Advertisement

Ecological Consequences of Genetically Modified Crops on Soil Biodiversity

  • Aditya Kumar Jha
  • Sukalyan ChakrabortyEmail author
  • Khushbu Kumari
  • Kuldeep Bauddh
Chapter
  • 22 Downloads

Abstract

Uncontrolled population raised an important concern of food security in front of the entire world. To increase the global food productivity, numerous technological interventions have been done, and development of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) especially crops was considered as a novel approach. Genetically modified crops (GMCs) are designed in such a way to fight against both biotic and abiotic stresses and to give a better yield than conventional crops. Several GMCs have been adopted in many countries of the world and many more are under trial. Like many other technologies, use of GMCs in the natural fields is found to have some ecological complications like their impacts on non-target organisms, loss of biodiversity, flow of transgene, etc. In this chapter, efforts have been done to explore the concept and role of GMCs in agriculture. Further, adverse impacts of GMCs on the environment, soil biodiversity, and non-target plants and animals have also been discussed thoroughly.

Keywords

Genetically modified crops Biodiversity Non-target organisms Soil organisms Gene flow 

Notes

Acknowledgment

Kuldeep Bauddh is thankful to Science and Engineering Research Board (SERB) Research Grant No. EEQ/2017/000476 for financial support.

References

  1. Actis LA, Tolmasky ME, Crosa JH (1999) Bacterial plasmids: replication of extra-chromosomal genetic elements encoding resistance to antimicrobial compounds. Front Biosci 4:43–62Google Scholar
  2. Aktar W, Sengupta D, Chowdhury A (2009) Impact of pesticides use in agriculture: their benefits and hazards. Interdiscip Toxicol 2(1):1–12PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Altieri MA (1999) The ecological role of biodiversity in agro-ecosystems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 74:19–31Google Scholar
  4. Ammann K (2005) Effects of biotechnology on biodiversity: herbicide tolerant and insect resistant GM crops. Trends Biotechnol 23(8):388–394PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Batista R, Oliveira MM (2009) Facts and fiction of genetically engineered food. Trends Biotechnol 27(5):277–286PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Benjamin A (2008) Pesticides: Germany bans chemicals linked to honeybee devastation. The GuardianGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernstein JA, Bernstein IL, Bucchini L, Goldman LR, Hamilton RG, Lehrer S, Rubin C, Sampson HA (2003) Clinical and laboratory investigation of allergy to genetically modified foods. Environ Health Perspect 111(8):1114–1121PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. Bevan M, Mayer K, White O, Eisen JA, Preuss D, Bureau T, Salzberg SL, Mewes HW (2001) Sequence and analysis of the Arabidopsis genome. Curr Opin Plant Biol 4:105–110PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Bohme H, Aulrich K, Daenicke R, Flachowsky G (2001) Genetically modified feeds in animal nutrition. 2nd communication: glufosinate tolerant sugar beets (roots and silage) and maize grains for ruminants and pigs. Arch Tierernahr 54(3):197–207PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Broll H, Zagon J, Butschke A, Leffka A, Spiegelberg A (2005) The fate of DNA of transgenic inulin synthesizing potatoes in pigs. J Anim Feed Sci 14(Suppl. 1):337–340Google Scholar
  11. Brown PB, Wilson KA, Jonker Y, Nickson TE (2003) Glyphosate tolerant canola meal is equivalent to the parental line in diets fed to rainbow trout. J Agric Food Chem 51(15):4268–4272PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Calsamiglia S, Hernandez B, Hartnell GF, Phipps R (2007) Effects of corn silage derived from a genetically modified variety containing two transgenes on feed intake, milk production, and composition, and the absence of detectable transgenic deoxyribonucleic acid in milk in Holstein dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 90(10):4718–4723PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Chainark P, Satoh S, Hirono SI, Aoki T, Endo M (2008) Availability of genetically modified feed ingredient: investigations of ingested foreign DNA in rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss. Fish Sci 74(2):380–390Google Scholar
