Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Environmental and agronomic monitoring of adverse effects due to cultivation of genetically modified herbicide tolerant crops

  • CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS "DECISION MAKING AND SCIENCE"
  • Published:
Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Herbicide tolerance allows a specific crop variety to survive a herbicide treatment without injury despite the fact that the herbicide cannot be used selectively in a common variety of the same crop. Widely adopted and used worldwide are genetically modified herbicide tolerant (GMHT) crops with tolerance to the non-selective herbicide active ingredients glyphosate and glufosinate. Development of GMHT crops has substantially changed weed control systems and sometimes crop rotations and soil tillage systems. Attention must be given to the environmental and agro-environmental aspects and sustainability of agro-ecosystems based on HT crops because some adverse effects with this technology can appear, especially if used without knowledge of the risks involved and their prevention. This paper identifies main areas that should be monitored and discusses such potential adverse effects as hybridization with related taxa, occurrence of feral crops, and evolved herbicide resistance within weed communities. If there is no principal difference between conventional and GM crop cultivation, we propose monitoring approaches shall be based mainly on existing methods and monitoring networks. Scientific approaches as basis, decentralization with site-specific focus, as well as reasonable extent of data collection and their effective utilization should be the main features of the monitoring.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bartsch D, Lehnen M, Clegg J, Pohl-Orf M, Schuphan I, Ellstrand NC (1999) Impact of gene flow from cultivated beet on genetic diversity of wild sea beet populations. Mol Ecol 8:1733–1741

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bartsch D, Cuguen J, Biancardi E, Sweet J (2003) Environmental implications of gene flow from sugar beet to wild beet—current status and future research needs. Environ Biosafety Res 2:105–115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baylis AD (2000) Why glyphosate is a global herbicide: strengths, weaknesses and prospects. Pest Manage Sci 56:299–308

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Darmency H, Vigouroux Y, Gestat de Garambé T, Richard-Molard M, Muchembled C (2007) Transgene escape in sugar beet production fields: data from six years farm scale monitoring. Environ Biosafety Res 6:197–206

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • De Bock TSM (1986) The genus Beta: domestication, taxonomy and interspecific hybridization for plant breeding. Acta Hortic 182:35–343

    Google Scholar 

  • DeGennaro FP, Weller SC (1984) Differential susceptibility of Field bindweed (Convolvulus arvensis) biotypes to glyphosate. Weed Sci 32:472–476

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Desplanque B, Hautekéete N, Van Dijk H (2002) Transgenic weed beets: possible, probable, avoidable? J Appl Ecol 39:561–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devos Y, De Schrijver A, Reheul D (2009) Quantifying the introgressive hybridisation propensity between transgenic oilseed rape and its wild/weedy relatives. Environ Monit Assess 149:303–322

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • EFSA (2009) Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms on applications (EFSA-GMO-NL-2005-22 and EFSA-GMO-RX-NK603) for the placing on the market of the genetically modified glyphosate tolerant maize NK603 for cultivation, food and feed uses and import and processing, and for renewal of the authorisation of maize NK603 as existing product. EFSA J 1137:1–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Ellstrand NC (2003) Dangerous liaisons? When cultivated plants mate with their wild relatives. The Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD

    Google Scholar 

  • Gressel J (ed) (2005) Crop ferality and volunteerism. CRC Press, London, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Gruber S, Pekrun C, Claupein W (2004) Population dynamics of volunteer oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) affected by tillage. Eur J Agron 20(4):351–361

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heap I (2010) International survey of herbicide resistant weeds. http://www.weedscience.org. Accessed Sep 2010

  • Holec J, Soukup J, Kohout V (2002) Secondary dormancy in sunflower and its variation between cultivars. In: 12th EWRS symposium, Wageningen, NL, pp 362–363

  • Hoss NE, Al-Khatib K, Peterson DE, Loughin TM (2003) Efficacy of glyphosate, glufosinate, and imazethapyr on selected weed species. Weed Sci 51:110–117

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen RB, Andersen B, Hauser TP, Landbo L, Mikkelsen TR, Østergård H (1998) Introgression of crop genes from oilseed rape (Brassica napus) to related wild species—an avenue for the escape of engineered genes. Acta Hortic 459:211–217

    Google Scholar 

  • Jørgensen R, Ammitzbøll H, Hansen L, Johannessen M, Andersen B, Hauser T (2004) Gene introgression and consequences in Brassica. In: den Nijs HCM, Bartsch D, Sweet J (eds) Introgression from genetically modified plants into wild relatives. CABI, Wallingford, UK, pp 253–277

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Longden PC (1974) Sugar beet as a weed. In: Proceedings of 12th British weed control conference—weeds, Brighton, UK, pp 61–66

