|
|
 |
" I heard it
through the
AgLine"
|
|
February 4, 2011
·
High-tech
advances for sustainable farming
·
Mexico losing
its taste for native corn
·
American
farmers get growing in Mexico
·
Dow Agro
upbeat over sales and profits
·
ANTS a model for tractor
of the future
High-tech advances for sustainable
farming
(TheScientist.com)
– The debate over genetically engineered crops rages on, but other technologies
offer new hope for sustainable farming.
In November 2010 a federal judge in California ordered that 256 acres of genetically
engineered (GE) sugar beet seedlings be ripped from the ground. The first
court-ordered destruction of GE crops in the United States, the ruling stemmed
from concerns about the environmental effects of the genetically altered
plants. Before any more GE sugar beets can be planted on US soil, the judge said, a
comprehensive analysis of environmental risks must be completed by the USDA, an
endeavor that may take until 2012.
Monsanto, a multinational agricultural biotechnology
company, genetically engineered the sugar beets to be resistant to the
company’s weed killer Roundup. Known as Roundup Ready beets,
the variety accounts for some 95 percent of the sugar beet crop grown in the United States.
If the regulations banning the GE beets don’t change by next spring, farmers
will have to plant conventional seeds, which yield smaller harvests per acre
and are in short supply. As a result, the country could see a sharp decline in
sugar production over the next few years, potentially leading to increased prices
for consumers.
And sugar beets are just one example. The debate over GE
crops continues to rage: while environmentalists worry about the crops’ effects
on surrounding ecosystems, proponents of genetic engineering argue that GE
crops, which can increase yields while minimizing toxic pesticide use, are
needed to produce enough food for the 9 billion people predicted to inhabit the
Earth by the mid-21st century.
“What gets lost in this debate in the US, where we have so
much to eat, is that sustainability is important to feed the poor and
malnourished and provide food at a cost that they can afford,” says Pamela
Ronald, professor of plant pathology at the University of California, Davis. GE
crops may provide part of the solution, she adds. “Genetically engineered seeds
are just seeds. You can use them in any part of the world and in [almost] any
system.”
China,
for example, with the highest population of any country in the world, rapidly
adopted the use of GE crops after their introduction in 1996. GE crops have
also grown to dominate more than 80 percent of the corn, soybean, and cotton
farmlands in the United
States, according to a 2010 National Academy
of Sciences report. In addition to increasing yields and reducing pesticide
use, such crops have also decreased the need for soil tillage, which diminishes
soil quality and increases the rate of erosion.
Most European countries, on the other hand, have opted for
precaution, insisting that GE crops must be proved completely safe for human
consumption and the environment before farmers integrate them into their
methods. They and others opposed to the use of GE crops cite the risk, for
example, that engineered genes will be spread by wind and potentially
contaminate organic fields, which ban genetic manipulation, and that crops
engineered to be pest-resistant may inadvertently affect harmless insect
populations. Furthermore, “the randomness inherent in our current technology
for inserting novel DNA into a plant genome,” says Charles Benbrook, chief
scientist at The Organic Center, a Colorado-based research organization that
studies the benefits of organic farming, “[may lead to] a host of uncertainties
that arise in how the modified plant is going to behave.”
But GE crops aren’t the only answer to the world’s growing
food shortage. Researchers are currently working to develop alternative
technologies that may offer benefits similar to those of genetic engineering
but avoid much of the attendant controversy. Marker-assisted breeding, for
example, chooses plants based on the presence of specific genes instead of
phenotypic traits, accelerating artificial selection for beneficial traits
without the introduction of transgenes. Similarly,
the nascent technology of RNA interference (RNAi) has
the potential to pinpoint specific pest targets and avoid killing insects that
pose no threat to the crops.
“I do not see genetic engineering as some sort of magic
bullet,” says Eric Rey, CEO of Arcadia Biosciences in Davis, California,
a biotech company that develops GE products. GE crops will be an important part
of agriculture’s future only in combination with age-old farming approaches and
emerging genomic techniques, he adds.
Making use of markersUnlike
conventional breeding, which selects and breeds plants based on a phenotypic
traits, marker-assisted selection (MAS) uses genetic markers known to be linked
to traits of interest to identify superior plants for breeding. Using a
technique called positional cloning, researchers
narrow down the genome until the desired gene is located, and then design
molecular markers to recognize allelic variation between individuals. MAS can
help breeders avoid the trial and error involved with choosing individuals
based on traits that are difficult to measure, like pest or drought resistance,
and go straight to their genetic source, significantly speeding up the
selection process.
