A case of “pseudo science”? A study claiming effects of the Cry1Ab protein on larvae of the two-spotted ladybird is reminiscent of the case of the green lacewing
Open accessAbstract
A recent report on the potential negative impact in a laboratory setting of the Cry1Ab protein on larvae of the two spotted ladybird Adalia bipunctata (Schmidt et al. 2009) has gained notoriety. It was used in Germany, along with some other studies supposedly showing a negative impact of the transgenic MON810 maize on non-target organisms, to temporarily ban the cultivation of this Bt-maize under a safeguard clause conforming with Article 23 of the EU directive 2001/18/EC. This decision, although officially communicated as based on new evidence, was in fact based on flawed science and has been recognized to be politically motivated by a number of the stakeholders involved (Sinha 2009). The present temporary ban of MON810 by the German Government will now be considered by the EU commission, which will consult the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), and then decide on the merits of the scientific data. Whether the ban will then be lifted or not lies within the commitological decision making process within the European Union. The data on A. bipunctata was first published in the Proceedings of the German Society for General and Applied Entomology half a decade ago (Schmidt et al. 2004). Thus, it does not even constitute “new evidence”. In their experiment, Schmidt et al. fed A. bipunctata larvae with eggs of the flour moth Ephestia kuehniella that had been sprayed with solutions of Cry1Ab and Cry3Bb of different concentrations. Mortality in the treatments was higher than in the control groups. Larval developmental time and adult biomass were also measured, but there were no differences between the experimental groups. The authors concluded that the Cry proteins, and especially Cry1Ab, had a negative impact on A. bipunctata larvae, based on some unknown mode of action. There are some obvious methodological flaws and inconsistencies in the Schmidt et al. (2009) paper, however: Firstly, the quantity of stock solutions applied and the actual quantity of test proteins taken up by the ladybird larvae is not reported. It is only written that the eggs of the flour moth E. kuehniella used as food were “sprayed” with the different Cry protein dilutions. There is also no information given on the food consumption by the larvae during their development. The authors thus did not know, at least they did not state, the actual dose that the tested individuals took up during the experiment. Thus, the first important criterion defining risk, i.e., the degree of exposure, was not properly quantified. Secondly, the mortality rates in identical control groups for the three separate treatments varied greatly between 7.5 and 20.8% for the 1st larval instars. These differences are neither explained nor addressed in the statistical analysis and the interpretation of the data, but strongly suggest methodological problems. Thirdly, the treatment groups with the highest Bt-protein concentrations did not show an increase in mortality rates over the groups treated with lower concentrations. This was the case for both Cry1Ab and Cry3Bb, and is a very astonishing result that contradicts classical dose-response relationship models. It is also interesting to note in this context that the Coleopteran-specific Cry3Bb protein had a smaller effect than the Lepidopteran-specific Cry1Ab, whereas one might expect the opposite to be the case for this test organism. Fourthly, none of the treatments had any impact on either larval developmental time, or on the body-weight of adult beetles. This means that the larvae either died, or seemed to be totally unaffected by the treatments with Cry proteins. This is also surprising, since it is well established that susceptible organisms suffer from sub-lethal effects long before direct toxic effects (i.e. mortality) can be observed (e.g. Sears et al. 2001). Schmidt et al. also totally neglect relevant recent literature. For example, Bai et al. (2005) reported the absence of any effects of rice pollen containing Cry1Ab on Propylea japonica. Similarly, a study by Alvarez-Alfageme et al. (2008) did not report any effects of Cry1Ab on another coccinellid, Stethorus punctillum. The discussion in the paper by Schmidt et al. would also have benefited from published results from a large number of field studies with Bt-maize reporting on a variety of beetle families encompassing Coccinellidae, Carabidae and Lathridiidae (de la Poza et al. 2005; Ahmad et al. 2006; Eckert et al. 2006; Toschki et al. 2006; Floate et al. 2007; Leslie et al. 2007). A recent report by Dhillon and Sharma (2009) that did show effects of Cry1Ab on larvae of Cheilomenes sexmaculatus in a laboratory setting, but using an exposure regime more relevant to the field situation, showed that “direct exposure to Bt toxins expressed in transgenic plants […] will have little effect on the activity and abundance of the ladybird”. The claims and interpretations by Schmidt et al. need to be put into the context of the vas
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
It is likely that those unexpected results are artifacts, probably resulting from problems in study design.
“It is thus likely that those results are artifacts, probably resulting from problems in study design (EFSA, 2009;Rauschen, 2010;Ricroch et al., 2010;Romeis et al., 2013aRomeis et al., , 2014b)).”
From Genetically engineered crops help support conservation biological control (2019) · cites this paper as Rauschen, 2010
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Assessment of risk of insect-resistant transgenic crops to nontarget arthropods
Romeis, J., Bartsch, D. K., Bigler, F., Candolfi, M. P., Gielkens, M. M. C., Hartley, S. E., Hellmich, R. L., Huesing, J. E., JEPSON, P. C., Layton, R. J., et al. (2008) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1381 · Cited by 501 · see citing works
Impact of Bt corn pollen on monarch butterfly populations: A risk assessment
Sears, M. K., Hellmich, R. L., Stanley-Horn, D. E., Oberhauser, K. S., Pleasants, J. M., Mattila, H. R., Siegfried, B. D., & Dively, G. P. (2001) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.211329998 · Cited by 492 · see citing works
Dutton, A. C., Klein, H., Romeis, J., & Bigler, F. (2002) · Ecological Entomology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-2311.2002.00436.x · Cited by 334 · see citing works
Raps, A., Kehr, J., Gugerli, P., Moar, W. J., Bigler, F., & Hilbeck, A. (2001) · Molecular Ecology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-294x.2001.01236.x · Cited by 205 · see citing works
Nguyen, H. T., & Jehle, J. A. (2007) · Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection · doi:10.1007/bf03356208 · Cited by 170 · see citing works
Head, G., Brown, C. R., Groth, M. E., & Duan, J. J. (2001) · Entomologia Experimentalis et Applicata · doi:10.1046/j.1570-7458.2001.00799.x · Cited by 155 · see citing works
Burgio, G., Santi, F., & Maini, S. (2002) · Biological Control · doi:10.1016/s1049-9644(02)00023-3 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
Cottrell, T. E., & Yeargan, K. V. (1998) · Environmental Entomology · doi:10.1093/ee/27.6.1402 · Cited by 137 · see citing works
Impact of farm-scale Bt maize on abundance of predatory arthropods in Spain
de la Poza, M., Pons, X., Farinós, G. P., López, C., Ortego, F., Eizaguirre, M., Castañera, P., & Albajes, R. (2005) · Crop Protection · doi:10.1016/j.cropro.2004.12.003 · Cited by 111 · see citing works
CANNIBALISM AND INTERSPECIFIC PREDATION:ROLE OF OVIPOSITION BEHAVIOR
Schellhorn, N. A., & Andow, D. A. (1999) · Ecological Applications · doi:10.1890/1051-0761(1999)009[0418:caipro]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 103 · see citing works
Environmental Impact of Genetically Modified Crops
Ferry, N., Gatehouse, A. M. R., & Spi, T. (2009) · CABI eBooks · doi:10.1079/9781845934095.0000 · Cited by 101 · see citing works
Schmidt, J. E. U., Braun, C. U., Whitehouse, L. P., & Hilbeck, A. (2008) · Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology · doi:10.1007/s00244-008-9191-9 · Cited by 90 · see citing works
Shelton, A. M., Naranjo, S. E., Romeis, J., Hellmich, R. L., Wolt, J. D., Federici, B. A., Albajes, R., Bigler, F., Burgess, E. P. J., Dively, G. P., et al. (2009) · Transgenic Research · doi:10.1007/s11248-009-9260-5 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Álvarez‐Alfageme, F., Ferry, N., Castañera, P., Ortego, F., & Gatehouse, A. M. R. (2008) · Transgenic Research · doi:10.1007/s11248-008-9177-4 · Cited by 65 · see citing works
Lundgren, J. G., Huber, A., & Wiedenmann, R. N. (2005) · Agricultural and Forest Entomology · doi:10.1111/j.1461-9555.2005.00246.x · Cited by 64 · see citing works
Effects of transgenic cry1Ab rice pollen on fitness of Propylea japonica (Thunberg)
Bai, Y., Jiang, M., & Cheng, J. A. (2005) · Journal of Pest Science · doi:10.1007/s10340-004-0078-x · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Lundgren, J. G., & Wiedenmann, R. N. (2005) · Environmental Entomology · doi:10.1603/0046-225x-34.6.1621 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Transgenes Sustain Epigeal Insect Biodiversity in Diversified Vegetable Farm Systems
Leslie, T. W., Hoheisel, G., Biddinger, D. J., Rohr, J. R., & Fleischer, S. J. (2007) · Environmental Entomology · doi:10.1603/0046-225x(2007)36[234:tseibi]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 48 · see citing works
