The Longest GMO Research: The Results Are In

The results of the longest GMO research have been released to the public last week and the findings are astonishing. The general public were left in the dark for years regarding the GMO crops and their influence on the economy of a country. A team of economists led by Francesco Ciliberti from The University of Virginia started collecting the data in 1998 and started analyzing it after fourteen years. They focused on the use of pesticides among farmers who are cultivating soy beans and maize, and looked at it from the economic aspect. The released findings mostly focus on the use of pesticides that include herbicides and insecticides and the final results are quite interesting.

The team and the research

Francesco Ciliberti managed to assemble a team of respectable economists who do have years of experience with data analysis. The majority of the team members come from respectable universities from all around the United States. They started their research back in 1998, selecting 10,000 US farmers who were growing soy beans and maize.

Have in mind that every past research that touched upon this topic usually covered only two or three years, so this study is definitely the largest (so far). Soy beans and maize are the most commonly cultivated crops in the world so it comes as no surprise that they decided to focus on the farmers who were growing those plants. The team selected the candidates and followed their journey from planting the first crop in 1998, to making a decision to grow GMO crops, and everything that followed, including the usage of pesticides and insecticides during each year.

GMO soy beans are modified in order to hold out against various weeds that ruin the crops, while genetically modified maize is resistant to pests. After planting the genetically modified crops, farmers did report the decrease in usage of herbicides and insecticides. They simply did not need it in the first couple of years of cultivating the genetically crops. However, the situation did change after a couple of years.

The results

Planting and growing GMO crops do have a significant impact on the economy due to the fact that the crops in question are more resistant to the outside factors and they generally give more produce at the end of each harvest. Additionally, farmers spend far less money on pesticides since they are not needed in this situation.

However, this research discovered that after some time, genetically modified plants do change the environment around them and even though they don’t require specific herbicides or insecticides, they do give in to other weeds or pests. For instance, weeds that grow around genetically modified soy develop immunity and farmers usually start using large amounts of herbicides in order to keep the situation under control.

This fact alone has a huge impact on the economy and the farming methods since farmers have to spend more money on various chemicals in order to battle this unexpected situation that can arise after years of growing genetically modified crops. On the other hand, insects are not reacting in the same way to genetically modified crops probably because they breed with other insects who do not live in the same.

The team was surprised by their findings regarding the increased usage of herbicides and the impact it has on the economy. The patterns were quite clear so dealing with this problem should definitely be the next goal of GMO researchers who develop the crops in order to reduce the weed resistance and keep the balance.

The Economics of Genetically Modified Crops

The potential of genetically engineered crops is manifold. This occurs even in the midst of the dwindling effects it has on the resource base thus promising a significant increase in productivity hence promoting sustainability regarding food supply as well as the provision of raw materials for the rapidly growing population. Genetically modified crops give rise to environmental benefits that play a central role in alleviating poverty through income generation especially in developing countries. It is through genetically modified foods that there is a nutritional enhancement in the plants hence offering a new platform through which human health is enhanced.

In spite of the contributions that are realized through the introduction of GM crops, its development has aroused lots of opposition. This is particularly high in Europe, and the effect has spilled over to other parts of the globe. This is through such aspects as trade regulations, media coverage as well as the establishment of outreach groups that intend to lobby anti-biotechnology usage. The key driving forces for these issues is the concern over the environment, health risks as well as social implication effects. For example, there is fear that consumption of GM crops and foods derived from them having the potential to undermine traditional knowledge systems, especially in developing countries.

Regarding economics, the increase in privatization of crop improvement research has aroused possible monopolization of the seed market and thus causing adverse exploitation of the farmers in the region. This is because GM crops are associated with novel possibilities that have triggered research dealing with aspects of the economy and policy making. Through this article, there is a clear outline of the economic factors that relate to GM crops.

Status of GM crops

Commercialization of GM crops
The commercial application of the GM crops goes way back to the mid-1990s and has then spread across the globe. According to reports released in 2008, GM crops were grown in over 25 countries in over 120 ha of land. However, the US registered the highest share of GM crops accounting for 50 % of total ha across the globe. Despite the fact that there is a significant increase in approval of GM technologies in some countries in Europe, the commercialization of the GM crops is still negligible. This is because of a low level of public acceptance as well as other regulatory framework factors that are not favorable.
Today, there is a limited number of technologies that are commercialized including herbicide tolerance in soybeans among others. GM maize also has been introduced to confer herbicide tolerance as well as resistance against insects. The resistance against insects is based on a wide range of genes that spring from Bacillus thuringiensis bacterium. It is these Bt genes that play a central role in the control of corn rootworm, corn borers as well as other stem borers.

