Mycotoxin Research

, Volume 26, Issue 3, pp 141–145 | Cite as

A review on comparative data concerning Fusarium mycotoxins in Bt maize and non-Bt isogenic maize

  • Vladimir Ostry
  • Jaroslava Ovesna
  • Jarmila Skarkova
  • Vladimira Pouchova
  • Jiri Ruprich
Review

Abstract

The European corn borer reportedly promotes the infection of maize by Fusarium spp. Stalk and ear rots caused by Fusarium spp. are often related to mycotoxin accumulation in maize kernels. As a result, food and animal feed from maize are more severely contaminated with Fusarium mycotoxins: e.g. fumonisins (FUM), deoxynivalenol (DON) and zearalenone (ZEA). Bt maize is primarily an important potential tool for insect pest protection, both in the European Union and in other countries. Bt maize carrying the Bt genes is highly resistant to European corn borer larval feeding due to Bt toxin (δ toxin) production. Effective measures to combat pests therefore often have a positive side-effect in that they also reduce mycotoxin levels. Comparative analysis was used to the evaluation of the studies dealing with the reduction of Fusarium mycotoxins in Bt maize. Nineteen out of 23 studies on Bt maize came to the conclusion that Bt maize is less contaminated with mycotoxins (FUM, DON, ZEA) than the conventional control variety in each case.

Keywords

Bt-maize Fusarium Deoxynivalenol Fumonisins Zearalenone 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Financial support for this work was provided by the Czech Scientific Committee on Genetically modified Food and Feed.

