Insects
develop resistance to engineered crops when single- and
double-gene altered plants are in proximity, Cornell researchers
say Genetically modified crops containing two insecticidal
proteins in a single plant efficiently kill insects. But when
crops engineered with just one of those toxins grow nearby,
insects may more rapidly develop resistance to all the
insect-killing plants, report Cornell University researchers.
A soil
bacterium called Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), whose genes are
inserted into crop plants, such as maize and cotton, creates these
toxins that are deadly to insects but harmless to humans.
Bt crops
were first commercialized in 1996, and scientists, critics and
others have been concerned that widespread use of Bt crops would
create conditions for insects to evolve and develop resistance to
the toxins.
Until now,
it has not been shown if neighboring plants producing a single Bt
toxic protein might play a role in insect resistance to transgenic
crops expressing two insecticidal proteins.
"Our
findings suggest that concurrent use of single- and dual-gene Bt
plants can put the dual-gene plants at risk if single-gene plants
are deployed in the same area simultaneously," said Anthony
Shelton, professor of entomology at Cornellıs College of
Agriculture and Life Sciences and an author of the study, which
was posted online June 6 in the Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences (PNAS) and is in the June 14 print edition of
the journal. "Single-gene plants really function as a
steppingstone in resistance of two-gene plants if the single gene
plants contain one of the same Bt proteins as in the two-gene
plant."
Cotton and
maize are the only commercial crops engineered with Bt genes. In
2004 these crops were grown on more than 13 million hectares
(about 32 million acres) domestically and 22.4 million hectares
(more than 55 million acres) worldwide. After eight years of
extensive use, there have been no reports of crop failure or
insect resistance in the field to genetically modified Bt crops,
Shelton said. Still, several insects have developed resistance to
Bt toxins in the lab, and recently, cabbage loopers (a moth whose
larvae feed on plants in the cabbage family) have shown resistance
to Bt sprays in commercial greenhouses.
So far,
only diamondback moths, which were used in this study, have
developed resistance to Bt toxins in the field. The resistance
resulted from farmers and gardeners spraying Bt toxin on plants
for insect control, a long-standing practice. While Bt toxin
sprayed on leaves quickly degrades in sunlight and often does not
reach the insect, genetically modified (GM) Bt plants express the
bacterium in the plant tissue, which makes Bt plants especially
effective against insects that bore into stems, such as the
European corn borer, which causes more than $1 billion in damage
annually in the United States.
In
greenhouses at the New York State Agriculture Experiment Station
in Geneva, N.Y., the researchers used three types of GM broccoli
plants: two types of plants each expressed a different Bt toxin,
and a third -- known as a pyramided plant -- expressed both
toxins. Elizabeth Earle and Jun Cao, co-authors of the PNAS paper
and members of the Department of Plant Breeding and Genetics at
Cornell created the plants.
For their
studies, the researchers employed strains of diamondback moth that
were resistant to each of the Bt proteins. The combination of Bt
plants and Bt-resistant insects allowed them to explore the
concurrent use of single- and dual-gene Bt plants in a way that
could not be done with cotton or maize, although their results are
relevant to these widely grown plants. First, the researchers bred
moth populations in which a low percent of the moths were
resistant to a single Bt toxin. The insects were then released
into caged growing areas with either single-gene plants, dual-gene
plants or mixed populations and allowed to reproduce for two
years.
The
researchers found that after 26 generations of the insect living
in the greenhouse with single-gene and dual-gene plants housed
together, all the plants were eventually damaged by the insects,
because over time, greater numbers of insects developed resistance
to the plantsı toxins. However, in the same two-year time frame,
all or almost all of the insects died when exposed to pyramided
plants alone.
"It's
easier for an insect to develop resistance to a single
toxin," said Shelton. "If an insect gets a jump on one
toxin, then it becomes more rapidly resistant to that same toxin
in a dual-gene plant. And when one line of defense starts to fail,
it puts more pressure on the second toxin in a pyramided plant to
control the insect," Shelton added.
While
single-gene Bt plants are most prevalent, industry trends suggest
that pyramided plants may be favored in the future. In Australia,
the use of single-gene Bt cotton was discontinued two years after
farmers began planting dual-gene cotton in 2002. In the United
States, companies introduced dual-gene cotton in 2003, but
single-gene varieties remain on the market.
"Single-gene
Bt plants have provided good economic and environmental benefits,
but from a resistance management standpoint they are inferior to
dual-gene plants. U.S. regulatory agencies should consider
discontinuing the use of those single-gene plants as soon as
dual-gene plants become available," Shelton said. "And
industries should be encouraged to create more dual-gene
plants."
Along with
effective insect control, pyramided plants have an added advantage
of requiring a smaller refuge -- a part of the field where non-Bt
plants are grown. Refuges create opportunities for Bt-resistant
insects to mate with other insects that do not have resistance.
The offspring of such a mating will be susceptible to the toxins.
\"Having a refuge is a good management strategy, but it is
not suitable for small farmers in China and India," said lead
author Jian-Zhou Zhao, a senior research associate in entomology
at Cornell. "The two-gene strategy is more suitable in
developing countries like China where farmers have an average of
half a hectare (1.2 acres) of land, much less land than American
farmers, and not enough to spare for refuges."
A U.S.
Department of Agriculture Biotechnology Risk Assessment Program
grant supported the study.
Weitere
Informationen: www.cornell.edu
This GMO
news service is underwritten by a generous grant from the Newman's
Own Foundation, edited by Thomas Wittman and is a production of
the Ecological Farming Association