IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v26y2006i3p845-858.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Genetically Engineered Plants, Endangered Species, and Risk: A Temporal and Spatial Exposure Assessment for Karner Blue Butterfly Larvae and Bt Maize Pollen

Author

Listed:
  • Robert K. D. Peterson
  • Steven J. Meyer
  • Amy T. Wolf
  • Jeffrey D. Wolt
  • Paula M. Davis

Abstract

Genetically engineered maize (Zea mays) containing insecticidal endotoxin proteins from Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) δ‐endotoxin proteins has been adopted widely in the Midwestern United States. The proteins are toxic to several lepidopteran species and because a variety of maize tissues, including pollen, may express the endotoxins, the probability of exposure to nontarget species, including endangered species, needs to be understood. The objective of this study was to assess the potential temporal and spatial exposure of endangered Karner blue butterfly larvae (Lycaeides melissa samuelis) to Bt maize pollen in Wisconsin using probabilistic exposure techniques and geographic information systems analysis. Based on degree‐day modeling of butterfly phenology and maize pollen shed, there is some potential for temporal exposure of larvae to maize pollen. However, in the majority of years and locations, maize pollen shed most likely will occur after the majority of larval feeding on wild lupine (Lupinus perennis). The spatial analysis indicates that some Karner blue butterfly populations occur in close proximity to maize fields, but in the vast majority of cases the butterfly's host plant and maize fields are separated by more than 500 m. A small number of potential or existing Karner blue butterfly sites are located near maize fields, including sites in two of the four counties where temporal overlap is most likely. The exposure assessment indicates that these two counties should receive the highest priority to determine if Karner blue butterfly larvae are actually at risk and then, if needed, to reduce or prevent exposure.

Suggested Citation

  • Robert K. D. Peterson & Steven J. Meyer & Amy T. Wolf & Jeffrey D. Wolt & Paula M. Davis, 2006. "Genetically Engineered Plants, Endangered Species, and Risk: A Temporal and Spatial Exposure Assessment for Karner Blue Butterfly Larvae and Bt Maize Pollen," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(3), pages 845-858, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:26:y:2006:i:3:p:845-858
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00763.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00763.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00763.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John E. Losey & Linda S. Rayor & Maureen E. Carter, 1999. "Transgenic pollen harms monarch larvae," Nature, Nature, vol. 399(6733), pages 214-214, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Grant Lewison, 2007. "The reporting of the risks from genetically modified organisms in the mass media, 2002–2004," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 72(3), pages 439-458, September.
    2. Millstone, Erik, 2009. "Science, risk and governance: Radical rhetorics and the realities of reform in food safety governance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(4), pages 624-636, May.
    3. Pardey, Philip G. & Koo, Bonwoo & Drew, Jennifer & Nottenburg, Carol, 2012. "The Evolving Landscape of IP Rights for Plant Varieties in the United States, 1930-2008," Staff Papers 119346, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    4. Ashkan Pakseresht & Anna Kristina Edenbrandt & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2021. "Genetically modified food and consumer risk responsibility: The effect of regulatory design and risk type on cognitive information processing," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-21, June.
    5. Pierre-Benoit Joly & Claire Marris, 2003. "Les Américains ont-ils accepté les OGM ? Analyse comparée de la construction des OGM comme problème public en France et aux Etats-Unis," Cahiers d'Economie et Sociologie Rurales, INRA Department of Economics, vol. 68, pages 11-45.
    6. Finucane, Melissa L. & Holup, Joan L., 2005. "Psychosocial and cultural factors affecting the perceived risk of genetically modified food: an overview of the literature," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(7), pages 1603-1612, April.
    7. Pierre-Benoit, Joly & Claire, Marris, 2003. "Les Américains ont-ils accepté les OGM ? Analyse comparée de la construction des OGM comme problème public en France et aux Etats-Unis," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 68.
    8. H. Hu & M. Xie & Y. Yu & Q. Zhang, 2013. "Transgenic Bt cotton tissues have no apparent impact on soil microorganisms," Plant, Soil and Environment, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 59(8), pages 366-371.
    9. Jeroen C.J.M. van den Bergh & Justin M. Holley, 2001. "An Environmental-Economic Assessment of Genetic Modification of Agricultural Crops," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 01-025/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    10. Zinatul Zainol & Rohaida Nordin & Frank Akpoviri, 2015. "Mandatory labelling of genetically modified (GM) foods," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 199-216, May.
    11. Springer, A. & Mattas, Konstadinos & Papastefanou, G. & Tsioumanis, Asterios, 2002. "Comparing Consumer Attitudes towards Genetically Modified Food in Europe," 2002 International Congress, August 28-31, 2002, Zaragoza, Spain 24858, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Debdatta Dobe & Rohini Sen, 2009. "Genetically Modified Organism Trade Route and Biosafety-Is It a Failing Synthesis?," American Journal of Economics and Business Administration, Science Publications, vol. 1(3), pages 206-212, September.
    13. B. Wang & H. Shen & X. Yang & T. Guo & B. Zhang & W. Yan, 2013. "Effects of chitinase-transgenic (McChit1) tobacco on the rhizospheric microflora and enzyme activities of the purple soil," Plant, Soil and Environment, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 59(6), pages 241-246.
    14. Mozumdar, Lavlu & Islam, Mohammad & Saha, Sumitra, 2012. "Genetically modified organisms and sustainable crop production: A critical review," Journal of the Bangladesh Agricultural University, Bangladesh Agricultural University Research System (BAURES), vol. 10.
    15. Holst, Niels & Lang, Andreas & Lövei, Gabor & Otto, Mathias, 2013. "Increased mortality is predicted of Inachis io larvae caused by Bt-maize pollen in European farmland," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 126-133.
    16. Buttel, Frederick H. & Merrill, Jeanne & Chen, Lucy & Goldberger, Jessica & Hurley, Terrance M., 2005. "Bt Corn Farmer Compliance with Insect Resistance Management Requirements: Results from the 2002 Minnesota and Wisconsin Farm Polls," Staff Papers 13659, University of Minnesota, Department of Applied Economics.
    17. Artuso, A., 2003. "Risk perceptions, endogenous demand and regulation of agricultural biotechnology," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 131-145, April.
    18. Mads Greaker & Yuyu Chen, 2006. "Can voluntary product-labeling replace trade bans in the case of GMOs?," Discussion Papers 485, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    19. Felloni, Fabrizio & Gilbert, John & Wahl, Thomas I. & Wandschneider, Philip, 2003. "Trade policy, biotechnology and grain self-sufficiency in China," Agricultural Economics, Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 173-186, May.
    20. Magdalena Pawełkowicz & Bartłomiej Zieniuk & Pawel Staszek & Arkadiusz Przybysz, 2024. "From Sequencing to Genome Editing in Cucurbitaceae: Application of Modern Genomic Techniques to Enhance Plant Traits," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-41, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:26:y:2006:i:3:p:845-858. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.