Obligatory metabolomic profiling of gene-edited crops is risk disproportionate

Multivariate equivalence testing for food safety assessment

Products for food and feed derived from genetically modified (GM) crops are only allowed on the market when they are deemed to be safe for human health and the environment. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) performs safety assessment including a comparative approach: the compositional characteristics of a GM genotype are compared to those of reference genotypes that have a history of safe use. Statistical equivalence tests are used to carry out such a comparative assessment. These tests are univariate and therefore only consider one measured variable at a time. Phenotypic data, however, often comprise measurements on multiple variables that must be integrated to arrive at a single decision on acceptance in the regulatory process. The surge of modern molecular phenotyping platforms further challenges this integration, due to the large number of characteristics measured on the plants. This paper presents a new multivariate equivalence test that naturally extends a recently proposed univariate equivalence test and allows to assess equivalence across all variables simultaneously. The proposed test is illustrated on plant compositional data from a field study on maize grain and on untargeted metabolomic data of potato tubers, while its performance is assessed on simulated data.

Using precision phenotyping to inform de novo domestication

An update on the use of precision phenotyping to assess the potential of lesser cultivated species as candidates for de novo domestication or similar development for future agriculture.

Transparency in risk-disproportionate regulation of modern crop-breeding techniques

Despite over 25 years of safe deployment of genetically engineered crops, the number, complexity, and scope of regulatory studies required for global approvals continue to increase devoid of adequate scientific justification. Recently, there have been calls to further expand the scope of study and data requirements to improve public acceptance. However, increased regulation can actually generate consumer distrust due to the misperception that risks are high. We believe risk-disproportionate regulation as a means to advocate for acceptance of technology is counterproductive, even though some regulatory authorities believe it part of their mandate. To help avoid public distrust, the concept of regulatory transparency to demystify regulatory decision-making should be extended to clearly justifying specific regulatory requirements as: 1) risk-driven (i.e., proportionately addressing increased risk compared with traditional breeding), or 2) advocacy-driven (i.e., primarily addressing consumer concerns and acceptance). Such transparency in the motivation for requiring risk-disproportionate studies would: 1) lessen over-prescriptive regulation, 2) save public and private resources, 3) make beneficial products and technologies available to society sooner, 4) reduce needless animal sacrifice, 5) improve regulatory decision-making regarding safety, and 6) lessen public distrust that is generated by risk-disproportionate regulation.

New plant breeding techniques and their regulatory implications: An opportunity to advance metabolomics approaches

Over the previous decades, biotechnological innovations have led to improved agricultural productivity, more nutritious foods and lower chemical usage. Both in western societies and Low Medium Income Countries (LMICs). However, the projected increases in the global population, means the production of nutritious food stuffs must increase dramatically. Building on existing genetic modification technologies a series of New Plant Breeding Technologies (NPBT) has recently emerged. These approaches include, Agro-infiltration, grafting, cis and intragenesis and gene editing technologies. How these new techniques should be regulated has fostered considerable debate. Concerns have also been raised, to ensure over-regulation does not arise, creating administrative and economic burden. In this article the existing landscape of genetically modified crops is reviewed and the potential of several New Plant Breeding Techniques (NPBT) described. Metabolomics is an omic technology that has developed in a concurrent manner with biotechnological advances in plant breeding. There is potentially further opportunities to advance our metabolomic technologies to characterise the outputs of New Plant Breeding Technologies, in a manner that is beneficial both from an academic, biosafety and industrial perspective.

Evaluation of the use of untargeted metabolomics in the safety assessment of genetically modified crops

BACKGROUND

The safety assessment of foods and feeds from genetically modified (GM) crops includes the comparison of key characteristics, such as crop composition, agronomic phenotype and observations from animal feeding studies compared to conventional counterpart varieties that have a history of safe consumption, often including a near isogenic variety. The comparative compositional analysis of GM crops has been based on targeted, validated, quantitative analytical methods for the key food and feed nutrients and antinutrients for each crop, as identified by Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development (OCED). As technologies for untargeted metabolomic methods have evolved, proposals have emerged for their use to complement or replace targeted compositional analytical methods in regulatory risk assessments of GM crops to increase the number of analyzed metabolites.

AIM OF REVIEW

The technical opportunities, challenges and strategies of including untargeted metabolomics analysis in the comparative safety assessment of GM crops are reviewed. The results from metabolomics studies of GM and conventional crops published over the last eight years provide context to enable the discussion of whether metabolomics can materially improve the risk assessment of food and feed from GM crops beyond that possible by the Codex-defined practices used worldwide for more than 25 years.

KEY SCIENTIFIC CONCEPTS OF REVIEW

Published studies to date show that environmental and genetic factors affect plant metabolomics profiles. In contrast, the plant biotechnology process used to make GM crops has little, if any consequence, unless the inserted GM trait is intended to alter food or feed composition. The nutritional value and safety of food and feed from GM crops is well informed by the quantitative, validated compositional methods for list of key analytes defined by crop-specific OECD consensus documents. Untargeted metabolic profiling has yet to provide data that better informs the safety assessment of GM crops than the already rigorous Codex-defined quantitative comparative assessment. Furthermore, technical challenges limit the implementation of untargeted metabolomics for regulatory purposes: no single extraction method or analytical technique captures the complete plant metabolome; a large percentage of metabolites features are unknown, requiring additional research to understand if differences for such unknowns affect food/feed safety; and standardized methods are needed to provide reproducible data over time and laboratories.