Skip Navigational Links
LISTSERV email list manager
LISTSERV - COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM
LISTSERV Menu
Log In
Log In
LISTSERV 17.5 Help - BEE-L Archives
LISTSERV Archives
LISTSERV Archives
Search Archives
Search Archives
Register
Register
Log In
Log In

BEE-L Archives

Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology

BEE-L@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Menu
LISTSERV Archives LISTSERV Archives
BEE-L Home BEE-L Home

Log In Log In
Register Register

Subscribe or Unsubscribe Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Search Archives Search Archives
Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
Re: bees shun frankenfood plants
From:
Peter Borst <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Informed Discussion of Beekeeping Issues and Bee Biology <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 4 Jan 2007 12:36:10 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (41 lines)
Dee Lusby quotes:

> The fact that bees are staying away from fields cultivated with
genetically modified organisms and the consequent reduction in pollination
is a scientific alarm for agriculture and the environment

This would be a lot more interesting if the writer backed up "the fact" with
a link to the actual report but she doesn't. Turns out, as usual, the
situation is a bit more complicated than this presentation of it. First off,
the study is only about rapeseed ("canola"). Second, it isn't only GM plants
the bees stay away from but "conventional" crops as well. Third, the authors
freely admit that "little is known". For example, we don't know if the
effect is caused by the plants, the crop method, the herbicides used, or the
abundance of weeds in the organic fields. These authors wisely state "little
is known" -- rather than presenting the information as a "fact".

QUOTE
> The ecological impacts of agriculture are of concern, especially with
genetically modified and other intensive, modern cropping systems, yet
little is known about effects on wild bee populations and subsequent
implications for pollination. Pollination deficit (the difference between
potential and actual pollination) and bee abundance were measured in
organic, conventional, and herbicide-resistant, genetically modified (GM)
canola fields (Brassica napus and B. rapa) in northern Alberta, Canada, in
the summer of 2002. ... There was no pollination deficit in organic fields,
a moderate pollination deficit in conventional fields, and the greatest
pollination deficit in GM fields. Bee abundance was greatest in organic
fields, followed by conventional fields, and lowest in GM fields. <

FROM:

WILD BEE ABUNDANCE AND SEED PRODUCTION IN CONVENTIONAL, ORGANIC, AND
GENETICALLY MODIFIED CANOLA by Lora A. Morandin, and Mark L. Winston

Department of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University, 8888 University
Drive, Burnaby, British Columbia, V5A 1S6, Canada

© Copyright by Ecological Society of America 2005

-- Visit www.honeybeeworld.com/bee-l for rules, FAQ and  other info ---

ATOM RSS1 RSS2

COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM CataList Email List Search Powered by LISTSERV