The proposed introduction of genetically modified herbicide tolerant (GMHT) crops, with claims of improved weed control, has prompted fears about possible environmental impacts of their widespread adoption, particularly on arable weeds, insects and associated farmland birds. In response to this, we have developed a novel weed-management system for GMHT sugar beet, based on band spraying, which exploits the flexibility offered by the broad-spectrum partner herbicides. Here, we show the results from two series of field experiments which, taken together, demonstrate that, by using this system, crops can be managed for enhanced weed and insect biomass without compromising yield, thus potentially offering food and shelter to farmland birds and other wildlife. These results could be applicable widely to other row crops, and indicate that creative use of GMHT technology could be a powerful tool for developing more sustainable farming systems in the future.

The effects of the management of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant (GMHT) crops on the abundances of aerial and epigeal arthropods were assessed in 66 beet, 68 maize and 67 spring oilseed rape sites as part of the Farm Scale Evaluations of GMHT crops. Most higher taxa were insensitive to differences between GMHT and conventional weed management, but significant effects were found on the abundance of at least one group within each taxon studied. Numbers of butterflies in beet and spring oilseed rape and of Heteroptera and bees in beet were smaller under the relevant GMHT crop management, whereas the abundance of Collembola was consistently greater in all GMHT crops. Generally, these effects were specific to each crop type, reflected the phenology and ecology of the arthropod taxa, were indirect and related to herbicide management. These results apply generally to agriculture across Britain, and could be used in mathematical models to predict the possible long-term effects of the widespread adoption of GMHT technology. The results for bees and butterflies relate to foraging preferences and might or might not translate into effects on population densities, depending on whether adoption leads to forage reductions over large areas. These species, and the detritivore Collembola, may be useful indicator species for future studies of GMHT management.

The effects of herbicide management of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant (GMHT) beet, maize and spring oilseed rape on the abundance and diversity of soil-surface-active invertebrates were assessed. Most effects did not differ between years, environmental zones or initial seedbanks or between sugar and fodder beet. This suggests that the results may be treated as generally applicable to agricultural situations throughout the UK for these crops. The direction of the effects was evenly balanced between increases and decreases in counts in the GMHT compared with the conventional treatment. Most effects involving a greater capture in the GMHT treatments occurred in maize, whereas most effects involving a smaller capture were in beet and spring oilseed rape. Differences between GMHT and conventional crop herbicide management had a significant effect on the capture of most surface-active invertebrate species and higher taxa tested in at least one crop, and these differences reflected the phenology and ecology of the invertebrates. Counts of carabids that feed on weed seeds were smaller in GMHT beet and spring oilseed rape but larger in GMHT maize. In contrast, collembolan detritivore counts were significantly larger under GMHT crop management.

No abstract

Measuring farmland biodiversity is time‐consuming and costly. Operational data from the Farm Scale Evaluation of genetically modified crops project were collated to identify the financial and time costs of each of the 14 protocols used. A subset of 113 of the 266 experimental sites was used. The mean overall cost per site was £19 453 (£ of 2002). Laboratory time was almost 2.5 times that in the field. The most costly protocol was soil surface invertebrates because it required species level identification. The ‘bees and butterflies’ protocol at £418 per site was particularly cost‐effective. The six vegetation protocols accounted for 65% and the six arthropod protocols accounted for 29% of the total costs. The recommended reduction from 12 to 3 transects would have saved £1356 per site, 6% of total budget. A minimalist approach using the single‐season seedbank protocol would cost £3437 per site. The effect of geographical spread of sites on cost was small because of clustering of sites and the large number of protocols. Careful selection of ecological indicators can save considerable resources.