Cry1Ab to be found everywhere ?

[William Gaatjes]

I have learned in the past that the "natural" by bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis produced version breaks down quickly.
But it seems that the version produced by bt corn is persistent and does not breakdown.

Does anybody know what the real story is here ?

Are only traces of the protein found ? Or do the bt corn produced proteins not breakdown ?



http://www.physorg.com/news204819190.html

Genetically-modified plants are a mainstay of large-scale agriculture in the American Midwest, where corn is a dominant crop. In 2009, more than 85% of U.S. corn crops were genetically modified to repel pests and/or resist herbicide exposure. Corn engineered to release an insecticide that wards off the European corn borer, commonly referred to as Bt corn, comprised 63% of crops. The tissue of these plants has been modified to express insecticidal proteins, one of which is commonly known as Cry1Ab.

Following an assessment of 217 stream sites in Indiana, the paper's authors found dissolved Cry1Ab proteins from Bt corn present in stream water at nearly a quarter of the sites, including headwater streams. Eighty-six percent of the sampled sites contained corn leaves, husks, stalks, or cobs in their channels; at 13% of these sites corn byproducts contained detectable Cry1Ab proteins. The study was conducted six months after crop harvest, indicating that the insecticidal proteins in crop byproducts can persist in the landscape.

Using these data, U.S. Department of Agriculture land cover data, and GIS modeling, the authors found that all of the stream sites with detectable Cry1Ab insecticidal proteins were located within 500 meters of a corn field. Furthermore, given current agricultural land use patterns, 91% percent of the streams and rivers throughout Iowa, Illinois, and Indiana —some 159,000 miles of waterways—are also located within 500 meters of corn fields.

Rosi-Marshall comments, "Our research adds to the growing body of evidence that corn crop byproducts can be dispersed throughout a stream network, and that the compounds associated with genetically-modified crops, such as insecticidal proteins, can enter nearby water bodies."

After corn crops are harvested, a common agricultural practice is to leave discarded plant material on the fields. This "no-till" form of agriculture minimizes soil erosion, but it also sets the stage for corn byproducts to enter nearby stream channels.

Rosi-Marshall concludes, "The tight linkage between corn fields and streams warrants further research into how corn byproducts, including Cr1Ab insecticidal proteins, potentially impact non-target ecosystems, such as streams and wetlands." These corn byproducts may alter the health of freshwaters. Ultimately, streams that originate in the Corn Belt drain into the Mississippi River and the Great Lakes.

Provided by Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies

 

[Wizlem]

I would think that proteins are proteins and you aren't changing them even if they are produced by genetically modified corn or naturally evolved bacteria. The major difference in my mind would be the quantity produced. Additionally, isn't the bacterium that produces this protein found in soil which would mean this protein is all over the place? I'd also think that 500 meters or about 1/3 of a mile is a long way to go and no one mentioned if there was a cornfield near a stream that didn't have trace proteins.

 

[William Gaatjes]

Well, that is the strange thing. From reading and seeing documentaries, i have understood that the bacterial version breaks down because of the sun light. It might be the uv component of sun light. I am guessing because i do not know for sure but it seems probable. Assuming that it is true that the bacterial version breaks down so fast and easily, why does it seem to be the case that this is not happening with the bt corn version of the protein ? Something is wrong here. Since i do not have evidence that this is the case, i will not claim that the bt corn version is different. But i am interested in what is going on here.

To give you an idea, the bacteria Bacillus anthracis that produces antrax spores is closely related to the bt bacteria. I have understood that not only the plasmids differ but i am sure there are some more differences. I have understood (although i could be wrong) that the plasmids carry the information to produce the cryproteins in the case of bt bacteria and anthrax in the case of the Bacillus anthracis. It seems that anthrax spores can exist for decades in the soil. This worries me. It is too early to draw any conclusion i know. But i am worried since there is no legislation for gm food in the USA. In Europe people still have a choice but that will not be forever.

 

[Wizlem]

I don't really worry about these things but then again I guess I'm a GMO industry insiderD:. I do find it disturbing that they only found detectable protein in 13% of the corn byproducts, which I assume is far less than the percentage of corn with the bt trait, and yet they found dissolved protein in a quarter of the sites they checked.

 

[William Gaatjes]

I don't really worry about these things but then again I guess I'm a GMO industry insiderD:. I do find it disturbing that they only found detectable protein in 13% of the corn byproducts, which I assume is far less than the percentage of corn with the bt trait, and yet they found dissolved protein in a quarter of the sites they checked.

That is something that should be looked into.

The problem i have with unregulated GMO tech, is that some people know what they are doing but there also exist people in the business that want to make money without looking at the consequences. I do not have this GMO tech is evil mantra, i favour research of it. But i do know that some companies do not have a clean bill of honesty. It is all about the money, dum dum dadadum dum for them. I am waiting for the next (hiv infected donor blood sale)...