User avatar
jal_ut
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 7447
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 10:20 pm
Location: Northern Utah Zone 5

Bt Corn

applestar said:
Of course the first thought that came to my mind is that the GMO idealization/propaganda is taking hold in the consumer concept of modern engineered crops. I'm talking about Bt corn, etc.
[url=https://www.ext.colostate.edu/pubs/crops/00707.html]OK I fixed the link[/url]

It would seem that Bt corn holds little if any risk to humans. Bt has long been used by organic gardeners to control many types of caterpillars. If that crowd will use it, how bad can it be?

I don't plant Bt corn. Not because I am afraid of it, but because I get along fine with what I do plant. I just wonder what your feelings are on these genetically engineered varieties?
Last edited by jal_ut on Mon Feb 21, 2011 11:47 am, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
applestar
Mod
Posts: 30514
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 7:21 pm
Location: Zone 6, NJ (3/M)4/E ~ 10/M(11/B)

Although I was referring primarily to consumer consciousness (and concience) being manipulated by marketing propaganda in general -- a pet peeve of mine, here are some information and opinions about Bt corn borrowed from a speciality forum for preservation of Monarch butterflies which in turn favors awareness of U.S. environmental health in general:
The report below documents another unintended consequence of the planting of GMO crops such as Bt corn - namely the contamination of waterways with the Bt protein (Cry1Ab) that is intended to kill insects, especially Lepidoptera that attempt to feed on the stems, foliage, roots or ears of the corn. The GM engineered protein, as you will see, has been found in waterways but how did it get there? Is it through direct runoff from fields that have been harvested? Is it from roots that extrude the protein in the process of controlling rootworms? Or, is it from the breakdown of corn tissues that results in the formation of a dust containing the protein that eventually makes its way to the water courses? All three avenues of contamination may be occurring. However, if the Cry1Ab protein is airborne and in sufficient quantities on the surfaces of foliage, it may well be contributing to mortality of Lepidoptera and in some cases beetles well outside the boundaries of the corn fields. Clearly, more work is needed to determine if the escaped Bt protein is a hazard to non-target insects, either in the aquatic habitats or on land.
[url=https://monarchwatch.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=15&t=2558&p=12601&hilit=Bt+corn#p12601]Monarchs & Monarch Watch ‹ Conservation Issues[/url]

User avatar
jal_ut
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 7447
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 10:20 pm
Location: Northern Utah Zone 5

Hmmm, anything posted in a forum is suspect. I would prefer information from trained professional scientists. Forums tend to play on the emotional side of humans.

TZ -OH6
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 2097
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:27 pm
Location: Mid Ohio

I am curious to see data on the environmental effects of sprayed Bt vs GMO. Bt is sprayed on everything (corn, potatoes etc) so the bugs are going to develop resistance sooner or later. GMO isn't going to speed that up. There is also the problem of spray drift onto butterfly plants etc, which GMO would at least partially avoid. Will Bt proteins from GMO plants entering the water be worse than the alternative pesticides? As long as people keep breeding like bunnies (and keeping warm fuzzy pets)there will have to be tradeoffs to feed and cloth everyone. Polyester useds petroleum, cotton uses Bt, organophosphates etc.

User avatar
jal_ut
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 7447
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 10:20 pm
Location: Northern Utah Zone 5

Unfortunately the caterpillars we want to keep off our plants are the immature stage of butterflies. Does that make butterflies the enemy?

About Monarch butterflies. The worms feed on milkweed plants. The problem seems to come when pollen from the Bt corn drifts over on some milkweed plants where the monarch's worms feed. In this area, I don't see that as any big problem since monarchs are not very common. Neither is milkweed. Nor is corn a major crop. For the small plot a home gardener may plant, it seems the risk to monarchs is nil. It may be a different in corn growing country? Bt is a naturally occuring organism. I would rather take my chances with that than some of the chemicals sprayed on corn on the large farms.

User avatar
applestar
Mod
Posts: 30514
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 7:21 pm
Location: Zone 6, NJ (3/M)4/E ~ 10/M(11/B)

https://www.fish.washington.edu/Seminars/fall_06/rosi-marshall.html

I grant you my garden is an unusual home garden :wink: but WE raised 125+ Monarch butterflies last summer/fall -- all from Monarch eggs laid in my garden.... And this was after giving away some caterpillars for other families to raise AND not obsessively (who me? :>) collecting every single egg and caterpillar to be found in the garden. :()

DoubleDogFarm
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:43 pm

One who controls the seed, controls the world.

