Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-tf8b9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T17:47:22.193Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Concerns a Weed Scientist Might Have About Herbicide-Tolerant Crops: A Revisitation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

M. Alejandra Martinez-Ghersa ,
Catherine A. Worster  and
Steven R. Radosevich
M. Alejandra Martinez-Ghersa
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331
Catherine A. Worster
Affiliation:
Department of Environmental Sciences, 2082 Cordley Hall, Botany and Plant Pathology, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331
Steven R. Radosevich
Affiliation:
Department of Forest Science, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Over a decade ago, the Weed Science Society of America sponsored a symposium on the then emerging technology of herbicide-tolerant crops (HTCs). The symposium and subsequent proceedings addressed potential benefits and concerns about that new technology to control weeds. Technological, biological, and ethical questions were addressed that were likely to emerge from the widespread adoption of HTCs. It was suggested at that time that if such questions were answered, HTC development would proceed on a more solid foundation, whereas continued uncertainty and criticism would probably result if the questions were not answered. We now review developments in HTC technology. Questions and concerns posed one decade ago are still pertinent, but current knowledge is still insufficient to address them. Adoption of HTC has risen dramatically since their commercial introduction, but there is still no evidence of associated production cost reductions or enhanced yields

Keywords

Biotechnologyherbicide-tolerant cropsweedsHTCherbicide-tolerant crops
Type
Education/Extension
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , March 2003 , pp. 202 - 210
Copyright
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Aldrich, R. J. 1984. Weed-Crop Ecology. Principles in Weed Management. North Scituate, MA, Breton. 465 p.Google Scholar
Altieri, M. A. 2000. The ecological impacts of transgenic crops on agroecosystem health. Ecosyst. Health 6: 13–23.Google Scholar
Altieri, M. and Rosset, P. 1999. Ten Reasons Why Biotechnology Will Not Ensure Food Security, Protect the Environment and Reduce Poverty in the Developing World. Mindfully Organization: Web page: http://www.mindfully.org/GE/Ten-Reasons-Why-Not.htm. Accessed: November 20, 2001, verified June 19, 2002).Google Scholar
Alstad, D. N. and Andow, D. A. 1995. Managing the evolution of insect resistance to transgenic plants. Science 268: 1894–1896.Google Scholar
Barton, J. E. and Dracup, M. 2000. Genetically modified crops and the environment. Agron. J. 92: 797–803.Google Scholar
Batie, S. S. and Ervin, D. E. 2001. Transgenic crops and the environment: missing markets and public roles. Environ. Dev. Econ. 6: 435–457.Google Scholar
Bekker, R. M., Bakker, J. P., Grandin, U., Kalamees, R., Milberg, P., Poschlod, P., Thompson, K., and Willems, J. H. 1998. Seed size, shape and vertical distribution in the soil: indicators of seed longevity. Funct. Ecol. 12: 834–842.Google Scholar
Benbrook, C. 1999. Evidence of the Magnitude and Consequences of the Roundup Ready Soybean Yield Drag from University-Based Varietal Trials in 1998. AgBioTech InfoNet Technical Paper, No. 1: Web page: http:www.biotech-info.net/RR_yield_drag_98.pdf. Accessed: November 20, 2001, verified June 19, 2002.Google Scholar
Burnside, O. C. 1992. Rationale for developing herbicide-resistant crops. Weed Technol. 6: 621–625.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapin III, F. S., Walker, B. H., Hobbs, R. J., Hooper, D. U., Lawton, J. H., Sala, O. E., and Tilman, D. 1997. Biotic control over the functioning of ecosystems. Science 277: 500–504.Google Scholar
Chrispeels, M. J. and Sadava, D. E. 1994. Plants, Genes and Agriculture. Boston, MA: Jones and Bartlett. pp. 231–240.Google Scholar
Clayton, G. W., Harker, K. N., O'Donovan, J. T., Baig, M. N., and Kidnie, M. J. 2002. Glyphosate timing and tillage system effects on glyphosate resistant canola (Brassica napus). Weed Technol. 16: 124–130.Google Scholar
