Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Commentary
  • Published:

Liabilities and economics of transgenic crops

Nature Biotechnology volume 20, pages 537–541 (2002)Cite this article

Two growing patterns threaten current crop production practices in intensive agriculture: the cross-pollination of genetically modified (GM) crop varieties with conventional varieties, and the germination of volunteer GM seeds (seeds dropped, blown, or inadvertently planted). Cross-pollination of GM crops with crop varieties destined for non-GM, GM-free, or “organic” niche markets is of great concern to the corresponding producers. The growth of volunteer GM seeds can be controlled chemically, but at an added cost for producers. Both of these problems must be rapidly addressed to ensure that the adoption rate of GM crops remains high and that the commercialization of future varieties is not jeopardized.

Looming challenges

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Khachatourians, G.G., McHughen, A., Scorza, R., Nip, W. & Hui, Y. Transgenic Plants and Crops (Marcel Dekker, New York, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  2. Phillips, P.W.B. & Khachatourians, G.G. The Biotechnology Revolution in Global Agriculture: Invention, Innovation and Investment in the Canola Sector (CABI, Wallingford, United Kingdom, 2001).

  3. http://www.cwb.ca/publicat/varsurv/index.shtml.

  4. Pohl-Orf, M. et al. Euphytica 108, 181–186 (1999).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Canola Council of Canada. An agronomic and economic assessment of transgenic canola (Canola Council of Canada, Winnipeg, MB, Canada, January 2001).

  6. Harrington, J. Sci. Agric. 12, 470–483 (1932).

    Google Scholar 

  7. Hucl, P. & Matus-Cádiz, M. Crop Sci. 4, 1348–1351 (2001).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hucl, P. Can . J. Plant Sci. 76, 423–427 (1996).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Losey, J., Rayor, L. & Carter, M. Nature 399, 214 (1999).

  10. Zangerl, A. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 11908–11912 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Oberhauser, K. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 11913–11918 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Pleasants, J. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 11919–11924 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Hellmich, R. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 11925–11930 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Stanley-Horn, D. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 11931–11936 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Sears, M. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 98, 11937–11942 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Staniland, B. et al. Canadian J. Plant Sci. 80, 521–526 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Eastham, K. & Sweet, J. Genetically modified organisms (GMOs): the significance of gene flow through pollen transfer (European Environment Agency, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2002).

  18. Timmons, A. et al. Euphytica 85, 417–423 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Bing, D.J., Downey, R.K. & Rakow, G. Plant Breed. 115, 470–473 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Metz, P., Jacobsen, E., Nap, J., Pereira, A. & Stiekema, W. Theor. Appl. Genet. 95, 275–282 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  21. http://www.producer.com/articles/20000210/news/20000210news01.html.

  22. Mayer, H. & Furtan, H. Food Policy 24, 431–442 (1997).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Chèvre, A. et al. in 6th International Symposium on the Biosafety of Genetically Modified Organisms (eds Fairbairn, C., Scoles, G. & McHughen, A.) 45–50 (Univ. of Saskatchewan Press, Saskatoon, SK, Canada, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lefol, E., Danielou, V. & Darmency, H. Field Crops Res. 45, 153–161 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lefol, E., Fleury, A. & Darmency, H. Sex. Plant Reprod. 9, 186–196 (1996).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Furst, I. Nat. Biotechnol. 17, 629 (1999).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. http://www.agr.gov.sk.ca/DOCS/statistics/finance/other/handbook98.asp?firstPick=statistics.

  28. http://www.agbioforum.org/vol3no4/ vol3no4ar7phillips mcneill.htm.

  29. http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_280000/280286.stm.

  30. http://www.plant.uoguelph.ca/safefood/archives/agnet/ 2001/11-2001/agnet_november_1-2.htm

  31. http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/sc_mrkti/tdst/engdoc/tr_homep.html.

  32. http://www.biogene.org/e/themen/biotech/e-news22.htm

  33. Saskatchewan Organic Directorate. Statement of Claim. Q.B. No. 67 of 2002 in the J.C. of Saskatoon, SK, Canada, 2002.

  34. Tomiuk, J., Wohrmann, K. & Sentker A. Transgenic Organisms: Biological and Social Implications (Birkhauser, Basel, Germany, 1996).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  35. Visser, B., Eaton, D., Louwaars, N. & van der Meer, I. Potential impacts of genetic use restriction technologies (GURTs) on agrobiodiversity and agricultural production systems (FAO, Rome, April, 2001).

  36. http://www.biotech-info.net/monsanto_letter.pdf.

  37. http://www.etcgroup.org/documents/terminatorbrochure02.pdf.

  38. Giddings, G. Theoret. Appl. Genet. 100, 971–974 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Khan, M.N., Heyne, E.G. & Arp, A.L. Crop Sci. 13, 223–226 (1973).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sears, M. & Stanley-Horn, D. Impact of Bt corn pollen on monarch butterfly populations. in 6th International Symposium on the Biosafety of Genetically Modified Organisms (eds Fairbairn, C, Scoles, G. & McHughen, A.) 120–130 (Univ. of Saskatchewan Press, Saskatoon, SK, Canada, 2000).

    Google Scholar 

  41. http://www.seedgrowers.ca/.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. postgraduate student in biotechnology, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada

    Stuart Smyth

  2. professor and head, Department of Applied Microbiology and Food Science, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada

    George G. Khachatourians

  3. professor of agriculture economics and National Science and Engineering Research Council/Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council chair in managing knowledge-based agri-food development, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada

    Peter W.B. Phillips

Authors
  1. Stuart Smyth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. George G. Khachatourians
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Peter W.B. Phillips
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Smyth, S., Khachatourians, G. & Phillips, P. Liabilities and economics of transgenic crops. Nat Biotechnol 20, 537–541 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0602-537

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0602-537

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing