The National Corn Growers Association (NCGA) disagrees with the conclusions made by two Iowa State University entomologists in an abstract from a soon_to_be_published study on the effects of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) corn pollen on Monarch butterflies (see News Summaries). Dr. Val Giddings, vice president for food and agriculture of the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) said the research "stands in the shadow" of more than 20 independent studies that found Bt corn does not pose a significant risk to the butterfly.

While the research may demonstrate an impact on Monarch larvae under controlled conditions, the findings do not support the abstract's final conclusion that "transgenic insecticidal crops" need more evaluation before being planted over extensive areas, said NCGA Chairman Roger Pine, a Lawrence, KS, corn grower. Pine is a member of the USDA Advisory Committee on Biotechnology which advises the Secretary of Agriculture on agricultural biotechnology issues.

First, Pine noted, the scientific findings are nothing new. "The ecological effects are not unexpected, and are in line with other studies that have been conducted," he said. "Second, these findings were based on research using a single type of Bt, not all Bt traits. The Bt used in this study is already known to express the insecticide at the highest level in its pollen. Finally, corn hybrids incorporating this type of Bt trait are not widely planted."

Pine explained that Bt technology is not nearly as detrimental to butterflies and other non_target species as some alternative technologies used to control insect pests, and allows farmers to produce a safe, abundant food supply.

"NCGA fully supports the science_based decision making process currently employed by the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) in evaluating and approving Bt technology," Pine emphasized. "NCGA supports continued evaluation of all agricultural production techniques. However, we cannot evaluate these technologies in a vacuum. We won't stop dead in our tracks, when a single study draws faulty conclusions from unrelated scientific findings."

Giddings said, "The ... paper is not truly 'field research' inasmuch as much of what it reports is based on analyses taking place in laboratory manipulations rather than field conditions. Furthermore, the paper clearly shows that larval mortality was not correlated with the number of pollen grains on the plant or the plant location within or at the edge of the field, surprises in search of an explanation.

"Both the United States Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Agriculture have studied Bt corn for many years," Giddings said. Just last week the EPA extended the registrations of these products through the 2001 growing season. And in April, the EPA dismissed a Greenpeace lawsuit challenging the Bt plant registrations on a lack of merit, and stated ' ... available scientific data and information indicates that the cultivation of Bt crops has a positive ecological effect, when compared to the most likely alternatives.'"

Giddings added, "To imply that Bt corn has a negative effect on monarch butterflies flies in the face of the fact that last year, more than 28 million acres were planted with Bt corn, an increase of approximately 40% over the previous year. In the same time period, the monarch butterfly population flourished and increased by about 30%, according to Monarch Watch."