INSECT RESISTANCE TO BT CROPS: Lessons from the First Seven Years
Bruce E. Tabashnika*, Yves Carrièrea, Timothy J.
Dennehya, Shai Morina, Mark S. Sistersona, Richard T.
Roushb, Anthony M. Sheltonc, and Jian-Zhou Zhaoc
Problems with insecticides have spurred the search for alternative means of insect control. Not only do conventional insecticides cause environmental and safety hazards, more than 500 species of pests have evolved resistance to them. Insecticidal proteins from the common bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) are an environmentally friendly alternative to conventional insecticides.
Bt toxins kill insects by binding to and disrupting midgut membranes. Unlike broad spectrum insecticides, Bt toxins kill certain pests but cause little or no harm to most nontarget organisms including wildlife, insect natural enemies, and people. For decades, sprays containing Bt toxins have been useful in organic and mainstream pest control.
Transgenic crops that produce Bt toxins control some key pests, thus decreasing reliance on insecticide applications1. Surprisingly, after seven years of large scale planting of Bt crops, pest resistance to Bt crops in the field has not been documented2.
Large scale planting of Bt crops began in 1996 and grew quickly to more than 10 million ha per year. The cumulative area of Bt crops grown globally from 1996 to 2002 exceeded 62 million ha, enough to cover the states of California and Iowa. More than 99% of this area was planted with either Bt corn or Bt cotton producing Bt toxins Cry1Ab or Cry1Ac to kill larvae of lepidopteran pests. These Bt crops expose pests to Bt toxin throughout the growing season.
The widespread and prolonged exposure to Bt toxins represents one of the largest selections for resistance in insects the world has ever seen. Before Bt crops were grown commercially, many scientists predicted that pests would evolve resistance quickly. This view was supported by pervasive resistance to conventional insecticides, lab-selected resistance to Bt toxins in many pests, and field-evolved resistance to sprays of Bt toxins in diamondback moth (Plutella xylostella)3.
To counter the threat of resistance, the refuge strategy4 has been adopted widely. Growers provide refuges of non-transgenic host plants along with Bt crops to enhance survival of susceptible pests. Ideally, rare resistant adults emerging from Bt crops mate with more abundant susceptible adults from refuges. Modeling results suggest that resistance can be substantially delayed if the heterozygous offspring from such matings are killed by the Bt crop. The refuge strategy is based primarily on theoretical calculations and limited experimental evidence from small-scale experiments with diamondback moth. No rigorous large scale tests of the refuge strategy have been reported.
Although the refuge strategy works beautifully in theory, some scientists thought that real world deviations from its assumptions could doom Bt crops to early failure. Contrary to this expectation, researchers from the University of Arizona, the University of California, and Cornell University recently reported that field-evolved resistance to Bt crops has not been documented yet2. This conclusion is based on a review of published results of resistance monitoring efforts in the U.S. and China, which account for the vast majority of Bt crops grown worldwide. To enhance understanding of this surprising outcome, we review below the status of pest resistance to Bt crops, including responses of resistant strains in laboratory and greenhouse tests, and frequencies of resistance in field populations targeted by Bt crops.
Survival of Resistant Strains on Bt Plants in Laboratory
and Greenhouse Tests
A key finding is that resistance to Bt toxins in artificial diet or leaf dip bioassays does not necessarily confer the ability to survive on Bt plants. Problems surviving on Bt plants despite resistance to Bt toxins in bioassays could be caused by longer exposure to toxins in tests with plants, higher toxin concentrations in Bt plants, differences between sets of toxins in Bt plants and those tested in bioassays, and interactions between plant chemistry and Bt toxins.
Many pests have been selected for resistance to Bt toxins in the laboratory, but only the diamondback moth has evolved resistance to Bt toxins in the field2. Some field populations of diamondback moth in the U.S., Asia and elsewhere that were treated
repeatedly with sprays of Bt toxins have evolved resistance to them. This pest attacks cruciferous crops such as cabbage and broccoli. It is not targeted by commercial Bt crops, but has been tested in lab and greenhouse experiments against Bt crucifers created primarily for resistance research. Successful development on Bt crucifers is well documented for at least three independent strains of diamondback moth that evolved resistance via field and lab selection.
While no pests have evolved resistance to Bt crops in the field yet, survival on Bt cotton is reported for at least two lab-selected resistant strains of each of two major cotton pests, pink bollworm (Pectinophora gossypiella) and cotton bollworm (Helicoverpa armigera). In contrast, a lab-selected strain of another major cotton pest, tobacco budworm (Heliothis virescens) had 10,000-fold resistance to Cry1Ac in artificial diet but did not survive to pupation on Bt cotton or on non-Bt cotton. This developmental failure on cotton plants could reflect fitness costs associated with resistance, inbreeding
depression, or both.
Lab selection of a major corn pest, European corn borer (Ostrinia nubilalis), has produced strains that resist Bt toxins in artificial diet, but cannot survive on Bt corn. Unlike the aforementioned resistant strain of tobacco budworm, a resistant strain of European corn borer survived on non-transgenic corn, but not on Bt corn. In this case, inability to survive on the Bt plants is caused by the high concentration of Bt toxin in the plants or the interaction between Bt toxin and other plant traits.
In summary, at least seven resistant strains of three species of pests have survived on Bt crops in lab and greenhouse tests. Three resistant strains of diamondback moth survived on Bt crucifers created for resistance research. Two resistant strains of pink bollworm survived on commercially grown varieties of Bt cotton that produce Cry1Ac. Two resistant strains of H. armigera, which has inherently lower susceptibility to Cry1Ac, also survived on Bt cotton.
Frequency of Resistance to Bt Toxins in Field Populations
As far as we know, field-evolved resistance to Bt crops has not yet occurred. Indeed, no increase in resistance to Bt toxins was detected in careful monitoring for two to six years of field populations of four major pests targeted by Bt crops (Table 1).
Table 1. Monitoring resistance for two to six years in field populations of pests targeted by Bt crops. So far, no studies show increases in resistance.
Estimated frequency of resistancea