  14. Chandler SF, Stevenson TW (2014) Gene flow and risk assessment in genetically modified crops. In: Pratap A, Kumar J (eds) Alien gene transfer in crop plants, vol 1. Springer, New York, pp 247–265Google Scholar
  15. Clark EA (2005) Environmental risks of genetic engineering. Euphytica 148:47–60Google Scholar
  16. D’Agnolo G (2005) GMO: human health risk assessment. Vet Res Commun 29(Suppl. 2):7–11PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Davies J, Honegger JL, Tencalla FG, Meregalli G, Brain P, Newman JR, Pitchford HF (2003) Herbicide risk assessment for non-target aquatic plants: sulfosulfuron—a case study. Pest Manag Sci 59(2):231–237PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Dawkar VV, Chougale AD, Barvkar V, Tanpure RS, Giri AP (2018) Genetically engineered crops: opportunities, constraints, and food security at a glance of human health, environmental impact, and food quality. In: Holban AM, Grumezescu AM (eds) Genetically engineered foods. Academic, New York, pp 311–334Google Scholar
  19. de Santis B, Stockhofe, Wal JM, Weesendorp E, Lalles JP, Dijk JV, Kok E, De Giacomo M, Einspanier R, Onori R, Brera C, Bikker P, Meulen JVD, Kleter G (2018) Case studies on genetically modified organisms (GMOs): Potential risk scenarios and associated health indicators. Food Chem Toxicol 117:36–65Google Scholar
  20. de Vendomois JS, Roullier F, Cellier D, Seralini GE (2009) A comparison of the effects of three GM corn varieties on mammalian health. Int J Biol Sci 5:706–726PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. de Vos CJ, Swanenburg M (2018) Health effects of feeding genetically modified (GM) crops to livestock animals: a review. Food Chem Toxicol 117:3–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Domingo JL (2007) Toxicity studies of genetically modified plants: a review of the published literature. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 47(8):721–733PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Dunfield KE, Germida JJ (2004) Impact of genetically modified crops on soil- and plant-associated microbial communities. J Environ Qual 33(3):806–815PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) (2008) Guidance on the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants. EFSA J 8:1879–1990Google Scholar
  25. Folmer J, Grant RJ, Milton CT, Beck J (2002) Utilization of Bt corn residues by grazing beef steers and Bt corn silage and grain by growing beef cattle and lactating dairy cows. J Anim Sci 80(5):1352–1361PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Gealy DR, Mitten DH, Rutger JN (2003) Gene flow between red rice (Oryza sativa) and herbicide-resistant rice (O. sativa): implications for weed management. Weed Technol 17:627–645Google Scholar
  27. Giddings G (2000) Modelling the spread of pollen from Lolium perenne. The implications for the release of wind-pollinated transgenics. Theor Appl Genet 100:971–974Google Scholar
  28. Giovannetti M, Sbrana C, Turrini A (2005) The impact of genetically modified crops on soil microbial communities. Riv Biol 98(3):393–417PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Glencross BJ, Curnow W, Hawkins GW, Kissil M, Peterson D (2003) Evaluation of the feed value of a transgenic strain of the narrow-leaf lupin (Lupinus angustifolius) in the diet of the marine fish, Pagrus auratus. Aquac Nutr 9(3):197–206Google Scholar
  30. Goujon A (2018) Human population growth. Encyclopedia of Ecology. March 2018Google Scholar
  31. Groot AT, Dicke M (2002) Insect-resistant transgenic plants in a multi-trophic context. Plant J 31:387–406PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Gustafson DI, Horak MJ, Rempel CB, Metz SG, Gigax DR et al (2005) An empirical model for pollen-mediated gene flow in wheat. Crop Sci 45:1286–1294Google Scholar
  33. Halver JE, Hardy RW (2002) Fish nutrition, 3rd ed. Academic, San Diego, CA. 824 pGoogle Scholar
  34. Herman RA, Zhuang M, Storer NP, Cnudde F, Delaney B (2019) Risk-Only assessment of genetically engineered crops is risky. Trends Plant Sci 24:158–168Google Scholar
  35. Hilbeck A (2002) Transgenic host plant resistance and nontarget effects. In Letourneau DK, Burrows BE (eds) Genetically engineered organisms. Assessing environmental and human health effects. CRC, Boca Raton, FL, pp 167–185. 438pGoogle Scholar
  36. Hyun Y, Bressner GE, Ellis M, Lewis AJ, Fischer R (2004) Performance of growing-finishing pigs fed diets containing. Roundup ready corn (event nk603), a non-transgenic genetically similar corn, or conventional corn lines. J Anim Sci 82:571–580PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA). Brief 53-2017Google Scholar
  38. Irtwange S (2006) Application of biological control agents in pre- and post-harvest operations. Agric Eng Int CIGR E J 8:1–10Google Scholar
  39. Ismail K, Azhar TNT, Yong CY, Aslan AS, Omar WZ, Majid I, Ajagbe AM (2012) Problems on commercialization of genetically modified crops in Malaysia. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 40:353–357Google Scholar
  40. Jialin Z, Juan H, Jianqun N, Qingwen Z, Xiaoxia L (2013) Influence of wind direction on pollen-mediated gene flow in transgenic insect-resistant cotton. Acta Ecologica Sinica 33:6803–6812Google Scholar
  41. Johannessen MM, Andersen BA, Jorgensen RB (2006) Competition affects gene flow from oil seed rape (♀) to Brassica rapa (♂). Heredity 96:360–367PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Key S, Ma JK-C, Drake PMW (2008) Genetically modified plants and human health. J R Soc Med 101(6):290–298PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Kramkowska M, Grzelak T, Czyzewska K (2013) Benefits and risks associated with genetically modified food products. Ann Agric Environ Med 20:413–419PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Ladics GS, Cressman RF, Herouet-Guicheney C, Herman RA, Privalle L, Song P, Ward JM, Mcclain S (2011) Bioinformatics and the allergy assessment of agricultural biotechnology products: industry practices and recommendations. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 60:46–53PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Lazebnik J, Arpaia S, Baldacchino F, Banzato P, Moliterni S, Vossen JH, Zande EM, Loon JJA (2017) Effects of a genetically modified potato on a non-target aphid are outweighed by cultivar differences. J Pest Sci 90:855–864Google Scholar
  46. Lu B, Snow AA (2005) Gene Flow from genetically modified rice and its environmental consequences. BioScience 55(8):669–678Google Scholar
  47. Lu B, Yang C (2009) Gene flow from genetically modified rice to its wild relatives: assessing potential ecological consequences. Biotechnol Adv 27:1083–1091Google Scholar
  48. Lusser M, Davies HV (2013) Comparative regulatory approaches for groups of new plant breeding techniques. New Biotechnol 30(5):437–446Google Scholar
  49. Lutz B, Wiedemann S, Einspanier R, Mayer J, Albrecht C (2005) Degradation of Cry1Ab protein from genetically modified maize in the bovine gastrointestinal tract. J Agric Food Chem 53:1453–1456PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Lynch JM, Benedetti A, Insam H, Nuti MP, Smalla K, Torsvik V, Nannipieri P (2004) Microbial diversity in soil: ecological theories, the contribution of molecular techniques and the impact of transgenic plants and transgenic microorganisms. Biol Fert Soils 40:363–385Google Scholar
  51. Macfadyen S, Davies AP, Zalucki MP (2015) Assessing the impact of arthropod natural enemies on crop pests at the field scale. Insect Sci 22:20–34PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Martinez-Ghersa MA, Worster CA, Radosevich SR (2003) Concerns a weed scientist might have about herbicide-tolerant crops: a revisitation. Weed Technol 17:202–210Google Scholar
  53. Mejia L, Jacobs CM, Utterback PL, Parsons CM, Rice D (2010) Evaluation of the nutritional equivalency of soybean meal with the genetically modified trait DP-305423-I when fed to laying hens. Poult Sci 89:2634–2639PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Mohanta RK, Singhal KK, Tyagi AK, Rajput YS, Prasad S (2010) Nutritional evaluation of transgenic cottonseed in the ration of lactating dairy cows. Trop Animal Health Prod 42:431–438Google Scholar
  55. Moon HS, Eda S, Saxton AM, Ow DW, Stewart CN (2011) An efficient and rapid transgenic pollen screening and detection method using flow cytometry. Biotechnol J 6:118–123PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Ndakidemi B, Mtei K, Ndakidemi PA (2016) The potential of common beneficial insects and strategies for maintaining them in bean fields of Sub Saharan Africa. Am J Plant Sci 7:425–436Google Scholar
  57. Neher DA (1999) Soil community composition and ecosystem processes: comparing agricultural ecosystems with natural ecosystems. Agrofor Syst 45:159–185Google Scholar
  58. Nicholls CI, Altieri MA (2013) Plant biodiversity enhances bees and other insect pollinators in agroecosystems, a review. Agron Sustain Dev 33:257–274Google Scholar
  59. O’Callaghan M, Glare TR, Burgess EPJ, Malone LA (2005) Effects of plants genetically modified for insect resistance on non-target organisms. Annu Rev Entomol 50:271–292PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Onkin SS, Velez JC, Totten AK, Stanisiewski EP, Hartnell GF (2003) Effects of feeding silage and grain from glycophosphate-tolerant or insect-protected corn-hybrids on feed intake, ruminal digestion, and milk composition in dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 86:1780–1788Google Scholar
  61. Paul MJ, Nuccio ML, Basu SS (2018) Are GM crops for yield and resilience possible? Trends Plant Sci 23(1):10–16PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Pellegrino E, Bedini S, Nuti M, Ercoli L (2018) Impact of genetically engineered maize on agronomic, environmental and toxicological traits: a meta-analysis of 21 years of field data. Sci Rep 8:3113PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. Phelinas P, Choumert J (2017) Is GM soybean cultivation in Argentina sustainable? World Dev 99:452–462Google Scholar
  64. Pu DQ et al (2014) Flower-visiting insects and their potential impact on transgene flow in rice. J Appl Ecol 51:1357–1365Google Scholar
  65. Ramesh T et al (2019) Soil organic carbon dynamics: impact of land use changes and management practices: a review. Adv Agron 156:1–107Google Scholar
  66. Rieben S, Kalinina O, Schmid B, Zeller SL (2011) Gene flow in genetically modified wheat. PLoS One 6(12).  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0029730
  67. Romeis J, Meissle M, Naranjo SE, Li Y, Bigler F (2014) The end of a myth—Bt(Cry1Ab) maize does not harm green lacewings. Front Plant Sci 5:1–10Google Scholar
  68. Sanden M, Berntssen MH, Krogdahl A, Herme GI, McKellep AM (2005) An examination of the intestinal tract of Atlantic salmon. Salmo salar L., parr fed different varieties of soy and maize. J Fish Dis 28:317–330PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Saxena D, Stotzky G (2000) Insecticidal toxin from Bacillus thuringiensis is released from roots of transgenic Bt corn in vitro and in situ. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 33:35–39PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Saxena D, Stotzky G (2001) Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) toxin released from root exudates and biomass of Bt corn has no apparent effect on earthworms, nematodes, protozoa, bacteria, and fungi in soil. Soil Biol Biochem 33:1225–1230Google Scholar
