Does GM wheat affect saprophagous Diptera species (Drosophilidae, Phoridae)?

Peter, M Dracatos; Lindfeld, Andreas; Nentwig, Wolfgang

doi:10.1016/j.pedobi.2009.12.006

Cited by 18 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our case, however, the wheat plants carrying Pm3b and Chi and Glu transgenes did not seem to change the post-harvest vegetation, at least within the 6-month time period. Our findings correspond to the results of several companion studies which showed no effects of these particular GM plants on non-target organisms, such as insect species (Alvarez-Alfageme et al, 2011;Peter et al, 2010;von Burg et al, 2010), soil fauna (Duc et al, 2011) or soil beneficial bacteria and mycorrhizal fungi (Meyer et al, 2013;Song Wilson et al, 2010).…”

Section: Post-harvest Weed Vegetationsupporting

confidence: 90%

Persistence of seeds, seedlings and plants, performance of transgenic wheat in weed communities in the field and effects on fallow weed diversity

Kalinina

Zeller

Schmid

2015

Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ntroduction of transgenic crops to agriculture has raised concerns about their effects on agroecosystems. We compared nine conventional lines of spring wheat with six genetically modified (GM) lines that contained transgenes of resistance against powdery mildew (Pm3b gene) or against fungi in general (Chi and Glu genes). We assessed the persistence and performance of these lines without competition and in experimental weed communities in the field, their seed germination in the laboratory, their survival in fallow plots and effects on post-harvest vegetation in the field. In competition with weeds, the GM lines showed reduced seed number, plant height and biomass allocation to seeds than their corresponding non-GM lines. No such performance differences were observed without competition. The seedlings of GM lines did not persist longer than those of the corresponding non-GM lines in fallow plots. In the field, GM and non-GM wheat lines had similar performance and persistence and both were able to reproduce in dense weed communities and to survive during winter on fallow plots. Stored in soil in the laboratory, the seeds of GM and non-GM lines either germinated quickly or lost their viability after 3 months. GM and non-GM lines had no differential effects on the structure and diversity of fallow plant communities within the 6-month period of monitoring. Poor seed longevity yet successful plant persistence in weed communities or on fallow plots indicate that not removing a population of growing plants presents a greater risk than allowing the build-up of a soil seed bank regarding the potential escape of transgenic wheat to the environment. Strong varietal differences in persistence point out the importance of case-bycase assessment of new GM varieties and indicate that transgenic traits should preferably be introduced into varieties with low persistence. ABSTRACTIntroduction of transgenic crops to agriculture has raised concerns about their effects on agroecosystems. We compared nine conventional lines of spring wheat with six genetically modified (GM) lines that contained transgenes of resistance against powdery mildew (Pm3b gene) or against fungi in general (Chi and Glu genes). We assessed the persistence and performance of these lines without competition and in experimental weed communities in the field, their seed germination in the laboratory, their survival in fallow plots and effects on post-harvest vegetation in the field. In competition with weeds, the GM lines showed reduced seed number, plant height and biomass allocation to seeds than their corresponding non-GM lines. No such performance differences were observed without competition. The seedlings of GM lines did not persist longer than those of the corresponding non-GM lines in fallow plots. In the field, GM and non-GM wheat lines had similar performance and persistence and both were able to reproduce in dense weed communities and to survive during winter on fallow plots. Stored in soil in the laboratory, the seeds of GM and non-GM lines ei...

show abstract

Section: Post-harvest Weed Vegetationsupporting

confidence: 90%

Persistence of seeds, seedlings and plants, performance of transgenic wheat in weed communities in the field and effects on fallow weed diversity

