五千年(敝帚自珍)

主题:【原创】方舟子与转基因的安全 -- 花大熊

共:💬829 🌺2364 🌵118
分页树展主题 · 全看首页 上页
/ 56
下页 末页
    • 家园 美国又出转基因的新闻了

      华尔街日报报道, 美国大量种植BT转基因玉米的爱荷华州发现抗BT的玉米害虫. 有机农业用BT菌做杀虫剂用了几十年没有催出抗BT的害虫, 转基因用了几年就弄出来了。 其实,这是不少农业生态学家早就预警很有可能发生的。

      -------------

      http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111904009304576532742267732046.html

      Monsanto Corn Plant Losing Bug Resistance

      By SCOTT KILMAN

      Widely grown corn plants that Monsanto Co. genetically modified to thwart a voracious bug are falling prey to that very pest in a few Iowa fields, the first time a major Midwest scourge has developed resistance to a genetically modified crop.

      The discovery raises concerns that the way some farmers are using biotech crops could spawn superbugs.

      Iowa State University entomologist Aaron Gassmann's discovery that western corn rootworms in four northeast Iowa fields have evolved to resist the natural pesticide made by Monsanto's corn plant could encourage some farmers to switch to insect-proof seeds sold by competitors of the St. Louis crop biotechnology giant, and to return to spraying harsher synthetic insecticides on their fields.

      "These are isolated cases, and it isn't clear how widespread the problem will become," said Dr. Gassmann in an interview. "But it is an early warning that management practices need to change."

      The finding adds fuel to the race among crop biotechnology rivals to locate the next generation of genes that can protect plants from insects. Scientists at Monsanto and Syngenta AG of Basel, Switzerland, are already researching how to use a medical breakthrough called RNA interference to, among other things, make crops deadly for insects to eat. If this works, a bug munching on such a plant could ingest genetic code that turns off one of its essential genes.

      Monsanto said its rootworm-resistant corn seed lines are working as it expected "on more than 99% of the acres planted with this technology" and that it is too early to know what the Iowa State University study means for farmers.

      The discovery comes amid a debate about whether the genetically modified crops that now saturate the Farm Belt are changing how some farmers operate in undesirable ways.

      These insect-proof and herbicide-resistant crops make farming so much easier that many growers rely heavily on the technology, violating a basic tenet of pest management, which warns that using one method year after year gives more opportunity for pests to adapt.

      Monsanto is already at the center of this issue because of its success since the 1990s marketing seeds that grow into crops that can survive exposure to its Roundup herbicide, a glyphosate-based chemical known for its ability to kill almost anything green.

      These seeds made it so convenient for farmers to spray Roundup that many farmers stopped using other weedkillers. As a result, say many scientists, superweeds immune to Roundup have spread to millions of acres in more than 20 states in the South and Midwest.

      Monsanto became the first company to sell rootworm-resistant biotech corn to farmers in 2003. The seed contains a gene from a common soil microorganism called Bacillus thuringiensis, or Bt, from which crop biotechnology has been used to mine several genes for making insecticidal proteins.

      One of the genes Monsanto developed makes a crystalline protein called Cry3Bb1. It rips apart the gut of the rootworm but is harmless to mammals, birds and most beneficial insects. Competitors, which use other Bt genes to attack the rootworm, estimate that roughly one-third of the corn grown in the U.S. carries Monsanto's Cry3Bb1 gene.

      Monsanto said it generated world-wide sales of $4.26 billion from corn seed and biotechnology traits, about 40% of its overall sales, in its last full year.

      Until insecticide-producing corn plants arrived, Midwest farmers typically tried to keep pests like the corn borer and the rootworm in check by changing what they grew in a field each year, often rotating between corn and soybeans. That way, the offspring of corn-loving insects would starve the next year.

      Some farmers began to plant corn in the same field year after year. The financial incentive to grow corn has increased in recent years in part because the ethanol-fuel industry's exploding appetite for corn has helped to lift prices to very profitable levels for growers.

      According to Dr. Gassmann, the Iowa fields in which he found rootworms resistant to the Cry3Bb1 toxin had been producing Monsanto's Bt-expressing corn continuously for at least three years. Dr. Gassmann collected rootworm beetles from four Iowa cornfields with plant damage in 2009. Their larvae were then fed corn containing Monsanto's Cry3Bb1 toxin. They had a survival rate three times that of control larvae that ate the same corn.

      Dr. Gassmann found that Monsanto's Bt toxin still had some lethal impact on the larvae from the problem Iowa fields, and that the bugs were still highly susceptible to a rootworm-resistant corn plant from a competitor that uses a different Bt toxin, called Cry34/35Ab1.

      Scientists in other Farm Belt states are also looking for signs that Monsanto's Bt corn might be losing its effectiveness. Mike Gray, a University of Illinois entomologist, said he is studying rootworm beetles he collected in northwest Illinois earlier this month from fields where Monsanto's Bt-expressing corn had suffered extensive rootworm damage.

      The government requires that farmers who plant the genetically modified corn take certain steps aimed at preventing insects from developing resistance. Farmers are told to create a refuge for the bugs by planting non-modified corn in part of their fields. The refuge, which can be as much as 20% of a farmer's field, is supposed to reduce the chances that two toxin-resistant bugs mate and pass along that trait to their offspring.