“By reducing the number of generations and making it
possible to more [rapidly] identify plants with superior gene and allelic
combinations, marker-assisted selection reduces the time it takes to develop
and release a stable, higher-yielding commercial cultivar or variety that is
more tolerant to environmental stresses or resistant to pests and pathogens,”
says Michael Gore, a geneticist at the US Arid-Land Agricultural Research
Center in Arizona, which uses marker-assisted breeding to develop more
productive crops such as cotton. And because the final products are
fundamentally the same as conventional crops, nontransgenic
plants bred using MAS technology are not subjected to additional regulatory
hurdles, Gore added. Indeed, MAS-bred crops, such as corn and soybeans, are
currently on the market.
Arcadia Biosciences also works with marker-assisted breeding
in combination with a proprietary technology called TILLING. After creating a
genetically diverse population of plants using chemical mutagenesis, the
TILLING approach uses high-throughput sequencing techniques that “very rapidly
find genetic variations in individual plants that might be valuable,” says Rey.
With this technology, Arcadia
has identified a number of genes related to improved shelf life of tomatoes
after they’re picked, such as those that code for fruit firmness. Most tomatoes
available today are harvested before they’re ripe and gassed en route to the
supermarket with ethylene to induce redness—a process that can reduce their
nutrition and flavor. Arcadia
is working on breeding tomatoes that can be plucked when they are ripe and stay
fresh as they are transported to market. In addition to tomatoes, Arcadia is also developing
lettuce, strawberries, and melons with improved shelf life.
MAS also improves another technique
traditionally employed in agriculture called backcrossing. The purpose of
backcrossing is to move a trait, like pesticide resistance, from a native or
genetically engineered cultivar into the genome of a commercial variety while
retaining most of the commercial line’s genome. Using markers helps accelerate
this process, says Gore, because researchers are again able to select specific genes
of interest without using phenotypes. According to Charles Pick of DNA LandMarks Inc., a genomics company that works exclusively
with MAS, most conventional corn backcrossing schemes need four to six
generations before the line is ready to be released commercially. Using
markers, a breeder can achieve the same end product in just two generations,
trimming 1 to 2 years off the development time, Pick says.
Specialized silencingTaking
advantage of a natural cellular pathway called RNA interference (RNAi), researchers have developed
a way to selectively silence or downregulate specific
genes. While this technology is commonly used in basic biology labs to study
gene functions, researchers have recently begun to apply it to agriculture,
developing crops that have many of the same benefits of GE crops, but are even
more selective when targeting pests or traits like disease resistance.
RNAi was first directly observed
by researchers studying petunias in the early 1990s. After inserting additional
copies of a cloned petunia gene related to pigmentation in an attempt to
produce flowers with darker colors, researchers unexpectedly produced lighter,
or even completely white, flowers, suggesting that the gene for pigmentation
had been knocked down. In 1998 researchers finally nailed down RNAi’s mechanism—short, single-stranded RNA molecules bind
to specific sections of messenger RNA (mRNA) transcripts, inhibiting
translation. Though still in its early days, RNAi has
already proven to be a promising method for regulating the expression of
specific genes in crops without causing off-target effects.
Researchers at Bayer CropScience, for example, have shown
that downregulating the genes that control the
production of poly (ADP ribose) polymerase (PARP), an enzyme activated under
stress to protect DNA, produced plants that were more tolerant to drought,
heat, and high levels of ozone. When PARP genes are downregulated,
the plant redirects the energy that it would use for the PARP pathway to
physiological processes like photosynthesis and growth despite the harsh
environmental conditions. The researchers have yet to find any negative effects
of downregulating PARP on the DNA of the plant,
possibly due to the fact that the PARP gene isn’t completely silenced, which
may still allow the plant to perform necessary DNA repair. After preliminary
trials with model plants such as Arabidopsis, the researchers are applying the
concept to crops like corn and canola.
