Quick viewing(Text Mode)

Hevea Brasiliensis Days and Establishment of H

Hevea Brasiliensis Days and Establishment of H

Indian Journal of Natural Products and Resources Vol. 8(1), March 2017, pp. 9-17

Search for rubber in pre- brasiliensis days and establishment of H. brasiliensis in

Anantanarayanan Raman1 and Chaendaekettu Narayanan2* 1Charles Sturt University & Graham Centre for Agricultural Innovation, PO Box 883, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia 2Rubber Research Institute of India, Rubber Board PO, Kottayam 686 009, Kerala, India

Received 03 June 2016; Revised 22 January 2017

Natural rubber, obtained from the spurge , is a material of high relevance in modern industrialized society. Its uses are manifold. In spite of a stiff competition from synthetic rubber and plastic, is still in demand and large plantations of it are presently exploited for an uninterrupted supply. H. brasiliensis was introduced into India from , through a circuitous route, thanks to Dietrich Brandis (then Inspector General of Forests, Government of India), who directed operations in the 1870s. The present article explores the historical landmark events that occurred before Brandis’s decision on its introduction into India and after, supplemented by relevant notations. The fascinating subplot in the story of H. brasiliensis introduction into India is the search for sources of ‘rubber’ within the subcontinent and how a non-edible fig was looked at, quite rigorously, as an invaluable material in this context. Early efforts made by the Rubber Research Institute of India, Kottayam in independent India include the development of a productive clone RRII 105, which has revolutionized rubber production in Indian in the recent decades.

Keywords: Central Travancore, Dietrich Brandis, Economic relevance, Ficus elastica, , John Royle, Joseph Hooker, Malabar, , William Griffith. IPC code; Int. cl. (2015.01)−Ao1H 5/00

Introduction by coagulating either spontaneously or applying heat, Natural rubber is a biomaterial of high importance smoke, or mechanical devices. In the later decades of today. Think of an Airbus A380 (22 wheels, the 19th and earlier decades of the 20th centuries, c. 600,000 kg when fully loaded). Its natural-rubber caoutchouc and gutta percha meant rubber. Caoutchouc tyres, reinforced with steel ribs, withstand a variety generically referred to the raw-rubber in French- of operational conditions. During landing these speaking nations, whereas it meant the refined tyres experience a runway-friction coefficient of material in English-speaking nations1. The term 0.40 and above in normal day conditions, in addition caoutchouc (weeping ) evolved from the Central- to enduring highly dynamic braking loads. The American indigenous name cau-cho (que-chu-a) nitrogen-filled tyres smoothen and cushion the referring to elastica (Family ) that harsh, friction-intensive landing of the aircraft. This naturally and plentifully occurs in the Amazon. Gutta adequately illuminates the strength and durability this percha is similar to the rubber of H. brasiliensis material — rubber — has, of course, after treating the source, but is obtained from the latex of such as raw latex of Hevea brasiliensis (Family ) Palaquium (Family Sapotaceae) that occur in the with various vulcanizing accelerators. Malaysian islands of Borneo (1° 0′ N, 114° 0′ E) and The latex of plants belonging to the Family Apocynaceae Sarawak (3°04’ N, 113°78’ E), and in North-Eastern (and ex-Asclepiadaceae), Euphorbiaceae, Moraceae, segments of India (26° 0′ N, 92° 7′ E). Gutta percha is and Asteraceae provide natural rubber (hereafter the anglicized Malay term gutta perça, which means ‘rubber’). However, presently, rubber is almost sap of perça, the sap of Palaquium. The gutta exclusively obtained from H. brasiliensis (the Pará- material is a 1-4-trans-poly-isoprene and is nearly rubber tree, Fig. 1). The finished product is produced identical to the molecular structure of H. brasiliensis rubber2. One contemporary use of gutta percha is —————— filling teeth cavities3. How the term ‘rubber’ came *Correspondent author Email: [email protected] about is a fascinating element in the rubber story. 10 INDIAN J NAT PROD RESOUR, MARCH 2017

Fig. 1—Hevea brasiliensis. Source: Köhler's Medizinal-Pflanzen in Naturgetreuen Abbildungen mit Kurz Erläuterndem Texte45

Joseph Priestley4, British chemist‒mathematician, found that the coagulated latex of H. brasiliensis can erase (‘rub’ off) lead-pencil markings. He says ‘…, I have seen a substance excellently adapted to the purpose of wiping from paper the marks of a black-lead-pencil. It must, therefore, be of singular use to those who practise drawing’. th From the later decades of 18 century, interest in Fig. 2—Urceola elastica. Source: Wight’s Icones Plantarum Indiæ rubber, especially of H. brasiliensis, known as the Orientalis46 [The explanation “Plates bearing the legend ‘India rubber’, fascinated several Western chemist ‘Roxburghianae’ represent redrawing of Roxburgh’s unpublished ‒physicists and inventors, such as Samuel Peal, plates now at the Calcutta Botanic Garden, and thus represent Roxburghian species as described in his Flora Indica.” occurs at Charles Macintosh, Thomas Hancock, and Charles the start of Wight’s Icones Plantarum, Volume 2.] The notation 5,6 Goodyear . European residents in the Straits ‘Dumphy Lith.’ at the right bottom of the image refers to John Settlements became interested in rubber-yielding, Dumphy, who was the lithographer at Fort St. George Press, th laticiferous plants, mainly because of their economic Madras, in mid 19 century. Dumphy was involved with the preparation of Robert Wight’s Icones Plantarum in 1839 prospects. James Howison, a practising surgeon in (Database of Scientific Illustrators, 1450—1950, http://www.uni- Penang (5° 24′ N, 100° 14′ E) proposed planting of stuttgart.de/hi/gnt/dsi2/index) Urceola elastica (Family Apocynaceae) after experimenting with its latex in rubber production7. Search for rubber in the Indian subcontinent: William Roxburgh in India8 described U. elastica Before the arrival of H. brasiliensis formally (Fig. 2). However, with the introduction of Ficus elastica (Family Moraceae) evoked H. brasiliensis into Malesian region in the later considerable interest in India, although a few other decades of the 19th century, the erstwhile British laticiferous plants, mostly exotic, but naturalized over colonies of Malesia have become world leaders in time, such as Cryptostegia grandiflora (Family H. brasiliensis cultivation and rubber production. Apocynaceae) also evoked some interest9. In this article, the efforts made in India before William Roxburgh, then Superintendent of the the introduction of H. brasiliensis, what led to Calcutta , received a rattan-cane its introduction into India, and how it was basket (rattan ― various species of Calamus, established as a key plantation crop in Malabar Family Arecaceae) bearing gifts from a friend in and Central Travancore regions in modern Kerala is Sylhet in 1810. The lining the basket attracted explored. Roxburgh. On examination, he found that the lining RAMAN & NARAYANAN: INTRODUCTION OF RUBBER IN INDIA 11

was a thin coat of caoutchouc10, which he later F. elastica was first described by William realized was from a ‘fig’ taxon. He described Roxburgh in his magnum opus Hortus Bengalensis this ‘fig’ as F. elastica in 181411. He sent a sample (1814). A redescription of F. elastica was provided by of the lining material to David Brewster, a physicist Danish botanist Jens Wilken Hornemann in 1832. The in London for analysis. Brewster12 found that Penny Magazine article also offers other, equally the material was elastic, similar to the South- fascinating, information on the ways by which the American rubber, and was ‘superior’ to the South- American-Indians ‘processed’ rubber material from American rubber in terms of lightness of colour and F. elastica and how the Indian-Indians ‘processed’ being free of foetid stench. The rationale behind the rubber material F. elastica. A remark, in the same naming of this plant as F. elastica by Roxburgh is article, obvious. ‘The Indians [sic. the Indian-Indians] had William Griffith13, an Assistant Surgeon on long been in the habit of making boots of deputation from Madras Medical Service to the caoutchouc, which were perfectly waterproof.’ Bhutan mission, stumbled on populations of F. is worthy of exploration clarifying what do ‘boots’ elastica during his travel into the forests of Bengal, mean and how Indians made them. made via Férôzepur (British Library, Digitized in his Illustrations of the Manuscript: IOR/F/4/1787/73597). Griffith talked Botany, and other branches of the Natural History of about the size, geographical locations, and abundance the Himalayan Mountains, and of the Flora of of this species. He indicated his interest in this tree as Cashmere (1835) refers to H. brasiliensis, while triggered by Roxburgh and also by one Matthew talking of Euphorbiaceae15: Richard Smith, a planter at Sylhet. With regard to the latex (referred as ‘juice’), Griffith explained its extraction. He compared the biological properties of F. elastica of Bengal (Sylhet) with those known in Assam, and with the South-American populations of H. brasiliensis in the context of cultivation (like making cuttings and planting), and F. elastica’s value as a ‘new’ product. Griffith also remarked on ‘bottling’ F. elastica latex. An ink drawing of a twig, captioned ‘Ficus elastica Roxburgh’, is available in Griffith (ibid) (Fig. 3). Documentation on F. elastica-source ‘rubber’ occurred in the Penny Magazine of the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge of London14: ‘The juice of this valuable plant (sic. Ficus elastica) is used by the natives of Silhet (sic. Sylhet) to smear over the inside of baskets constructed of split rattan, which thus rendered water-tight. Old yield richer juice than young one. The milk is extracted by incisions made across the bark down to the wood, at a distance of a foot (c. 30 cm) from each other, all round the trunk or branch, up to the top of the tree, and the higher the more abundant is the fluid said to be. After one operation the tree requires a fortnight’s rest, when it may be again repeated. When the juice is exposed to the air it separates spontaneously into a firm elastic substance and a fetid whey-coloured liquid. Fifty ounces of pure milky juice taken from the trees in August yields exactly 15½ ounces of clean washed caoutchouc. This Fig. 3—William Griffith’s artwork of Ficus elastica from the substance is of the finest quantities.’ material obtained by him on his trip to Sylhet13 12 INDIAN J NAT PROD RESOUR, MARCH 2017