References

  1. Aulrich K, Bohme H, Daenicke R, Halle I, Flachowsky G (2001) Genetically modified feeds (GMO) in animal nutrition: Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) corn in poultry, pig and ruminant nutrition. Arch Anim Nutr 54:183–195Google Scholar
  2. Bakan B, Melcion D, Richard-Molard D, Cahagnier B (2002) Fungal growth and Fusarium mycotoxin content in isogenic traditional maize and genetically modified maize grown in France and Spain. J Agric Food Chem 50(4):728–731CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Barros G, Magnoli C, Reynoso MM, Ramirez ML, Farnochi MC, Torres A, Dalcero M, Sequeira J, Rubinstein C, Chulze S (2009) Fungal and mycotoxin contamination in Bt maize and non-Bt maize grown in Argentina. World Mycotoxin J 2:53–60CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chung OK, Park SH, Kim Y (2007) Concerted efforts in cereal grain quality improvement. ICC International Conference on cereals and cereal products quality and safety, Rosario, Argentina, 23-26 September 2007.Google Scholar
  5. Clements MJ, Campbell KW, Maragos CM, Pilcher C, Headrick JM, Pataky JK, White DC (2003) Influence of Cry1Ab protein and hybrid genotype on fumonisin contamination and Fusarium ear rot of corn. Crop Sci 43:1283–1293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. De la Campa R, Hooker DC, Miller JD, Schaafsma AW, Hammond BG (2005) Modeling effects of environment, insect damage, and Bt genotypes on fumonisin accumulation in maize in Argentina and the Philippines. Mycopathologia 159:539–552CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Dowd PF (1998) Involvement of arthropods in the establishment of mycotoxigenic fungi under field conditions. In: Sinha KK, Bhatnagar D (eds) Mycotoxins in agriculture and food safety. Marcel Dekker, New York, pp 307–350Google Scholar
  8. Dowd PF (2001) Biotic and abiotic factors limiting efficacy of Bt corn in indirectly reducing mycotoxin levels in commercial fields. J Econ Entomol 94:1067–1074CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Hammond BK, Campbell C, Pilcher T, De Gooyer A, Robinson L, Rice A, Pietri G Piva, Melcion D, Cahagnier B (2002) Reduction of fungal and fumonisin levels in Bt corn. Mycopathologia 155:22Google Scholar
  10. Hammond BG, Campbell KW, Pilcher CD, De Gooyer TA, Robinson AE, McMillen BL et al (2004) Lower fumonisin mycotoxin levels in the graint of Bt corn grown in the United States in 2000–2002. J Agric Food Chem 52:1390–1397CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Magg T, Melchinger AE, Klein D, Bohn M (2002) Relationship between European corn borer resistance and concentration of mycotoxins produced by Fusarium spp. in grains of transgenic Bt maize hybrids, their isogenic counterparts, and commercial varieties. Plant Breed 121:146–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Masoero F, Moschini M, Rossi F, Prandini A, Pietri A (1999) Nutritive value, mycotoxin contamination and in vitro rumen fermentation of normal and genetically modified corn (Cry 1A(B)) grown in northern Italy. Maydica 44:205–209Google Scholar
  13. Munkvold GP, Desjardins AE (1997) Fumonisins in maize—can we reduce their occurrence. Plant Dis 81:556–565CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Munkvold GP, Hellmich RL, Rice LG (1999) Comparison of fumonisin concentrations in kernels of transgenic Bt maize hybrids and nontransgenic hybrids. Plant Dis 83:130–138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Munkvold GP, Hellmich RL, Showers WB (1997) Reduced Fusarium ear rot and symptomless infection in kernels of maize genetically engineered for European corn borer resistance. Phytopathology 87:1071–1077CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Naef A, Zesiger T, Défago G (2006) Impact of transgenic Bt maize residues on the mycotoxigenic plant pathogen Fusarium graminearum and the biocontrol agent Trichoderma atroviride. J Environ Qual 35:1001–1009CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Papst C, Utz HF, Melchinger AE, Eder J, Magg T, Klein D, Bohn M (2005) Mycotoxins produced by Fusarium spp. in isogenic Bt vs. non-Bt maize hybrids under European corn borer pressure. Agron J 97:219–224Google Scholar
  18. Schaafsma AW, Hooker DC, Baute TS, Illincic-Tamburic L (2002) Effect of Bt-corn hybrids on deoxynivalenol content in grain at harvest. Plant Dis 86(10):1123–1126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Schulthess F, Cardwell KF, Gounou S (2002) The effect of endophytic Fusarium verticillioides on infestation of two maize varieties by lepidopterous stemborers and coleopteran grain feeders. Phytopathology 92:120–128CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Strosnider H, Azziz-Baumgartner E, Banziger M, Bhat RV, Breiman R, Brune MN, DeCock K, Dilley A, Groopman J, Hell K et al (2006) Workgroup report: public health strategies for reducing aflatoxin exposure in developing countries. Environ Health Perspect 114:1898–1903PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Valenta H, Dänicke S, Flachowsky G, Böhme T (2001) Comparative study on concentrations of deoxynivalenol and zearalenone in kernels of transgenic Bt maize hybrids and nontransgenic maize hybrids. Mycotoxin Res 17:15–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wu F (2004) Explaining consumer resistance to genetically modified corn: an analysis of the distribution of benefits and risks. Risk Anal 24:717–728CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Wu F (2006a) Mycotoxin reduction in Bt corn: potential economic, health and regulatory impacts. Transgenic Res 15:277–189CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Wu F (2006b) An analysis of Bt corn’s benefits and risks for national and regional policymakers considering Bt corn adoption. Inter J Technol Global 2:115–136Google Scholar
  25. Wu F (2007) Bt corn and mycotoxin reduction. CAB Reviews: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary Science, Nutrition and Natural Resources 2(060), CABI, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  26. Wu F, Miller JD, Casman EA (2004) Bt corn and mycotoxin reduction: economic impacts in the United States and the developing world. J Toxicol Toxin Rev 23:397–424Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Mycotoxin Research and Springer 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vladimir Ostry
    • 1
  • Jaroslava Ovesna
    • 2
  • Jarmila Skarkova
    • 1
  • Vladimira Pouchova
    • 2
  • Jiri Ruprich
    • 1
  1. 1.Department for Food Safety and NutritionNational Institute of Public Health in PragueBrnoCzech Republic
  2. 2.Czech Scientific Committee on Genetically Modified Food and FeedCrop Research InstitutePrague 6Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations