Assessing The Commercialization Of Bt Corn Varieties Essay Example

lethal effects on non-pest species. This paper will explore the origins and mode of action of Bt and Bt-Corn, as well as the economic and environmental advantages. It will also discuss FDA regulations on genetically modified organisms and the controversies surrounding Bt-corn. The discovery of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) can be credited to Japanese biologist Shigetane Ishiwata in 1901, but it was Ernst Berliner who named the bacterium in 1911 after rediscovering it in Thuringia, Germany.

In 1938, a French company began producing a pesticide called Sporeine, which combined a bacterium and its toxin crystals. In the 1950s, American organic farmers started using Bt on their crops to control pests (Aroian). As research methods improved in the 1960s and new Bt species were discovered, more farmers began using Bt. However, it wasn't until advancements in genetics and genetic engineering in the 1990s that researchers were able to identify and isolate the specific genes responsible for toxin production and transfer them into certain crop species, like Bt-Corn. Bt-Corn was the first registered Bt crop approved for commercial use by the USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency) (Aroian). By 2004, Bt-Corn covered a significant portion of cornfields in the United States (Wu, 2006). According to Clive James, the chair of the ISAAA, as of 2002, the total Bt-Corn fields worldwide reached approximately 25 million acres.

(James, 2002) Bt toxins, produced by Bacillus thuringiensis, are crystal proteins that target and inhibit specific metabolic processes of insects. When activated upon contact with their specific host, these proteins attach to the gut epithelium cells of the insects and create pores in the cell membranes. These pores disrupt the osmotic balance of the cells,

leading to swelling and lysis.

(Hofte, 1989) In simpler terms, these toxins cause water absorption imbalance in specific insect cells, resulting in swelling and lysis. They are highly selective and only affect certain species of insects, making them effective in pest control while posing little harm to other organisms.

The toxins (insecticidal crystal proteins) in Bt-Corn do not harm human health or vertebrates such as mammals, reptiles, amphibians, birds, bony fish, and sharks. Peairs (2007) explains that these toxins are safe for humans and non-targeted organisms because they only affect specific groups of insects compared to traditional pesticides.

Bt-Corn has been available commercially for over ten years and data shows it is both economically efficient and environmentally beneficial. According to Brookes' study, farms have seen significant economic benefits totaling $5 billion in 2005 and $27 billion during the first decade (1996-2005) of genetically engineered crop commercialization.

Since 1996, the introduction of genetically engineered maize species such as Bt-Corn and other forms of genetically modified corn has caused a significant increase in farm incomes. Globally, this increase amounts to over $3.1 billion, with the United States contributing around $2.3 billion. According to Brookes (2006), these income benefits make up approximately 88% of the total income generated from GM maize crops worldwide. The economic advantage of genetically modified corn is primarily due to its ability to produce higher quantities of crops that are equal or superior in quality compared to 'organic' corn. This advantage can be attributed to two main factors: firstly, pests are not attracted to the crop, resulting in higher yields.

The second reason for self-producing insecticidal toxins is that it helps farmers save on costs for maintaining the crop

because they don't need to buy large amounts of pesticide. This also results in less time spent on crop walking and applying pesticides and herbicides, reduced energy usage from less spraying, savings in machinery costs and usage (due to less spraying and shorter harvest times), and improved health and safety for farm workers who don't have to handle as many pesticides (Brookes, 2006).

In terms of environmental benefits, the use of Bt-Corn allows farmers to avoid using environmentally harmful chemicals, whether it's pesticides or herbicides. Overall, GM crops have reduced the environmental impact on cropping areas by 15.3% from 1996 to 2005, with a decrease of 7% in the total volume of active ingredient usage.

The GM maize sector has seen a 4.6% decrease in environmental impact on the cropping area, as reported by Brookes (2006). This decline is mainly attributed to reduced pesticide usage. Furthermore, there has been an overall reduction of 4% in environmental impact due to the adoption of more eco-friendly herbicides. Brookes emphasizes that excessive greenhouse gas emissions contribute to global warming and credits the decrease in emissions to two factors: decreased fuel consumption resulting from fewer applications of pesticides and herbicides, which require machinery for spraying.

Between 1996 and 2005, there has been a decrease in carbon dioxide emissions of approximately 4,613 million kg. This reduction is calculated based on the decreased fuel usage of around 1,679 liters. In comparison, during this time period, planting genetically modified (GM) crops resulted in permanent carbon dioxide savings equivalent to removing 2.05 million cars from the road for one year. This calculation considers the average annual distance traveled by a car (15,000 km) and the average

carbon dioxide produced per kilometer (2,250 kg CO2) by an average family car emitting 150 grams of CO2 per kilometer (Brookes, 2006).

The advancements in genetic engineering and biotechnology have necessitated regulation and oversight of products and methods used, particularly in relation to food products. The regulatory bodies responsible for supervising genetically modified foods are the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and United States Department of Agriculture (USDA).

Among these agencies, the FDA plays a primary role as it serves as the official government agency responsible for regulating food, drug, and cosmetic laws. It ensures food safety (excluding meat), regulates food additives, medicines medical devices veterinary drugs cosmetics ?? ,and genetically modified food products.

