Over the last 20 years, there has been much research aimed at improving environmental risk assessment of transgenic crops. Despite large amounts of data, decisions to allow or prohibit the release of transgenic crops remain confused and controversial. We argue that part of the reason for confusion is the lack of clear definitions of components of the environment that should be protected, and, as a consequence, there is no way to judge the relevance of data collected under the auspices of ‘environmental risk assessment’. Although this criticism applies to most aspects of environmental risk assessment of transgenic crops, it is most pertinent to effects that might result from an increase in plant fitness, often referred to as increased weediness. Environmental risk assessment of weediness is regarded as complicated: an increase in the fitness of a transgenic plant compared with non-transgenic counterparts will be the result of an interaction between the altered plant phenotype and an enormous number of environmental variables. This has led to the idea that risk assessment of weediness needs to “understand” these interactions, with the implication that exhaustive data are required. Here we argue that environmental risk assessment of the weediness of transgenic plants need not be complicated. Analysis of the conditions that must be met for increased weediness to occur suggests a series of studies that starts with simple tests in the laboratory under “worst case” assumptions, and becomes increasingly complex and realistic should the simpler studies not indicate negligible risk with sufficient certainty. We illustrate how the approach might work for assessing the risks of increased weediness using the example of possible introgression of a gene for Turnip mosaic virus (TuMV) resistance from oilseed rape to certain wild Brassica species.

Genetically engineered transgenic crop varieties (TGVs) have spread rapidly in the last 10 years, increasingly to traditionally-based agricultural systems (TBAS) of the Third World both as seed and food. Proponents claim they are key to reducing hunger and negative environmental impacts of agriculture. Opponents claim they will have the opposite effect. The risk management process (RMP) is the primary way in which TGVs are regulated in the US (and many other industrial countries), and proponents claim that the findings of that process in the US and its regulatory consequences should be extended to TBAS. However, TBAS differ in important ways from industrial agriculture, so TGVs could have different effects in TBAS, and farmers there may evaluate risks and benefits differently. To evaluate some potential impacts of TGVs in TBAS we used the RMP as a framework for the case of Bt maize in Mesoamerica and Cuba. We interviewed 334 farmers in Cuba, Guatemala and Mexico about farming practices, evaluations of potential harm via hypothetical scenarios, and ranking of maize types. Results suggest high potential for transgene flow via seed, grain and pollen; differences in effects of this exposure in TBAS compared with industrial agriculture; farmers see some potential consequences as harmful. Perceptions of harm differ among farmers in ways determined by their farming systems, and are different from those commonly assumed in industrial systems. An RMP including participation of farmers and characteristics of TBAS critical for their functioning is necessary to ensure that investments in agricultural technologies will improve, not compromise these agricultural systems.

Previous studies have shown that the widely used plant transformation vector Agrobacterium tumefaciens can persist in genetically engineered plants in vitro and in transgenic greenhouse-grown plants, despite the use of counter-selective antibiotics. However, little is known regarding Agrobacterium persistence in tree species. To understand the kinetics of A. tumefaciens decline and persistence in transformation experiments, we assayed for the presence of A. tumefaciens in spruce and pine embryogenic tissue for up to 10 weeks post-transformation. The A. tumefaciens populations declined rapidly in the first five days post-cocultivation but generally declined more slowly in pine, relative to spruce. No bacteria were detected in spruce embryogenic tissue beyond four weeks after cocultivation, however in pine there were ~100 colony forming units per g tissue at 10 weeks post-cocultivation. We present evidence that the detection limit for PCR using virD2 primers to detect A. tumefaciens in a background of pine needle DNA was approximately 109–1010 A. tumefaciens cells per g of tissue. We also assayed for A. tumefaciens in transgenic pine and spruce embryogenic tissue and from needles, branches, stems and roots of transformed plants, up to four years post-inoculation. Occasionally A. tumefaciens was detected in embryogenic tissue up to 12 months post-inoculation. A. tumefaciens was never detected in cultured embryogenic tissue more than twelve months after inoculation, nor in developing somatic embryos or germinating plantlets, nor any of the parts of greenhouse-grown plants. From these data we conclude that if A. tumefaciens persists in transgenic conifers, it does so beneath our ability to detect it.

This paper analyzes some important issues surrounding possible deployment of genetically engineered (GE) insect-resistant potato in Peru, based on a large farmer survey held in Peru in 2003. We found that the formal seed system plays a limited role compared with the informal seed system, especially for smallholder farmers. Although 97% of smallholder farmers would buy seed of an insect-resistant variety, a majority would buy it only once every 2 to 4 years. Survey data show that farmers would be willing to pay a premium of 50% on seed cost for insect resistant varieties. Paying price premiums of 25% to 50%, farmers would still increase their net income, assuming insect resistance is high and pesticide use will be strongly reduced. Of all farmers, 55% indicated preference for insect-resistant potato in varieties other than their current varieties. The survey indicates that smallholder farmers are interested to experiment with new varieties and have a positive perception of improved varieties. Based on these findings, and considering the difficulties implementing existing biosafety regulatory systems such as those in place in the U.S. and E.U., we propose to develop a variety-based segregation system to separate GE from conventionally bred potatoes. In such a system, which would embrace the spread of GE potatoes through informal seed systems, only a limited number of sterile varieties would be introduced that are easily distinguishable from conventional varieties.