More than 100 scientists have written to the prime minister, criticising the government's handling of the public debate on genetically modified crops.

Ministers had not corrected "misleading" media reports about GM technology, leaving those involved in the trials "demoralised" by the public hostility to it, their letter said.

The scientists argued that the process of public debate had been hijacked by those organisations against the commercialisation of GM, leaving them "hung out to dry".

"The fault lies with the politicians who have not yet set up a level playing field for the debate," said one scientist, Professor Derek Burke.

"They set up meetings which were rallying groups for the anti-GM people and they were hijacked.

"We want arguments based on evidence and what we are getting is arguments based on opinion.

"We are saying to Tony Blair loud and clear that the science community is disaffected."

A three-year trial of GM recently reported that wildlife was adversely affected by two of the three crops tested.

Speaking on Friday, a spokesman for the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said there would be no comment on recent studies before they had been considered by the government's Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment (Acre).

"Acre's advice will inform the decision the government has to make on whether GM crops should be grown commercially in the UK, " he said.

"We recognise that the biotechnology industry is a vital part of the country's economy. However our approach to GM is based on the precautionary principle.

"Each GM crop application is considered on a case by case basis."

Liberal Democrats supported the scientists' move, but not their reasons for complaint.

"The scientists are right to criticise the government's handling of the GM public debate, but not for the reasons they put forward," said environment spokesman Andrew George.

"The government wanted the public to give their views before crucial evidence from their own commissioned studies was available."GM decisions must be based on sound science rather than hasty or make-do science, or on hysteria.

"Government commissioned studies have thrown up many questions and doubts which should form the basis of a re run public debate next year, before any decisions are taken."