Annual post‐market environmental monitoring (PMEM) report on the cultivation of genetically modified maize MON 810 in 2014 from Monsanto Europe S.A

Assessment of the 2019 post-market environmental monitoring report on the cultivation of genetically modified maize MON 810 in the EU

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA assessed the 2019 post-market environmental monitoring (PMEM) report on the cultivation of Cry1Ab-expressing maize event MON 810. Like previous years, there was full compliance with refuge requirement in Portugal and partial compliance with refuge requirements by Spanish farmers growing MON 810 varieties. European and Mediterranean corn borer populations collected from north-eastern Spain during the 2019 maize growing season and tested for Cry1Ab susceptibility show no symptoms of resistance to maize MON 810. The assessment of farmer questionnaires and relevant scientific publications does not indicate any unanticipated adverse effects on human and animal health or the environment arising from the cultivation of maize MON 810. Overall, EFSA concludes that the evidence reported in the 2019 PMEM report does not invalidate previous EFSA evaluations on the safety of maize MON 810. However, as in previous years, EFSA identifies shortcomings on resistance monitoring that need revision in future reports. In particular, the monitoring plan, as implemented in 2019, is not sufficiently sensitive to detect the recommended 3% resistance allele frequency. Consequently, EFSA strongly recommends the consent holder to achieve full compliance with refuge obligations in areas where adoption of maize MON 810 is high and increase the sensitivity of the monitoring plan by performing periodic F2 screens on corn borer populations from north-eastern Spain. EFSA recommends revising the farmer questionnaires when new characteristics of the receiving environment emerge which are relevant for the environmental risk assessment of MON 810 such as the emergence of teosinte. EFSA encourages the Competent authorities of concerned EU Member States, the consent holder and environmental networks to engage in a dialogue to develop a framework on how to best identify and report unexpected adverse effects from the cultivation of Bt maize varieties.

Assessment of the 2018 post-market environmental monitoring report on the cultivation of genetically modified maize MON 810 in the EU

Following a request from the European Commission, the EFSA assessed the 2018 post-market environmental monitoring (PMEM) report on the cultivation of Cry1Ab-expressing maize event MON 810. Like previous years, there was partial compliance with refuge requirements by Spanish farmers growing MON 810 varieties. European and Mediterranean corn borer populations collected from north-eastern Spain during the 2018 maize growing season and tested for Cry1Ab susceptibility show no symptoms of resistance to maize MON 810. The assessment of farmer questionnaires and relevant scientific publications does not indicate any unanticipated adverse effects on human and animal health or the environment arising from the cultivation of maize MON 810. The report does not provide information about the use of existing networks involved in environmental monitoring. Overall, EFSA concludes that the evidence reported in the 2018 PMEM report does not invalidate previous EFSA evaluations on the safety of maize MON 810. However, as in previous years, EFSA identifies shortcomings on resistance monitoring that need revision in future reports. In particular, the monitoring plan, as implemented in 2018, is not sufficiently sensitive to detect the recommended 3% resistance allele frequency. Consequently, EFSA strongly recommends the consent holder to: (1) achieve full compliance with refuge obligations in areas where adoption of maize MON 810 is high; (2) increase the sensitivity of the monitoring plan and address previously mentioned limitations for resistance monitoring; and (3) perform an F2 screen on corn borer populations from north-eastern Spain. A fit-for-purpose farmer alert system may help to detect unexpected adverse effects associated with the cultivation of MON 810 varieties and be an alternative to the current farmer survey system. Moreover, relevant stakeholders should implement a methodological framework to enable making the best use of existing networks involved in environmental monitoring for the general surveillance of genetically modified plants.

Results from ten years of post-market environmental monitoring of genetically modified MON 810 maize in the European Union

In European regulations for the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms (GMO), the objective of General Surveillance in Post-Market Environmental Monitoring is defined as the identification of the occurrence of adverse effects of the GMO or its use which were not anticipated in the environmental risk assessment (ERA). Accompanying the commercial cultivation in the EU of maize event MON 810, General Surveillance was implemented by Monsanto, the authorization holder, on a voluntary basis. We carried out a statistical analysis on the pooled results of ten years of farmer questionnaires, which were a part of this General Surveillance, amounting to 2,627 farmer fields in eight European countries in the period 2006-2015. This analysis did not reveal any unexpected adverse effects associated with the cultivation of MON 810. Results from farmer questionnaires confirmed that the cultivation of MON 810 resulted in a significant reduction in the use of pesticides, efficient protection against the target pests, and healthier, higher yielding crops compared to conventional maize. MON 810 also had reduced susceptibility to disease and pests when compared to conventional maize. Monitoring characteristics related to environment and wildlife revealed no significant differences between MON 810 and conventional maize. Literature searches, that were also conducted as part of General Surveillance, identified a comprehensive set of publications addressing environmental safety as well as food and feed safety aspects of MON 810. None of the publications indicated any adverse effect of MON 810 that was not anticipated in the initial ERA, nor did they lead to a change in the conclusions of the initial risk assessment that demonstrated the safety of MON 810. The development of resistance by the target pests (Ostrinia nubilalis, ECB and Sesamia nonagrioides, MCB) was the only potential adverse effect identified in the ERA of MON 810 cultivation in the EU. The extensive safety data package for MON 810, the robust weight of evidence demonstrating both its safety and benefits, and the history of safe use of MON 810 for 15 years in the EU, indicates that focussing the General Surveillance of MON 810 on literature searches and farmer complaint systems would be appropriately protective. This will allow the identification of potential adverse effect not anticipated in the initial ERA without the intensive effort and organizational challenges of farmer questionnaires.