Does quantifying risk (e.g., hybridization rates, gene introgression) provide adequate means to assess potential environmental impact and determine approval of a plant pesticide which has wild or feral relatives in the United States? If yes, what further risk assessment is warranted to evaluate the risk of outcrossing? |
The EPA asks the Panel to discuss whether it is possible to evaluate, in part, impacts of a gene flow event by gathering data on target (pest) species which are associated with the wild species (transgene recipient). |
Are isolation distances as proposed for certified or registered seed considered sufficient to mitigate gene flow between B.t. crops and wild or feral populations of sexually compatible species? If not, what distances or measures should be imposed to mitigate outcrossing? |
The EPA asks the Panel to discuss whether the gathered data will allow estimating the degree to which resistance to these target species may influence the population dynamics or invasiveness of the wild relative. |
Does the panel agree that the gene flow and outcrossing assessment contained in the background documents are adequate for the currently registered B.t. crops? If not, what additional data or issues should be considered to assess gene flow and outcrossing risks from B.t.‐expressing plant products? |
The EPA asks the Panel to discuss whether empirical data regarding the target species (e.g., fungi, insects) and nontarget species (e.g., pollinators, detritivores) associated with the sexually compatible wild relative have the potential to inform about risks to the [sexually compatible wild relative] population and the associated community. |
The EPA asks the Panel to discuss whether an understanding of the potential effect(s) of introgressed transgenes on basic plant habit, phenology and physiology provide a basis for assessing potential impacts following a gene flow event. |