Opinion of the Scientific Panel on genetically modified organisms [GMO] related to the notification (Reference C/ES/01/01) for the placing on the market of insect-tolerant genetically modified maize 1507 for import, feed and industrial processing and cult

Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 89034 × 1507 × MIR162 × NK603 × DAS-40278-9 for food and feed uses, under regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2018-151)

Genetically modified maize MON 89034 × 1507 × MIR162 × NK603 × DAS‐40278‐9 was developed by crossing to combine five single events: MON 89034, 1507, MIR162, NK603 and DAS‐40278‐9. The GMO Panel previously assessed the five single maize events and 16 of the subcombinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single maize events or the assessed subcombinations were identified that could lead to the modification of the original conclusions on their safety. The molecular characterisation, comparative analysis (agronomic, phenotypic and compositional characteristics) and the outcome of the toxicological, allergenicity and nutritional assessment indicate that the combination of the single maize events and of the newly expressed proteins in the five‐event stack maize does not give rise to food and feed safety and nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel concludes that five‐event stack maize, as described in this application, is as safe as the non‐GM comparator and non‐GM maize varieties tested. In the case of accidental release of viable five‐event stack maize grains into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. The GMO Panel assessed the likelihood of interactions among the single events in nine of the maize subcombinations not previously assessed and concludes that these are expected to be as safe as the single events, the previously assessed subcombinations and the five‐event stack maize. The post‐market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of maize MON 89034 × 1507 × MIR162 × NK603 × DAS‐40278‐9. Post‐market monitoring of food/feed is not considered necessary. The GMO Panel concludes that the five‐event stack maize and its subcombinations are as safe as its non‐GM comparator and the tested non‐GM maize varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.

Assessment of genetically modified maize 1507 × MIR162 × MON810 × NK603 and subcombinations, for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2015-127)

Maize 1507 × MIR162 × MON810 × NK603 (four-event stack maize) was produced by conventional crossing to combine four single events: 1507, MIR162, MON810 and NK603. The GMO Panel previously assessed the four single events and six of the subcombinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single events or the six subcombinations that could lead to modification of the original conclusions on their safety were identified. The molecular characterisation, comparative analysis (agronomic, phenotypic and compositional characteristics) and the outcome of the toxicological, allergenicity and nutritional assessment indicate that the combination of the single maize events and of the newly expressed proteins in the four-event stack maize does not give rise to food and feed safety and nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel concludes that the four-event stack maize, as described in this application, is as safe as its non-GM comparator and the non-GM reference varieties tested. In the case of accidental release of viable seeds of the four-event stack maize into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. The GMO Panel assessed the likelihood of interactions among the single events in the four maize subcombinations not previously assessed and concludes that these are expected to be as safe as the single events, the previously assessed subcombinations and the four-event stack maize. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of the four-event stack maize. Post-market monitoring of food/feed is not considered necessary. The GMO Panel concludes that the four-event stack maize and its subcombinations are as safe as the non-GM comparator and the tested non-GM reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.

Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 87427 × MON 87460 × MON 89034 × 1507 × MON 87411 × 59122 and subcombinations, for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2017-139)

Maize MON 87427 × MON 87460 × MON 89034 × 1507 × MON 87411 × 59122 (six-event stack maize) was produced by conventional crossing to combine six single events: MON 87427, MON 87460, MON 89034, 1507, MON 87411 and 59122. The GMO Panel previously assessed the six single maize events and 17 of the subcombinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single maize events or the 17 subcombinations were identified that could lead to modification of the original conclusions on their safety. The molecular characterisation, comparative analysis (agronomic, phenotypic and compositional characteristics) and the outcome of the toxicological, allergenicity and nutritional assessment indicate that the combination of the single maize events and of the newly expressed proteins and dsRNA in the six-event stack maize does not give rise to food and feed safety and nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel concludes that the six-event stack maize, as described in this application, is as safe as its non-GM comparator and the selected non-GM reference varieties. In the case of accidental release of viable grains of the six-event stack maize into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. The GMO Panel assessed the likelihood of interactions among the single events in the 39 maize subcombinations not previously assessed and concludes that these are expected to be as safe as the single events, the previously assessed subcombinations and the six-event stack maize. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of the six-event stack maize. Post-market monitoring of food/feed is not considered necessary. The GMO Panel concludes that the six-event stack maize and its subcombinations are as safe as the non-GM comparator and the selected non-GM reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.

