You
are
very well continuing.
Juan Manuel Osorio Hernandez is an
agronomist for the National Autonomous
University of Mexico.
He has a master's degree in business
administration by the Pan American
Institute of High Business Direction,
the PADE, and he has a variety of
diplomas such as product management,
a challenger market workshop in
England, and a course of administration
in the Institute of Technology of
Higher Studies of Monterrey.
In his professional development,
he currently runs as general manager
of the company Impulsagro, Rega,
which are advanced genetic resources,
and he is also a marketing advisor
in the south-central area of
Quimicaambac, Mexico.
He is also a consultant for
agro-pecuary companies with which
he has developed marketing,
positioning, products, and
commercialization, such as
Seneca, General Electric,
GBM, Quiminova, Organizaciones Aguayo,
Agronova, productors of
Semilla Híbrida de Maíz.
Master Osorio Hernandez,
sorry, was director general of
Seneca Grícola Colombiana and
commercial director of Seneca
Mexicana, and has occupied
various management positions.
He has been a marketing manager
of ICI of Mexico,
of the Agro-Chemical Division,
and has a professional experience
of 31 or 32 years, and has
collaborated with the Agro-Chemical
Division in the area of technical
development, sales, and marketing
of ICI, as well as product management
and commercial representative.
He has received various
recognitions, such as the
Market Focus Award for the
segmentation of clients from the
Latin American region.
In 1985, he was certified
for the joint development work
with the Soil Accessories,
Conversion Service,
granted by the Department of
Agriculture of the United States.
He is a member of various
technical and scientific associations
and participates regularly as
a conference speaker, and has
various forums of congresses
and symposiums.
Let's welcome the master
Osorio, your participation.
Good afternoon, and thank you
for joining me.
It has been ten minutes, right?
This series of presentations
began three years ago.
If I'm not mistaken, the first
presentation was about how to
review the environment when
our entrepreneur wants to
put his own business.
Then we ran to Irapuato to talk
about biotechnology,
but not biotechnology to
use more insumes, but biotechnology
to try to take advantage of
the genetic resources that are already
within the same species that
we talked about in Irapuato,
as well as something about nanotechnology
that we are doing, and right now
we are making an effort to
reflect on what I'm inviting you
to think about where agriculture
is going, because if we try to
have scenarios in that sense,
we can know ourselves as
farmers, or as professionals
of phytosanity, to know how we
can engage in that future,
that some of us don't see it
that easy.
There are things that we have to
work on, and things that we
have to improve.
That's why we put it when
destiny reaches us.
Maybe it's a movie that many of
you haven't seen, but I'm going
to recommend it in the end.
Basically, as a reference,
it's all about the new
technologies.
We've talked about biotechnology
during the last 10, 15 years,
probably during the last 20
years, and the issue is that
biotechnology has solved
some problems.
But if we start checking what
has happened in Argentina, in
Brazil, in Uruguay, in Paraguay,
in the United States, basically
in the basic crops, we start
to observe that it has solved
problems, but it also begins
to challenge new challenges.
For example, the resistance
of malice to specific herbicides.
And we can already talk about
Brazil, between Brazil and
Argentina, in Uruguay, probably
between 10 to 12 million
hectares, with resistant
malice to glyphosate, and
also to other services.
Or as Dr. Fischer said
two years ago in Argentina, in
Rosario, the problem is not
only that, we are forcing
malice to have
resistance, let's say,
towards a specific way of
action, towards a mechanism
of action.
And that would lead us to
eliminate certain herbicides
in the short term.
The issue of nanotechnology,
biotechnology, we can go much
further, because not only
to use insumes, there are
specific characteristics of the
plants that we can manipulate,
and with which we can
treat examples,
how we can cut the cycle
of certain plants.
And these are advances that
an organization has made, linked
to what is always direct in
Brazil.
All the issue of nanotechnology,
that when we find one
in the part of nutrition,
suddenly they tell us that this
is nanotechnology, for
the size.
But not because they are
molecules specifically designed
for certain things.
Here we can probably design
a specific molecule
that attacks phytophthora,
right?
Only that fungus.
And probably over there
we will see a lot of
new developments.
Another point that we have
and that has been advancing very
quickly is the increase in use
of microorganisms.
If you realize,
and someone one day
did an analysis of you,
as humans,
you would realize that finally
we are an internal balance
between good microorganisms,
between wheat,
and bad microorganisms.
