Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
05 April 2022 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Supplied
WJ swart
Prof Wijnand Swart believes a ‘systems level understanding’ of phytobiomes (consisting of plants, their environment, and all their associated organisms) will enable us to produce sufficient crops to meet global demands while minimising negative impacts on our environment.

Plant health is important for the survival of our planet and all its living creatures. Now, imagine an instrument that contains a DNA chip from virtually every known plant pathogen, where one can simply snip off a piece of the infected plant material, slip it into the ‘plant disease tricorder’, and within seconds you have not only a diagnosis of the disease, but all the information about its control too.

According to Prof Wijnand Swart, Professor of Plant Pathology in the Department of Plant Sciences at the University of the Free State (UFS) and President of the Southern African Society for Plant Pathology (SASPP), this concept might be a bit far-fetched, but is a distinct possibility for the not-too-distant future. “Without a doubt …,” he believes.

He was recently a guest on a series of radio talks on plant health in South Africa, hosted by the National Science and Technology Forum (NSTF) in partnership with Plaas/Farm TV (YouTube broadcaster). His talk on the topic, Whither (or wither) Plant Pathology in the next 50 years, was specifically focused on understanding the latest research and dynamics of the discipline in a South African context.

In terms of this futuristic perspective, he says collaboration between plant pathologists and biomedical and aeronautical engineers, nanotechnologists, and computer scientists will aid the development of micro-sensory technologies for the detection of new plant diseases that are relevant to biosecurity, plant disease diagnostics, and epidemiological modelling.

In his discussion, Prof Swart referred to the work of Prof John Lucas, former Head of Plant Pathology and Microbiology at the Rothamsted Research Station in the United Kingdom, who believes that there are three key issues facing plant pathologists in the 21st century. These are the strengthening of food security while simultaneously safeguarding the health of associated ecosystems and reducing the dependency on natural resources; the creation of pest and disease control systems that are sustainable and not compromised by the evolution of pest and pathogen strains; and the development of suitable crop protection technologies.

Future technologies

Based on the work of Prof Lucas, Prof Swart states that future technologies in plant health will develop in five areas. In the first area, he says DNA-based technologies will greatly increase the speed, sensitivity, and accuracy of pest and pathogen detection and diagnosis.

Also key here, is the integration of nanomaterials into disease management strategies and diagnostics. He says in the past decade, the use of nanotechnology in phytopathology has grown exponentially. According to him, nanotechnology can increase productivity using nano-pesticides and nano-fertilisers, improve soil quality by means of nano-zeolites and hydrogels, stimulate plant growth using nanomaterials, and provide smart monitoring via nano-sensors and wireless communication devices.

Prof Swart says according to Prof Lucas, the second area in which plant health technologies will grow is plant defence and immunity. When induced, plant resistance primes plants to deal with a diversity of biotic and abiotic stresses. Prospects of inducing chemically modulated plant resistance via biological agents (such as engineered microbes), might result in low-cost seed treatments, thereby removing the need for expensive chemical spray regimes.

Technology development in plant health will also become more evident in genetic diversification. Prof Swart believes sequencing the genomes of major crop species and their wild relatives will expand the known gene pool and diversify genetic resources available to plant breeders.

According to him, a new era is beckoning, where the prospect of crop pharmacology based on signal molecules and their receptors will become a reality. It will be based on the development of novel chemistries designed to manipulate specific molecular targets, by either regulating host resistance or disabling the disease-causing processes of pathogens.

The fifth area in which plant health technologies will develop, is ecological approaches to disease control. He says by understanding the ecology of pathogens, our ability to exploit their natural enemies will improve. Ecological approaches to plant disease control will have a significant impact on the introduction of invasive pathogen species, while the effect of climate change will influence the emergence of new plant diseases and epidemics. He strongly believes that it is important to take a holistic approach to understanding how and why plant pathogenesis occurs if we are to manage diseases effectively.

Future challenges

The development of these new technologies is very important, as there are several challenges that plant pathology will face in the future. These include the increasing demand for food to support the growing global population; the decreasing production potential of agriculture due to competition for fertile land; the increased risk of plant disease epidemics resulting from agricultural intensification; the depletion of natural resources; and the influence of climate change on interactions between plants and their pests or pathogens.

Prof Swart believes a ‘systems level understanding’ of phytobiomes (consisting of plants, their environment, and all their associated organisms) will enable us to produce sufficient crops to meet global demands while minimising negative impacts on our environment.

