World Peanut Magazine 13.2024 by camaradelmani

_ Bottom Up! / 02

Laws and Regulations

_ Will Europe Embrace Gene Editing? / 06

. efsa seems to clear the way toward easing restrictions of ngts, but many eu members appear unconvinced.

Science and tech

_ From Lab to Field: the Impact of Genome Editing on Peanut Breeding / 10

. Genome editing is transforming peanut farming by enabling precise genetic modifications that accelerate breeding processes and offer innovative solutions to longstanding agricultural challenges.

_ Winds of Change in the Peanut Breeding World / 14

. A conversation with Steve Brown, Executive Director of the US-based Peanut Research Foundation, about the latest trends in the development of new technology within the industry.

_

Peanut Market Data

_ Charts & Tables / 21 _

Industrial Processing

_ The Blanching Process / 24

. Final sorting to obtain the best product . _

Market Trends

international events

_ The World Sesame and Peanut Conference 2024 – August 28 - 30 / 30

_ The China International Peanut Conference – September 26 - 28 / 36

Nº 13

Bottom Up!

The frustrating Argentine 2022/23 harvest and the challenging Brazilian 23/24 crop, both severely affected by droughts, put the world supply of peanuts under pressure.

Encouragingly, the excellent recent harvest in Argentina together with the encouraging northern hemisphere crops seem to signal the strong recovery of global stocks and an ability to satisfy a demand that continues to grow.

For the next six months it seems reasonable to assume that the market will not move far from the current high levels of transactions.

Starting in the second quarter of 2025, however, we could see a different story, based on potential good crops up North, and also a potential increase of planting areas down South.

Brazil seems to be behind schedule with its planting program while Argentina received the first good rains at the beginning of October, just in time for its planting season.

As usual, the weather will determine the next market moves.

The general perception is that the world peanut supply will continue to improve, a fact that should be warmly welcomed by the industry with its need to secure availability in this demanding market. In this issue of wpm , we will cover two important trade events in China that brought together many peanut professionals from around the globe: the World Sesame and Peanut Conference 2024 in Macau in August, and September’s China International Peanut Conference in Liaoning Province. We then take a closer look at gene editing and its potential impact on peanut breeding, including the current regulatory trend in the European Union, which may lead to an easing of restrictions in this field. We also discuss new genetic techniques with the President of the Peanut Research Foundation in the US, Steve Brown, and look at some of this important institution’s other activities. Finally, we continue our journey in the field of peanut processing with a description of sorting/hand-picking.

_ Market Trends

This section of the wpm deals with the dynamics of the demand and supply of peanuts in the international markets. We will try to keep track of the changes in peanut consumption in the main areas of the world, the factors that can affect production, and the price shifts of the various peanut products.

_ Industrial Processing

This area of the magazine focuses on shellers as well as companies transforming peanuts into consumer products. We will focus on current industry standards, quality issues, new technologies and the different industrial solutions adopted by producing countries. A special section will be dedicated to new products and tools for peanut processing developed by the best manufacturers.

_ Science and Technology

The activities of the universities and other research institutes engaged in scientific research on peanuts are of paramount importance for the future of the business. We will follow the main discoveries, from the latest issues concerning peanut genetics to the development of projects on pathogens or the impact of peanut consumption on human health. The consequences of scientific research on the future of the industry are hard to overstate, so we will be putting them in perspective in order to try to understand where the sector is heading in the long term.

_ Laws and Regulations

The Laws and Regulations section of World Peanut Magazine analyses the impact of new legislation and regulations affecting the production and trade of peanuts. The main issues treated in this section are governmental measures directly affecting international trade (such as the introduction of tariffs or quotas), health safety issues (such as the establishment of Maximum Residue Limits for certain substances) but also legislation impacting distribution, packaging and sales.

_ Peanut as a Superfood

This section offers peanut professionals news and insights into the world of peanut consumption and all its aspects. Typical news is related to findings concerning the nutritional values of peanuts, the impact of peanut consumption on human health, and the development of peanut-based food.

_ Peanut Farming

The primary production is where the peanut business starts, of course, so we will have a dedicated section for all events, activities, techniques and equipment related to growing peanuts in different parts of the world. The general idea is to bring farming in the producing countries closer to all peanut professionals so that they can have a better grasp of the business from a grower’s perspective and maybe on what the future of peanut farming may look like.

