Fixed-route monitoring and a comparative study of the occurrence of herbicide-resistant oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) along a Japanese roadside

Contamination of imported kernels by unapproved genome-edited varieties poses a major challenge for monitoring and traceability during transport and handling on a global scale: inferences from a study on feral oilseed rape in Austria

Novel techniques such as CRISPR/Cas are increasingly being applied for the development of modern crops. However, the regulatory framework for production, labelling and handling of genome-edited organisms varies worldwide. Currently, the European Commission is raising the question whether genome-edited organisms should still be regulated as genetically modified organisms in the future or whether a deregulation should be implemented. In our paper, based on the outcome of a 2-year case study on oilseed rape in Austria, we show that seed spillage during import and subsequent transport and handling activities is a key factor for the unintended dispersal of seeds into the environment, the subsequent emergence of feral oilseed rape populations and their establishment and long-term persistence in natural habitats. These facts must likewise be considered in case of genome-edited oilseed rape contaminants that might be accidentally introduced with conventional kernels. We provide evidence that in Austria a high diversity of oilseed rape genotypes, including some with alleles not known from cultivated oilseed rape in Austria, exists at sites with high seed spillage and low weed management, rendering these sites of primary concern with respect to possible escape of genome-edited oilseed rape varieties into the environment. Since appropriate detection methods for single genome-edited oilseed rape events have only recently started to be successfully developed and the adverse effects of these artificial punctate DNA exchanges remain largely unknown, tracing the transmission and spread of these genetic modifications places high requirements on their monitoring, identification, and traceability.

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.

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.

Morphological and genetic characteristics of F1 hybrids introgressed from Brassica napus to B. rapa in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Unintentional introgression from genetically modified (GM) oilseed rape (Brassica napus) to a relative is inevitable in the open field. A feasible and practical strategy for restricting the spread of GM offspring is to set a reasonable isolated distance between GM B. napus and the relatives. To define the isolated distance, a pollen donor/recipient pair is a prerequisite to conducting the field trial of pollen flow. However, because the cultivation of GM B. napus is prohibited in Taiwan, it is difficult to obtain relevant information. Thus, this study explored the morphological and genetic characteristics of five varieties of B. napus (donor), three varieties of B. rapa (recipient), and the 15 corresponding F₁ hybrids, aiming to construct phenotypic data and genetic variation data and to select the most appropriate pollen donor/recipient for future field trials of pollen flow.

RESULTS

The genome size of all F₁ hybrids estimated using flow cytometry showed intermediate DNA content between B. napus and B. rapa varieties. Most of the F₁ hybrids had intermediate plant height and blooming period, and the rosette leaves type and colors resembled those of B. napus varieties. The results of sequence-related amplified polymorphism (SRAP) showed an average of 9.52 bands per primer combination and 67.87 polymorphic bands among the F₁ hybrid population. Similarity and cluster analyses revealed higher similarity between F₁ hybrids and B. napus varieties than between F₁ hybrids and B. rapa varieties. Furthermore, we identified a specific 1100-bp band (LOC106302894) in F₁ hybrids and B. napus varieties but not in B. rapa varieties.

CONCLUSIONS

The rosette leaves and the DNA marker LOC106302894 observed in F₁ hybrids are consistent phenotypic and genetic characteristics that can be used to identify the presence of unintentional hybridization from B. napus to B. rapa in Taiwan. Due to the prohibition of GM crop cultivation, the hybridization system of non-GM Brassica species in this study can be utilized as a mimic scheme to conduct pollen flow trials, thus facilitating the determination of the proper isolated distance.

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.

Transgenic glyphosate-resistant oilseed rape (Brassica napus) as an invasive weed in Argentina: detection, characterization, and control alternatives

The presence of glyphosate-resistant oilseed rape populations in Argentina was detected and characterized. The resistant plants were found as weeds in RR soybeans and other fields. The immunological and molecular analysis showed that the accessions presented the GT73 transgenic event. The origin of this event was uncertain, as the cultivation of transgenic oilseed rape cultivars is prohibited in Argentina. This finding might suggest that glyphosate resistance could come from unauthorized transgenic oilseed rape crops cultivated in the country or as seed contaminants in imported oilseed rape cultivars or other seed imports. Experimentation showed that there are alternative herbicides for controlling resistant Brassica napus populations in various situations and crops. AHAS-inhibiting herbicides (imazethapyr, chlorimuron and diclosulam), glufosinate, 2,4-D, fluroxypyr and saflufenacil proved to be very effective in controlling these plants. Herbicides evaluated in this research were employed by farmers in one of the fields invaded with this biotype and monitoring of this field showed no evidence of its presence in the following years.

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

Seed losses from imported oilseed rape (OSR) and the genetically modified (GM) admixtures therein may potentially lead to the establishment of transgenic plants and their hybridization with wild crucifers. The post-market environmental monitoring (PMEM) must therefore also address problems related to seed spillages of GM OSR. Since detailed information on imported commodity flows, GM contents, means of transport, downstream users and efficient containment of GM OSR was lacking, we performed a field study in the vicinity of large oil mills and seed processing industries at the harbours along the river Rhine. One hundred thirty-six composite samples taken from one to 20 plants per site were collected near roads, railways and waterways. Individuals or large groups of feral OSR plants were detected in all of the nine study areas, but only one plant out of 1918 tested was confirmed to be transgenic (GT73). The results suggest that a spread of herbicide tolerant GM OSR has not occurred to date. In order to confirm the absence of GM feral OSR and potentially adverse effects of GM plants in the future, we recommend monitoring feral OSR on a routine basis. We present an approach for the sampling and testing of feral OSR that is based on floristic mapping and rapid tests for the determination of herbicide tolerances.