Bred to Resist Insect Pests GMO Crops Cause Less Damage to Biodiversity than Non-GMO
For those who think that GMO equals "Franken" crops and the introduction of transgenic plants that will ultimately destroy our biodiversity, think again. It turns out according to a study recently reported in the Journal Nature that cotton containing a crystal-like protein labelled Bt, short for Bacillus thuringiensis, has been planted in small plots in China and studied over two decades. Bt crystal proteins a subject which I have written about before, are poisonous to insects. They have been in use for more than 60 years and are considered safe for non-target organisms and for human and animal consumption. But Bt insecticides have a short shelf life and need to be constantly applied to fields to have a longer-term impact on insect pests.
When Bt crystal proteins were implanted into corn and cotton, these altered plants retained the toxicity of the crystal proteins throughout the growing cycle and bollworms that tried to eat the cotton died. Compared to non-Bt crops today's farmers of the latter have to apply insecticide as much as 15 times each growing season. But those planting Bt Cotton find themselves using 60% less pesticide in their fields. This allows spiders, ladybugs, lacewings and other beneficial insect predators to be unaffected. Ladybugs and lacewings are particularly valued because they eat the cotton aphid. So by incorporating GMO crops farmers use fewer chemicals and do less collateral damage to the environment.
Another interesting aspect of the Bt story relates to the type of agriculture practiced in China. Unlike North America, Chinese farm holdings are small and farmers plant conventional crops right next to fields growing Bt Cotton. This has given bollworms a refuge from exposure to Bt allowing them to continue the gene pool so that a Bt resistant strain of the insect has not yet evolved. This practice provides an interesting balancing act that we don't see here in North American farms which are much larger and tend to plant a single crop.
- About WFS
- Contact Us
- Frequently Asked Questions
- History of WFS
- Board and Council
- Press Room
- Futurist Gear
- Are You the Next CEO of the World Future Society?
- Book a WFS / Futurist Magazine Speaker
Essays and comments posted in World Future Society and THE FUTURIST magazine blog portion of this site are the intellectual property of the authors, who retain full responsibility for and rights to their content. For permission to publish, distribute copies, use excerpts, etc., please contact the author. The opinions expressed are those of the author. The World Future Society takes no stand on what the future will or should be like.
Free Email Newsletter
To sign up for Futurist Update, our free monthly email newsletter, enter your email in the box below and click Save.
In Our Final Invention (St. Martin’s Press 2013), documentary filmmaker James Barrat presents three scenarios for the long-term future of Artificial Intelligence. Unfortunately, as a skeptic he provides no preferred scenarios.
One of the advantages of being around for a long time is perspective. In particular, perspective in the field in which I chose to work many years ago – organizational and social transformation. I’m not talking about transforming a company or a city; I’m talking about transforming the whole world.
The latest resupply mission to the International Space Station (ISS) by SpaceX, Elon Musk's private company, met several milestones last week. First it delivered almost 3,500 pounds of supplies, including a space garden for growing vegetables, and legs for the on-board robot, Robonaut-2. But even more interesting was what happened at the back end of the launch.
Last night I watched an HBO documentary called "Questioning Darwin." It took an in-depth look at those who reject Darwin's theory of natural selection on grounds of faith in the words of the Judeo-Christian Bible. At the same time it presented the personal journey of Darwin from his roots to his presentation of his theories in the book, "The Origin of the Species," in which he described the mechanism of natural selection, the theory upon which our scientific understanding of how life evolves on this planet.
Google’s Director of Engineering, Ray Kurzweil, has predicted that we will reach a technological singularity by 2045, and science fiction writer Vernor Vinge is betting on 2029.
Sometimes simple ideas work, and this one is pretty simple.
There’s a new study out which, press outlets are telling me, shows that the United States is now an oligarchy, ruled by the rich and powerful, and perhaps that the US has been sliding in this direction for decades.
Which will it be? Will we regenerate organs using stem cells and switching on genes to rebuild diseased or damaged organs? Or will we take a patients own cells and bio-print organs using 3D printers? Both technologies are showing promise based on recent reports.