Will Europe Embrace Gene Editing?

efsa seems to clear the way toward easing restrictions on ngts, but many eu members appear unconvinced.

Current European Union legislation considers varieties of plants obtained through genomic editing, included in the category labeled “New Genomic Techniques” ( NGTs), as genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and, as such, banned by law, since a European Court of Justice ruling in 2018.

In the last few years, however, things have changed to some degree. Shortly after the 2018 ruling, the European Council, which represents the governments of the member states, asked the EU Commission to study the matter. Among the findings of the commission was that the GMO norms were an obstacle to scientific advances and in July last year, the commission published a regulatory proposal to ease the prohibition of gene editing, with the general principle that NGTs would not fall under GMOs legislation if the changes to the organisms could have been achieved through traditional breeding techniques, while other more complex genetic modifications, such as those involving the implanting of genes from different species, would remain regulated by the existing laws. The declared objectives of the proposal are steering developments toward sustainability goals in a wide range of plant products and creating a more enabling environment for research and innovation in the agri-food sector while maintaining a high level of protection for health and the environment.

An important step toward the liberalization of NGTs was taken in February this year, when the European Parliament voted, albeit with a rather slim majority (the resolution passed with 307 votes in favor and 263 against, with 41 members abstaining) to reduce regulatory oversight on gene editing. The vote did not constitute the final word, however, as the measure must be agreed in negotiations with the member states, which remain divided on many issues, including the patenting rules of gene editing and the labeling rules of products that are made from gene-edited organisms. A similar divide also exists between a majority of the parliament, which appears to be more inclined to have labels identifying NGT plants, and the commission, which thinks biotech crops exempt from GMO regulation should only have seeds labeled so that farmers can be sure of what they are planting.

But member states appear to be divided on a number of fronts. For starters, some seem reluctant to embrace the new gene-editing technologies at all. Hungary, for example, has a constitution that bans the use of genetically modified organisms in agriculture, and Poland in the past has signaled that it would oppose even moderate liberalizations of the NGTs. Other countries, including Austria, Slovakia, and Slovenia, also seem to oppose the innovation.

Just a few months ago, however, the proponents of liberalization received strong encouragement from a new study performed by efsa , the European Food Safety Authority. efsa has published its scientific opinion on new developments in microorganism biotechnology, which assesses the use of new genomic techniques in microorganisms. The main conclusion of the opinion is that NGTs do not pose any potential new hazards/risks compared to established techniques, while NGTs can offer greater efficiency, specificity and predictability of genomic modifications.

As the new European Commission starts its term after the June 2024 elections, the new Agriculture and Food Commissioner, Christophe Hansen from Luxemburg, will work to implement the expected radical restructuring of the EU subsidy policy, but it is not yet clear what his position is on genetic engineering.

From Lab to Field: the Impact of Genome Editing on Peanut Breeding

Genome editing is transforming peanut farming by enabling precise genetic modifications that accelerate breeding processes and offer innovative solutions to longstanding agricultural challenges.

Peanuts, as a tetraploid species, have four sets of chromosomes which makes their genetics both an opportunity and a challenge. On one hand, it offers a rich array of genetic material that can be used to improve different traits. On the other, it makes traditional breeding methods complex, as they rely on the arduous process of crossing different varieties and selecting for desired traits over multiple generations. Genome editing, however, speeds up this process by allowing scientists to directly target and modify specific genes.

A recent article published in The Nucleus (Singh et al., 2024) highlights how genome editing, with special emphasis on crispr-Cas9, is opening new doors in peanut farming. crispr , a tool originally adapted from bacteria, allows scientists to make precise cuts in the dna that can then be fixed by the cell’s natural repair mechanisms, allowing for the insertion, deletion or modification of genetic material.

In peanuts, crispr-Cas9 has been used to address some pressing issues facing the crop. For example, the technology has been instrumental in reducing allergenic proteins by knocking out the responsible genes, leading to the development of hypoallergenic peanut lines. Simultaneously, crispr-Cas9 has been used to enhance the oleic acid content in peanuts by targeting the fad2 gene, which regulates the conversion of oleic acid to linoleic acid. Furthermore, genome-editing tools have also introduced a single-nucleotide mutation in the als gene, conferring resistance to als -inhibiting herbicides and thus facilitating more effective weed management in peanut crops.

Despite the promise of genome editing, the technology faces significant regulatory and public perception challenges. In many countries, genetically modified organisms (gmos) are subject to rigorous regulations, and genome-edited crops often fall into a regulatory gray area. While genome editing differs from traditional genetic modification in that it does not involve the introduction of foreign dna , the changes made to the genome can still be significant. This has led to debates over how genome-edited crops should be regulated and whether they should be labeled as gmos.

In the United States, the Department of Agriculture (usda) indicated that it will not regulate genome-edited crops in the same way as gmos, provided the changes could have occurred naturally or through

traditional breeding. This has facilitated the development and commercialization of genome-edited crops in the us. In contrast, the European Union has taken a more cautious approach. While genome-edited crops were initially classified as gmos and subjected to the same strict regulations, the European Parliament recently voted to lessen these rules for genome-edited crops with minimal genetic alterations that mimic natural variations. This difference in regulatory approaches creates challenges for global trade and the adoption of genome-editing technologies.

Public perception is another major consideration. While scientists generally support the safety and benefits of genome editing, many people remain skeptical. Concerns about potential longterm impacts and unintended consequences have intensified opposition to genome-edited crops. This means that clear, transparent communication and engagement between stakeholders, consumers, farmers and policymakers is essential. Moreover, it’s important to emphasize the rigorous safety assessments these crops undergo and to highlight the tangible benefits they offer.

Looking ahead, genome editing will play a crucial role in the peanut sector by addressing critical challenges and enhancing crop attributes. As the technology progresses, it offers promising solutions for improving nutritional quality and tackling practical issues. Despite this progress, challenges like abiotic and biotic stress, fresh seed dormancy and nutrient bioavailability still require targeted research to better understand and manipulate the underlying genes and pathways. There’s even potential for the technology to tackle more complex challenges like improving peanuts’ ability to sequester carbon in soil, contributing to climate change mitigation. For agronomists and technicians, the challenge will be to stay informed about the latest advancements in the field and to apply this knowledge in a way that maximizes the benefits while minimizing the risks.

Sushmita Singh, Chandramohan Sangh, Praveen Kona and Sandip Kumar Bera. Genome editing in peanuts: advancements, challenges and applications. The Nucleus (2024) 67:127-139

Winds of Change in the Peanut Breeding World

A conversation with Steve Brown, Executive Director of the US-based Peanut Research Foundation, about the latest trends in the development of new technology within the industry.

We talk to Steve Brown, Executive Director of the US-based Peanut Research Foundation.

Steve, can you tell us about the current focus of the Peanut Foundation? What are the main research areas?

In the past, we had a multi-year funding program like the Genome Initiative…where we focused on mapping the peanut genome. That was very successful. Then we had what we call phase two of that project, which consisted of the application of the new knowledge in specific areas. We finished that as well. So now the board has approved a new research plan in Dec 2023. The main goal is to have a plan: instead of just receiving proposals, we want to guide the research, we want to be a little more organized, have a focus and a plan of where we are going; and we seek to receive proposals based on that. Our first call for proposals will go out in two weeks. We are expecting a diversity of proposals so that the board can vote on them and move on with the success we’ve had in since 2007.

Is the plan made of big topics or very specific projects?

Well, in some cases there are pretty specific things. There are new things and old ones. For instance, disease resistance: we want to continue with that. I would say the new things are more quality-related rather than things that impact production. The new goals are a little different: traits that we did not think of in the past… I hope we get proposals on all of them. They are probably more difficult than some of the things we did in the past, but we really want to refocus part of the research.

Is the call open to foreign entities?

Our policy has been in the past to support foreign entities as long as they work with US entities.

Last October we had the AAGB (Advance in Arachis through Genomics and Biotechnology) meeting in Alabama. Can you give us your take on the results?

We thought it was a great success. It was the first meeting after the pandemic. Even before the pandemic, there had been some discussion about the future of the group: since the sequencing of the genome was done, should we continue? But the overwhelming majority wanted to have the group to continue, to have these international meetings, to continue the genomic work. So, we had the first meeting at HudsonAlpha , which is where a lot of the research had been performed in the previous years. It is a great facility, with many talented people working there. So, it was good to start the new phase in that particular venue. The next one has already been planned, it will be in Goa, India, March 23-25, 2025. ICRISAT (the International Crop Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropic) is kind of taking the lead on planning that event.

We had a chance to talk to some of the scientists who participated in the event last year. We understand that one of the things that waswere mentioned as a possible focus for the future wasis aflatoxin, which is obviously a widespread problem for peanuts around the world. But another topic that attracted a lot of attention was pangenomics. Can you tell us what itthat is?

