New analysis of trial data from the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) is raising questions about two gene-edited rice varieties recently released by the government. These varieties, DRR Rice 100 (Kamala) and Pusa DST Rice 1, were introduced with claims of increased yield and better tolerance to drought and salinity. However, the analysis suggests these claims are not fully supported by the trial results.
The two genome-edited rice varieties were released in May with the aim of boosting rice production and improving crop resilience. DRR Rice 100 was developed from the Sambha Masuri variety, while Pusa DST Rice 1 was developed from Cotton Dora Sannalu. The government stated that these varieties use genome editing technology without adding foreign DNA and could bring significant improvements.
However, a report by The Coalition for a GM-Free India has examined ICAR’s own trial data from 2023 and 2024. They found that the advantages claimed, such as higher yield, earlier maturity, and disease resistance, do not appear to be consistent across different trial locations.
For Pusa DST Rice 1, the analysis indicates that it did not perform better than its parent variety, MTU 1010, especially under drought or salty conditions. In several test sites, the gene-edited version yielded the same or even less than the original. While the government had claimed a yield increase of 20-30% under saline and alkaline soils, trial data for 2023 was limited due to a shortage of seeds. In 2024, no significant yield improvement was seen in salty conditions, with only a small gain in alkaline soils. Despite this, ICAR reported a 30% higher yield, which the Coalition believes was based on selective data from only a few locations.
Similarly, DRR Rice 100 (Kamala) did not show consistent higher yields or mature earlier than its parent variety, BPT 5204. The claims made during its release included a 17% higher yield and maturity 20 days sooner. However, the analysis shows that Kamala yielded less than its parent in many trial sites. The overall average yield was actually lower than the parent variety. Furthermore, there is no published data to support the claim of it maturing 20 days earlier. Differences were also noted in other basic measurements like the number of grains and flowering time, suggesting that the data might have been interpreted to match the expected results.
Scientists involved in the analysis highlighted that scientific trials should show consistent performance, which was not observed in these cases. The Coalition has described the promotion of these varieties as a “hasty promotion of untested, underperforming and unsafe varieties.” They believe this is an attempt to overcome public resistance to new gene technologies in India’s food system.
Earlier, in June, a group of 20 agricultural scientists had also raised concerns about the release of these rice varieties. They questioned the use of CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing technology, pointing out its foreign origin and the potential for India to become reliant on multinational corporations for seed rights.
Activists have stated that producing poor science from public institutions has serious consequences for farmers’ lives. In a letter to the Union Agriculture Minister, the Coalition has called for an immediate halt to promotional claims about the gene-edited rice and for an independent review of ICAR’s trial data and methods.