Literature review of baseline information to support the risk assessment of RNAi‐based GM plants

Assessment of genetically modified maize DP23211 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2019-163)

Genetically modified maize DP23211 was developed to confer control of certain coleopteran pests and tolerance to glufosinate-containing herbicide. These properties were achieved by introducing the pmi, mo-pat, ipd072Aa and DvSSJ1 expression cassettes. 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 maize DP23211 and its conventional counterpart needs further assessment, except for those in levels of histidine, phenylalanine, magnesium, phosphorus and folic acid in grain, which do not raise safety and nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel does not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the IPD072Aa, PAT and PMI proteins and the DvSSJ1 dsRNA and derived siRNAs newly expressed in maize DP23211, and finds no evidence that the genetic modification impacts the overall safety of maize DP23211. In the context of this application, the consumption of food and feed from maize DP23211 does not represent a nutritional concern in humans and animals. Therefore, no post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable maize DP23211 grains 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 maize DP23211. The GMO Panel concludes that maize DP23211 is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non-GM reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.

Strategies for the production of dsRNA biocontrols as alternatives to chemical pesticides

Current crop pest control strategies rely on insecticidal and fungicidal sprays, plant genetic resistance, transgenes and agricultural practices. However, many insects, plant viruses, and fungi have no current means of control or have developed resistance against traditional pesticides. dsRNA is emerging as a novel sustainable method of plant protection as an alternative to traditional chemical pesticides. The successful commercialisation of dsRNA based biocontrols for effective pest management strategies requires the economical production of large quantities of dsRNA combined with suitable delivery methods to ensure RNAi efficacy against the target pest. A number of methods exist for the production and delivery of dsRNA based biocontrols and here we review alternative methods currently employed and emerging new approaches for their production. Additionally, we highlight potential challenges that will need to be addressed prior to widespread adoption of dsRNA biocontrols as novel sustainable alternatives to traditional chemical pesticides.

RNAi for Western Corn Rootworm Management: Lessons Learned, Challenges, and Future Directions

The western corn rootworm (WCR), Diabrotica virgifera virgifera LeConte, is considered one of the most economically important pests of maize (Zea mays L.) in the United States (U.S.) Corn Belt with costs of management and yield losses exceeding USD ~1-2 billion annually. WCR management has proven challenging given the ability of this insect to evolve resistance to multiple management strategies including synthetic insecticides, cultural practices, and plant-incorporated protectants, generating a constant need to develop new management tools. One of the most recent developments is maize expressing double-stranded hairpin RNA structures targeting housekeeping genes, which triggers an RNA interference (RNAi) response and eventually leads to insect death. Following the first description of in planta RNAi in 2007, traits targeting multiple genes have been explored. In June 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approved the first in planta RNAi product against insects for commercial use. This product expresses a dsRNA targeting the WCR snf7 gene in combination with Bt proteins (Cry3Bb1 and Cry34Ab1/Cry35Ab1) to improve trait durability and will be introduced for commercial use in 2022.

Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 87427 × MON 89034 × MIR162 × MON 87411 and subcombinations, for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2017-144)

Maize MON 87427 × MON 89034 × MIR162 × MON 87411 (four‐event stack maize) was produced by conventional crossing to combine four single events: MON 87427, MON 89034, MIR162 and MON 87411. The genetically modified organism (GMO) Panel previously assessed the four single maize events and four of the subcombinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single maize events or the four 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 and dsRNA 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 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 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 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 its non‐GM comparator and tested non‐GM reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.

Biosafety of GM Crop Plants Expressing dsRNA: Data Requirements and EU Regulatory Considerations

The use of RNA interference (RNAi) enables the silencing of target genes in plants or plant-dwelling organisms, through the production of double stranded RNA (dsRNA) resulting in altered plant characteristics. Expression of properly synthesized dsRNAs in plants can lead to improved crop quality characteristics or exploit new mechanisms with activity against plant pests and pathogens. Genetically modified (GM) crops exhibiting resistance to viruses or insects via expression of dsRNA have received authorization for cultivation outside Europe. Some products derived from RNAi plants have received a favourable opinion from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) for import and processing in the European Union (EU). The authorization process in the EU requires applicants to produce a risk assessment considering food/feed and environmental safety aspects of living organisms or their derived food and feed products. The present paper discusses the main aspects of the safety assessment (comparative assessment, molecular characterization, toxicological assessment, nutritional assessment, gene transfer, interaction with target and non-target organisms) for GM plants expressing dsRNA, according to the guidelines of EFSA. Food/feed safety assessment of products from RNAi plants is expected to be simplified, in the light of the consideration that no novel proteins are produced. Therefore, some of the data requirements for risk assessment do not apply to these cases, and the comparative compositional analysis becomes the main source of evidence for food/feed safety of RNAi plants. During environmental risk assessment, the analysis of dsRNA expression levels of the GM trait, and the data concerning the observable effects on non-target organisms (NTO) will provide the necessary evidence for ensuring safety of species exposed to RNAi plants. Bioinformatics may provide support to risk assessment by selecting target gene sequences with low similarity to the genome of NTOs possibly exposed to dsRNA. The analysis of these topics in risk assessment indicates that the science-based regulatory process in Europe is considered to be applicable to GM RNAi plants, therefore the evaluation of their safety can be effectively conducted without further modifications. Outcomes from the present paper offer suggestions for consideration in future updates of the EFSA Guidance documents on risk assessment of GM organisms.

