Mass Releases of Genetically Modified Insects in Area-Wide Pest Control Programs and Their Impact on Organic Farmers

Abstract

Abstract:The mass release of irradiated insects to reduce the size of agricultural pest populations of the same species has a more than 50-year record of success. Using these techniques, insect pests can be suppressed without necessarily dispersing chemical insecticides into the environment. Ongoing release programs include the suppression of medfly at numerous locations around the globe (e.g., California, Chile and Israel) and the pink bollworm eradication program across the southern USA and northern Mexico. These, and other successful area-wide programs, encompass a large number of diverse organic farms without incident. More recently, mass release techniques have been proposed that involve the release of genetically modified insects. Given that the intentional use of genetically modified organisms by farmers will in many jurisdictions preclude organic certification, this prohibits the deliberate use of this technology by organic farmers. However, mass releases of flying insects are not generally conducted by individual farmers but are done on a regional basis, often without the explicit consent of all situated farms (frequently under the auspices of government agencies or growers' collectives). Consequently, there exists the realistic prospect of organic farms becoming involved in genetically modified insect releases as part of area-wide programs or experiments. Herein, we describe genetically modified insects engineered for mass release and examine their potential impacts on organic farmers, both intended and unintended. This is done both generally and also focusing on a hypothetical organic farm located near an approved experimental release of genetically modified (GM) diamondback moths in New York State (USA).

RNA Interference in Insects: Protecting Beneficials and Controlling Pests

“…Considering these potential strategies to control insect viral diseases, the use of genetically engineered insects deserves special attention due to the risks of environmental contamination. In fact, up to date, the release of transgenic insects has been limited to sterile animals, with the aim of reducing pest species populations (Reeves and Phillipson, 2017; Wilke et al, 2018). However, the use of genetically engineered beneficial insects, as would be the eventual goal for various species of bees, would mostly require the maintenance of viable populations and therefore the use of fertile transgenic animals.…”

Limits of Knowledge and Tipping Points in the Risk Assessment of Gene Drive Organisms

“…• No possibility of coexistence: if coexistence with relevant standards for food production, such as organic agriculture, is not possible, the release of GE organisms would infringe consumers' choice and the livelihoods of organic farmers (Reeves and Phillipson 2017).…”

I Have a Dream: Organic Movements Include Gene Manipulation to Improve Sustainable Farming

“…For organic farming this is not only an environmental concern, but also a financial problem, as the presence of GMOs in organic products jeopardizes organic certification, resulting in loss of the premium price of organic products. A few illustrative examples of decertified organic products due to GMO contamination are listed in the paper of this Special Issue by Reeves and Phillipson [4]. The potential contamination of organic crops with GMOs constitutes, for Wickson et al [2], an example of how GM crops infringe on the principles of fairness.…”

“…The contribution of Reeves and Phillipson [4] addresses the impact of mass releases of genetically modified insects on organic farmers. Mass releases of irradiated insects have been used to reduce the size of the pest population for more than 50 years.…”

“…To address the problem of whether organic farming and gene manipulation may be compatible, I initiated a Special Issue in Sustainability by inviting experts of both fields to express their views on this topic [1][2][3][4][5][6][7]. I am most thankful to all contributors for joining this discussion, but also to the reviewers for evaluating these manuscripts.…”