06.08.2013 Views

GM Crops: The First Ten Years - International Service for the ...

GM Crops: The First Ten Years - International Service for the ...

GM Crops: The First Ten Years - International Service for the ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>GM</strong> <strong>Crops</strong>: <strong>The</strong> <strong>First</strong> <strong>Ten</strong> <strong>Years</strong><br />

using conventional tillage fell 25.6% (to 5.8 million ha), <strong>the</strong> area planted using reduced tillage<br />

increased by 7.0% (to 11.9 million ha) and <strong>the</strong> area planted using no till increased 39.0% (to 11.1<br />

million ha, equal to about 38.5% of <strong>the</strong> total 2005 crop).<br />

<strong>The</strong> most rapid rate of adoption of <strong>the</strong> <strong>GM</strong> HT technology has been by growers using NT systems<br />

(<strong>GM</strong> HT cultivars accounted <strong>for</strong> about 99% of total NT soybeans in 2005). This compares with<br />

conventional tillage systems <strong>for</strong> soybeans where <strong>GM</strong> HT cultivars accounted <strong>for</strong> 80% of total<br />

conventional tillage soybean plantings (Table 52).<br />

Table 52. US soybean tillage practices and <strong>the</strong> adoption of <strong>GM</strong> HT cultivars 1996-2005<br />

(million ha)<br />

1996<br />

1997<br />

1998<br />

1999<br />

2000<br />

2001<br />

2002<br />

2003<br />

2004<br />

2005<br />

Total<br />

area<br />

26.0<br />

28.3<br />

29.1<br />

29.8<br />

30.1<br />

30.0<br />

29.5<br />

29.7<br />

30.3<br />

28.9<br />

No till<br />

8.0<br />

8.7<br />

9.4<br />

9.7<br />

10.0<br />

10.2<br />

10.3<br />

11.0<br />

11.7<br />

11.1<br />

Reduced<br />

till<br />

11.1<br />

12.0<br />

12.8<br />

12.9<br />

12.9<br />

12.6<br />

12.3<br />

12.4<br />

12.5<br />

11.9<br />

Conventional<br />

till<br />

6.8<br />

7.6<br />

6.9<br />

7.3<br />

7.2<br />

7.2<br />

6.9<br />

6.3<br />

6.1<br />

5.8<br />

Total<br />

<strong>GM</strong><br />

area<br />

0.5<br />

3.2<br />

11.8<br />

16.4<br />

18.2<br />

22.2<br />

24.3<br />

25.7<br />

27.2<br />

26.9<br />

Total<br />

Non<br />

<strong>GM</strong><br />

area<br />

25.5<br />

25.1<br />

17.4<br />

13.4<br />

11.9<br />

7.8<br />

5.3<br />

4.0<br />

3.1<br />

2.0<br />

No till-<br />

<strong>GM</strong><br />

area<br />

0.24<br />

1.91<br />

4.81<br />

6.12<br />

7.48<br />

8.38<br />

9.31<br />

10.46<br />

11.39<br />

11.02<br />

Reduced<br />

till <strong>GM</strong><br />

area<br />

0.17<br />

1.20<br />

4.45<br />

7.07<br />

8.23<br />

9.39<br />

10.49<br />

11.18<br />

11.26<br />

11.33<br />

Source: Adapted from Conservation Tillage and Plant Biotechnology (CTIC) 2002<br />

NT = no-till + ridge till, RT = reduced tillage + mulch till, CT = conventional tillage, <strong>GM</strong> = <strong>GM</strong> HT varieties<br />

Conventional<br />

tillage <strong>GM</strong><br />

area<br />

0.07<br />

0.08<br />

1.97<br />

3.2<br />

3.83<br />

4.39<br />

4.46<br />

4.07<br />

4.56<br />

4.54<br />

<strong>The</strong> importance of <strong>GM</strong> HT soybeans in <strong>the</strong> adoption of a NT system has also been confirmed by an<br />

American Soybean Association (ASA) study (2001) of conservation tillage. This study found that<br />

<strong>the</strong> availability of <strong>GM</strong> HT soybeans has facilitated and encouraged farmers to implement reduced<br />

tillage practices; a majority of growers surveyed indicated that <strong>GM</strong> HT soybean technology had<br />

been <strong>the</strong> factor of greatest influence in <strong>the</strong>ir adoption of reduced tillage practices.<br />

a) Fuel consumption<br />

Based on <strong>the</strong> soybean crop area planted by tillage system, type of seed planted (<strong>GM</strong> and non-<strong>GM</strong>)<br />

and applying <strong>the</strong> fuel usage consumption rates presented in section 4.2.1 89 , <strong>the</strong> total consumption<br />

of tractor fuel has increased by about 19.9 million litres (from 752.7 to 772.6 million litres 1996 to<br />

2005: Table 53). As <strong>the</strong> area of soybeans increased by 2.9 million ha over <strong>the</strong> same period, <strong>the</strong><br />

average fuel usage fell 7.7% (from 29.0 litres/ha to 26.8 litres/ha: Table 53). A comparison of <strong>GM</strong><br />

versus non <strong>GM</strong> production systems shows that in 2005, <strong>the</strong> average tillage fuel consumption on <strong>the</strong><br />

89 Our estimates are based on <strong>the</strong> following average fuel consumption rates: NT 14.12 litre/ha, RT 28.83 litres/ha (<strong>the</strong> average of fuel<br />

consumption <strong>for</strong> chisel ploughing and disking) and conventional tillage 46.65 litres/ha<br />

73

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!