Researchers at the Arid-Land Agricultural
Center are also beginning
to use RNAi technology to develop cotton plants that
are resistant to one of their biggest foes: the whitefly. Many whitefly species
not only feed on crops but also transmit geminiviruses
that cause plant diseases and can devastate entire fields. The RNAi-engineered plant cells are armed with long
double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) sequences that can kill
insect pests upon first ingestion of the plant. When the dsRNAs
are split apart and digested by the whitefly’s antiviral machinery, the smaller
single-stranded RNA pieces complement mRNAs of genes vital to the insect’s
development, inhibiting translation and killing the insect. And because the RNAi technology targets a gene specific to whitefly
development, the crops are able to kill off whitefly populations without
harming nonpest insect species, unlike some GE
pest-resistant crops. Arming the plants with the dsRNA
molecules, however, does involve genetic manipulation, potentially posing some
of the regulatory roadblocks that GE crops now face.
With technologies such as these striving to bring new and
improved crops to market, it is clear that change is in the wind. “First we had
primitive domestication, then we had directed breeding, then hybridization,
then mutagenesis, and now we have genetic engineering,” says Ronald. Beyond a
doubt, she adds, agriculture is going to continue evolving.
Return to Top
Mexico losing its taste for native
corn
(McClatchy.com)
GUELATAO, Mexico — Yank the husks off ears of corn grown in the mountains of
southern Mexico, and you may find kernels that are red, yellow, white, blue,
black or even variegated.
It's only one measure of the diversity of the 60 or so
native varieties of corn in Mexico.
Another is the unusual adaptation of some varieties to drought, high heat,
altitude or strong winds.
Plant specialists describe the native varieties of corn in Mexico
as a genetic trove that might prove valuable should extreme weather associated
with global warming get out of hand. Corn, one of the most widely grown grains
in the world, is a key component of the global food supply.
But experts say Mexico's native varieties are
themselves under peril — from economics and genetic contamination — potentially
depriving humans of a crucial resource.
Farmers are punished at the marketplace for selling native
corn, and some types are dwindling from use. Perhaps more significantly,
genetically modified corn is drifting southward and mingling with native
varieties, potentially bringing unexpected aberrations and even possible
extinction.
At stake may be more than just curious and exotic types of
corn, grown in small fields alongside beans and then ground into tortillas
after harvest.
"With climate change," said Aldo Gonzalez, an
indigenous Zapotec engineer with long, flowing black
hair who's at the forefront of protecting native varieties, "new diseases
could occur, and the only place in the world where we can look for existing
varieties that might be resistant is in Mexico.
"These varieties of corn might at some point save
humanity."
Corn is not only a crucial crop in Mexico but also a symbol in a
nation that's the birthplace of the grain. Maize likely originated from a grass-like,
tasseled plant, teosinte, in southern Mexico.
Scientists say humans domesticated corn 7,000 to 10,000 years ago.
In the Popol Vuh,
the sacred book of the ancient Mayans, gods create humans out of cornmeal,
allowing the "people of corn" to flourish.
Through the centuries, varieties of corn adapted to
different soils, altitudes, temperature conditions and water availability, and
Gonzalez said the seed stock handed down in his village in this corner of the
Sierra Juarez range in central Oaxaca
state probably wouldn't grow well just a few miles distant.
"In the sierra here, there are varieties of corn that
grow as high as 3,000 meters," Gonzalez said, or nearly 10,000 feet.
"There are varieties that can be planted in swampy land or that you can
plant in semidesert areas. They may not be very
productive but they have allowed people to survive."
Native varieties of corn have fed humans for millennia in Mesoamerica.
"The elders understand the importance of various types
of corn because they had their fields in different places under different
conditions," said Lilia Perez Santiago, an agricultural engineer who works
for a state forestry bureau.
Perez was among the activists behind a petition in 2000 to
the Montreal-based Commission for Environmental Cooperation, a panel created
under the North American Free Trade Agreement. The petition claimed that
genetically modified corn, altered to be pest resistant or herbicide tolerant,
had drifted to southern Mexico
and begun contaminating native varieties.
Four years later, the panel recommended to Mexico that it suspend modified
corn imports and adopt strict labeling rules to allow the public to identify
food products that contained such corn. Mexico ignored the recommendations,
arguing that the ruling came into conflict with its obligations to open markets
under trade pacts.
In late 2009, the government permitted a subsidiary of a U.S.
conglomerate, Monsanto, to test genetically modified corn on isolated plots of
about 240 acres in Sinaloa and Tamaulipas states in the north.