User avatar
GardenRN
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1102
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:01 am
Location: Chesterfield, Va

before long we'll all be eating whatever we are lucky enough to get our hands on. how long can the world really go without some sort of population control? Honestly, the earth can only hold and feed (support) so many humans. Sure feels like we're quickly approaching a major problem. I just hope my kids and I are long gone by the time it gets here.

DoubleDogFarm
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:43 pm

:shock:

User avatar
GardenRN
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1102
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:01 am
Location: Chesterfield, Va

:?

User avatar
applestar
Mod
Posts: 30514
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 7:21 pm
Location: Zone 6, NJ (3/M)4/E ~ 10/M(11/B)

I honestly don't think it's the number of people that is the problem but the quality -- and I mean by this of course that obscure quality of "goodness" as opposed to "badness" -- of the people. But that's another discussion altogether. :wink:

cynthia_h
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 7500
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 7:02 pm
Location: El Cerrito, CA

Applestar is perhaps too easygoing to say this, but:

Please keep this discussion to Bt corn, possible effects on other forms of life (caterpillars, butterflies, folks who eat the corn, etc.) and do *not* make this discussion into a platform for other political stances, e.g., population control.

/mod hat off/

Cynthia H.
Moderator

JZydowicz
Full Member
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 11:25 pm
Location: Southern Wisconsin (Zone 5a)

jal_ut wrote:Unfortunately the caterpillars we want to keep off our plants are the immature stage of butterflies. Does that make butterflies the enemy?

About Monarch butterflies. The worms feed on milkweed plants. The problem seems to come when pollen from the Bt corn drifts over on some milkweed plants where the monarch's worms feed. In this area, I don't see that as any big problem since monarchs are not very common. Neither is milkweed. Nor is corn a major crop. For the small plot a home gardener may plant, it seems the risk to monarchs is nil. It may be a different in corn growing country? Bt is a naturally occuring organism. I would rather take my chances with that than some of the chemicals sprayed on corn on the large farms.
I did a report on whether or not Bt corn is having an effect on Monarch populations. And you're exactly right, the concern is about the protein being present in pollen that drifts and lands on milkweed plants, which Monarch larvae accidentally eat.
There was a huge concern about this in the late 90's and early 00's, and because of that, a national group was formed to study its effects. Of the dozen or so articles we read for the report, they all agreed that Bt pollen could in fact kill Monarch larvae. However, the amounts it took to kill monarch larvae were incredibly high. We're talking the milkweed leaves would have to be literally covered in Bt pollen, like fuzzy yellow. None of these levels is even close to what is found in fields, even if the milkweed plant is growing between rows.
I would argue that Bt corn is actually safer than (organically certified) Bt dusting and granular formulas, as it can't be blown off the plants by wind onto surrounding plants. Housing the Bt within the plant selectively kills only the insects (like European Corn Borer) which feed on the plant, and the amount of pollen drift is negligible.
The report below documents another unintended consequence of the planting of GMO crops such as Bt corn - namely the contamination of waterways with the Bt protein (Cry1Ab) that is intended to kill insects, especially Lepidoptera that attempt to feed on the stems, foliage, roots or ears of the corn. The GM engineered protein, as you will see, has been found in waterways but how did it get there? Is it through direct runoff from fields that have been harvested? Is it from roots that extrude the protein in the process of controlling rootworms? Or, is it from the breakdown of corn tissues that results in the formation of a dust containing the protein that eventually makes its way to the water courses? All three avenues of contamination may be occurring. However, if the Cry1Ab protein is airborne and in sufficient quantities on the surfaces of foliage, it may well be contributing to mortality of Lepidoptera and in some cases beetles well outside the boundaries of the corn fields. Clearly, more work is needed to determine if the escaped Bt protein is a hazard to non-target insects, either in the aquatic habitats or on land.

To be fair, I've never seen a study on the Bt toxin protein leaching, so it could be possible. However, I think it's far more likely to break down quickly after it leaves the plant, since it is an organic compound and Bt toxin dusts break down fairly quickly as well.

