Literature DB >> 22002083

Assessing the ecological risks from the persistence and spread of feral populations of insect-resistant transgenic maize.

Alan Raybould1, Laura S Higgins, Michael J Horak, Raymond J Layton, Nicholas P Storer, Juan Manuel De La Fuente, Rod A Herman.   

Abstract

One source of potential harm from the cultivation of transgenic crops is their dispersal, persistence and spread in non-agricultural land. Ecological damage may result from such spread if the abundance of valued species is reduced. The ability of a plant to spread in non-agricultural habitats is called its invasiveness potential. The risks posed by the invasiveness potential of transgenic crops are assessed by comparing in agronomic field trials the phenotypes of the crops with the phenotypes of genetically similar non-transgenic crops known to have low invasiveness potential. If the transgenic and non-transgenic crops are similar in traits believed to control invasiveness potential, it may be concluded that the transgenic crop has low invasiveness potential and poses negligible ecological risk via persistence and spread in non-agricultural habitats. If the phenotype of the transgenic crop is outside the range of the non-transgenic comparators for the traits controlling invasiveness potential, or if the comparative approach is regarded as inadequate for reasons of risk perception or risk communication, experiments that simulate the dispersal of the crop into non-agricultural habitats may be necessary. We describe such an experiment for several commercial insect-resistant transgenic maize events in conditions similar to those found in maize-growing regions of Mexico. As expected from comparative risk assessments, the transgenic maize was found to behave similarly to non-transgenic maize and to be non-invasive. The value of this experiment in assessing and communicating the negligible ecological risk posed by the low invasiveness potential of insect-resistant transgenic maize in Mexico is discussed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22002083      PMCID: PMC3348485          DOI: 10.1007/s11248-011-9560-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Transgenic Res        ISSN: 0962-8819            Impact factor:   2.788


  10 in total

1.  Principles of risk perception applied to gene technology.

Authors:  Lennart Sjöberg
Journal:  EMBO Rep       Date:  2004-10       Impact factor: 8.807

2.  Biofortified sorghum in Africa: using problem formulation to inform risk assessment.

Authors:  Karen E Hokanson; Norman C Ellstrand; Jeremy T Ouedraogo; Patrick A Olweny; Barbara A Schaal; Alan F Raybould
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 54.908

3.  Regulating transgenic crops sensibly: lessons from plant breeding, biotechnology and genomics.

Authors:  Kent J Bradford; Allen Van Deynze; Neal Gutterson; Wayne Parrott; Steven H Strauss
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 54.908

4.  Effect of volunteers on maize gene flow.

Authors:  Montserrat Palaudelmàs; Gisela Peñas; Enric Melé; Joan Serra; Jordi Salvia; Maria Pla; Anna Nadal; Joaquima Messeguer
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2009-02-19       Impact factor: 2.788

5.  Are Bt crops safe?

Authors:  Mike Mendelsohn; John Kough; Zigfridais Vaituzis; Keith Matthews
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 54.908

6.  Compositional assessment of transgenic crops: an idea whose time has passed.

Authors:  Rod A Herman; Bruce M Chassy; Wayne Parrott
Journal:  Trends Biotechnol       Date:  2009-08-21       Impact factor: 19.536

Review 7.  Evaluation of genetically engineered crops using transcriptomic, proteomic, and metabolomic profiling techniques.

Authors:  Agnès E Ricroch; Jean B Bergé; Marcel Kuntz
Journal:  Plant Physiol       Date:  2011-02-24       Impact factor: 8.340

8.  Safety risks of cryptic reading frames and gene disruption due to crop transgenesis: what are the odds?

Authors:  Rod A Herman; Ping Song; Meibao Zhuang
Journal:  GM Crops       Date:  2011 Jan-Mar

Review 9.  Environmental risk assessments for transgenic crops producing output trait enzymes.

Authors:  Alan Raybould; Ann Tuttle; Scott Shore; Terry Stone
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2009-11-19       Impact factor: 2.788

10.  Problem formulation in the environmental risk assessment for genetically modified plants.

Authors:  Jeffrey D Wolt; Paul Keese; Alan Raybould; Julie W Fitzpatrick; Moisés Burachik; Alan Gray; Stephen S Olin; Joachim Schiemann; Mark Sears; Felicia Wu
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2009-09-15       Impact factor: 2.788

  10 in total
  9 in total

1.  Environmental risk assessment of GE plants under low-exposure conditions.

Authors:  Andrew Roberts; Yann Devos; Alan Raybould; Patrick Bigelow; Alan Gray
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2013-11-01       Impact factor: 2.788

2.  Introduction to ISBGMO12: biosafety research past, present and future.

Authors:  Alan Raybould; Hector Quemada; Jörg Romeis
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2014-05-14       Impact factor: 2.788

3.  Transportability of confined field trial data from cultivation to import countries for environmental risk assessment of genetically modified crops.

Authors:  Shuichi Nakai; Kana Hoshikawa; Ayako Shimono; Ryo Ohsawa
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2015-07-03       Impact factor: 2.788

Review 4.  Transgenic maize event TC1507: Global status of food, feed, and environmental safety.

Authors:  Gajendra B Baktavachalam; Bryan Delaney; Tracey L Fisher; Gregory S Ladics; Raymond J Layton; Mary Eh Locke; Jean Schmidt; Jennifer A Anderson; Natalie N Weber; Rod A Herman; Steven L Evans
Journal:  GM Crops Food       Date:  2015       Impact factor: 3.074

5.  Expert opinion vs. empirical evidence: the precautionary principle applied to GM crops.

Authors:  Rod A Herman; Alan Raybould
Journal:  GM Crops Food       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 3.074

6.  Plant characterization of genetically modified maize hybrids MON-89Ø34-3 × MON-88Ø17-3, MON-89Ø34-3 × MON-ØØ6Ø3-6, and MON-ØØ6Ø3-6: alternatives for maize production in Mexico.

Authors:  Oscar Heredia Díaz; José Luis Aldaba Meza; Baltazar M Baltazar; Germán Bojórquez Bojórquez; Luciano Castro Espinoza; José Luis Corrales Madrid; Juan Manuel de la Fuente Martínez; Héctor Abel Durán Pompa; José Alonso Escobedo; Armando Espinoza Banda; José Antonio Garzón Tiznado; Juvencio González García; José Luis Guzmán Rodríguez; Jesús Ignacio Madueño Martínez; José Luis Martínez Carrillo; Chen Meng; Francisco Javier Quiñones Pando; Enrique Rosales Robles; Ignacio Ruiz Hernández; José Elías Treviño Ramírez; Hugo Raúl Uribe Montes; Francisco Zavala García
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2016-10-22       Impact factor: 2.788

7.  Spread of volunteer and feral maize plants in Central Europe: recent data from Austria.

Authors:  Kathrin Pascher
Journal:  Environ Sci Eur       Date:  2016-12-30       Impact factor: 5.893

8.  Transgenic Maize Has Insignificant Effects on the Diversity of Arthropods: A 3-Year Study.

Authors:  Zhentao Ren; Muzhi Yang; Haopeng He; Yanjie Ma; Yijun Zhou; Biao Liu; Kun Xue
Journal:  Plants (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-30

9.  Impact of transgenic wheat with wheat yellow mosaic virus resistance on microbial community diversity and enzyme activity in rhizosphere soil.

Authors:  Jirong Wu; Mingzheng Yu; Jianhong Xu; Juan Du; Fang Ji; Fei Dong; Xinhai Li; Jianrong Shi
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-06-04       Impact factor: 3.240

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.