Micro-level impact of the first generation GM plants
Many of the studies that focus on the micro-level impact of GM plants are currently based on random sample surveys as well as a comparison of adopter performances with non-adopter GM crops. However, this kind of comparison is characterized by selectivity bias. Additionally, its adoption may give rise to an overestimation of technological impacts and underestimation of farmers’ impact under certain conditions. Bacillus thuringiensis technology is a promising platform for control of pests in the environment. Some of the approaches that are geared towards addressing selectivity bias using econometric means include;

Empirical evidence: Bt GMO plants do not entirely get rid of the need for sprays against insects. This is because there still crop damage that occurs. The reason for this is based on the fact that Bt toxins have a high specificity for certain species of pests while insect pests are not affected at all. There is evidence that insecticide-reducing effect, as well as yield increasing the effect, is observed on the international front with high scores reported in Argentina and India.
Conventional cotton farmers often use very low levels of insecticides and thus effectiveness in controlling pests is small. However, the use of pesticides in India is higher. This suggests that there is a yield effect of the Bt technology is influenced by the quantity and quality of insecticides used hence control of damage on cotton. Additionally, the resistance to insecticides, as well as the timing of spraying the GM crops, is also to be considered xxx.

Econometric estimates: using different models, this confirms the net effect on insecticide reduction and increasing effect on yield in using the Bt technology. This is evident through the demonstration that part of the impact variation that was seen in some countries like India was because of integration of the Bt gene in a few cotton varieties that did not suit the location. This is because the positive impact of this gene was undermined by the adverse effect of the germ-plasm.
This indicates that the full benefits of GM plants can be realized through the insertion of the target gene in a wide range of varieties that are locally adaptable. This is the approach that is used in reducing the occurrence of selectivity issues as well as problems associated with endogeneity.

Gross margin effect:
 farmers that have been shown to adopt Bt technologies have benefited from the economic advantage that is related to female entrepreneurs saving insecticides as well as high yields. This means that on average the gross margin gains are estimated to be very high in the case of such crops as GM Bt maize and GM Bt cotton. Additionally, the cost of seeds is much lower in developing countries as opposed to other regions of the world. This is attributed to the weak aspects that relate to intellectual property rights, seed production, subsidies as well as other price interventions that are set by the government. Additionally, other factors such as agricultural policies play a role in determining the gross margin effects.

Conclusion
Aspects that relate to economics play a pivotal role in determining novel ways through which social benefits can be maximized. This means that more effort is to be directed towards quantification of possible indirect effects of GM plants and the outcome it has on health and the surrounding environment. This is through a significant contribution made by economists in designing efficient regulations and innovative systems. This could finally lead to advanced levels of income generated from the sale of GM crops.

The Legacy of the GMO movement- the Flavr Savr tomato

    Each movement has its mascots and icons that are emblazoned in the minds of the public as being representative of the whole. For cloning animals it had been Dolly the sheep, for transgenic animals it had been the goats who had spider silk producing genes implanted in them to make their milk into spider silk fibers, and for the genetically modified plant movement the Flavr Savr tomato by Monsanto had become the face of what some worried was the future of their gardens.

      What the Flavr Savr tomato had hoped to accomplish in the early days would be seen as tame by the ambitions set forth by modified plants today. As the name suggests, the only alteration to the tomato had been to allow the tomato to ripen for longer on the vine, which would have hopefully resulted in a longer shelf life and a better, more full taste. This was accomplished through the deactivating of one of its processes. As the article “Tomatoes” on gmo-compass explained, the process to create the tomato was called the Antisense approach and it occurred by the deactivating of the creation of an enzyme, called polygalacturonase, that was in charge of the fruit softening.

      What ended up happening was much different, though. Though the Flavr Savr tomatoes had passed the legislation necessary to be on market back in the day, they had turned out to be a market failure, not recouping the cost of their creation and distribution. In addition to that, modified tomatoes have had a lengthy battle in the European Union, where they had trouble being passed as safe for consumption. The same article on gmo-compass states that tomato puree had been very popular in Great Britain, but that nearly all other states could not decide whether they had wanted to legalize the sale and consumption of the plant, and whether they had deemed it safe, which eventually led to the removal of all pending applications by modified crop producers. There are no modified tomatoes for sale in any markets in the EU now.

