Dane Yu

Prof Flower
Life Unlimited?
10 Feb 2015
The natural effects of GMOs on the environment and how they alter our agricultural
practices.
For thousands of years, Homo sapiens have been cultivating, selectively breeding and
growing crops for consumption. Through selective breeding, we are able to control the gene flow
of many organisms, like plant and animals, to show the desirable traits that benefit humans the
most. In recent decades, the population boom has been a cause for concern in food production as
each generation puts more strain onto the agriculture and the agriculture practices we currently
use, in turn putting pressure on the environment and the stable ecosystems that it houses. Luckily
for us, we have the technology and research capabilities to develop genetically modified
organisms quickly and efficiently to suit our demands. However, we must consider how these
new modified crops will affect the environment either directly, or indirectly through humans.
With the wide variety of GM crops at hand, there are many differing perspectives to their effect
on the environment and surrounding ecosystems as well as farming practices. In order to
understand the wide complexity of outcomes, we must study each type of GM to assess the
environmental impact. With most modified crops being focused on either insect resistant or
herbicide resistance modification, the two modifications likely have the largest current impact on
the environment and farming practices. In this essay I will be discussing the potential and already
visible effects of the two strains of modified crops on the environment and on agricultural
practices thus far, paying particular attention to the GMOs interaction with nature, or their
interactions with humans to alter nature through the increase or decrease use of chemicals such
as pesticides and herbicides
Through the introduction of new crop species, or novel crops altogether to a region, there
is no doubt agricultural practices change with the new variables. In the 1900's, with the
introduction of herbicides and pesticides, agricultural practices shifted once again, favoring those
with access to the chemicals and generating plentiful income to those who developed them. With
access to these new chemicals, not only was farming practice altered, but through their use, the
environment was altered as well. However humans use to proceed in agriculture, it will

"inevitably have an impact on the environment" in one way or another and in many cases, in
many different ways (Dale 567). In the past decade, we see another advancement that will alter
farming practices and the ecosystems that sustain those processes. The production, research, and
introduction of GMO's into everyday farming will have a profound impact on the environment in
many differing ways. Some of those effects will be beneficial to the ecosystems and humans that
rely on the crop. However, other effects can be detrimental to the biodiversity in that area as well
as surrounding areas. Regardless of the perspective or lens the effect on the environment is seen
through, there is consideration to be had about "what constitutes as acceptable or unacceptable
environmental impact" (Dale 567).
The introduction of Roundup Ready crops into the United States has lead to changes in
the farming industry in response to the new GM seeds, as well as concerns from many scientists
and common people alike about the possible long term effects of the modified seeds on the
surrounding environment and ecosystem. Roundup Ready crops are those that are genetically
modified to be resistant to the herbicide chemical glyphosphate, which is the active ingredient in
the widely popular herbicide Roundup. Monsanto, the manufacturer of Roundup as well as the
Roundup Ready line of seeds introduce these genetically modified seeds in 1996 (Delano). Since
then, Monsanto has introduced and patented soybeans, corn, canola, sugar beets and alfalfa with
the Roundup Ready gene (Delano). However, many are concerned that these newly modified
seeds allow farmers to freely spray vast amounts of Round up in their fields since it will do little
to no damage to their desired crop if they are planting these GMOs. Not only could this lead to
Roundup contaminating the ground water and making it's way into streams, but could also
contribute to "less weed diversity and ecosystem complexity" (Dale 571). While the farmers of
these plants may view the weed diversity reduction as a godsend, they do not consider the
massive ecosystem shift that would cause. Many insects use plants as resources for food or
breeding. Without the proper plants, the insect would also suffer and the chain reaction would
cause the whole ecosystem to suffer because of the disturbance in the food chain.
The prolonged continued use of Roundup Ready crops also contributes to concerns about
the desired crop becoming weeds themselves. Because the Roundup Ready trait makes these
crops more suited to their environment, many worry that they may thrive so well in their
environment and many others to acquire weed like traits and show invasiveness of surrounding
areas (Dale 569). This is a cause for alarm because the use of Roundup has already decreased