      Dr. Gray said the confirmation of toxin-resistant rootworms in Iowa could force the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to revisit its policy of allowing the size of these insect refuges to shrink to as little as 5% of a cornfield as crop biotechnology companies begin to sell seed for corn plants that can make two different rootworm-killing toxins.

      Part of what has attracted some farmers to Monsanto's new SmartStax corn line is that it allows them to plant a smaller refuge. But one of the two anti-rootworm toxins in that variety is the Cry3Bb1 protein at the center of Dr. Gassmann's study.

      The EPA said it is too early to comment on any implications arising from Dr. Gassmann's paper.

      Write to Scott Kilman at [email protected]

      • 家园 国内早就不是新闻了。

        666都能对付的了,虫子们还怕小小的BT蛋白?

        充其量是时间长短的问题。

        好在国家也不糊涂。

        一个字,拖。

        拖到美国白老鼠的数据足够了,俺们再说话。

        没准也出个啥英雄,呵呵。

        说不定是你哦

    • 家园 同样是基因改变,为什么没人反杂交,辐射育种?

      反转的和中医FANS是一个调调,“凡是天然的都是好的”。

      按照反转的观点,辐射育种更应该猛烈的反,因为完全辐射育种是随机改变基因,完全不可控。

      • 本帖(曾)被判违规,无申诉/道歉帖,未达标。

        家园 你爸和你妈把你生出来算不算杂交育种。。。

        这和转基因有关系么。。。


        本帖一共被 1 帖 引用 (帖内工具实现)
      • 家园 这个楼里是聊转基因的,扯中医干嘛

        要扯,你自己开贴去。

        至于辐射育种是不是随机改变,阁下能否推荐两篇文献呢。

        据俺古老的课堂知识,辐射好像不是随机的。

        • 家园 辐射好像不是随机的?难道辐射能定向改变基因?
          • 家园 辐射不是随机,而只能说不定向

            完全随机和不定向之间略微有差异。

            比如辐射不能产生新的基因,而完全随机的话应该有可能。

            呵呵,有点文字游戏的味道


            本帖一共被 1 帖 引用 (帖内工具实现)
            • 家园 商榷一下

              “人工诱变的变异范围较大,往往超出一般的变异范围,甚至是自然界尚未出现或很难出现的新基因源。例如通过诱发处理可以产生不同类型的矮杆水稻种质。”

              作物育种学总论 中国农业出版社 张天真主编 2004年版 P93

              随机和定向我实在是被你们搞糊涂了。不同的诱变处理(物理,化学)有一定的偏好性,例如“射线处理容易引起染色体的断裂,其断裂往往在异染色质的区域,因此突变也发生在这些区域邻近的基因中。”同前,P109

              所以说,辐射是可以产生新基因的,但辐射诱变有一定的偏好性。


              本帖一共被 1 帖 引用 (帖内工具实现)
              • 家园 是不是那本绿色封面的,呵呵

                回答你这个问题有些风险,因为是活在当下的人物。

                试着说说吧,只能简单些了。

                辐射育种,产生新的表型,也就产生新的性状,这个是没问题滴。

                按照达尔文和孟德尔的推测,自然是属于新的基因型。

                但是多基因调控的现象越来越多,很多传统意义上说的所谓新基因型,实际上只是相同基因的不同表型。

                你说的矮杆,起码在不同的节段上是如此的。

                这本书,作为本科教材,估计下一次修订,会要修改了。

                我们对如何创造一个新的基因,目前近乎一无所知。

                大部分集中在定位与调控方面。

                斯坦福据说有个设计基因的计划。老实说,我猜还是挂羊头卖狗肉。

                诱变这一块,我不是很擅长。是不是有全新的基因出现,没有仔细的了解。据我所知,大部分新发现的基因,还是来自自然界。

                如果你有相关的实例,欢迎赐教

                仅供参考

                • 家园 “赐教”不敢当,大家互相学习

                  的确,目前诱变“新”基因都是把原有基因打断或者提前终止,破坏其原有功能导致了相关变化,我没有见到有诱变导致原来一个基因或无意义DNA片段产生了新的完全不相干功能的报道(理论上应该存在)。

                  但回到你们最初始的讨论话题,即诱变会不会导致食用突变后的水稻种子而产生某些对人体有负面影响,那是完全有可能的。诱变水稻籽粒中营养成分变化是相当大的,保不齐有什么诱变后的水稻里某种对人体有益氨基酸含量就降低了。

                  实际上水稻种子里含有植酸,而植酸易同铁、钙等金属离子或蛋白质结合排出体外,是多种动物的抗营养因子,因此是否可以理解为我们食用了上千年的水稻本身按照所谓“完全没有负面影响”的对转基因主粮的评价标准,本身就是不合格的?

分页树展主题 · 全看首页 上页
/ 56
下页 末页


有趣有益,互惠互利;开阔视野,博采众长。
虚拟的网络,真实的人。天南地北客,相逢皆朋友

Copyright © cchere 西西河