Scientists have long said the use of herbicide-tolerant canola would eventually result in super-resistant plants.
Now they’ve been proven right.
Volunteer canola resistant to three herbicide-tolerant canola systems has been found in a field in northern Alberta.
“We knew it was going to happen,” said Alberta Agriculture canola specialist Phil Thomas.
“It was only a matter of when.”
A series of chemical and DNA tests confirm the weeds in Tony Huether’s field near Sexsmith are resistant to Roundup, Liberty and Pursuit chemicals.
Read Also
Going beyond “Resistant” on crop seed labels
Variety resistance is getting more specific on crop disease pathogens, but that information must be conveyed in a way that actually helps producers make rotation decisions.
It’s the first official case of natural gene stacking in canola since genetically modified canola was adopted by farmers five years ago, said Denise Maurice, agronomy manager with Westco Fertilizers, a fertilizer sales company. Stacking is the transfer of multiple genetic traits, in this case herbicide tolerance.
The discovery comes at a time when GM crops are under fire worldwide. Despite assurances from scientists, environmental groups have raised concerns about the safety of eating products made from GM crops and have expressed fears of producing a so-called superweed.
Canola scientist Keith Downey, who created modern canola, said the triple-resistant canola isn’t a great problem.
“We haven’t created a superweed or anything like that.”
Adding 2,4-D or a similar herbicide to a chemical mix will kill any wayward weeds, he added.
“I don’t think it means anything to consumers.”
Jenny Hillard, vice-president of the Consumer Association of Canada, said this will just be another “horror story” tossed about to frighten consumers.
“The backlash now is so little based on fact, I know it won’t make it any worse,” said Hillard.
“The general public hasn’t a clue of what’s going on. They’re frightened with so little science behind their fears. They need to get a handle on this or we’ll lose the whole damn technology.”
Still, farmers like Huether have begun to question the technology that led to the canola stew in his field.
The gene crossings have prompted him to stop growing genetically modified canola.
“I wouldn’t say I’d never do it again, but the way I feel, it’s for the best interest of the consumer that I don’t.”
Huether seeded two fields of canola in 1997. On the west side of a county road he planted Quest, a canola tolerant of Monsanto’s Roundup herbicide. On the east side of the road he planted 20 acres of Innovator, a canola tolerant of Aventis’s Liberty herbicide. The rest of the 140-acre field was planted to 45A71, a Smart canola tolerant to Cyanamid’s Pursuit and Odyssey herbicides. All are Argentine types. The two fields are about 30 metres apart.
The year after he planted the field, he discovered volunteer weeds resistant to Roundup where none had been planted. Double resistance was confirmed the first year. The next year, triple resistance was confirmed. Triple resistance can’t happen in one year, said Downey.
The mixing of all three herbicide-tolerant types has been blamed on a combination of bees and wind that carry pollen between plants in fields too close together.
Researchers now recommend at least 200 metres between genetically modified canola varieties and any other canola field to prevent gene crossing.
It’s been two years since Alberta Agriculture officials suspected there might be a chance the volunteer canola weeds are resistant to all three canola-herbicide systems, Huether said. Yet few farmers, including him, have been made aware of potential problems and results of the tests, he said.
Huether is bothered by the secrecy surrounding the field tests.
“Many plants were taken and a lot of seeds taken and grown out in the lab and sprayed with herbicide, and DNA tests done on it, and the results are not being made public. I feel that should be made public.”
Huether points his finger at the close relationship between chemical companies and government scientists.
“It’s hush hush because research is funded to a large extent by big business. I’m losing more and more confidence in the whole system of research and how things are approved.”
Carman Read, with Monsanto, said the company had nothing to do with the Alberta Agriculture study and hasn’t influenced Alberta Agriculture to withhold the results.
John Huffman, an Alberta Agriculture crop specialist who worked with Huether to identify the problems, said the report will likely be released in two weeks.