And they need to check their facts, because I'm not exactly sure what this is talking about: "it may well be contributing to mortality of Lepidoptera and in some cases beetles."
I'm pretty sure the Bt toxin inserted into Bt corn has zero toxicity against Coleoptera (a completely different Order than Lepidoptera). Now, there are Bt toxins that kill Coleoptera, but none that I know of that are modified into corn genomes. Corn doesn't have a huge amount of pest pressure from beetles at least not on the scale of EAB. Big seed companies like Monsanto wouldn't find it profitable to spend the money inserting Bt toxin effective against Coleoptera, as far as I can guess.

User avatar
GardenRN
Greener Thumb
Posts: 1102
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 10:01 am
Location: Chesterfield, Va

My apologies Cynthia. :oops:

I think for every action people take to "modify" nature, there is a natural reaction. Even if we don't see it for a long time,or at all! I disagree with genetically modifying anything. I do understand the benefits, but I think the long term cons outweigh the pros every time. Just my two cents.

JZydowicz
Full Member
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 11:25 pm
Location: Southern Wisconsin (Zone 5a)

There definitely are consequences we're seeing. Bt resistance is showing up and affecting organic growers who want to use it. Open pollinated crops like GMO beets are being pulled off (or are already pulled off) because the Bt toxin gene can spread from nearby Bt planted fields to organic producers nearby.

And there is something a little off about taking genes from bacteria and other plants and pretty much anything and sticking it in our crops. Let's call that the Jurassic Park effect. Giant dinosaurs may not come eat us, but there may be unforeseen consequences lurking.

DoubleDogFarm
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:43 pm

There definitely are consequences we're seeing. Bt resistance is showing up and affecting organic growers who want to use it. Open pollinated crops like GMO beets are being pulled off (or are already pulled off) because the Bt toxin gene can spread from nearby Bt planted fields to organic producers nearby.

And there is something a little off about taking genes from bacteria and other plants and pretty much anything and sticking it in our crops. Let's call that the Jurassic Park effect. Giant dinosaurs may not come eat us, but there may be unforeseen consequences lurking.
I'm sorry, Politics are not allowed here. The topic is Mothra. :roll:

Eric

cynthia_h
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 7500
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 7:02 pm
Location: El Cerrito, CA

JZydowicz wrote:There definitely are consequences we're seeing. Bt resistance is showing up and affecting organic growers who want to use it. Open pollinated crops like GMO beets are being pulled off (or are already pulled off) because the Bt toxin gene can spread from nearby Bt planted fields to organic producers nearby.
From what little I've read, most of the action is in the other direction: organic farmer/grower finds that his/her crop is the object of litigation by the GMO farmer/grower due to "unauthorized use" of the GMO plant(s).

Do you have any specific articles you can point me to re. the GMO beets being pulled off [the market?] in favor of organic growers? *That* would be a switch!

Thank you.

Cynthia

JZydowicz
Full Member
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 11:25 pm
Location: Southern Wisconsin (Zone 5a)

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/14/business/14sugar.html?_r=1

https://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/12/01/01greenwire-judge-orders-destruction-of-genetically-modifi-66587.html

This happened pretty recently.

Although I agree, litigation tends to come from those with the money and the proprietary claims, namely Monsanto, Syngenta, etc.

cynthia_h
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 7500
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 7:02 pm
Location: El Cerrito, CA

Thank you. I read both articles.

I think the phrase that puzzled me was "open pollinated" in conjunction with "GMO beets." Most gardeners and (at least) small growers use "open pollinated" to refer to plants left in their natural state for pollinators--bees, other insects (e.g., dragonflies, butterflies, native bees), and birds--to fertilize. "Open pollinated" is often used to refer to varieties/cultivars that have not been hybridized; certain traditional--I.e., non-gene-spliced--forms of hybridization require careful control of pollination, so the plants are raised in protected circumstances, not in open fields.

The GMO sugar beet is Beta vulgaris, as are all varieties of chard and table beets (beetroot to our British and other English-speaking friends). One of the lawsuits in question was joined by organic farmers in the Willamette Valley of Oregon who were concerned that their chard and table-beet products (seeds and veggies, and perhaps other products as well), grown very near some GMO sugar beet fields, would be embargoed by export clients in countries with very strict anti-GMO regulations, thus endangering the growers' livelihoods.

No Bt corn, milkweed, or related crops were discussed in either suit, but closely related principles seem to have been involved.

