Disease Causing Organism Could Destroy Monsato

A while ago a botanist sent a letter to the USDA stating that he had found a new disease causing organism in Monsato's genetically engineered food.

He says that it is not a problem with the genetic engineering, it is a problem with the herbicides that Monsato are using. This herbicide known as glyphosate:

The problem with glyphosate, Huber says, is that it effectively “gives a plant AIDS,” weakening its defences and making it more susceptible to pathogens, such as the one his team discovered. The scientists have taken to calling the bug “the electron microscope (EM) organism,” since it can only be seen with an electron microscope.

Glyphosate interferes with the plants ability to absorb nutrients, especially manganese.

Huber claims that the double whammy of weakened defenses and the new EM organism have contributed to “unexplained epidemics” of disease on farms — sudden death syndrome of soybean crops and Goss’ wilt on corn.

Of course, all this is merely anecdotal. Whether it can be scientifically proven that farm animals are suffering because they’re eating Roundup Ready soy and corn is another story. But since GE food crops are such a fundamentally new part of agriculture (first planted in 1996) and Huber’s account — if accurate — spells disaster for American agriculture, it’s worth finding out what’s going on before allowing more of Monsanto’s RR crops onto the market.

Disease Causing Organism Could Destroy Monsato

Disease causing organism? What? The title doesn't even make sense o_o

reply to post by Swizzy


An organism that causes disease. What's there to be confused about

Awesome! Wouldn't it be great if Monsanto's own genetic manipulation can back to bite them on the butt! I wonder would they then be liable for the damaged crops and livestock of farmers using their products? I'd been wondering a lot lately how we'd ever be able to get rid of this monster company, maybe we won't have to as this disease causing organism (makes perfect sense, never mind the first reply to the OP) will do it for us.

Nice find man,

int.criminal

The evolution of resistance to insecticides is another critical example of how human society has impacted the evolution of species. The evolution of such traits is rather fast, and found to be based on founder effects. Such events are reason why 400 out of the 1500 categorized pest now express resistance to several or all insecticides in use (Georghiou & Mellon, 1983) . Any species causing severe lost of crops are defined as pests.

Most insecticides can be classified into four: (1) organochlorines, DDT and the DDT-like compounds such as dieldrin; (2) organophosphates, such as malathion or parathion; (3) carbamates, like carbaryl; and (4)pyrethroids, such as permethrin. All of these are designed to interfere with the nervous system of the pest. Due to this design they are highly effective in causing a fast and extensive reduction of the pest population.

However, this represents a problem since it creates a small founder population which has some selective advantage allowing it to survive. The following founder flush then enables the manifestation of the genes, providing the selective advantages. Most common adaptations are changes in metabolism as well as the decreased penetrance of organic molecules across insect cuticles.

The acquisition of such traits corresponds to the frequency as well as the dose of the insecticides. One such example is provided through resistance acquiring of Colorado potatoes beetle. The first insecticide frequently used against this beetle was DDT. It took 7 years for the development of immunity. Once resistance against this toxin was acquired the use of azinophosmethyl, carbofuran, pyrethroid and synegysts was initiated. Although the evolution of resistance to DDT took 7 years further resistance evolution required less and less time down to 1 year due to the persistently high selective pressure by the toxins (Fogash, 1984).

The problem of insecticide resistance becomes even more severe as shown in studies of the possibility of cross and multiple resistances. These resistances occur due to the mating between subpopulation which have been previously exposed to different toxins. This allows recombination for traits determining the resistance in the species (Keiding, 1974).

www.fao.org.../1986/v1211/US8633084.xml;US8633084
GEORGHIOU, G. P. & MELLON, R. B., 1983. Pesticide resistance in time and space. In G. P. Georghiou & T. Saito (Eds), Pest Resistance to Pesticides: New York: Plenum.
zoology.okstate.edu...

Though such resistance might be a problem here I think the inherent problem with genetically modified crops is due to our incomplete understanding of the manipulated genes. In almost all known cases of genes, multiple functions are held by a single gene and any manipulation of these may cause a multitude of effects, ranging from who knows what. In essence --> DON'T mess with nature is the best approach.

For the most part this whole thing sounds to me like these crops are failing at certain developmental stages. This in turn suggest a failure in the genetic engineering. This assumption is strengthened by the fact that corn and soy are unrelated species and as such a singular pest is unlikely and improbable to affect two genetically speaking different organisms. Furthermore, since in essence these plants are new species, it is also unlikely that a specific microorganism already evolved to be a specific pest to these species.

I wouldn't worry though considering that MONSATO plants are infertile clones, thus the created plant species are incapable of mixing with other plants nor propagate themselves. So really the problem will take care of itself.