‘The most useful product of the family, however, H. brasiliensis rubber — Historical milestones and that which has lately become an article of Rubber products were known in the Central and commerce, and of great utility in a variety of arts, is South Americas for long. For example, Mesoamerican Caoutchouc, so well known as India-rubber and (Mexican) archaeological excavations dating to exported principally from Pará. This is chiefly yielded 1600―1200 BC have revealed rubber balls20. by Siphonia elastica (, Aublet), a Christopher Columbus on his 1495 AD voyage to tree of Guiana and Brazil, which would no doubt the Americas records that he saw the people of thrive in Bengal.’ Hispaniola (modern Haiti, Caribbean Island Group) In the early 1850s, at least 20 plants of the Indian playing, using heavy balls made of a ‘plant gum’, subcontinent were ‘registered’ as rubber sources, which bounced to greater heights than what he had which necessitated Government of India to appoint a known in Europe21. Christopher Columbus knew of Chemical Analyst to examine the veracity of the objects similar to balls used in games in Spain. Such claims. objects were animal bladders filled with either air or Hugh Cleghorn16, Conservator of Forests, Madras water. Columbus introduced this novel gum material Presidency, refers to the latex from a species of from Hispaniola into Europe. Bassia (Family Sapotaceae) from Wyanad region Charles-Marie de la Condamine (1701–1774) was (11° 60′ N, 76° 08′ E; in the present Kerala) known the first to shine light on H. brasiliensis. He found locally as pauchontee (the Indian-gutta) tree. Cleghorn H. brasiliensis on the banks of Esmeralda River determined this taxon as a species of Palaquium16 (modern Bolivia) (Fig. 4). de la Condamine did not after comparing notes with Wight’s Icones Plantarum. go to searching H. brasiliensis, but Today, we know that this taxon is Palaquium. He got events panned out so22. In the early decades of the the plant material from A. R. W. Lascelles, a coffee 20th century, immense interest developed in the planter at Devallikottah (Wyanad) in September 1858. production of commercial rubber, and consequently in The report also included reports on the analysis of the science of H. brasiliensis and scientific management laticiferous exudates of this plant carried out by of its plantations evolved. Until the mid 1850s, most various British chemists, who summarily indicate this of extracted rubber was from natural populations of as ‘invaluable’. H. brasiliensis in South America. Between 1870s and Gustav Mann, then an Imperial Forest Servant in Assam, explored rubber-yielding plants locally. In a communication to (then Director of Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew), Mann17 asked whether the caoutchouc trees of and Brazil are likely to be exhausted; he argued that a response to that query was important for the Assam Forest Division, since F. elastica could not be tapped regularly without great care and therefore a permanent supply of rubber from the area needed to be secured. In spite of these efforts, Government of India preferred to bring H. brasiliensis germplasm from Brazil in the later decades of the 19th century. The key reasons for favouring H. brasiliensis and bringing it to India were (a) the cultivation of local ‘rubber’ species such as F. elastica as monoculture was cumbersome, Fig. 4—Artwork of ‘H. brasiliensis’ and ‘’ in de la (b) H. brasiliensis yielded rubber more quickly than Condamine22. (For explanations of annotated numbers see the ‘known’ Indian taxa of similar use and value, (c) original.) [Note: This artwork is signed ‘J. Ingram, Sculpt.’. John the yield quantity of H. brasiliensis was greater than Ingram, a British-born engraver moved to Paris in 175547. Tree that from the rubber-yielding taxa of the subcontinent, and leaf sketches in this artwork appear inaccurate. Nevertheless, and (d) latex of F. elastica polymerized rapidly, while a reasonable explanation would be that de la Condamine carried the crude sketches made by Fresneau to Paris and from those transporting latex for processing elsewhere, thus 18,19 sketches, Ingram prepared the engravings without personally disadvantaging tappers and planters . seeing either the tree or its foliage.] RAMAN & NARAYANAN: INTRODUCTION OF RUBBER IN INDIA 13

