6th International Young Scientist Congress (IYSC-2020) will be Postponed to 8th and 9th May 2021 Due to COVID-19. 10th International Science Congress (ISC-2020).  International E-publication: Publish Projects, Dissertation, Theses, Books, Souvenir, Conference Proceeding with ISBN.  International E-Bulletin: Information/News regarding: Academics and Research

Ecological Impact of Genetically Modified Crops

Author Affiliations

  • 1 Department of Zoology, Punjab Agricultural University, Ludhiana, Punjab, INDIA

Res. J. Recent Sci., Volume 2, Issue (ISC-2012), Pages 1-4, February,2 (2013)


Despite the potential benefits of transgenic crops, they are also concerned regarding the possible environmental and agronomic impacts. The biosafety implications of the field release of transgenic crops have attracted global attention also.Research for analyzing the short and long term effects of transgenic crops on the environment is one of the major challenges for its safe release in developing countries which are rich sources of genetic biodiversity. Horizontal transfer of genes between soils microorganisms may be facilitated by vector DNA from genetically engineered plants resulting in disturbances in the functioning of organism that affects the soil ecology and fertility. There is a need of in depth study to address the effect of transgenic plant on non-target animals, plants and other organisms. Considering the potential impact of transgenic crops on genetic diversity, pragmatic decisions should be taken by the policy-makers not to release these crops into centers of origin, delicate ecological zones and the pockets rich in biodiversity. Therefore, the challenge will be to use scientific tools and knowledge to attempt to predict problems and solve them before they happen.


  1. Mangal M., Malik K. and Randhawa G.J., Import of transgenic planting material: National scenario, Cur Sci, 85, 4 (2003)
  2. Ervin D.E., Welsh R., Batie S.S. and Carpentier C.L., Towards an Ecological Systems Approach in Public Research for Environmental Regulation of Transgenic Crops, Agri. Eco. Env., 99, 1-14 (2003)
  3. Brookes M., Running Wild, New Scientist, 38-41 (1998)
  4. Cavan G., Biss P. and Moss S.R., Herbicide Resistance and Gene Flow in Wild-Oats (Avenafatua and AvenaSterilis ssp. Iudoviciana), Ann. App. Biol., 133, 207-217 (1998)
  5. Robinson J., Ethics and Transgenic Crops: A Review, Plant Biotechnol., 2(2) (1999)
  6. Darmency H., The Impact of Hybrids Between Genetically Modified Crop Plants and Their Related Species: Introgression and Weediness, Mol. Ecol., 3, 37-40 (1994)
  7. Altieri M.A., The Environmental Risks of Transgenic Crops: An Agroecological Assessment (2001)
  8. Altieri M.A., Biodiversity and Pest Management in Agroecosystems, New York, NY, USA: Haworth Press, (1994)
  9. Radosevich S.R., Holt J.S. and Ghersa C.M., Weed Ecology: Implications for weed Management (2nd Edition), New York, USA: John Wiley and Sons. (1996)
  10. Pimentel D., Hunter M.S., LaGro J.A., Efroymson R.A., Landers J.C., Mervis F.T., McCarthy C.A. and Boyd A.E., Benefits and risks of genetic engineering in agriculture, BioSci., 39, 606-614 (1989)
  11. Gresshoft P.M., Technology Transfer of Plant Biotechnology, Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press (1996)
  12. Robinson R.A., Return to Resistance: Breeding Crops to Reduce Pesticide Resistance, Davis, CA, USA: Ag Access (1996)
  13. Tripp R., Biodiversity and Modern Crop Varieties: Sharpening the Debate, Agri. Human Values,13, 48-62 (1996)
  14. Gould F., Potential and Problems with High-dose Strategies for Pesticidal Engineered Crops, Biocont. Sci.Technol., 4, 451-461 (1994) , 1-4 (2013)
  15. Tabashnik B.E., Genetics of Resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis, Ann. Rev. Entomol., 39, 47-79 (1994)
  16. Kennedy G.G. and Whalon M.E., Managing Pest Resistance to Bacillus thuringiensis Endotoxins: Constraints and Incentives to Implementation, J. Eco. Entomol., 88, 454-460 (1995)
  17. Alstad D.N. and Andow D.A., Managing the Evolution of Insect Resistance to Transgenic Plants, Sci., 268, 1894-1896 (1995)
  18. Birch A.N.E., Geoghegan I.E., Majerus M.E.N., Hackett C. and Allen J,. Interaction between plant resistance genes, pest aphid populations and beneficial aphid predators, Scottish Crops Research Institute (SCRI) Annual Report, 68-72 (1997)
  19. Palm C.J., Schaller D.L., Donegan K.K. and Seidler R.J., Persistence in Soil of Transgenic Plant Produced Bacillusthuringiensisvar. Kurstaki d-Endotoxin, CanadianJ. Microbio., 42, 1258-1262 (1996)
  20. James R.R., Utilizing a Social Ethic Toward the Environment in Assessing Genetically Engineered Insect-Resistance in Trees, Agri. Human Val., 14, 237-249 (1997)
  21. Hilbeck A., Baumgartner M., Fried P.M., and Bigler F., Effects of transgenic Bacillus thuringiensiscorn-fed prey on mortality and development of immature Chrysoperlacarnea (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae), Environmen. lEntomol., 27, 1-8 (1998)
  22. Losey J.E., Raynor L.S., and Carter M.E., Transgenic pollen harms monarch larvae [scientific correspondence], Nat., 399, 214(1999)
  23. Watrud L.S. and Seidler R.J., Nontarget ecological effects of plant, microbial, and chemical introductions to terrestrial systems. Soil Chemistry and Ecosystem Health. Special Publication 52. Soil Science Society of America, Madison, Wisconsin., 313-340 (1998)
  24. Hansan-Jesse L.C., and Obrycki J.J., Field deposition of Bt transgenic corn pollen: Lethal effects on the monarch butterfly, Oecol., (19 August) (2000)
  25. Wraight C.L., Zangerl A.R., Carroll M.J., and Berenbaum M.R., Absence of toxicity of Bacillus thuringiensispollen to black swallowtails under field conditions, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS Online, 6 June) (2000)