Page 10-Corn Talk, Lancaster Farming, Saturday, January 29, 2000
SIDELINE VIEW
OF THE
GMO DEBATE
The debate over the potential
for GMO (genetically modified
organism) com continues in the
national media, but here in Pen
nsylvania we seem to be mostly
on the sidelines on this issue.
I see our position similar to
that of a backup quarterback in
a football game; while all of the
action taking place now only
has an indirect effect on us, we
better pay attention because we
could be in the game quickly.
Generally our com markets,
which are mainly poultry and
livestock feed, have not sent
any signals to producers
regarding a market for non-
GMO com. As a result, most
producers in our area seem to
be continuing to purchase
GMO com and soybean seeds.
Let’s just review a few of the
issues surrounding the national
debate over GMOs.
One of the largest issues is
food safety. Are the products
from GMO derived foods as
safe as those from non-GMO
crops? Approved GMO pro
ducts have undergone a com
prehensive review by the FDA
on this issue and they have con
cluded that the food and feeds
produced from these crops ate
no different than from normal
com. This is based on an
analysis of the composition of
the grain, the properties of the
In 2001, Bt Corn Technology
(Continued from Page t)
eases and pests to come up with
effective management
methods. Voight demonstrated
how using a digital camera, a
picture of a disease or insect
can be taken. The picture can be
downloaded into a computer
and transmitted by e-mail using
a commercially available word
processor to plant entomolo
gists or pathologists quickly at
Penn State. The technology can
expedite information about a
pest or disease from the grower,
to Penn State experts, and those
experts can provide recommen
dations directly back to the
grower.
Recommendations about
R-k.iaiogt
—r a
17547
1225
Colebrook Rd.
BUYING EAR CORN,
SHELLED CORN & WHEAT
(717) 653-2510
1 (800) 654-2510
Spot or contract prices available
EAR CORN FOR SALE
DELIVERED TO THE FARM
ENNSYLVANIA MASTER
GROWERS ASSOCIATION
Between The Rows
Dr. Greg Roth
Penn State Agronomy Associate Professor
introduced compounds, and
feeding trials that have beat
conducted on animals.
Nevertheless, some ate ques
tioning the thoroughness of the
FDA approval process. Oppo
nents of the technology are sug
gesting that the FDA should
ban the use of GMO crops in
foods until long-tom testing
can be completed or at least
label products that contain
GMO crops.
The FDA has had a long
standing policy on labeling
stating that they “will requite
labeling if the composition dif
fers significantly from its con
ventional counterpart.” Up to
this point the FDA has not
endorsed labeling. Since such a
wide range of products contain
com, and since much of the
com supply in the U.S. contains
some GMOs, many consumer
food products on the market
contain GMO com. A decision
to label GMO foods by the
FDA would mean that that the
food industry would cither need
to label many products or begin
to secure large supplies of non-
GMO com.
In the last several weeks,
Midwest com processors have
been sending letters to com
producers that typically supply
them. In these letters, the com
panies note that while they sup
port the use of biotechnology,
they are concerned about the
market signals requiting non-
GMO com. They go on to sug-
treating can then come directly
from Penn State specialists.
gest that producers should plan
on segregating GMO and non-
GMO com next fall.
Hie issue of segregation
causes lots of headaches for
Midwest com producers. One
of the first issues is how they
can be sure their crop is GMO*
free. Testing procedures arc
being developed that should be
cost effective, quick, and rela
tively accurate for next fall’s
harvest. Possible sources of
contamination include cross
pollination from an adjacent
GMO crop, GMO seed in a
non-GMO hybrid, or incom
plete cleanout from combines,
elevators, trucks or grain bins.
The next issue would be
acceptable tolerance levels
would it be any detection, 1 per
cent, 2 percent or 5 percent
GMO in a shipment of grain?
Now, it’s not clear.
Liability is a concern as well.
If a mistake is made along the
way in the grain production or
delivery process, who is liable
for the contamination?
Another area of frustration
with producers is whether non-
GMO com will command a
premium. The marketplace will
likely determine this. If it does
command a premium, then
some corn users may be reluc
tant to make a switch to non-
GMO.
Another issue with the GMO
crops is their impact on the
environment. Will they cause
resistance in target species and
increased mortality of non
target species? Most scientists
agree that there is potential for
com borer resistance to Bt com
but it is remote.
A resistance management
program that consists of not
planting 20 percent of our com
acres to Bt com has been
adopted by the seed industry
and the National Com Growers
Association. This would allow
any resistant insects a greater
possibility of mating with sus
ceptible insects, thereby pro
ducing susceptible offspring
that could be controlled with Bt
com the next year. Otherwise a
resistant com borer might be
forced to mate with another
resistant com borer, and this
would increase the likelihood
of a resistant population deve
loping. Consequently, it’s
important to pay attention to
refiige requirements of Bt com.
The issue of increased mor
tality of non-target insects
came to light earlier this year
when an article was published
in Nature, a prestigious British
journal, that showed that Bt
com pollen was toxic to the lar
va of the Monarch butterfly.
This started quite a controversy
early in the summer. Numerous
entomologists around the coun
try began to look at the issue. In
November they met and shared
their findings with the press.
According to Dr. Dennis
Calvin, Pom State’s extension
entomologist, a few of the con
ference conclusions were that
1. Bt com pollen does have
some toxicity to Monarch lar
vae; 2. toxic levels of com pol
len do not occur far from com
fields; and 3. it is likely the Bt
com pollen is not a significant
V-Link Feeding System
Stainless Steel Nipple Drinker
Ml
OF AMERICA
P.O. Box 39 • Register, GA 30452 • 912.681.2763 • Fax- 911681.1096
Contact Sheldon Goodine • Regional Manager • 1,800.683,2634
mentality factor to Monarch
butterfly larva. Thus the
Monarch issue was probably
overblown in the press but there
do appear to be some effects of
the pollen on off-target
organisms.
There are many other issues
in the GMO debate. With the
large overhead needed to deve
lop these crops, the genetics of
farm seeds ate concentrated in
the hands of a few companies.
Is this good or bad? If we ban
OMOs or make it difficult to
produce and market them, are
we sacrificing what could be
one of the greatest agricultural
innovations of all time? Who
will fund the application of
QMO technologies for self
pollinated crops such as rice
and wheat in the less developed
countries?
All of these ate legitimate
questions and each of us has to
develop our own position on
these issues. In some ways this
debate is not that much diffe
rent that others that have
occurred with the introduction
of other new technologies: tele
vision, nuclear power, the
Internet to name a few.
Take time to research and
monitor this tope as it unfolds.
Visit my webpage for more
links to other sources of infor
mat i o n
http://www.agronomy.psu.edu
/Extcnsion/Com Management/
ComManagementJitm
Keep informed. That way
you’ll be ready if we get called
in the game.
Egg Saver System
Maxi-Dry
Manure Drying System
Available in 2,3,4,5,6,7 & 8 decks