1900s, things changed dramatically. Professional Another news item entitled ‘the rival of Pará rubber scientific approach in dealing with crop husbandry in the east’ in p. 219 refers to a lengthy report by and plantation administration, besides evidence-based Stanley Arden of Selangor (3o 12′ N, 101o 44′ E) on improvements to achieve large-scale production of the early failure of H. brasiliensis introduced into rubber products and perfection of the machinery used India. Arden argued that H. brasiliensis is unsuitable gained significance in the 1900s. This encouraged for planting in South and South-East Asia, because of emergence of professional journals, such as the India climatic and edaphic factors. He explained that Rubber World (IRW) published in USA between 1899 planters in the Straits Settlements were unimpressed and 1954. The 1903 issue of IRW (Fig. 5) included by H. brasiliensis, because of low profits it could articles, commentaries, and news items on rubber fetch compared with those from Coffea arabica industry and trade, nearly from all over the world, (Family ) planting. Nevertheless, with offering a great reading. Rubber-based industries were dropping coffee prices across the world, interest of one key element in the technological advancement planters in Straits Settlements shifted to trial planting of the USA in the early 20th century. Even the of H. brasiliensis in relatively small areas (c. 12,000 advertisements were informative. Commercial acres) in 1896–1897. The Arden report summary in advertisements in IRW refered to industrial conveyer IRW refered to production costs and profit margins as belts, gaskets and ‘O’ rings that go at metal junctions, preferred by planters in Straits Settlements. Arden large industrial and thin garden hoses, automobile reiteratered that a ‘new source’ of the Pará rubber tyres, valves, Macintoshes, rain jackets, waders, car plant should be ‘developed’ (p. 220) and growing that springs, oil-proof and acid-proof connectors used in ‘new’ plant should be in Brazil. Whether Arden steam carrying pipes — made of rubber, further to means a ‘hybrid’ or a ‘clone’ by saying ‘a new plant’ hardened rubber items such as rods, tubes, sheets, is not clear; maybe that was the intent. This was the mallets, and rubber-sole tennis shoes, and what state of affairs with H. brasiliensis introduction into else not. A news item in p. 229 speaks of the unique South and at the close of 19th century. single ‘rubber’ copy of Charles Goodyear’s book23 H. brasiliensis made of ‘rubber and fibre parchment’ pages and hard- Introduction of into India, early rubber wrapper. misadventures Charles Goodyear’s serendipitous discovery of vulcanization changed global interest in H. brasiliensis dramatically24. To ensure an uninterrupted supply of rubber, the British Government was keen on obtaining seeds of H. brasiliensis for establishment in its tropical colonies. The India Office in London initiated and sponsored the first South-American exploration to secure H. brasiliensis seeds in 1873. Two thousand seeds collected in Cametá (Brazil, 02°14′ S, 49°29′ W) were germinated in the Kew Botanic Gardens in June 1873. Six of the seedlings were sent to Calcutta Botanic Gardens in the same year25. They never survived. The reasons were attributed to climate. The India Office considered South-America expedition based on the recommendation of Clements Robert Markham, because of his experience in exploring Peru for Cinchona in the 1860s. Markham remarked26, 'After visiting the forests in South America and reflecting on the great demand, I came to the conclusion that the best caoutchouc yielding trees should be

cultivated and introduced into our Eastern possessions'. Fig. 5—Cover page of India Rubber World, 1903 (This was Nothing of the biology of H. brasiliensis was published on the 1st of each month by ‘The India Rubber Publishing Co.’, New York; source: at http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/ known. James Collins, Curator of the Pharmaceutical item/31418#page/1/mode/1up) Society Museum, London, was commissioned to 14 INDIAN J NAT PROD RESOUR, MARCH 2017

