Exploratory study on the presence of GM oilseed rape near German oil mills

Assessment of genetically modified oilseed rape MON 94100 for food and feed uses, under regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2020-169)

Oilseed rape MON 94100 was developed to confer tolerance to dicamba herbicide. The molecular characterisation data and bioinformatic analyses do not identify issues requiring food/feed safety assessment. None of the identified differences in the agronomic/phenotypic and compositional characteristics tested between oilseed rape MON 94100 and its conventional counterpart needs further assessment, except for the levels of carbohydrates, calcium and ADF in seeds, which do not raise nutritional and safety concerns. The GMO Panel does not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the dicamba mono‐oxygenase (DMO) protein as expressed in oilseed rape MON 94100. The GMO Panel finds no evidence that the genetic modification impacts the overall safety of oilseed rape MON 94100. In the context of this application, the consumption of food and feed from oilseed rape MON 94100 does not represent a nutritional concern in humans and animals. The GMO Panel concludes that oilseed rape MON 94100 is as safe as the conventional counterpart and non‐GM oilseed rape reference varieties tested, and no post‐market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable oilseed rape MON 94100 seeds into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. The post‐market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of oilseed rape MON 94100. The GMO Panel concludes that oilseed rape MON 94100 is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non‐GM oilseed rape reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.

A Review of the Unintentional Release of Feral Genetically Modified Rapeseed into the Environment

Simple Summary

With the advent of genetic engineering technology, the development and cultivation of genetically modified (GM) crops has increased. They were mainly developed for high yielding, herbicide resistance, and tolerance against different biotic and abiotic stresses. Rapeseed, also known as canola, was developed mainly for herbicide resistance and to increase the production of canola oil. Since it forms weedy, feral populations and has a proven ability to hybridize with its close relatives, it is important to manage the GM crops’ cultivation and spread, especially the rapeseed. Several studies have reported that the spread of GM rapeseed in non-GM fields and road verges is possible due to transport and agronomic practices, and it may become a weed. Hence, in this review, we summarized the cases of unintentional spread of feral GM rapeseed in the fields and road verges. In addition, we made recommendations for the effective management of feral GM and non-GM rapeseed in agricultural fields and along roads.

Abstract

Globally, the cultivation area of genetically modified (GM) crops is increasing dramatically. Despite their well-known benefits, they may also pose many risks to agriculture and the environment. Among the various GM crops, GM rapeseed (Brassica napus L.) is widely cultivated, mainly for oil production. At the same time, B. napus possesses a number of characteristics, including the ability to form feral populations and act as small-seeded weeds, and has a high potential for hybridization with other species. In this review, we provide an overview of the commercialization, approval status, and cultivation of GM rapeseed, as well as the status of the feral rapeseed populations. In addition, we highlight the case studies on the unintentional environmental release of GM rapeseed during transportation in several countries. Previous studies suggest that the main reason for the unintentional release is seed spillage during transport/importing of rapeseed in both GM rapeseed-cultivating and -non-cultivating countries. Despite the fact that incidents of unintentional release have been recorded often, there have been no reports of serious detrimental consequences. However, since rapeseed has a high potential for hybridization, the possibilities of gene flow within the genus, especially with B. rapa, are relatively significant, and considering their weedy properties, effective management methods are needed. Hence, we recommend that specific programs be used for the effective monitoring of environmental releases of GM rapeseed as well as management to avoid environmental and agricultural perturbations.

Assessment of genetically modified oilseed rape 73496 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2012-109)

Oilseed rape 73496 was developed to confer tolerance to the herbicidal active substance glyphosate through the expression of the glyphosate acetyltransferase protein GAT4621. The molecular characterisation data and bioinformatic analyses identify no issues requiring food/feed safety assessment. None of the identified differences between oilseed rape 73496 and its conventional counterpart in the agronomic/phenotypic endpoints tested needs further assessment. Differences identified in seed composition of oilseed rape 73496 as compared to its conventional counterpart raise no safety and nutritional concerns in the context of the scope of this application. No safety concerns are identified regarding toxicity and allergenicity of the GAT4621 protein as expressed in oilseed rape 73496. No evidence is found that the genetic modification would change the overall allergenicity of oilseed rape 73496. Based on the outcome of the comparative and nutritional assessments, the consumption of oilseed rape 73496 does not represent any nutritional concern, in the context of the scope of this application. The implementation of a post-market monitoring plan is recommended to confirm the predicted consumption data and to verify that the conditions of use are those considered during the pre-market risk assessment. In the case of accidental release of viable oilseed rape 73496 seeds into the environment, oilseed rape 73496 would not raise environmental safety concerns. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of oilseed rape 73496. The GMO Panel concludes that oilseed rape 73496, as described in this application, is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the non-genetically modified oilseed rape reference varieties tested with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.

