Transgenic crops and its application ppt.pptx

This ppt is about defrent type of seed and transgenic crops

1. WELCOME

2. Agronomic Bio-fortification of cereals with Iron and Zinc Course seminar on DEPARTMENT OF AGRONOMY, INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURE SCIENCES BHU ,VARANASI (U.P.) Speaker Shiv Poojan Yadav M.Sc. (Agronomy) ID No. – 16AGR18 Supervisor Prof . Ramesh Kr. Singh

3. Introduction Fortification? Why Bio fortification Biofortification A) Types of Biofortification B)Agronomic Biofortification C) A gronomic approaches Why biofortification of Fe and Zn in cereals Research finding Conclusion Future thrust Content 3 1

4. Cereal crop is a Staple food for more than half of the world’s population. Cereals meet 60% of energy and protein needs of human. Up to 75% of the daily calorie intake of the developing world people living in the rural areas comes only from cereal-based foods which are inherently low in micronutrients specially Fe and Zn ( Cakmak , 2012 ). A diet of 300-400 g cereal day -1 will supply only 4-6 mg Zn day -1 in case of rice and11-18 mg Zn day -1 in case of wheat. . 2 Introduction

5. Fig.1 : Percentage of Population U ndernourished in World 3

6. Fig.2 : Global Scenario of Iron D eficiency in H umans SEVERE 4

7. Fig .3 : Global Scenario of Zn Deficiency in soil & Humans 5

8. Deficiency Prevalence in Developing Countries Consequences Iron 2 billion people Anaemia , maternal mortality Zinc 2 billion people Infectious diseases, poor child growth, maternal mortality, reduced birth weight PRESENT STATUS Worldwide, One in every three humans is affected by micro -nutrient deficiency WHO , 2012 6

9. Nutrients Male Female Requirement Consumption Requirement Consumption Calories (Kcal) 2800 1437 2200 1464 Protein (g) 55 39 45 43 Fe (mg) 20 17 30 15 Carotene ( µ g) 3000 1670 3000 1383 Thiamine (mg) 1.4 0.64 1.1 0.83 Riboflavin (mg) 1.5 0.69 1.2 0.64 ICMR , 2009 Table: 1 Nutrient Requirement and C onsumption per Capita per Day in I ndia 7

10. 8

11. Poverty (poor people rarely have access to commercially fortified food. Diversification of diet is not possible for all . Among micronutrients iron and zinc remain significant problems in developing country populations . Why Bio fortification ? 9

12. BIOFORTIFICATION Increasing the bio-available concentrations of micronutrients in edible portions of plants through crop management and genotype improvement (WHO 2002). Bio-fortification differs from ordinary fortification because it focuses on making plant foods more nutritious as the plants are growing rather than addition during processing. 10

13. Molecular Conventional breeding BIOFORTIFICATION Molecular Genetic engineering Conventional A pproach Biotechnological Approach Conventional breeding Agronomic 11

14. Why Agronomic Biofortification Conventional breeding- much time to development of new variety. Molecular approach-sophisticated technology Genetically modified crop-not accepted in all countries. Trade-off between yield and micronutrient concentration in grain. 12

15. Agronomic Biofortification Agronomic biofortification is the application of micronutrient containing mineral fertilizer to the soil and/or plant leaves (foliar), to increase micronutrient contents of the edible part of food crops ( Valenca et al., 2017). 13

16. Agronomic Approach of Biofortification 14

17. Singh and P rasad (2014). BHU 15 Fig.4

18. About 30% of the world population suffering from iron deficiency. For pregnant women, anaemia contributes to 20% of all maternal deaths ( WHO 2013). High phytic acid, is a potent inhibitor of iron absorption. Iron fortification of food is difficult because soluble iron is either unstable or non-soluble and not bioavailable. Why Bio fortification for Iron? 16

19. Fig.5 : Iron Deficiency 17

20. More than 30% world’s population is Zn deficient. Benefits of zinc supplementation on the growth rate of children. I mpact on hormonal balance. Why Bio fortification for Zinc 18

