DOCSLIB.ORG

(IRM)/Grower Guide for Genuity® Smartstax® RIB Complete™ Seed

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
(IRM)/Grower Guide for Genuity® Smartstax® RIB Complete™ Seed 2011 Insect Resistance Management (IRM)/Grower Guide for Genuity® SmartStax® RIB Complete™ seed Genuity® SmartStax® RIB Complete™ seed contains Cry1A.105, refuge may be planted as an in-field or adjacent (e.g., across Cry2Ab2, Cry1F, Cry3Bb1, Cry34Ab1 and Cry35Ab1 from Bacillus the road) refuge, or as a separate block that is within 1/2 mile thuringiensis (B.t.) that together control European corn borer, of the Genuity® SmartStax® RIB Complete™ field. In-field refuge southwestern corn borer, southern cornstalk borer, corn earworm, options include blocks, perimeter strips (i.e., strips around the fall armyworm, stalk borer, lesser corn stalk borer, sugarcane field), or in-field strips. If perimeter or in-field strips are imple- borer, western bean cutworm, black cutworm, western corn mented, the strips must be at least 4 consecutive rows wide. rootworm, northern corn rootworm, and Mexican corn rootworm. The 20% structured refuge can be protected from lepidopteran This product also contains Roundup Ready® 2 Technology and damage by use of non-B.t. insecticides if the population of one LibertyLink® Technology that provide tolerance to in-crop applica- or more target lepidopteran pests of Genuity® SmartStax® RIB tions of labeled Roundup® agricultural herbicides and Ignite® Complete™ in the refuge exceeds economic thresholds. In herbicides, respectively, when applied according to label directions. addition, the 20% structured refuge can be protected from corn rootworm damage by an appropriate seed treatment or soil This product includes refuge that is interspersed within the field insecticide; however, insecticides labeled for adult corn rootworm by planting a licensed seed-mixture containing 95% Genuity® control must be avoided in the refuge during the period of corn SmartStax® mixed with at least 5% non-B.t. seed within a single rootworm adult emergence. Economic thresholds will be lot of seed. This product satisfies the refuge requirements in determined using methods recommended by local or regional all regions other than in the cotton-growing region as defined professionals (e.g., Extension Service agents, crop consultants). herein. Genuity® SmartStax® RIB Complete™ may not yet be registered in all states. Check with your Monsanto representative The cotton-growing region requiring the additional 20% refuge for the registration status in your state. consists of the following states (see map below): In the corn-growing region— there are no requirements for Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Florida, Louisiana, North Carolina, a separate structured refuge for Genuity® SmartStax® RIB Mississippi, South Carolina, Oklahoma (only the counties of Complete™ corn when planted in the U.S. corn-growing region. Beckham, Caddo, Comanche, Custer, Greer, Harmon, Jackson, The refuge seed of Genuity® SmartStax® RIB Complete™ corn is Kay, Kiowa, Tillman, and Washita), Tennessee (only the counties contained in the bag resulting in a refuge configuration that is of Carroll, Chester, Crockett, Dyer, Fayette, Franklin, Gibson, interspersed within the field. The interspersed refuge can only Hardeman, Hardin, Haywood, Lake, Lauderdale, Lincoln, be used by planting seed corn specifically generated by qualified Madison, Obion, Rutherford, Shelby, and Tipton), Texas (except seed producers/conditioners licensed by Monsanto. The seed the counties of Carson, Dallam, Hansford, Hartley, Hutchinson, producers/conditioners licensed by Monsanto must ensure a Lipscomb, Moore, Ochiltree, Roberts, and Sherman), Virginia minimum of 5% non-B.t. refuge seed is included with the Genuity® (only the counties of Dinwiddie, Franklin City, Greensville, Isle SmartStax® seed in each lot of seed corn. The refuge seed in the of Wight, Northampton, Southampton, Suffolk City, Surrey, seed mixture may not be treated with seed-applied insecticides and Sussex) and Missouri (only the counties of Dunklin, New for corn rootworm control unless the Genuity® SmartStax® seed Madrid, Pemiscot, Scott, and Stoddard). in the seed mixture receives the same treatment. Insecticidal treatments labeled for adult corn rootworm control are discour- WA aged during the time of adult corn rootworm emergence. ME MT ND MI VT OR ® ® MN In the cotton-growing region— Genuity SmartStax RIB ID NH NY MA SD WI CT WY Complete™ seed requires the planting of an additional 20% MI RI IA PA NV NE NJ structured refuge (i.e. 20 acres of non-B.t. corn for every 80 OH MD DE UT IL IN ® ® CA CO WV D.C. acres of Genuity SmartStax RIB Complete™ corn planted). VA KS MO KY NC The 20% refuge must be planted with corn hybrids that do not TN AZ OK NM AR SC contain B.t. technologies for the control of corn rootworms or GA MS AL ® ® corn borers. The refuge and the Genuity SmartStax RIB TX LA FL Complete™ seed should be sown on the same day, or with the AK shortest window possible between planting dates to ensure that corn root development is similar among hybrids. The structured HI Insect Resistance Corn- and Management Cotton-Growing Areas IRM Grower Guide 2 011 Table of Contents 2 011 2 Why Plant a Refuge? 4 Corn Refuge Requirements 7 Genuity® SmartStax™—This hybrid contains Cry1A.105, Cry2Ab2, Cry1F, Cry3Bb1, Cry34Ab1 and Cry35Ab1 from Bacillus thuringiensis (B.t.) that together control European corn borer, southwestern corn borer, southern cornstalk borer, corn earworm, fall armyworm, stalk borer, lesser corn stalk borer, sugarcane borer, western bean cutworm, black cutworm, western corn rootworm, northern corn rootworm, and Mexican corn rootworm. This hybrid also contains Roundup Ready® 2 Technology and LibertyLink® Technology that provide tolerance to in-crop applications of labeled Roundup® agricultural herbicides and Ignite® herbicides, respectively, when applied according to label directions. 9 Genuity® Vt triple prO™—This hybrid contains Cry1A.105, Cry2Ab2 and Cry3Bb1 from B.t. that together control European corn borer, southwestern corn borer, sugarcane borer, southern cornstalk borer, corn earworm, fall armyworm, corn stalk borer, western corn rootworm, northern corn rootworm, and Mexican corn rootworm. This hybrid also contains Roundup Ready 2 Technology that provides tolerance to in-crop applications of labeled Roundup agricultural herbicides when applied according to label directions. 10 Genuity® Vt DOuble prO™—This hybrid contains Cry1A.105 and Cry2Ab2 from B.t. that together control European corn borer, southwestern corn borer, sugarcane borer, southern cornstalk borer, corn earworm, corn stalk borer, and fall armyworm. This hybrid also contains Roundup Ready 2 Technology that provides tolerance to in-crop applications of labeled Roundup agricultural herbicides when applied according to label directions. 10 yielDGarD® COrn Borer—This hybrid contains Cry1Ab from B.t. which controls European corn borer, southwestern corn borer and sugarcane borer. YieldGard Corn Borer with Roundup Ready Corn 2 contains the Roundup Ready Corn 2 trait (NK603) that provides tolerance to in-crop applications of labeled Roundup agricultural herbicides when applied according to label directions. 11 YieldGard VT Triple®—This hybrid contains Cry1Ab and Cry3Bb1 from B.t. that together control European corn borer, southwestern corn borer and sugarcane borer as well as excellent protection against western corn rootworm, northern corn rootworm, and Mexican corn rootworm. This hybrid also contains Roundup Ready 2 Technology that provides tolerance to in-crop applications of labeled Roundup agricultural herbicides when applied according to label directions. 11 YieldGard plus®—This hybrid contains Cry1Ab and Cry3Bb1 from B.t. that together control European corn borer, southwestern corn borer and sugarcane borer as well as excellent protection against western corn rootworm, northern corn rootworm, and Mexican corn rootworm. YieldGard Plus with Roundup Ready Corn 2 trait provides tolerance to in-crop applications of labeled Roundup agricultural herbicides when applied according to label directions. (see note below) 13 YieldGard VT rooTworm/rr2®—This hybrid contains the active ingredient Cry3Bb1 from B.t. which provides effective and consistent protection against western corn rootworm, northern corn rootworm, and Mexican corn rootworm. This hybrid contains Roundup Ready® 2 Technology that provides crop safety for in-crop applications of labeled Roundup agricultural herbicides when applied according to label directions. 13 YieldGard rooTworm—This hybrid contains the Cry3Bb1 protein from B.t. which controls western corn rootworm, northern corn rootworm, and Mexican corn rootworm larvae. YieldGard Rootworm with Roundup Ready Corn 2 provides tolerance to in-crop applications of labeled Roundup agricultural herbicides when applied according to label directions. (see note below) 14 Cotton Refuge Requirements 14 GenuiTY® BollGard ii® CoTTon varieties contain two distinct insecticidal proteins, Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab2, from Bacillus thuringiensis (B.t.) that increase the efficacy and spectrum of control and reduce the chance that resistance will develop to the B.t. insecticidal proteins. Genuity® Bollgard II® cotton controls tobacco budworm, pink bollworm and cotton bollworm. Genuity® Bollgard II® cotton also provides control against fall armyworm, beet armyworm, cabbage and soybean loopers and other secondary leaf- or fruit-feeding caterpillar pests of cotton. Applications of insecticides to control these pests are substantially reduced with Genuity® Bollgard II®. Note: Monsanto’s U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) registrations for corn rootworm events MON
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Roundup Ready Wheat – an Overview Based on Advancements in the Risk Assessment of Genetically Engineered Crops
    Roundup Ready Wheat – An Overview Based on Advancements in the Risk Assessment of Genetically Engineered Crops by Doug Gurian-Sherman, Ph.D. Center for Science in the Public Interest 1875 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, DC 20009-5728 Phone: (202) 332-9110 www.cspinet.org TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE Abstract................................................................................................................................. 2 Introduction.......................................................................................................................... 3 Background on the U.S. Regulatory System for GE Crops ............................................. 3 Characterization of the Transgene and Transgenic Protein............................................ 4 Human Safety....................................................................................................................... 6 Allergenicity ...................................................................................................................... 7 Unintended Adverse Effects.............................................................................................. 9 Environmental Issues ........................................................................................................ 11 Resistance Management ................................................................................................. 12 Gene Transfer..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Genetically Modified Cotton
    BACKGROUND 2013 GENETICALLY MODIFIED COTTON Genetically engineered (also called genetically modified or GM) cotton is currently grown on 25 million hectares around the world, mostly in India, China, Pakistan and the US.1 Other countries growing much smaller amounts of GM cotton are South Africa, Burkina Faso, Sudan, Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, Columbia, Mexico, Costa Rica, Burma, Australia, and Egypt. GM cotton is engineered with one of two traits. One makes it resistant to glyphosate-based herbicides such as Monsanto’s Roundup, SUMMARY while the other stimulates the plant to produce a toxin that kills the bollworm, one of the crop’s primary pests. This pest-resistant cotton GM COTTON FAILED is engineered with a gene from the bacteria Bacillus thurengiensis FARMERS IN INDIA or “Bt”, and is the more commonly grown of the two types. » Yields declined. BT COTTON IN INDIA » Secondary pests emerged, Cotton is an important cash crop in India. It is grown on 12 million forcing increased pesticide use. hectares, making India the second largest producer of cotton in the » The price of cotton seed rose. world, behind China. Insect-resistant Bt cotton is the only GM crop currently grown in India.2 It was introduced in India by Monsanto in » Farmers lost the option to buy 2002, under the trade name Bollgard, in a joint venture with the non-GM cotton seeds. Indian seed company Mahyco. Monsanto promised Indian farmers that Bt cotton would: 1. Reduce the amount of pesticides farmers need to buy to control pests, 2. Increase harvests and farm income by reducing crop losses due to pest attacks.3 In the first few years after Bt cotton was commercialized in India, some farmers saw reductions in pesticide use and crop losses, but this pattern quickly and dramatically changed.
    [Show full text]
  • Genuity Smartstax Corn: an Amazing Advancement in GE Crop
    Genuity SmartStax corn: An amazing advancement in GE crop 05 May 2010 | News Image not found or type unknown Using GS corn as a platform would be a quicker way of enhancing the number of transgenes in a single crop variety The trademarked Genuity-SmartStax corn (GS corn) containing eight transgenes-six for pest control and two for weed control- developed through collaboration between Monsanto and Dow AgroSciences, introduced few months ago, is an amazing development in crop genetic engineering (GE). Incorporated into the best of corn varieties, this event is expected to provide the most comprehensive pest and weed control system available, leading to an impressive crop health and increase of whole farm crop yields. The development of Genuity SmartStax corn from the shaky origins of genetic engineering is a fascinating reading. Genuity SmartStax corn GS corn takes care of the major pests, such as the European and southwestern corn borer, northern and western corn rootworm, western bean cutworm, black cutworm, corn earworm, and fall armyworm and also imparts tolerance to both glyphosate and glufosinate herbicides. In addition, the coming together of two giants in the seed industry will encourage other private-private partnerships to further this initiative. Eight transgenes in GS corn Tolerance to aerial pests (three Bt genes): Cry 1A.105 (Monsanto), Cry 2Ab2 (Monsanto) and Cry 1F (Dow). Tolerance to subsoil pests (three Bt genes): Cry 3Bb1 (Monsanto), Cry 34Ab1 (Dow) and Cry 35Ab1 (Dow). Tolerance to herbicides (two genes): Glyphosate (Roundup Ready, Monsanto) and Glufosinate (LibertyLink, Dow, under license from Bayer). Biosecurity evaluation Transgenic crops are evaluated for product efficacy and biosecurity in the laboratory, green house and in the field for over 10 years before commercialization.
    [Show full text]
  • Harness Xtra Herbicide, EPA Registration REPACKAGING LIMITATIONS
    ATTENTION: This specimen label is provided for general information only. • This pesticide product may not yet be available or approved for sale or use in your area. • It is your responsibility to follow all Federal, state and local laws and regulations regarding the use of pesticides. • Before using any pesticide, be sure the intended use is approved in your state or locality. • Your state or locality may require additional precautions and instructions for use of this product that are not included here. • Monsanto does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of this specimen label. The information found in this label may differ from the information found on the product label. You must have the EPA approved labeling with you at the time of use and must read and follow all label directions. • You should not base any use of a similar product on the precautions, instructions for use or other information you find here. • Always follow the precautions and instructions for use on the label of the pesticide you are using. 36021K6-29 3.0 PRECAUTIONARY STATEMENTS RESTRICTED USE PESTICIDE due to ground and surface water concerns. For retail sale to and use only by .1 Hazards to Humans and Domestic Animals Certified Applicators, or persons under their direct supervision and only for those 3 uses covered by the Certified Applicator’s certification. Keep out of reach of children. CAUTION! HARMFUL IF SWALLOWED. HARMFUL IF INHALED. CAUSES MODERATE EYE IRRITATION. ® MAY CAUSE ALLERGIC SKIN REACTION. Avoid contact with skin, eyes, or clothing. Avoid breathing spray mist. Prolonged or frequently repeated skin contact may cause allergic reactions in some individuals.
    [Show full text]
  • Agricultural Biotechnology: Benefits of Transgenic Soybeans
    AGRICULTURAL BIOTECHNOLOGY: BENEFITS OF TRANSGENIC SOYBEANS Leonard P. Gianessi Janet E. Carpenter April 2000 National Center for Food and Agricultural Policy 1616 P Street, NW, First Floor Washington, DC 20036 Tel: 202-328-5048 Fax: 202-328-5133 [email protected] Preparation of this report was supported financially with a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. U.S. Soybean Production 3. Soybean Products 4. Soybean Physiology 5. Soybeans – Agronomic Factors 6. Soybean Genetic Improvements A. Introduction B. Reproductive Process C. Artificial Cross Breeding D. Mutation Breeding E. Transgenic Plants 7. Weed Competition – Soybeans 8. Weed Control in Soybeans: 1940’s – 1950’s 9. Herbicides – An Overview 10. Herbicide Use in Soybeans: 1960’s – 1995 A. Introduction B. Historical Overview 1. The Early 1960’s 2. Soil Applied Herbicides 3. Postemergence Herbicides 4. Sulfonylurea/Imidazolinone Herbicides 5. Burndown Herbicides C. Summary of Usage: 1995 11. Transgenic Herbicide Tolerant Soybeans A. Glyphosate – An Overview B. Performance of Roundup Ready Soybeans C. Herbicide Ratings D. Adoption Impacts: 1995 – 1998 1. Herbicide Costs 2. Soybean Yields 3. Returns 4. Other Aggregate Studies 5. Herbicide Treatments 6. Herbicide Use Amounts 7. Other Impacts 12. Summary and Conclusions 13. References Appendix 1: Soybean Processing – A Description 1. Introduction Soybeans and other crops have been improved genetically for many decades through traditional crop breeding – a technique that requires that species be sexually compatible. With the development of biotechnology methods, scientists have the ability to transfer single genes from one living organism into another, regardless of species or sexual compatibility. Varieties that are developed through the transfer of genes between species that are not sexually compatible are referred to as “transgenic.” Transgenic soybean plants have been developed with a gene from a soil bacteria that allows the use of an herbicide that would normally kill soybeans.
