Norman Borlaug Vs Ivan Michurin

[revi]

Friends,
I am interested to know how many of you wanted to use the method used by Borlaug in gardens to create new variety. Borlaug, who has been known as the father of so-called “green revolution” has used some unique methods to create high yielding varieties which are widely “successful(!)” in South Asia (India, Pakistan) and Mexico. I am curious to know whether Borlaug’s methods are limited only to crops or extended to fruiting trees too. And if yes, what kind of new varieties has been found on the basis of processes proposed by Borlaug.

[raymondo]

It appears Borlaug used traditional plant breeding techniques in his work. From that point of view, then most people doing breeding work that post here are using the same methods, though without the backup of external funding. Although the methods are similar, the aims might not be. For instance, as a home gardener, I'm interested in developing crops that do well in my garden. That underlies all the breeding work I do. Borlaug had quite a different focus.

[revi]

I want to know the uniqueness of Borlaug's work, if there is any. If there is nothing new in his method, then by which magic his methods have increase wheat yield in Mexico, India and Pakistan. I am also curious to know how much his method is applied in industrialized countries i.e. where agriculture was already industrialized. From the wiki article, it seems that his method succeeded only in third world countries where agriculture isn't industrialized.

[raymondo]

Judging from what I've read, and that's precious little, he appears to have had the knack of recognizing useful breeding material and making the right combinations. His crosses produced some excellent results in terms of yield increases. These would have been of as much benefit to industrialized nations as any other but perhaps the effects were much more obvious in the poorer nations. Along with the new seed, he introduced western agricultural practices. My guess is that it was actually the combination of these factors that had such a dramatic impact in places like Mexico and Pakistan.
This is just what I've gleaned from the little reading I've done. There may well be other factors that I have missed entirely that better explain his success.

[revi]

Well, in that case, I am curious to know whether the increase in production is a result of introduction of western agricultural practices or Borlaug's genius. In the wiki page on Borlaug, there isn't any mention of increase in yield in countries where agriculture was already industrialized. And if the increase in yield is due to introduction of modern agricultural practices, then why Borlaug can be credited for that?

[castanea]

Borlaug worked hard using traditional plant breeding methods. I respect that but certainly don't consider him a genius. I don't think he spent much time evaluating the consequences of his work. I don't think he had any understanding of the importance of local landraces nor any respect for local and regional cultures. I don't think he was very knowledgeable about nutrition. His work has led to the destruction of local and regional seed resources and helped Monsanto and others in their concentration of seed resources.

[revi]

I just want to add one point to Canstanea's remarks. I have doubt that whether Borlaug in reality created something unique or not. His system has been adopted only in three countries in the world (as per the wiki page on him) and all were backward third world countries. I have doubt that the increase in production of crops is a result of Borlaug's effort or just the introduction of machinery and other western methods to agriculture.
In India, his practices are now showing their black sides. Punjab, one of the wealthiest states of India, where the so called "green revolution" has started now become one of the infertile state. Excessive use of underground water make the groundwater level lowest ever in centuries. Excessive use of chemical fertilizer has made the soil so much infertile that a handful of chemical is needed just to grow a single seedling. As per the present surveys, more that 50% of the young people of Punjab are drug addicted and it's a big market of drugs produced in Afghanistan.
At present, groundwater levels are lowering where such agricultural practices started by Borlaug are still practiced. Productivity of high yielding seeds are reducing every year and both pests are weeds are becoming resistant to chemicals every year.
India farmers, from long time ago, have been producing 64000 type of rice in India. Most historians at present consider India as the birthplace of paddy. But, thanks of Borlaug and his practices, it has now been reduced to just 50.

[Hristo]

There is nothing secret behind the Borlaug's work. His biggest innovation was the short straw (so called semi-dwarf) cereals. The old wheat varieties were very tall and often they suffer lodging. If you apply high amount of fertilizers to them, especially Nitrogen they will grow even taller and the loses out of lodging will be huge. By using some accessions with short straw Borlaug bred the modern semi-dwarf wheat and other cereals. These varieties allow high amounts of ferts without danger of lodging. That way the yields were increased a lot. Undoubtedly this was huge success. Unfortunately this success turned out to be a double edged sword.