  • Maughan GL (1984) Survey of weed beet in sugar beet in England 1978-81. Crop Prot 3(3):315–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mücher T, Hesse P, Pohl-Orf M, Ellstrand NC, Bartsch D (2000) Characterization of weed-beet in Germany and Italy. J Sugar Beet Res 37(3):19–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagaharu U (1935) Genome analysis in Brassica with special reference to the experimental formation of B. napus and peculiar mode of fertilization. Jpn J Bot 7:389–452

    Google Scholar 

  • Nandula VK (ed) (2010) Glyphosate resistance in crops and weeds: history, development, and management. Wiley, New York

  • Nandula VK, Reddy KN, Duke SO, DH Poston (2005) Glyphosate-resistant weeds: current status and future outlook. Outlook Pest Man, August 2005, pp 183–187

  • Norris C, Sweet J, Parker J, Law J (2004) Implications for hybridization and introgression between oilseed rape (Brassica napus) and wild turnip (B. rapa) from an agricultural perspective. In: den Nijs HCM, Bartsch D, Sweet J (eds) Introgression from genetically modified plants into wild relatives. CABI, Wallingford, UK, pp 107–123

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Owen MDK (2008) Weed species shifts in glyphosate-resistant crops. Pest Manage Sci 64:377–387

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Pekrun C, Potter TC, Lutman PJW (1997) Genotypic variation in the development of secondary dormancy in oilseed rape and its impact on the persistence of volunteer rape. In: Brighton crop protection conference, pp 243–248

  • Senior IJ, Moyes C, Dale PJ (2002) Herbicide sensitivity of transgenic multiple herbicide-tolerant oilseed rape. Pest Manage Sci 58:405–412

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Soukup J, Holec J, Vejl P, Skupinová S, Sedlák P (2002) Diversity and distribution of weed beet in the Czech Republic. J Plant Dis Prot 18:34–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Van den Brink L, Bus CB, Franke AC, Groten JAM, Lotz LAP, Timmer RD, van de Wiel CCM (2010) Inventory of observed unexpected environmental effects of genetically modified crops. Report commissioned by COGEM. Applied Plant Research Unit for Arable farming, Field production of vegetables and Multifunctional agriculture (PPO-AGV), 80 p. http://www.cogem.net/ContentFiles/CGM%202010-08%20Unexpected%20environmental%20effects.pdf

  • Van Dijk H (2004) Gene exchange between wild and crop in Beta vulgaris: how easy is hybridization and what will happen in later generations? In: den Nijs HCM, Bartsch D, Sweet J (eds) Introgression from genetically modified plants into wild relatives. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp 53–61

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Vila-Aiub MM, Neve P, Powles SB (2009) Fitness costs associated with evolved herbicide resistance alleles in plants. New Phytol 184:751–767

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Warwick SI, Simard MJ, Légère A, Beckie HJ, Braun L, Zhu B et al (2003) Hybridization between transgenic Brassica napus L. and its wild relatives: B. rapa L., Raphanus raphanistrum L., Sinapis arvensis L., and Erucastrum gallicum (Willd.) O.E. Schulz. Theor Appl Genet 107:528–539

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Warwick SI, Beckie HJ, Hall LM (2009) Gene flow, invasiveness, and ecological impact of genetically modified crops. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1168:72–99

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wilhelm R, Beißner L, Schiemann J (2003) Concept for the realisation of a GMO monitoring in Germany. Federal Biological Research Centre for Agriculture and Forestry Institute for Plant Virology, Microbiology and Biosafety, Braunschweig

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors J. Soukup, J. Holec, M. Jursík and K. Hamouzová declare that the research was sponsored by the grant agencies of the Czech Ministry of Agriculture (project No. QH 91093), and Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MSM 6046070901) and that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Agrobiology, Food and Natural Resources, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Kamýcká 129, 165 21, Prague 6, Suchdol, Czech Republic

    Josef Soukup, Josef Holec, Miroslav Jursík & Kateřina Hamouzová

Authors
  1. Josef Soukup
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Josef Holec
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Miroslav Jursík
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kateřina Hamouzová
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Josef Soukup.

Additional information

Conference Proceedings: “Decision Making and Science—The Balancing of Risk Based Decisions that Influence Sustainability of Agricultural Production”, 7th and 8th October 2010 in Berlin, Germany, sponsored by the OECD Co-operative Research Programme.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Soukup, J., Holec, J., Jursík, M. et al. Environmental and agronomic monitoring of adverse effects due to cultivation of genetically modified herbicide tolerant crops. J. Verbr. Lebensm. 6 (Suppl 1), 125–130 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00003-011-0682-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00003-011-0682-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation