| |
|
|
| Registros recuperados : 425 | |
| 39. |  | FARIA, J. C.; VILARINHO, R. M. Detecção, clonagem parcial e sequenciamento de um begomovirus de soja perene. Fitopatologia Brasileira, v. 30, p. S184, ago. 2005. Suplemento, ref. 772. Edição de Resumos do XXXVIII Congresso Brasileiro de Fitopatologia, Brasília, DF, ago. 2005.| Biblioteca(s): Embrapa Arroz e Feijão. |
|    |
| Registros recuperados : 425 | |
|
|
|
 | Acesso ao texto completo restrito à biblioteca da Embrapa Arroz e Feijão. Para informações adicionais entre em contato com cnpaf.biblioteca@embrapa.br. |
Registro Completo
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Arroz e Feijão. |
|
Data corrente: |
02/12/2020 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
02/12/2020 |
|
Tipo da produção científica: |
Capítulo em Livro Técnico-Científico |
|
Autoria: |
PINHEIRO, P. V.; FARIA, J. C. de. |
|
Afiliação: |
PATRICIA VALLE PINHEIRO, CNPAF; JOSIAS CORREA DE FARIA, CNPAF. |
|
Título: |
GMOs - impact on non-target arthropods. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
2020 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
In: CHAURASIA, A.; HAWKSWORTH, D. L.; MIRANDA, M. P. de (Ed.). GMOs: implications for biodiversity conservation and ecological processes. Cham: Springer, 2020. |
|
Páginas: |
p. 87-127. |
|
Série: |
(Topics in Biodiversity and Conservation). |
|
ISBN: |
978-3-030-53183-6 |
|
DOI: |
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53183-6 |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
Genetically modified (GM) plants have been adopted at unprecedented levels since they were first commercialized in 1996. At that time, two main objec-tives were set by the industry: tolerance to herbicides and resistance to insect pests. While there was no promise of productivity increase, GM crops certainly reduce crop losses by reducing weed and pest populations that otherwise compete with nutrients and the overall crop ability to yield at its genetic potential. At which cost for the environment? This review focuses on non-target herbivores, pollinators, natural enemies, and detritivores. A huge body of literature reporting laboratory and field studies have been published. Although the majority of these reports show neu-tral or ?negligible? effects of GM crops or insecticidal proteins on non-target arthro-pods, some reported negative effects, while a few others reported positive effects. The massive adoption of insect-resistant GM crops is accepted in cases where no other pest control method is available or else the GM crop impact on the environ-ment will be lower than that of pesticides. However, most of the studies published to date did not compare pesticides to GM crops, in terms of potential negative impacts. There are still many unanswered questions on how GM crops might inter-fere with multi-trophic interactions. Even so, it is certain that we currently know better the potential effects of GM crops on non-target arthropods than those of any other crop technology developed to date. MenosGenetically modified (GM) plants have been adopted at unprecedented levels since they were first commercialized in 1996. At that time, two main objec-tives were set by the industry: tolerance to herbicides and resistance to insect pests. While there was no promise of productivity increase, GM crops certainly reduce crop losses by reducing weed and pest populations that otherwise compete with nutrients and the overall crop ability to yield at its genetic potential. At which cost for the environment? This review focuses on non-target herbivores, pollinators, natural enemies, and detritivores. A huge body of literature reporting laboratory and field studies have been published. Although the majority of these reports show neu-tral or ?negligible? effects of GM crops or insecticidal proteins on non-target arthro-pods, some reported negative effects, while a few others reported positive effects. The massive adoption of insect-resistant GM crops is accepted in cases where no other pest control method is available or else the GM crop impact on the environ-ment will be lower than that of pesticides. However, most of the studies published to date did not compare pesticides to GM crops, in terms of potential negative impacts. There are still many unanswered questions on how GM crops might inter-fere with multi-trophic interactions. Even so, it is certain that we currently know better the potential effects of GM crops on non-target arthropods than those of any other crop technology deve... Mostrar Tudo |
|
Palavras-Chave: |
Non-target herbivores; Undesirable effects. |
|
Thesagro: |
Inimigo Natural; Organismo Transgênico; Predador. |
|
Thesaurus NAL: |
Detritivores; Environmental economics; Genetically modified plants; Herbivores; Natural enemies; Parasitoids; Pollinators; Predators. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
X Pesquisa, Tecnologia e Engenharia |
|
Marc: |
LEADER 02599naa a2200337 a 4500
001 2127453
005 2020-12-02
008 2020 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
020 $a978-3-030-53183-6
024 7 $ahttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-53183-6$2DOI
100 1 $aPINHEIRO, P. V.
245 $aGMOs - impact on non-target arthropods.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2020
300 $ap. 87-127.
490 $a(Topics in Biodiversity and Conservation).
520 $aGenetically modified (GM) plants have been adopted at unprecedented levels since they were first commercialized in 1996. At that time, two main objec-tives were set by the industry: tolerance to herbicides and resistance to insect pests. While there was no promise of productivity increase, GM crops certainly reduce crop losses by reducing weed and pest populations that otherwise compete with nutrients and the overall crop ability to yield at its genetic potential. At which cost for the environment? This review focuses on non-target herbivores, pollinators, natural enemies, and detritivores. A huge body of literature reporting laboratory and field studies have been published. Although the majority of these reports show neu-tral or ?negligible? effects of GM crops or insecticidal proteins on non-target arthro-pods, some reported negative effects, while a few others reported positive effects. The massive adoption of insect-resistant GM crops is accepted in cases where no other pest control method is available or else the GM crop impact on the environ-ment will be lower than that of pesticides. However, most of the studies published to date did not compare pesticides to GM crops, in terms of potential negative impacts. There are still many unanswered questions on how GM crops might inter-fere with multi-trophic interactions. Even so, it is certain that we currently know better the potential effects of GM crops on non-target arthropods than those of any other crop technology developed to date.
650 $aDetritivores
650 $aEnvironmental economics
650 $aGenetically modified plants
650 $aHerbivores
650 $aNatural enemies
650 $aParasitoids
650 $aPollinators
650 $aPredators
650 $aInimigo Natural
650 $aOrganismo Transgênico
650 $aPredador
653 $aNon-target herbivores
653 $aUndesirable effects
700 1 $aFARIA, J. C. de
773 $tIn: CHAURASIA, A.; HAWKSWORTH, D. L.; MIRANDA, M. P. de (Ed.). GMOs: implications for biodiversity conservation and ecological processes. Cham: Springer, 2020.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Arroz e Feijão (CNPAF) |
|
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
Fechar
|
| Nenhum registro encontrado para a expressão de busca informada. |
|
|
