Acknowledgments
- For assistance with information for this report and with its preparation, the following people are gratefully acknowledged:
- Beatriz Achaval, TransHoney S.A., Argentina
- Rod Bieleski, HortResearch
- Henrik Brødsgaard, Danish Institute of Agricultural Sciences, Flakkebjerg, Denmark
- John Christeller, HortResearch
- Heather Clay, Canadian Honey Council, Calgary, Canada
- Andrew Gleave, HortResearch
- Mark Goodwin, HortResearch
- Chris Hale, HortResearch
- Nikki Henderson, HortResearch
- Hamish Lamb, Department of Primary Industries, Queensland, Australia
- Robin MacDiarmid, HortResearch
- Elspeth MacRae, HortResearch
- Michele Napier, HortResearch
- Richard Newcomb, HortResearch
- Leonie Osborne, HortResearch
- Irene Parminter, MAF Policy
- Minh-Hà Pham-Delègue, INRA, Bures-Sur-Yvette, France
- Joerg Romeis, Federal Research Station for Agroecology and Agriculture, Zurich, Switzerland
- Cynthia Scott-Dupree, University of Guelph, Canada
- Kim Snowden, HortResearch
- Stephen Ware, Australian Honey Bee Indutry Council, Sydney, Australia
- Mark Winston, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada.
Table 1. Expression of novel proteins in pollen of GM plants.
| Plant | Novel protein encoded by transgene | Promoter | Expression level of novel protein in pollen | Expression level as % of total soluble protein (estimated) 1 | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maize | Bt toxin | maize pollen-specific and PEP2 (leaf-specific) promoters | 260 - 418 ng/mg (of total soluble protein) | 0.026 - 0.0418 | Kozeil et al., 1993 |
| Maize | Bt toxin | CaMV 35S3 | Nil | 0 | Kozeil et al., 1993 |
| Cotton | Bt toxin Cry 1Ac | CaMV 35S | 0.6mg per g fresh weight | 0.00024 | Greenplate, 1997 |
| Maize | Bt toxin Cry 1Ab | maize pollen-specific and PEP promoters | 1100-2400 ng/g fresh weight | 0.00044 - 0.00096 | Fearing et al., 1997 |
|
Arabidopsis (experimental brassica) |
GUS (marker protein producing blue colour) | CaMV 35S | Nil | 0 | Wilkinson et al., 1997 |
| Arabidopsis | GUS | nopaline synthase (NOS) | Nil | 0 | Wilkinson et al., 1997 |
| Tobacco | GUS | CaMV 35S | <64.6 pmol 4-MU /min/mg of total protein | N/A | Wilkinson et al., 1997 |
| Tobacco | GUS | NOS | <2561 pmol 4-MU /min/mg of total protein | N/A | Wilkinson et al., 1997 |
| Tobacco | nptII (kanamycin resistance) | NOS | 1.39 ng/mg of total protein | 0.000139 | Anon A, 1998 |
| Oilseed rape | Oryzacystatin I | CaMV 35S | Nil | 0 | Bonadé Bottino et al., 1998 |
| Oilseed rape | Bowman-Birk trypsin inhibitor | CaMV 35S | Nil | 0 | Jouanin et al., 1998 |
| Oilseed rape | nptII (kanamycin resistance) | NOS | 1.61 ng/mg of total protein | 0.000161 | Anon A, 1998 |
| Maize (Starlink) | Bt toxin Cry 9C | CaMV 35S | 0.24 m g/g fresh weight | 0.000096 | Anon U, 2000 |
| Maize (Bt 11) | Bt toxin Cry 1Ab | CaMV 35S | < 90 ng/g dry weight | N/A | Anon V, 2001 |
| Maize (MON 810) | Bt toxin Cry 1Ab | CaMV 35S | < 90 ng/g dry weight | N/A | Anon V, 2001 |
| Maize (Event 176) | Bt toxin Cry 1Ab | maize pollen-specific and PEP promoters | < 7.1 m g/g of pollen | < 0.00284 | Stanley-Horn et al., 2001) |
| Cotton | Bt toxin Cry1Ac | CaMV 35S | 11 ng /g fresh weight | 0.0000044 | Anon V, 2001 |
1 Values expressed as a proportion of fresh pollen weight in the original reference have been converted using the assumption that fresh pollen is 25% protein.
2Phosphoenolpyruvate.