21. Fig.5 : Zinc Deficiency

22. Reasons of low bioavailability of Fe and Zn Genotypic variations. Anti-nutrients ( Zn:P , Zn:Cu and Zn:Mn ) balance. Low bioavailability of trace elements in soil. Soil factors reducing solubility and mobility of zinc: High CaCO 3 , High p H , high clay soil, low OM, low soil moisture, high Fe and Al oxides etc. 19

23. How to overcome it ??? Selection of cultivars : Fe and Zn efficient Soil amendments : in problem soils. Fertilizer scheduling : Right source, Right rate, Right Method, Right Stage. Organic matter content : Good source of micronutrients, can chelate and thus increase their availability. No till planting- For increasing the O.M. 20

24. Sustainable Advantages 1 Compliment to genetic approach Cost effective Quick Easy practice 5 4 3 2 21

25. Research Findings 22

26. Treatment Nutrient Content (ppm) Zn Fe control 148.36 39.08 Zn EDTA@ 1.00 Kg ha -1 as SA 176.087 44.348 Zn EDTA@ 0.5 Kg ha -1 as FA 169.843 58.088 Fe EDTA@ 1.00 Kg ha -1 as SA 158.513 48.018 Fe EDTA@ 0.5 Kg ha -1 as FA 161.806 80.144 Zn EDTA@ 1.00 Kg ha -1 as SA +Fe EDTA@ 1.00 Kg ha -1 as SA 168.227 58.389 Zn EDTA@ 0.5 Kg ha -1 as FA+ Fe EDTA@ 0.5 Kg ha -1 as FA 166.279 64.807 Zn EDTA@ 1.00 Kg ha -1 as SA+F e EDTA@ 0.5 Kg ha -1 as FA 169.618 66.977 Fe EDTA@ 1.00 Kg ha -1 as SA+ Zn EDTA@ 0.5 Kg ha -1 as FA 156.092 61.579 CD (P < 0.05) 3.611 1.352 Table 2 : Effect of Zn, and Fe fertilization on Micro nutrient content in rice grain (ppm) Srivastav et al.,2013 23 Varanasi (BHU)

27. Tretaments Zn concentration in rice grain mg/kg 2010 2011 Absolute control 20.7 21.2 NPK Kg ha -1 (120:26.2:60) 23.1 23.6 NPK+5 kgha -1 ( ZnSHH ) 26.4 26.9 NPK+ZnSHH @ 0.2% FSAT 24.8 25.3 NPK+ZnSHH @ 0.2% FSAT+B Stage 26.3 26.8 NPK+ZnSHH @ 0.2% FSAT+B + GF Stage 26.8 27.3 NPK+ZnSHH @ 0.5% FSAT 25.4 25.9 NPK+ZnSHH @ 0.5% FSAT+ B Stage 26.6 26.1 NPK+ZnSHH @ 0.5% FSAT+ B +GF stage 28.2 28.7 NPK+ ZnEDTA @ 5 kgha -1 SA 27.2 28.3 NPK+ ( ZnEDTA ) @0.2% FSAT 24.7 25.2 NPK+0.2% ( ZnEDTA ) FSAT+B Stage 26.6 27.1 NPK+0.2% ( ZnEDTA ) FSAT+B+GF Stage 27.7 28.2 NPK+8.5% ( ZnEDTA ) FSAT 25.2 26.3 NPK+8.5% ( ZnEDTA ) FSAT+B stage 28.2 28.7 NPK+8.5% ( ZnEDTA ) FSAT+B +GF stage 29.8 30.3 Sem ± 0.74 0.58 C.D(P=0.05) 2.15 1.68 Table3: Effect of sources, time and method of zinc application on Zn conc . in grain of basmati rice Shivay et al., 2016 24 IARI, new delhi

