Science-Based Risk Assessment for Nontarget Effects of Transgenic Crops

Andow, David A.; Hilbeck, Angelika

doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[0637:srafne]2.0.co;2

Cited by 161 publications

(129 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

125

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Many nontarget organisms, including herbivores, pollinators, parasitoids, and predators will directly and indirectly be exposed to transgene products and altered interactions (Andow and Hilbeck 2004;Dutton et al 2003;Groot and Dicke 2002;Hilbeck 2001;O'Callaghan et al 2005) and it is well justified to test these for potential harmful effects. Several reviews cover many groups of invertebrates, but nearly all of the tested species are terrestrial.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reduced Fitness of Daphnia magna Fed a Bt-Transgenic Maize Variety

Bøhn

Primicerio

Hessen

et al. 2008

Arch Environ Contam Toxicol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Genetically modified (GM) maize expressing the Bt-toxin Cry1Ab (Bt-maize) was tested for effects on survival, growth, and reproduction of the water flea Daphnia magna, a crustacean arthropod commonly used as a model organism in ecotoxicological studies. In three repeated experiments, D. magna were fed 100% ground maize in suspension, using either GM or isogenic unmodified (UM) maize. D. magna fed GM-maize showed a significantly reduced fitness performance: The mortality was higher, a lower proportion of females reached sexual maturation, and the overall egg production was lower compared to D. magna fed UM isogenic maize. We conclude that the tested variety of Bt-maize and its UM counterpart do not have the same quality as food sources for this widely used model organism. The combination of a reduced fitness performance combined with earlier onset of reproduction of D. magna fed Bt-maize indicates a toxic effect rather than a lower nutritional value of the GMmaize.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reduced Fitness of Daphnia magna Fed a Bt-Transgenic Maize Variety

Bøhn

Primicerio

Hessen

et al. 2008

Arch Environ Contam Toxicol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It consists of an assessment of the probability that a component of an ecosystem is exposed to a stressor and the characterisation of the ecological effects of the stressor on this ecosystem component (Andow and Hilbeck, 2004;Simberloff, 2005). In invasive species risk assessment systems, the risk of exposure is defined as the risk that a species Living Reviews in Landscape Research http://www.livingreviews.org/lrlr-2008-2 is introduced, establishes in a new range and spreads into natural areas.…”

Section: Ecological Risk Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

How to Achieve Effectiveness in Problem-Oriented Landscape Research: The Example of Research on Biotic Invasions

Kueffer¹,

Hadorn²

2008

Living Rev. Landscape Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is increasingly expected from environmental research such as landscape research that science directly contributes to the solving of pressing societal problems. However, despite increased efforts to direct research towards societal problems, it is not obvious if science has become more effective in supporting environmental problem-solving. We present in this article a framework that facilitates the analysis and design of problem-orientation in research fields. We then apply the proposed framework to a concrete example of a problem-oriented landscape research field -namely research on biotic invasions. Invasion research addresses the problem that some organisms, that have been introduced by humans to a new geographic area where they were previously not present, spread in the landscape and pose negative impacts.We argue that problem-oriented research is more than applied research. Besides research on specific questions it also encompasses boundary management, i.e., deliberations among experts and stakeholders on the framing of adequate research questions about processes, values and practices for effective problem-solving. We postulate that such research may assist problem-solving in three ways, by analysing causal relationships (systems knowledge), clarifying conflicts of interests and values (target knowledge), or contributing to the development of appropriate means for action (transformation knowledge).We show that over the past decades a broad range of different research approaches has emerged in the young field of invasion research in order to produce systems, target and transformation knowledge for invasive species management. Early research in the field was dominated by the development of systems knowledge, but increasingly the three knowledge forms are Boundary management in invasion research is mainly restricted to informal networks (communities of practice), while formal processes such as transdisciplinary research are scarce. We suggest that the paucity of structured and explicit boundary management processes will limit the future development of a more effective science for invasive species management. In particular, we envisage three obstacles that can only be removed through explicit boundary management. First, the existing theoretical frameworks are currently only partly able to integrate natural and social sciences research on the processes underlying invasions. Second, a clarification of the normative thinking about alien plant invasions is needed. Third, research on transformation knowledge has so far not fundamentally challenged the existing conceptual framing and institutional setup of invasive species management.

show abstract

“…In providing guidance on biosafety assessment of transgenic crops in developing countries, a case-specific process for selecting non-target species as assessment endpoints has been proposed that combines ecological and anthropocentric concerns (Andow and Hilbeck, 2004;Hilbeck and Andow, 2004;Hilbeck et al, 2006). A set of functional groups (including an "unknown function" group) is established and local species assigned to each group.…”

Section: Jh Todd Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The EPA (Kough and Vaituzis, 1999;Lewis and Portier, 2000) takes these practical considerations into account, and this approach is supported by many researchers in this field (Dutton et al, 2003;Jepson et al, 1994;Romeis, 2006;Romeis et al, 2006;Rose, 2006;Stacey et al, 2006;Wolt et al, 2006). The EPA also recommends the use of species with short life cycles (Kough and Vaituzis, 1999;Lewis and Portier, 2000), although this approach is criticized by Andow and Hilbeck (2004), who suggest that bioassays should be designed to reflect the generation time of the test species, rather than the species chosen to fit the quickest test. Stark et al (2004) also counseled caution in extrapolating from data obtained with short-life-cycle species, such as Daphnia, to assess risk to other organisms with different life-history variables.…”

Section: Ability To Perform Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A screening method for prioritizing non-target invertebrates for improved biosafety testing of transgenic crops

Todd

Ramankutty

Barraclough

et al. 2008

Environ. Biosafety Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We have developed a screening method that can be used during the problem formulation phase of risk assessment to identify and prioritize non-target invertebrates for risk analysis with any transgenic plant. In previously published protocols for this task, five criteria predominated. These criteria have been combined by our method in a simple model which assesses: (1) the possible level of risk presented by the plant to each invertebrate species (through measurements of potential hazard and exposure, the two principal criteria); (2) the hypothetical environmental impact of this risk (determined by the currently known status of the species' population in the ecosystem and its potential resilience to environmental perturbations); (3) the estimated economic, social and cultural value of each species; and (4) the assessed ability to conduct tests with the species. The screening method uses information on each of these criteria entered into a specially designed database that was developed using Microsoft Access 2003. The database holds biological and ecological information for each non-target species, as well as information about the transgenic plant that is the subject of the risk assessment procedure. Each piece of information is then ranked on the basis of the value of the information to each criterion being measured. This ranking system is flexible, allowing the method to be easily adapted for use in any agro-ecosystem and with any plant modification. A model is then used to produce a Priority Ranking of Non-Target Invertebrates (PRONTI) score for each species, which in turn allows the species to be prioritized for risk assessment. As an example, the method was used to prioritize non-target invertebrates for risk assessment of a hypothetical introduction of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) Cry1Ac-expressing Pinus radiata trees into New Zealand.

show abstract

Science-Based Risk Assessment for Nontarget Effects of Transgenic Crops

Cited by 161 publications

References 31 publications

Reduced Fitness of Daphnia magna Fed a Bt-Transgenic Maize Variety

Reduced Fitness of Daphnia magna Fed a Bt-Transgenic Maize Variety

How to Achieve Effectiveness in Problem-Oriented Landscape Research: The Example of Research on Biotic Invasions

A screening method for prioritizing non-target invertebrates for improved biosafety testing of transgenic crops

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About