3Cauliflower mosaic virus 35S promoter.
Table 2. NZ crops which could be genetically modified and their relevance to honey bees.
| NZ crops for which GM varieties might become available1 | Role of honey bees in relation to crop2 | Potential hive products from crop |
|---|---|---|
| Forage crops | ||
| Perennial ryegrass | Bees known to collect some grass pollen, but only small amounts | |
| White clover | Very important nectar source and pollen source to a lesser extent; bees required for seed production | Honey; pollen |
| Forage brassicas (turnip, swede) | Good nectar source and pollen source to a lesser extent; bees required for seed production | Honey; pollen |
| Grain and arable crops | ||
| Maize | Bees may collect pollen if no other forage available3 | |
| Canola | Good source of nectar and pollen (to a lesser extent); bees improve seed production, but not essential | Honey; pollen |
| Vegetables | ||
| Potato | Bees may visit, but flowers have no nectar, little pollen | |
| Onion | Bees required for pollination, although the flowers not attractive to them | |
| Vegetable brassicas | Good source of nectar and pollen (to a lesser extent); bees required for seed production when crop not self-fertile | Honey; pollen |
| Pea | None | |
| Leek | Bees required for pollination | |
| Garlic | None | |
| Forestry | ||
| Radiata pine | None | |
| Spruce | None | |
| Eucalyptus | Ornamental species are good source of nectar and pollen (to a lesser extent) | Honey; pollen; propolis? |
| Fruit | ||
| Apples | Source of pollen and nectar (to a lesser extent); bees required for adequate pollination | Pollen; propolis? |
| Kiwifruit | Pollen source; bees required for pollination | Pollen |
| Tamarillo | Bees may visit and could collect some pollen; flowers self-fertile and have no nectar | |
| Flowers | ||
| Cyclamen, Lisianthus, Orchids, Pelargonium, Petunia, Sandersonia, Rose, Carnation | None |
1 Based on current NZ GM research (Christey and Woodfield, 2001) and availability of commercial GM cultivars from overseas.
2 Crane and Walker, 1984; Matheson, 1997
3 Treu and Emblin, 2000
Table 3. Effects of novel proteins and GM plants on bees (see Malone and Pham-Delègue, 2001, for details).
| Novel protein or GM plant | Type of experiment | Results |
|---|---|---|
| Bt toxins (lepidopteran-active) | Larval survival | Not toxic |
| Adult survival (in lab and in colony) | Not toxic | |
| Adult food consumption | No effect | |
| Adult flight activity (protein fed to colony) | No effect | |
| Bt toxins (coleopteran-active) | Larval survival | Not toxic |
| Larval survival, pupal weight (protein fed to colony) | No effects | |
| Bt-corn (lepidopteran-active) | Larval development, adult survival, foraging frequency (in field) | No effects |
| Serine protease inhibitors | Adult survival (in lab and in colony) | High concentrations reduce survival by a few days; low concentrations have no effect |
| Adult digestive proteases | Inhibition of some proteases | |
| Adult flight activity (protein fed to colony) | Flight activity begins a few days earlier (when fed a high concentration) | |
| Olfactory learning response | One inhibitor offered in sugar reward reduced ability to learn; others did not | |
| Larval survival | High concentrations reduce survival1 | |
| Cysteine protease inhibitors | Adult survival | No effect |
| Cysteine protease inhibitor-expressing oilseed rape | Foraging behaviour | No effect |
| Chitinase | Adult survival | No effect |
| Olfactory learning response | No effect | |
| Foraging behaviour (sugar feeder with chitinase added) | No effect | |
| Chitinase-expressing oilseed rape | Foraging behaviour | No effect |
| b -1,3 glucanase | Adult survival | No effect |
| Olfactory learning response | No effect | |
| Foraging behaviour (sugar feeder with b-1,3 glucanase added) | No effect | |
| Biotin-binding protein (avidin)2 | Adult survival | No effect |
| Adult food consumption | No effect | |
| Larval development and survival | No effect | |
| Herbicide (glufosinate)-resistant oilseed rape (pat gene) | Larval and adult survival, foraging behaviour (in colony) | No effect |
1
Brødsgaard et al., 2001.2
Malone et al., in press.
Contact for Enquiries
Dr Sharon Adamson
Manager,
Innovation Policy
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry
PO Box 2526
Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Phone: +64 4 894 0618
Fax: +64 4 4 894 0741
Contact this person