document the biology of this plant. On return to Department of Madras Presidency), 28 saplings from Britain, Collins formally reported to Hooker. The end Ceylon were planted in Nilambur (11° 16′ N, 76° 13′ section of the Collins report27 includes a Memorandum E) in 1880. However, these failed to grow. The 1881 by Dietrich Brandis28 (then an Imperial Forest Servant consignments were planted in the new botanical and Inspector-General of Forests of India) responding garden at Burliar (The Nilgiris, 11° 21’ N, 76° 47’ E) to concerns raised by Collins on the possible cultivation established by K. B. Thomas, Collector of of H. brasiliensis in India. Brandis listed the best options Coimbatore—Nilgiris District, a few years earlier. for H. brasiliensis cultivation in the subcontinent in Not only H. brasiliensis seedlings were tried in the this Memorandum. He clarified that the local ‘rubber’ Burliar Garden, but also those of Manihot glaziovii plants, such as F. elastica, should be overlooked and (presently, M. carthaginensis subsp. glaziovii, Family H. brasiliensis needed to be tried as the rubber source Euphorbiaceae) and F. elastica. Further, planting of and supply for Britain. Based on climate and soil H. brasiliensis in small measures was attempted reasons, Brandis recommended South Canara (13° 00′ by individual planters. A. G. Nicholson planted N, 75° 40′ E; Mangalore and neighbourhood), Malabar H. brasiliensis in the Shevroys (Yercaud, 11o 77′ N, (11° 25′ N, 75° 77′ E; Kasargod‒Calicut), and Travancore 78o 20′ E) and in Kotagiri (The Nilgiris, 11o 43′ N, 76o (8° 26′ N, 76° 55′ E; Kanyakumari‒ southern end of 88′ E) in 1898. Nicholson planted H. brasiliensis Alwaye) as the ideal locations in India. Based on this, among Coffea bushes, and that association probably Hooker endorsed introduction of H. brasiliensis into invited disaster due to unexplained reasons. Today we India. Brandis’s arguments favouring the Malabar know that Coffea can be allelopathic30. Coast (sensu lato) for H. brasiliensis mass cultivation At the behest of the Nilgiri Planters’ Association, a impresses as prophetic, especially in the light of 5-acre block of land along the mountain road to Stanley Arden’s remarks that South Asia and Coonoor (11o 35′ N, 76o 80′ N) came up for South-East Asia are unsuitable for H. brasiliensis experimental purposes under the supervision of cultivation, made nearly three decades later. Today H. Rudolph Anstead [then Scientific Officer, United brasiliensis cultivation in Travancore‒Malabar Planters’ Association of South India (UPASI)] and F. regions of Kerala is a key contributor to India’s H. Butcher (then Curator, Botanical Gardens, Ooty) exchequer. for hybridization trials of Coffea and Hevea in 1910. Hooker persuaded Henry Alexander Wickham For various reasons these hybridization trials ceased (1846–1928), a coffee planter in Brazil, to collect shortly30; no explanations occur why H. brasiliensis H. brasiliensis seeds in 1876, with expenses met by trials were abandoned. the India Office in London. Wickham collected Goa’s landscape and environment prompted a few 70,000 seeds of H. brasiliensis from Santarém of its Portuguese residents to believe that it would suit (Brazil, 2° 25′ S, 54° 43′ W) and delivered them to H. brasiliensis cultivation. In 1900, H. brasiliensis Hooker. Of these, c. 4000 germinated. Two thousand saplings, obtained from Belgaum, were planted in o o of them were dispatched to Ceylon () and Ponda (15 40′ N, 74 02′ E). Attempts were made to the remaining 2000 to Straits Settlements, which grew plant in Aldona (15° 35′ N, 73° 52′ E) and Margao well in their new locations. The irony is that the (15° 16′ N, 73° 57′ E) as well. These efforts too did 1 rubber-seed collection expedition was funded by the not take off as desired due to a variety of reasons . India Office, whereas India never received the seeds, In the following decade (1900‒1910), large which instead were sent to Ceylon and the Straits monocultural plantations of H. brasiliensis were Settlements. The newly set up rubber garden in facilitated in Malabar and Travancore, and along the o o Ceylon — later the Henarathgoda Botanic Gardens lower ranges of the Palnis (10 45′ N, 77 51′ E) using 31 (Gampaha, 7° 06′ N, 79° 59′ E) — too was financially 16000 seedlings from Burliar Garden nursery . supported by Government of India28. Large-scale cultivation of H. brasiliensis in India started with the pioneering effort of four European Establishment in India planters (John J. Murphy, J. A. Hunter, K. E. Nicoll, The earliest H. brasiliensis seedling consignment and C. M. F. Ross) in Central Travancore, who received in India was sent from Ceylon in 1878. formed the Périyãr Syndicate. They established the Consignments of smaller numbers of H. brasiliensis first H. brasiliensis plantation on the banks of Périyãr seedlings were received in 1880 and 1881. On the river at Thottékãdu near Alwayé (10° 11′ N, 76° 35′ suggestion of Richard Beddome (then Head, Forest E) in 190232. John Murphy, along with H. D. Deane RAMAN & NARAYANAN: INTRODUCTION OF RUBBER IN INDIA 15

