1900s science has a number of well publicized tragic tales relating to scientists promising something and missing side effects; or government/business entities

1900s science has a number of well publicized tragic tales relating to scientists promising something and missing side effects; or government/business entities misusing scientific products. It thus behooves us to be have some concern and caution regarding the food supply. I was at a demo farm once, where a set of 5-6 corn plots were laid out in farming practices from 1850 to 2000. While the 2000s plot had almost no weeds, very little pest damage, had tall and strong stalks, closer together, with high levels of nutrients, the 1850s plot had far more weeds and a large amount of pest damage. Now, what struck me the most was that the 1850s plot was integrated into the ecosystem in a way the 2000s plot wasn't. The modern view is "kill weeds, kill pests", because that increases yield. Much like we view software bugs and filing pointless paperwork. But I think that there's an ecosystem problem arising with the giant fields of corn that are hostile to other life. This is understood by the US Federal government: "Refuge" crops must be planted in the field to help keep native life around. So I'm very ambiguous about this approach, recognizing the advantages of cheap food, but concerned about the second and third order effects on the flora and fauna of the farming regions.