Collins, W. W. and Hawtin, G. C. 1999. Conserving and using crop plant biodiversity in agroecosystems. In Collins, W. W. and Qualset, C. O., eds. Biodiversity in Agroecosystems. Boca Raton, FL: CRC. pp. 267–282.Google Scholar
Crawley, M. J., Brown, S. L., Hails, R. S., Kohn, D. D., and Rees, M. 2001. Transgenic crops in natural habitats. Nature 409: 682–683.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S., York, A. C., Batts, R. G., and Jennings, K. M. 2000. Weed management in glufosinate-and glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 14: 77–88.Google Scholar
Dale, P. J., Clarke, B., and Fontes, E. M. G. 2002. Potential for the environmental impact of transgenic crops. Nature Biotechnol. 20: 567–574.Google Scholar
Dill, G., Baerson, S., Casagrande, L., Feng, Y., Brinker, R., Reynolds, T., Taylor, N., Rodriguez, D., and Teng, Y. 2000. Characterization of Glyphosate Resistant Eleusine indica Biotypes from Malaysia. Proceedings of the Third International Weed Science Congress, Foz do Iguazu, Brazil. International Weed Society: Oxford, MS, USA.Google Scholar
Duffy, M. 2001. Economic Issues in Agricultural Biotechnology. Economic Research Service, Agriculture Information Bulletin, Iowa State University, 762.Google Scholar
Dundon, S. 1986. The moral factoring innovative research. In Busch, L. and Lacy, W. B., eds. The Agricultural Scientific Enterprise: A System in Transition. Westview Special Studies in Agriculture, Science and Policy. Boulder, CO: Westview. pp. 39–51.Google Scholar
Eichenwald, K., Kolata, G., and Petersen, M. 2001. Biotechnology food: from the lab to a debacle. New York Times, January 25, 2001.Google Scholar
Ellstrand, N. C., Prentice, H. C., and Hancock, J. 1999. Gene flow and introgression from domesticated plants into wild relatives. Annu. Rev. Ecol. System 30: 539–563.Google Scholar
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 2001. Regulations under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act for Plant-Incorporated Protectants (Formerly Plant Pesticides):. Web page: http://www.epa.gov/scipoly/new.htm. Accessed: November 20, 2001, verified June 19, 2002.Google Scholar
Ervin, D. E., Batie, S. S., Welsh, R., Carpentier, C. L., Fern, J. I., Richman, N. M., and Schulz, M. A. 2000. Transgenic Crops: An Environmental Assessment. Henry A. Wallace Center for Agricultural and Environmental Policy at Winrock International: Web page: www.winrock.org/what/wallace-center.asp. Accessed: November 20, 2001, verified June 19, 2002).Google Scholar
Ferre, F. 1988. Philosophy of Technology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. pp. 75–88.Google Scholar
Ghersa, C. M., Martinez-Ghersa, M. A., Brewer, T. G., and Roush, M. L. 1994. Use of gene flow to control diclofop-methyl resistance in Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum). Weed Technol. 8: 15–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gianessi, L. P. and Carpenter, J. E. 1999. Agricultural Biotechnology: Insect Control Benefits. National Center for Food and Agriculture Policy, Washington, DC: Web page: http://www.bio.org/foodag/bioins01.html.Google Scholar
Gould, F. 1998. Sustainability of transgenic insecticidal cultivars: integrating pest genetics and ecology. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 43: 701–726.Google Scholar
Gressel, J. and Segel, C. A. 1978. The paucity of plants evolving genetic resistance to herbicides: possible reasons and implications. J. Theor. Biol. 75: 349–372.Google Scholar
Hall, L. M., Huffman, J., and Topinka, K. 2000. Pollen flow between herbicide-resistant Brassica napus is the cause of multiple resistant B. napus volunteers. Weed Sci. 48: 688–694.Google Scholar
Hails, R. S. 2000. Genetically modified plants-the debate continues. Trends Ecol. Evol. 15: 14–18.Google Scholar
Hilbeck, A., Meier, M. S., and Raps, A. 2000. Review on Non-Target Organisms and BT-Plants. Report to Greenpeace International. Amsterdam: EcoStrat BmbH, Ecological Technology Assessment and Environmental Consulting, April 2000. pp. 10–75.Google Scholar
Jasieniuk, M., Brule-Babel, A. L., and Morrison, I. N. 1996. The evolution and genetics of herbicide resistance in weeds. Weed Sci. 44: 176–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, W. G., Bradley, P. R., Hart, S. E., Buesinger, M. L., and Massy, R. E. 2000. Efficacy and economics of weed management in glyphosate-resistant corn (Zea mays). Weed Technol. 14: 57–65.Google Scholar