The FDA has a 'GRAS' list that includes genetically modified food products considered safe. Manufacturers must ensure their products are not adulterated or misbranded to be on this list. These products can be sold without prior FDA approval. Whole foods like unprocessed meat, poultry, fish, fruits and vegetables, and non-homogenized milk fall under the GRAS category. However, if there is evidence of adulteration or harm to human or animal health with a product, it may be taken off the market and result in legal consequences for the manufacturer (Gertsberg, 2009). Genetic engineering of organisms remains controversial and subject to ongoing research. Concerns about GMOs mainly arise from differing perspectives and ethical considerations due to fear and uncertainty among many individuals discussing this issue.

Controversies surrounding genetic engineering arise from the lack of substantial evidence demonstrating the dangers of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) to human health and the environment. These concerns include the possibility of creating new allergens, increasing toxicity levels in

organisms, transferring unwanted genes between species, reducing biodiversity, and causing unknown effects on various organisms (Turner, 2007).

Ethical issues also emerge, such as the monopolization of global food production by certain companies, problems with intellectual property rights, and non-mandatory labeling practices in the United States. The absence of mandatory labeling restricts consumers' ability to choose between organic and genetically engineered foods.

A significant concern involves the potential impact on unintended species like Monarch butterflies when exposed to Bt-Corn pollen containing delta endotoxins. The primary worry focuses on potentially poisoning Monarch butterflies through Bt toxins.

Monarch butterflies have been observed migrating and laying their eggs near areas where Bt-Corn fields are present. These butterflies' larvae rely on milkweed plants for sustenance, a type of plant that is commonly found in the same regions where Bt-Corn is grown. However, it has been discovered that Bt-Corn pollen can disperse and settle on these milkweed leaves. Various studies have documented instances of mortality in Monarch butterfly caterpillars that consume these pollen-covered leaves from the milkweed plants (Peairs, 2007). As a result of the recent controversy surrounding this issue, numerous private parties have joined together to organize workshops and investigations, with the support of the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) of the United States.

Scientists and researchers from U. S. and Canadian universities, ARS members, and several other environmental organizations came together to determine whether the issue has a scientific basis. (Hellmich, 2008) Laboratory experiments using pure Crystal toxins (Bt toxins) mixed with artificial diets showed that one specific type of Cry toxin, Cry1Ab, was harmful to Monarch caterpillars. However, other types of Cry toxins did not have a toxic effect on them. Both

field studies and lab experiments suggested that Monarch caterpillars that consumed milkweed leaves with naturally occurring levels of Bt-Corn pollen did not experience any adverse effects. Only the single Cry toxin was found to be unsafe.

The production of Bt-Corn species 176, which produced high amounts of Cry1Ab toxins, was terminated due to the results of an experiment (Hellmich, 2008). Other studies compared the mortality rates of Monarch caterpillars in agricultural and non-agricultural habitats without Bt-Corn species, finding no significant differences (Hellmich, 2008). Another study examined the mortality rates of Monarch caterpillars exposed to Bt-Corn species versus 'organic' corn species treated with cyhalothrin pesticide. The experiment revealed that almost all Monarch larvae on milkweed plants within the field were killed (Hellmich, 2008).

According to Hellmich (2008), Bt-Corn is considered safer than conventional insecticides and pesticides. Hellmich also states that the risks to the Monarch population are minimal due to low exposure of Monarch caterpillars to Bt-Corn pollen. Additionally, commercially available Bt-Corn hybrids have been found to have low toxicity. In conclusion, Hellmich emphasizes that all commercial Bt corn hybrids have minimal impact on populations of monarch butterflies, particularly when compared to traditional insecticides.

"(Hellmich, 2008) Evaluation In conclusion, extensive research and investigations conducted worldwide confirm that the commercialization of Bt-Corn in the past 14 years has had significant benefits for society and the environment. These benefits include cost reduction for farmers, decreased usage of energy, fuel, and CO2 emissions, increased crop yields, and reduced reliance on harmful chemicals such as pesticides and herbicides. It is important to note that many concerns about Bt-Corn and genetically engineered organisms are subjective and based on personal preferences. The main obstacle to

progress in the agricultural industry is the lack of education and open-mindedness towards genetically modified organisms.

Bibliography Aroian, R. (n."

October 2006 - Brookes, G. - History of Bt: UCSD - Aroian Lab.

According to Gertsberg (2009, August 30), the first decade of GM crops has had global impacts on society, economy, and environment.

The following text is an introduction to the FDA's regulation of genetically modified foods. It was obtained from GMO Journal: Food Safety Politics website on May 2, 2010, and authored by Hellmich, R.L.

(2008, March 8) Monarch Butterflies and Bt Corn

1-3 Hofte, H.

(1989). Insecticidal Crystal Proteins of Bacilllus thuringiensis. MICROBIOLOGICAL REVIEWS, 53, 242-255. James, C.

(2002). Global Review of Commercialized Transgenic Crops: 2001. ISAAA Briefs (26), 1-184. Peairs, F.

(2007, April). Bt Corn: Health and the Environment. Colorado State University Extension. Turner, L. (2007).

Playing With Our Food. Better Nutrition, 69 (4), 30-33. Wu, F. (2006).

Mycotoxin reduction in Bt corn has the potential to have economic, health, and regulatory impacts (Transgenic Research, 277-289).