You think that they are
chemically pure.
The bad news is that we are not.
The good news is that
we have maintained a balance.
When that balance is lost,
it is when we begin to have
diseases, ailments, etc.
This in agriculture has
been running through the
mycorrhizas,
through the bacteria,
but this part will
advance probably faster
than what we see.
In research there are many
products that will probably
be released in the short term.
The other point that we want to
deal with is the distribution of
wealth.
Why the issue of the distribution
of wealth is important?
Because finally that means
what we can eat.
Yes?
And if we see each other
at this moment, well,
not all,
some of us are fat,
but not because we eat very well,
but because we have a lot of stress.
But basically
we in the country
have a country of what?
Of poor people
who have certain food habits.
Yes?
And this concentrated wealth,
not only we will see it in
the economic part,
we will see it in the technological,
financial part,
even ecological.
And the issue of
the governments, for example,
few governments controlling things,
companies controlling
entire sectors of the economy,
or people controlling
entire sectors of the economy.
So if we start
to configure a certain scenario,
we will realize
that it will mark us
where we can walk.
The issue of climate
adjustment or climate change
that we have treated in different years
and that finally we have
to assume every year.
Yes? For example,
Valle Salto, Valle de Toluca,
we have ice
in September since
five, six years, all the years,
things we didn't have.
And just like that, the issue
of concentrated rains of high intensity,
well, this is already a fact.
But this is going to bring us
a reduction in cultivable diaries.
And we have two effects
of thinking well
in terms of long-term policy.
Why do the best soils
become fractures?
Or in urban areas?
First.
And you can check
the richest valleys in the country.
Now they are the
largest fractures in the country.
That means that
agriculture, where are we going to do it?
In marginal areas.
And that leads us to
lower quality agricultural soils,
the poorest soils.
Therefore, less response
in the long term.
And finally, a specific
follow-up of three things
that are critical resources
in agriculture.
Who generates
more carbon problems
for the atmosphere?
Who needs more water to produce?
And finally, who needs
more energy to produce
and if we start adding things
we will realize that we are not
as efficient as we think.
In the economic
and social part, I only put
three things that I think
are important.
The movement of the western
economy to the east,
which has been going very fast
in economic terms, with the
part of China, etc.
The north-south movement
that has to do with
countries like Brazil,
and a fight
between globalization
and regionalization.
What does this
tell us? What we are seeing with
PAPA, for example.
Everyone is going to take advantage
of their advantages to try to
advance as quickly as possible.
And that goes through the
orange barriers and non-orange
barriers.
And probably with the formation
of the most powerful,
still.
Now, what happens with our way
of thinking?
That is another point we have to
start analyzing.
And this point is important because
we are losing an important
ability in the way we
focus things.
Do we have more access to
information?
But it turns out that it is the same
information.
We have to review a specific problem
and I assure you that all of us
are going to access the same
three books or three articles.
And that
starts to make us
have an issue
of convergence of information.
It is true that there is
a lot of information available,
but it is also true that we look for
less.
And thinking
starts to be linear.
The first, the second and the third.
And the question is, do we think
deeply about the problems?
I would say, and I invite you
to stay here one day without a
computer and without a phone.
You are going to say, I am going to
die.
And what is the important thing that
we give ourselves time for?
For something that is not very common,
we give ourselves time to think.
Yes?
And that probably leads us
to see different things
to solve the same problem.
Now, the other point is the
conceptual homogenization.
There is no discussion about
important concepts
to solve specific problems.
Who takes us to
have the same solution for everything?
And if not,
check out the last thing
that is happening in the country.
We need the labor reform,
the fiscal reform and the energy reform.
We probably don't need
that anymore.
We need to take a bigger step forward.
Yes, but anyway,
in order not to get in the
way of today.
Now, we have to make some
considerations.
All organisms in the presence of
unused resources can grow
an exponential rate.
And we see it
in the floor.
And although this varies
from species to species,
what we cause is
the lack of time, space and
available resources.
This basically leads us
to the fact that the resources
are the ones that set the limits, right?
That is to say, if there are
only five places
in a restaurant,
how many people can enter?
Others will say,
we can bring another seat.
And then we enter six.
Others will say, no,
we are going with our wives.
So there are already ten.
That is what the man has done
in all these years.
What has he basically done
to make these resources
grow?
Why? Because all this
is limited, if we see it.
