Cultivation of GMO in Germany: support of monitoring and coexistence issues by WebGIS technology

BackgroundIn Germany, apart from the Amflora potato licensed for cultivation since March 2010, Bt-maize MON810 is the only genetically modified organisms (GMO) licensed for commercial cultivation (about 3,000 ha in 2008). Concerns have been raised about potential adverse environmental impacts of the GMO and about potential implications on the coexistence between conventional and genetically modified production. These issues should be considered on a regional base. The objective of this article is to describe how GMO monitoring that is required after risk assessment and GMO release can be complemented by a Web-based geoinformation system (WebGIS). Secondly, it is also described how WebGIS techniques might support coexistence issues with regard to Bt-maize cultivation and conservation areas. Accordingly, on the one hand, the WebGIS should enable access to relevant geodata describing the receiving environment, including information on cultivation patterns and conservation areas containing protected species and habitats. On the other hand, metadata on already established environmental monitoring networks should be provided as well as measurement data of the intended GMO monitoring. Based on this information and based on the functionality provided by the WebGIS, the application helps in detecting possible environmental GMO impacts and in avoiding or identifying coexistence problems.ResultsThe WebGIS applies Web mapping techniques to generate maps via internet requests and offers additional functionality for analysis, processing and publication of selected geodata. It is based on open source software solely. The developments rely on a combination of the University of Minnesota (UMN ) MapServer with the Apache HTTP server, the open source database management systems MySQL and PostgreSQL and the graphical user interface provided by Mapbender. Important information on the number and the location of Bt-maize fields were derived from the GMO location register of BVL. The "WebGIS GMO Monitoring" provides different tools allowing for the application of basic GIS techniques as, for instance, automatic or interactive zooming, distance measurements or querying attribute information from selected GIS layers. More sophisticated GIS tools were implemented additionally, e.g. a buffer function which enables generating buffers around selected geo-objects like Bt-maize fields. Finally, a function for intersection of different maps was developed. The WebGIS comprises information on the location of all Bt-maize fields in Germany according to the official GMO location register of the Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety between 2005 and 2008. It facilitates, amongst others, access to geodata of GMO fields and their surroundings and can relate them with additional environmental data on climate, soil, and agricultural patterns. Furthermore, spatial data on the location of flora-fauna-habitats and environmental monitoring sites in the federal state of Brandenburg were integrated.The WebGIS GMO monitoring was implemented according to the concept for an "Information System for Monitoring GMO" (ISMO) which was designed on behalf of the German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation. ISMO includes hypotheses-based ecological effects of GMO cultivation and suggests checkpoints for GMO monitoring to test whether impacts may be observed in the receiving environment.In contrast to the public GMO register, the WebGIS GMO monitoring enables mapping of GMO fields and provides relevant geodata describing environmental and agricultural conditions in their neighbourhood of the cultivation sites as well as information derived from monitoring sites. On this basis, spatial analyses should be enabled and supported, respectively. Further, the WebGIS GMO monitoring supplements PortalU which, in Germany, is the technical realisation of the Infrastructure for Spatial Information in Europe directive (Directive 2007/2/EC) released by the EU in 2007.ConclusionsThe article should have shown how to support and complement GMO monitoring with the help of the WebGIS application. It facilitates co-operation and data access across spatial scales for different users since it is based on internet technologies. The WebGIS improves storage, analysis, management and presentation of spatial data. Apart from the improved flow of information, it supports future long-term GMO monitoring and modelling of the dispersal of transgenic pollen, for instance. Additional information (e.g. data on wind conditions or soil observation sites) provided by the WebGIS will be helpful to determine representative monitoring sites for detecting potential GMO impacts by means of monitoring or modelling. Thus, the WebGIS can also serve as part of an early warning system. In the near future, the integration of locations of all Bt-maize fields in Germany into the WebGIS as a continuous task should be automatised. Additionally, a methodology should be developed to detect maize fields by means of remote sensing data to manage coexistence problems on the basis of actual field patterns.

[1]  Stéphane M. McLachlan,et al.  Gene Flow and Multiple Herbicide Resistance in Escaped Canola Populations , 2008, Weed Science.

[2]  W. Schröder,et al.  Monitoring of Bt-Maize pollen exposure in the vicinity of the nature reserve Ruhlsdorfer Bruch in northeast Germany 2007 to 2008 , 2010 .

[3]  M. Finck,et al.  Concepts for General Surveillance: VDI Proposals Standardisation and Harmonisation in the Field of GMO-Monitoring , 2006, Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit.

[4]  M. Chapman,et al.  Letting the gene out of the bottle: the population genetics of genetically modified crops. , 2006, The New phytologist.

[5]  Margaret Mellon,et al.  The Ecological Risks of Engineered Crops , 1996 .

[6]  F. Graef,et al.  Determining indicators, methods and sites for monitoring potential adverse effects of genetically modified plants to the environment: the legal and conceptional framework for implementation , 2008, Euphytica.

