1
|
Kleter GA, van der Voet H, Engel J, van der Berg JP. Comparative safety assessment of genetically modified crops: focus on equivalence with reference varieties could contribute to more efficient and effective field trials. Transgenic Res 2023; 32:235-250. [PMID: 37213044 PMCID: PMC10409827 DOI: 10.1007/s11248-023-00344-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/24/2022] [Accepted: 03/28/2023] [Indexed: 05/23/2023]
Abstract
The initial compositional analysis of plants plays an important role within the internationally harmonized comparative safety assessment approach for genetically modified plants. Current EFSA guidance prescribes two types of comparison, namely difference tests with regard to a conventional comparator or control, and equivalence tests with regard to a collection of commercial reference varieties. The experience gained so far shows that most of the statistically significant differences between the test and control can be discounted based on the fact that they are still within equivalence limits of reference varieties with a presumed history of safe use. Inclusion of a test variety and reference varieties into field trial design, and of the statistical equivalence test would already suffice for the purpose of finding relevant parameters that warrant further assessment, hence both the inclusion of a conventional counterpart and the performance of difference testing can be omitted. This would also allow for the inclusion of safety testing regimes into plant variety testing VCU (value for cultivation and use) or other, independent variety trials.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gijs A Kleter
- Wageningen Food Safety Research, Part of Wageningen University and Research, P.O. Box 230, 6700 AE, Wageningen, Netherlands.
| | - Hilko van der Voet
- Biometris, Wageningen Plant Research, Part of Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, Netherlands
| | - Jasper Engel
- Biometris, Wageningen Plant Research, Part of Wageningen University and Research, Wageningen, Netherlands
| | - Jan-Pieter van der Berg
- Wageningen Food Safety Research, Part of Wageningen University and Research, P.O. Box 230, 6700 AE, Wageningen, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Heinemann JA, Clark K, Hiscox TC, McCabe AW, Agapito-Tenfen SZ. Are null segregants new combinations of heritable material and should they be regulated? Front Genome Ed 2023; 4:1064103. [PMID: 36704579 PMCID: PMC9871356 DOI: 10.3389/fgeed.2022.1064103] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/07/2022] [Accepted: 12/19/2022] [Indexed: 01/12/2023] Open
Abstract
Through genome editing and other techniques of gene technology, it is possible to create a class of organism called null segregants. These genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are products of gene technology but are argued to have no lingering vestige of the technology after the segregation of chromosomes or deletion of insertions. From that viewpoint regulations are redundant because any unique potential for the use of gene technology to cause harm has also been removed. We tackle this question of international interest by reviewing the early history of the purpose of gene technology regulation. The active ingredients of techniques used for guided mutagenesis, e.g., site-directed nucleases, such as CRISPR/Cas, are promoted for having a lower potential per reaction to create a hazard. However, others see this as a desirable industrial property of the reagents that will lead to genome editing being used more and nullifying the promised hazard mitigation. The contest between views revolves around whether regulations could alter the risks in the responsible use of gene technology. We conclude that gene technology, even when used to make null segregants, has characteristics that make regulation a reasonable option for mitigating potential harm. Those characteristics are that it allows people to create more harm faster, even if it creates benefits as well; the potential for harm increases with increased use of the technique, but safety does not; and regulations can control harm scaling.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jack A. Heinemann
- Centre for Integrated Research in Biosafety and School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
| | - Katrin Clark
- Centre for Integrated Research in Biosafety and School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
| | - Tessa C. Hiscox
- Centre for Integrated Research in Biosafety and School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
| | - Andrew W. McCabe
- Centre for Integrated Research in Biosafety and School of Biological Sciences, University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
| | - Sarah Z. Agapito-Tenfen
- Climate and Environment Division, NORCE Norwegian Research Centre AS, Tromsø, Norway,*Correspondence: Sarah Z. Agapito-Tenfen,
