by another year. Mahyco conducts large-scale trials on 100 hectares in seven states.

October 2001: Mahyco discovers commercial Bt cotton farming over several thousand hectares in Gujarat. Source of the cotton is traced back to Navbharat Seeds Pvt Ltd.

October 2001: GEAC orders Bt cotton fields to be burnt in Gujarat. No action taken after farmers’ protest order.

November 20, 2001: Gene Campaign files a case in the Delhi High Court charging the Government with negligence in allowing large-scale field trials to be conducted without appropriate monitoring, regulation and safety precautions.

December 12, 2001: Sharma writes an open letter to PM. warning of the potentially devastating impact GE cotton seeds could have on farmers in India and the scientific fraud involved in the way the research trials have been conducted and monitored. "the biggest scientific scam" to have ever hit India.

January 23, 2002: Dr Manju Sharma, secretary of DBT, declares that the latest round of Bt cotton trials were satisfactory and that it is up to the GEAC and the Ministry of Environment to decide on a date of commercial release.

February 20, 2002: The Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) submits a positive report to the Ministry of Environment on the field trials of Bt cotton. It is now expected that the Genetic Engineering and Approval Committee (GEAC) of the environment ministry will approve commerical use of Bt cotton within a month.

March 25, 2002: Approval given to Bt Cotton by GEAC

May 2002: Piyush Patel of Navbharat seeds finally arrested.Monsanto ready to release another Bt-gene Cry 2x also known as Cry 2 Ab for pest resistance in cotton. Expects clearance in India in 3 years.Rasi Seeds gets nod to conduct Bt cotton trials.

June 2002: Chinese environmental protection agency – Greenpeace report showing fall in diversity index in Bt cotton fields, other pests increasedSeveral groups in India ask for ban

August 8, 2002: Suman Sahai of gene campaign Demands Release of Bt Cotton Data

August 9, 2002: Government Bans Sale of Bt Cotton Seeds Temporarily

August 24, 2002: First reports from Khargone of 100 % failure of Bt crops (Shah and Banerjee)n Bt cotton as a result through press release in Bangalore

Corporate Monopoly:-

In May 1998, Monsanto the American multinational corporation entered into a joint venture with MAHYCO (Maharashtra Hybrid Seeds Company Ltd.) by acquiring a 26% stake in MAHYCO with the aim of introducing Bt Cotton in India.

This is the same Monsanto who:

- Peddled the infamous Agent Orange from 1962 to 1970, during the Vietnam wars. The US military sprayed 72 million liters of herbicides, mostly Agent Orange, over Vietnam. Over one million Vietnamese were exposed to the spraying, as well as over 100,000 Americans and allied troops.

- Patented and attempted to commercialise the “terminator technology” meant to control the viability of seeds.

- Feb. 4, 1994, despite nationwide protests by consumer groups, Monsanto and the FDA forced onto the US market the world's first GE animal drug, recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH, sometimes known as rBST). BGH is a powerful GE drug produced by Monsanto which, injected into dairy cows, forces them to produce 15%-25% more milk, in the process seriously damaging their health and reproductive capacity.

- In 1995-ranked 5th in the EPA’s toxic release inventory, as it was responsible for releasing 37 million pounds of toxic chemicals into the environment.

- To date, Monsanto has opened more than 475 seed piracy cases nationwide, generated from over 1,800 leads. More than 250 of these cases are under active investigation. And more than 100 cases have been settled.

Provensaftey:-
The biosafety studies carried out by several teams of experts in public research institutions, as a part of the regulatory requirements, have shown Bt-cotton to be safe to non-target beneficial organisms including human beings, animals, and birds and to environment. Bt-proteins produced in Bt-cotton are Lepidopteron specific and, therefore, can bring about mortality of only those insects like bollworms belonging to this order, and have no adverse effect on other insects or organisms belonging to other groups. Despite, several wild allegations are made by certain NGOs from time to time about the safety of Bt-cotton without being substantiated by scientific data. In fact, in the 12 years of its commercial cultivation on millions of hectares globally, and for the last 6 years in India, there is no scientific evidence to show Bt-cotton has caused any untoward incidents anywhere in the world.

Discussion and conclusion:-

Bt-cotton, being a new technology, has attracted a great deal of interest and controversy right from 1998 when its first regulatory trials were initiated in India. All kinds of allegations were made and doubts raised with regard to its safety and benefits by certain NGOs and they continue to do so even after they have been proved wrong. Unfortunately, what did such opponents not realize is the fact that Bt-cotton has undergone and passed all the biosafety tests prescribed by the regulatory authorities in India, and other countries, prior to its approval? Despite the continued opposition by a small section, the Indian cotton farmers have accepted this technology in a big way and derived social and economic benefits. This clearly shows that farmers cannot be misled and they know what is best for them. The ever-increasing demand for Bt-cotton seeds is a testimony to the proven merits of this technology.