     This doesn’t mean that the tomato was a total loss. There are plenty of scientists today who are trying to figure out ways to alter the tomatoes to give them more traits like better herbicide and pesticide resistance, or a natural defense against pesticides. With the strides made in the modifying of other fruits and vegetables, there are always more options to apply to tomatoes before they are sent for approval to the market again.

      But in a young biotech industry the fact was that what captured the imagination of the public about the possibilities had been a small red tomato called the Flavr Savr. For some it was the opportunity at technology making a better life for people once again, preserving taste and serving as a gateway to a future of even better traits and possibilities for what crops could be for people around the world. The tomato had also served as a scary beacon of the overreach of science, with a new technology that was too young to be fully studied in the biological ramifications it caused to consumers and to a crossing of the natural boundaries where we weren’t meant to tread.

      The Flavr Savor became a casualty of a culture war over genetic modification the world over, but for both good and bad it cemented itself as the progenitor of what would become one of the most contested and transformative scientific movements the world had ever seen.

Source:
Gmocompass. (2016). Tomatoes. Gmo-compass. Retrieved on May 5, 2016 from http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/grocery_shopping/fruit_vegetables/15.genetically_modified_tomatoes.html

Examining Inborn Defenses against Pests in Leptra Corn

     One of the most prevalent traits of genetically modified plants is their ability to resist insects that would normally consume and destroy the plant. One recent addition to the family of gmo plants created to protect itself from insects is a hybrid plant created by DuPont Pioneer and is known as Optimum Leptra. The website states that the modification is to the corn plant and is designed to reduce the ear feeding of lepidopteran pests which delivers cleaner ears with less kernel damage and that it eliminates the major risk of development of molds and mycotoxins in harvested grain (“Optimum Leptra Hybrids”).

      An article by Clarin Rural, covering news in the Latin American regions, talked about how the corn will soon be introduced in Argentina after having the Ministry of Agro Industry approve the marketing of the plant (“Resistant corn comes with four transgenic events”). The article gives more details on the function of the modifications, stating that two of the events protect against stem borer and isoca Tang, a double event for protection against fall armyworm and glufosinate ammonium with a room for glyphosate. The corn has already been made available in Brazil and hopes carry to better yields with it in Argentina.

     In the United States the protections on the crop protect it from different pests. In the article “DuPont Pioneer releases Optimum Leptra Hybrid” on AGProfessional, in the United States the insects repelled by the modifications of the corn include European and Southwestern corn borers, the corn earworm, and black and western bean cutworms. In the article, penned by the DuPont Pioneer Company, they cite figures of 98% reduction in ear feeding damage using their crops. The plants are also resistant to herbicides, protecting them from more types of poison control.

     Some of the traits found in the corn have long been used in other genetically modified plants produced by DuPont, and have long known mechanisms for working. For example, Herculex I, a trait available in Leptra to kill bugs functions by being ingested by larva who feed on the modified plant. The protein binds to receptors in the gut of the larva and causing a series of reactions which ultimately lead to the death of the larva (“Herculex FAQ”).

      As with any genetically modified food, of course, there are questions about the effects these different traits may have on the ecology around it. Modified plants that have natural pesticides and that are resistant to herbicides and pesticides have been shown to cause resistant strains of weeds and pest insects to survive and reproduce, causing a drop in the effectiveness of the traits modified in the plants. The article “How pesticides develop” by Michigan State University explained that worldwide more than 500 species of pests have developed a resistance to pesticides due to the growth of resistance among their populations.

      Even so, the Clarin Rural article goes on to state that the importance of the Leptra crop is that, since it has so many different resistance traits it makes it easier to rotate the amount of herbicides and pesticides needed for cultivating the crop. In addition, the natural pest defenses the corn has should also reduce the amount of poison needed as it is targets the greatest pests that threaten the growth of corn plants in the regions the crop is planted in. All of these different additions may prove to be fundamental in helping feed a world that is highly defendant on its corn plants on production, if they can get past the stigma of genetic modification and scientific uncertainty.

Sources:

Clarin. (2016). Argentina approves new GMO corn with four traits for insect, pesticide resistance. Genetic Literacy Poroject. 

Dow AgroSciences. (2016). Herculex I FAQ. DowAgro. 

DuPont Pioneer. (2013). DuPont Pioneer releases Optimum Leptra hybrid. AGProfessional. 

Gut, L., Schilder, A., Isaacs, R., & McManus, P. (2016). How Pesticide Resistance Develops. Michigan State University. 

Pioneer. (2016). Optimum Leptra Hybrids. DuPont Pioneer.