  71. Saxena D, Flores S, Stoztky G (2002) Bt toxin is released in root exudates from 12 transgenic corn hybrids representing three transformation events. Soil Biol Biochem 34:133–137Google Scholar
  72. Scheideler SE, Hileman RE, Weber T, Robeson L, Hartnell GF (2008) The in vivo digestive fate of the Cry3Bb1 protein in laying hens fed diets containing MON 863 corn. Poult Sci 87:1089–1097PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Schuler TH (2000) The impact of insect resistant GM crops on populations of natural enemies. Antenna 24:59–65Google Scholar
  74. Seralini GE, Clair E, Mesnage R, Gress S, Defarge N, Malatesta M, Hennequin D, de Vendomois JS (2014) Republished study: long-term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. Environ Sci Eur 26(14):1–17Google Scholar
  75. Shennan C (2008) Biotic interactions, ecological knowledge and agriculture. Phil Trans R Soc B 363(1492):717–739PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Sidhu RS, Hammond BG, Fuchs RL, Mutz J, Holden LR (2000) Glyphosate-tolerant corn: the composition and feeding value of grain from glyphosate-tolerant corn is equivalent to that of conventional corn (Zea mays). J Agric Food Chem 48:2305–2312PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Singh M, Tiwari DP, Kumar A (2003) Effects of feeding transgenic cotton seeds on nutrients utilization, milk production and its composition in lactating Murrah buffaloes. Buffalo J 19:117–126Google Scholar
  78. Tripathi MK, Mondal D, Somvanshi R, Karim SA (2011) Haematology, blood biochemistry and tissue histopathology of lambs maintained on diets containing an insect controlling protein (Cry1Ac) in Bt cotton seed. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr (Berl) 95:545–555Google Scholar
  79. Tudisco R, Lombardi P, Bovera F, d’Angelo D, Cutrignelli MI (2006) Genetically modified soyabean in rabbit feeding: detection of DNA fragments and evaluation of metabolic effects by enzymatic analysis. Anim Sci 82:193–199Google Scholar
  80. Verma SR (2013) Genetically modified plants: public and scientific perceptions. ISRN Biotechnol. Article ID 820671:11Google Scholar
  81. Wang Z, Zemetra RS, Hansen J, Mallory-Smith C (2001) The fertility of wheat jointed goatgrass hybrid and its backcross progenies. Weed Sci 49:340–345Google Scholar
  82. Warwick SI, Beckie HJ, Hall LM (2009) Gene flow, invasiveness, and ecological impact of genetically modified crops. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1168:72–99PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Welbaum GE, Sturz AV, Dong Z, Nowak J (2004) Managing soil microorganisms to improve productivity of agro-ecosystems. Crit Rev Plant Sci 23:175–193Google Scholar
  84. Yadav SK, Soni R, Rajput AS (2018) Role of microbes in organic farming for sustainable agro-ecosystem. In: Panpatte D, Jhala Y, Shelat H, Vyas R (eds) Microorganisms for green revolution. Microorganisms for sustainability, vol 7. Springer, Singapore, pp 241–252Google Scholar
  85. Yan S et al (2015) Pollen-mediated gene flow from transgenic cotton under greenhouse conditions is dependent on different pollinators. Sci Rep 5:15917PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  86. Zamana QU, Lia C, Chenga H, Hua Q (2018) Genome editing opens a new era of genetic improvement in polyploid crops. Crop J 7(2):141–150Google Scholar
  87. Zhang CJ, Yook MJ, Park HR, Lim SH, Kim JW, Nah G, Song HR, Jo BH, Roh KH, Park S, Kim DS (2018) Assessment of potential environmental risks of transgene flow in smallholder farming systems in Asia: Brassica napus as a case study in Korea. Sci Total Environ 640–641:688–695PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aditya Kumar Jha
    • 1
  • Sukalyan Chakraborty
    • 1
    Email author
  • Khushbu Kumari
    • 2
  • Kuldeep Bauddh
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringBirla Institute of Technology, MesraRanchiIndia
  2. 2.Department of Environmental ScienceCentral University of JharkhandRanchiIndia

Personalised recommendations