|
ENVIRONMENTAL HARM
One way of thinking generally about the environmental
harm that genetically engineered plants might do is to consider
that they might become weeds. Here, weeds means all plants
in places where humans do not want them. The term covers everything
from Johnson grass choking crops in fields to kudzu blanketing
trees to melaleuca trees invading the Everglades. In each
case, the plants are growing unaided by humans in places where
they are having unwanted effects. In agriculture, weeds can
severely inhibit crop yield. In unmanaged environments, like
the Everglades, invading trees can displace natural flora
and upset whole ecosystems.
Some weeds result from the accidental introduction
of alien plants, but many were the result of purposeful introductions
for agricultural and horticultural purposes. Some of the plants
intentionally introduced into the United States that have
become serious weeds are Johnson grass, multiflora rose, and
kudzu. A new combination of traits produced as a result of
genetic engineering might enable crops to thrive unaided in
the environment in circumstances where they would then be
considered new or worse weeds. One example would be a rice
plant engineered to be salt-tolerant that escaped cultivation
and invaded nearby marine estuaries.
GENE TRANSFER TO WILD OR WEEDY RELATIVES
Novel genes placed in crops will not necessarily stay
in agricultural fields. If relatives of the altered crops
are growing near the field, the new gene can easily move via
pollen into those plants. The new traits might confer on wild
or weedy relatives of crop plants the ability to thrive in
unwanted places, making them weeds as defined above. For example,
a gene changing the oil composition of a crop might move into
nearby weedy relatives in which the new oil composition would
enable the seeds to survive the winter. Overwintering might
allow the plant to become a weed or might intensify weedy
properties it already possesses.
CHANGE IN HERBICIDE USE PATTERNS
Crops genetically engineered to be resistant to chemical
herbicides are tightly linked to the use of particular chemical
pesticides. Adoption of these crops could therefore lead to
changes in the mix of chemical herbicides used across the
country. To the extent that chemical herbicides differ in
their environmental toxicity, these changing patterns could
result in greater levels of environmental harm overall. In
addition, widespread use of herbicide-tolerant crops could
lead to the rapid evolution of resistance to herbicides in
weeds, either as a result of increased exposure to the herbicide
or as a result of the transfer of the herbicide trait to weedy
relatives of crops. Again, since herbicides differ in their
environmental harm, loss of some herbicides may be detrimental
to the environment overall.
SQUANDERING OF VALUABLE PEST SUSCEPTIBILITY GENES
Many insects contain genes that render them susceptible
to pesticides. Often these susceptibility genes predominate
in natural populations of insects. These genes are a valuable
natural resource because they allow pesticides to remain as
effective pest-control tools. The more benign the pesticide,
the more valuable the genes that make pests susceptible to
it.
Certain genetically engineered crops threaten
the continued susceptibility of pests to one of nature's most
valuable pesticides: the Bacillus thuringiensis or Bt toxin.
These "Bt crops" are genetically engineered to contain
a gene for the Bt toxin. Because the crops produce the toxin
in most plant tissues throughout the life cycle of the plant,
pests are constantly exposed to it. This continuous exposure
selects for the rare resistance genes in the pest population
and in time will render the Bt pesticide useless, unless specific
measures are instituted to avoid the development of such resistance.
POISONED WILDLIFE
Addition of foreign genes to plants could also have serious
consequences for wildlife in a number of circumstances. For
example, engineering crop plants, such as tobacco or rice,
to produce plastics or pharmaceuticals could endanger mice
or deer who consume crop debris left in the fields after harvesting.
Fish that have been engineered to contain metal-sequestering
proteins (such fish have been suggested as living pollution
clean-up devices) could be harmful if consumed by other fish
or raccoons.
CREATION OF NEW OR WORSE VIRUSES
One of the most common applications of genetic engineering
is the production of virus-tolerant crops. Such crops are
produced by engineering components of viruses into the plant
genomes. For reasons not well understood, plants producing
viral components on their own are resistant to subsequent
infection by those viruses. Such plants, however, pose other
risks of creating new or worse viruses through two mechanisms:
recombination and transcapsidation.
Recombination can occur between the plant-produced
viral genes and closely related genes of incoming viruses.
Such recombination may produce viruses that can infect a wider
range of hosts or that may be more virulent than the parent
viruses.
Transcapsidation involves the encapsulation
of the genetic material of one virus by the plant-produced
viral proteins. Such hybrid viruses could transfer viral genetic
material to a new host plant that it could not otherwise infect.
Except in rare circumstances, this would be a one-time-only
effect, because the viral genetic material carries no genes
for the foreign proteins within which it was encapsulated
and would not be able to produce a second generation of hybrid
viruses.
UNKNOWN HARMS
As with human health risks, it is unlikely that all potential
harms to the environment have been identified. Each of the
potential harms above is an answer to the question, "Well,
what might go wrong?" The answer to that question depends
on how well scientists understand the organism and the environment
into which it is released. At this point, biology and ecology
are too poorly understood to be certain that question has
been answered comprehensively.
|