GM Crop Farm Scale Evaluations:
Scientific Steering Committee Minutes
1 November 2000
| Attending: | Members: | Professor Chris Pollock (chairman) (IGER) Dr Nicholas Aebischer (GCT) Dr Alastair Burn (EN) Professor Mick Crawley (Imperial College) Dr David Gibbons (RSPB) Mr Jim Orson (Morley Research Centre) Dr Nick Sotherton (GCT) |
| Secretariat: | Dr Linda Smith (DETR) Dr Andrew Wakeham-Dawson (DETR) Mr Stuart Darke (DETR) |
|
| Assessors: | Mr Dave Bench (MAFF) Dr Brian Johnson (EN) Dr Roger Turner (SCIMAC) Dr Toby Willison (SERAD) Mr Derek Bearhop (SE) |
|
| Contractors: | Dr Les Firbank (CEH) Professor Joe Perry (IACR) Dr Peter Rothery (CEH) Dr Cathy Hawes (SCRI) Dr Gillian Champion (IACR) |
Summary
The Scientific Steering Committee (SSC) of the Farm Scale Evaluations (FSE) of Genetically Modified Herbicide Tolerant (GMHT) crops met on 1 November 2000 to consider the progress with the FSE and the latest report from the Research Consortium carrying out the studies
The SSC has reviewed and approved the research carried out and development of data analysis techniques in spring-planted crops and presented in the Research Consortium's third interim report (October 2000).
The SSC has considered and approved the suggested revisions to research protocols proposed by the Research Consortium for use in the next round of the FSE (spring 2001).
The SSC continued to emphasise the importance of meeting its requirements for the evaluations in subsequent years, with regard to adequate:
-
geographical distribution of study sites,
-
representation of less intensive production systems, and
-
total number of study sites
in order to meet the original aims and objectives of the FSE. The SSC noted that for spring oilseed rape and forage maize the number of evaluation sites this year was less than in the original design of the evaluations. The SSC recommended that SCIMAC provide a sufficient pool of sites to allow the Research Consortium to select 32 spring oilseed rape, 32 forage maize and 32 beet (including sugar and fodder varieties) sites for the spring 2001 evaluations. The SSC recommended that a similar number of sites be available in spring 2002.
The SSC has approved the Research Consortium's proposed publication of papers relating to FSE methods, including an analysis of the statistical power of the research based on the experience of the first year of fieldwork.
Introduction
The Chairman outlined the reasons for the meeting:
-
to discuss the Research Consortium's most recent draft interim report of 20 October and assess the progress that had been made in the Farm Scale Evaluation (FSE) programme;
-
to discuss future selection of sites; and
-
to provide advice to Ministers on the status of the FSEs.
Interim Report
The Research Consortium presented its draft interim report of 20 October stating that morale was high within the project team and that research was currently up to schedule.
Record of Field Activity
The Consortium presented its record of field activity for the 1999 pilot research and 2000 spring and autumn sowings of GMHT crops. Despite bad weather conditions, the Consortium had managed to complete satisfactorily its intended research programme.
The Committee were satisfied with the record of field activity, but discussed the most appropriate timing for the biomass sampling and weed population density in the research fields. The Committee were reassured that post harvest monitoring of the sites required only a single biomass-sampling to be taken. The Committee highlighted that the timing of herbicide application in relation to weed growth stage should be recorded by both farmers and, where possible, researchers. The Secretariat will circulate to the Committee the draft agronomic advice prepared by Aventis for the application of Liberty herbicide.
The Committee asked the Research Consortium to clarify whether data were being collected on crop yield. The Committee was reminded that farmers were estimating crop yield. The Research Consortium noted that farmers were satisfied with weed control under the GMHT regime and had been taking full advantage of the technology to improve weed management in the GM part of the research sites. The Committee advised that more information about herbicide spray-drift damage to the boundaries of fields would be helpful, as would comparisons of herbicide use in the FSE with national data on timing of herbicide application in the 2000 growing season.
Data and Statistical Analysis
The Consortium gave a presentation on progress that had been made in creating the automated process of data entry and the statistical methods to be used in the project. The Committee was informed that these analyses would form the basis on which higher level analyses would be performed.
A preliminary examination of some of the data collected during the 2000 growing system suggested that the assumptions underpinning the initial power analyses were realistic. The Committee requested that a comprehensive examination be carried out and presented at the next meeting. The Research Consortium explained that the accuracy of data is double-checked before they are subjected to statistical analysis.
The Committee endorsed the section of the draft interim report on data and statistical analysis and asked to be kept informed of how this fitted in with higher order analyses. In addition the Committee urged the Research Consortium to publish its power analysis in the light of experience gained in the first full year of field research. The Committee also agreed that other papers relating to the methods used in the FSE should be published as soon as possible.
Protocol Development
The Consortium presented an outline of the development and improvement of some of the protocols being used in the evaluations.
The Committee was pleased to note that most changes to protocols were small, but focused on the changes to protocols involving gastropods (slugs and snails), crop pests (e.g. aphids) and seed rain. The change to the crop pest protocol was welcomed given that the Consortium thought that better information would be available from the change. The Committee felt that seed depletion as a result of natural predation could be a problem to the seed rain protocol, however recognised that steps had been taken to minimise seeds being taken by animals, especially ground beetles.
The Committee was interested in the possibility of changing the gastropod protocol in an attempt to increase the number of slugs being caught. Baiting of traps was dismissed for technical reasons, but it was agreed that an increase in sampling intensity by application of more traps in the sampling areas would be tried. The Committee also discussed the methods being used to estimate damage to field margins through herbicide drift. The Committee asked the Consortium and Secretariat to draw up a list of protocols and describe how they had developed to date.
The Committee discussed the level of follow-on crop monitoring proposed by the Consortium and was content that the planned seed bank and weed plant monitoring were appropriate protocols.
The Secretariat provided an overview of the research being carried out on birds in the FSE sites by the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO). The Committee asked that a more comprehensive analysis of the bird (and large mammal) study, including a statistical power analysis, be brought to the next meeting.
The Future Programme
The Consortium presented an outline to research requirements in the spring 2001 round of the FSE.
The Committee continued to emphasise the importance of meeting the research requirements for the evaluations in subsequent years, with regard to adequate:
-
geographical distribution of study sites,
-
representation of less intensive production systems, and
-
total number of study sites
in order to meet the original aims and objectives of the FSE. The Committee noted that for spring oilseed rape and forage maize the number of evaluation sites this year was less than in the original design of the evaluations. The Committee recommended that SCIMAC provide a sufficient pool of sites to allow the Research Consortium to select 32 spring oilseed rape, 32 forage maize and 32 beet (including a significant proportion of the sugar beet variety in relation to the fodder beet variety) sites for the spring 2001 evaluations. The Committee recommended that a similar number of sites be available in spring 2002.
Members Items
The Committee noted the correspondence to Members regarding post-harvest monitoring at the 1999 pilot FSE sites and asked the Secretariat to respond on its behalf
The Committee agreed that a public statement should be prepared explaining what the FSE were and were not investigating to try to prevent misconception in the media and elsewhere. In addition, this publication will to attempt to put the FSE into context in relation to the wider debate concerning genetic modification technology.
A request to the Committee from the Agriculture and Environment Biotechnology Commission (AEBC) for information concerning the methods used in the FSE was noted. The Secretariat will prepare a paper for the Committee on this subject.
The meeting closed at 16:30 hours.
The next meeting of the Scientific Steering Committee will be held on 9 February 2001 (venue to be confirmed).
Page published 1 December
2000;
Page last modified
25 February, 2003