It is a new concept to me too. Traditionally what researchers do in terms of genetic tracing is to map a reference genome of the species, then map a number of different strains in

order to highlight those points that vary within that genome. The pangenome is a little different, in that you compare all the genomes of peanuts around the world and you make a map that shows all the possibilities of genetic variation within that particular species. It is very broad, but it gives you a lot of perspective…

I gather the potential there is very significant, even though it may take time…

Yes, you mentioned aflatoxin… some of our scientists managed to map the genome of the fungus Aspergillus, the one that causes aflatoxin. They actually did a pangenome of it. So, you have all the features of the fungus in all its variability all over the world and that can be fundamental in the understanding of the pathology.

So if I understand correctly, if you are able to direct the evolution of the Aspergillus in such a fashion as to generate less aflatoxin, you can limit the contamination…

Exactly, there are non-toxigenic strains out there in the environment. Some of these strains are very aggressive, more than the pathogenic types, so they outcompete them in the field. There has been some level of success, sometimes even impressive success.

That is very interesting. I remember we talked about this last year and one of the issues with aflatoxin is that even though the genetics of peanuts can be somewhat resistant, there are so many other elements to the contamination. But now we are talking about the genomics of the fungus, that is a very different perspective…

Yes, the way I describe is that there is a dance between the plant and the fungus, where the plant starts showing some signs of stress, the fungus then sees that as an opportunity to invade the plant, then the plant responds with a defense mechanism, the fungus responds with a counter-defense mechanism, and the back and forth goes on… The genetics of the plant and the fungus of course control all that process, so if we have a better understanding of the biological warfare that goes on there we can make some adjustments to mitigate the amount of aflatoxin.

Do you believe we are getting closer to solving the problem?

I do not think we will solve it in the next couple of years, but we have made some amazing advances. At the beginning of the genome process, I think there was a consensus that that part of the genetics of peanuts is too complicated to figure out. But now there have been some amazing discoveries that paint a better picture of the war I was describing. We were even able to identify some markers in the plant that contribute to resistance to aflatoxin. I see that as highly significant, there is real progress being made. Hopefully, within the next decade, we will see those markers being utilized and incorporated in peanut varieties.

That will have quite an impact… Yes, I cannot think of a more relevant issue for the industry.

We mentioned genetic editing. In Europe, there has been a push in the last year and a half or so to amend legislation in order to allow it. Which specific area do you see where gene editing can be effectively applied to peanuts?

In my personal opinion gene editing is our future. There are some hurdles on the way, and government regulation may be the biggest one. When we started the genome project there was a consensus that no one wanted GMOs, and it was not a fear of the technology, but of marketing a GMO peanut. Today the industry still feels that way. But before the consensus was that because the EU did not accept it, we should not proceed, today things may be changing. For me personally, it is time for the peanut industry to be thinking a few years ahead. Even though it can be a barrier to exports at this particular time, I would predict that, in a few years, some of those barriers are going to start crumbling. Because it is not only peanuts: every crop is looking at the advantages and the potential of gene editing and the many amazing things that can be done. I just see that it is the inevitable future. Besides, there is no evidence whatsoever that there is any health risk. This is a train that is coming and we can’t stop it. We need to be at least prepared to understand what we can do, and what traits to look at with this technology. The policy of the Foundation is that we will fund some gene editing projects, limited to research purposes in order to better understand what specific genes do. . But we do not want to develop a variety that can be identified as a gene-edited variety.

That is where we stand right now. I see it changing a lot in the future.

I think that makes a lot of sense. It is also difficult to predict the future attitude of the public; given the scientific evidence, consumers may become more receptive toward this kind of technology. So it could be important to develop the tools ready, in case it becomes feasible to apply it to commercial varieties. There are gene editing companies popping up all over the place. People with this expertise are starting to explore the potential of gene editing. Our board of directors has talked about this many times. In the US peanut industry, our seeds come from public breeding programs: we have universities and the USDA that have active breeding programs that supply the varieties that we use, at least 95% of what we use. In other crops, private companies play the most important role, big companies such as Syngenta and Bayer are producing seeds for big acreage crops, like cotton, soybeans, and others. But now, there can be an unknown company that just pops up from nowhere, and they may decide to work on peanuts while we do not even know who they are. And, all of a sudden, they’ve got some new technique, some new trait. I have had some interaction just recently with one, they called me and said: “We have solved a problem” and I said, “What problem? Who are you?”... And that may be what the future looks like, we are going to have private enterprises playing a big role in the peanut business, something we are not used to considering for seeds. They are going to come up with ideas, with innovating things and growers may want to buy them. So, it is a little new game that we have to deal with lately.

Let’s talk about sustainability. Does the Foundation have projects going on in this area?

Yes, that is a big issue for us in the US, even though it is the APC (the American Peanut Council) that has the lead in this area. It has hired a sustainability coordinator and there is an effort to gather data from US peanut farmers that can be validated to understand what our sustainability picture is. Once that is done, we can benchmark it to improve sustainability. But ultimately many of the Foundation’s research projects are closely linked to sustainability. For instance, drought resistance would certainly improve sustainability. Or practices

and technologies that allow for reduced use of pesticides. A lot of what we do is closely tied to sustainability.

How do you measure the success of the projects? Is there any metric you employ?

We write an annual report, but, in general, it is really difficult to measure results, for example in economic terms. We just came up with a variety that we can say is a direct result of our genome research program. It takes that long! Ten years… We have great expectations for that variety, we think farmers are going to buy it, and then we will have some data about its economic impact, of how much it saves the farmers. This variety is called the TifCB7, it is being released by the USDA and the University of Georgia and it is resistant to leaf spot, a level of resistance we have never seen before. It comes from a wild species and has been developed with marker-assisted selection. We supported that project from the very beginning. It also has very good agronomic features, and we think it is so good that whereas normally a grower must spray 6 or 8 times in one season, we think maybe one time at most will be enough for this variety. A great saving to growers I think our first measurable success story is coming.

peanut exports of brazil - kernels (mt 1202.42 + 2008.11) eu 27 imports, tm (shelled - 1202.42) &

eu 27 imports, tm (prepared 2008.11)

TOTAL JAN-MAY 12.835 - 17.574 - 15.266

china future prices (settle value - rbm)

peanut exports of argentina - kernels (mt)

The Blanching Process

Final sorting to obtain the best product.

In the previous issue of WPM, we described the peanut blanching process from a general point of view. We stated that the most widely adopted processes involved the following steps:

_ HEATING.

Consists of a gentle heating, necessary to minimize the fragility and therefore the possibility of splitting. There are different technologies available, with heating temperatures normally not exceeding 95° –100° Celsius (in most cases the temperature is kept within the 75° – 95° Celsius range). The heating removes the moisture from the kernels, it passes through the skin, loosens it, and facilitates the further removal.

_ COOLING .

Consists of a cooling of the peanuts, also very gentle, aiming to take the kernels back down to an ambient temperature, thus helping the blanching.

_ TEMPERING.

The peanuts are stored for a few hours to allow the stabilization of both temperature and moisture of the kernels, resulting in better blanching conditions and less splitting.

_ BLANCHING.

This step consists of a mechanical procedure by which the skins are finally removed from the kernels. The most common technique involves abrasive rollers for skin removal. In this process, the operators face a trade-off between blanching efficiency and splitting; they may achieve a product with an acceptably low split level, but still with some unblanched kernels that needs to be re-blanched.

_ SORTING / HAND PICKING .

The last step consists of the mechanical or manual separation of the damaged or discolored kernels, as well as the still unblanched ones, in order to obtain the finished product: “Selected Blanched Peanuts”. If the desired finished product is whole-blanched peanuts, it is sometimes necessary to adjust the quantity of split kernels through a sieving machine.

In this issue of WPM, we are covering Step 5: Sorting / Hand Picking

When we discussed the blanching process and the machinery involved, we described a trade-off between maximizing the blanching efficiency and minimizing the splitting rate. The conclusion was that some unblanched kernels need to be accepted in order to avoid an excessive percentage of splits ( 1).

Therefore, separation of unblanched kernels becomes a necessary step to obtaining the finished product we are expecting.

In issue 6 of the WPM, we reviewed in some details all the issues involved in the sorting process. Specifically, for blanched peanuts sorting is important to remove:

_ DAMAGED KERNELS (kernels with damage under the skin)

_ UNBLANCHED KERNELS

(kernels not properly blanched)

_ FOREIGN MATERIAL

(at this stage, it is more of an extra safety step, as there should not be many)

These sorting requirements are normally easier than the ones performed at the shelling plants, because there is a natural difference between the blanched kernels (white) and unblanched/damaged kernels (black/red), making the separation easier.