The head of Monsanto Mexico, Jose Manuel Madero, said at
a news conference two weeks ago that the federal government demands further
tests before allowing commercial farming of the genetically altered corn.
Madero said modified corn was in use in 20 countries around
the world and would help Mexico
raise agricultural productivity, cut its reliance on food imports and slash the
use of herbicides, thereby protecting the environment.
Several scientists have joined a Mexican grass-roots campaign,
known as Sin Maiz No Hay Pais,
or There Is No Country Without Corn, to oppose the
import or harvest of genetically changed corn.
"We have a nationwide survey that shows genetic
contamination in Guanajuato, Yucatan,
Veracruz and Oaxaca (states). We also know of some
large-scale plantings in Chihuahua,"
said Elena Alvarez-Buylla Roces,
a molecular geneticist at the National Autonomous University of Mexico.
She said lab analysis showed that some native varieties
already carried altered genes.
"There is no possibility of coexistence without
contamination," Alvarez-Buylla said. "One
gene can make a large difference. Do we want to run the risk?"
Black-market brokers already sell genetically modified seed
corn to farmers in the north of Mexico,
opponents say, and bags of unmarked genetically altered corn have been found in
the far south.
"The bags of corn are not secure. During transport,
some bags break open and fall out. So there are many possible ways of
contamination," Perez said.
The vast majority of farmers of native varieties select
seeds each year to save for the next harvest, thus making what Alvarez-Buylla described as "active, dynamic genetic
elements" prone to aberrations from genetic drift of altered corn.
Scientists don't know which varieties could prove useful for
climate change.
"We don't really know if there is a variety with the
most promise. Promise for what?" Alvarez-Buylla
said, adding that future climate conditions are unknowable.
While the government maintains seed banks for native corn,
Alvarez-Buylla said, "This is not a diversity
that can be preserved in a laboratory."
Some farmers already are abandoning certain native
varieties, unable to make a living harvesting their small plots.
"They get a price penalty for not growing uniform,
large volumes of corn that the tortilla manufacturers want," said Timothy
A. Wise, a rural policy expert at the Global Development and Environment
Institute at Tufts University in Massachusetts.
Economic realities that make it increasingly unviable for
farmers to grow native varieties may be as big a peril as genetic
contamination, Wise said.
"If that traditional knowledge isn't passed from
generation to generation and those farmers stop farming, then that seed variety
is lost for economic reasons," he said.
In Mexico's
cities, consumers have little taste for the native varieties of corn in their
own country, offering no price advantage for the small farmers who are
nurturing the nation's corn diversity.
"In urban areas," Gonzalez said, "they don't know
about the varieties. All they know is that the dining room table must have
tortillas on it."
Return to Top
American farmers get growing in Mexico
(PRI.org)
– American farmers have long depended on immigrant labor. But some farmers say
a steady supply of legal immigrants has become too unreliable. So they're
moving to where many of the workers come from: Mexico.
Steve Scaroni has been growing
lettuce in Arizona and California for 30 years. Four years ago, he
started to expand to the central Mexican state of Guanajuato. Today, half of
his operation is south of the border.
Going to work with Scaroni is like
spending a day with a super-caffeinated Wall Street trader: He yells, he
bargains, he complains, he compliments. His office is his truck. He uses two cellphones, a hand radio, a walkie
talkie, and an iPad for his e-mails. He's on one or
two, even three devices at any given time, almost all the time, as he sells his
lettuce and broccoli.
I spent two full days with Scaroni,
from morning until night, to get a full sense of his operation. It's massive.
There's a good chance the lettuce you eat for lunch or dinner was touched by Scaroni's workers in the U.S.
or Mexico.
His operation plants, harvests and processes 20 million servings each week.
Much of his lettuce ends up in bags on the shelves of U.S. supermarkets.
"Between 50 and 75 trucks a week goes out of here to
the United States,"
said Scaroni as he showed me his freezer operation.
Huge bags of lettuce are sealed airtight and injected with liquid nitrogen for
the long ride north.
It's a long way to haul lettuce, but there are clear
advantages to working in Mexico.
If there's bad weather in Arizona or California, Scaroni has a back-up crop. Also, in the United States, Scaroni
says he pays field workers $9 to $10 an hour. In Mexico, he pays $12 to $15 a day.
