Independent on Sunday (London)
March 30, 2003
INSECTS THRIVE ON GM 'PEST-KILLING' CROPS
BY GEOFFREY LEAN ENVIRONMENT EDITOR

Genetically modified crops specially engineered to kill pests in fact
nourish them, startling new research has revealed.

The research - which has taken even the most ardent opponents of GM
crops by surprise - radically undermines one of the key benefits
claimed for them. And it suggests that they may be an even greater
threat to organic farming than has been envisaged. It strikes at the
heart of one of the main lines of current genetic engineering in
agricultu breeding crops that come equipped with their own
pesticide.

Biotech companies have added genes from a naturally occurring poison,
Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), which is widely used as a pesticide by
organic farmers. The engineered crops have spread fast. The amount of
land planted with them worldwide grew more than 25-fold - from four
million acres in 1996 to well over 100 million acres (44.2m hectares)
in 2000 - and the global market is expected to be worth $ 25bn (pounds
16bn) by 2010.

Drawbacks have already emerged, with pests becoming resistant to the
toxin. Environmentalists say that resistance develops all the faster
because the insects are constantly exposed to it in the plants, rather
than being subject to occasional spraying.

But the new research - by scientists at Imperial College London and
the Universidad Simon Rodrigues in Caracas, Venezuela - adds an
alarming new twist, suggesting that pests can actually use the poison
as a food and that the crops, rather than automatically controlling
them, can actually help them to thrive.

They fed resistant larvae of the diamondback moth - an increasingly
troublesome pest in the southern US and in the tropics - on normal
cabbage leaves and ones that had been treated with a Bt toxin. The
larvae eating the treated leaves grew much faster and bigger - with a
56 per cent higher growth rate.

They found that the larvae "are able to digest and utilise" the toxin
and may be using it as a "supplementary food", adding that the
presence of the poison "could have modified the nutritional balance in
plants" for them.

And they conclude: "Bt transgenic crops could therefore have
unanticipated nutritionally favourable effects, increasing the fitness
of resistant populations."

Pete Riley, food campaigner for Friends of the Earth, said last night:
"This is just another example of the unexpected harmful effects of GM
crops.

"If Friends of the Earth had come up with the suggestion that crops
engineered to kill pests could make them bigger and healthier instead,
we would have been laughed out of court.

"It destroys the industry's entire case that insect-resistant GM crops
can have anything to do with sustainable farming."

Patrick Holden, director of the Soil Association, said it showed that
GM crops posed an even "worse threat to organic farming than had
previously been imagined". Breeding resistance to the Bt insecticide
sometimes used by organic farmers was bad enough, but problems would
become even greater if pests treated it as "a high-protein diet".

wrote in message
...

Independent on Sunday (London)
March 30, 2003
INSECTS THRIVE ON GM 'PEST-KILLING' CROPS
BY GEOFFREY LEAN ENVIRONMENT EDITOR


rather makes a mess of the claims that GM crops were a threat to all those
butterflies doesn't it

:-))


--

-
Jim Webster

I believe that this thought has been enunciated before. A surly critic might
even use the word "banality".

Was the BT cabbage designed to target the diamond backed moth? There are a
great number of BT proteins out there that more or less toxic to different
species and they went with the one they did because it was the number on
pest in the world.

If your quail gun doesn't kill deer it not the shells fault you are using
the wrong shells. Make sure they are using the proper toxins for the proper
moth. The beauty of GM crops is you can select the pests you want to kill
and leave others alone.

It may have been a roaring success for all you know.

Gordon

wrote in message
...

Independent on Sunday (London)
March 30, 2003
INSECTS THRIVE ON GM 'PEST-KILLING' CROPS
BY GEOFFREY LEAN ENVIRONMENT EDITOR

Genetically modified crops specially engineered to kill pests in fact
nourish them, startling new research has revealed.

The research - which has taken even the most ardent opponents of GM
crops by surprise - radically undermines one of the key benefits
claimed for them. And it suggests that they may be an even greater
threat to organic farming than has been envisaged. It strikes at the
heart of one of the main lines of current genetic engineering in
agricultu breeding crops that come equipped with their own
pesticide.

Biotech companies have added genes from a naturally occurring poison,
Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), which is widely used as a pesticide by
organic farmers. The engineered crops have spread fast. The amount of
land planted with them worldwide grew more than 25-fold - from four
million acres in 1996 to well over 100 million acres (44.2m hectares)
in 2000 - and the global market is expected to be worth $ 25bn (pounds
16bn) by 2010.

Drawbacks have already emerged, with pests becoming resistant to the
toxin. Environmentalists say that resistance develops all the faster
because the insects are constantly exposed to it in the plants, rather
than being subject to occasional spraying.

But the new research - by scientists at Imperial College London and
the Universidad Simon Rodrigues in Caracas, Venezuela - adds an
alarming new twist, suggesting that pests can actually use the poison
as a food and that the crops, rather than automatically controlling
them, can actually help them to thrive.

They fed resistant larvae of the diamondback moth - an increasingly
troublesome pest in the southern US and in the tropics - on normal
cabbage leaves and ones that had been treated with a Bt toxin. The
larvae eating the treated leaves grew much faster and bigger - with a
56 per cent higher growth rate.

They found that the larvae "are able to digest and utilise" the toxin
and may be using it as a "supplementary food", adding that the
presence of the poison "could have modified the nutritional balance in
plants" for them.

And they conclude: "Bt transgenic crops could therefore have
unanticipated nutritionally favourable effects, increasing the fitness
of resistant populations."

Pete Riley, food campaigner for Friends of the Earth, said last night:
"This is just another example of the unexpected harmful effects of GM
crops.

"If Friends of the Earth had come up with the suggestion that crops
engineered to kill pests could make them bigger and healthier instead,
we would have been laughed out of court.

"It destroys the industry's entire case that insect-resistant GM crops
can have anything to do with sustainable farming."

Patrick Holden, director of the Soil Association, said it showed that
GM crops posed an even "worse threat to organic farming than had
previously been imagined". Breeding resistance to the Bt insecticide
sometimes used by organic farmers was bad enough, but problems would
become even greater if pests treated it as "a high-protein diet".

rather makes a mess of the claims that GM crops were a threat to all those
butterflies doesn't it

Certainly not. It seems that Bt protein acts on different species in
different ways. So, for some insect larvae it will act as extra food
and for others it will be a poison...

regards
Marcus

wrote in message
...

rather makes a mess of the claims that GM crops were a threat to all
those
butterflies doesn't it

Certainly not. It seems that Bt protein acts on different species in
different ways. So, for some insect larvae it will act as extra food
and for others it will be a poison...


looks like they will have to stop organic producers using Bt then if it is
so variable in its effects


--

-
Jim Webster

I believe that this thought has been enunciated before. A surly critic might
even use the word "banality".


regards
Marcus

wrote:


rather makes a mess of the claims that GM crops were a threat to all those
butterflies doesn't it

Certainly not. It seems that Bt protein acts on different species in
different ways. So, for some insect larvae it will act as extra food
and for others it will be a poison...

regards
Marcus

Then I must infer that insects consuming Bt poisons have altered their digestive
systems to make a poison become a food.

Dennis

And the ox shall lie down with the lion.

Jim Webster wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

rather makes a mess of the claims that GM crops were a threat to all
those
butterflies doesn't it

Certainly not. It seems that Bt protein acts on different species in
different ways. So, for some insect larvae it will act as extra food
and for others it will be a poison...


looks like they will have to stop organic producers using Bt then if it is
so variable in its effects

I may be wrong but as far as I know organic producers is not allowed to use
GM crops?



--

-
Jim Webster

I believe that this thought has been enunciated before. A surly critic
might
even use the word "banality".


regards
Marcus

"Eugene Ferreira" wrote in message
...

Jim Webster wrote in message
...

wrote in message
...

rather makes a mess of the claims that GM crops were a threat to all
those
butterflies doesn't it

Certainly not. It seems that Bt protein acts on different species in
different ways. So, for some insect larvae it will act as extra food
and for others it will be a poison...


looks like they will have to stop organic producers using Bt then if it
is
so variable in its effects

I may be wrong but as far as I know organic producers is not allowed to
use
GM crops?

they appear to be allowed to use Bt as a pesticide but cannot grow Bt GM
modified crops.


--
Jim Webster

I believe that this thought has been enunciated before. A surly critic might
even use the word "banality".