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Chu P, Agapito-Tenfen SZ. Unintended Genomic Outcomes in Current and Next Generation GM Techniques: A Systematic Review. PLANTS (BASEL, SWITZERLAND) 2022; 11:plants11212997. [PMID: 36365450 PMCID: PMC9655061 DOI: 10.3390/plants11212997] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/17/2022] [Revised: 11/01/2022] [Accepted: 11/02/2022] [Indexed: 05/27/2023]
Abstract
Classical genetic engineering and new genome editing techniques, especially the CRISPR/Cas technology, increase the possibilities for modifying the genetic material in organisms. These technologies have the potential to provide novel agricultural traits, including modified microorganisms and environmental applications. However, legitimate safety concerns arise from the unintended genetic modifications (GM) that have been reported as side-effects of such techniques. Here, we systematically review the scientific literature for studies that have investigated unintended genomic alterations in plants modified by the following GM techniques: Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated gene transfer, biolistic bombardment, and CRISPR-Cas9 delivered via Agrobacterium-mediated gene transfer (DNA-based), biolistic bombardment (DNA-based) and as ribonucleoprotein complexes (RNPs). The results of our literature review show that the impact of such techniques in host genomes varies from small nucleotide polymorphisms to large genomic variation, such as segmental duplication, chromosome truncation, trisomy, chromothripsis, breakage fusion bridge, including large rearrangements of DNA vector-backbone sequences. We have also reviewed the type of analytical method applied to investigate the genomic alterations and found that only five articles used whole genome sequencing in their analysis methods. In addition, larger structural variations detected in some studies would not be possible without long-read sequencing strategies, which shows a potential underestimation of such effects in the literature. As new technologies are constantly evolving, a more thorough examination of prospective analytical methods should be conducted in the future. This will provide regulators working in the field of genetically modified and gene-edited organisms with valuable information on the ability to detect and identify genomic interventions.
Collapse
|
4
|
Zanon Agapito-Tenfen S, Guerra MP, Nodari RO, Wikmark OG. Untargeted Proteomics-Based Approach to Investigate Unintended Changes in Genetically Modified Maize for Environmental Risk Assessment Purpose. FRONTIERS IN TOXICOLOGY 2021; 3:655968. [PMID: 35295118 PMCID: PMC8915820 DOI: 10.3389/ftox.2021.655968] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/19/2021] [Accepted: 05/06/2021] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Profiling technologies, such as proteomics, allow the simultaneous measurement and comparison of thousands of plant components without prior knowledge of their identity. The combination of these non-targeted methods facilitates a more comprehensive approach than targeted methods and thus provides additional opportunities to identify genotypic changes resulting from genetic modification, including new allergens or toxins. The purpose of this study was to investigate unintended changes in GM Bt maize grown in South Africa. In the present study, we used bi-dimensional gel electrophoresis based on fluorescence staining, coupled with mass spectrometry in order to compare the proteome of the field-grown transgenic hybrid (MON810) and its near-isogenic counterpart. Proteomic data showed that energy metabolism and redox homeostasis were unequally modulated in GM Bt and non-GM maize variety samples. In addition, a potential allergenic protein-pathogenesis related protein -1 has been identified in our sample set. Our data shows that the GM variety is not substantially equivalent to its non-transgenic near-isogenic variety and further studies should be conducted in order to address the biological relevance and the potential risks of such changes. These finding highlight the suitability of unbiased profiling approaches to complement current GMO risk assessment practices worldwide.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Miguel Pedro Guerra
- CropScience Department, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil
| | - Rubens Onofre Nodari
- CropScience Department, Federal University of Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, Brazil
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Aguilera J, Aguilera‐Gomez M, Barrucci F, Cocconcelli PS, Davies H, Denslow N, Lou Dorne J, Grohmann L, Herman L, Hogstrand C, Kass GEN, Kille P, Kleter G, Nogué F, Plant NJ, Ramon M, Schoonjans R, Waigmann E, Wright MC. EFSA Scientific Colloquium 24 – 'omics in risk assessment: state of the art and next steps. ACTA ACUST UNITED AC 2018. [DOI: 10.2903/sp.efsa.2018.en-1512] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Lutz Grohmann
- Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Fabien Nogué
- French National Institute for Agricultural Research INRA