Scaroni said he pays above the
going wage. And he insists that he didn't move to Mexico just to save money on labor.
He says when you factor in added transportation costs, Mexican taxes, and the
hassles and costs of getting things like fertilizer on time in a foreign
country… He said it's been a four-year headache and his Mexico operation still isn't
profitable.
"I'm doing all this, I'm sleeping in a foreign country
a lot of times away from my family because of the lack of a coherent
immigration policy in the United States," said Scaroni.
"I brought all this equipment to the United States. I have hundreds of
thousands of dollars in just import costs to bring all my equipment down here.
Why? Because I don't have enough legal labor in the United States.
We're in a labor shortage crisis for legal immigrants."
That's the key word: Legal. Scaroni
has a point.
"You might say around half of all farm workers are
probably undocumented most of them are Mexicans, and others are Salvadorans,
and Hondurans, quite a few Guatemalans," said agricultural economist Rick
Mines. He designed the survey that the Department of Labor uses to estimate how
many farm workers in the United
States are documented vs. undocumented.
American farmers are required to check the paperwork of
everyone they hire. The open secret is that many field workers use phony
documents. Most large agribusiness operations hire workers through a
contractor, or a middleman, so the farm is insulated from the hiring process.
This look-the-other-way policy works for most big farmers. American farmers
also aren't allowed to investigate the validity of a document.
But American farms that rely on illegal workers risk being
temporarily shut down by raids or administrative enforcement. For Steve Scaroni, the hassles were enough to drive him south of the
border.
For many farmers, though, Mexico isn't an option. Rick Mines
said, "Most of the major crops – grapes, tomatoes, cucumbers, sweet
peppers and peppers – are very sensitive to local growing conditions and to
proximity to market, and so, these products are not that easy to shift."
The numbers are murky as to just how many American farmers
are shifting work to Mexico.
Most farmers don't want to talk about it. The California
and Arizona organization Western Growers asked
its 3,000 members in 2008 if they're growing crops in Mexico; only 25 members responded.
Of those that did respond, they reported that they're hiring 22,285 people on
farms in Mexico.
Steve Scaroni said he's speaking
out because he's fed up with the system. He supports an immigration bill called
"AgJOBS."
The legislation was a compromise between growers and labor
after some 15 years of negotiations. AgJOBS would give farm workers more rights
and provide a path to legal status. The bill would also make it easier for
American farmers to bring in temporary immigrant workers.
Many Republicans in Congress are lining up against it
calling it an amnesty for lawbreakers. This puts Scaroni
at a boil.
"Now I'm a conservative, [but] I don't consider myself
a Republican anymore because I think the Republican party
is as big a part of the problem as the Democrats are, and especially on this
immigration thing," said Scaroni. "All they
[Republicans in Congress] do is block everything that
tries to get passed. They never come up with a solution. So yes, I hold the
Republican party responsible for why I had to move to Mexico to complete my American
dream."
There is an alternative to moving to Mexico or importing immigrant farm
labor: Hire Americans. California's
official unemployment rate is more than 12 percent. Despite that, Kent Wong,
director of UCLA's Center for Labor Research and Education, said Americans
still don't want jobs in the field.
"There is no indication that if someone is laid off
from a job in Los Angeles, in San Francisco, that they would pack up their
family and move to the Central Valley to pick grapes. There's never been an
example or tradition of that occurring," said Wong.
Wong adds that most Americans don't want to pick fruits and
vegetables because it's hard, seasonal work that only pays around $8 an hour.
Steve Scaroni argues that he can't
pay much more than that in the U.S.
And he said he can't pay higher wages in Mexico either.
"We live in an international environment now,"
said Scaroni "They produce broccoli in China.
They produce it in Guatemala,
in Mexico.
I mean, if we do produce it in the United States, we have to be able
to produce it cost effectively. Or Mexico
or Guatemala
will knock us out of the marketplace. Because, like I said, at the end of the
day the American consumer wants it cheap, clean, and perfect."
That may be true, but farm worker advocates argue that
American growers paid low wages in the U.S. long before there was global
competition.
As another year closes without immigration reform, American
farmers remain in a bind. But the biggest losers appear to be the workers in
the fields, doing back-breaking work for low wages, with little protection.