On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 13:00:33 +0100, wrote:


rather makes a mess of the claims that GM crops were a threat to all those
butterflies doesn't it

Certainly not. It seems that Bt protein acts on different species in
different ways.

Wow, what a surprise. No one would have guessed such a thing.

/sarcasm off

If you want to know about Bt, a good place to start is
http://helios.bto.ed.ac.uk/bto/microbes/bt.htm


___________________________________________
Unit #02582: Endangered Old-Growth Redwood
Toothpick Artisans, LLC [TINEOGRTALLC]
--
To me, boxing is like a ballet, except there's no music,
no choreography, and the dancers hit each other.

"Charles Hawtrey" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 01 Apr 2003 13:00:33 +0100, wrote:


rather makes a mess of the claims that GM crops were a threat to all
those
butterflies doesn't it

Certainly not. It seems that Bt protein acts on different species in
different ways.

Wow, what a surprise. No one would have guessed such a thing.

/sarcasm off

If you want to know about Bt, a good place to start is
http://helios.bto.ed.ac.uk/bto/microbes/bt.htm

There are hundreds of Bt natural BT proteins and hundreds more we can take a
nasty racial on to make them more effective to meet the needs of killing
worms for a long time. As verities develop rotation of BT strains so less
resistance is likely to happen is a real likelihood.

While the rest of the word debates the benefits of BM crops We have punt in
125 acre of drip irrigation for drip irrigated no till cotton in west Texas
and as soon as we get the water quality reports we will start planing our
actions in south west Oklahoma. In Oklahoma we may no be able to get enough
water to obtain maximum production so we will be clanged to find a program
to get the most from the water with cotton, alfalfa and possibly another
crop the could stager the use of water so they could all benefit some while
cotton was using the most in the summer. Out farmer in Texas is making bale
or better cotton with 20 inches of rain and 150 GPM on 170 acres under low
evapratortoion center pivot. We put in enough water for the drip it should
make 5 bales on a good year with the right weather. That way simulate
amounts of water did this year did this year.

We have a boll worm control program that works, Gm Cotton make the worm
problem acceptable it you have to spray for a pest and kill te beneficial in
mid season and not be committed to spraying all the rest of the season and
the spry pilot getting the crop.

And better yet it allows no till farming that almost totally stops erosion
and pollution of nutrients of fertilizer, herbicide and pesticide and
builds organic mater in the soil at a rate of 1 % a year. Over a period of
25 year the soils should go form less than 1/3 to over 2/3 the organic mater
of virgin prairie.

Over those thirty years it provides a substantial carbon sink until it
reaches steady state in 30 of forty years. a much bigger contribution to
reducing global warming that the Kyoto treaty would ever do if it continues
to be adapted at the cut rate.

There will be weeds that find a way to make it in no till by we have
technology to handle them. Faming is a dynamic system and anyone that tries
to do it the same way for 30 years has an auctioneer in his near future
unless he has a nice stand of oilwells or stash of moldy money to support
his hobby.

--
Gordon

Gordon Couger
Stillwater, OK
www.couger.com/gcouger

Gordon Couger writes

There are hundreds of Bt natural BT proteins and hundreds more we can take a
nasty racial on to make them more effective to meet the needs of killing
worms for a long time. As verities develop rotation of BT strains so less
resistance is likely to happen is a real likelihood.

Given the way resistance usually works I wouldn't count on new strains
of BT overcoming resistance. However BT isn't the only insecticidal bio-
control molecule.

--
Oz
This post is worth absolutely nothing and is probably fallacious.
Note: soon (maybe already) only posts via despammed.com will be accepted.

(Gordon Couger) writes:

While the rest of the word debates the benefits of BM crops We have punt in
125 acre of drip irrigation for drip irrigated no till cotton in west Texas
and as soon as we get the water quality reports we will start planing our
actions in south west Oklahoma. In Oklahoma we may no be able to get enough
water to obtain maximum production so we will be clanged to find a program
to get the most from the water with cotton, alfalfa and possibly another
crop the could stager the use of water so they could all benefit some while
cotton was using the most in the summer. Out farmer in Texas is making bale
or better cotton with 20 inches of rain and 150 GPM on 170 acres under low
evapratortoion center pivot. We put in enough water for the drip it should
make 5 bales on a good year with the right weather. That way simulate
amounts of water did this year did this year.

