Insect resistance to transgenic Bt crops: Lessons from the laboratory and field

Bruce E Tabashnik, Yves Carriere, Timothy J. Dennehy, Shai Morin, Mark S. Sisterson, Richard T. Roush, Anthony M. Shelton, Jian Zhou Zhao

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

401 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Transgenic crops that produce insecticidal toxins from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) grew on >62 million ha worldwide from 1996 to 2002. Despite expectations that pests would rapidly evolve resistance to such Bt crops, increases in the frequency of resistance caused by exposure to Bt crops in the field have not yet been documented. In laboratory and greenhouse tests, however, at least seven resistant laboratory strains of three pests (Plutella xylostella [L.], Pectinophora gossypiclla [Saunders], and Helicocerpa annigera [Hübner]) have completed development on Bt crops. In contrast, several other laboratory strains with 70- to 10,100-fold resistance to Bt toxins in diet did not survive on Bt crops. Monitoring of field populations in regions with high adoption of Bt crops has not yet detected increases in resistance frequency. Resistance monitoring examples include Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner) in the United States (6 yr), P. gossypiella in Arizona (5 yr), H. arinigera in northern China (3 yr), and Hclicocerpa zea (Boddie) in North Carolina (2 yr). Key factors delaying resistance to Bt crops are probably refuges of non-Bt host plants that enable survival of susceptible pests, low initial resistance allele frequencies, recessive inheritance of resistance to Bt crops, costs associated with resistance that reduce fitness of resistant individuals relative to susceptible individuals on non-Bt hosts ("fitness costs"), and disadvantages suffered by resistant strains on Bt hosts relative to their performance on non-Bt hosts ("incomplete resistance"). The relative importance of these factors varies among pest-Bt crop systems, and violations of key assumptions of the refuge strategy (low resistance allele frequency and recessive inheritance) may occur in some cases. The success of Bt crops exceeds expectations of many, but does not preclude resistance problems in the future.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1031-1038
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Economic Entomology
Volume96
Issue number4
StatePublished - Aug 2003

Fingerprint

Bacillus thuringiensis
genetically modified organisms
insect
insects
crop
crops
pests
refuge
toxin
allele
fitness
Pectinophora
gene frequency
laboratory
inheritance (genetics)
toxins
monitoring
Zea
Ostrinia nubilalis
cost

Keywords

  • Bacillus thuringiensis
  • Bt crops
  • Genetically modified crops
  • Refuge
  • Resistance

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Insect Science
  • Ecology

Cite this

Tabashnik, B. E., Carriere, Y., Dennehy, T. J., Morin, S., Sisterson, M. S., Roush, R. T., ... Zhao, J. Z. (2003). Insect resistance to transgenic Bt crops: Lessons from the laboratory and field. Journal of Economic Entomology, 96(4), 1031-1038.

Insect resistance to transgenic Bt crops : Lessons from the laboratory and field. / Tabashnik, Bruce E; Carriere, Yves; Dennehy, Timothy J.; Morin, Shai; Sisterson, Mark S.; Roush, Richard T.; Shelton, Anthony M.; Zhao, Jian Zhou.

In: Journal of Economic Entomology, Vol. 96, No. 4, 08.2003, p. 1031-1038.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Tabashnik, BE, Carriere, Y, Dennehy, TJ, Morin, S, Sisterson, MS, Roush, RT, Shelton, AM & Zhao, JZ 2003, 'Insect resistance to transgenic Bt crops: Lessons from the laboratory and field', Journal of Economic Entomology, vol. 96, no. 4, pp. 1031-1038.
Tabashnik, Bruce E ; Carriere, Yves ; Dennehy, Timothy J. ; Morin, Shai ; Sisterson, Mark S. ; Roush, Richard T. ; Shelton, Anthony M. ; Zhao, Jian Zhou. / Insect resistance to transgenic Bt crops : Lessons from the laboratory and field. In: Journal of Economic Entomology. 2003 ; Vol. 96, No. 4. pp. 1031-1038.
@article{4c69d42c364f4ea087d72d0b065c6ecd,
title = "Insect resistance to transgenic Bt crops: Lessons from the laboratory and field",
abstract = "Transgenic crops that produce insecticidal toxins from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) grew on >62 million ha worldwide from 1996 to 2002. Despite expectations that pests would rapidly evolve resistance to such Bt crops, increases in the frequency of resistance caused by exposure to Bt crops in the field have not yet been documented. In laboratory and greenhouse tests, however, at least seven resistant laboratory strains of three pests (Plutella xylostella [L.], Pectinophora gossypiclla [Saunders], and Helicocerpa annigera [H{\"u}bner]) have completed development on Bt crops. In contrast, several other laboratory strains with 70- to 10,100-fold resistance to Bt toxins in diet did not survive on Bt crops. Monitoring of field populations in regions with high adoption of Bt crops has not yet detected increases in resistance frequency. Resistance monitoring examples include Ostrinia nubilalis (H{\"u}bner) in the United States (6 yr), P. gossypiella in Arizona (5 yr), H. arinigera in northern China (3 yr), and Hclicocerpa zea (Boddie) in North Carolina (2 yr). Key factors delaying resistance to Bt crops are probably refuges of non-Bt host plants that enable survival of susceptible pests, low initial resistance allele frequencies, recessive inheritance of resistance to Bt crops, costs associated with resistance that reduce fitness of resistant individuals relative to susceptible individuals on non-Bt hosts ({"}fitness costs{"}), and disadvantages suffered by resistant strains on Bt hosts relative to their performance on non-Bt hosts ({"}incomplete resistance{"}). The relative importance of these factors varies among pest-Bt crop systems, and violations of key assumptions of the refuge strategy (low resistance allele frequency and recessive inheritance) may occur in some cases. The success of Bt crops exceeds expectations of many, but does not preclude resistance problems in the future.",
keywords = "Bacillus thuringiensis, Bt crops, Genetically modified crops, Refuge, Resistance",
author = "Tabashnik, {Bruce E} and Yves Carriere and Dennehy, {Timothy J.} and Shai Morin and Sisterson, {Mark S.} and Roush, {Richard T.} and Shelton, {Anthony M.} and Zhao, {Jian Zhou}",
year = "2003",
month = "8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "96",
pages = "1031--1038",
journal = "Journal of Economic Entomology",
issn = "0022-0493",
publisher = "Entomological Society of America",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Insect resistance to transgenic Bt crops