Return to Top
Dow Agro upbeat over sales and profits
(IBJ.com)
– Indianapolis-based Dow AgroSciences on Thursday reported record
fourth-quarter revenue of $1.3 billion, up 19 percent from the prior-year
period.
Quarterly earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and
amortization also edged up from $69 million to $72 million.
Dow Agro’s selling, general and
administrative expenses increased 3 percent during the quarter because of new
product launches and commercial activities related to recent seed acquisitions.
Companywide, such costs declined 6 percent.
The Indianapolis
unit’s research and development costs were up 14 percent.
Its Midland, Mich.-based parent company, meanwhile, reported
sharply higher fourth-quarter profit and strong sales across the globe.
Profit was $426 million, or 37 cents per share, compared to
$87 million a year ago. Excluding special items, the company earned 47 cents a
share.
Revenue rose 10 percent to $13.8 billion, topping analyst
expectations for $12.5 billion. Sales were helped by a 12-percent increase in
volume and a 10-percent rise in prices.
Dow saw double-digit sales increases in all geographic
areas, with North America leading the way with
a 25-percent gain. Every business segment posted double-digit gains except for
its coatings and infrastructure unit, which rose 6 percent.
Revenue from emerging nations is still booming for Dow, with
growth especially strong in Thailand,
India, Russia and Brazil. The company said business
activity in North American and Europe shows
that the economic recovery is gaining traction.
Dow expects more growth around the world, with the biggest
gains coming from emerging markets. But with inflation concerns in
faster-growing economies, high unemployment in the U.S.
and lingering debt issues in Europe, the
company said it is "prepared for a reversal in momentum."
For all of 2010, the company earned $1.97 billion, or $1.72
per share, compared with net income of $336 million, or 32 cents per share in
2009.
Return to Top
ANTS a model for tractor of the future
(Wired.com)
– The tractor of the future will look like an ant. Or a Mars
rover. Or maybe something out of Halo. Whatever it is, it’s nice to see
automakers aren’t the only ones who go nuts designing wild concepts that may
never see production.
To mark its 60th anniversary, the designers at Valtra came up with a concept vehicle that would make even
the guys at Peugeot and Citroen look twice. The machine is called ANTS, an
acronym based on actual models in the Finnish company’s lineup.
As wild as this concept might look, Valtra
says the technology underpinning it will be essential if we are to feed the 9
billion people expected to inhabit the planet in 2050. We’ll need farm
equipment that uses less energy, offers greater versatility and provides
maximum efficiency.
Enter the ANTS.
“ANTS will rise to these future challenges, but respect Valtra traditions. It is dynamic, friendly, customizable, intelligent,
agile, and light in comparison to its power,” the company said.
Yes, the company described its tractor as “friendly.”
The tractor is modular, with two components: the “soldier,”
with 100 kilowatts (134 horsepower) and the “worker,” with 200 kw (268 horsepower). The two
components can be used individually or together — a configuration dubbed the
“queen,” with articulated steering and maximum power of 400 kW (536
horsepower).
The “worker” will be autonomous, able to carry out its tasks
unattended. The “soldier” is fitted with a cab and electric — instead of
hydraulic — actuators and controls. For those instances where the power of a
hydraulic system is needed, ANTS will used a water-based system.
The operator sits in cab that rotates and can be placed
almost anywhere on the module to meet specific needs. Because most
tractor-related injuries occur as the operator climbs in and out of the cab, Valtra designed ANTS with a cab that can be lowered for
easier access. Plus, it looks really, really cool.
This is the future, baby, so most functions are
voice-activated. Everything is presented in a heads-up display on the
windshield. Of course ANTS runs on electricity drawn from either a battery or a
fuel cell. A hybrid — powered by biofuel, of course – is another possibility.
Hub-mounted motors provide power directly to the wheels,
which ride on fully independent suspension arms. That allows the ANTS to roll
over the most varied terrain while ensuring optimal traction, stability and
comfort.
“It will also be easier to gain access to low and tight
places with the machine, thanks to its ability to ‘curtsy’,” the company said.
Cooler — and more outlandish — still, the wheels actually expand to almost
twice their normal width to increase traction when necessary.
Hey — it’s a concept. It doesn’t have to actually work.
Valtra’s built a 1:5 scale model
of the concept and will be showing it off at agriculture and machinery shows
throughout the year.
Click
here to check out some very cool graphics
Return to Top
End Transmission