Assessment of genetically modified oilseed rape MS11 for food and feed uses, import and processing, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-BE-2016-138)

Oilseed rape MS11 has been developed to confer male sterility and tolerance to glufosinate-ammonium-containing herbicides. Based on the information provided in the application and in line with the scope of application EFSA-GMO-BE-2016-138, the genetically modified organism (GMO) Panel concludes that the molecular characterisation data and bioinformatic analyses do not identify issues requiring food/feed safety assessment. None of the identified differences in the agronomic/phenotypic characteristics tested between oilseed rape MS11 and its conventional counterpart needs further assessment. No conclusions can be drawn for the compositional analysis due to the lack of an appropriate compositional data set. No toxicological or allergenicity concerns are identified for the Barnase, Barstar and PAT/bar proteins expressed in oilseed rape MS11. Owing to the incompleteness of the compositional analysis, the toxicological, allergenicity and nutritional assessment of oilseed rape MS11 cannot be completed. In the case of accidental release of viable oilseed rape MS11 seeds into the environment, oilseed rape MS11 would not raise environmental safety concerns. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the scope of the application. Since oilseed rape MS11 is designed to be used only for the production of hybrid seed, it is not expected to be commercialised as a stand-alone product for food/feed uses. Thus, seeds harvested from oilseed rape MS11 are not expected to enter the food/feed chain, except accidentally. In this context, the GMO Panel notes that, oilseed rape MS11 would not pose risk to humans and animals, while the scale of environmental exposure will be substantially reduced compared to a stand-alone product.

Potential risk evaluation for unintended entry of genetically modified plant Propagating material in Europe through import of seeds and animal feed - the experience of Latvia

Significant attention has been drawn to the adventitious and technically unavoidable presence of genetically modified (GM) organisms in the food and feed imported into the European Union (EU), while the potential presence of GM seeds in material for cultivation is less studied. Here we report a study from an EU member state, Latvia, during years 2017-2018 regarding monitoring for the presence of GM seeds in certified seed and animal feed material. Eighty-two and 28 samples of seeds intended for cultivation were analyzed in 2017 and 2018, respectively. One soybean sample contained MON40-3-2 soybean seeds (0.09 ± 0.01%) and one maize sample contained MON810 maize seeds (0.08 ± 0.01%). In addition, 102 samples of feed imported from outside of the EU or produced locally were also analyzed for the presence of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and viability of grains. One oilseed rape cake sample contained GT73 (1.04 ± 0.01%) and one soybean cake sample contained MON40-3-2 (<0.045%). One sample of declared MON40-3-2 GM soybean cake was confirmed to be positive, with MON40-3-2 content of 94.78 ± 10.01%. One soybean sample submitted by feed producer and originating from Argentina contained 54.9 ± 1.1% of MON40-3-2 and one rapeseed sample originating from Ukraine contained 5.30 ± 3.95% of GT73. Although only two seed samples contained low levels of GMOs authorized in the EU for food and feed uses, this study reinforced the need to maintain regular monitoring programs that assist farmers in their efforts to comply with the current EU GMO legislation.

Genetically modified seeds and plant propagating material in Europe: potential routes of entrance and current status

Genetically modified organisms (GMO), mainly crop plants, are increasingly grown worldwide leading to large trade volumes of living seeds and other plant material both for cultivation and for food and animal feed. Even though all the traded GMOs have been assessed for their safety with regards to human and animal health and the environment, there still are some concerns regarding the potential uncontrolled release in the environment of authorized or unauthorized GM plants. In this review, we identify the possible entrance routes of GM seeds and other propagating plant material in the EU which could be linked to unauthorized release of GMOs in the environment. In addition, we discuss the situation with GM plant cultivation in some non-EU countries in terms of potential risks for GM seed imports. The available body of information suggests that GM seeds and plant propagating material can enter the EU due to problems with labeling/traceability of GM seed lots, contamination of conventional seed lots and accidental release into the environment of grains imported for food and animal feed. Even though cases of uncontrolled release of authorized GMOs, as well as, release of unauthorized GMOs have been reported, they can be generally attributed to adventitious and technically unavoidable presence with little environmental impact. In conclusion, the probability of GM seeds and plant propagating material illegally entering the cultivation in EU is unlikely. However, specific monitoring programs need to be established and maintained to facilitate the compliance of European farmers with the current GMO legislation.

Scientific Opinion on application EFSA-GMO-NL-2013-119 for authorisation of genetically modified glufosinate-ammonium- and glyphosate-tolerant oilseed rape MON 88302 × MS8 × RF3 and subcombinations independently of their origin, for food and feed uses, import and processing submitted in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 by Monsanto Company and Bayer CropScience

In this opinion, the GMO Panel assessed the three‐event stack oilseed rape (OSR) MON 88302 × MS8 × RF3 and its three subcombinations, independently of their origin. The GMO Panel has previously assessed the single events combined to produce this three‐event stack OSR and did not identify safety concerns; no new information that would modify the original conclusions was identified. The combination of the single OSR events and of the newly expressed proteins in the three‐event stack OSR does not give rise to food and feed safety and nutrition issues – based on the molecular, agronomic/phenotypic and compositional characteristics. In the case of accidental release of viable OSR MON 88302 × MS8 × RF3 seeds into the environment, the three‐event stack OSR would not raise environmental safety concerns. The GMO Panel therefore concluded that the three‐event stack OSR is as safe and as nutritious as its conventional counterpart and the tested non‐GM reference varieties in the context of the scope of this application. Since no new safety concerns were identified for the previously assessed two‐event stack OSR MS8 × RF3, the GMO Panel considered that its previous conclusions on this subcombination remain valid. For the two subcombinations MON 88302 × MS8 and MON 88302 × RF3 for which no experimental data were provided, the GMO Panel assessed the likelihood of interactions among the single events, and concluded that their different combinations would not raise safety concerns. These two subcombinations are therefore expected to be as safe as the single events, the previously assessed OSR MS8 × RF3, and OSR MON 88302 × MS8 × RF3. Since the post‐market environmental monitoring plan for the three‐event stack OSR does not include any provisions for two subcombinations not previously assessed, the GMO Panel recommended the applicant to revise the plan accordingly.