Abstract
The comment titled "Factors related to Bacillus thuringiensis and gut physiology" disputes some of the inferences in the paper "An Alkaline Foregut Protects Herbivores from Latex in Forage, but Increases Their Susceptibility to Bt Endotoxin" published in this journal. The key points in the dissent are the following: 1. Bt is generally safe to non-target species. 2. Transgenic Bt crops provide additional ecological benefits due to reductions in conventional pesticide use. 3. Susceptibility to Bt does not indicate alkalinity, nor vice versa. My response is summarized as follows: 1. Bt can form non-specific pores at concentrations of 100 ng/mL in culture, and so is potentially unsafe for animals with gut environments in which Bt persists at or above this level. 2. Initial reductions in insecticide applications have not been sustained and are even increasing in areas planted with transgenic Bt cotton. 3. Acidic guts degrade Bt more efficiently, but I concede that gut alkalinity does not imply susceptibility to Bt due to many factors including resistance in target species, toxin heterogeneity and variable modes of action. However, the susceptibility of foregut-fermenting herbivores with alkaline guts to Bt intoxication cannot be invalidated without further study.