The sunlight, the water, the nutrients
that finally make photosynthesis
and transform.
And here, we all compete
for these resources.
Everything, absolutely everything.
The man and the animals
and all the living beings.
Well, and we are going to refer
to Maltus very quickly.
He said in
1800, we are going to say
that the English population is growing
beyond what you have never seen.
If we apply what we said
we are not going to have food.
And therefore, what did Maltus say?
There is a segment
of the population that is going to die.
Because that's life,
that's cold.
Who are going to die?
Poor people, right?
Why? Because they don't have how to access
many sources of satisfaction.
And maybe it sounds like this,
very cold.
I am not a nazi,
I want to clarify, I am a moron
but well, that's what
is said and said, well, we are going to control
Christmas.
And there we begin to work with these
issues. What is the reason
that humans have the capacity
to increase the available resources?
In many
senses, in the sense of
feeding, but also
in the sense of pleasure.
Why? Because when you see a rose
and it says, all these
colors, it is asked
who did it, right?
Until those resources, we have that
capacity to be able to
expand those barriers, to be able to
expand those horizons.
We use the 40%
of the terrestrial surface,
the human beings.
Who used that before?
The animals,
the plants,
the water
and all this
we have done on the basis of
the technology, which is
our main tool.
That is the tool that has led us to
grow. And this technology
we see it in the equipment, in the
agrochemicals, we talked about it in the
previous conference, and we add up
several, but this has costs.
Loss of vegetation, erosion,
contamination.
And this leads us to a dilemma,
right?
That it is probably false.
Less technology,
more food,
more nutrition.
Or,
a green revolution
that finally supported this production
of food in the last years,
but where we already have a limit.
What is the limit? The use of
certain insumes.
And among those insumes is a resource
that is very important.
When you work with farmers,
what is the most important asset
of the farmer in general terms?
The land.
Who agrees?
The land. That is our factory.
The question
that you ask a farmer,
how much has he invested in his land
in the last 10 years?
No one has invested it.
And then there we begin to have a problem
to be able to maintain this.
Yes?
If we analyze what is going to happen
with the man as such,
according...
There are a lot of proposals
about how we are going
to do it.
Obviously,
those of us who have less hair
are the most evolved.
Yes?
Please, you too,
we are including it.
But what they say is this,
basically.
We are going to make a little higher in average.
We are going to have a shorter intestine.
Why are we going to have
a shorter intestine?
Why don't we get sick?
Why don't we die?
What do we eat that hurts us?
Nothing hurts me right now.
There we go.
Carbohydrates?
What else?
Grasses?
So apparently our diet
is going to start changing to what?
Protein.
Apparently.
This
is going to make our mouth smaller.
Because we are going to have
smaller mouths
with protein.
One is going to be more satisfied.
You put them on diet
and the first thing they say
is that they start eating protein
and then they get rid of the rest.
Less teeth?
Bigger eyes?
We are going to do more
visuals in many things.
Viral fertility
is going to be low.
That is, our reproductive apparatus
is going to reduce its activity.
Don't get nervous.
We are going to continue to be fertile
but in a smaller proportion
because we are going to do more.
And curiously, a smaller brain.
And the smaller brain
but with greater use
why?
Because we are going to stay with the function
of deep thinking.
Not linear thinking.
We are going to do it.
We are not necessarily going to do it.
Yes?
Or something will not be done.
And that is why I point out
that being a trend
there are specialized works.
Certain types of things
where there can be a combination.
If today we can already
do organs,
we can probably do things
of mix between humans
and equipment.
Military sectors
and sports sectors. Why?
Because they are the ones who pay better
for this type of technology.
One would say that we are very concerned
as a society
about food but sometimes
there are more resources here
and here than in the same agriculture.
Now,
all technological changes
are not going to be adapted
in the first instance in agriculture.
Why?
Because we are going to go
to the contribution of the general wealth.
Although we generate food,
but we contribute little.
That is the reality.
And then,
many of these changes
are going to be seen first in other sectors
and later in agriculture.
Now,
what would be the scenarios?
Well, that everything is still the same
and that everything I am doing
helps us to keep
in shape
connected to the population growth.
The first scenario,
probably here is
that we review the environmental impact
to increase the food
in 50% probably more.
We have to analyze it.
The scenario is that everything changes.
It seems like songs
but it is for us to be recorded.
Everything changes.
Green agriculture, less productive,
more conservative, but less food.
