Tucson, Arizona
May 2, 2006
By Mari N. Jensen
Arizona
farmers receive the same yield/acre, use fewer chemical
insecticides and maintain insect biodiversity when they plant
the biotech cotton known as Bt cotton, according to new
research.
The finding comes from the first large-scale study that
simultaneously examined how growing Bt cotton affects yield,
pesticide use and biodiversity.
It's good news for the environment.
"What we see is that it's positive here in Arizona -- no doubt
about it," said Yves Carrière, an associate professor of
entomology at The University
of Arizona in Tucson. "We've reduced pesticide use in
Arizona. We've wanted to do that for 25 years."
Bt cotton has been genetically altered to produce Bt toxin, a
naturally occurring insecticide that kills pink bollworm, a
major pest of cotton. Bt cotton has been planted in Arizona
since 1996. Now more than half of the state’s 256,000 acres of
cotton fields are planted with the biotech plants.
Some have
suggested that, in addition to killing the target pests,
insecticide-containing crops like Bt cotton would also kill
beneficial and non-target arthropods.
The new study found that Bt cotton, also known as transgenic
cotton, does not affect the biodiversity of insects in cotton
fields.
Carrière said, "There were lots of factors that affected
biodiversity in this study. Transgenics were not one of them."
He and his colleagues based their findings on a two-year study
of 81 commercial cotton fields in a region of Arizona that spans
about 2,500 square miles (6,600 square kilometers). Much of the
field and lab work was done by Manda G. Cattaneo as part of her
master's research at UA. Cattaneo is now an extension
entomologist at Texas A&M
University in College Station.
The multidisciplinary team will publish their research in an
upcoming issue of the Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences. A complete list of
authors is at the end of this release. The Environmental
Protection Agency funded the research.
Bt cotton controls only one of Arizona's three major cotton
pests. To control the other two pests, sweet potato whitefly
(Bemisia tabaci) and the western tarnished plant bug (Lygus
hesperus), growers use broad-spectrum insecticides and other
types of insecticides known as insect growth regulators.
Carrière and his colleagues studied how Arizona farmers actually
planted their crops and applied pesticides.
The researchers compared the yield and pesticide use for 40
fields of non-Bt cotton, 21 fields of Bt cotton and 20 fields of
Bt cotton that was also herbicide-resistant.
In addition, each cotton field selected for the study was next
to an uncultivated area. That allowed the researchers to compare
ant and beetle biodiversity among the various cotton fields and
the uncropped areas.
The team used Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and LANDSAT
satellite imagery to map the fields and evaluate plant growth in
the non-cultivated areas. Plant growth can affect the
biodiversity of insects found in an area.
The researchers found that, per pesticide application, Bt cotton
produced 9 percent more cotton/acre than non-Bt cotton. However,
growers that planted Bt cotton used fewer applications of
broad-spectrum insecticides.
As a result, growers ended up with similar yields/acre
regardless of the type of cotton grown. Carrière suggests that
yields were similar across cotton types because the additional
insecticide applications on the non-Bt fields cut down on the
damage from whiteflies and western tarnished plant bugs.
To see what factors affected insect biodiversity in the cotton
fields, the researchers used a type of statistical analysis
called path analysis. Factors that affected biodiversity
included the sandiness of the soil, use of broad-spectrum
insecticides and insect growth regulators, number of cotton
seeds planted per acre, and the amount and types of plants in
the adjacent uncultivated areas.
The researchers found that the type of cotton had no effect on
how much insect biodiversity was in a particular field.
"Yield, pesticides and effects on non-target organisms -- we
must look at those all together to assess the environmental
impacts of transgenics," Carrière said. "The take-home message
is that transgenic crops are very promising for reducing the
impact of agriculture, but we need to study how they're
integrated into the way we do agriculture. It depends on how the
producers react to the technology."
He added, "It's a problem that is ecologically complex. We
cannot say, 'Because it's good in Arizona that it will
necessarily be good somewhere else.' We need to study many
systems carefully before we can generalize."
Carrière's co-authors on the research article, "Farm-scale
Evaluation of the Impacts of Transgenic Cotton on Biodiversity,
Pesticide Use, and Yield," are Cattaneo of Texas A&M
University in College Station; Christine Yafuso, Chris Schmidt,
Carl Olson and Christa Ellers-Kirk of the department of
entomology at The University of Arizona; Cho-ying Huang,
Magfurar Rahman, Barron J. Orr and Stuart E. Marsh of the
Arizona Remote Sensing Center at The University of Arizona;
Larry Antilla of the Arizona Research and Protection Council in
Phoenix; and Pierre Dutilleul of McGill University in
St-Anne-de-Bellevue, Canada. |