New meta-analysis finds Bt crops have no impact on soil biota

benefits to the soil by earthworms

A new meta-analysis finds that genetically modified Bt crops — in stark contrast to some pesticides — have no impact on soil invertebrates.

The new research provides further weight to the argument that Bt crops, which control pests in a very targeted way using insecticidal proteins (Bt) expressed in plant tissues, protect biodiversity by helping farmers reduce their use of broad-spectrum insecticide sprays.

The study, published in the journal Transgenic Research, is the first systematic review of the effects of genetically modified (GM) crops on soil invertebrates and the first such review to include a quantitative meta-analysis.

“The ongoing debate about the ecological effects of Bt crops calls for thorough reviews about the impact on soil biodiversity and their ecosystem services,” the authors write. “Non-target soil invertebrates are particularly recognized for their contribution to plant nutrient availability and turnover of organic matter and it is therefore relevant to protect these invertebrate taxa.”

To provide protection against pests, researchers insert a gene from Bacillus thuriengensis — a naturally occurring soil bacterium widely used for crop protection in organic agriculture — so the plant expresses a Cry protein that is toxic to certain insects.

Other recent studies have shown that Bt crops do not have harmful effects on beneficial bugs in farmers’ fields. But previous reviews of how Bt crops effect non-target organisms (NTOs) “have not included quantitative effects on soil invertebrates at the species level or complied with principles of systematic reviews,” the authors note.

In response, the authors conducted a systematic review — based on observation data from a number of field studies across a range of environmental conditions — that aimed to provide an unbiased assessment of possible effects of Bt crops on soil invertebrates.

The authors reviewed and analyzed a selection of studies on Protista, nematodes, Collembola, mites, enchytraeids and earthworms to determine whether the abundance of soil invertebrates is changed by Bt crops compared to conventional crops.

“Soil invertebrates are exposed to Bt crops through soil, including soil organic matter, rhizosphere, including root exudates, and roots and litter in and on the soil, and these exposure routes will all be present in field grown Bt crops,” the authors wrote. “Among crucial requirements, we maintained that a comparator must be included, while additional study inclusion criteria were a proper replicated experimental design with a randomized field plot distribution.”

Related article:  Viewpoint: World must embrace CRISPR, synthetic biology to boost food production in the face of climate change

After conducting a thorough literature search and screening out non-relevant reports, researchers found 22 studies suitable for carrying out a meta-analysis. Twenty of these were published in scientific journals and two in meeting proceedings. They represented experiments conducted in 36 locations in 10 countries, primarily using maize and cotton.

Follow the latest news and policy debates on agricultural biotech and biomedicine? Subscribe to our newsletter.

“There is considerable variation among soil invertebrate orders, but within orders the sample size was insufficient and the sample heterogeneity too large to draw any credible conclusions on the effect of Cry at the order level,” the authors write. “However, we consider the result of the analysis among order sufficiently credible to conclude that there is no significant effect of Cry on soil invertebrates. These results are expected based on the species specificity of Bt and the mode of action.”

The study was led by Paul Henning Krogh, a senior researcher in the Depatment of Bioscience-Terrestrial Ecology at Aarhus University in Denmark. Co-authors are Kaloyan Kaostov, a research fellow at AgroBioInstitute in Bulgaria and Christian Frølund Damgaard, a bioscience professor at Aarhus University.

Joan Conrow has 35 years of experience as a journalist, editor, and communications consultant. She specializes in environmental issues, biotechnology, and agriculture. Follow her on Twitter @joanconrow

This article ran at Cornell Alliance for Science and has been republished here with permission. Follow the Alliance for Science on Twitter @ScienceAlly

Outbreak Daily Digest
Biotech Facts & Fallacies
Talking Biotech
Genetics Unzipped
Video: Test everyone – Slovakia goes its own way to control COVID

Video: Test everyone – Slovakia goes its own way to control COVID

As Europe sees record coronavirus cases and deaths, Slovakia is testing its entire adult population. WSJ's Drew Hinshaw explains how ...
mag insects image superjumbo v

Disaster interrupted: Which farming system better preserves insect populations: Organic or conventional?

A three-year run of fragmentary Armageddon-like studies had primed the journalism pumps and settled the media framing about the future ...
dead bee desolate city

Are we facing an ‘Insect Apocalypse’ caused by ‘intensive, industrial’ farming and agricultural chemicals? The media say yes; Science says ‘no’

The media call it the “Insect Apocalypse”. In the past three years, the phrase has become an accepted truth of ...
globalmethanebudget globalcarbonproject cropped x

Infographic: Cows cause climate change? Agriculture scientist says ‘belching bovines’ get too much blame

A recent interview by Caroline Stocks, a UK journalist who writes about food, agriculture and the environment, of air quality ...
organic hillside sweet corn x

Organic v conventional using GMOs: Which is the more sustainable farming?

Many consumers spend more for organic food to avoid genetically modified products in part because they believe that “industrial agriculture” ...
benjamin franklin x

Are most GMO safety studies funded by industry?

The assertion that biotech companies do the research and the government just signs off on it is false ...

Environmental Working Group: EWG challenges safety of GMOs, food pesticide residues

Known by some as the "Environmental Worrying Group," EWG lobbies for tighter GMO legislation and famously puts out annual "dirty dozen" list of fruits and ...
m hansen

Michael Hansen: Architect of Consumers Union ongoing anti-GMO campaign

Michael K. Hansen (born 1956) is thought by critics to be the prime mover behind the ongoing campaign against agricultural biotechnology at Consumer Reports. He is an ...
News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.
Optional. Mail on special occasions.
Send this to a friend