RNA-based biocontrol compounds: current status and perspectives to reach the market

Facing current climate challenges and drastically reduced chemical options for plant protection, the exploitation of RNA interference (RNAi) as an agricultural biotechnology tool has unveiled possible new solutions to the global problems of agricultural losses caused by pests and other biotic and abiotic stresses. While the use of RNAi as a tool in agriculture is still limited to a few transgenic crops, and only adopted in restricted parts of the world, scientists and industry are already seeking innovations in leveraging and exploiting the potential of RNAi in the form of RNA-based biocontrol compounds for external applications. Here, we highlight the expanding research and development pipeline, commercial landscape and regulatory environment surrounding the pursuit of RNA-based biocontrol compounds with improved environmental profiles. The commitments of well-established agrochemical companies to invest in research endeavours and the role of start-up companies are crucial for the successful development of practical applications for these compounds. Additionally, the availability of standardized guidelines to tackle regulatory ambiguities surrounding RNA-based biocontrol compounds will help to facilitate the entire commercialization process. Finally, communication to create awareness and public acceptance will be key to the deployment of these compounds. © 2019 Society of Chemical Industry.

Key Mechanistic Principles and Considerations Concerning RNA Interference

Canonical RNAi, one of the so-called RNA-silencing mechanisms, is defined as sequence-specific RNA degradation induced by long double-stranded RNA (dsRNA). RNAi occurs in four basic steps: (i) processing of long dsRNA by RNase III Dicer into small interfering RNA (siRNA) duplexes, (ii) loading of one of the siRNA strands on an Argonaute protein possessing endonucleolytic activity, (iii) target recognition through siRNA basepairing, and (iv) cleavage of the target by the Argonaute's endonucleolytic activity. This basic pathway diversified and blended with other RNA silencing pathways employing small RNAs. In some organisms, RNAi is extended by an amplification loop employing an RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, which generates secondary siRNAs from targets of primary siRNAs. Given the high specificity of RNAi and its presence in invertebrates, it offers an opportunity for highly selective pest control. The aim of this text is to provide an introductory overview of key mechanistic aspects of RNA interference for understanding its potential and constraints for its use in pest control.

Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 87411 for food and feed uses, import and processing, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2015-124)

Maize MON 87411 was developed to confer resistance to corn rootworms (Diabrotica spp.) by the expression of a modified version of the Bacillus thuringiensis cry3Bb1 gene and a DvSnf7 dsRNA expression cassette, and tolerance to glyphosate‐containing herbicides by the expression of a CP4 5‐enolpyruvylshikimate‐3‐phosphate synthase (cp4 epsps) gene. The molecular characterisation data and bioinformatics analyses did not identify issues requiring assessment for food and feed safety. No statistically significant differences in the agronomic and phenotypic characteristics tested between maize MON 87411 and its conventional counterpart were identified. The compositional analysis of maize MON 87411 did not identify differences that required further assessment except for palmitic acid levels in grains from not treated maize MON 87411. The GMO Panel did not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the Cry3Bb1 and CP4 EPSPS proteins, as expressed in maize MON 87411 and found no evidence that the genetic modification might significantly change the overall allergenicity of maize MON 87411. The nutritional impact of maize MON 87411‐derived food and feed is expected to be the same as those derived from the conventional counterpart and non‐GM commercial reference varieties. The GMO Panel concludes that maize MON 87411, as described in this application, is nutritionally equivalent to and as safe as the conventional counterpart and the non‐GM maize reference varieties tested, and no post‐market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable maize MON 87411 grains into the environment, maize MON 87411 would not raise environmental safety concerns. The post‐market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of maize MON 87411. The GMO Panel concludes that maize MON 87411, as described in this application, is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non‐GM maize reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.