CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 254Genetically Modified Organisms ResearchFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecologyInsect Resistance and Genetics

Toxins in transgenic crop byproducts may affect headwater stream ecosystems

Open access
Rosi-Marshall, E. J., Tank, J. L., Royer, T. V., Whiles, M. R., Evans-White, M., Chambers, C., Griffiths, N. A., Pokelsek, J. +1 more·2007·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
DOI 10.1073/pnas.0707177104PMC PMC2042185
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Corn (Zea mays L.) that has been genetically engineered to produce the Cry1Ab protein (Bt corn) is resistant to lepidopteran pests. Bt corn is widely planted in the midwestern United States, often adjacent to headwater streams. We show that corn byproducts, such as pollen and detritus, enter headwater streams and are subject to storage, consumption, and transport to downstream water bodies. Laboratory feeding trials showed that consumption of Bt corn byproducts reduced growth and increased mortality of nontarget stream insects. Stream insects are important prey for aquatic and riparian predators, and widespread planting of Bt crops has unexpected ecosystem-scale consequences.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0707177104

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Pollen, plant debris, and exudates from living roots or decaying plant material might enter small streams close to agricultural fields, providing potential routes of exposure for aquatic organisms.

    “Pollen, plant debris, and also exudates from living roots or exudes from decaying plant material might enter small streams that often run close to agricultural fields (Rosi-Marshall et al., 2007;Tank et al., 2010).”

    From Genetically engineered crops help support conservation biological control (2019) · cites this paper as Rosi-Marshall et al., 2007

  • Insecticidal proteins similar to those from Bacillus thuringensis and Bacillus sphaericus have been expressed in plants and cyanobacteria and shown to be detrimental towards aquatic insects, aquatic larvae and daphnids.

    “These proteins have already been expressed in plants and cyanobacteria, and shown to be detrimental towards aquatic insects, aquatic larvae and daphnids [73,83–85].”

    From Biofuels from algae: Challenges and potential (2010) · cites this paper as [84]

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 24

  1. [1]Hynes HBN. Verh Internat Verein Limnol. 1975;19:1–15. [Google Scholar]
  2. [2]Wallace JB, Eggert SL, Meyer JL, Webster JR. Science. 1997;277:102–194. [Google Scholar]
  3. [10]Raynor GS, Ogden EC, Hayes JV. Agron J. 1972;64:420–427. [Google Scholar]
  4. [11]Minshall GW, Petersen RC, Cummins KW, Bott TL, Sedell JR, Cushing CE, Vannote RL. Ecol Mono. 1983;53:1–25. [Google Scholar]
  5. [12]Dalzell BJ, Filley TR, Harbor JM. J Geophys Res. 2005;110:G02011. [Google Scholar]
  6. [13]Wallace JB, Cuffney TF, Webster JR, Lugthart GJ, Chung K, Goldowitz BS. Limnol Oceanogr. 1991;36:670–682. [Google Scholar]
  7. [14]Boisvert M, Boisvert J. Biocontr Sci Techno. 2000;10:517–561. [Google Scholar]
  8. [15]Hershey AE, Lima AR, Niemi GJ, Regal R. Ecol Appl. 1998;8:41–60. [Google Scholar]
  9. [16]Pont D, Franquet E, Tourenq JN. J Econ Entom. 1999;92:266–272. [Google Scholar]
  10. [17]Jackson JK, Horwitz RJ, Sweeney BW. Trans Am Fish Soc. 2002;131:910–930. [Google Scholar]
  11. [19]Edler C, Georgian T. J N Am Benthol Soc. 2004;23:756–770. [Google Scholar]
  12. [20]Vannote RL, Sweeney BW. Am Nat. 1980;115:667–695. [Google Scholar]
  13. [23]Cooper CM. J Environ Qual. 1993;22:402–408. [Google Scholar]
  14. [24]Allan JD. Annu Rev Ecol Syst. 2004;35:257–284. [Google Scholar]
  15. [25]Benfield EF. J N Am Benthol Soc. 1997;16:104–108. [Google Scholar]
  16. [26]Lugthart GJ, Wallace JB. J N Am Benthol Soc. 1992;11:138–164. [Google Scholar]
  17. [27]Fonseca AE, Westgate ME, Doyle RT. Crop Sci. 2002;42:2201–2206. [Google Scholar]
  18. [28]Webster JR, Benfield EF, Ehrman TP, Schaeffer MA, Tank JL, Hutchins JJ, D'Angelo DJ. Freshw Biol. 1999;41:687–705. [Google Scholar]
  19. [29]Miller JL, Georgian T. J N Am Benthol Soc. 1992;11:172–180. [Google Scholar]
  20. [30]Thomas SA, Newbold JD, Monaghan MT, Minshall GW, Georgian T, Cushing CE. Limnol Oceanogr. 2001;46:1415–1424. [Google Scholar]
  21. [32]Grafius E, Anderson NH. Ecology. 1979;60:433–441. [Google Scholar]
  22. [33]Whiles MR, Wallace JB, Chung K. Am Midl Nat. 1993;130:356–363. [Google Scholar]
  23. [35]Saxena D, Stotzky G. Am J Botany. 2001;88:1704–1706. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. [36]Benke AC, Huryn AD. In: Methods in Stream Ecology. Hauer FR, Lamberti GA, editors. Amsterdam: Academic, Elsevier; 2006. pp. 691–710. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Rosi-Marshall, E. J., Tank, J. L., Royer, T. V., Whiles, M. R., Evans-White, M., Chambers, C., Griffiths, N. A., Pokelsek, J., & Stephen, M. L.
Affiliations
  • *Department of Biology, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, IL 60626;
  • University of Notre Dame (US)
  • Indiana University Bloomington (US)
  • Southern Illinois University Carbondale (US)
  • Department of Biological Sciences, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, IN 46556;
  • Loyola University Chicago (US)
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Publisher
National Academy of Sciences
Published
2007-10-09
Volume
104
Issue
41
Pages
16204-16208
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
DOI
10.1073/pnas.0707177104
PMC
PMC2042185
OpenAlex
W1976661160
Cited by
254
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 30
FWCI
24.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (0415984)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Freshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Insect Resistance and Genetics
Keywords
Bt maize, Cry1Ab toxin, corn pollen, headwater streams, stream food webs, agricultural runoff
MeSH terms
Bacillus thuringiensis Toxins, Animals, Bacterial Proteins, Bacterial Toxins, Zea mays, Endotoxins, Fresh Water, Hemolysin Proteins, Insecta, Lepidoptera, Plant Diseases, Pollen, Water Pollutants, Chemical, Ecosystem, Plants, Genetically Modified

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