In News:

• Recently, the Union Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers’ Welfare launched India’s first genome-edited rice varieties—DRR Dhan 100 (Kamala) and Pusa DST Rice 1.
• Developed by ICAR-IIRR (Hyderabad) and ICAR-IARI (New Delhi) using CRISPR-Cas9 technology under SDN1/SDN2 methods.

About the Varieties

DRR Dhan 100 (Kamala)

• Developed by: ICAR-Indian Institute of Rice Research (IIRR), Hyderabad
• Parent variety: Samba Mahsuri (BPT 5204)
• Features:
  • 19% increase in yield
  • Matures in ~130 days (20 days earlier than parent)
  • Stronger stem – reduces lodging
  • Saves ~7,500 million cubic meters of irrigation water
  • Lower methane emissions
  • Edited gene: CKX2 (Gn1a) – increases grain number per panicle

Pusa DST Rice 1

• Developed by: ICAR-Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), New Delhi
• Parent variety: MTU 1010 (Cotton Dora Sannalu)
• Features:
  • Improved tolerance to drought and salinity
  • Yield increase: Up to 30.4% in saline/alkaline soils
  • Edited gene: DST gene
  • Developed using SDN1 genome editing – no foreign DNA inserted

Technology Used

• CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing system:
  • Enables precise editing of native genes without inserting foreign DNA
  • SDN1/SDN2 methods approved by India’s biosafety regulations
• Genome editing vs GMOs:
  • Genome editing makes internal gene alterations
  • GMOs involve insertion of foreign genetic material
  • GM crops are banned for cultivation/import in India (except Bt cotton)

Benefits Claimed

• Increased agricultural productivity:
  • 19% increase in yield (DRR Dhan 100)
  • Up to 30.4% increase in saline soils (Pusa DST Rice 1)
• Environmental benefits:
  • Reduced greenhouse gas emissions (~20%)
  • Lower methane release due to early maturation
  • Major water conservation
• Target states: Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Karnataka, Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Odisha, Jharkhand, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, and Puducherry

Concerns and Criticisms

Biosafety and Unintended Effects

• Unintended mutations: CRISPR-Cas enzymes may cause off-target gene edits, potentially resulting in unknown protein formations.
• Lack of global standardisation on enzyme concentration and specificity.
• Some scientists warn of genetic instability in SDN1-based edits.

Seed Sovereignty & Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)

• Genome editing tools are IPR-protected, raising concerns over farmers' seed sovereignty.
• Activist groups like Coalition for a GM-Free India demand transparency on IPR ownership and oppose reliance on proprietary technologies.
• Risk of monoculture, loss of rice genetic diversity, and trade barriers for India’s non-GM rice exports.

Policy and Regulatory Framework

• India’s biosafety guidelines (2022) permit SDN1 and SDN2 genome editing for general crops.
• The Union Budget 2023–24 allocated ?500 crore for advancing genome editing in agriculture.
• ICAR expanding genome editing to oilseeds and pulses.