Assessment of genetically modified maize Bt11 × MIR162 × MIR604 × 1507 × 5307 × GA21 and subcombinations, for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-DE-2011-103)

Maize Bt11 × MIR162 × MIR604 × 1507 × 5307 × GA21 (six-event stack maize) was produced by conventional crossing to combine six single events: Bt11, MIR162, MIR604, 1507, 5307 and GA21. The GMO Panel previously assessed the six single events and 22 of their combinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the maize single events or their 22 combinations that could lead to modification of the original conclusions on their safety have been identified. The molecular characterisation, comparative analysis (agronomic, phenotypic and compositional characteristics) and the outcome of the toxicological, allergenicity and nutritional assessment indicate that the combination of the single maize events and of the newly expressed proteins in the six-event stack maize does not give rise to food and feed safety and nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel concludes that the six-event stack maize, as described in this application, is as safe as and nutritionally equivalent to its non-GM comparator and the non-GM reference varieties tested. In the case of accidental release of viable grains of the six-event stack maize into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. The GMO Panel assessed the likelihood of interactions among the single events in the 34 maize subcombinations not previously assessed and concludes that these are expected to be as safe as and nutritionally equivalent to the single events, the previously assessed subcombinations and the six-event stack maize. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of the six-event stack maize. Post-market monitoring of food/feed is not considered necessary. The GMO Panel concludes that the six-event stack maize and its subcombinations are as safe as its non-GM comparator and the tested non-GM reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.

Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 89034 × 1507 × MON 88017 × 59122 × DAS-40278-9 and subcombinations independently of their origin for food and feed uses, import and processing under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2013-113)

Maize MON 89034 × 1507 × MON 88017 × 59122 × DAS-40278-9 (five-event stack maize) was produced by conventional crossing to combine five single events: MON 89034, 1507, MON 88017, 59122 and DAS-40278-9. The GMO Panel previously assessed the 5 single maize events and 11 of their subcombinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single maize events or their 11 subcombinations that could modify the original conclusions on their safety were identified. The molecular characterisation, comparative analysis (agronomic, phenotypic and compositional characteristics) and the outcome of the toxicological, allergenicity and nutritional assessment indicates that the combination of the single maize events and of the newly expressed proteins in the five-event stack maize does not give rise to food and feed safety and nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel concludes that the five-event stack maize, as described in this application, is as safe as and nutritionally equivalent to its non-GM comparator and the non-GM reference varieties tested. In the case of accidental release of the five-event stack maize into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. The GMO Panel assessed the likelihood of interactions among the single events in the 14 maize subcombinations for which no experimental data were provided, and concludes that they are expected to be as safe as and nutritionally equivalent to the single events, the previously assessed subcombinations and the five-event stack maize. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of the five-event stack maize. No post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. The GMO Panel concludes that the five-event stack maize and its subcombinations are as safe as its non-GM comparator and the tested non-GM reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.

Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 89034 × 1507 × NK603 × DAS-40278-9 and subcombinations independently of their origin for food and feed uses, import and processing, under Regulation (EC) No 1829-2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2013-112)

Maize MON 89034 × 1507 × NK603 × DAS-40278-9 (four-event stack maize) was produced by conventional crossing to combine four single events: MON 89034, 1507, NK603 and DAS-40278-9. The GMO Panel previously assessed the four single events and four of their subcombinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the maize single events or their four subcombinations that could lead to modification of the original conclusions on their safety have been identified. The molecular characterisation, comparative analysis (agronomic, phenotypic and compositional characteristics) and the outcome of the toxicological, allergenicity and nutritional assessment indicates that the combination of the single maize events and of the newly expressed proteins in the four-event stack maize does not give rise to food/feed safety and nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel concludes that the four-event stack maize, as described in this application, is as safe as and nutritionally equivalent to its non-GM comparator and the non-GM reference varieties tested. In the case of accidental release of viable grains of the four-event stack maize into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. The GMO Panel assessed the likelihood of interactions among the single events in the six maize subcombinations for which no experimental data were provided, and concludes that these are expected to be as safe as and nutritionally equivalent to the single events, the previously assessed subcombinations and the four-event stack maize. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of the four-event stack maize. No post-market monitoring for food/feed is necessary. The GMO Panel concludes that the four-event stack maize and its subcombinations are as safe as its non-GM comparator and the tested non-GM reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.

Assessment of genetically modified maize Bt11 x MIR162 x 1507 x GA21 and three subcombinations independently of their origin, for food and feed uses under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-DE-2010-86)

In this opinion, the GMO Panel assessed the four-event stack maize Bt11 × MIR162 × 1507 × GA21 and three of its subcombinations, independently of their origin. The GMO Panel previously assessed the four single events and seven of their combinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single events or the seven subcombinations leading to modification of the original conclusions were identified. Based on the molecular, agronomic, phenotypic and compositional characteristics, the combination of the single events in the four-event stack maize did not give rise to food/feed safety issues. Based on the nutritional assessment of the compositional characteristics of maize Bt11 × MIR162 × 1507 × GA21, foods and feeds derived from the genetically modified (GM) maize are expected to have the same nutritional impact as those derived from non-GM maize varieties. In the case of accidental release of viable grains of maize Bt11 × MIR162 × 1507 × GA21 into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. The GMO Panel concludes that maize Bt11 × MIR162 × 1507 × GA21 is nutritionally equivalent to and as safe as its non-GM comparator in the context of the scope of this application. For the three subcombinations included in the scope, for which no experimental data were provided, the GMO Panel assessed the likelihood of interactions among the single events and concluded that their combinations would not raise safety concerns. These maize subcombinations are therefore expected to be as safe as the single events, the previously assessed subcombinations and the four-event stack maize. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of maize Bt11 × MIR162 × 1507 × GA21 and its subcombinations. A minority opinion expressed by a GMO Panel member is appended to this opinion.

Risk assessment of information on the subcombination Bt11 × 1507 × GA21, related to the application of Syngenta (EFSA-GMO-DE-2011-99) for authorisation of food and feed containing, consisting and produced from genetically modified maize Bt11 × 59122 × MIR604 × 1507 × GA21

The GMO Panel has previously assessed the single events Bt11, 59122, MIR604, 1507 and GA21 as well as different stacked events corresponding to combinations of these events and no safety concerns were identified. In its assessment of the five-event maize stack Bt11 × 59122 × MIR604 × 1507 × GA21 (application EFSA-GMO-DE-2011-99), the GMO Panel also assessed all the subcombinations of these events not previously assessed, including some for which little or no experimental data were provided, including the three-event stack Bt11 × 1507 × GA21. In line with Article 5 of the decision for authorisation of application EFSA-GMO-DE-2011-99, the European Commission received from Syngenta information on the levels of the newly expressed proteins in subcombination Bt11 × 1507 × GA21 and tasked EFSA to analyse these data and to indicate whether they have an impact on the previously issued opinion on the five-event stack Bt11 × 59122 × MIR604 × 1507 × GA21 and its subcombinations. Analyses of the levels of the newly expressed proteins Cry1Ab, PAT, Cry1F and mEPSPS showed that there is no indication of an interaction between the events combined in maize Bt11 × 1507 × GA21 that would affect the levels of the newly expressed proteins. Thus, the GMO Panel is of the opinion that the new information for maize Bt11 × 1507 × GA21 does not alter the conclusions of the scientific opinion on application EFSA-GMO-DE-2011-99.

Assessment of genetically modified maize 1507 × 59122 × MON810 × NK603 and subcombinations, for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2011-92)

In this opinion, the GMO Panel assessed the four-event stack maize 1507 × 59122 ×  MON810 ×  NK603 and its ten subcombinations, independently of their origin. The GMO Panel previously assessed the four single events combined in this four-event stack maize and five of their combinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single events or their previously assessed combinations leading to modification of the original conclusions were identified. Based on the molecular, agronomic, phenotypic and compositional characteristics, the combination of the single maize events and of the newly expressed proteins in the four-event stack maize did not give rise to food and feed safety or nutritional issues. The GMO Panel concludes that the four-event stack maize is as safe and as nutritious as its non-GM comparator. In the case of accidental release of viable grains of maize 1507 × 59122 × MON810 × NK603 into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. For four of the subcombinations not previously assessed, protein expression data were provided and did not indicate an interaction affecting the levels of the newly expressed proteins in these subcombinations. The five subcombinations not previously assessed are expected to be as safe as the single maize events, the previously assessed subcombinations and the four-event stack maize. The GMO Panel considers that post-market monitoring of maize 1507 × 59122 ×MON810 × NK603 and its subcombinations is not necessary. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of maize 1507 × 59122 × MON810 ×NK603 and its subcombinations.