Thank you again.

Cynthia

TZ -OH6
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 2097
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 7:27 pm
Location: Mid Ohio

For those non flowering crops it seems to only be a problem with the seed producing areas. GMO beet seed farms can't be near Swiss chard seed farms. It wouldn't make much difference to crop farmers. It seems like it would be pretty easy to regulate. Apply for a permit to grow seeds and argue that no nonGMO seeds farms within X miles are growing that same species plants.

JZydowicz
Full Member
Posts: 25
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 11:25 pm
Location: Southern Wisconsin (Zone 5a)

Ah! My mistake, you guys are totally right. I think I heard a case about beets grown for seed or something.

All this stuff fascinates me. These are issues that people have never dealt with before...how do you regulate genetic modification? How do we decide if it's safe? Big, big questions that are, for the most part, being handled out of the public eye.

User avatar
rootsy
Green Thumb
Posts: 435
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 1:58 pm
Location: Litchfield, Michigan

One subject I have not seen mentioned on this thread is the mandated refuge crop that must be planted in a proportion to any Bt genetically altered crop.

This is to aid in keeping resistance low or to a minimum in targeted species.

In Bt corn the systemic Bt bacteria is used primarily to keep European Corn Borer and Corn Ear worm at bay. These worms are of the moth species. This is a big issue in sweet corn, particularly mid to late season varieties or plantings. Here in Michigan you can plan on seeing heavy ear worm infestation begin about mid August and really increase by the end of the month into September.

While home gardeners may not fret over worms when they pull the husk back, most retail outlets and customers purchasing the product (sweet corn) have little tolerance for finding a big fat worm in the ear. Heck I get the majority of market and roadside customers pulling husks back looking for worms.

For growers on a commercial scale, the alternative to non Bt corn generally is Warrior, or a generic form of such, applied at 7 day intervals from tassel emergence to harvest.

Good or bad, systemic Bt traits are here to stay and for commercial sweet corn growers are a real God send. If anything expect to see the offered varieties expand in the coming years.

One thing that most do not have to be concerned with is the use by the majority of small gardeners as most seed suppliers require a 25K seed count minimum purchase.

As a caveat, I do not grow Bt sweet corn.

DoubleDogFarm
Super Green Thumb
Posts: 6113
Joined: Sun Mar 28, 2010 11:43 pm

Good or bad, systemic Bt traits are here to stay and for commercial sweet corn growers are a real God send.
Except for the commercial growers who have lost everything. Bankruptcy. Being sued by Monsanto or similar for finding trace signs of the their GMO in uncontracted fields. Not having a contract with Monsanto.


Eric

User avatar
ozark_rocks
Senior Member
Posts: 128
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2010 7:58 pm
Location: Arkansas

rootsy wrote:
In Bt corn the systemic Bt bacteria is used primarily to keep European Corn Borer and Corn Ear worm at bay. These worms are of the moth species. This is a big issue in sweet corn, particularly mid to late season varieties or plantings. Here in Michigan you can plan on seeing heavy ear worm infestation begin about mid August and really increase by the end of the month into September.

While home gardeners may not fret over worms when they pull the husk back, most retail outlets and customers purchasing the product (sweet corn) have little tolerance for finding a big fat worm in the ear. Heck I get the majority of market and roadside customers pulling husks back looking for worms.
You are right, I don't worry too much about worms. Plantings made early, don't have the worm damage of later planting. Here in Arkansas my corn planted in March, is usually worm free, but what I plant late June through mid July , it is wormy.

I'd rather work with nature(by planting early), than alter my food source, and use gmo's.

User avatar
rootsy
Green Thumb
Posts: 435
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 1:58 pm
Location: Litchfield, Michigan

DoubleDogFarm wrote:
Good or bad, systemic Bt traits are here to stay and for commercial sweet corn growers are a real God send.
Except for the commercial growers who have lost everything. Bankruptcy. Being sued by Monsanto or similar for finding trace signs of the their GMO in uncontracted fields. Not having a contract with Monsanto.


Eric
I was speaking only on the subject of Bt sweet corn. I was not referring at any point to the good or bad of Monsanto and it's practices. The truth is genetic modification through pollen drift is not and will not be an issue with field or sweet corn. That battle ground is fought in the open pollinated arena of soybeans and canola.



Return to “Vegetable Gardening Forum”