competition for these crops. If the crops become invasive, it would further deteriorate the
ecosystem diversity because they would out compete any existing weeds in the area. Without
careful control on the use of the GM Roundup Ready crops in commercial farming use, the
desirable traits could quickly turn against us. Not only could the novel genes in the Roundup
Ready crops turn against us, but there is the possibility of horizontal gene transfer within the
region. Horizontal gene transfer refers to the possibility of the new gene being accidentally
incorporated into another plants DNA sequence through any number of means. It could be
through cross fertilization or bacteria. However, if the genes were to enter the weed population,
then weeds would soon have the Roundup Ready advantage as well, allowing them to grow
freely in the crop fields.
Although many are concerned, and rightly so, about the possible increased use of
Roundup herbicide due to the genetically modified cash crops, research indicates that the use of
GM crops with herbicide resistance may have lead to positive impacts on the environment. Due
to the introduction of Roundup Ready crops into commercial growing use, farmers have changed
some of their practices to accommodate. Namely, farmers began to use more and more
glyphosphate herbicide in lieu of many others. In the decade that Roundup Ready crops have
been widely used, glyphosphate herbicide has been "replacing other herbicides with less
favorable environmental profiles" (Phipps 4). While it is accurate to say the these GM crops
encourage farmers to use herbicide, their choice of herbicide is less harmful to the environment
than others that could be used. It is illogical and unreasonable to expect farmers to give up all
herbicide use completely since agriculture in the US is so dependent on their use. However, if
their use is reduced and chemicals that are linked to adverse ecological effects are reduced, the
increased use of glyphosphate may be a small price to pay in the larger scheme of things. This
causes a dilemma for us a consumers and possible supporters or proponents against the use of
these herbicides because on the one hand, and increased amount of herbicide is detrimental to the
environment regardless of how much impact the herbicide true has on the ecosystem, whether
that is small or large. However, perhaps the changing preference of Roundup herbicide is a step
in the right direction if farmers are encouraged to phase out more harmful herbicides. According
to a study on the effects of GM crops in the first 9 years of use, this seems to be the case, state
that the "largest environmental gain has been associated with the adoption of GM Ht (herbicide
tolerant) soybeans" (Brookes, GM Crops 193).

Similarly, the introduction of genetically modified plants that produce a natural

insecticide has caused controversy about its potential dangers, but in looking at the dangers, we
must also gain a perspective on the potential good. Insecticide producing crops were also created
in the 1990's and done through genetic modification. Scientists inserted genes from a bacteria
that naturally produced an insecticide into desired crops (Bt GM). These crops are known as Bt
crops. Today, Bt crops are widely used and many cotton, potato, and corn plants have this
modification (Bt GM). One concern about Roundup Ready crops also pertains to Bt crops and
that is the potential loss of ecosystem diversity. The insecticide that Bt crops contains is only
targeted to unwanted pests. However, it is difficult to target only one or a few unwanted
organisms without detrimental effects to others (Dale 567). Friendly insects and beneficial ones
that are closely related to the targeted pests often also suffer because of their similar physiology.
The targeting of specific pests also disturbs the ecological food chain in that area since the pests
were food for other animals causing a ripple effect that is detrimental to the food chain.
However, although these natural pesticides made by Bt crops is slightly detrimental, we must
compare that to the widespread use of pesticides without the use of these crops. Often pesticides
are in much higher concentrations than that found in fields of Bt crops, whether that be corn,
cotton, or soybean. Chemical sprayed pesticides also kill a wider range of insects, both pest and
beneficial ones. The spraying of pesticides has also been linked directly to the deaths of
numerous birds (Phipps 3). The Environmental Protection Agency or EPA has states that
Carbofuron kills 1-2 million birds/year (Phipps 3). With the use of Ht crops we can prevent
these deaths and the toll on the ecosystem that they cause. Often chemical pesticides also disrupt
the natural controls of the food chain more and allow more chances for a secondary pest to arise
with the eradication of the first (Dale 567). This could be due to both the mortality rate of birds
in the areas of pesticide use in addition to possible pesticide tolerant pests overtaking the area.
Other migrating pests can also take up residence in plots of agricultural land who otherwise
wouldnt if primary pests are eradicated. If these secondary pests begin to destroy crops at a
different time than the primary pests, farmers may not think to spray pesticides during those few
weeks, resulting in yield loss. Thus traditional pesticide use may well be more dangerous and
less effective than the use of these GM Bt plants.
Crops containing the Bt gene also impact the farming practices of those growing the
crops due to the decreased need to spray pesticides in the fields. This change in practice and need

is highly beneficial not only to the environment but also to the farmers and workers themselves.
According to the WHO, pesticides contribute to 500,000 cases of pesticide poisoning worldwide
yearly which results in about 5,000 deaths (Phipps 2). In the United States alone, the EPA,
Environmental Protection Agency, reports 10,000 to 20,000 cases of pesticide poisonings a year
in agricultural workers (Phipps 2). Thus the effect of having access and the utilization of Bt crops
in agriculture is actually very beneficial to human life and health thus far. Although these
pesticides are still in the environment and still being used regularly, the introduction of Bt crops
has also lead to a decrease in pesticides by 172 million kg since 1996 (Brookes, GM Crops 193).
To put this into perspective, the insecticide use was decreased by 70% on plots were Bt crops
were grown compared to plots with conventional seeds (Qaim 900). This dramatic decrease in
insecticide use shows the profound interaction between GMO crops and agriculture practices that
has an impact on both humans and the surrounding ecosystem. Not only is this reduction in
chemical use beneficial to the environment, but it is also cost saving. The use of Bt crops has
saved farmers $30 per hectare on average (Qaim 900).
In looking at the effects of each of these two modified genes in commercial crops we see
that the introduction of them has impacted the environment, or nature, in certain ways. But they
have also driven us humans to interact with nature differently. To assess the benefits and costs of
each newly modified crop, we have to understand how they interact with nature, and how they
cause us to change how we interact with nature. The environment cannot exists in and of itself, it
is not a vacuum (Dubock). We cannot simply blame or shun GM crops for their effects on the
environment, good or bad. We must take responsibility for how GM crops change our
agricultural practices for worse or for better. Many of these crops, if used correctly, would be a
healthy addition to an ecosystem in place of all the baggage of conventional farming with
increased chemical use. But in other instances, perhaps GM crops will do more harm than good.
As for concerns, we cannot see into the future about how GM crops will affect the environment
in the long run. But perhaps simply lowering the chemical use by farmers across the globe is a
good first step in the right direction to preserving our natural ecological spaces. In these cases of
Roundup Ready and Bt crops, I would say the benefits currently outweigh the costs.

Works Cited:
Brookes, Graham, and Peter Barfoot. "Global Impact of Biotech Crops: Socio-Economic and
Environmental Effect in the First Ten Years of Commercial Use."The Journal of
Agrobiotechnology Management and Economics 9 (2006): 139-151. Web. 1 Feb. 2015.
Brookes, Graham, and Peter Barfoot. "GM Crops: The Global Economic and Environmental
Impact- The First Nine Year 1996-2004." The Journal of Agrobiotechnology Management and
Economics 8 (2005): 187-196. Web. 3 Feb. 2015.
"Bt GM (genetically modified) crops." University of California San Diego, n.d. Web. 4 Feb.
2015.
Conner, Anthony J., Travis R. Glare, and Jan-Peter Nap. "The release of genetically modified
crops into the environment." The Plant Journal 33.1 (2003): 19-46. Web. 3 Feb. 2015.
Dale, Philip J., Belinda Clarke, and Eliana M. Fontes. "Potential for the environmental impact of
transgenic crops." Nature Biotechnology 220 (2002): 567-574. Web. 1 Feb. 2015.

Delano, Maggie. "Roundup Ready Crops: Cash crop or third world savior?." web.mit.edu. n.d.
Web. 4 Feb. 2015.
Dubock, Adrian. "The politics of Golden Rice." GM Crops & Food 5.3 (2014): 210-222. Web. 28
Jan. 2015.
Phipps, R.H, and J.R Park. "Environmental Benefits of Genetically Modified Crops: Global and
European Perspectives on Their Ability to Reduce Pesticide Use."Journal of Animal and Feed
Sciences 11 (2002): 1-18. Web. 1 Feb. 2015.
Qaim, Matin, and David Zilberman. "Yield Effects of Genetically Modified Crops in Developing
Countries." Science 299 (2003): 900-902. Web. 1 Feb. 2015.