Fbae Logo
Home | | Support Us | Contact Us
Goals & Objectives Our Position False Propaganda Special Topics Important Publications Important Links Events news Biosafety
Fbae Header Home




Bt-Corn does not Harm Biodiversity
Jörg Romeis
Translated by Christopher Ortler, CheckBiotech
June 25, 2008
NZZ <http://www.nzz.ch>

A recent meta study on the effects of Bt-corn on non-target organisms has generated clear cut results according to its author. Bt-corn exhibits the desired effect on the targeted pest and seems to do no unwanted harm to other organisms in the cornfield.
Genetically modified crops were planted in large scale in 23 countries in 2007. Alone Bt-corn, which produces proteins from genes of the soil bacteria, Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), was planted on 28 million hectares. These so-called Bt toxins, of which Bt-corn has two, protect the plant from being eaten by insect larvae. Varieties of the corn with Bt-toxins targeting butterfly larvae, in particular the European corn borer, Ostrinia nubilalis, have been in cultivation since 1996.

In addition, the last several years has seen the development of a Bt-corn variety producing a toxin targeting another agricultural pest. It protects the roots of corn stalks from the Western Corn Rootworm, Diabrotica virgifera. In the USA this pest is considered to be by far the most important corn pest and each year more than 10 million hectares of land are sprayed with insecticide to combat it. Since its introduction into Europe during the mid 80´s, it has been spreading steadily and has now become a threat to European corn production.

Danger for other insects?

Because the target of the toxins produced by Bt corn is an insect, the question has been raised as to whether other insects might also be harmed when cultivating this crop. Recently, all data from field studies on Bt-corn published in scientific journals in the years 1992 to 2006 have been gathered together and quantitatively analyzed, a so-called meta study, by LaReesa Wolfenbarger and her colleagues at the University of Nebraska.

A meta study, or meta analysis, allows compilation of the results of individual studies and can be applied for detecting and better understanding even minor ecological phenomena. The method is therefore used in many of the different areas of ecology.

Although the majority of studies included in the meta study by Wolfenbarger were on Bt-corn resistant to butterfly larvae, several studies on corn varieties resistant to the Western Corn Rootworm were included as well.

Many predatory and parasitic insect species important for down regulating the numbers of certain agricultural pests are among the beneficial organisms which could be potentially harmed by Bt-plants, as well as by insecticides. In the course of their lifecycle, predators such as green lacewings, Family Chrysopidae, or ladybugs, Family Coccinellidae, consume large numbers of harmful insects and mites; and parasites like the Ichneumon wasp use their ovipositor to pierce and deposit their eggs inside of various insect pests. Development of the wasp larvae then leads to the death of the host.

It is therefore in the interests of the biological control of agricultural pests, generally, that these beneficial predators and parasites not be adversely affected by efforts to protect crops from specific pest species. In this meta analysis the non-target organisms were sub-divided into several categories: predators, Ichneumon wasps, plant eaters (potential agricultural pests), species with a broad spectrum diet and species that contribute to the decomposition of plant material.

Lessons from field studies

In a first step, studies were analyzed in which neither Bt-corn nor the non-genetically engineered corn control was treated with insecticide. There were no observed differences in the numbers of non target organisms in the fields, with one exception. Ichneumon wasps that deposit their eggs exclusively in the European corn borer were significantly reduced in number. This is not unexpected. The Bt-corn is planted with the specific goal of eliminating European corn borer infestation as completely as possible.

It is unavoidable that beneficial species relying on the European corn borer as their sole nutrition source will also be adversely affected when these pest numbers are successfully reduced. This side effect, however, is not to be considered an unwanted effect of the Bt-corn because it results regardless of how the pest numbers are reduced.

The meta analysis of Wolfenbarger and her colleagues also showed that the proportion of predators to herbivores was not affected by which type of corn was being grown, Bt- or non-engineered. This is an indication that the regulatory function of the beneficial organisms is intact; very important for the control of pests unaffected by the Bt toxins.

A scientifically based, environmental impact study must consider not only the ecological consequences of the Bt-corn. It must also consider the impact on the environment of the conventional methods used to control pest numbers. Feed corn, generally, is not widely sprayed with insecticide. In the USA, only 1 out of 10 such fields were sprayed in 2005. That means that planting Bt-corn in these fields would not lead to a significant reduction in the amount of pesticide being applied.

Sweet corn, on the other hand, is given multiple chemical treatments throughout its cultivation. If one compares the prevalence of non target organisms in untreated Bt-corn fields to their prevalence in pesticide-treated, non-Bt corn fields, the results are very clear. Important beneficial species, including predatory insects, spiders and Ichneumon wasps were significantly more numerous in the Bt-corn field than in the pesticide treated fields. This encourages natural pest eradication and supports long term biological regulation of pests.

According to the author, when one looks at all available data there are no indications that Bt-corn exhibits unexpected or unwanted effects on non-target organisms in corn fields. When replacing corn being treated with pesticide, the Bt-corn even raises biodiversity significantly.

Bt-cotton and Bt-carrots

In addition to Bt-corn, the authors of this meta study also performed analyses of the available data for Bt-cotton and Bt-potatoes. While Bt-potatoes are no longer grown, Bt-cotton is being cultivated on millions of hectares in a long list of countries. Bt-potatoes were protected from the potato beetle but new pesticide developments have made them obsolete. The Bt-toxins of Bt-cotton are directed against a number of important butterfly pests.

