GE -Two studies, no advantages

[GEN lists <genetics@gn.apc.org>]

1Comparision of weed management strategies with Roundup 
Ready corn  - University of Kentucky
2Agriculture Canada Study questions higher-yield theory on genetically 
modified canola 
====================================================
1
TITLE: Comparision of weed management strategies with Roundup 
Ready corn 
SOURCE: University of Kentucky, USA, by J.A.Ferrell & W.W.Witt 
<http://www.uky.edu/Agriculture/Agronomy/files/news>http://www.uky.edu/Agri
culture/Agronomy/files/news/ 
agvl32_2.pdf 
DATE: January 2000
----------------- archive: <http://www.gene.ch/>http://www.gene.ch/
------------------

Comparision of weed management strategies with Roundup Ready corn 
(For full text and tables go to http://www.uky.edu/Agriculture/ 
Agronomy/files/news/agvl32_2.pdf)
Introduction
Corn weed management during the past several years in Kentucky 
has centered around two herbicide families, the chloroacetamides 
(Dual, Frontier, Harness, Micro-Tech, Surpass) and the s- 
triazines (AAtrex, Bladex, Princep). These products have been 
used widely because they offer acceptable, full season control of 
many common warm season annual weeds at a reasonable price. This 
combination has been so popular that several premixtures that 
contain these types of herbicides (Bicep II, Bullet, Guardsman, 
Harness Xtra, Surpass 100, FulTime) are used commonly used in 
Kentucky. The key to this efficacious and economic program is 
atrazine because it controls most annual broadleaf species that 
exist in Kentucky corn production with minimal economic 
investment.
In addition to a good foundation soil-applied herbicide program 
for controlling annual weeds, a postemergence application of 
nicosulfuron (Accent) is often needed to help manage johnsongrass 
(Sorghum halepense). Including nicosulfuron as a part of a weed 
control program increases costs and may increase risk of corn 
injury due to antagonism with certain insecticides or untimely 
applications.
Monsanto released Roundup Ready corn, which is a transgenic crop 
that is tolerant to glyphosate, in the spring of 1998. Glyphosate 
is the active ingredient in several products including Roundup 
Ultra and has long been used as a non-selective burndown 
herbicide for no-till production of grain crops. The Roundup 
Ready technology allows corn growers the opportunity to use 
Roundup Ultra as a tool for managing most annual grass and 
broadleaf weeds as well as johnsongrass and other perennial 
species.
Although Roundup Ultra was known to control a wide range of weedy 
species, there were questions regarding the economics of this 
technology relative to traditional standard herbicide programs 
for controlling warm-season annual weeds. The technology fee of 
$6 per acre for the Roundup Ready seed was an expense associated 
with a Roundup weed control program. Furthermore, it was not 
known if one or two applications of Roundup Ultra would be needed 
to provide weed control comparable to other products.
The first objective of this research was to compare the 
effectiveness of Roundup Ready³ technology with other herbicide 
options for managing johnsongrass. A second objective was to 
compare the profitability of Roundup Ready technology with 
traditional herbicide programs for managing warm-season annual 
weeds.
[...]
Summary
These results demonstrated that Roundup Ultra can be used 
alone, or sequentially with other products, to deliver effective 
and consistent weed control over a range of weed species and 
environmental conditions. There were no differences in return 
above fixed and variable costs between Roundup Ultra and any of 
the other herbicide programs compared in this study. Roundup 
Ready technology provides another weed management alternative 
for Kentucky corn growers.
The two years in which these studies were conducted were very 
different. Growing conditions in 1998 were excellent for corn 
production resulting in excellent yields in Lexington and 
Princeton while rainfall was lacking at both locations in 1999 
and corn yield was reduced greatly. The extremes in growing 
conditions provided an opportunity to evaluate Roundup Ready 
technology under the "best" and "worst" cases that will be 
encountered in Kentucky. Consistent weed control was obtained 
with all herbicide treatments in both years. 
=========================================================
2
The Montreal Gazette - Montreal, Québec, Canada 
January 14, 1999 
<http://www.montrealgazette.com/>http://www.montrealgazette.com/
Agriculture Canada Study questions higher-yield theory on genetically 
modified canola 
CAROL HARRINGTON
CALGARY (CP) - Farmers won't necessarily get higher yields by growing 
costly genetically modified canola, a new Agriculture Canada study suggests.
The two-year study indicated herbicide-tolerant canola brought bigger 
yields than traditional farming methods in only 60 per cent of test fields.
Those results should prod Prairie canola farmers to be more prudent when 
deciding which farming method to use, said Bob Blackshaw, an Alberta weed 
specialist who conducted the study 
(<http://res.agr.ca/leth/scitech/blacksha.htm>http://res.agr.ca/leth/scitec
h/blacksha.htm).
"There is this general assumption by farmers that they get higher yields 
and make more money if they used herbicide-tolerant canolas," Blackshaw said.
"They might get better economic return on their farm by not growing a 
herbicide-tolerant canola."
Ever since genetically modified canola was introduced to Prairie fields 
four years ago, farmers have been widely experimenting with it.
In 1999, 80 per cent of the 5.6 million hectares of canola in Western 
Canada used herbicide-tolerant varieties.
Blackshaw estimated it costs 30 per cent more to grow genetically modified 
canola.
Anne Lindsey, executive director of the Manitoba Eco Network, applauded the 
$100,000 study.
"Hopefully, farmers will pay attention to that," Lindsey said. "The 
chemical companies are out there making a strong argument the (farm) input 
costs will be reduced and they will get a premium but that doesn't 
necessarily seem to be the case."
Regardless of the study, the Canola Council of Canada advised farmers to 
continue using the new technology.
"Biotechnology is safe and it provides all kinds of benefits to both sides 
- the farmer and the consumer," said Dave Wilkins, manager of the 
industry-member council.
"When you weigh all those costs out, it may not be as profitable, but often 
it is."
The study compared three widely used herbicide-tolerant systems with a 
conventional canola system using two herbicides at sites in Alberta, 
Saskatchewan and Manitoba.
Average acreage yields ranged from 38 to 49 bushels, but Blackshaw noted 
that five of the 13 experiment fields had comparable yields regardless of 
the type of seed and system used.
Scientists found it was advantageous to use herbicide-tolerant canola only 
when specific weeds were abundant, particularly thistles, cleavers and 
stork's bills, Blackshaw said.
Eduard Hiebert, a Manitoba canola farmer who is moving toward using fewer 
pesticides, said the study could cut down on farmers having to conduct 
similar experiments on farms.
"I think farmers are caught in that economic treadmill," he said, adding 
that many use the new technology because they are trying to do more with 
less time and money.
The technology involves splicing a gene from a bacteria that is resistant 
to a specific herbicide into the canola seed, thereby making the crop 
resistant to the herbicide.
© The Canadian Press, 2000
=============================================== 


signature:
Genetic Engineering Network 
Requests for information as well as general enquiries should be sent to the 
GEN office - 
<info@genetix.freeserve.co.uk> 
To subscribe or send information for submission to the 
GEN - INFO 4 ACTION - email lists only- contact:
<genetics@gn.apc.org>
email archived as info4action -
<<http://www.gene.ch/info4action.html>http://www.gene.ch/info4action.html>