Paper · 2006 · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Farm-scale evaluation of the impacts of transgenic cotton on biodiversity, pesticide use, and yield

Manda G. Cattaneo; Christine Yafuso; Chris Schmidt; et al.

9
claims
11
verbatim quotes
218
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access

Abstract

Higher yields and reduced pesticide impacts are needed to mitigate the effects of agricultural intensification. A 2-year farm-scale evaluation of 81 commercial fields in Arizona show that use of transgenic Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) cotton reduced insecticide use, whereas transgenic cotton with Bt protein and herbicide resistance (BtHr) did not affect herbicide use. Transgenic cotton had higher yield than nontransgenic cotton for any given number of insecticide applications. However, nontransgenic, Bt and BtHr cotton had similar yields overall, largely because higher insecticide use with nontransgenic cotton improved control of key pests. Unlike Bt and BtHr cotton, insecticides reduced the diversity of nontarget insects. Several other agronomic and ecological factors also affected biodiversity. Nevertheless, pairwise comparisons of diversity of nontarget insects in cotton fields with diversity in adjacent noncultivated sites revealed similar effects of cultivation of transgenic and nontransgenic cotton on biodiversity. The results indicate that impacts of agricultural intensification can be reduced when replacement of broad-spectrum insecticides by narrow-spectrum Bt crops does not reduce control of pests not affected by Bt crops.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 9

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bt cotton reduced insecticide use in Arizona fields.

Material
transgenic Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) cottone0
Treatment
use of transgenic Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) cottone0
Outcome
insecticide usee0
Direction
reducede0
Setting
Arizonae0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“A 2-year farm-scale evaluation of 81 commercial fields in Arizona show that use of transgenic Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) cotton reduced insecticide use”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 112–264 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

BtHr cotton did not affect herbicide use.

Material
transgenic cotton with Bt protein and herbicide resistance (BtHr)e0
Treatment
transgenic cotton with Bt protein and herbicide resistance (BtHr)e0
Outcome
herbicide usee0
Direction
did not affecte0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“transgenic cotton with Bt protein and herbicide resistance (BtHr) did not affect herbicide use”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 274–368 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

At a given number of insecticide applications, transgenic cotton yielded more than nontransgenic cotton.

Material
Transgenic cottone0
Outcome
yielde0
Direction
highere0
Qualifier
for any given number of insecticide applicationse0
Comparator
nontransgenic cottone0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Transgenic cotton had higher yield than nontransgenic cotton for any given number of insecticide applications”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 370–479 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Overall yields were similar across nontransgenic, Bt, and BtHr cotton.

Material
nontransgenic, Bt and BtHr cottone0
Outcome
yieldse0
Direction
similare0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“nontransgenic, Bt and BtHr cotton had similar yields overall”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 490–550 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Higher insecticide use in nontransgenic cotton improved control of key pests.

Material
nontransgenic cottone0
Treatment
higher insecticide usee0
Interactor
key pestse0pest
Outcome
control of key pestse0
Direction
improvede0

Not reportedComparator

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“higher insecticide use with nontransgenic cotton improved control of key pests”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 568–646 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Insecticides reduced nontarget insect diversity, unlike Bt and BtHr cotton.

Treatment
insecticidese0
Interactor
nontarget insectse0other
Outcome
diversity of nontarget insectse0
Direction
reducede0
Comparator
Bt and BtHr cottone0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Unlike Bt and BtHr cotton, insecticides reduced the diversity of nontarget insects”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 648–730 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Other agronomic and ecological factors affected biodiversity.

Outcome
biodiversitye0
Qualifier
Several other agronomic and ecological factorse0

Not reportedSettingDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e0

“Several other agronomic and ecological factors also affected biodiversity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 732–805 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultno effectmeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Relative to adjacent noncultivated sites, transgenic and nontransgenic cotton cultivation had similar effects on nontarget insect diversity.

Interactor
nontarget insectse0other
Outcome
diversity of nontarget insectse0
Direction
similare0
Comparator
adjacent noncultivated sitese0
Setting
cotton fieldse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“pairwise comparisons of diversity of nontarget insects in cotton fields with diversity in adjacent noncultivated sites revealed similar effects of cultivation of transgenic and nontransgenic cotton on biodiversity”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 821–1034 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors conclude that replacing broad-spectrum insecticides with Bt crops can reduce intensification impacts if control of non-Bt pests remains effective.

Treatment
replacement of broad-spectrum insecticides by narrow-spectrum Bt cropse0
Interactor
pestse0pest
Outcome
impacts of agricultural intensification can be reducede0
Qualifier
does not reduce control of pests not affected by Bt cropse0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“cotton”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 51–57 · show in text ↑
e0

“impacts of agricultural intensification can be reduced when replacement of broad-spectrum insecticides by narrow-spectrum Bt crops does not reduce control of pests not affected by Bt crops”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1062–1250 · show in text ↑

Bacillus thuringiensis · molecular: metabolites · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

4 papers: 3 positive, 1 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. positive
  3. positive
See all 4 papers →

insecticide · pest · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results differ

76 papers: 51 positive, 25 negative or no effect

24 papers in the same direction as this paper · 51 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

72 papers more in this group

See all 76 papers →

herbicide · molecular: metabolites · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

8 papers: 4 positive, 4 negative or no effect

3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

4 papers more in this group

See all 8 papers →

transgenic · molecular: metabolites · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

27 papers: 24 positive, 3 negative or no effect

23 papers in the same direction as this paper · 3 in the opposite direction

  1. no effect
  2. negative
  3. negative

23 papers more in this group

See all 27 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.