Impact of Insect-resistant Transgenic Crops on Aboveground Non-target Arthropods
Romeis, J., Meissle, M., Raybould, A. F., & Hellmich, R. L. (2009) · CABI eBooks · doi:10.1079/9781845934095.0165 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Ahmad, A., Wilde, G. E., Whitworth, R. J., & Zolnerowich, G. (2006) · Journal of Economic Entomology · doi:10.1093/jee/99.4.1085 · Cited by 42 · see citing works
Arthropods on Maize Ears for Detecting Impacts ofBtMaize on Nontarget Organisms
Eckert, J., Schuphan, I., Hothorn, L. A., & Gathmann, A. (2006) · Environmental Entomology · doi:10.1603/0046-225x-35.2.554 · Cited by 39 · see citing works
Effects of Cultivation of Genetically Modified Bt Maize on Epigeic Arthropods (Araneae; Carabidae)
Toschki, A., Hothorn, L. A., & Roß‐Nickoll, M. (2007) · Environmental Entomology · doi:10.1603/0046-225x(2007)36[967:eocogm]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Dhillon, M. K., & Sharma, H. C. (2009) · Biocontrol Science and Technology · doi:10.1080/09583150902783801 · Cited by 32 · see citing works
Rauschen, S., Schaarschmidt, F., & Gathmann, A. (2009) · Transgenic Research · doi:10.1007/s11248-009-9351-3 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Self-citationFloate, K. D., Cárcamo, H. A., Blackshaw, R. E., Postman, B., & Bourassa, S. (2007) · Environmental Entomology · doi:10.1603/0046-225x(2007)36[1269:rogbcc]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 27 · see citing works
Sinha, G. (2009) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt0709-592 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
(2003) · CrossRef Listing of Deleted DOIs · doi:10.1023/a:1018913429026 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Rauschen, S., Schaarschmidt, F., Gathmann, A., & Romeis, J. (2010) · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Genetically engineered crops help support conservation biological control
Romeis, J., Naranjo, S. E., Meissle, M., & Shelton, A. M. (2019) · Biological Control · doi:10.1016/j.biocontrol.2018.10.001 · Cited by 231 · see citing works
“It is thus likely that those results are artifacts, probably resulting from problems in study design (EFSA, 2009; Rauschen, 2010; Ricroch et al., 2010; Romeis et al., 2013a, 2014b).”
Álvarez‐Alfageme, F., Bigler, F., & Romeis, J. (2010) · Transgenic Research · doi:10.1007/s11248-010-9430-5 · Cited by 104 · see citing works
Li, Y., & Romeis, J. (2009) · Biological Control · doi:10.1016/j.biocontrol.2009.12.003 · Cited by 91 · see citing works
<i>Bt</i> maize and integrated pest management ‐ a European perspective
Meissle, M., Romeis, J., & Bigler, F. (2011) · Pest Management Science · doi:10.1002/ps.2221 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Li, Y., Romeis, J., Wu, K., & Peng, Y. (2013) · Insect Science · doi:10.1111/1744-7917.12044 · Cited by 51 · see citing works
Use of a Pollen-Based Diet to Expose the Ladybird Beetle Propylea japonica to Insecticidal Proteins
Zhang, X., Li, Y., Romeis, J., Yin, X., Wu, K., & Peng, Y. (2014) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0085395 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Bt-maize event MON 88017 expressing Cry3Bb1 does not cause harm to non-target organisms
Devos, Y., de Schrijver, A., CLERCQ, P. D., Kiss, J. G., & Romeis, J. (2012) · Transgenic Research · doi:10.1007/s11248-012-9617-z · Cited by 46 · see citing works
Spök, A., Racovita, M., Karner, S., Adduci, G., Smets, G., Rüdelsheim, P., Kohl, C., Wilhelm, R., & Schiemann, J. (2018) · Environmental Evidence · doi:10.1186/s13750-017-0113-z · Cited by 45 · see citing works
Towards a more open debate about values in decision-making on agricultural biotechnology
Devos, Y., Sanvido, O., Tait, J., & Raybould, A. F. (2013) · Transgenic Research · doi:10.1007/s11248-013-9754-z · Cited by 41 · see citing works
Axelsson, E. P., Hjältén, J., LeRoy, C. J., Whitham, T. G., Julkunen‐Tiitto, R., & Wennström, A. (2011) · Journal of Applied Ecology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.02046.x · Cited by 40 · see citing works
A controversy re-visited: Is the coccinellid Adalia bipunctata adversely affected by Bt toxins?
