1
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Camargo AM, Goumperis T, Lenzi P, Piffanelli P, Raffaello T. Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 89034 × 1507 × MON 88017 × 59122 and 8 out of 10 of its subcombinations for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (dossier GMFF-2022-9170). EFSA J 2024; 22:e8715. [PMID: 38686342 PMCID: PMC11056846 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8715] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/02/2024] Open
Abstract
Following the joint submission of dossier GMFF-2022-9170 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Bayer Agriculture B.V. and Corteva Agriscience Belgium B.V., the Panel on genetically modified organisms of the European Food Safety Authority was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the context of the renewal of authorisation application for the herbicide tolerant and insect resistant genetically modified maize MON 89034 × 1507 × MON 88017 × 59122 and 8 out of 10 of its subcombinations, for food and feed uses, excluding cultivation within the European Union. The data received in the context of this renewal application contained post-market environmental monitoring reports, an evaluation of the literature retrieved by a scoping review, a search for additional studies performed by or on behalf of the applicant and updated bioinformatics analyses. The GMO Panel assessed these data for possible new hazards, modified exposure or new scientific uncertainties identified during the authorisation period and not previously assessed in the context of the original application. Under the assumption that the DNA sequences of the events in maize MON 89034 × 1507 × MON 88017 × 59122 and 8 out of 10 of its subcombinations considered for renewal are identical to the sequences of the originally assessed events, the GMO Panel concludes that there is no evidence in renewal dossier GMFF-2022-9170 for new hazards, modified exposure or scientific uncertainties that would change the conclusions of the original risk assessment on maize MON 89034 × 1507 × MON 88017 × 59122 and 8 out of 10 of its subcombinations.
Collapse
|
2
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Camargo AM, Goumperis T, Lenzi P, Piffanelli P, Raffaello T. Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 89034 × 1507 × NK603 for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application GMFF-2022-3670). EFSA J 2024; 22:e8716. [PMID: 38681739 PMCID: PMC11046403 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8716] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/01/2024] Open
Abstract
Following the submission of dossier GMFF-2022-3670 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Corteva Agriscience Belgium BV and Bayer Agriculture BV, the Panel on genetically modified organisms of the European Food Safety Authority was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the context of the renewal of authorisation application for the herbicide-tolerant and insect-resistant genetically modified maize MON 89034 × 1507 × NK603, for food and feed uses, excluding cultivation within the European Union. The data received in the context of this renewal application contained post-market environmental monitoring reports, a systematic search and evaluation of literature, updated bioinformatic analyses and a search for additional documents or studies performed by or on behalf of the applicant. The GMO Panel assessed these data for possible new hazards, modified exposure or new scientific uncertainties identified during the authorisation period and not previously assessed in the context of the original application. Under the assumption that the DNA sequences of the events in maize MON 89034 × 1507 × NK603 considered for renewal are identical to the sequences of the originally assessed events, the GMO Panel concludes that there is no evidence in renewal dossier GMFF-2022-3670 for new hazards, modified exposure or scientific uncertainties that would change the conclusions of the original risk assessment on maize MON 89034 × 1507 × NK603.
Collapse
|
3
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, De Sanctis G, Gennaro A, Gómez Ruiz JÁ, Grammatikou P, Goumperis T, Jacchia S, Lenzi P, Lewandowska A, Camargo AM, Neri FM, Piffanelli P, Raffaello T, Xiftou K. Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 94804 (application GMFF-2022-10651). EFSA J 2024; 22:e8714. [PMID: 38681741 PMCID: PMC11046408 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8714] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/01/2024] Open
Abstract
Genetically modified (GM) maize MON 94804 was developed to achieve a reduction in plant height by introducing the GA20ox_SUP suppression cassette. The molecular characterisation and bioinformatic analyses do not identify issues requiring food/feed safety assessment. None of the agronomic/phenotypic and compositional differences identified between maize MON 94804 and its conventional counterpart needs further assessment, except for ear height, plant height and levels of carbohydrates in forage, which do not raise safety or nutritional concerns. The Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO Panel) does not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the GA20ox_SUP precursor-miRNA and derived mature miRNA as expressed in maize MON 94804 and finds no evidence that the genetic modification would change the overall allergenicity of maize MON 94804. In the context of this application, the consumption of food and feed from maize MON 94804 does not represent a nutritional concern in humans and animals. The GMO Panel concludes that maize MON 94804 is as safe as the conventional counterpart and non-GM maize varieties tested, and no post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable maize MON 94804 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 MON 94804. The GMO Panel concludes that maize MON 94804 is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non-GM maize varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.
Collapse
|
4
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, Camargo AM, De Sanctis G, Federici S, Fernandez A, Gennaro A, Gómez Ruiz JÁ, Goumperis T, Grammatikou P, Kagkli DM, Lenzi P, Neri FM, Papadopoulou N, Raffaello T. Assessment of genetically modified maize DP202216 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2019-159). EFSA J 2024; 22:e8655. [PMID: 38510324 PMCID: PMC10952026 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8655] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/22/2024] Open
Abstract
Genetically modified maize DP202216 was developed to confer tolerance to glufosinate-ammonium-containing herbicides and to provide an opportunity for yield enhancement under field conditions. These properties were achieved by introducing the mo-pat and zmm28 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 DP202216 and its comparator needs further assessment, except for the levels of stearic acid (C18:0), which do not raise nutritional and safety concerns. The GMO Panel does not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the PAT and ZMM28 proteins as expressed in maize DP202216, and finds no evidence that the genetic modification would change the overall allergenicity of maize DP202216. In the context of this application, the consumption of food and feed from maize DP202216 does not represent a nutritional concern in humans and animals. The GMO Panel concludes that maize DP202216 is as safe as the comparator and non-GM reference varieties tested, and no post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable maize DP202216 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 DP202216. The GMO Panel concludes that maize DP202216 is as safe as its comparator and the tested non-GM reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.