28. Trteatments Zn concentraion (mg/kg) grain straw Varities HD 2851 40.6 25.1 HD 2687 38.1 23.8 HD 2967 38.7 21.8 PBW 343 38.0 24.4 HD 2894 38.0 24.7 HD 2932 35.8 22.8 SEm ± 0.45 0.37 C.D (P=0.05) 1.42 1.165 Zinc fertilization Control 35.35 22.2 5.0 Kg Zn/ha( ZnSHH as SA) 37.95 23.8 2.5 Kg Zn/ha( ZnSHH as SA 0.5% as FS at MT & B stage) 39.40 24.1 2.5 Kg Zn/ha( ZnEDTA SA) 38.45 24.15 1.25 Kg Zn/ha(Zn EDTA as SA+0.5% FS at MT and B stage) 39.85 24.45 SEm ± 0.43 0.29 CD (P = 0.05) 1.22 0.825 Table:4 Effect of varieties and zinc fertilization on zinc conc. in grain and straw of wheat. Ghasal et al., 2016 25 IARI, New D elhi

29. Table 5: Effect of Zn-enriched urea (ZEU) on grain yield and grain Zn concentrations of aromatic rice Treatments Zn Added (kg/ha) Grain Yield (t/ha) Zn Content in grain (mg/kg) Prilled Urea -- 3.87 27 0.5% ZEU 1.3 4.23 29 1.0% ZEU 2.6 4.39 33 2.0% ZEU 5.2 4.60 39 3.0% ZEU 7.8 4.76 42 Shivay et al. (2008) IARI (New Delhi) 26

30. Treatments Rice Wheat Grain yield (t/ha) Grain Zn concentration ( mg/kg ) Grain yield (t /ha) Grain Zn concentration ( mg /kg ) Prilled Urea 3.99 30 3.72 40 enriched Urea 1 % Zn as ZnO 4.46 36 4.14 46 1% Zn as ZnSO 4 4.67 39 4.25 49 2 % Zn as ZnO 4.95 43 4.39 49 2% Zn as ZnSO 4 5.15 48 4.53 51 Table 6 : Effect of Zn-enriched urea on Grain yield and grain Zn concentrations of rice and wheat. Shivay et al. (2008) IARI (New Delhi) 27

31. Cropping system Shoot Seed Fe (mg /kg) Zn ( mg/kg) Fe (mg/kg) Zn (mg/kg) Wheat 28.69 5.71 36.58 25.09 Wheat + chickpea 40.31 9.45 46.13 27.10 Table 7 - Shoot and seed iron and zinc concentrations per dry mass of wheat grown as monocropping and intercropping in field conditions. Zuo and Zhang (2009) China 28

32. Table 8 :Effect of different fertilizer treatment on Zn and Fe uptake (g ha -1 ). Yadav et al., 2014 29 Treatment Zn uptake (gha -1 ) Iron uptake (gha -1 ) Grain Straw Grain Straw RFD+2.5 Kg Zn ha -1 105.89 53.46 167.21 294.84 RFD+5 Kg Zn ha -1 124.46 61.68 185.63 338.52 RFD+2.5 Kg Zn ha -1 + 5 tonne FYM ha -1 149.79 69.71 226.18 399.16 RFD+5 Kg Zn ha -1 + 5 tonne FYM ha -1 157.80 70.83 242.35 427.08 RFD+2.5 Kg Zn ha -1 + + 10 tonne FYM ha -1 175.11 77.83 284.69 490.48 RFD+5 Kg Zn ha -1 + 10 tonne FYM ha -1 183.53 82.41 328.14 547.07 SEm ± 11.58 5.31 19.19 32.83 CD (P= 0.05) 36.48 16.74 60.45 103.43 Varanasi,(BHU)

33. Table 9: Effects of Zn application methods on the grain Zn concentration in wheat. Treatments Grain Zinc concentration (mg/kg) 2008 2009 Control 18.79b 23.11d S 50 19.48b 29.11c F 4 24.03a 35.59b F 4 +S 50 24.40a 43.61a S 50 : soil application of 50 kg ZnSO 4 .7H 2 O ha -1 F 4 : foliar application of 4 kg ZnSO 4 .7H 2 O ha -1 Wang et al. (2012) 30 China

34. Treatments Grain yield (t ha -1 ) Zn concentration in unhusked rice (mg kg -1 ) Zn concentration in polished rice (mg kg -1 ) Control 3.92 30.4 26.1 25 kg ZnSO 4 .7H 2 O ha -1 (5.3 kg Zn ha-1) as SA 5.20 47.5 40.3 0.2% ZnSO 4 .7H 2 O ha -1 as FA (1.2 kg Zn ha-1) 4.99 52.6 28.8 Soil application of 1% ZnO -coated urea (2.6 kg Zn ha-1) 4.48 38.2 32.4 Soil application of 2% ZnO -coated urea (5.2 kg Zn ha -1 ) 5.13 44.7 37.9 Soil application of 1% ZnSO 4 .7H 2 O coated urea (2.6 kg Zn ha -1 ) 4.69 40.3 34.1 Soil application of 2% ZnSO 4 .7H 2 O coated urea (5.2 kg Zn ha -1 ) 5.27 49.7 42.1 C.D(P=0.05) 0.45 4.5 - Table 10 :Effect of method, source, and rate of Zn application on grain yield and Zn content of basmati rice Prasad et al. (2014) 31 IARI, New Delhi.

35. Treatments Fe conc. In grain (mg/kg) Control 36 Control+urea 36 FeSO 4 38 FeSO 4 + urea 43 Fe-EDTA 38 Fe-EDTA + urea 42 Fe-EDDHA 35 Fe-EDDHA+urea 39 Fe-citrate 36 Fe-citrate+urea 37 C.D(P=0.05) 5 Table 11: Changes in grain yield and Fe concentrations in wheat treated by various foliar Fe fertilizers with and without urea Aciksoz et al., (2011 ) pH- 8 DTPA-Extractable Fe- 2.1 mg kg-1 DTPA-extractable Zn- 0.1 mg kg-1 Fe-0.25% (w/v) Urea -1 % (w/v) 32 Australia.

36. Treatments Rice cultivar PR-113 PR-116 PR-118 PR-120 PAU-201 Fe (mg/kg) Control 15.2 14.8 13 17.8 12.5 0.5% Feso 4 .7H 2 O 18.8 20.5 19.7 20.2 19.8 Percentage increase over control 23.6 38.5 51.5 13.4 55.4 1% FeSo 4 .7H 2 O 26.4 25.8 26.5 28.2 28.8 Percentage increase over control 73.6 74.3 103.8 54.4 130.4 C.D(P=0.05) NS 3.1 1.1 6.2 5.7 Table 12: Effect of foliar spray of FeSO 4 .7H 2 O on Fe concentration in different rice cultivars pH- 7.9 OC- 0.22% Extractable Fe (mg kg -1 ) - 5.28 Spray-Maximum tillering , Pre- anthesis and Post- anthesis stages Singh et al. (2013) 33 Ludhiana

37. Constraints to agronomic bio fortification Setting appropriate target levels of micronutrients in bio fortified food. Retention of micronutrients in bio fortified food. Bio-availability of nutrients. Determining biological impact of bio fortified staple crops. Creating awareness amongst the farmers about bio fortification. Increased cost of fertilization. 34

38. Conclusion Biofortification offer sustainable solutions to the escalating micronutrient-related malnutrition problems. Agronomic- biofortification is the easiest and fastest way for biofortification of cereal grains with minerals. Two-three foliar sprays of Zn and Fe (0.5% ZnSO4 and FeSO4) on later growth stages offers a practical and useful means for bio fortification with Zn and Fe. Concentration of micronutrients increases 60-80% in cereal grains and 50-65% in pulses over control. Foliar application of micronutrients results significantly higher micronutrient recovery percent over soil application. 35

39. Future Thrust Need recent soil status of nutrients. Carrying out research to understand the physiological micronutrient uptake and translocation by root, sequestration in leaves and its partioning in grains. Development of micronutrient containing customised fertilizer. Screening of micronutrient responsive variety. Evaluation of suitable crop rotation and specific stage of micronutrient application on cultivar having high yield. Need to identify different micro organisms which enhance bio-availability of micro nutrients. 36

40. THANK YOU 38