and R. S. Imray established H. brasiliensis plantation independent India, especially from the late 1950s, this in Mundakãyam (Central Travancore) in 1904. Local industry has prospered more as a small stakeholder government provided land grants encouraging rubber- industry with the disintegration of estate-based tree plantations. The Travancore Rubber & Produce industry. Company and Malayalam Rubber & Produce Company started their operations in Central Travancore in Conclusion 1904-1910. Rise in motor-car use and World War I Among the popular rubber sources, H. brasiliensis, needs enhanced the demand for finished rubber F. elastica, and Parthenium argentatus (Family products, which in turn accelerated rubber production Asteraceae) today, P. argentatus and H. brasiliensis making the Indian rubber industry to grow by 16 % provide high-molecular weight rubber and F. elastica in 1905-191533. Globally, the price of the finished low-molecular weight rubber. Therefore, attention is presently invested on investigating P. argentatus rubber rose significantly, influencing the rapid expansion 40 of this industry in Kerala in particular34. Governments of as a possible alternative for rubber extraction . Additionally, P. argentatus has a wider genepool than Madras and Mysore encouraged rubber cultivation in 41 their states with land-tax exemptions for 3‒5 years that of H. brasiliensis . being offered as incentives35. An excellent socio- Today production of H. brasiliensis rubber in India historic-economic analysis is available in Kumar35. has grown immensely from an insignificantly small His remarks on the role played by the then new, consignment of saplings introduced from Brazil via Kew Botanic Gardens and Ceylon Rubber Garden in Central Travancore newspaper Malayala Manorama th referring to issues and crises that arose between the the final decade of the 19 century. In a global established European planters and the newly context, India — ranked fourth in natural rubber establishing Indian planters are notable. production in 2012, but slipped to fifth in 2014 The appointment of a Scientific Officer by the because of Vietnam — producing close to 900,000 Government of Madras in 1909 sowed the seeds for tons annually contributing to c. 8 % of the global scientific management of rubber-tree planting in rubber production. In 2012-2013, India earned c. INR India36,37. A research station committed to rubber 155 billion as foreign exchange from manufactured- tree development was established at Mundakãyam rubber product export. Kerala leads in rubber (Kerala) in 1921 on the initiative of the UPASI, which production in India. The north-eastern state Tripura is led to the classical trials of spraying Bordeaux currently recognized as a potential location for rubber mixture to manage Phytophthora disease of Hevea38. cultivation in the near future42. The Indian rubber The establishment of the Rubber Research Institute industry, today, is driven mostly by small- and micro- of India (RRII) in 1955 accelerated H. brasiliensis scale plantations. The Indian rubber industry faced a cultivation and rubber product improvement in setback in 2014 with c. 17 % decline in annual India. Comprehensive breeding trials led to multiple production; however, agricultural economists predict RRII clones, which were subsequently launched into that this problem will be remedied in 2016. One key commercial cultivation. The Indian flagship clone reason for such rapid production expansion in India RRII 105, born out of the first hybridization trial in was the generation of ‘new’ high-yielding clones of 1954 involving the Indonesian and Malaysian clones H. brasiliensis43. Nevertheless, vulnerability to was launched in the 1980s. RRII 105 revolutionized climate change and susceptibility to epidemic diseases India’s rubber production greatly benefitting the and pestiferous outbreaks44 pose serious challenges 38 socio-economic status of the planters of Kerala . to productivity because H. brasiliensis breeding About 100 years after the Wickham adventure exercises have kept productivity as the prime to Amazon, a more organised collection was focus (e.g., H. brasiliensis RRII 105). In terms of sponsored by the International Rubber Research and sustainable production of a crop of significant human Development Board (IRRDB) in 1981, which resulted interest, H. brasileinsis deserves greater caution in in collecting c. 65,000 seeds and budwood from 200 maintaining the purity of the germplasm and in trees, apparently with greater yield capacity and generating clones for specific reasons. disease-free that were shared among IRRDB member countries, including India9,38. Viswanathan and Acknowledgement Shivakoti39 explain the growth of rubber industry in We thank Henry Noltie (Royal Botanic Garden, India at length and they further explained that in post- Edinburgh), C. Sathish Kumar (Jawaharlal Nehru 16 INDIAN J NAT PROD RESOUR, MARCH 2017

