Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Years
2019 2020 2021 2024
Previous Archive
25 August 2020 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Pixabay
Research-industry linkages for the promotion of biofortified maize and wheat, highlighted the link between research and industry.

Prof Maryke Labuschagne believes that research through collaboration can be to the benefit of the whole food chain, literally from laboratory to farm to fork. 

She is professor of Plant Sciences at the University of the Free State (UFS) and heads the SARChI Chair: Disease Resistance and Quality in Field Crops.

Prof Labuschagne recently delivered a presentation at a webinar organised by the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT) and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The focus was on Maize: Technologies, Development and Availability in South Asia. 

Her presentation: Research-industry linkages for the promotion of biofortified maize and wheat, highlighted the link between research and industry, stating that research outcomes should improve the livelihoods and health of people who grow and consume the food. 

Prof Labuschagne believes research by universities and research organisations can be linked to industry, with special reference to the development of biofortified crops. “Biofortification is the process where crop nutritional value is improved through genetic intervention,” she explains.

She states that the same technologies for crop biofortification can be applied throughout the world. 

In her presentation, Prof Labuschagne also reviewed the current technologies used, which include conventional genetic improvement and genetic engineering. Recently, the latter has been increasingly used for crop biofortification.

Enhancing nutritional value of crops

According to Prof Labuschagne, crop biofortification has developed exponentially in the last decade. Crop biofortification has been very successful in terms of improving the iron and zinc content, the provitamin A content, and the amounts of essential amino acids (lysine and tryptophan) in various staple foods.

“What we have learned is that genetic intervention in crop nutritional value is the best long-term solution to sustainably address vitamin and micronutrient deficiencies, especially in poor communities. It is a sustainable, and relatively cheap way to address mineral and vitamin deficiencies in the diets of people,” she says.

UFS research on biofortification

For a number of years now, a team of UFS scientists in the Division of Plant Breeding has been doing research on the biofortification of maize, sweet potatoes, bananas, and cassava. “The research took place in collaboration with a number of partners in Africa, and with funding from organisations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.”

“This research has resulted in tangible outcomes, including the availability of seed and planting material of biofortified crops for farmers, who in turn make these crops available to consumers,” says Prof Labuschagne.

The crops not only add to the well-being of consumers, especially children and women, but also contribute to food security. 

News Archive

Visiting Professor, Piet Bracke, Speaks on Public Mental Health
2015-02-20

Piet Bracke

Professor in the Department of Sociology at the Ghent University in Belgium, Piet Bracke, recently visited the UFS to speak about his research on the Public mental health and comparative health research: between social theory and psychiatric epidemiology.

At the public lecture on Monday 16 February, Bracke stated that part of the sociological attention to mental health and well-being was rooted in the 19th century's romanticists' discontent with self and society. The classical and contemporary social theorists' views on the disconnection between culture and the ‘real’ self resembles the more recent evolutionary psychological assumptions about the maladaptation of  psychobiological mechanisms to contemporary societal arrangements.

In contrast to these perspectives, contemporary psychiatric epidemiological research has a strongly underdeveloped conception about the nexus between society and population mental health. Both perspectives, the social-theory-and-societal-discontent approach and the biomedical psychiatric epidemiological approach, have drawbacks. Starting from the pitfalls of the aforementioned perspectives, they have been exploring the challenges posed by the development of a macro-sociology of population mental health.

Recently, this research domain has received renewed attention of scholars inside as well as outside sociology. The rise of multi-country, multilevel datasets containing health-related information, as well as the growing attention on the fundamental social causes of health and illness, and the focus on population as opposed to individual health, has contributed to the revival of comparative public mental health research. Based on findings from their recent research, they have illustrated how taking the context into account is vital when exploring the social roots of mental health and illness. In addition, they have demonstrated how they can liberate a few so-called ‘control variables’ in risk factor epidemiology – e.g. gender, education, and age – from their suppressed status by linking them to core concepts of sociology. With their research, they hope to further the development of a macro-sociology of public mental health.

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