
Food grown with fewer chemicals? A Brazilian scientist wins $500,000 for showing the way
DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — A Brazilian scientist who pushed back against chemical fertilizers and researched biologically based approaches to more robust food production has been honored with this year's World Food Prize, the organization announced Tuesday.
Microbiologist Mariangela Hungria's research helped her country become an agricultural powerhouse, an accomplishment that has now won her $500,000 from the Iowa-based
World Food Prize Foundation.
Hungria has been researching biological seed and soil treatments for 40 years, and has worked with
Brazilian farmers
to implement her findings.
'I still cannot believe it. Everybody said, my whole life, it's improbable, you are going the wrong way, just go to things like chemicals and so on. And then, I received the
most important prize
in the world of agriculture,' Hungria said in an interview. 'Sometimes I still think I'll wake up and see that it's not true.'
Norman Borlaug, who received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1970 for his work to dramatically increase crop yields and reduce the threat of starvation in many countries, founded the World Food Prize. Since the first prize was handed out in 1987, 55 people have been honored.
Hungria said she grew up wanting to alleviate hunger. Early in her career, she decided to focus on a process called biological nitrogen fixation, in which soil bacteria could be used to promote plant growth. At that time, farmers in Brazil and around the world were reluctant to reduce their use of nitrogen fertilizers, which dramatically increase crop production but lead to greenhouse gas emissions and
pollutes waterways
.
Hungria studied how bacteria can interact with plant roots to naturally produce nitrogen. She then demonstrated her work on test plots and began working directly with farmers to convince them that they wouldn't have to sacrifice high crop yields if they switched to a biological process.
The work is credited for increasing yields of several crops, including wheat, corn and beans, but it has been especially affective on soybeans. Brazil has since become the world's largest soybean producer, surpassing the United States and Argentina.
Although Hungria's research could be applied on farms in other countries, soybean production in the U.S. is different than it is in Brazil; American farmers typically rotate crops on their land between growing corn and soybeans. Enough nitrate fertilizer applied to corn still remains in the soil when soybeans are planted that little or no fertilizer needs to be applied, Hungria said.
Brazilian agricultural companies have faced fierce criticism for
clearing forested land
to create farmland, largely to grow soybeans.
Much of that criticism is justified, Hungria said, but she added that her biological approach builds up the soil and makes further encroachment into forested areas less necessary.
'If you manage the crop well, the crop will enrich the soil with nitrogen. Soil health improves if you do the right things,' she said.
Hungria will be awarded her prize at an annual October gathering in Des Moines, Iowa, of agricultural researchers and officials from around the world.
Gebisa Ejeta, chair of the World Food Prize Laureate Selection Committee, credited Hungria for her 'extraordinary scientific achievements' that have transformed agriculture in South America.
'Her brilliant scientific work and her committed vision for advancing sustainable crop production to feed humanity with judicious use of chemical fertilizer inputs and biological amendments has gained her global recognition both at home and abroad,' Ejeta said in a statement.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Business Insider
4 hours ago
- Business Insider
AstraZeneca announces results from MATTERHORN Phase III trial of IMFINZI
Positive results from the MATTERHORN Phase III trial showed perioperative treatment with AstraZeneca's (AZN) IMFINZI in combination with standard-of-care FLOT chemotherapy demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in the primary endpoint of event-free survival, EFS, versus chemotherapy alone. Patients were treated with neoadjuvant IMFINZI in combination with chemotherapy before surgery, followed by adjuvant IMFINZI in combination with chemotherapy, then IMFINZI monotherapy. The trial evaluated this regimen versus perioperative chemotherapy alone for patients with resectable, early-stage and locally advanced gastric and gastroesophageal junction, GEJ, cancers. In a planned interim analysis, patients treated with the IMFINZI-based perioperative regimen showed a 29% reduction in the risk of disease progression, recurrence or death versus chemotherapy alone. Estimated median EFS was not yet reached for the IMFINZI arm versus 32.8 months for the comparator arm. For the secondary endpoint of overall survival, a strong trend was observed in favor of the IMFINZI-based perioperative regimen. The trial will continue to follow OS, which will be formally assessed at the final analysis. Confident Investing Starts Here:


Business Insider
4 hours ago
- Business Insider
Guardant Health presented results of largest study on ctDNA in colon cancer
Guardant Health (GH) presented results of the largest study to date evaluating circulating tumor DNA, ctDNA, in colon cancer prior to chemotherapy, demonstrating the ability of the Guardant Reveal test to stratify the risk of disease recurrence and overall survival, and thus inform treatment decisions after surgery. Data from the phase III trial of FOLFOX-based adjuvant chemotherapy involving over 2,000 patients with stage III colon cancer with median follow-up of 6.1 years were presented at the 2025 American Society for Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting. Results demonstrated that circulating tumor DNA detected in the bloodstream after cancer surgery and prior to the start of adjuvant therapy, using the Guardant Reveal test, is a strong predictor of the risk of disease recurrence and poorer survival, and suggest the potential for ctDNA testing to improve decision-making at a critical time point for post-operative chemotherapy. Specifically: Among patients with post-surgical ctDNA detected, 62.6% had the cancer return within 3 years, despite having had adjuvant chemotherapy, while only 15.4% of patients with undetectable ctDNA recurred in the same period. The level of ctDNA, or tumor fraction, showed promise in identifying individuals who are less likely to clear residual disease with adjuvant treatment.


