Literature DB >> 16958885

Assessing environmental risks of transgenic plants.

D A Andow1, Claudia Zwahlen.   

Abstract

By the end of the 1980s, a broad consensus had developed that there were potential environmental risks of transgenic plants requiring assessment and that this assessment must be done on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the transgene, recipient organism, intended environment of release, and the frequency and scale of the intended introduction. Since 1990, there have been gradual but substantial changes in the environmental risk assessment process. In this review, we focus on changes in the assessment of risks associated with non-target species and biodiversity, gene flow, and the evolution of resistance. Non-target risk assessment now focuses on risks of transgenic plants to the intended local environment of release. Measurements of gene flow indicate that it occurs at higher rates than believed in the early 1990s, mathematical theory is beginning to clarify expectations of risks associated with gene flow, and management methods are being developed to reduce gene flow and possibly mitigate its effects. Insect pest resistance risks are now managed using a high-dose/refuge or a refuge-only strategy, and the present research focuses on monitoring for resistance and encouraging compliance to requirements. We synthesize previous models for tiering risk assessment and propose a general model for tiering. Future transgenic crops are likely to pose greater challenges for risk assessment, and meeting these challenges will be crucial in developing a scientifically coherent risk assessment framework. Scientific understanding of the factors affecting environmental risk is still nascent, and environmental scientists need to help improve environmental risk assessment.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16958885     DOI: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00846.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ecol Lett        ISSN: 1461-023X            Impact factor:   9.492


  45 in total

1.  Neighbouring crop diversity mediates the effect of Bt cotton on insect community and leaf damage in fields.

Authors:  Yongbo Liu; Zhongkui Luo
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2019-05-25       Impact factor: 2.788

Review 2.  The eco-evolutionary impacts of domestication and agricultural practices on wild species.

Authors:  Martin M Turcotte; Hitoshi Araki; Daniel S Karp; Katja Poveda; Susan R Whitehead
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2017-01-19       Impact factor: 6.237

3.  Testing potential effects of maize expressing the Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ab endotoxin (Bt maize) on mycorrhizal fungal communities via DNA- and RNA-based pyrosequencing and molecular fingerprinting.

Authors:  Erik Verbruggen; Eiko E Kuramae; Remy Hillekens; Mattias de Hollander; E Toby Kiers; Wilfred F M Röling; George A Kowalchuk; Marcel G A van der Heijden
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2012-08-10       Impact factor: 4.792

4.  Risk assessment of Cry toxins of Bacillus thuringiensis on the predatory mites Euseius concordis and Neoseiulus californicus (Acari: Phytoseiidae).

Authors:  Thiago Rodrigues de Castro; John Jairo Saldarriaga Ausique; Daiane Heloisa Nunes; Fernando Henrique Ibanhes; Italo Delalibera Júnior
Journal:  Exp Appl Acarol       Date:  2012-10-02       Impact factor: 2.132

5.  Pollen flow of wheat under natural conditions in the Huanghuai River Wheat Region, China.

Authors:  Ai-Qing Sun; Chun-Qing Zhang; Cheng-Lai Wu; Qing-Rong Gao
Journal:  GM Crops Food       Date:  2015-02-06       Impact factor: 3.074

6.  Transgene x environment interactions in genetically modified wheat.

Authors:  Simon L Zeller; Olena Kalinina; Susanne Brunner; Beat Keller; Bernhard Schmid
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-07-12       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Quantification of toxins in a Cry1Ac + CpTI cotton cultivar and its potential effects on the honey bee Apis mellifera L.

Authors:  Peng Han; Chang-Ying Niu; Chao-Liang Lei; Jin-Jie Cui; Nicolas Desneux
Journal:  Ecotoxicology       Date:  2010-08-11       Impact factor: 2.823

8.  Impact of an 8-year-old transgenic poplar plantation on the ectomycorrhizal fungal community.

Authors:  Franck O P Stefani; Jean-Marc Moncalvo; Armand Séguin; Jean A Bérubé; Richard C Hamelin
Journal:  Appl Environ Microbiol       Date:  2009-10-02       Impact factor: 4.792

9.  Comparison between volatile emissions from transgenic apples and from two representative classically bred apple cultivars.

Authors:  Ute Vogler; Anja S Rott; Cesare Gessler; Silvia Dorn
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2009-06-19       Impact factor: 2.788

10.  Field evaluation of Bt cotton crop impact on nontarget pests: cotton aphid and boll weevil.

Authors:  E R Sujii; P H B Togni; P de A Ribeiro; T de A Bernardes; P V G N Milane; D P Paula; C S S Pires; E M G Fontes
Journal:  Neotrop Entomol       Date:  2012-11-14       Impact factor: 1.434

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.