HOME about sciencentral my account help contact
sciencentral news : making sense of science
life sciences physical sciences technology full archive
space biotechnology engineering computers nanotechnology
November 26, 2004
ScienCentral Inc. home
  Plant Pesticides    
Search
 

Biotech Bugs - Research aimed at fighting a major cotton pest is igniting a battle over genetically modified insects. (7/26/01)

StarLink Allergies - While the experts review whether StarLink corn is safe, more foods containing StarLink are being pulled from stores. (7/17/01)

Corn Controversy - The controversy over biotech crops is sure to be fueled by a new study from researchers at Iowa State University. (8/31/00)

 

Revised Bt Crops Reassessment - Federal Register notice

Congressional Research Service summary of Bt crops issues

Genetically Modified Pest-Protected Plants: Science and Regulation - National Academy of Sciences

Appraisal of EPA’s Assessment of the Benefits of Bt Crops - by Dr. Charles M. Benbrook for the Union of Concerned Scientists

Regulatory Process for Transgenic Crops in the US

EPA Advisors Assess Risks, Benefits of Bt Crops



   08.09.01
email to a friend
 
 
play video Video
Bt cotton plant
image: Iowa State University
(movie will open in a separate window)
Choose your format:
Quicktime
Realmedia


It’s been six years since the first biotech crops that produce their own pesticides were approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Those crops are now set to be reapproved in September.

As this ScienCentral News video reports, while they’ve yielded their share of controversy, most biotech crops are here to stay.

Genetically modified regulations

Plant-pesticides (or "plant-incorporated protectants," as they are now euphemistically called) have not only altered the way many growers protect their crops against insect pests. They have also broken new regulatory ground. Because they are crops, their field-testing is regulated by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA). Because they are pesticides, approval, or registration, for marketing them is the domain of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). And when they are also food crops, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulates their safety.

When EPA began registering plants engineered to make the "Bt" toxin in 1995, it was already very familiar with Bt. Sprayed formulations of the Bt protein, naturally produced by the bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis had already been widely and safely used by organic growers for decades.

But Bt crops are different from crops sprayed with Bt. The toxin is inside the plant, so safety risks might differ. And the crops produce it all the time, whether the pests are present or not, raising the risk of insects becoming resistant to it. The initial registrations included rules for growers using the crops to prevent or slow resistance. Those rules require that growers plant areas of non-Bt crops around their Bt fields to serve as "refuges" for nonresistant pests.

The agency set an expiration date on the registrations for Bt cotton and Bt corn so that they can be updated using the latest scientific information on both their risks and their benefits. The original expiration date of April 2001 has already been extended once, to September 2001, to give EPA more time to revise its rules. While EPA is likely to renew the registrations, it must also decide under what conditions, and for how long. Environmental groups and others who felt that EPA made too many favorable assumptions about the safety of these crops the first time around, want to be assured the risks are thoroughly addressed now.

The main contentions are shaping up to be:

The Monarch butterfly. At press time, this issue had a possibility of delaying the entire process. Five new studies by academic scientists on the effect of bt corn pollen on Monarch butterfly caterpillars in the field are set to be published by the National Academy of Sciences. EPA has considered the new data, but it has not been made public, the agency says, because NAS has not finished peer-reviewing them. The Union of Concerned Scientists and other watchdog groups are demanding access to the studies in time to make public comments on them (the public comment period officially ends on August 30, 2001).

Resistance Management. Planting non-Bt refuges takes a bite out of growers’ profits, but environmental groups say they need to be bigger.

Allergenicity. Friends of the Earth says the StarLink corn problem highlights the need for more allergenicity testing of all Bt plants.


 
top       email to a friend by Joyce Gramza


Terms of Use     Privacy Policy     Site Map     Help     Contact     About     My Account
 
ScienCentral News is a production of ScienCentral, Inc. in collaboration with the Center for Science and the Media 248 West 35th St., 17th Fl., NY, NY 10001 USA (212) 244-9577. The contents of these WWW sites ScienCentral, 2000- 2004. All rights reserved. The views expressed in this website are not necessarily those of the NSF. NOVA News Minutes and NOVA are registered trademarks of WGBH Educational Foundation and are being used under license. Image Credits National Science Foundation
ScienCentral home