There is another good example how something initially thought to be good after some time turns out to be not so good - Paul Hermann Müller, the man who discovered DDT's insecticidal properties was awarded too a Nobel Prize award. Twenty or so years after that DDT was banned.

[castanea]

Borlaug's followers may also have been responsible for the destruction of the Karan barley breeding work in India.

[revi]

Hristo,
In that case, I am curious to know why his success is limited only to three countries where modern agricultural practices and machinery hasn't been introduced at that time. I am also curious to know how much this dwarf and semi-dwarf varieties had been helpful in increasing the production in countries, where modern agricultural practices were already introduced.

[Hristo]

I would not say that the short straw cereals (not only the wheat) were successful only in a few countries. The yields raised a lot not only in a few countries. Of course the reason for that is not only because of the short straw, it's more complex - better agricultural practices, better varieties, the pesticides and herbicides. But the short straw allowed the intensive agriculture. That is - abundant fertilizing.

Check this document, there are some graphs showing the wheat yield increase during 20th century in several countries:
rghost.net/41205690

[oxbowfarm]

Its a very simple equation, traditional long straw wheat has a certain yield capacity. If you fertilize it with N the straw grows longer and weaker and lodges resulting in severe loss of the crop. So small grains traditionally were grown without fertilization. The dwarfing genes Borlaug and others introduced prevented the straw from getting so tall. This enabled the wheat to respond to N fertilization without lodging, it also diverted some carbohydrate/photosynthate to grain vs straw production. So dramatic yield increases were the result if you used the whole dwarf seed, herbicide, high fertilization technique. Pretty solid plant breeding work all around, not necessary to call it genius.

The method is for the most part only successful if you use the seed within the production system it is designed around. Dwarf grain is less competitive to weeds due to its shortness, so you need to be using herbicides or cultivation. Also the yield increases are only very dramatic if you are giving it the extra fertilization.

I would say that none of us are using the same methods as Borlaug or Minchurin, none of us are professional plant breeders to my knowledge. We are hobbyists, and don't have access to the resources, greenhouses, research plots, and staff assistance to do the kind of focused and directed breeding work with controls, replications, and data etc that a professional can and must use.

I do this for fun, if I have a goal it is for the most part only a vague hope and I am mostly just watching a cross to see if something interesting happens.

[revi]

The document on the link that Hristo given just produced an account of increase in wheat yield worldwide in different countries and nowhere in the document, I have found that the research of Brolaug was behind it. As for example, wheat production in former USSR start to grow from 1951 onwards and at that time, the ruling practice there was the Lysenko system.
@ oxbowfarm, at least Michurin worked with mostly handmade tools throughout the majority of his research phase and upto 1917, he hadn't got any kind of government assistance, but rather neglect and opposition from both government and the official scientific community of Russia of that time. Michurin worked in condition worse than most hobbyists are now on this forum through most of his life. Though the case with Borlaug was quite opposite.

[oxbowfarm]

I'm wondering about your motives in starting this thread? There are plenty of intelligent and compelling criticisms of the Green Revolution in print and on the web, it seems rather pointless to beat up on Norman Borlaug. We are all gardeners and farmers, some of us dabble in amateur plant breeding.

From everything I've read about them both Norman Borlaug and Ivan Michurin were brilliant men who actively tried to work to help feed people. Both of them seemed to have their hearts in the right place. They are both dead now and unable to defend themselves and their work. I personally take issue with some of the directions that Dr. Borlaug wanted to take global agriculture via the use of genetic engineering, but every public statement I've read from him regarding the issue was directed towards his concerns about fighting global poverty and global hunger.

Instead of trying to compare/contrast the two men, who were scientists from completely different eras of technology and scientific knowledge, why don't you focus on highlighting Michurin? You seem to be a strong supporter/fan of his work, and very little information on his techniques are available in English to my knowledge.

[greltam]

I think Norman's double wheat season idea was pretty good? Selecting for seeds that do well in a variety of environments so they work in more than one area. Kind of how Carol Deppes seeds might only do well for her environment in the PNW because they only grow there, if they were to also be grown every other season in a drier environment like Josephs, they might have a wider range of adaptability.