QIs glyphosate (a broad spectrum herbicide manufactured by Monsanto) removed from GMO-glyphosate tolerant crops of horse hay (alfalfa, timothy, bermuda, etc.), and straw before it is baled and bulk shipped to California race tracks and feed stores?

Is glyphosate (a broad spectrum herbicide manufactured by Monsanto) removed from GMO-glyphosate tolerant crops of horse hay (alfalfa, timothy, bermuda, etc.), and straw before it is baled and bulk shipped to California race tracks and feed stores?

AExpert Answer

When glyphosate is applied to plants (e.g., crops or weeds) a certain percentage is absorbed and transported throughout the plant. The amount absorbed is variable depending on the application rate and the type of plant. Very little of the absorbed glyphosate is degraded by the plant and cannot be removed. Its persistence in plants is also variable. Federal regulatory agencies have established allowable limits for glyphosate residues in many different crops to protect human and animal health.  The tolerance for glyphosate in grass, forage, fodder and hay, and non-grass animal feed is either 300 ppm (e.g., timothy or Bermuda) or 400 ppm (e.g., alfalfa). Concentrations below these tolerances would be considered safe to feed to livestock such as cattle and horses; concentrations above these tolerances would be considered adulterated and should not be fed to livestock. It is important to point out that allowable concentrations have wide margins of safety built in to their determination. 

Posted on May 4, 2018
There would be more public seed development if genome editing technologies like CRISPR are not regulated as GMOs. Single point mutations are an extension of the undirected mutation breeding that is commonly used now. Having genome editing regulated like conventional plant breeding would allow university plant breeders to use the technology to develop new varieties without the stigmatism of them being GMOs. As for would it allow for more start-up seed companies, this is more doubtful. It is... Read More
Posted on May 4, 2018
There would be more public seed development if genome editing technologies like CRISPR are not regulated as GMOs. Single point mutations are an extension of the undirected mutation breeding that is commonly used now. Having genome editing regulated like conventional plant breeding would allow university plant breeders to use the technology to develop new varieties without the stigmatism of them being GMOs. As for would it allow for more start-up seed companies, this is more doubtful. It is... Read More
Posted on April 18, 2018
GMO Answers provides the facts that answer questions related to biotechnology, GM crops and agriculture. We work to ensure that the content and answers provided by experts and companies are accurate and therefore do not present opinions about GMOs, simply facts. GMO Answers is a community focused on constructive discussion about GMOs in order to have open conversations about agriculture and GMOs. This website is funded by the Council for Biotechnology Information. The Council... Read More