Scidev.net has an interesting report on how breeders at IRRI and the Africa Rice Center, working with scientists and farmers in Mozambique, have developed a new variety of rice that offers almost six times the average yield and is more tolerant of diseases. The new variety is currently still known as IR80482-64-3-3-3 and has just entered Mozambique’s formal seed sector for bulking up and eventual supply to farmers.
That’s good news for Mozambique and farmers, although it isn’t the end of the story:
“For irrigated and rainfed lowland ecosystems we can produce rice varieties that combine high yield, resistance to major diseases and superior grain quality accepted by local and international markets,” said Surapong Sarkarung, an IRRI rice breeder based in Mozambique.
But he added that drawbacks could be: the low capacity of the seed sector to produce certified seed; lack of milling equipment to produce high standard milled rice and lack of credit to support farmers to buy inputs such as seed, fertilisers and machinery.
And of course we are duty bound to ask: will any effort be made to collect Mozambique’s existing varieties before the new variety sweeps them away? Or maybe that’s already been done.
What a shameful misrepresentation to say that the new variety “boosts yields nearly six-fold”. Presumably computed by dividing 7 tons per ha (the experimental yield) with 1.2 tons per ha (the average yield in the country).
And this is the Science and Development Network? As the same message is broadcast at other web sites as well, I am willing to assume this nonsense came from an IRRI press release, making things even worse. But you’d think that editors specializing in Science and Development would know better.
I am all for rice breeding and disease resistance. But yields of 1.2 tons per ha suggest that either there is a lot of land, or that fertilizer (etc) are too expensive. Please find me a rice variety that you could not use to produce at least 4 tons per ha with. Beyond that traditional varieties start falling over. But what are they growing in Mozambique? Probably mostly IR64?
FAO reports that IR52 yields 6.8 ton/ha. Interesting, rounding upwards leads to, ahum, an estimate of a 3% increase in yield potential. That’s probably more like it. And perhaps more like NERICA?
All true, and thanks for pointing it out. To be fair, Scidev.net did quote an IRRI rice breeder who talked about some of the “drawbacks,” which included ones you mention. But not, as far as I know, solutions.
You may like to read the original IRRI media release about the new rice variety for Mozambique.
Also, IRRI is the custodian of the International Rice Genebank where we conserve different sorts of heritage varieties, modern varieties and the wild ancestors of rice. We currently conserve and have available for sharing 76 types of rice from Mozambique.
Thanks for this, Sophie. Interestingly, I know the guy who collected some of the Mozambique rice in IRRI’s genebank, though I believe they were mainly wild ones.
Are you saying that the “original” press release came out 6 months after the press covered it? Anyway, good to read a more sensible report than that of scidev.
The IRRI press release also stated (aside from the improved field yield) if I follow the link indicated by Sophie from IRRI: “In addition, Makassane has a higher milling recovery (about 80%) than Limpopo (70%).” This asks for some explanation from IRRI. It assumes that if the total milling recovery (Total Milling Yield) is 80% it means that when milling the paddy rice it produces only 20% husk and bran together. I am involved in rice milling for more that 35 years in several countries around the world (also in Mozambique) and never heard of a commercial variety that has this abilities. But maybe they mean: head rice milling recovery from whole husked grains. So this press release creates a lot of confusion and should be corrected. I think Sophie from IRRI should inform the Communication Department of IRRI to explain the characteristics of this “wonder rice” a little better to us workers in the field.