He concludes, saying that plant pathology will evolve as an interdisciplinary science. He adds that future research will focus on new problems that are traditionally seen as outside the core discipline of plant pathology. Furthermore, food security will be a dominant and important driver of plant pathology research, while the impact of climate change on plant diseases will be very significant. Finally, that the adaptive potential of plant and pathogen populations will be one of the most important predictors of the magnitude of climate change effects.

LISTEN: radio interview


News Archive

Inaugural lecture: Prof. Phillipe Burger
2007-11-26

 

Attending the lecture were, from the left: Prof. Tienie Crous (Dean of the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences at the UFS), Prof. Phillipe Burger (Departmental Chairperson of the Department of Economics at the UFS), and Prof. Frederick Fourie (Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS).
Photo: Stephen Collet

 
A summary of an inaugural lecture presented by Prof. Phillipe Burger on the topic: “The ups and downs of the South African Economy: Rough seas or smooth sailing?”

South African business cycle shows reduction in volatility

Better monetary policy and improvements in the financial sector that place less liquidity constraints on individuals is one of the main reasons for the reduction in the volatility of the South African economy. The improvement in access to the financial sector also enables individuals to manage their debt better.

These are some of the findings in an analysis on the volatility of the South African business cycle done by Prof. Philippe Burger, Departmental Chairperson of the University of the Free State’s (UFS) Department of Economics.

Prof. Burger delivered his inaugural lecture last night (22 November 2007) on the Main Campus in Bloemfontein on the topic “The ups and downs of the South African Economy: Rough seas or smooth sailing?”

In his lecture, Prof. Burger emphasised a few key aspects of the South African business cycle and indicated how it changed during the periods 1960-1976, 1976-1994 en 1994-2006.

With the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as an indicator of the business cycle, the analysis identified the variables that showed the highest correlation with the GDP. During the periods 1976-1994 and 1994-2006, these included durable consumption, manufacturing investment, private sector investment, as well as investment in machinery and non-residential buildings. Other variables that also show a high correlation with the GDP are imports, non-durable consumption, investment in the financial services sector, investment by general government, as well as investment in residential buildings.

Prof. Burger’s analysis also shows that changes in durable consumption, investment in the manufacturing sector, investment in the private sector, as well as investment in non-residential buildings preceded changes in the GDP. If changes in a variable such as durable consumption precede changes in the GDP, it is an indication that durable consumption is one of the drivers of the business cycle. The up or down swing of durable consumption may, in other words, just as well contribute to an up or down swing in the business cycle.

A surprising finding of the analysis is the particularly strong role durable consumption has played in the business cycle since 1994. This finding is especially surprising due to the fact that durable consumption only constitutes about 12% of the total household consumption.

A further surprising finding is the particularly small role exports have been playing since 1960 as a driver of the business cycle. In South Africa it is still generally accepted that exports are one of the most important drivers of the business cycle. It is generally accepted that, should the business cycles of South Africa’s most important trade partners show an upward phase; these partners will purchase more from South Africa. This increase in exports will contribute to the South African economy moving upward. Prof. Burger’s analyses shows, however, that exports have generally never fulfil this role.

Over and above the identification of the drivers of the South African business cycle, Prof. Burger’s analysis also investigated the volatility of the business cycle.

When the periods 1976-1994 and 1994-2006 are compared, the analysis shows that the volatility of the business cycle has reduced since 1994 with more than half. The reduction in volatility can be traced to the reduction in the volatility of household consumption (especially durables and services), as well as a reduction in the volatility of investment in machinery, non-residential buildings and transport equipment. The last three coincide with the general reduction in the volatility of investment in the manufacturing sector. Investment in sectors such as electricity and transport (not to be confused with investment in transport equipment by various sectors) which are strongly dominated by the government, did not contribute to the decrease in volatility.

In his analysis, Prof. Burger supplies reasons for the reduction in volatility. One of the explanations is the reduction in the shocks affecting the economy – especially in the South African context. Another explanation is the application of an improved monetary policy by the South African Reserve Bank since the mid 1990’s. A third explanation is the better access to liquidity and credit since the mid 1990’s, which enables the better management of household finance and the absorption of financial shocks.

A further reason which contributed to the reduction in volatility in countries such as the United States of America’s business cycle is better inventory management. While the volatility of inventory in South Africa has also reduced there is, according to Prof. Burger, little proof that better inventory management contributed to the reduction in volatility of the GDP.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept