Bacillus thuringiensis toxin (Cry1Ab) has no direct effect on larvae of the green lacewing Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens) (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae)

Romeis, Jörg; Dutton, Anna; Bigler, F.

doi:10.1016/j.jinsphys.2003.11.004

Cited by 196 publications

(140 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

127

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Immature predator development was delayed and survival reduced by the GM plants in these studies, or adult longevity was reduced (Ponsard et al, 2002). Subsequent detailed studies of several of these examples demonstrated that the observed effects were in most cases more appropriately ascribed to reduced quality of prey fed Bt plant tissues rather than the gene products themselves (Romeis et al, 2004;Torres and Ruberson, 2006a). Further, Rodrigo-Simó n et al (2006) found that Cry toxins did not bind to the gut of the predator Chrysoperla carnea (Stephens) and thus presented no serious direct risk to this predator.…”

Section: Predatorsmentioning

confidence: 87%

Ecological compatibility of GM crops and biological control

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant genetically modified (GM) crops pervade many modern cropping systems (especially field-cropping systems), and present challenges and opportunities for developing biologically based pest-management programs. Interactions between biological control agents (insect predators, parasitoids, and pathogens) and GM crops exceed simple toxicological relationships, a priority for assessing risk of GM crops to non-target species. To determine the compatibility of biological control and insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant GM crop traits within integrated pest-management programs, this synthesis prioritizes understanding the bi-trophic and prey/host-mediated ecological pathways through which natural enemies interact within cropland communities, and how GM crops alter the agroecosystems in which natural enemies live. Insect-resistant crops can affect the quantity and quality of non-prey foods for natural enemies, as well as the availability and quality of both target and non-target pests that serve as prey/hosts. When they are used to locally eradicate weeds, herbicide-tolerant crops alter the agricultural landscape by reducing or changing the remaining vegetational diversity. This vegetational diversity is fundamental to biological control when it serves as a source of habitat and nutritional resources. Some inherent qualities of both biological control and GM crops provide opportunities to improve upon sustainable IPM systems. For example, biological control agents may delay the evolution of pest resistance to GM crops, and suppress outbreaks of secondary pests not targeted by GM plants, while herbicide-tolerant crops facilitate within-field management of vegetational diversity that can enhance the efficacy of biological control agents. By examining the ecological compatibility of biological control and GM crops, and employing them within an IPM framework, the sustainability and profitability of farming may be improved. RightsWorks produced by employees of the U.S. Government as part of their official duties are not copyrighted within the U.S. The content of this document is not copyrighted. b s t r a c tInsect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant genetically modified (GM) crops pervade many modern cropping systems (especially field-cropping systems), and present challenges and opportunities for developing biologically based pest-management programs. Interactions between biological control agents (insect predators, parasitoids, and pathogens) and GM crops exceed simple toxicological relationships, a priority for assessing risk of GM crops to non-target species. To determine the compatibility of biological control and insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant GM crop traits within integrated pest-management programs, this synthesis prioritizes understanding the bi-trophic and prey/host-mediated ecological pathways through which natural enemies interact within cropland communities, and how GM crops alter the agroecosystems in which natural enemies live. Insect-resistant crops can...

show abstract

Section: Predatorsmentioning

confidence: 87%

Ecological compatibility of GM crops and biological control

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hilbeck et al (1998a) observed reduced fitness of C. carnea larvae when fed on Bt maize-reared lepidopteran larvae and claimed it was associated with the CrylAb protein and that CrylAb is toxic to C. carnea (Hilbeck et al 1998b). However, subsequent studies clearly demonstrated that Cry1A proteins are not toxic to C. carnea larvae (Romeis et al 2004;Rodrigo-Simón et al 2006;Lawo and Romeis 2008) and that these proteins do not bind to the midgut of C. carnea, a prerequisite for toxicity (RodrigoSimón et al 2006). These results strongly indicate that the effects observed by Hilbeck et al (1998a) were due to C. carnea feeding on poor quality (sick or dying) lepidopteran prey.…”

Section: Prey/host-quality Mediated Effectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Setting the record straight: a rebuttal to an erroneous analysis on transgenic insecticidal crops and natural enemies

et al. 2009

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In particular, the green lacewing (Chrysoperla carnea), an important predator in many maize growing areas, has thoroughly been studied since studies suggested that this predator was negatively affected by Cry1Ab [31][32][33]. Results of subsequent studies using several different prey species reared on Cry1Ab-maize, however, showed that the insecticidal protein itself does not directly affect this predator, but that the green lacewing may be affected when feeding on prey species that are susceptible to Bttoxin [34][35][36]. The negative effect observed was thus entirely prey-quality mediated, i.e., caused by the suboptimal food quality of the lepidopteran larvae used in the experiments.…”

Section: Lower-tier Studies In the Laboratory And Greenhousementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The negative effect observed was thus entirely prey-quality mediated, i.e., caused by the suboptimal food quality of the lepidopteran larvae used in the experiments. Because lepidopteran larvae are not considered an important prey for C. carnea in the field, it is unlikely that Bt-maize poses a risk for this predator [36,37]. Similarly, effects of Bt-crops on mortality, development, weight or longevity of hymenopteran parasitoids developing in herbivores reared on transgenic plants were only observed in cases where Btsusceptible herbivores were used as hosts [30].…”

Section: Lower-tier Studies In the Laboratory And Greenhousementioning

confidence: 99%