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Dolezel M, Miklau M, Heissenberger A, Reichenbecher W. Limits of Concern: suggestions for the operationalisation of a concept to determine the relevance of adverse effects in the ERA of GMOs. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES EUROPE 2018; 30:39. [PMID: 30416927 PMCID: PMC6208838 DOI: 10.1186/s12302-018-0169-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/29/2018] [Accepted: 10/12/2018] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The European Food Safety Authority proposed a concept for the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants in the EU that is based on the definition of thresholds for the acceptability of potential adverse effects on the environment. This concept, called Limits of Concern (LoC), needs to be further refined to be implemented in the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified organisms. METHODS We analyse and discuss how LoC can be defined for the environmental risk assessment for three different types of genetically modified plants. We outline protection goals relevant to the genetically modified plants in question and discuss existing concepts and suggestions for acceptability thresholds from the environmental risk assessment of different regulatory areas. We make specific recommendations for the setting and use of LoC for each type of genetically modified plant. RESULTS The LoC concept can be suitably applied for the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified organisms, if the different protection goals in agro-environments are specifically considered. Not only biodiversity protection goals but also agricultural protection goals need to be addressed. The different ecosystem services provided by weeds inside and outside agricultural fields have to be considered for genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. Exposure-based LoCs are suggested based on knowledge about dose-effect relationships between maize pollen and non-target Lepidoptera for insect-resistant maize. Due to the long-term nature of biological processes such as spread and establishment, LoCs for genetically modified oilseed rape should be defined for the presence of the genetically modified plant or its genetically modified traits in relevant protection goals. CONCLUSIONS When setting LoCs, the focus should be on protection goals which are possibly affected. Potential overlaps of the LoC concept with the ecosystem service concept have to be clarified to harmonise protection levels in the agro-environment for different stressors. If additional impacts on agro-biodiversity resulting from the cultivation of genetically modified plants are to be avoided, then high protection levels and low thresholds for acceptable effects (i.e. LoC) should be set.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marion Dolezel
- Environment Agency Austria, Spittelauer Laende 5, 1090 Vienna, Austria
| | - Marianne Miklau
- Environment Agency Austria, Spittelauer Laende 5, 1090 Vienna, Austria
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Slot MM, van de Wiel CCM, Kleter GA, Visser RGF, Kok EJ. The assessment of field trials in GMO research around the world and their possible integration in field trials for variety registration. Transgenic Res 2018; 27:321-329. [DOI: 10.1007/s11248-018-0076-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/24/2018] [Accepted: 04/27/2018] [Indexed: 10/17/2022]
|
8
|
Risk associated with off-target plant genome editing and methods for its limitation. Emerg Top Life Sci 2017; 1:231-240. [PMID: 33525760 PMCID: PMC7288994 DOI: 10.1042/etls20170037] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/14/2017] [Revised: 09/13/2017] [Accepted: 09/19/2017] [Indexed: 12/26/2022]
Abstract
Assessment for potential adverse effects of plant genome editing logically focuses on the specific characteristics of the derived phenotype and its release environment. Genome-edited crops, depending on the editing objective, can be classified as either indistinguishable from crops developed through conventional plant breeding or as crops which are transgenic. Therefore, existing regulatory regimes and risk assessment procedures accommodate genome-edited crops. The ability for regulators and the public to accept a product focus in the evaluation of genome-edited crops will depend on research which clarifies the precision of the genome-editing process and evaluates unanticipated off-target edits from the process. Interpretation of genome-wide effects of genome editing should adhere to existing frameworks for comparative risk assessment where the nature and degree of effects are considered relative to a baseline of genome-wide mutations as found in crop varieties developed through conventional breeding methods. Research addressing current uncertainties regarding unintended changes from plant genome editing, and adopting procedures that clearly avoid the potential for gene drive initiation, will help to clarify anticipated public and regulatory questions regarding risk of crops derived through genome editing.