    [Show full text]
  • Bt Cotton in Texas
    B-6107 02-01 Bt Cotton Technology in Texas: A Practical View Glen C. Moore, Thomas W. Fuchs, Mark A. Muegge, Allen E. Knutson* Since their introduction in 1996, transgenic cot- tons expressing the Bollgard® gene technology have been evaluated by producers in large scale commer- cial plantings across the U.S. Cotton Belt. Transgenic cottons are designed to be resistant to the target pests of bollworm Helicoverpa zea (Boddie), pink bollworm Pectinophora gossypiella (Sanders), and tobacco budworm Heliothis virescens (F.). These cottons contain Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), a gene toxic to the target pests. The perfor- mance of these cottons has been highly efficacious against the tobacco budworm and the pink bollworm. They also preform well against bollworm; however, in certain situations producers may need to make supplemental insecticide treatments for this insect. Conditions that have contributed to the need for sup- plemental control are heavy bollworm egg laying during peak bloom, boll injury and the presence of larvae larger than 1/4 inch, high production inputs that favor rapid or rank plant growth, and fields pre- viously treated with insecticides. Earliest reports of bollworm damage on transgenic cotton varieties NuCOTN 33B and NuCOTN 35B surfaced in the Brazos Bottomlands and parts of the upper Coastal Bend areas of Texas in 1996. NuCOTN 33B and NuCOTN 35B have, however, provided effective bollworm control throughout much of Texas and reduced insecticide treatments for bollworm, tobacco budworm and pink bollworm compared to non-Bollgard® cotton. Yields from Bollgard® cotton are generally equal to or slightly higher than those for standard non- Bollgard® cultivars grown under the same production scheme.
    [Show full text]
  • Lack of Glyphosate Resistance Gene Transfer from Roundup Ready
    Lack of Glyphosate Resistance Gene Transfer from Roundup Ready® Soybean to Bradyrhizobium japonicum under Field and Laboratory Conditions Laura Arango Isazaa, Katja Opelta, Tobias Wagnera,b, Elke Mattesa, Evi Biebera, Elwood O. Hatleyc, Greg Rothc, Juan Sanjuánd, Hans-Martin Fischere, Heinrich Sandermanna, Anton Hartmannf, and Dieter Ernsta,* a Institute of Biochemical Plant Pathology, Helmholtz Zentrum München – German Research Center for Environmental Health, D-85764 Neuherberg, Germany. Fax: +49 89 3187 3383. E-mail: [email protected] b Present address: Applied Biosystems, Frankfurter Strasse 129B, D-64293 Darmstadt, Germany c The Pennsylvania State University, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, University Park, PA 16802, USA d Departamento de Microbiologia del Suelo y Sistemas Simbióticos, Estación Experimental del Zaidin, CSIC, Prof. Albareda 1, Granada, Spain e ETH, Institute of Microbiology, Wolfgang-Pauli-Str. 10, Zürich, Switzerland f Department Microbe-Plant Interactions, Helmholtz Zentrum München – German Research Center for Environmental Health, D-85764 Neuherberg, Germany * Author for correspondence and reprint requests Z. Naturforsch. 66 c, 595 – 604 (2011); received March 25/October 14, 2011 This paper is dedicated to the memory of the late Professor Dr. Heinrich Sandermann, former director of the Institute of Biochemical Plant Pathology, Helmholtz Zentrum München A fi eld study was conducted at the Russell E. Larson Agricultural Research Center to de- termine the effect of transgenic glyphosate-resistant soybean in combination with herbicide (Roundup) application on its endosymbiont Bradyrhizobium japonicum. DNA of bacteroids from isolated nodules was analysed for the presence of the transgenic 5-enolpyruvylshiki- mate-3-phosphate synthase (CP4-EPSPS) DNA sequence using polymerase chain reaction (PCR).