Kalinina

Zeller

Schmid

2015

Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Earthworms might adapt the amount of consumption to the quality of food as a pre-ingestive compensatory mechanism (Lavy et al, 2001). However, a chemical analysis of the structural plant components (Lindfeld et al 2010) did not find significant differences between GE wheat and non-GE wheat and the regression analysis showed no correlation between structural plant components or C/N ratio and the amount of litter consumption, respectively weight change of L. terrestris. The insertions of the transgenes do not seem to affect plant metabolism concerning the structural plant components we analysed and have no effect on the performance of L. terrestris.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…Differences in structural plant components and C/N ratio were analysed with linear mixed effects models and one-way ANOVAs by Lindfeld et al (2010). To check for pleiotropic effects we conducted a regression analysis of plant compounds and weight change or litter consumption, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The consumed leaf litter mass during the experiment was measured by subtracting the remaining litter residual mass from the initial litter mass. Results of the chemical analysis of hemicellulose, cellulose and lignin contents as well as the C/N ratio of all crop varieties were taken from an earlier study by Lindfeld et al (2010).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…enchytraeids (Hönemann et al, 2009) or dipteran larvae (Knecht et al, 2010). Several studies have been done investigating potential effects of Bt crops on earthworms (Saxena and Stotzky, 2001b;Zwahlen et al, 2003;Liu et al, 2009;Zeilinger et al, 2010) but little research has been conducted about effects of fungicidal GE wheat on soil fauna (Romeis et al, 2003;Peter et al, 2010;Lindfeld et al, 2010) and nothing so far about effects on earthworms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Genetically Engineered Antifungal Wheat has no Detrimental Effects on the Key Soil Species Lumbricus terrestris

Lindfeld¹,

Nentwig

2012

TOECOLJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Since the first introduction of genetically engineered (GE) plants, one of the major concerns has been their potential effects on non-target organisms and ecosystem services. We focused in this study on the earthworm species Lumbricus terrestris as important ecosystem engineer and studied its performance when feeding on GE antifungal wheat. We compared litter consumption, weight change and mortality of individuals feeding on GE wheat with either specific resistance against powdery mildew (Blumeria graminis) or unspecific resistance against fungi via chitinase and glucanase expression with individuals feeding on non-GE wheat or other conventional crops. We did not find detrimental direct or indirect effects of GE wheat on L. terrestris and overall L. terrrestris tended to cope even better with GE wheat varieties. Concluding from our experiment the transgene products do not harm the soil key species L. terrestris and ecosystem services like decomposition, organic matter turnover and nutrient cycling are unlikely to be affected detrimentally.

show abstract

Potential use of an arthropod database to support the non-target risk assessment and monitoring of transgenic plants

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Worldwide, plants obtained through genetic modification are subject to a risk analysis and regulatory approval before they can enter the market. An area of concern addressed in environmental risk assessments is the potential of genetically modified (GM) plants to adversely affect non-target arthropods and the valued ecosystem services they provide. Environmental risk assessments are conducted case-by-case for each GM plant taking into account the plant species, its trait(s), the receiving environments into which the GM plant is to be released and its intended uses, and the combination of these characteristics. To facilitate the non-target risk assessment of GM plants, information on arthropods found in relevant agro-ecosystems in Europe has been compiled in a publicly available database of bio-ecological information during a project commissioned by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). Using different hypothetical GM maize case studies, we demonstrate how the information contained in the database can assist in identifying valued species that may be at risk and in selecting suitable species for laboratory testing, higher-tier studies, as well as post-market environmental monitoring.

show abstract

Does GM wheat affect saprophagous Diptera species (Drosophilidae, Phoridae)?

Cited by 18 publications

References 37 publications

Persistence of seeds, seedlings and plants, performance of transgenic wheat in weed communities in the field and effects on fallow weed diversity

Persistence of seeds, seedlings and plants, performance of transgenic wheat in weed communities in the field and effects on fallow weed diversity

Genetically Engineered Antifungal Wheat has no Detrimental Effects on the Key Soil Species Lumbricus terrestris

Potential use of an arthropod database to support the non-target risk assessment and monitoring of transgenic plants

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About