Forbes
17 hours ago
- Forbes
Immigration Research Shows Stephen Miller Wrong About American Science
White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller attends a press briefing at the White House on ... More February 20, 2025. Miller, the chief architect of the Trump administration's immigration policy, argues that American scientific achievement owes little to immigrants. A significant body of research disputes that contention. (Photo by) Stephen Miller, the chief architect of the Trump administration's immigration policy, said recently that American scientific achievement owes little to immigrants. A significant body of research disputes that contention. Miller's argument and a statement by Vice President JD Vance about the Apollo Program seem designed to justify the administration's restrictions on international students and high-skilled immigrants. On May 31, 2025, in a statement on White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller wrote, 'During the middle of the 20th century—when the U.S. achieved unquestioned global scientific dominance—there was net zero migration. From the 20's to the 70's the foreign-born population was cut almost by half while the overall population doubled. (Until Hart-Celler kicked in).' Contrary to the implication of Miller's statement, American science owes a great deal to immigrants in the post-war period. Between 1945 and 1974, 16 of the 30 U.S. winners of the Nobel Prize in physics were immigrants, according to a National Foundation for American Policy analysis. In 1954, the Atomic Energy Act established an award recognizing scientific achievements in atomic energy. Italian-born Enrico Fermi won the first award. Five of the first eight winners of what became the Enrico Fermi Award (named after his death) were immigrants. Four of the nuclear scientists who came to the United States from Europe in the 1930s later received a Nobel Prize for physics: Felix Bloch, born in Switzerland, won it in 1952, Emilio Segre (Italy) in 1959, and Maria Mayer (Poland) and Eugene Wigner (Hungary) won the award in 1963. Despite the immigration restrictions imposed by Congress in 1921 and 1924, U.S. universities and others found ways around some of the quotas as fascist governments drove many brilliant individuals out of Europe. Immigrants Albert Einstein and Leo Szilard signed a letter used by Russian-born economist Alexander Sachs to convince President Franklin Delano Roosevelt to start the Manhattan Project. Breakthroughs by Niels Bohr, born in Denmark, and Enrico Fermi were crucial in developing the atomic bomb. In the end, immigrant and U.S.-born scientists working together turned theory into reality in the race to build the bomb before Nazi Germany. Between 1945 and 1974, 15 of the 36 U.S. Nobel Prizes in medicine, or 42%, were awarded to immigrants. That tells only part of the story. Albert Sabin, an immigrant from Poland, and Jonas Salk, the son of an immigrant, developed the vaccines that ended polio as a threat to Americans. Both men were in America due to family immigration. 'Without Sabin and Salk, American children would continue to be paralyzed for life by polio,' Michel Zaffran, director of polio eradication at the World Health Organization, said in an interview. 'Their contribution is quite simply immeasurable.' Immigrants have been awarded 40% of the Nobel Prizes won by Americans in chemistry, medicine and physics since 2000, according to an NFAP analysis (updated through the 2024 awards). Enrico Fermi in His Laboratory (Photo by © CORBIS/Corbis via Getty Images) The 1924 Immigration Act, which reduced the flow of immigrants by approximately 90% and blocked Jews, Eastern Europeans and Asians, proved disastrous economically for America. According to research by New York University economists Petra Moser and Shmuel San, the restrictive immigration quotas of the 1920s significantly reduced invention in the United States. 'After the quotas, U.S. scientists produced 68% fewer additional patents in the pre-quota fields of ESE-born [Eastern and Southern European immigrant] scientists compared with the pre-quota fields of other U.S. scientists,' write Moser and San. 'Time-varying effects show a large decline in invention by U.S. scientists in the 1930s, which persisted into the 1960s.' Moser and San said the results show that U.S. scientists benefited from the presence of immigrant scientists but suffered after U.S. immigration restrictions blocked their entry. 'A firm-level analysis of changes in patenting reveals that firms which employed ESE-born [Eastern and Southern European immigrant] scientists in 1921 created 53% fewer inventions after the quotas,' according to Moster and San. 'A text analysis of U.S. patents indicates that invention also declined more broadly. After the quotas, 23% fewer U.S. patents describe inventions in ESE [Eastern and Southern European immigrant] fields compared with other fields.' UPENN Wharton economics professor Zeke Hernandez said one would expect similar consequences today should U.S. immigration policy block the entry of international students and foreign-born scientists and engineers. 'America's innovation machine would be decimated,' said Hernandez. 'Sixteen percent of inventors in the U.S. are foreign-born, but they account for 36% of all patents.' He points out immigrants are 80% more likely than the U.S.-born to start new businesses, and they are founders of over half of startups that achieve a $1 billion valuation. Over 70% of the full-time graduate students in key technical fields at U.S. universities are foreign-born. According to economist Zeke Hernandez, 'You don't have to have compassion for foreigners to know that getting rid of immigrants is bad for us.'