    [Show full text]
  • Barriers to Adoption of GM Crops
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Creative Components Dissertations Fall 2021 Barriers to Adoption of GM Crops Madeline Esquivel Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/creativecomponents Part of the Agricultural Education Commons Recommended Citation Esquivel, Madeline, "Barriers to Adoption of GM Crops" (2021). Creative Components. 731. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/creativecomponents/731 This Creative Component is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Creative Components by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Barriers to Adoption of GM Crops By Madeline M. Esquivel A Creative Component submitted to the Graduate Faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Major: Plant Breeding Program of Study Committee: Walter Suza, Major Professor Thomas Lübberstedt Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2021 1 Contents 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 3 2. What is a Genetically Modified Organism?................................................................................ 9 2.1 The Development of Modern Varieties and Genetically Modified Crops .......................... 10 2.2 GM vs Traditional Breeding: How Are GM Crops Produced?
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainable Intensive Agriculture: High Technology and Environmental Benefits
    University of Arkansas School of Law [email protected] $ (479) 575-7646 An Agricultural Law Research Article Sustainable Intensive Agriculture: High Technology and Environmental Benefits by Drew L. Kershen Originally published in KANSAS JOURNAL OF LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY 16 KAN. J. L. & PUB. POL’Y 424 (2007) www.NationalAgLawCenter.org SUSTAINABLE INTENSIVE AGRICULTURE: HIGH TECHNOLOGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS Drew L. Kershen- I. PREFACE In the coming decades, agriculture faces three significant challenges. While these challenges will manifest themselves in ways unique to the cultural, socio-economic, and political conditions of different countries, developed and developing nations alike will face these challenges. Moreover, for the purposes of this article, the author assumes these challenges are truisms; consequently, there is no need to cite authority to support the author's identification and assertions. 1 Agriculture faces an agronomic challenge. Millions of people are still hungry in our world. Moreover, the world's population will continue to grow . for at least several decades. Agriculture must produce the food necessary to provide the people of the world-including those who presently have the money to feel secure about their daily bread-with an adequate supply of nutritious food'. "Agriculture must first be about food production for the survival and health of human beings, Agriculture faces an environmental challenge. It cannot produce the food needed for human beings if it exhausts or abuses Earth's soil, water, air, and biodiversity. Moreover, the general public, governments, and civil organizations from all societal sectors (academic, business, consumer, for­ profit and non-profit, public interest, and scientific) demand that agriculture Earl Sneed Centennial Professor of Law, University of Oklahoma, College of Law.
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Recessive Bt Toxin Resistance Conferred by an Intracellular Cadherin Mutation in Field-Selected Populations of Cotton Bollworm
    Non-Recessive Bt Toxin Resistance Conferred by an Intracellular Cadherin Mutation in Field-Selected Populations of Cotton Bollworm Haonan Zhang1, Shuwen Wu1, Yihua Yang1, Bruce E. Tabashnik2, Yidong Wu1* 1 Key Laboratory of Integrated Management of Crop Diseases and Pests (Ministry of Education), College of Plant Protection, Nanjing Agricultural University, Nanjing, China, 2 Department of Entomology, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, United States of America Abstract Transgenic crops producing Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) toxins have been planted widely to control insect pests, yet evolution of resistance by the pests can reduce the benefits of this approach. Recessive mutations in the extracellular domain of toxin- binding cadherin proteins that confer resistance to Bt toxin Cry1Ac by disrupting toxin binding have been reported previously in three major lepidopteran pests, including the cotton bollworm, Helicoverpa armigera. Here we report a novel allele from cotton bollworm with a deletion in the intracellular domain of cadherin that is genetically linked with non- recessive resistance to Cry1Ac. We discovered this allele in each of three field-selected populations we screened from northern China where Bt cotton producing Cry1Ac has been grown intensively. We expressed four types of cadherin alleles in heterologous cell cultures: susceptible, resistant with the intracellular domain mutation, and two complementary chimeric alleles with and without the mutation. Cells transfected with each of the four cadherin alleles bound Cry1Ac and were killed by Cry1Ac. However, relative to cells transfected with either the susceptible allele or the chimeric allele lacking the intracellular domain mutation, cells transfected with the resistant allele or the chimeric allele containing the intracellular domain mutation were less susceptible to Cry1Ac.