The sorting systems consist of four essential stages (  2).

1. THE FEED SYSTEM is designed in such a way as to allow the presentation of the product to the optical devices in an even fashion, facilitating the identification of the defined features of the product. A critical variable is speed: a product flow too slow will reduce efficiency, while if the speed of the conveyor belt is very high, the optical devices may have difficulties sorting the proper items.

2. THE OPTICAL SYSTEM IS A CENTRAL PART OF THE PROCESS: it must scan the product flow, check every kernel (or whatever fruit, vegetable or grain is being sorted), and identify the desired features set by the plant based on the specific sorting needs. Since the dawn of sorting equipment, this system has used traditional cameras, but many of the newest generations of sorting machinery are equipped with infrared and ultraviolet cameras, which enhance the accuracy and speed of product recognition.

3. THE PROCESSING SYSTEM IS KEY: it considers the images of the optical system and, based on the criteria set by the operators, defines whether a product should stay in the flow or be diverted to a different process within the plant. The development of Artificial Intelligence software in the last few years has allowed the creation of highly sophisticated processing systems which greatly enhance the efficiency of sorting machinery.

4. THE SEPARATION SYSTEM IS ACTIVATED BY THE PROCESSING SYSTEM WHEN THE USER-DEFINED THRESHOLD IS MET. the “good” products are allowed to stay in the main flow, the ones that meet the separation criteria are separated through the use of different devices. In the case of small kernels like peanuts compressed air will be sufficient when dealing with bigger products, such as potatoes a mechanical device will be deployed.

After the sorting process, we obtained the desired product (  3) and a certain amount of rejected products (  4).

The blanched peanuts can be bagged into finished product packaging, either directly or prior adjusting split content by sieving.

The rejected product is normally given a second round of blanchers/color sorting to maximize the blanched outcome from the process.

Most common process arrangements are as shown in pictures 5 and 6 (  5 /  6).

If the quality of the accepted product after the second sorting loop is good enough, this product can be added to the finish product pipeline. If not, it is safer to send it to the infeed of the first sorting step.

General maintenance considerations

The blanching process produces a certain amount of peanut meal, which sticks to the machines. Aspiration and screening can minimize its presence, but cleaning operations for color sorters on blanched process are a key part of good practice. No machine will do a good job if its glasses are dirty. Some technologies carry automatic cleaning systems, which help, but sometimes it is not enough and periodically manual cleaning tasks are necessary to secure proper operations.

International Events

The World Sesame and Peanut Conference 2024

August

28 - 30

In this issue of WPM we are celebrating two important international events where peanut professionals gathered to learn the latest news regarding the industry.

The first was the World Sesame and Peanut Conference 2024, organized jointly by Eventell Global Advisory Pvt Ltd and the China Chamber of Commerce of Import and Export of Foodstuffs, Native Produce and Animal By-products (cfna), which took place at the Parisian Macau Hotel, in the Special Administrative Region of Macau, China from August 28–30.

More than 275 delegates participated in the conference, from the following countries: Brazil, China, Ethiopia, Gambia, Germany, India, Japan, Mexico, Nigeria, Pakistan, Senegal, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Taiwan, Tanzania, Togo, Turkey, UAE, USA and Vietnam.

The event also hosted 30 sponsors, 13 international supporting bodies, 17 exhibitors and over 42 distin guished speakers. The inaugural address was delivered by Cao Derong, president of the cfna , while speakers from different countries presented the peanut crop scenarios and market conditions: Jahid Nagarwala (Mo zambique and Tanzania), Monik Vorra (India), Boubacar Konta (Senegal), Robson Fonseca (Brazil), Edoardo Fracanzani (Argentina) and Islam Baasher (the uae

International Events

The China International Peanut Conference

September 26 - 28

The second important event we are celebrating is the one organized in September by the China Chamber of Commerce of Import and Export of Foodstuffs, Native Produce and Animal By-products (cfna) at the Xingcheng Haishanghai Hotel, Xingcheng City, Liaoning Province.

This event was dedicated exclusively to peanuts and included presentations of the crop outlook in the main producing areas: China, the usa , India, Argentina, Brazil and Africa. Separate talks focused on the development of High Oleic peanut production and processing in China and the peanut futures market, among other topics. The last day of the conference was dedicated to an outdoor visit to the Xingcheng National Peanut Planting Base and the Peanut Industry Park.