T2 - Lessons from the laboratory and field

AU - Tabashnik, Bruce E

AU - Carriere, Yves

AU - Dennehy, Timothy J.

AU - Morin, Shai

AU - Sisterson, Mark S.

AU - Roush, Richard T.

AU - Shelton, Anthony M.

AU - Zhao, Jian Zhou

PY - 2003/8

Y1 - 2003/8

N2 - Transgenic crops that produce insecticidal toxins from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) grew on >62 million ha worldwide from 1996 to 2002. Despite expectations that pests would rapidly evolve resistance to such Bt crops, increases in the frequency of resistance caused by exposure to Bt crops in the field have not yet been documented. In laboratory and greenhouse tests, however, at least seven resistant laboratory strains of three pests (Plutella xylostella [L.], Pectinophora gossypiclla [Saunders], and Helicocerpa annigera [Hübner]) have completed development on Bt crops. In contrast, several other laboratory strains with 70- to 10,100-fold resistance to Bt toxins in diet did not survive on Bt crops. Monitoring of field populations in regions with high adoption of Bt crops has not yet detected increases in resistance frequency. Resistance monitoring examples include Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner) in the United States (6 yr), P. gossypiella in Arizona (5 yr), H. arinigera in northern China (3 yr), and Hclicocerpa zea (Boddie) in North Carolina (2 yr). Key factors delaying resistance to Bt crops are probably refuges of non-Bt host plants that enable survival of susceptible pests, low initial resistance allele frequencies, recessive inheritance of resistance to Bt crops, costs associated with resistance that reduce fitness of resistant individuals relative to susceptible individuals on non-Bt hosts ("fitness costs"), and disadvantages suffered by resistant strains on Bt hosts relative to their performance on non-Bt hosts ("incomplete resistance"). The relative importance of these factors varies among pest-Bt crop systems, and violations of key assumptions of the refuge strategy (low resistance allele frequency and recessive inheritance) may occur in some cases. The success of Bt crops exceeds expectations of many, but does not preclude resistance problems in the future.

AB - Transgenic crops that produce insecticidal toxins from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) grew on >62 million ha worldwide from 1996 to 2002. Despite expectations that pests would rapidly evolve resistance to such Bt crops, increases in the frequency of resistance caused by exposure to Bt crops in the field have not yet been documented. In laboratory and greenhouse tests, however, at least seven resistant laboratory strains of three pests (Plutella xylostella [L.], Pectinophora gossypiclla [Saunders], and Helicocerpa annigera [Hübner]) have completed development on Bt crops. In contrast, several other laboratory strains with 70- to 10,100-fold resistance to Bt toxins in diet did not survive on Bt crops. Monitoring of field populations in regions with high adoption of Bt crops has not yet detected increases in resistance frequency. Resistance monitoring examples include Ostrinia nubilalis (Hübner) in the United States (6 yr), P. gossypiella in Arizona (5 yr), H. arinigera in northern China (3 yr), and Hclicocerpa zea (Boddie) in North Carolina (2 yr). Key factors delaying resistance to Bt crops are probably refuges of non-Bt host plants that enable survival of susceptible pests, low initial resistance allele frequencies, recessive inheritance of resistance to Bt crops, costs associated with resistance that reduce fitness of resistant individuals relative to susceptible individuals on non-Bt hosts ("fitness costs"), and disadvantages suffered by resistant strains on Bt hosts relative to their performance on non-Bt hosts ("incomplete resistance"). The relative importance of these factors varies among pest-Bt crop systems, and violations of key assumptions of the refuge strategy (low resistance allele frequency and recessive inheritance) may occur in some cases. The success of Bt crops exceeds expectations of many, but does not preclude resistance problems in the future.

KW - Bacillus thuringiensis

KW - Bt crops

KW - Genetically modified crops

KW - Refuge

KW - Resistance

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0041422690&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0041422690&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 14503572

AN - SCOPUS:0041422690

VL - 96

SP - 1031

EP - 1038

JO - Journal of Economic Entomology

JF - Journal of Economic Entomology

SN - 0022-0493

IS - 4

ER -