    [Show full text]
  • Glyphosate and Cancer Risk: Frequently Asked Questions
    May 2015 FACT SHEET GLYPHOSATE AND CANCER RISK: FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS WHY IS THERE CONCERN ABOUT showing higher rates of cancer in glyphosate-using GLYPHOSATE AND CANCER? The World farmers; and research showing that glyphosate damages Health Organization’s (WHO’s) cancer authorities – the DNA and chromosomes, one mechanism by which cancer International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) is induced.2 IARC’s full assessment is due out in 2016. – recently determined that glyphosate is “probably carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2A). Glyphosate is WHOSE ASSESSMENT IS MORE the most heavily used pesticide in the world thanks to RELIABLE: IARC OR EPA? IARC is the world’s widespread planting of Monsanto’s Roundup Ready crops, leading authority on cancer. Its glyphosate determination which are genetically engineered to survive spraying with was made by unanimous decision of 17 qualified scientists it. Use and exposure will increase still more if glyphosate- led by Dr. Aaron Blair, a distinguished epidemiologist resistant turfgrasses currently being developed for lawns, recently retired from the U.S. National Cancer Institute.3 playing fields and golf courses are introduced. IARC’s assessment is up-to-date, analyzing all the relevant available research, while EPA’s last comprehensive WHERE DO EPA AND WHO’S IARC STAND assessment of glyphosate occurred in 1993. IARC ON GLYPHOSATE’S CARCINOGENICITY? considered a broad range of evidence, including human In 1985, EPA classified glyphosate as a possible epidemiology and other peer-reviewed studies, while EPA carcinogen based on experiments showing tumors in did not assess epidemiology and relied almost entirely on glyphosate-treated rodents.
    [Show full text]
  • Monsanto's BT Cotton Patent, Indian Courts and Public Policy
    6. MONSANTO’S BT COTTON PATENT, INDIAN COURTS AND eligible subject matter promotes public policy and farmers’ PUBLIC POLICY interests. Keywords: Bt. cotton, patent eligible subject matter, nucleic Ghayur Alam∗ acid sequence, plant, public policy, revocation of patent, seed, ABSTRACT TRIPS. This Paper primarily deals with an unanswered substantial 1. INTRODUCTION question of patent law that has arisen in India. The question is whether an invented Nucleic Acid Sequence after being A substantial question of patent law (hereinafter, ‘question’) inserted into a seed or plant becomes part of the seed or the of great significance has arisen in India and is awaiting an plant. If answer is in the affirmative, said invention is not answer from Indian courts. The question is whether an patentable under Section 3(j) of the (Indian) Patents Act 1970, invented Nucleic Acid Sequence (NAS) after being inserted which excludes from patentability, inter alia, plants, seeds, or into a seed or plant becomes part of the seed or the plant? any part thereof. If answer is in the negative, said invention is Specifically, the question is whether the patent granted1 by patentable. Answer will determine the fate of patenting of the Indian Patent Office to Monsanto Technology LLC such inventions in the field of agro-biotechnology. Problem is (Monsanto) on transgenic variety of cottonseeds, containing that the question has moved forth and back like pendulum invented Bt. trait is valid or not? If the answer is in affirmative, from one court to another but in vain. This paper seeks to claimed invention is not patentable under the (Indian) address this question in light of the decisions of Indian courts.
    [Show full text]