Inventory of observed unexpected environmental effects of genetically modified crops

In general, it can be concluded that very few clearly unexpected effects were observed during the large scale post-release growing of herbicide-tolerant crops and Bt crops. Of course, one has to keep in mind Applied Plant Research (Praktijkonderzoek Plant & Omgeving ) 14 that there will always be an element of subjectivity in assessing effects as “unexpected”. Furthermore, it is also possible that certain effects are becoming visible only after a longer period than 10 – 15 years, but no indications for such effects were found in the literature. Besides the reports about the Farm Scale Evaluations no other reports were found with information about effects of GM crops on biodiversity in ecosysystems surrounding the production fields. Unexpected effects caused directly by the genetic modification were not found. Only in herbicide-tolerant crops, we concluded to some indirect unexpected effects: the reduced uptake of micro-nutrients and some positive and negative effects on susceptibility to diseases. These effects were specific to herbicide use with glyphosate-tolerant crops. Based on this, it was not possible to draw general conclusions for developing protocols for post-release monitoring of environmental effect

A review of knowledge of the potential impacts of GMOs on organic agriculture

The organic movement believes that organic agriculture, by its nature, cannot involve the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). This has been incorporated into EU regulations which state that there is no place in organic agriculture for GMOs. The aim in this review is to consider the ways in which the use of GMOs in agriculture in the UK and internationally might impact on organic farming. It does not address the controversy about the rights or wrongs of GMO’s per se. The subjects covered are based on a set of questions raised at the beginning of the study. The review is based primarily on evidence from peer-reviewed literature. The report is based on a number of themes, as follows: • Fate of DNA in soil • Fate of DNA in livestock feed and possible impact of GM feed • Fate of DNA in slurry, manure, compost and mulch • Impact of herbicide tolerant crops • Impact of pest and disease resistant crops • Safety of promoters • DNA transfer in pollen and seeds • Horizontal gene transfer • Impact of scale The report’s Executive Summary includes summaries of the findings on each of these themes

Indian Bt cotton varieties do not affect the performance of cotton aphids.

Cotton varieties expressing Cry proteins derived from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) are grown worldwide for the management of pest Lepidoptera. To prevent non-target pest outbreaks and to retain the biological control function provided by predators and parasitoids, the potential risk that Bt crops may pose to non-target arthropods is addressed prior to their commercialization. Aphids play an important role in agricultural systems since they serve as prey or host to a number of predators and parasitoids and their honeydew is an important energy source for several arthropods. To explore possible indirect effects of Bt crops we here examined the impact of Bt cotton on aphids and their honeydew. In climate chambers we assessed the performance of cotton aphids, Aphis gossypii Glover (Hemiptera: Aphididae) when grown on three Indian Bt (Cry1Ac) cotton varieties (MECH 12, MECH 162, MECH 184) and their non-transformed near isolines. Furthermore, we examined whether aphids pick up the Bt protein and analyzed the sugar composition of aphid honeydew to evaluate its suitability for honeydew-feeders. Plant transformation did not have any influence on aphid performance. However, some variation was observed among the three cotton varieties which might partly be explained by the variation in trichome density. None of the aphid samples contained Bt protein. As a consequence, natural enemies that feed on aphids are not exposed to the Cry protein. A significant difference in the sugar composition of aphid honeydew was detected among cotton varieties as well as between transformed and non-transformed plants. However, it is questionable if this variation is of ecological relevance, especially as honeydew is not the only sugar source parasitoids feed on in cotton fields. Our study allows the conclusion that Bt cotton poses a negligible risk for aphid antagonists and that aphids should remain under natural control in Bt cotton fields

Effects of transgenic Cry1Ac + CpTI cotton on non-target mealybug pest Ferrisia virgata and its predator Cryptolaemus montrouzieri

Recently, several invasive mealybugs (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) have rapidly spread to Asia and have become a serious threat to the production of cotton including transgenic cotton. Thus far, studies have mainly focused on the effects of mealybugs on non-transgenic cotton, without fully considering their effects on transgenic cotton and trophic interactions. Therefore, investigating the potential effects of mealybugs on transgenic cotton and their key natural enemies is vitally important. A first study on the effects of transgenic cotton on a non-target mealybug, Ferrisia virgata (Cockerell) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) was performed by comparing its development, survival and body weight on transgenic cotton leaves expressing Cry1Ac (Bt toxin) + CpTI (Cowpea Trypsin Inhibitor) with those on its near-isogenic non-transgenic line. Furthermore, the development, survival, body weight, fecundity, adult longevity and feeding preference of the mealybug predator Cryptolaemus montrouzieri Mulsant (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) was assessed when fed F. virgata maintained on transgenic cotton. In order to investigate potential transfer of Cry1Ac and CpTI proteins via the food chain, protein levels in cotton leaves, mealybugs and ladybirds were quantified. Experimental results showed that F. virgata could infest this bivalent transgenic cotton. No significant differences were observed in the physiological parameters of the predator C. montrouzieri offered F. virgata reared on transgenic cotton or its near-isogenic line. Cry1Ac and CpTI proteins were detected in transgenic cotton leaves, but no detectable levels of both proteins were present in the mealybug or its predator when reared on transgenic cotton leaves. Our bioassays indicated that transgenic cotton poses a negligible risk to the predatory coccinellid C. montrouzieri via its prey, the mealybug F.virgata

The impact of secondary pests on Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) crops