Jorgensen, R. B., Andersen, B., Landbo, L., and Mikkelsen, T. R. 1996. Spontaneous hybridization between oilseed rape (Brassica napus) and weedy relatives. Acta Hort. 407: 193–200.Google Scholar
Kaeppler, H. F. 2000. Food safety assessment of genetically modified crops. Agron. J. 92: 793–797.Google Scholar
Kalaitzandonakes, N. and Bjornson, B. 1997. Vertical and horizontal coordination in the agribiotechnology industry: evidence and implications. J. Agric. Appl. Econ. 29: 29–139.Google Scholar
Klotz-Ingram, C., Jans, S., Fernandez-Cornejo, J., and McBride, W. 1999. Farm-Level Production Effects Related to the Adoption of Genetically Modified Cotton for Pest Management. AgBioForum 2: 73–84. (web page: http://www.agbioforum.missouri.edu. Accessed: November 20, 2001, verified June 19, 2002).Google Scholar
Lee, L. J. 2000. A first report of glyphosate-resistant goosegrass (Eleusine indica (L.) Gaertn) in Malaysia. Pest Manag. Sci. 56: 336–339.Google Scholar
Lefol, E., Fleury, A., and Darmency, H. 1996. Gene dispersal from transgenic crop. II. Hybridization between oilseed rape and the wild hoary mustard. Sex Plant Reproduct 9: 89–196.Google Scholar
Loreau, M., Naeem, S., and Inchausti, P. et al. 2001. Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning: current knowledge and future challenges. Science 294: 804–807.Google Scholar
Losey, J. E., Rayor, L. S., and Carter, M. E. 1999. Transgenic pollen harms monarch larvae. Nature 399: 214.Google Scholar
Mallory-Smith, C. A., Snyder, J., Hansen, J. L., Wang, Z., and Zemetra, R. S. 1999. Potential for Gene Flow Between Wheat (Triticum aestivum) and Jointed Goatgrass (Aegilops cylindrical) in the Field. Gene Flow and Agriculture Relevance for Transgenic Crops. Symposium Proceedings. BCPC: London, UK 72: 165–169.Google Scholar
Maxwell, B. D., Roush, M. L., and Radosevich, S. R. 1990. Predicting the evolution and dynamics of herbicide resistance in weed populations. Weed Technol. 3: 2–13.Google Scholar
Medlin, C. R. and Shaw, D. R. 2000. Economic comparison of broadcast and site-specific herbicide applications in non-transgenic and glyphosate-tolerant Glycine max . Weed Sci. 48: 653–661.Google Scholar
McGriff, D. E., Brown, S. M., Dugger, P., and Richter, D. (eds.). 1999. Evaluation of Transgenic Versus Conventional Varieties. 1999. Transgenic and Conventional Insect and Weed Control Systems. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conferences, National Cotton Council of America: Orlando, FL 1: 466–468.Google Scholar
Mikkelsen, T. R., Andersen, B., and Jorgensen, R. B. 1996. The risk of crop transgene spread. Nature 380: 31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mooney, H. A. and Hobbs, R. J. 2000. Global change and invasive species: where do we go from here? In Mooney, H. A. and Hobbs, R. J., eds. Invasive Species in a Changing World. Washington, DC: Island Press. p. 425–434.Google Scholar
Moser, H. S., McCloskey, W. B., Silvertooth, J. C., Dugger, P., and Richter, D. 2000. Performance of Transgenic Cotton Varieties in Arizona. Proceedings of the Beltwide Cotton Conferences, National Cotton Council of America: San Antonio, TX 1: 497–499.Google Scholar
Naeem, S. L., Thompson, J., Lawler, S. P., Lawton, J. H., and Woodfin, R. M. 1994. Declining biodiversity can alter the performance of ecosystems. Nature 368: 734–737.Google Scholar
NRC. 2000. Genetically Modified Pest-Protected Plants: Science and Regulation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 292 p.Google Scholar
Owen, M. D. K. 1997. North American Developments in Herbicide-Tolerant Crops. Proceedings of the British Crop Protection Conference, Brighton, UK, BCPC: Brighton, UK 3: 955–963.Google Scholar
Owen, M. D. K. 2000. Current use of transgenic herbicide-resistant soybean and corn in the USA. Crop Prot. 19: 765–771.Google Scholar
Potthast, T. 1996. Transgenic organisms and evolution: ethical implications. In Tomiuk, J., Wöhrmann, K., and Sentker, A., eds. Transgenic Organisms: Biological and Social Implications. Boston, MA: Birkhäuser Verlag. pp. 227–240.Google Scholar
Powles, S. B. and Holtum, J. A. 1994. Herbicide Resistance in Plants. Biology and Biochemistry. Boca Raton, FL: Lewis Publishers.Google Scholar