And here we are going to deal
with the next issue
of organic agriculture.
I want you to tell me
where more organic agriculture is done.
Without a shame,
in the poor areas,
but in general,
like the world,
in Cuba, where else?
Well, in Europe, right?
Where agriculture is more subsidized?
In the United States, yes.
And finally, when we produce it
in an organic way that we cannot control,
what is what we ask regularly?
An exception
to be able to apply a specific product.
And this is going to lead us to convergence,
but
if we start to see the part of the wealth,
if we start to see
what is going to happen in the big cities,
probably we have
organic production
for needs and even individualized
in rural and urban places.
Apply it there
because we are going to see many people
producing food in their own house.
The foods that probably
are not so efficient
to produce in large extensions.
And probably the commodities,
maíz, soya, trigo, etc.,
etc.
With balanced inputs,
more bioreational,
but they are going to have a greater impact
on the performance.
When the time is running out,
you tell me,
now, what would we have to do
as paracitologists,
let's say,
always talk about what is going to happen in the future,
we are in the field of speculation,
right,
of what could happen.
What would we need?
Well,
start managing more
a more preventive economic management.
And this goes even
with the agrochemicals.
The agrochemicals are not using
well.
We always apply
in the economic umbrellas that we
should not apply.
And talking about the preventive part
it has to do with the soil too.
If we have organic matter
in general terms in the soil,
it is much better not to have it.
We have to be more rational.
We have to start to see
that we have to produce
as much as possible with the lowest cost.
With a low environmental impact
and that probably
the paracitologists will have to work
even in urban areas,
rural areas and industrial production.
I would leave it here
because I no longer have another lamina.
So if someone
wants to make a comment,
welcome.
Someone has a...
Yes, someone has.
Yes, thank you.
Well,
as a comment,
I could say
that, well,
at least I was wrong,
the foods themselves do not do harm.
Be it lipids, carbohydrates,
proteins,
but what does harm are the excesses
or in any case,
that they are not inocuous foods
that are contaminated by some bacteria,
virus or similar.
So,
I consider
that maybe
agriculture as such
can be done organically
because it is not exactly
so much that it is not produced enough
or that it is not known how to produce,
but that
sometimes
the resource is not administered well.
For example, the other one
I was reading in a magazine
that mentioned that there is a very interesting
fact that
about 1,300 million tons
are wasted from food
worldwide.
With those 1,300 million tons
could be increased,
sorry, to many people.
And although it is true that
maybe the technology
helps,
it could also be
a more balanced system,
not as much as
too much technology,
but it is the
comment.
The
point of distribution,
that is an important point,
but remember that one of the trends
is concentration.
And whoever
concentrates on money and food
has the
way of
pressing certain things
and certain decisions.
I hope
I would like everyone to distribute
in a better way.
But it is not distributed because
obviously we live in a world
in which maybe
that part is not interesting.
And we are already seeing it.
Why do we have a speculation
in the prices of food?
Someone would say, well,
we have enough food.
Well, it is to see
how it is distributed.
If we have a concentration,
we buy corn at a global level.
And here
I am left with two.
So we are in a
situation where the
concentration processes
have to be taken into account as a country.
And then take them
to our specific environment.
The joke is that we
discuss,
not that we discuss, but that we all
discuss.
very strong, then you have to take into account that element, in other concepts they are handling them
and there I think there may be very good experiences of all those present here and what
that comes and it is not today, but in the next 20 years at least.
Yes, Juan Manuel, very good your reflection, as always you make us see many topics, it
is so broad that each topic is a world, it seems very interesting, as in Acapulco
you said, you can read the newspaper, who reads the newspaper, who wants to be an entrepreneur,
in the end there are always interesting reflections on your part that we thank you, one point
that I wanted to comment on what the boy mentioned is in the sense that agriculture
never thought it well, if agriculture itself is not a natural process, the process is not
a natural ecosystem, we are forcing a plant that you believe in the place where I want
when I want as I want and that gives me what I want, then from there we are bad, then
to do all this there is the reflection that I am displacing species, I am displacing
fields, I am doing things that I should not to do what I want with an economic benefit
for me, but not thinking about food, I am thinking about a benefit for me, a farmer
has already lost the farmer who only worries about producing for his family and having his
chickens and his animals, agriculture is a business and as all businesses have their
processes against, then we have to reflect all that part too, that is what I wanted to
comment on.
