1. Environmental impacts and social responses to genetically engineered crops L. LaReesa Wolfenbarger University of Nebraska at Omaha

2. Potential benefits of transgenic organisms: environmental, health, social

3. Why so much potential? Genetic engineering provides a greater range of possibilities for transferring desired traits into organisms.

4. The potential is biological novelty Genetic engineering provides a greater range of possibilities for transferring desired traits into organisms. –A greater diversity of organisms may be modified –The quantity and quality of traits are limited by the identification of useful genes and are not constrained by existing variation among interbreeding relatives

5. Are they good or bad for the environment?

6. Yes, according to the plant biotechnology industry

7. No, according to environmental activist groups

8. Answer Environmental impacts vary on a case by case basis Environmental tradeoffs most likely Values and not science determine whether outcome is good or bad

9.  Level of disturbance to environment Effect on environment The role of science: what are the environmental consequences? x

10.  Level of disturbance to environment Effect on environment Social responses: what consequences are acceptable? x

11. One point of agreement Case-by-case environmental impacts

12. Overview Possible environmental consequences Environmental impacts of Bt corn and Round up Ready soybean Social responses to these impacts Predicting environmental impacts of future GE crops

13. What are the possible environmental consequences of GE crops? No change Further degradation Improvement

14. Using past experience to think of possible effects Past experience with introductions of chemicals –Vary in toxicity, persistence –Lethal, Sublethal, No effect Past introductions of species: intentional and unintentional –Unwanted spread of an organism or its genes

15. Chemicals and rat mortality

16. Persistence of chemicals varies

17. Using past experience to think of possible effects Past experience with introductions of chemicals Past introductions of species: intentional and unintentional

18. Past biological introductions Intentional Landscaping Restoration/reintrod uctions Agricultural crops Biological control Unintentional Hitchhikers

19. Survival or Death Reproduction or not Self-sustaining population Spread and persistence Possible outcomes of biological introductions Introduction of plants Population dies out Never really spreads

20. Kudzu spread and persists beyond its intended purpose

21. Can ecologists predict how species will spread Can identify plants characteristics in common BUT Lag times can occur. Repeated introductions have different results. Biological organisms can evolve.

22. Survival or Death Reproduction Self-sustaining population Spread and persistence Pollen flows to wild relative Hybrid formation or not Hybrid survival or death Hybrid reproduction or not Self-sustaining hybrids Possible outcomes of biological introductions Introduction of plant

23. Gene flow from crops to wild relatives is implicated in enhanced weediness in wild relatives of 7 of the world’s 13 most important crops. (Ellstrand, 1999)

24. Are current GE crops likely to spread? Self-sustaining populations Outside of cultivation HT Corn Bt and GNA Potato HT Oilseed rape HT Sugar beet Unlikely Crop Crawley et al. 2001. Nature 409: 682-683.

25. Summary of possible environmental impacts Improvements if less toxic and does not spread outside of cultivation Degradation if more toxic or spreads uncontrollably

26. Less toxic to what? Spread where?

27. The environment: Biodiversity and interactions Plants Herbivores Predators Bigger predators

28. Ecological functions Plants: primary producers Decomposers Herbivores Pollinators Predators Bigger predators

29. Impacts on the environment occur through alterations of… what species are present how many individuals of each species the ecological function(s) of a species in an ecosystem the biological interactions affecting a species’ function in the environment

30. Humans are part of the environment herbivores predators environmental engineers

31. Environments are a continuum Grassland environment Agricultural environment Forest environment

32. What general factors define the context? The transgenic organism Where it is introduced –environment Baseline for comparison and evaluation –What GE crop will replace: regional agricultural practices

33. How a GE plant will interact with the environment Presence of transgenic crop or its transgene –plant above ground –roots –decomposing tissue –pollen drift –gene flow to wild relatives in natural ecosystem

34. Other ways introducing a GE crop will affect the environment Changes in agricultural practices associated with adoption of a transgenic crop –Pesticide use patterns –Amount of agricultural land –Tillage practices –Crop diversity/rotation

35. Phytoremediation Remove and sequester toxic heavy metals Transform pollutants into less toxic forms

36. What do we know about environmental impacts of current GE crops?

37. Source: Biotechnology Industry Organization and USDA Adoption of GE crops in U.S.

38. Bt crops protect plants against specific insect pests

39. The story of Monarchs and Bt corn

40. We saw the findings as an illustration of how superficial risk assessment [for genetically modified foods] was...The question still remains, would this science have been done if the monarch wasn’t such a beautiful butterfly?” We saw an embargoed copy of a Cornell press release where we thought the risk seemed exaggerated,”

41. Components of risk assessment for monarch butterflies Bt corn Production and Distribution Pollen characterization Bt expression Pollen shed (timing, duration, quantity) Deposition and dispersal Milkweed Occurrence and Distribution (Regional, landscape, habitat, abundance in corn) Monarch Occurrence and Distribution Behavior (oviposition preferences, phenology) Environmental exposureRisk Monarch Toxic effect (lethal/sublethal) Adapted from Sears et al. 2001. PNAS 98: 11937-11942.

42. Monarch survival: 9 days after onset of pollen deposition No differences among Bt and Non- Bt sweet corn treatments Survival significantly decreased in presence of insecticide treatment From Stanley-Horn et al. 2001. PNAS 98: 11931-11936 Percent survival

43. Studies with Bt corn underscore importance of context Susceptibility of butterfly and moth species varies Exposure varies geographically and locally Susceptibility of lacewings (predatory insect) varies with prey species

44. Results of formal risk assessment The six studies published in PNAS showed there was little risk to monarch larvae from the two most commonly grown types of Bt corn because the pollen isn’t toxic in the concentrations that monarch larvae would encounter in the fields.

45. Components of risk assessment for monarch butterflies Bt corn Production and Distribution Pollen characterization Bt expression Pollen shed (timing, duration, quantity) Deposition and dispersal Milkweed Occurrence and Distribution (Regional, landscape, habitat, abundance in corn) Monarch Occurrence and Distribution Behavior (oviposition preferences, phenology) Environmental exposureRisk Monarch Toxic effect (lethal/sublethal) Adapted from Sears et al. 2001. PNAS 98: 11937-11942.

46. Responses to EPA’s decision “I felt that the conclusions made from a one year study that excluded anthers were premature,” Obrycki says. “That’s why we requested that EPA shorten the reauthorization period until we had data from subsequent studies.” the studies do not rule out very small effects, long-term or sublethal effects

47. Epilogue Concern about ingestion of other plant parts Longer term studies occurring Registration will expire in 2006

48. My response and questions subtle effects seem likely Should this change the registration? –no, minimize impacts on monarchs What if a broader number of butterfly species are affected?

49. Reduced impacts from pesticides

50. Insecticide use in cotton Number of treatment/acres

51. Roundup ready soybeans are the best for weed management

52. Compiled from USDA Agriculture Chemical Usage reports 1991-2002 http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/reports/nassr/other/pcu-bb/ Herbicide use in U.S. soybean production

53. Benefits from changing agricultural practices with soy

54. No till and conservation tillage Reduce erosion Decrease water loss Increase soil organic matter

55. Increase in No Till acreage Roundup Ready soy introduced

56. How do we predict future impacts? Use past experience Expect tradeoffs Evaluate on a case- by-case basis Remember that genetic engineering is a tool