Powles, S. B., Lorraine-Colwill, D. F., Delow, J. J., and Preston, C. 1998. Evolved resistance to Italian ryegrass. Weed Sci. 46: 604–607.Google Scholar
Pringnitz, B. A. 2001. Issues in Weed Management for 2002. Extension Publication PM 1898, Iowa State University, University Extension Service. 15 p.Google Scholar
Radosevich, S. R., Ghersa, C. M., and Comstock, G. 1992. Concerns a weed scientist might have about herbicide tolerant crops. Weed Technol. 6: 635–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Radosevich, S. R., Holt, J. S., and Ghersa, C. M. 1997. Weed Ecology. Implications for Management. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Randhawa, M. S. 1973. Green Revolution. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Raybould, A. F. and Gray, A. J. 1993. Genetically modified crops and hybridization with wild relatives: a UK perspective. J. Appl. Ecology 30: 199–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ritter, R. L. and Menbere, H. 2001. Weed management systems utilizing glufosinate-resistant corn (Zea mays) and soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 15: 89–94.Google Scholar
Scott, G. H., Askew, S. D., Bennett, A. C., and Wilcut, J. W. 2001. Economic evaluation of HADSS computer cprogram for weed management in non transgenic and transgenic cotton. Weed Sci. 49: 549–557.Google Scholar
Sheffler, J. A. and Dale, P. J. 1994. Opportunities for gene transfer from transgenic oilseed rape (Brassica napus) to related species. Trans. Res. 3: 263–278.Google Scholar
Sheffler, J. A., Parkinson, A., and Dale, P. J. 1995. Evaluating the effectiveness of isolation distances for field plots of oilseed rape (Brassica napus) using a herbicide-resistance transgene as a selectable marker. Plant Breed 14: 317–321.Google Scholar
Snow, A. and Palma, P. M. 1997. Commercialization of transgenic plants: potential ecological risks. Bioscience 47: 86–96.Google Scholar
Squire, G. R., Crawford, J. W., Ramsay, G., Thompson, C., and Brown, J. 1999. Gene flow at the landscape level. In Lutman, P. W., ed. Gene Flow in Agriculture: Relevance for Transgenic Crops. London: British Crop Protection Council. pp. 57–64.Google Scholar
Strauss, S., Raffa, K., and List, P. 2000. Ethical guidelines for assessing genetically engineered plantations. J. Forestry 98: 47–48.Google Scholar
Swanton, C. J., Shrestha, A., Chandler, K., and Deen, W. 2000. An economic assessment of weed control strategies in no-till glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technol. 14: 755–763.Google Scholar
Tarvydas, R., Gaisford, J. D., Hobbs, J. E., and Kerr, W. A. 2000. Agricultural biotechnology in developing countries—market-based technology transfer or piracy. In Lesser, W. H., ed. Transitions in Agbiotech: Economics of Strategy and Policy. Proceedings of NE-165 Conference; June 24–25, 1999; Washington. DC: Food Marketing Policy Center, University of Connecticut. pp. 407–423.Google Scholar
Thompson, K., Bakker, J. P., and Bekker, R. M. 1998. Ecological correlates of seed persistence in the soil in the northwest European flora. J. Ecol. 86: 163–170.Google Scholar
Tripp, R. 1996. Biodiversity and modern crop varieties: sharpening the debate. Agric. Human Values 13: 48–62.Google Scholar
USDA-ERS. 2002. Agricultural Biotechnology: Adoption of Biotechnology and its Production Impacts. US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Services, Washington DC: Web page:http://www.ers.usda.gov/whatsnew/issues/biotech. Accessed: November 2001, verified 10 June 2002.Google Scholar
VanGessel, M. J. 2001. Glyphosate-resistant horseweed from Delaware. Weed Sci. 49: 703–705.Google Scholar
Verhoog, H. 1996. Genetic modification of animals: should science and ethics be integrated? Monist 79: 2.Google Scholar
Vitta, J., Faccini, D., and Nisensohn, L. 2000. Control of Amaranthus quitensis in soybean crops: an alternative to reduce herbicide use. Crop Prot. 19: 511–513.Google Scholar
Wolfenbarger, L. L. and Phifer, P. R. 2000. The ecological risks and benefits of genetically engineered plants. Science 290: 2088–2093.Google Scholar
Wyse, D. L. 1992. Future impact of crops with modified herbicide resistance. Weed Technol. 6: 665–668.Google Scholar
Zimdahl, R. L. 1998a. Rethinking agricultural research roles. J. Agric. Human Values 15: 77–84.Google Scholar
Zimdahl, R. L. 1998b. Ethics in weed science. Weed Sci. 46: 636–639.Google Scholar