Collapse
|
9
|
Li R, Quan S, Yan X, Biswas S, Zhang D, Shi J. Molecular characterization of genetically-modified crops: Challenges and strategies. Biotechnol Adv 2017; 35:302-309. [DOI: 10.1016/j.biotechadv.2017.01.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/22/2016] [Revised: 01/19/2017] [Accepted: 01/23/2017] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
|
10
|
Dolezel M, Miklau M, Heissenberger A, Reichenbecher W. Are Limits of Concern a useful concept to improve the environmental risk assessment of GM plants? ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES EUROPE 2017; 29:7. [PMID: 28261537 PMCID: PMC5313563 DOI: 10.1186/s12302-017-0104-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/20/2016] [Accepted: 01/27/2017] [Indexed: 06/06/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has introduced a concept for the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified (GM) plants which foresees the definition of ecological threshold values defining acceptable adverse effects of the GM plant on the environment (Limits of Concern, LoC). METHODS We analysed the LoC concept by scrutinising its feasibility with regard to important aspects of the environmental risk assessment. We then considered its relationship with protection goals, the comparative safety assessment and the stepwise testing approach. We finally discussed its usefulness for assessing long-term effects, effects on non-target organisms and species of conservation concern. RESULTS The LoC concept is a possible approach to introduce ecological thresholds into environmental risk assessment in order to evaluate environmental harm. However, the concept leaves many important aspects open. Thresholds for environmental harm for protection goals need spatial and temporal differentiation from LoCs used for ERA indicators. Regionalisation of LoCs must be provided for as biodiversity levels and protection goals vary across the EU. Further guidance is needed with respect to the consequences, in case LoCs are exceeded and a link needs to be established between environmentally relevant results from the comparative safety assessment and the LoC concept. LoCs for long-term effects have to be evaluated by long-term monitoring. LoCs for non-target organisms need to be discriminated according to the species and parameters assessed. CONCLUSIONS The overall LoC concept is considered useful if LoCs are further specified and differentiated. Although LoCs will finally be determined by political decisions, they should be based on scientific grounds in order to increase confidence in the conclusions on the safety of GM plants.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Marion Dolezel
- Environment Agency Austria, Spittelauer Laende 5, 1090 Vienna, Austria
| | - Marianne Miklau
- Environment Agency Austria, Spittelauer Laende 5, 1090 Vienna, Austria
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Jones HD. Future of breeding by genome editing is in the hands of regulators. GM CROPS & FOOD 2016; 6:223-32. [PMID: 26930115 DOI: 10.1080/21645698.2015.1134405] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
Abstract
We are witnessing the timely convergence of several technologies that together will have significant impact on research, human health and in animal and plant breeding. The exponential increase in genome and expressed sequence data, the ability to compile, analyze and mine these data via sophisticated bioinformatics procedures on high-powered computers, and developments in various molecular and in-vitro cellular techniques combine to underpin novel developments in research and commercial biotechnology. Arguably the most important of these is genome editing which encompasses a suite of site directed nucleases (SDN) that can be designed to cut, or otherwise modify predetermined DNA sequences in the genome and result in targeted insertions, deletions, or other changes for genetic improvement. It is a powerful and adaptive technology for animal and plant science, with huge relevance for plant and animal breeding. But this promise will be realized only if the regulatory oversite is proportionate to the potential hazards and has broad support from consumers, researchers and commercial interests. Despite significant progress in research and development and one genome edited crop close to commercialization, in most regions of the world it still remains unclear how or whether this fledgling technology will be regulated. The various risk management authorities and biotechnology regulators have a unique opportunity to set up a logical, appropriate and workable regulatory framework for gene editing that, unlike the situation for GMOs, would have broad support from stakeholders.
Collapse
|
12
|
Scientific Opinion on an application by Pioneer (EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2007‐47) for the placing on the market of the herbicide‐tolerant, high‐oleic acid, genetically modified soybean 305423 × 40‐3‐2 for food and feed uses, import and processing under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003. EFSA J 2016. [DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2016.4566] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
|
13
|
Klocko AL, Ma C, Robertson S, Esfandiari E, Nilsson O, Strauss SH. FT overexpression induces precocious flowering and normal reproductive development in Eucalyptus. PLANT BIOTECHNOLOGY JOURNAL 2016; 14:808-19. [PMID: 26132805 DOI: 10.1111/pbi.12431] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/08/2015] [Revised: 05/29/2015] [Accepted: 06/10/2015] [Indexed: 05/18/2023]
Abstract