Scientific Opinion on application EFSA-GMO-BE-2013-118 for authorisation of genetically modified maize MON 87427 × MON 89034 × 1507 × MON 88017 × 59122 and subcombinations independently of their origin, for food and feed uses, import and processing submitted under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 by Monsanto Company

In this opinion, the GMO Panel assessed the five-event stack maize MON 87427 × MON 89034 ×1507 × MON 88017 × 59122 and its 25 subcombinations, independently of their origin. The GMO Panel has previously assessed the five single events combined to produce this five-event stack maize and 11 subcombinations of these events and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single events or their previously assessed subcombinations, leading to modification of the original conclusions were identified. The combination of the single events and of the newly expressed proteins in the five-event stack maize did not give rise to issues - based on the molecular, agronomic/phenotypic or compositional characteristics - regarding food and feed safety and nutrition. Considering the scope of this application, the known biological function of the newly expressed proteins and the data available for the five-event stack maize and its previously assessed maize subcombinations, the GMO Panel considered that different combinations of the single events would not raise environmental concerns. The GMO Panel concludes that the five-event stack maize is as safe and as nutritious as the non-genetically modified (GM) comparator and the tested non-GM reference varieties in the context of its scope. For the 14 maize subcombinations for which no experimental data were provided, the GMO Panel assessed the likelihood of interactions among the single events, and concluded that their combinations would not raise safety concerns. These maize subcombinations are therefore expected to be as safe as the single events, the previously assessed subcombinations and maize MON 87427 ×MON 89034 × 1507 × MON 88017 × 59122. Since the post-market environmental monitoring plan for the five-event stack maize does not include any provisions for the 14 maize subcombinations not previously assessed, the GMO Panel recommended the applicant to revise the plan accordingly.

Scientific opinion on an application for renewal of authorisation for continued marketing of maize 1507 and derived food and feed submitted under Articles 11 and 23 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 by Pioneer Overseas Corporation and Dow AgroSciences LLC

Following the submission of application EFSA-GMO-RX-001 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Pioneer Overseas Corporation and Dow Agrosciences LLC, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority (GMO Panel) was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the frame of a renewal of authorisation application of the insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant genetically modified (GM) maize 1507. The data package received in the frame of this renewal application contained post-market environmental monitoring reports, a systematic search and evaluation of literature, an updated bioinformatics analysis and additional documents or studies performed by or on behalf of the applicant. The GMO Panel assessed this data package for possible new hazards, modified exposure or new scientific uncertainties identified during the authorisation period and not previously assessed in the frame of the original application. Under the assumption that the DNA sequence of the event in maize 1507 considered for renewal is identical to the corrected sequence of the originally assessed event, the GMO Panel concludes that no new hazards or modified exposure and no new scientific uncertainties were identified for the application for renewal that would change the conclusions of the original risk assessment on maize 1507 (EFSA, 2005b, 2009).

Transgenic maize event TC1507: Global status of food, feed, and environmental safety

Maize (Zea mays) is a widely cultivated cereal that has been safely consumed by humans and animals for centuries. Transgenic or genetically engineered insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant maize, are commercially grown on a broad scale. Event TC1507 (OECD unique identifier: DAS-Ø15Ø7–1) or the Herculex®^# I trait, an insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant maize expressing Cry1F and PAT proteins, has been registered for commercial cultivation in the US since 2001. A science-based safety assessment was conducted on TC1507 prior to commercialization. The safety assessment addressed allergenicity; acute oral toxicity; subchronic toxicity; substantial equivalence with conventional comparators, as well as environmental impact. Results from biochemical, physicochemical, and in silico investigations supported the conclusion that Cry1F and PAT proteins are unlikely to be either allergenic or toxic to humans. Also, findings from toxicological and animal feeding studies supported that maize with TC1507 is as safe and nutritious as conventional maize. Maize with TC1507 is not expected to behave differently than conventional maize in terms of its potential for invasiveness, gene flow to wild and weedy relatives, or impact on non-target organisms. These safety conclusions regarding TC1507 were acknowledged by over 20 regulatory agencies including United States Environment Protection Agency (US EPA), US Department of Agriculture (USDA), Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), and European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) before authorizing cultivation and/or food and feed uses. A comprehensive review of the safety studies on TC1507, as well as some benefits, are presented here to serve as a reference for regulatory agencies and decision makers in other countries where authorization of TC1507 is or will be pursued.