Well, the topic is very broad and very interesting and it would also give us to work for a while
in the way of thinking, but also trying to talk a little with the young people, what
we want today, to feed, to eat well or to eat a lot, and what we are going to want
in a few years, in 50 years we are going to have 2,500 million more inhabitants living
this land, 2,500 million inhabitants who need to eat, then we have to look for the way
to produce more first, we have to look for the way to feed first and then we will have
to look for the quality of that food and a series of other things, then organic agriculture
is a good alternative, but it is not unfortunately the alternative to increase the production
of food, so we have a lot to think about this and it is also worth to continue reacting
because those of us who are involved in this medium, sacred techniques, chemists, biologists
etc., what we are looking for is to increase production and feed more to this world, then
we see how we do it so that it is good, beautiful and cheap.
Good afternoon, I am licensed in biology and my name is Nancy.
Basically it is a good, if it serves as a contribution, I come from the Sierra Nororiental
basically and what they handle or what I have been managing is that it does not take much
into account the production of margined areas, but that is what could help many times
progress and what I said in this case the engineer or I do not know what, to give it
a nice, cheap and more, many of those families do not depend on the economic system of urbanized
areas, but on the little they have in the parcels, then if they can survive and have
survived for a long time, why not return to the little they have and improve it with
what is being carried out today.
If we take the small parcels million years ago, it would be a support for what we are
managing right now with the fight for sustainability and sustainability.
Good, I am Pedro de Parasitología de Chapingo, well, coincided with the engineer that this
the organic agriculture is an alternative for small producers, for small families,
but for people who produce hundreds of hectares is not profitable for them, because what happens
is that never with chemical products you use, well, the proportional to produce a good,
very much product and what is organic matter, you occupy a lot and produce little and then
there is no profitable for society and if we are talking about future that the population
will increase, obviously we will not be able to sustain or sustain the person with organic
agriculture and the only basis is that technology or nanotechnology would be in our future, because
we need to produce more, we need to cover the market, we need to produce good quality,
so our only future is the chemical and technology, because if we destroy, if we move, the environment
is no longer favorable for any agriculture, then what do we do? Find an alternative to
produce, but with the surface that we have, that's all.
I just want to say what the partner says, organic agriculture is business, unfortunately
the markets that demand it are very limited, but it is a business, a kilo of organic garlic
is worth ten times more than a kilo of garlic of normal production, unfortunately the culture,
the population that demand it is very limited and it can pay it, so here what we are going
is that the reflection that the engineer Juan Manuel said, we have to see alternatives
to the best, it is not so much produce more, but create a culture to lower the population,
regulate the population, create a better diet habit, previously they said to a person
a little boy, they said it's healthy, now they say it's a little more, unfortunately
the cultures are changing with time and that we have to adapt, and it's true, we have
to think about how we are going to be productive and we are going to contribute to our country,
but that contribution must be in a global way, maybe we are no longer the families
of ten children, but maybe a son or two children we can keep, but this is something very complex
that we have to leave it in the air to meditate in a wider forum, very good, I think we continue
now for one last question, please, first Karen, my name is Karen Sain, I'm from
El Chapingo also, the problem what the teacher shows us here is that two things are dedicated
and ignorance and indifference, because due to this we arrive at the bad use, bad employment
of all technologies and also of the consumption that we use, because they are plagued, wasteful
and others, the problem is that from there the fact that we have a lot of toxic waste
and from there also other problems that have been given even before we were using this
type of waste, let's talk about things like that are botanical, it had many problems precisely
due to its agriculture, the beginnings of what agriculture was in the world, it is not about
that new technologies are bad, the bad thing is the way we use them.
Yes, as Gandhi said, the varecia is the loss of the men, Karen, not to finalize because
this could even give us for a round table, maybe for the next symposium, for the next
one, but there are issues that we would have to discuss strongly, the issue of the closed
rural economies that have been given for a long time and there they are, and the point
that I would like to emphasize is the technology, it is such, but finally people use it and
I will give you a specific point, for 25 years we have treated, including your father, to
increase the percentage of organic matter on the ground, and there in the Tiburco as well,
we have been calling for 25 years and finally we talk to the people, we talk to them, we
give them capacitations, we return and nothing happens, the issue that we also have to put
in the center of the discussion is whether people are, right, and I would leave it there for
you.
Excellent, Juan, thank you very much, Juan.