The intensification of agriculture and the development of synthetic insecticides enabled worldwide grain production to more than double in the last third of the 20th century. However, the heavy dependence and, in some cases, overuse of insecticides has been responsible for negative environmental and ecological impacts across the globe, such as a reduction in biodiversity, insect resistance to pesticides, negative effects on nontarget species (e.g. natural enemies) and the development of secondary pests. The use of recombinant DNA technology to develop genetically engineered (GE) insect resistant crops could mitigate many of the negative side effects of pesticides. One such genetic alteration enables crops to express toxic crystalline (Cry) proteins from the soil bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt). Despite the widespread adoption of Bt crops, there are still a range of unanswered questions concerning longer term agro-ecosystem interactions. For instance, insect species that are not susceptible to the expressed toxin can develop into secondary pests and cause significant damage to the crop. Here we review the main causes surrounding secondary pest dynamics in Bt crops and the impact of such outbreaks. Regardless of the causes, if non-susceptible secondary pest populations exceed economic thresholds, insecticide spraying could become the immediate solution at farmers’ disposal, and the sustainable use of this genetic modification technology may be in jeopardy. Based on the literature, recommendations for future research are outlined that will help to improve the knowledge of the possible longterm ecological trophic interactions of employing this technology

Impact environnemental des cultures transgéniques : II. L’impact des caractères recombinants

La publication d’un article scientifique sur les effets néfastes d’un hybride de maïs transgénique exprimant une δ-endotoxine du Bacillus thuringiensis contre des larves du papillon monarque causait, il y a quelques années, une controverse sans précédent sur l’impact environnemental des caractères recombinants introduits au bagage génétique des cultures agricoles. Le présent article de synthèse, complémentaire à un article de ce même numéro abordant la migration des transgènes dans l’environnement (Michaud 2005), discute de l’impact des caractères recombinants encodés par les transgènes sur l’incidence et le développement des différents organismes vivants du milieu. L’impact des nouveaux caractères est d’abord considéré à l’échelle des écosystèmes, à la lumière des effets exercés par les pratiques agricoles courantes sur la diversité biologique au champ. L’impact de ces caractères est ensuite considéré en fonction des interactions spécifiques établies au champ ou en conditions de laboratoire entre la plante modifiée et une gamme d’espèces modèles incluant des ravageurs herbivores secondaires, des arthropodes prédateurs et différents organismes du sol.A scientific communication reporting the deleterious effects on monarch butterfly larvae of a transgenic corn hybrid expressing a Bacillus thuringiensis δ-endotoxin has caused, a few years ago, an unprecedented controversy on the environmental impact of recombinant traits introduced into the genome of agricultural crops. This review, complementing a review in this same issue on transgene migration in the environment (Michaud 2005), addresses the impact of these new traits on the development and survival of different non-target living organisms present in the environment. The impact of these new traits is first considered at the ecosystem level, in relation with the effects of current agricultural practices on field biodiversity. The impact of these traits is then considered in relation with the specific interactions established in the field or under laboratory conditions between the modified plant and a collection of model organisms including secondary herbivorous pests, predatory arthropods and different species of the soil community

Ecological Safety Assessment of Insecticidal Proteins Introduced into Biotech Crops

Crops genetically engineered to express insecticidal proteins have been used in U.S. agriculture since 1996 and are being increasingly adopted worldwide. The ecological safety of these crops has been extensively considered by regulatory agencies prior to their commercial release, and is confirmed by a growing body of published research and experience under a variety of environments and management regimes. Ecological risk assessment provides a framework to understand the safety of these crops by considering the hazard potential of the expressed proteins in conjunction with environmentally relevant exposure scenarios. The ecological risk assessment framework applied to plant-expressed insecticidal proteins also provides insights into data and assessment requirements for forthcoming transgenic crops

Genetically engineered organisms and the environment: Current status and recommendations

The Ecological Society of America has evaluated the ecological effects of current and potential uses of field-released genetically engineered organisms (GEOs), as described in this Position Paper. Some GEOs could play a positive role in sustainable agriculture, forestry, aquaculture, bioremediation, and environmental management, both in developed and developing countries. However, deliberate or inadvertent releases of GEOs into the environment could have negative ecological effects under certain circumstances. Possible risks of GEOs could include: (1) creating new or more vigorous pests and pathogens; (2) exacerbating the effects of existing pests through hybridization with related transgenic organisms; (3) harm to nontarget species, such as soil organisms, non-pest insects, birds, and other animals; (4) disruption of biotic communities, including agroecosystems; and (5) irreparable loss or changes in species diversity or genetic diversity within species. Many potential applications of genetic engineering extend beyond traditional breeding, encompassing viruses, bacteria, algae, fungi, grasses, trees, insects, fish, and shellfish. GEOs that present novel traits will need special scrutiny with regard to their environmental effects. The Ecological Society of America supports the following recommendations. (1) GEOs should be designed to reduce environmental risks. (2) More extensive studies of the environmental benefits and risks associated with GEOs are needed. (3) These effects should be evaluated relative to appropriate baseline scenarios. (4) Environmental release of GEOs should be prevented if scientific knowledge about possible risks is clearly inadequate. (5) In some cases, post-release monitoring will be needed to identify, manage, and mitigate environmental risks. (6) Science-based regulation should subject all transgenic organisms to a similar risk assessment framework and should incorporate a cautious approach, recognizing that many environmental effects are GEO- and site-specific. (7) Ecologists, agricultural scientists, molecular biologists, and others need broader training and wider collaboration to address these recommendations. In summary, GEOs should be evaluated and used within the context of a scientifically based regulatory policy that encourages innovation without compromising sound environmental management. The Ecological Society of America is committed to providing scientific expertise for evaluating and predicting the ecological effects of field-released transgenic organisms