Hilbeck, A., McMillan, J. M., Meier, M., Humbel, A., Schläpfer‐Miller, J., & Trtikova, M. (2012) · Environmental Sciences Europe · doi:10.1186/2190-4715-24-10 · Cited by 33 · see citing works
Antoniou, M. N., Robinson, C., & Fagan, J. (2012) · Cited by 35 · see citing works
Rauschen, S., Schaarschmidt, F., & Gathmann, A. (2009) · Transgenic Research · doi:10.1007/s11248-009-9351-3 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
Self-citationHilbeck, A., Meier, M., & Trtikova, M. (2012) · Environmental Sciences Europe · doi:10.1186/2190-4715-24-9 · Cited by 25 · see citing works
(GMO), E. P. O. G. M. O. (2011) · EFSA Journal · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2428 · Cited by 21 · see citing works
Can science justify regulatory decisions about the cultivation of transgenic crops?
Raybould, A. F. (2012) · Transgenic Research · doi:10.1007/s11248-012-9613-3 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
The German ban on GM maize MON810: scientifically justified or unjustified?
Bøhn, T., Primicerio, R., & Traavik, T. (2012) · Environmental Sciences Europe · doi:10.1186/2190-4715-24-22 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Lumbierres, B., Albajes, R., & Pons, X. (2012) · Biological Control · doi:10.1016/j.biocontrol.2012.07.009 · Cited by 16 · see citing works
Putative effects of Cry1Ab to larvae of Adalia bipunctata - reply to Hilbeck et al. (2012)
Romeis, J., Álvarez‐Alfageme, F., & Bigler, F. (2012) · Environmental Sciences Europe · doi:10.1186/2190-4715-24-18 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Agricultural GMOs and their associated pesticides: misinformation, science, and evidence
Antoniou, M. N., Robinson, C., Castro, I., & Hilbeck, A. (2023) · Environmental Sciences Europe · doi:10.1186/s12302-023-00787-4 · Cited by 13 · see citing works
Risk Assessment of Bt Transgenic Crops
Kaur, S. (2012) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-94-007-3021-2_3 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Sweet, J. B., & Bartsch, D. K. (2012) · vdf Hochschulverlag AG an der ETH Zürich eBooks · doi:10.3218/3499-8 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Álvarez‐Alfageme, F., Devos, Y., Guajardo, I. M., Li, Y., Romeis, J., & Meissle, M. (2019) · Environmental Evidence · doi:10.1186/s13750-019-0169-z
Do genetically engineered plants affect aquatic non-target invertebrates? – a critical review
Chen, Y., Romeis, J., & Meissle, M. (2026) · Environmental Advances · doi:10.1016/j.envadv.2026.100726
- Authors
- Rauschen, S.
- Affiliations
- RWTH Aachen University (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Rauschen, Stefan
- ORCID
- Rauschen, Stefan
- Venue
- Transgenic Research
- Published
- 2009-06-30
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 13-16
- ISSN
- 0962-8819 (ISSN-L)
- 1573-9368
- PMC
- PMC2801835
- OpenAlex
- W2032392254
- Cited by
- 25
- References
- 28
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 6.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Transgenic Research (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Insect Resistance and Genetics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural safety and regulations
- Keywords
- Cry1Ab toxin, two-spotted ladybird, Adalia bipunctata, non-target effects, Bt maize, MON810, Ephestia kuehniella, flour moth, insecticide mode of action, methodological errors, scientific integrity, green lacewings, non-target organisms
- MeSH terms
- Bacillus thuringiensis Toxins, Animals, Bacterial Proteins, Coleoptera, Zea mays, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Endotoxins, Hemolysin Proteins, Larva, Mortality, Moths, Pollen, Artifacts, Plants, Genetically Modified, Ecotoxicology
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