Okay, let's accelerate, the next presentation was in charge of the engineer Gabriel Paniagua,
for some reason, he had been impossible at work, he asked me to help him by presenting
his work, then it will take a while and against my habit, I do not feel very much like presenting
myself, but it is simply an idea of ​​what I dedicate myself, I am a specialist agronomist
for astrology and master of science in vegetable protection by the University of Autonomous
Chapingo, I started in research, in the National Institute of Agricultural Research, and little
before I went to postgraduate school in phytopathology, then I went to the official sector in the
general direction of vegetable health, where I occupy various positions, department head,
subdirector, etc., of the field and regulatory, both national and international, I was secretary
of technical, two general directors, and finally when I left the public service, I entered
the agrochemical industry, I started as manager of research and development in a chemical
unit in Mexico, which is now Captura Corporation, and currently I am in charge of the management
of research, development and registration and this situation of the Stuart management,
I do not remember, but well, that is my professional antecedent, I am going to talk to you a little
about the issue of large companies, you know well, some have learned, perhaps some
took the workshop yesterday in reference to the norm of all 32 label plagued, the importance
of this indicates that with the previous rule of the label, there was a toxicological classification
based only on high toxicity, oral, now with the intervention of the government of Mexico
and the adoption of the global harmonized system for chemical substances, well, we already adopted
the way to make the label as they do in the general of the countries.
What I brought then, as a result, instead of being four categories toxicological currently
are five, not that the plagued are more toxic, for itself is simply a way to classify them
and now the interesting thing about this is that not only takes into account the classification,
I say, sorry, oral toxicology, but also the dermis and also the inhalation, then
that is why now it is a little more restrictive and classification is understood that it is
more exact, it is better.
This antecedent refers or I speak precisely to the importance that it has in the issue
of formulations, in this case we are going to talk about some granulated insecticides
and the interesting thing about the matter is that, as it says, renovating the renovated,
these granulated insecticides that are applied to the soil mainly are done based on some
type of clay or lotus and these things, that is good, finally, when you incorporate the
soil is not adding strange substances, lotus is vegetable material and finally
it is incorporated and it is pleasant, but the interesting thing about this matter goes
with the importance of the agricultural plagues, what is important, above all here to future
colleagues, what importance do the plagues of the soil have in reference to crops, why
are they important, why is it important to control them?
Yes, thank you, as I mentioned, we use soil as raw material to cultivate, if the soil
is contaminated, if the soil is contaminated, it can lead to an infection with the plant,
so to speak.
Would it be a nutrition competition?
Yes, among other things, nothing, all of that, well here I pass a quick summary, when you
incorporate the seed to the soil, well, you can see that the plagues destroy them, if
they destroy them, what will happen, will decrease the population, that in the end is going to
increase the yield, when the roots are fed, they will decrease the absorption area, if
there are few roots, in addition to being fed badly, they will grow less and apart
they will have a lower yield, right, so simple, another damage that they cause is that many
times they are fed but also cause injuries, those injuries that cause the roots or the
stems or the plants are entry points for infections, so they are facilitators of infections
for bacteria and fungi, mainly, that is why the control is important and that is why
both INCO and TATAR have products that help us control these problems, as I told you,
in general the accumulation of insecticides, we are going to talk about in this case, they
do it with sand, in some cases with clay, or lotus, or mojita and in this case what
I come to tell you is that AMBAC makes its formulations based on Biodac, you have heard
of Biodac, you know what this is, it is nothing of the other world, but it is something also
interesting and important, Biodac is a product that is used as inert, inert for active ingredient,
the interesting thing about this, the important thing, is that it is made based on a cellulose
paper, a residual product of plants, but not only that, but it is also recycled, that
is, they do not even use new cellulose to manufacture Biodac, but it is recycled, that
is important for the matter of taking care of the trees, of taking care of the forests
and all that, the other important situation is that once the active is incorporated or
is impregnated to the Biodac spheres, is that it releases them gradually, not so slowly
but gradually, it is not like on other occasions that the granite of clay is there and releases
it in a single blow or retains it for a long time and the freeing is irregular, no, in this
case the freeing is paulatina and quite regular, another very important thing, returning to
the issue of the label and the psychological classification, is that it does not release
dust, if you have ever driven a granite based on clay or even clay, at the moment
the granites are too much or the applicator generates a certain amount of dust, that is
what they call it in coffee shops and all this, they are the risks that the person who
handles the product suffers, as they call it in the exposed population in the work,
then this does not release, it does not release dust, the risks are reduced, it is not that
it is less toxic, we simply reduce the risk or exposure of the product to the active ingredient,
also mitigates the smell of the active ingredients, there are active ingredients that have a very
penetrating, very strong smell, this helps to mitigate, in all ways it is important that
the products have a certain smell because it serves as warning to the people that there
is a toxic product and at least be careful, as in the case of gas, it has uniform particles,
these spheres are very uniform, practically the same in all cases, this makes a distribution
better than the product on the ground, then you apply it, it serves as a wheel and the
application is quite uniform, then when it is more uniform the distribution is also better,
this means that the product will be destroyed in all ways, in a more correct way and has
a very good performance in confectionary mixes, given its uniformity at the time of making
the application or in confectionary mixes, well the distribution is also very uniform.
