Claims of Genetically-Modifed ‘superweed’ are dismissed

[Ian David]

Claims of GM-field ‘superweed’ are dismissed
* 15:08 26 July 2005
* NewScientist.com news service
* Rowan Hooper


A herbicide-resistant weed has been found in a field used for the UK’s farm-scale evaluations of genetically-modified crops but – despite the claims of several media reports – it is no GM “superweed”, say scientists.

Researchers at the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology in Dorset, UK, tested the herbicide glufosinate ammonium on plants in fields previously sowed with oilseed rape modified to carry a gene conferring resistance to the herbicide. But a single charlock plant carried on growing happily, raising fears that the gene for herbicide resistance had crossed over to the charlock and created a herbicide-resistant strain. But this is not proof that gene transfer has taken place, says Les Firbank, head of land use systems at the CEH.

“And even if it did occur, it’s not a superweed,” stresses Firbank, “because there’s no sign it can produce viable seeds.”

Gene transfer has been shown in the lab to be possible between GM oil seed rape – Brassica napus – and a closely related species, field mustard – Brassica rapa. But there is not yet proof that it occurred between oilseed rape and the more distantly related charlock, Sinapis arvensis.
Natural resistance

“There is no superweed and there never has been,” echoes Brian Johnson, ecological geneticist at English Nature, the nature advisers to the British government. “It’s more likely that herbicide resistance in charlock has evolved naturally.”

More:
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7729

[Moochy]

1. GMO Bummer dude

:hippie:

Franken-food, franken-weed. Whats' next Franken-al?

[applegrove]

2. Right. What will survive increased herbicide spraying? What will

that look like?

[Trillo]

3. No Proof! None! The answer is NO!

I believe them :sarcasm:

[Ian David]

5. I have no idea if they're telling the truth or not

Superweed?



I don't see an superweed...

[SteppingRazor]

4. Says you!

I can get ahold of some total dank shit that will change your beliefs about the existence of superweed, my friend. Totally. :smoke:

[SlipperySlope]

6. I don't understand why people worry about this so much...

Glyphosate (the active ingredient in RoundUp) was first marketed in 1974. As with almost all herbicides, it is expected that treated plants will eventually develop a natural resistance to this chemical.

It was later discovered that the common geranium was resistant to glyphosate. The gene that conferred this resistance was isolated and inserted into a variety of crop cultivars ("RoundUp Ready" crops).

Now, this gene *may* have been transferred from the crop plants to certain weed plants. Even if this gene transfer hasn't taken place, it certainly will sooner or later.

Meanwhile, there is good evidence that several species of weeds have spontaneously developed a resistance to glyphosate.

Either way, through gene transfer from GE crops, or through natural selection, certain weeds are going to develop a resistance.

We've had a very effective herbicide for the past 30 years. Some plants are beginning to show resistance. We probably have 10 to 50 more years ahead where glyphosate will still be of general utility in agriculture. This resistance will come no matter what we do, short of completely stopping use of glyphosate.

So why do people act like the sky is falling when this resistance begins to be expressed by the plants?

[Kraklen]

7. Yeah, it's fearmongering.

Look at where the source of the anti-GM fears comes from. It almost always leads back to Jeremey Rifkin, a pseudoscientific creationist rightwing nutjob.

[Pepperbelly]

8. highly misleading ... "superweed"

That wasn't what I was thinking about.