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

Reaction by the Rector of the UFS after a meeting with student leaders
2008-02-25

Reaction by the Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS, Prof. Frederick Fourie, on the agreement reached at a meeting with student leaders held on Friday, 22 February 2008

Note: This is meant to be used together with the full joint statement that was issued by the UFS management and student leaders on 22 February 2008.

The memorandum of the primes of the University of the Free State’s (UFS) residences was handed to top management on Wednesday, 20 February 2008. In the memorandum they asked for a meeting with the UFS management by Friday, 22 February 2008. Such a meeting was arranged and took place.

The UFS top management, all the residence primes as well as the house committee member for first years, the executive of the Main Campus Student Representative Council (SRC) and residence heads were present.

In contrast to what is suggested in the Volksblad report of Saturday, the discussion went off very well. There was no consternation or shouting or “emotions that ran high”. It was a civilised, decent meeting as it should be at a good university. Of course, now and again individuals spoke out strongly and very enthusiastically, but it was all decent and orderly. The contribution of the primes was insightful and well formulated.

Because the top management and I wanted to listen very carefully what the problems and frustrations were, we spent nearly five hours in the meeting. The issues in the memorandum were discussed one by one. In some cases I could take a decision immediately and finalise the matter, in other cases, the management provided information that could largely finalise a matter. A number of other matters must be investigated further.

The management undertook to respond comprehensively and in writing to all the issues raised in the memorandum by Monday, 25 February 2008. This will be handed to the primes but will not be handed to the media beforehand.
It is obvious that there are matters at the university that can be better managed and that there are problems with communication within the Student Affairs division. A major change such as the new policy on diversity places huge demands on management and the administration, and problems were to be expected. However, we understand the frustration of the students in residences.

On the other hand, students don’t always make matters easier. The strong opposition of white student leaders last year, and their unwillingness to co-operate in preparation for 2008 is well known. This year it is going better. But often student leaders take positions that are very inflexible. They also see no room for adapting old habits and simply want their own way. Their contributions are then full of statements such as “It cannot be done”. This delays measures such as the full implementation of expert interpreting services, which, for the management, is a very important measure (and which is functioning very well in certain residences). Communication from student leaders to management is also not always what it should be.

At the end of the meeting student leaders and management reached an important agreement and issued a joint statement in which they committed themselves to the integration process and to good co-operation and communication. This was an important step which is a sign of rebuilding trust. Naturally everyone will still have to work hard to build on this and to strengthen mutual trust.

The course and outcome of Friday’s discussions, as requested by the student leaders, show that issues can be addressed and resolved by means of us talking to one another. This is why it is so sad that primes and house committee members went on strike on Wednesday already and stayed in tents in front of the Main Building – leaving their residences without its leadership. This created an opening for what appears to have been well planned and co-ordinated acts of vandalism by inhabitants of residences on the campus on Wednesday.

Such vandalism is unacceptable and no one can justify it.

Fortunately, order could be restored quickly during the night and all academic activities could resume without any disruption on Thursday and Friday.

FCvN Fourie

Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za   
24 February 2008

 

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