Exactly. If GM cotton does not perform as advertised, you will find out
in a hurry. Farmers will listen to seed salesmen once, but the real
proof is in the bottom line.

I'm glad to hear that the beneficial insects thrive on Bt Cotton. That
sure beats applying enough insecticide to kill everything.

--
http://home.teleport.com/~larryc

"Oz" wrote in message
...
Gordon Couger writes

There are hundreds of Bt natural BT proteins and hundreds more we can
take a
nasty racial on to make them more effective to meet the needs of killing
worms for a long time. As verities develop rotation of BT strains so less
resistance is likely to happen is a real likelihood.

Given the way resistance usually works I wouldn't count on new strains
of BT overcoming resistance. However BT isn't the only insecticidal bio-
control molecule.

Changing the chemistry of the BT protien has a good deal of potential. I
think they are also experimenting with introducing genes in the population
that make the population more susceptible. It requires a way to selectively
sterilize females and flood the area with males with the desired genetics.
If they can pull that off a lot of things become possible.

The ideal situation would be to have two separate systems to control worms
that you rotated world wide every 2 years. It would work for the seed people
with out much change by raising the systems off by one year. It would be a
little more expensive for them because they would have to save a little more
seed on the two years they skip because the germination of cotton falls off
with storage because of the high oil content and the oil going rancid. It
would be difficult to enforce in the third world but it is long past time
that education should have been brought to farmers around the world. It is
beyond belief the way most countries treat agriculture when it takes from 15
to 70% of their disposable income to eat.

So far the refuge method seems to work for cotton & corn in the US.

Worms are not a big problem anywhere we have farms unless we kill out the
benefices insects. One of the benefits of hot dry weather. We probably
double our money by planting BT cotton. It is mainly insurance in case we
have to spray for beet army worms or some other pest that is not very common
but may strike mid season and we can spray without committing to spraying
ever 5 to 7 days for the rest of the season.

Monsanto is releasing a BT that is more toxic to boll worms this year and
that should reduce the likelihood of resistance a little.

Unless BT crops cover a large area solid other crops and plants should serve
the purpose of a refuge in the third world. The worms that feed on cotton
and corn will eat about anything available.


Gordon

"Larry Caldwell" wrote in message
...
snip
Exactly. If GM cotton does not perform as advertised, you will find out
in a hurry. Farmers will listen to seed salesmen once, but the real
proof is in the bottom line.

Even the first time we only try a little.

I'm glad to hear that the beneficial insects thrive on Bt Cotton. That
sure beats applying enough insecticide to kill everything.

We have been working on insect control strategies all my life to preserve
beneficial insects. There is no way to raise dryland cotton that averages
300 pound to the acre and spend much money on spraying. Twice in my lifetime
boll weevil have run cotton out of my part of the world. One year the gin
ginned 708 bales of cotton and ten years later it ginned 25,000.

We have been trying to develop a program to eradicate the boll weevil for
40 years and finally enough farmers have gone out business that the ones
left have a big enough investment to cooperate in a early spraying to get
the over wintering weevil and late spraying to kill them before they can
hole up for the winter and agree to binding laws that force spraying if you
have boll weevil. We are even giving a free ride to the organic cotton
growers by not forcing them to spray in the spring and fall and giving them
the choice of either spraying or taking the same money that they would get
from crop insurance to plow up their cotton if they become infested with
boll weevil which is a better option than the non organic farmer who has to
spray or plow up with no payment and crop insurance wouldn't cover it.

The boll weevil eradication program , BT and Round Up Ready cotton change
the whole way cotton is being farmed. By going to no till we convert cotton
from being one of the most environmentally unfriendly crops to doing less
damage to the environment than any crop that requires tillage. It still not
as good for the ground as Alfalfa but it all but stops or may reverse
erosion if there is any water that backs out on the ground that has silt in
it. It reveres the loss of organic matter in the soil. Invertebrates quickly
repopulate the soil.

All you need to do is add water to have a sure winner. And I am working on
that every where I can.

Even if you don't go to no till it reduces the number of trips over the
feild by a third or a fourth. When they come out with cotton that can be
sprayed with Round Up any time it will cut the number of trips even more.

Gordon