Paper · 2020 · Open Agriculture

Genetically modified crops in India: Experiments with Bt Cotton to explore the road ahead

Amanpreet Kaur

4
claims
8
verbatim quotes
5
citations
3
research areas
✓
Open access · cc-by

Abstract

Abstract The success of genetically modified crops (GMCs), claimed to hold solution to impending environmental problems, depends on land holdings, agroclimatic and geoclimatic conditions, food preferences and sociocultural factors. The direct and indirect impacts of these crops on human health, ecology and environment have not been evaluated on long-term basis. In India, with rich background of farming, GMCs remain a minor change. Introduction of first GMC, Bt Cotton (BC), showed varied response throughout the country. New GMCs like Bt Brinjal and GM Mustard approved for open-field trials in the country were marred under contentious debate and were never approved for commercial cultivation. The current research article aims to study the ecological implications of only GMC available for experimentation in India, BC. A three-phase study carried out as field survey, glass dome experiments and open-field trials compared the BC and conventional cotton (CC) plants with extensive experimentation of ecological parameters including vegetation diversity, insect diversity, plant morphology and infestation intensity. Results highlighted the better morphological characteristics of BC over CC, while infestation studies showed 40% survival rate of insect pest on BC for which it is genetically modified. High electrical conductivity and low organic matter content in the BC soil samples as compared to CC soil samples were indicative of impact of Bt toxins in soil but need further in-depth soil studies to reach scientifically valid results. The current research article substantiates the environmental concerns raised against GMCs especially BC in the country. Its objective is to trigger more research in this direction, so that the technology of GMCs is utilized for the benefit of humankind.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed cc-by. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 4

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Bt cotton had better morphological characteristics than conventional cotton.

Treatment
BCe1
Outcome
morphological characteristicse1
Direction
bettere1
Comparator
CCe1

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Experiments with Bt Cotton to explore the road ahead”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 37–89 · show in text ↑
e1

“Results highlighted the better morphological characteristics of BC over CC”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1123–1197 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

The survival rate of an insect pest on Bt cotton was 40%.

Interactor
insect peste2pest
Outcome
survival rate of insect peste2
Value
40%e2

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Experiments with Bt Cotton to explore the road ahead”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 37–89 · show in text ↑
e2

“infestation studies showed 40% survival rate of insect pest on BC for which it is genetically modified”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1205–1307 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil under Bt cotton had higher electrical conductivity than soil under conventional cotton.

Treatment
BCe3
Outcome
electrical conductivitye3
Direction
Highe3
Comparator
CC soil samplese3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Experiments with Bt Cotton to explore the road ahead”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 37–89 · show in text ↑
e3

“High electrical conductivity and low organic matter content in the BC soil samples as compared to CC soil samples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1309–1422 · show in text ↑

schema checkedfield values found in the cited quotesPermalinkReport an issue

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil under Bt cotton had lower organic matter content than soil under conventional cotton.

Treatment
BCe3
Outcome
organic matter contente3
Direction
lowe3
Comparator
CC soil samplese3

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Gossypium hirsutum
Gossypium hirsutum · TaxonChriKo · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

t0

“Experiments with Bt Cotton to explore the road ahead”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 37–89 · show in text ↑
e3

“High electrical conductivity and low organic matter content in the BC soil samples as compared to CC soil samples”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1309–1422 · show in text ↑

schema checkedfield values found in the cited quotesPermalinkReport an issue

transgenic · molecular: metabolites · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Positive and negative results

27 papers: 24 positive, 3 negative or no effect

2 papers in the same direction as this paper · 24 in the opposite direction

  1. positive
  2. positive
  3. positive

23 papers more in this group

See all 27 papers →

transgenic · soil: chemistry · Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)Results agree

2 papers: 0 positive, 2 negative or no effect

1 paper in the same direction as this paper

  1. no effect
See all 2 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.