Another advantage is that it retains humidity, it retains some nitrogen avoiding the volatility
of this, it provides certain organic matter due to being cellulose, it is biodegradable
as we say, it does not incorporate strange things to the environment as in the case, for
example, of some concentrated, exciting and there are more particles per kilogram per
hectare, now we see a table to explain this, for example, when you use an inert base
of olote, more or less the number of granules per gram is 2,500, in the case of clay, 5,000,
in the case of biodegradable it is 1,200, the greater the number of granules, this means,
as I told you, better distribution, because there is a greater number of units, despite
that the two are similar, you see that here the distribution will actually be much better,
that is what it means, and well that is the situation to comment on, it is as not necessarily
necessary to be taking out new molecules, the existing ones and above all if you know
that they are very efficient, you can continue using them, you just have to be able to work
on the side of improving the formulas to make them more available for control and well
give them, as I said, also commercial life to the product and simply, essentially, well
the new products that are coming out because they are already incorporating the existing ones,
they are also doing the necessary rotations, it has to do with the matter also of resistance
and well, among more options there, it is always better, that's what I wanted to tell you,
I do not know if you have any, do you mention anything?
Well when using these materials in the formulation of granules, surely your cost rises a little,
but on the other hand, perhaps I would also like to understand if this material interferes
in the toxicological classification that the materials would have, for example, or maybe
use entre bufos, which is a fairly high category, perhaps one, then this, when adding this
inert, varies its category or not of the final product.
Now that we did the exercise of changing labels of all, not the exercise, when we change all
our label, does not contribute at all to add, let's say, greater toxicity as with other
inerts, already for the simple calculation and the way to use high toxicology, oral
and so on, is that it is classified in a category, let's say, superior, that went from yellow
to red, for example, but it was for that, but the truth is that, for example, Biodac does not
contribute to make it more toxic.
Little less.
No, little less, the advantages are the others I told you, better distribution, less contamination
for other types of strange ingredients, perhaps the cost increases a little, but the product
has the advantage of, well, it has all those advantages, it already depends, also many times
of each producer used the product.
But sorry for that answer, in reality does not change toxicology because the ingredient
active is the same, what it changes is the exposure index, that is, an annulated product
that rolls easier on the ground, that does not have dust, there is no deriva, the applicator
has less exposure and that is where the advantage of the material comes, that is, the active is
the same, it will not change the toxicology or toxicity of the material, that would be
a little the part for the companions, as they say, next generation and competitors.
The point of this technology is that, to be looking for how to take advantage of the same
product, how to do better, how to do more efficient, how to make it reach the insect
almost near the mouth, the product so that it does not have to walk a lot, to lower
the dosage per hectare, and if you review the 1970s books that some of us had to study
with the books of the 2000s, you have found applications of powder per hectare, and then
powder per hectare of insecticides, para tión, malatión, diacinón, polvos, this was
highly inefficient, as well as fungicides, as well as insecticides, and now the products
we are looking for that are much more efficient, much more effective, and much more directed
towards the moment, the place of the problem, that would be a little the clarification.
So, of course, as I said, 40 kilos was against 7 kilos now, and with less exposure to the
people who handle it, who are handling their products.
Enrique Gómez, engineer agronomist, one question, this material has the same distribution
in all types of soil, or it has some harmful, arsigous variations, that is, it distributes
the same, the same effect.
Yes, it has no problem, both in soil, let's say with sand or arsigous equivalence, or
all that, it still distributes pretty well, it has no problem, there are no differences
between the results in those soils.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