Eucalyptus trees are among the most important species for industrial forestry worldwide. However, as with most forest trees, flowering does not begin for one to several years after planting which can limit the rate of conventional and molecular breeding. To speed flowering, we transformed a Eucalyptus grandis × urophylla hybrid (SP7) with a variety of constructs that enable overexpression of FLOWERING LOCUS T (FT). We found that FT expression led to very early flowering, with events showing floral buds within 1-5 months of transplanting to the glasshouse. The most rapid flowering was observed when the cauliflower mosaic virus 35S promoter was used to drive the Arabidopsis thaliana FT gene (AtFT). Early flowering was also observed with AtFT overexpression from a 409S ubiquitin promoter and under heat induction conditions with Populus trichocarpa FT1 (PtFT1) under control of a heat-shock promoter. Early flowering trees grew robustly, but exhibited a highly branched phenotype compared to the strong apical dominance of nonflowering transgenic and control trees. AtFT-induced flowers were morphologically normal and produced viable pollen grains and viable self- and cross-pollinated seeds. Many self-seedlings inherited AtFT and flowered early. FT overexpression-induced flowering in Eucalyptus may be a valuable means for accelerating breeding and genetic studies as the transgene can be easily segregated away in progeny, restoring normal growth and form.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amy L Klocko
- Department Forest Ecosystems & Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA
| | - Cathleen Ma
- Department Forest Ecosystems & Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA
| | - Sarah Robertson
- Department Forest Ecosystems & Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA
| | - Elahe Esfandiari
- Department Forest Ecosystems & Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA
| | - Ove Nilsson
- Department of Forest Genetics and Plant Physiology, Umeå Plant Science Centre, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå, Sweden
| | - Steven H Strauss
- Department Forest Ecosystems & Society, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Fonseca C, Planchon S, Serra T, Chander S, Saibo NJM, Renaut J, Oliveira MM, Batista R. In vitro culture may be the major contributing factor for transgenic versus nontransgenic proteomic plant differences. Proteomics 2014; 15:124-34. [DOI: 10.1002/pmic.201400018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/20/2014] [Revised: 09/09/2014] [Accepted: 09/29/2014] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Cátia Fonseca
- National Health Institute; Lisboa Portugal
- Instituto de Tecnologia Química e Biológica; Universidade Nova de Lisboa; Oeiras Portugal
| | - Sébastien Planchon
- Department of Environment and Agrobiotechnologies (EVA); Centre de Recherche Public; Gabriel Lippmann; Belvaux Luxembourg
| | | | - Subhash Chander
- Instituto de Tecnologia Química e Biológica; Universidade Nova de Lisboa; Oeiras Portugal
| | - Nelson J. M. Saibo
- Instituto de Tecnologia Química e Biológica; Universidade Nova de Lisboa; Oeiras Portugal
| | - Jenny Renaut
- Department of Environment and Agrobiotechnologies (EVA); Centre de Recherche Public; Gabriel Lippmann; Belvaux Luxembourg
| | - M. Margarida Oliveira
- Instituto de Tecnologia Química e Biológica; Universidade Nova de Lisboa; Oeiras Portugal
- IBET; Oeiras Portugal
| | - Rita Batista
- National Health Institute; Lisboa Portugal
- Instituto de Tecnologia Química e Biológica; Universidade Nova de Lisboa; Oeiras Portugal
| |
Collapse
|
15
|
Prado JR, Segers G, Voelker T, Carson D, Dobert R, Phillips J, Cook K, Cornejo C, Monken J, Grapes L, Reynolds T, Martino-Catt S. Genetically engineered crops: from idea to product. ANNUAL REVIEW OF PLANT BIOLOGY 2014; 65:769-90. [PMID: 24579994 DOI: 10.1146/annurev-arplant-050213-040039] [Citation(s) in RCA: 74] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/20/2023]
Abstract
Genetically engineered crops were first commercialized in 1994 and since then have been rapidly adopted, enabling growers to more effectively manage pests and increase crop productivity while ensuring food, feed, and environmental safety. The development of these crops is complex and based on rigorous science that must be well coordinated to create a plant with desired beneficial phenotypes. This article describes the general process by which a genetically engineered crop is developed from an initial concept to a commercialized product.
Collapse
|
16
|
Devos Y, Aguilera J, Diveki Z, Gomes A, Liu Y, Paoletti C, du Jardin P, Herman L, Perry JN, Waigmann E. 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. Transgenic Res 2013; 23:1-25. [PMID: 23963741 DOI: 10.1007/s11248-013-9741-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 64] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/19/2013] [Accepted: 08/14/2013] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yann Devos
- GMO Unit, European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Via Carlo Magno 1, 43126, Parma, Italy,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Guidance on conducting repeated-dose 90-day oral toxicity study in rodents on whole food/feed. EFSA J 2011. [DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2438] [Citation(s) in RCA: 108] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
|
18
|
EFSA guidance on the submission of applications for authorisation of genetically modified food and feed and genetically modified plants for food or feed uses under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003. EFSA J 2011. [DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2011.2311] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
|