Tropical Botanical Garden & Research Institute, 21 Irwing W, A History of the Life and Voyages of Christopher Trivandrum), and K G Tharian (Rubber Research Columbus, Volume I, G. & C. Carvill, New York, 1828. 22 de la Condamine C M, Sur une résine élastique, Institute of India, Kottayam) for reviews and helpful nouvellement découverte à Cayenne par M. Fresneau: et sur remarks. l’usage de divers suc laiteux d’arbres de la Guiane ou France équinoctiale, Mém Acad R Sci, 1751, 1755 (year of References publication), 319‒333. 1 Wyllie J A and Ferreira O G, Notes on Rubber Cultivation, 23 Goodyear C, Gum-elastic and its Varieties: with a Detailed with Special Reference to Portuguese India, Higginbotham & Account of its Applications and Uses, and of the Discovery Co., Madras, 1907. of Vulcanization, published by Charles Goodyear, New 2 Bunn C W, Molecular structure and rubber-like elasticity. I. Haven, 1853. The crystal structures of beta gutta-percha, rubber and 24 Porritt B D, The rubber industry ‒Past and present, J Roy Soc polychloroprene, Proc Roy Soc (A), 1942, 180, 40‒66. Arts, 1919, 67, 255‒256. 3 Rajeswari P, Gopikrishna V, Parameswaran A, Gupta T and 25 Hilton R N, South-American leaf blight: a review of the Kandaswamy D, In-vitro evaluation of apical micro leakage literature relating to its depredations in South America, its of Thermafil and Obtura II heated guttapercha in comparison threats to the Far East and the methods available for its with cold lateral condensation using fluid filtration system, control, J Rubb Res Inst Malay, 1955, 14, 287‒354. Endodont, 2005, 17, 24‒31. 26 Markham C R, The cultivation of caoutchouc-yielding trees 4 Priestley J, A familiar introduction to the theory and practice in British India, Bull Rubb Grow Asso, 1927, 9, 674–679. of perspective, J. Johnson & J. Payne, London, 1779. 27 Collins J, Report on the Caoutchouc of Commerce, being 5 Müller I and Strehelow P, Rubber and rubber balloons, Information on the Plants Yielding it, their Geographical paradigms of thermodynamics, Springer, Heidelberg, 2004. Distribution, Climatic Conditions, and the Possibility of their 6 Loadman J, Tears of the tree: the story of rubber — a modern Cultivation and Acclimatization in India, Office of the marvel, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2005. Secretary of State for India in Council, London, 1872. 7 Howison J, Some account of the elastic gum vine of Prince 28 Brandis D, Memorandum on Mr. Collins’ Report on of Wales’s Island, and of experiments made on the milky Caoutchouc, Office of the Secretary of State for India in juice which it produces; with hints respecting the useful Council, London, 1872. purposes to which it may be applied, Asiat Res, 1798, 5, 29 Petch, T., Notes on the history of the plantation rubber industry 157‒165. in the East, Ann Roy Bot Gard Perad, 1911‒1914, 5, 433‒537. 8 Roxburgh W, A botanical description of Urceola Elastica, or 30 Krishnamurthi S (ed.), Horticultural and Economic Plants of caout-chouc vine of Sumatra and Pullo-Penang with an the Nilgiris, Coimbatore Co-operative Printing Works, account of the properties of its inspisstated juice compared Coimbatore, 1953, 243‒254. with those of the American caout-chouc, Asiat Res, 1798, 5, 31 Francis W, The Nilgiris (Madras District Gazetteers), 167‒175. Government of Madras, Madras, 1908. 9 Priyadarshan P M, Biology of Hevea rubber, CABI Books, 32 Guillerme S, Kumar B M, Menon A, Hinnewinkel C, Maire London, 2011. É and Santhoshkumar, A V, Impacts of public policies and 10 Collins J, On India rubber, J. Soc. Arts, 1869, XVIII, 80‒102. farmer preferences on agroforestry practices in Kerala, India, 11 Roxburgh W, Hortus Bengalensis, Serampore Mission Press, Environ Manage, 2011, 48(2), 351‒364. Calcutta, 1814. 33 Allen P W, Natural Rubber and the Synthetics, Crosby 12 Brewster D., Edinburgh Encyclopaedia, Volume V, 290‒292, 1832. Lockwood, London, 1972. 13 Griffith W, Report of the caoutchouc tree of Assam, made at 34 Tharian K G, Haridasan V and Sreekumar B, Role of the request of Captain Jenkins, agent to the Governor government and structural changes in rubber plantation General, J Asiat Soc Beng, 1838, VII, 132‒142. industry, Econ Polit Week, 1988, 23, M158‒M166. 14 Anonymous, Ficus elastica, Penny Mag Soc Diff Usef Know, 35 Kumar N A, Technological Changes and its Impact on 1838, 412, 337‒338. Rubber Plantation Industry in Kerala — an Econometric 15 Anonymous, Notices of books, Madras J Lit Sci, 1836, IV, Study, PhD Thesis, Cochin University of Science & 408‒429. Technology, Cochin, 1994.

