Why GM maize trials at PAU have sparked a row

There’s an air of anticipation and apprehension in equal measure, as the Punjab Agricultural University (PAU) is set to begin field trials of two types of genetically modified (GM) maize after recent approval from the Genetic Engineering Appraisal Committee (GEAC) and the Punjab government.

While scientists have described the trials as a necessary step toward innovation and informed decision-making, environmentalists and farmer groups have voiced strong concerns over potential ecological risks and socio-economic implications.

GM crops are cultivated in over 30 countries, including agricultural powerhouses like the United States and Canada, and the upcoming trials at PAU could shape the future of maize cultivation in India.

The trials at PAU will focus on two types of GM maize varieties — herbicide-tolerant (HT) and insect-resistant (IR). These crops, it is claimed, have been developed using advanced biotechnology to address two major challenges in maize cultivation: weed management and pest control.

HT maize is engineered to tolerate applications of Glyphosate-K salt, a commonly used herbicide, allowing for more effective weed control without harming the crop. IR maize is designed to resist lepidopteran pests such as the stem borer and fall armyworm, which are known to cause significant yield losses.

The technology for these transgenic maize hybrids is being provided by Bayer Crop Science Limited. The trials fall under BRL-I and BRL-II phases, Biosafety Research Level Trials, which evaluate the safety and performance of GM crops under controlled conditions.

Being conducted during the current kharif season at PAU’s Ludhiana campus, the trials are being supervised by the Department of Biotechnology (DBT), Government of India, and are strictly regulated under national biosafety guidelines. The primary goal, PAU researchers say, is to assess the agronomic performance and environmental biosafety of GM maize hybrids. The trials are non-commercial and intended solely for research, they stress, with no market release or distribution involved.

Conducted in a confined setting, the trials combine both Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) and HT traits, offering dual protection against pests and weeds. Protocols have been approved by expert panels at both the state and national levels. PAU has prior experience of Bt cotton trials, which laid the foundation for India’s first commercial GM crop.

Despite the scientific rigour, environmental groups and farmer organisations have raised serious concerns. Critics argue that the approval process lacked adequate public consultation and transparency. Fears include biosafety risks, cross-pollination with non-GM crops, and overuse of herbicides like Glyphosate, which could harm soil health and biodiversity. These groups have called for the immediate cancellation of trial permissions in Punjab, advocating a more cautious and inclusive approach.

Amid the debate, PAU Vice-Chancellor Dr Satbir Singh Gosal has defended the university’s role, emphasising that the trials are strictly for research and not linked to commercial release. “The field trials will begin soon as this is the right time for sowing maize,” he said, clarifying that PAU’s mandate is limited to scientific evaluation.

Dr Gosal reiterated that PAU has the infrastructure, expertise, and regulatory clearance to conduct the trials. “Unless we study the matter, we will not know whether it’s good or bad,” he said. “We are not going to recommend that GM maize should be grown commercially or not. That decision lies with the Central government.”

He stressed that the trials follow DBT guidelines and standard operating procedures. “We are not releasing this crop. That is the job of the government. PAU is only carrying out scientific research,” he said. He added that trials are permitted only after clearance from the DBT and state-level committees, which include officials from agriculture, science and technology, health departments, and PAU scientists.

He defended GM technology, noting its adoption in over 30 countries and the success of Bt cotton in India. “There were stories that animals died after eating Bt cotton leaves. But none of those were proven scientifically,” he said. “We must let data speak.”

Dr Baldev Singh Dhillon, former PAU Vice-Chancellor and a member of the review and appraisal committee, echoed support for the trials. “For policy approval, we need to conduct research, otherwise years will be wasted in speculation and delay,” he said.

Dr Dhillon emphasised that not all GM crops are harmful, citing Bt cotton, Bt brinjal and GM mustard as examples of successful innovation. He highlighted biotechnology’s role in developing maize enriched with Vitamin A and called for a nuanced understanding of genetic engineering. “Where GM is coming from and where it is affected is most important,” he said.

He drew parallels with historical resistance to the steam engine in the UK, where people feared hens would stop laying eggs — underscoring how fear often precedes acceptance. “Insect resistance is not naturally present in crops, we have to develop it through research,” he said, warning that without trials, India could lose three to four years in testing and validation.

Farmer organisations remain sceptical. Bhartiya Kisan Union (Lakhowal) president Harinder Singh Lakhowal says the GM trials could lead to corporate dominance. “They will recommend their own sprays and pesticides and develop monopoly. Where will the farmers go?” he asks. Farmers also fear dependency on proprietary seeds and inputs controlled by multinational companies, which could erode autonomy and increase costs. Concerns include soil health, seed sovereignty, and market access. They demand transparency, public consultation, and safeguards to ensure innovation doesn’t come at the expense of farmer welfare.

The Coalition for a GM-Free India has strongly opposed the trials. In a letter to Punjab Agriculture Minister Gurmeet Singh Khudian, co-convenor Kavitha Kuruganti urged withdrawal of the no-objection certificate, citing Glyphosate’s health and environmental risks. The herbicide has been banned in Punjab since 2018.

Kuruganti questioned how Glyphosate-resistant maize could be tested when the chemical itself is prohibited under India’s pesticide regulatory regime. The coalition warned that the trials contradict existing state orders and could worsen Punjab’s environmental health crisis, pointing to rising cancer rates and agrochemical dependency.

It has also criticised the lack of transparency in the approval process, noting that Punjab was the only state among the 11 approached by Bayer to grant permission. Bayer, it says, had sought approval for penultimate-stage trials in 11 states, including Haryana, Gujarat, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan, Maharashtra, MP, Bihar and Tamil Nadu, “but PAU was the only institution to respond positively”. Describing the move as “anti-people and anti-nature”, the coalition warned that even confined trials pose risks of genetic contamination and long-term ecological damage.

The debate continues.

Features