Luigi over at Agricultural Biodiversity Weblog brought up a really great point in a recent post, the Bourne Ultimatum, about the National Geographic article The Global Food Crisis: The End of Plenty, a point that just begs to be repeated.

As is typical of Nat Geo, the journalism is excellent (although a bit jumpy in this global story), and doesn’t shy away from telling readers from the start that increasing global meat consumption means we will run out of grain soon.

The first point the author fails to address is that we wouldn’t have such a run on grain if meat consumption per capita were reduced (such as by increasing cost through reduction of subsidies or implementation of taxes), but I suppose even Nat Geo readers don’t want to hear such pragmatism.

The second point the author fails to address (and the one Luigi writes about) in the text is that we need solutions (plural), plenty of them.

Sustainable farming methods are certainly key, but we will also need marker assisted selection, genetic engineering, agricultural biodiversity, integrated pest management, local food production, grain storage, seed vaults, agricultural education and extension… there is no single solution. All of these and more are valuable pieces of of a puzzle that might just reveal food security for all. Tossing aside any of the pieces reduces the chance that we actually solve the puzzle.

This idea is described briefly in the illustration New Green Revolution – breeding (including genetic engineering), sustainable farming, and smart irrigation are all pieces. However, the main text of the illustration still poses the issue as a debate rather than as a potential collaboration. We won’t get anywhere if we let ideologues keep butting heads.

On page 12 of the article a perfect collaboration waiting to happen is ignored: one non-profit has a farmer increase yield with hybrid seed and fertilizer, another non-profit has a farmer increase yield with a legume rotation, but there is no discussion of what could happen if hybrid maize were included in a legume rotation. Why aren’t these non-profits collaborating? Instead they use the farmers as pawns in a sick battle for what tech is “best”.

How do you improve crop yields without actually improving crop yields? Control rodents that are eating grain in the fields.
This is exactly what Dr. Loretta Mayer and her graduate student Heidi Miers intend to do with a chemical called VCD (4-vinylcyclohexene diepoxide), commonly used in tires, polyesters and plastics. VCD basically degrades ovaries, similar to how the ovaries degrade during menopause – hence “mouseopause”. Simply place VCD bait stations in fields, rodents eat the bait, then the female rodents are unable to reproduce.
Most rodenticides are horrible chemicals that cause painful deaths and are equally horrible when accidentally consumed by humans. Any method that removes these chemicals from the environment should be strongly considered. Another possible application of VCD would be cheap, humane control of animals like cats, dogs, and deer. This would allow for population control of these animals without expensive sterilization or repeated birth control treatments, and without inhumane and costly slaughter and disposal of unwanted animals.
It all sounds great, but I have a lot of qualms about the actual implementation of this research! First, what if endangered rodent species eat the bait? It could lead to extinctions. What if the tablets dissolve and release VCD into the water that is then used by locals for drinking and cooking?  What if children or adults are not properly educated about the bait stations and then eat the bait? What if women hear about what the bait does and eat it on purpose? There are a lot of potential problems.
Even though I think there are very real concerns involved with this work -  I don’t think the research or implementation should be stopped – there just need to be very strong safeguards along, as there should be with any chemical or technology that will be released into the environment. The potential gain of 10% more rice harvests may outweigh the risk of the VPD being consumed by non-target organisms. What do you think?
Source: Discovery Could Help Feed Millions via Newswise.