[7]  C. Hawes,et al.  Cumulative impact of GM herbicide-tolerant cropping on arable plants assessed through species-based and functional taxonomies , 2009, Environmental science and pollution research international.

[8]  W. Schröder,et al.  GIS-gestützte Analysen zur möglichen Gefährdung von Naturschutzgebietendurch den Anbau gentechnisch veränderter Kulturpflanzen , 2009 .

[9]  J. Russo,et al.  Effects on Monarch Butterfly Larvae (Lepidoptera: Danaidae) After Continuous Exposure to Cry1Ab-Expressing Corn During Anthesis , 2004 .

[10]  A. Fleury,et al.  Gene dispersal from transgenic crops , 1996, Sexual Plant Reproduction.

[11]  W. Schröder,et al.  Auswahl repräsentativer Standorte zur Modellierung der Ausbreitung von gentechnisch veränderten Pflanzen in Nord-Deutschland , 2008 .

[12]  Joseph Strobl,et al.  Angewandte Geoinformatik 2007 , 2007 .

[13]  John Hood Emerging Risks in the 21st Century: An Agenda for Action , 2005 .

[14]  E. J. Rosi-Marshall,et al.  Toxins in transgenic crop byproducts may affect headwater stream ecosystems , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[15]  F. Graef Agro-environmental effects due to altered cultivation practices with genetically modified herbicide-tolerant oilseed rape and implications for monitoring. A review , 2011, Agronomy for Sustainable Development.

[16]  Richard L. Hellmich,et al.  Impact of Bt corn pollen on monarch butterfly populations: A risk assessment , 2001, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[17]  A. Lang,et al.  The effects of pollen consumption of transgenic Bt maize on the common swallowtail, Papilio machaon L. (Lepidoptera, Papilionidae) , 2006 .

[18]  Sam Williams,et al.  Free as in Freedom: Richard Stallman's Crusade for Free Software , 2002 .

[19]  B. Breckling,et al.  Information System for the Monitoring of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) – ISMO – , 2006, Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit.

[20]  Christopher Preston,et al.  Pollen-Mediated Movement of Herbicide Resistance Between Commercial Canola Fields , 2002, Science.

[21]  Darrell L. Parks,et al.  Agenda for action , 2005, Including the Excluded.

[22]  Joachim Schiemann,et al.  Guidance document of the scientific panel on genetically modified organisms for the risk assessment of genetically modified plants and derived food and feed: (Question No EFSA-Q-2003-005) , 2004 .

[23]  A. Werner,et al.  Agricultural practice changes with cultivating genetically modified herbicide-tolerant oilseed rape , 2007 .

[24]  C. Lavigne,et al.  Modelling and estimating pollen movement in oilseed rape (Brassica napus) at the landscape scale using genetic markers , 2006, Molecular ecology.

[25]  I. Davenport,et al.  A direct regional scale estimate of transgene movement from genetically modified oilseed rape to its wild progenitors , 2000, Molecular ecology.

[26]  Clive James,et al.  ISAAA Briefs brief 41 Global status of Commercialized biotech/GM Crops: 2009 , 2009 .

[27]  W. Schröder,et al.  GIS-based analyses for the potential risk of nature conservation areas by the cultivation of genetically modified plants–effects of isolation distances: Auswirkung von Sicherheitsabständen , 2009 .

[28]  J. Duan,et al.  Response of Danaus plexippus to pollen of two new Bt corn events via laboratory bioassay , 2005 .

[29]  Richard Verhoeven,et al.  Information system for monitoring environmental impacts of genetically modified organisms , 2010, Environmental science and pollution research international.

[30]  Hugh J. Beckie,et al.  GENE FLOW IN COMMERCIAL FIELDS OF HERBICIDE‐RESISTANT CANOLA (BRASSICA NAPUS) , 2003 .

[31]  Armin Spök,et al.  RISK ASSESSMENT OF GMO PRODUCTS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION Toxicity assessment, allergenicity assessment and substantial equivalence in practice and proposals for improvement and standardisation , 2004 .

[32]  Josef Strobl,et al.  Geospatial Crossroads @ GI_Forum '08. Proceedings of the Geoinformatics Forum Salzburg , 2008 .

[33]  J. Losey,et al.  Transgenic pollen harms monarch larvae , 1999, Nature.

[34]  E. Meynen,et al.  Handbuch der naturräumlichen Gliederung Deutschlands , 1953 .

[35]  G. Schmidt,et al.  Determining Ecoregions for Environmental and GMO Monitoring Networks , 2005, Environmental monitoring and assessment.

[36]  Decio Ripandelli,et al.  An overview of general features of risk assessments of genetically modified crops , 2008, Euphytica.

[37]  Wilhelm Windhorst,et al.  Risk indication of genetically modified organisms (GMO): Modelling environmental exposure and dispersal across different scales , 2011 .