EFSA's scientific activities and achievements on the risk assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) during its first decade of existence: looking back and ahead

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and derived food and feed products are subject to a risk analysis and regulatory approval before they can enter the market in the European Union (EU). In this risk analysis process, the role of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), which was created in 2002 in response to multiple food crises, is to independently assess and provide scientific advice to risk managers on any possible risks that the use of GMOs may pose to human and animal health and the environment. EFSA's scientific advice is elaborated by its GMO Panel with the scientific support of several working groups and EFSA's GMO Unit. This review presents EFSA's scientific activities and highlights its achievements on the risk assessment of GMOs for the first 10 years of its existence. Since 2002, EFSA has issued 69 scientific opinions on genetically modified (GM) plant market registration applications, of which 62 for import and processing for food and feed uses, six for cultivation and one for the use of pollen (as or in food), and 19 scientific opinions on applications for marketing products made with GM microorganisms. Several guidelines for the risk assessment of GM plants, GM microorganisms and GM animals, as well as on specific issues such as post-market environmental monitoring (PMEM) were elaborated. EFSA also provided scientific advice upon request of the European Commission on safeguard clause and emergency measures invoked by EU Member States, annual PMEM reports, the potential risks of new biotechnology-based plant breeding techniques, evaluations of previously assessed GMOs in the light of new scientific publications, and the use of antibiotic resistance marker genes in GM plants. Future challenges relevant to the risk assessment of GMOs are discussed. EFSA's risk assessments of GMO applications ensure that data are analysed and presented in a way that facilitates scientifically sound decisions that protect human and animal health and the environment.

Biosafety and risk assessment framework for selectable marker genes in transgenic crop plants: a case of the science not supporting the politics

Selectable marker gene systems are vital for the development of transgenic crops. Since the creation of the first transgenic plants in the early 1980s and their subsequent commercialization worldwide over almost an entire decade, antibiotic and herbicide resistance selectable marker gene systems have been an integral feature of plant genetic modification. Without them, creating transgenic crops is not feasible on purely economic and practical terms. These systems allow the relatively straightforward identification and selection of plants that have stably incorporated not only the marker genes but also genes of interest, for example herbicide tolerance and pest resistance. Bacterial antibiotic resistance genes are also crucial in molecular biology manipulations in the laboratory. An unprecedented debate has accompanied the development and commercialization of transgenic crops. Divergent policies and their implementation in the European Union on one hand and the rest of the world on the other (industrialized and developing countries alike), have resulted in disputes with serious consequences on agricultural policy, world trade and food security. A lot of research effort has been directed towards the development of marker-free transformation or systems to remove selectable markers. Such research has been in a large part motivated by perceived problems with antibiotic resistance selectable markers; however, it is not justified from a safety point of view. The aim of this review is to discuss in some detail the currently available scientific evidence that overwhelmingly argues for the safety of these marker gene systems. Our conclusion, supported by numerous studies, most of which are commissioned by some of the very parties that have taken a position against the use of antibiotic selectable marker gene systems, is that there is no scientific basis to argue against the use and presence of selectable marker genes as a class in transgenic plants.

Spatial distribution ofAglais urticae(L.) and its host plantUrtica dioica(L.) in an agricultural landscape: implications forBtmaize risk assessment and post-market monitoring

Over the past decades, genes of Bacillus thuringiensis var. kurstaki (Berliner) (Bt) coding for protein toxins have been engineered into maize for protection against the European Corn Borer (Ostrinia nubilalis (Hbn.)). However, these transgenic plants may have an impact on non-target organisms. In particular, a potential hazard was identified for non-target lepidopteran larvae, if they consume Bt maize pollen on their host plants. Risk can be defined as a function of the effect of an event (hazard) and the likelihood of this event occurring. Although data on toxicity (hazard) are available from many lab and field studies, knowledge about the environmental exposure of European lepidopteran larvae is incomplete at the population level. Therefore we studied the distribution of small tortoiseshell caterpillars (Aglais urticae (L.)) and its host plant in an agricultural landscape in Germany, to estimate the potential population exposure to maize pollen. The results showed that larvae of the small tortoiseshell developed primarily on freshly sprouted nettle stands (Urtica dioica (L.)) in field margins, rather than adjacent to hedges and groves. However, the main distribution was at margins of cereal (non-maize) fields, where 70% of all larvae were found. This may be due the fact that cereals covered 54% of the survey area, while maize only covered 6.1%. On the other hand, maize fields seem so show higher food plant densities than cereal crops. The results must be interpreted carefully, as the data basis of the present study is very small, and the situation can vary between years due to crop rotation or other changes in agricultural practices. Therefore it is still questionable whether the small tortoiseshell is significantly exposed to maize pollen. For a conclusive risk assessment, more replications and surveys of larger areas in different intensively managed agricultural landscapes over several years are needed.