Przeglądaj pestycydy ze względu na podział:
toksyczność dla ludzi
toksyczność dla pszczół
toksyczność dla ryb
klasę toksyczności dla rozwielitek
klasę toksyczności dla glonów
klasę toksyczności dla organizmów wodnych
Ostatnie komentarze (zobacz wszystkie):
Opinia nr 2788 o Cruiser OSR 322 FS
Spis-Pestycydow.pl - serwis internetowy prezentujący informacje na temat pestycydów. W bazie serwisu znajduje się blisko 1000 opisanych środków ochrony roślin. Zachęcamy do dodawania własnych opini na temat opisywanych środków chemicznych.
Polecamy zapoznanie się ze sklepem internetowym, na którym można kupić nasiona.
Nazwa usługodawcy: Cruiser OSR 322 FS.
Wpis numer 2788
If the seeds are available acosrs the whole range that is. If one variety is modified and the range of varieties reduced then I see problems. I dont think it matters what crop we are talking about BTW the same principle applies.It would appear then that you have no problem. Genetic modification is introgressed into available varieties. There is no reduction in varietal availability due to the process of genetic modification (there may be a reduction of varieties available that are not GMO, but this is a function of market economics and not the process of genetic modification itself if everyone wants to buy the GM version of a variety there is little incentive for a seed company to maintain the non-modified version as an available product)Terminator technology is something that concerns me. My argument is *if * it is implemented then it simplifies bioterrorism by reducing the crop area that needs to be destroyed.Depends on the seed production model if you had a single centralized site for seed production then sure, but as things are there are diverse companies and geographies where seed are manufactured targetting the whole shebang would be nigh on impossible particularly as so many varieties are in play that to be succesful you'd have a bio-weapon that you may as well just unleash on the whole crop (as it would be species rather than variety specific)I agree that risks are very, very low but letting someone else take them is prudent.That might make sense (in a very cowardly sort of way) if there weren't risks of non-adoption. There are however. Non-adoption of herbicide resistance traits for instance leaves the EU having to utilize herbicide regimes which have a higher environmental impact than the systems GM allows. Non-adoption of IR traits leaves the EU utilizing more broad spectrum insecticides. Non-adoption in general by the EU sets back the capacity for areas which would benefit greatly from GMOs to do so the non-adoption of Bt brinjal in India for instance was fueled, in part, by the batshit stupid stance of the EU on GMOs.I'm sure however that any Indian kids who happen to get poisoned by broad spectrum insecticides over the next few years while assisting with the cultivation of Brinjal will be more than happy to know that the EU has avoided stepping on a mine that doesn't exist.
|Autor wypowiedzi: gUOixsVmi
||Data: 2012-10-03 09:44:53
poprzedni wpis | następny wpis