Ecological Engineering Viable Alternative to GM

Via SciDev.net:

9 December 2008

Ecological engineering could offer cheaper, more efficient long-term strategies for pest control than genetically modified (GM) crops, say Josef Settele and colleagues in Nature.

Ecological engineering in irrigated rice — controlling insect pests through landscape management — has almost eradicated insecticide use in the field sites of the International Rice Research Institute in the Philippines.

The authorsargue that, unlike GM rice, ecological engineering does not undermine the independence of farmers in developing countries by relying on big business for pest control.

In such a well-studied crop as rice, ecological engineering could be implemented immediately, they say. Future research should focus on developing sustainable management schemes for other key crops.

***

Link to full article in Nature

Nature 456, 570 (4 December 2008) | doi:10.1038/456570a; Published online 3 December 2008

Switch to ecological engineering would aid independence

Josef Settele¹, Jacobus Biesmeijer² & Riccardo Bommarco³

1. UFZ, Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research, Theodor-Lieser-Strasse 4, 06120 Halle, Germany
   Email: Josef.Settele@ufz.de
2. Institute of Integrative and Comparative Biology and Earth and Biosphere Institute, University of Leeds, Leeds LS2 9JT, UK
3. Department of Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, 75007 Uppsala, Sweden

Sir

In your News Feature 'Is China ready for GM rice?' (Nature 455, 850–852; 2008), you consider the merits of using genetically modified (GM) crops for pest control. But don't overlook the potential of ecological engineering, which can provide an important and undervalued approach to tackling agricultural problems.

Biological control in irrigated rice is a prime example of how increasing biodiversity can offer a key service to humans. Insect pests in rice are efficiently controlled by appropriate reduction of pesticide application together with landscape management (see, for example, M. J. Way and K. L. Heong Bull. Ent. Res. 84, 567–587; 1994). This strategy has led to almost complete abolition of insecticide application in places such as the research fields of the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in the Philippines.

It was the strikingly successful example of biodiversity and ecosystem services management by IRRI that persuaded us to recruit the institute into a large international research network (J. Settele et al. Nature 453, 850; 2008), with a view to developing sustainable land use on a global scale and refining ecological-engineering approaches.

Employing GM rice for pest control overlooks services available from natural resources that are not so dependent on big business and so do not undermine the independence of farmers and developing nations. Switching investment of resources from GM crops and pesticides to ecological engineering could be a more efficient long-term and low-cost strategy.

In such a well-studied crop as rice, ecological engineering could be implemented immediately. Research efforts should focus on developing sustainable management schemes for ecosystem services for other key crops, in China and worldwide.

Contributions to this page may be submitted to correspondence@nature.com. Please see the Guide to Authors at http://tinyurl.com/373jsv. Published contributions are edited.

China's GM ambition raises biosafety concerns

Source: Nature

6 November 2008

China's recent roll-out of a a US$3.7 billion research programme to develop genetically modified (GM) crops, particularly rice, has been hailed by supporters as the means to feed the country's swelling population.

But opposition remains strong due to concerns ranging from the health and environmental risks to regulation loopholes, writes Jane Qiu in Nature.

GM rice developers have shown that introducing Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) or other anti-insect genes can cut pesticide use, labour costs and yield losses caused by pests.

But ecologists such as David Andow, an entomologist at the University of Minnesota, say other pests have overtaken those targeted by Bt, and gene outflow through cross-pollination might be unavoidable.

Others warn that GM technology safeguards could be undermined by the monoculture of rice and lack of adjacent refuges, which would encourage resistant pests; the absence of effective labelling of GM seeds; and the illegal release of GM varieties from laboratories.

Worryingly, many stakeholders are being excluded from the agriculture ministry's biosafety evaluation process.

However, the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development warned in April that a narrow focus developing GM crops is misguided. "Without a concerted global effort to restore soil fertility, genetic modification would be futile," its president, Hans Herren, says.

Link to full article in Nature