The analyses of the data for these two crops largely corresponded to the results observed with Bt-corn. However, particularly in the cotton, the observed biodiversity increase in fields planted with the Bt-crop compared to fields treated with broad activity pesticide, was even more substantial than the increase observed with Bt-corn cultivation. This is significant because cotton is among the most highly sprayed crops in the world.

Aside from the predatory insects, there are, however, also agricultural pests that profit from the reduction in pesticide, and which then cause more damage. This point underscores how important it is to view Bt-crops as a method for controlling agricultural pests to be applied in conjunction with other methods in order that the desired effect can be long lasting.

Related News Articles

Influence of Transgenosis on the Plant-Insect- Relationships, in Particular on Chemically       Mediated Interactions

Effect of Transgenes Conferring Enhanced Pathogen Resistance on the Interaction with Symbiotic        Fungi in Rice

Impact on the Soil Ecosystem through Natural and Genetically Engineered Organisms:
      Effects, Methods and Definition of Damage as Contribution to Risk Assessment

The Decomposition of Bt-Corn on the Fields and its Impact on Earthworms and on other        Macroorganisms in the Soil

Environmental Post-market Monitoring of Bt-maize:
       Approaches to Detect Potential Effects on Butterflies and Natural Enemies

Columns by Dan Gardner

Against the Grains: 'The Terminator Hoax '

Decisions taken in the 84th Meeting of the Genetic Engineering Approval Committee

Brazilian Health Biotech: Fostering Crosstalk Between Public and Private Sectors

Biotechnology Related Article Appeared on 'Samyukta Karnataka' ( Regional Language )
June 12, 2008.

Nothing Left to the Imagination

The Politics of GM Food
Kirit S Javali

Hi-tech seed factories: Sowing Seeds of Success

"Indian Seed Industry is Well Placed to Serve Both Domestic and International Markets"
Dr MK Sharma,
Managing Director,
Mahyco Monsanto

"If we Facilitate Seed Industry, we Facilitate Growth in Agriculture"
Dr Govind Garg,
Krishidhan Seeds

Metagenomics: Window to the Microbial Universe

Few Checks to Prevent Entry of GM Food

Gene Campaign Criticises India’s ‘Silence’ at Global Bio-Safety Meet

An Enforceable International Compact for Infectious Diseases

"Indian Science in Genomics has been Able to Place Itself on the Global Map"

Indian Gene Decoded

The Development of RNAi as a Therapeutic Strategy

FAO E-Conference on Biotechnologies and Water Scarcity

Genetic Landscape

Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture

RH Nature Reviews Genetics 08- Opposition to Transgenic Technologies

Germany: Discussion Paper of German Ag-Industry about EU Biotech Policy Implications

Bt maize performance in Spain

Arsenic speciation varies with type of rice

Why I Am Bothered by Neo-Colonialist NGOs

China experts identify gene for yield, height in rice

The French government has called for a debate on the review of the EU
The World Trade Organisation (WTO) has also repeatedly criticised the EU for "undue delays" in the authorisation of GMOs. See the latest WTO ruling:

The legal bans are in France, Austria, Poland, Hungary and Greece.

EU delays decision on approving more GM crops

UCR Geneticist Plays Scientific Advisor to Movie about “Love, Adventure and ... Genetically Modified Rice”

Gujrat worst-hit by illegal Bt cotton production

Farmers seek ban on GM crops

Call for policing
Ijaz Ahmed Rao discusses the virtues of a bio-safety framework for genetically modified crops, now that they have become farmers’ favourite

Stem cells: The 3-billion-dollar question

Genes as the solution

Food crisis spurs research spending

Global Food Crisis / UN / Bilingual Transcript of Statements by Secretary-General, Heads of Concerned Agencies, and Response to Questions at Press Conference on Global Food CrisisGM Crops, A World View

Mass Protests against GM Crops in IndiaInterference at the EPA

Open letter to Robert B. Zoellick, President, World BankNew BT variety may push short staple cotton output.

The future of agricultural biotechnology: Creative, destruction, adoption, or irrelevance? ICABR Conference 2008

Soaring food prices and global grain shortages are bringing new pressures on governments, food companies and consumers to relax their longstanding resistance to genetically engineered crops.

Prof. Kameswara Rao and Dr. T.M. Manjunath's Participation in 2008 Biotech Activities

Scrutinizing Industry-Funded Science: The Crusade Against Conflicts of Interest

LEADER: Nurturing nanotech

Center for Indigenous Knowledge for Agriculture and Rural Development

Scientists find potential schistosomiasis treatment

Islamic conference boosts S&T with new resolutions

Mexico publishes GM approval guidelines

Uganda 'close to stamping out Hib meningitis'

New method 'prevents spread of GM plants'

Social factors 'help women with post-tsunami stress'

Women scientists celebrated in new charter

Sub-Saharan Africa news in brief: 13–25 March

Brazil creates US$18 million fund for young scientists

Health weeks 'powerful tools' for deworming children

Rotavirus vaccine, not treatment, 'cheaper for Panama'