16 Cleghorn, H., Memorandum upon the Pauchontee, or Indian 36 The Rubber Board, Ind Rubb Board Bull, 1951, 1, 1‒82. Gutta Tree, Government of Madras, Madras, 1858. 37 Tharian K G, From Control to Decontrol: The Evolution of 17 Mann G, Letter to Sir Joseph Dalton Hooker from Rubber Propagation Policy in India (1949―1986), Rubber Debrooghur, Upper Assam, India, 26-October-1870, 1870, Research Institute of India, Kottayam, 2011. http://plants.jstor.org/stable/10.5555/al.ap.visual.kdcas5247 38 Mydin K K, Genetic improvement of Hevea brasiliensis: sixty (accessed on 16 February 2016). years of breeding efforts in India, Rubber Sci, 2014, 27, 153‒181. 18 Dean W, Brazil and the Struggle for Rubber: An 39 Viswanathan P K and Shivakoti G P, Adoption of rubber- Environmental History, Cambridge University Press, integrated farm-livelihood systems: Contrasting empirical Cambridge, 2002. evidence from the Indian context, J Forest Res, 2008, 13, 19 Wicherley W, The Whole Art of Rubber Growing, West 1‒14. Strand Publishing Company, London, 1911. 40 Madhavan S, Greenblatt G A, Foster M A and Benedict C R, 20 Hosler D, Burkett S L and Tarkanian M J, Prehistoric Stimulation of isopentenyl pyrophosphate incorporation into polymers: rubber processing in ancient , polyisoprene in extracts from guayule plants (Parthenium Science, 1999, 284, 1988‒1991. argentatum Gray) by low temperature and 2-(3,4- RAMAN & NARAYANAN: INTRODUCTION OF RUBBER IN INDIA 17

dichlorophenoxy) triethylamine, Plant Physiol, 1989, 89, (1981), S. Vishveshwara (ed.), The Indian Society for 506‒511. Plantation Crops, Kasargode, 1982, 58‒63. 41 Cornish K, Similarities and differences in rubber biochemistry 44 Jayasinghe C K, Pests and diseases of Hevea rubber and their among plant species, Phytochemistry, 2001, 57, 1123‒1134. geographical distribution, Bull Rubb Res Inst Sri Lanka, 42 Anonymous, Geospatial Technology for Acreage 1999, 40, 1‒8. Estimation of Natural Rubber and Identification of 45 Pabst G, Köhler's Medizinal-Pflanzen in naturgetreuen Potential Areas for its Cultivation in Tripura, Collaborative Abbildungen mit kurz erläuterndem Texte. Untermhaus, Project Report by the National Remote Sensing Gera, 1887. Centre (ISRO) and Rubber Research Institute of India, India, 46 Wight R, Icones Plantarum Indiæ Orientalis or Figures 2012. of Indian Plants, Vol. II, J B Pharoah & Company, Madras. 43 Markose V C, Saraswathyamma C K, Licy J and George P J, 47 Fincham H W, Artists and Engravers of British and Studies on the progenies of a Hevea mutant, In: Proceedings American Book Plates, Kegan Paul, Trench, and Trübner & of the Fourth Annual Symposium on Plantation Crops Co. Limited, London, 1897.

Top View