Target and nontarget effects of novel "triple-stacked" Bt-transgenic cotton 1: canopy arthropod communities

Transgenic cotton varieties (Bollgard II) expressing two proteins (Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab) from Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) have been widely adopted in Australia to control larvae of Helicoverpa. A triple-stacked Bt-transgenic cotton producing Cry1Ac, Cry2Ab, and Vip3A proteins (Genuity Bollgard III) is being developed to reduce the chance that Helicoverpa will develop resistance to the Bt proteins. Before its introduction, nontarget effects on the agro-ecosystem need to be evaluated under field conditions. By using beatsheet and suction sampling methods, we compared the invertebrate communities of unsprayed non-Bt-cotton, Bollgard II, and Bollgard III in five experiments across three sites in Australia. We found significant differences between invertebrate communities of non-Bt and Bt (Bollgard II and Bollgard III) cotton only in experiments where lepidopteran larval abundance was high. In beatsheet samples where lepidopterans were absent (Bt crops), organisms associated with flowers and bolls in Bt-cotton were more abundant. In suction samples, where Lepidoptera were present (i.e., in non-Bt-cotton), organisms associated with damaged plant tissue and frass were more common. Hence in our study, Bt- and non-Bt-cotton communities only differed when sufficient lepidopteran larvae were present to exert both direct and indirect effects on species assemblages. There was no overall significant difference between Bollgard II and III communities, despite the addition of the Vip gene in Bollgard III. Consequently, the use of Bollgard III in Australian cotton provides additional protection against the development of resistance by Helicoverpa to Bt toxins, while having no additional effect on cotton invertebrate communities.

Target and non-target effects on the invertebrate community of Vip cotton, a new insecticidal transgenic

A new transgenic cotton producing the Vegetative Insecticidal Protein (Vip) is being developed to control Lepidopteran pests, especially Helicoverpa larvae. Before its introduction its efficacy against Helicoverpa larvae under field conditions needs to be confirmed, and any non-target effects it may have on the arthropod community need to be identified. We conducted field trials to compare the arthropod community in unsprayed conventional (Sicala 40) and Vip (Coker 312 Vip3A, event 102) cotton using visual searches, beatsheets, and suction samplers at 2 sites in Australia. At both sites, Vip controlled Helicoverpa larvae leading to much higher boll counts. There were no major differences in either species richness or diversity of the beneficial and non-target communities between Vip and conventional cotton, although cotton cultivar accounted for 2–7% of the variance in arthropod communities. There was no detrimental effect of Vip cotton on egg parasitoids. The number of predatory beetles and the pest mirid Creotiades dilutus (Stål) was higher in the Vip, although the increase in mirids was probably the result of more food (bolls) in the Vip crop. In a small plot experiment, we found higher numbers of whitefly in Vip, but this may be driven by differences in leaf hair between the cotton cultivars. Vip cotton appeared to have little effect on the arthropod community other than on Helicoverpa. As such it has the potential to be a useful tool in the management of Helicoverpa and may relieve resistance pressure on existing Bt cultivars (transgenic cotton containing genes for insecticidal Cry proteins), thereby increasing the durability of both technologies.

Corrigendum to: Target and non-target effects on the invertebrate community of Vip cotton, a new insecticidal transgenic

A new transgenic cotton producing the Vegetative Insecticidal Protein (Vip) is being developed to control Lepidopteran pests, especially Helicoverpa larvae. Before its introduction its efficacy against Helicoverpa larvae under field conditions needs to be confirmed, and any non-target effects it may have on the arthropod community need to be identified. We conducted field trials to compare the arthropod community in unsprayed conventional (Sicala 40) and Vip (Coker 312 Vip3A, event 102) cotton using visual searches, beatsheets, and suction samplers at 2 sites in Australia. At both sites, Vip controlled Helicoverpa larvae leading to much higher boll counts. There were no major differences in either species richness or diversity of the beneficial and non-target communities between Vip and conventional cotton, although cotton cultivar accounted for 2.7% of the variance in arthropod communities. There was no detrimental effect of Vip cotton on egg parasitoids. The number of predatory beetles and the pest mirid Creotiades dilutus (St�l) was higher in the Vip, although the increase in mirids was probably the result of more food (bolls) in the Vip crop. In a small plot experiment, we found higher numbers of whitefly in Vip, but this may be driven by differences in leaf hair between the cotton cultivars. Vip cotton appeared to have little effect on the arthropod community other than on Helicoverpa. As such it has the potential to be a useful tool in the management of Helicoverpa and may relieve resistance pressure on existing Bt cultivars (transgenic cotton containing genes for insecticidal Cry proteins), thereby increasing the durability of both technologies.