Collapse
|
5
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, M. Camargo A, Goumperis T, Lenzi P, Piffanelli P, Raffaello T. Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 810 for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (dossier GMFF-2022-9450). EFSA J 2024; 22:e8489. [PMID: 38250501 PMCID: PMC10797474 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8489] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/23/2024] Open
Abstract
Following the submission of dossier GMFF-2022-9450 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Bayer Agriculture BV, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the context of the renewal of authorisation application for the insect protected genetically modified maize MON 810, for food and feed uses (including pollen), excluding cultivation within the European Union. The data received in the context of this renewal application contained post-market environmental monitoring reports, an evaluation of the literature retrieved by a scoping review, additional studies performed by or on behalf of the applicant and updated bioinformatics analyses. The GMO Panel assessed these data for possible new hazards, modified exposure or new scientific uncertainties identified during the authorisation period and not previously assessed in the context of the original application. Under the assumption that the DNA sequence of the event in maize MON 810 considered for renewal is identical to the sequence of the originally assessed event, the GMO Panel concludes that there is no evidence in dossier GMFF-2022-9450 for new hazards, modified exposure or scientific uncertainties that would change the conclusions of the original risk assessment on maize MON 810.
Collapse
|
6
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, Camargo AM, De Sanctis G, Federici S, Fernández A, Gennaro A, Gómez Ruiz JÁ, Goumperis T, Kagkli DM, Lenzi P, Lewandowska A, Neri FM, Papadopoulou N, Raffaello T. Assessment of genetically modified maize DP23211 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2019-163). EFSA J 2024; 22:e8483. [PMID: 38239495 PMCID: PMC10794937 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8483] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2024] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
7
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogue F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, Camargo AM, De Sanctis G, Federici S, Fernandez Dumont A, Gennaro A, Gomez Ruiz JA, Goumperis T, Kagkli DM, Lenzi P, Lewandowska A, Neri FM, Papadopoulou N, Raffaello T. Assessment of genetically modified maize DP915635 for food and feed uses, under regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2020-172). EFSA J 2024; 22:e8490. [PMID: 38235311 PMCID: PMC10792476 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2024.8490] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/19/2024] Open
Abstract
Genetically modified maize DP915635 was developed to confer tolerance to glufosinate herbicide and resistance to corn rootworm pests. These properties were achieved by introducing the ipd079Ea, mo-pat and pmi 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 DP915635 and its conventional counterpart needs further assessment, except for the levels of crude protein in forage, which does not raise nutritional and safety concerns. The GMO Panel does not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the IPD079Ea, PAT and PMI proteins expressed in maize DP915635. The GMO Panel finds no evidence that the genetic modification impacts the overall safety of maize DP915635. In the context of this application, the consumption of food and feed from maize DP915635 does not represent a nutritional concern in humans and animals. The GMO Panel concludes that maize DP915635 is as safe as the conventional counterpart and non-GM maize varieties tested, and no post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable maize DP915635 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 DP915635. The GMO Panel concludes that maize DP915635 is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non-GM maize varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.
Collapse
|
8
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Naegeli H, Moreno FJ, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, De Sanctis G, Fernández A, Gennaro A, Gómez Ruiz JÁ, Goumperis T, Kagli DM, Lenzi P, Lewandowska A, Camargo AM, Neri FM, Papadopoulou N, Raffaello T. Assessment of genetically modified cotton COT102 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-DE-2017-141). EFSA J 2023; 21:e08031. [PMID: 37377664 PMCID: PMC10291446 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2023.8031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/29/2023] Open
Abstract
Genetically modified cotton COT102 was developed to confer resistance against several lepidopteran species. The molecular characterisation data and bioinformatic analyses do not identify issues requiring food/feed safety assessment. None of the differences in the agronomic-phenotypic and compositional characteristics between cotton COT102 and its non-GM comparator needs further assessment, except for levels of acid detergent fibre, which do not raise safety or nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel does not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the Vip3Aa19 and APH4 proteins as expressed in cotton COT102 and finds no evidence that the genetic modification would change the overall allergenicity of cotton COT102. In the context of this application, the consumption of food and feed from cotton COT102 does not represent a nutritional concern for humans and animals. The GMO Panel concludes that cotton COT102 is as safe as the non-GM comparator and non-GM cotton varieties tested, and no post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable cotton COT102 seeds 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 cotton COT102. The GMO Panel concludes that cotton COT102 is as safe as its non-GM comparator and the tested non-GM cotton varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.
Collapse
|
9
|
Mullins E, Bresson JL, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, De Sanctis G, Federici S, Fernandez A, Gennaro A, Gómez Ruiz JÁ, Goumperis T, Kagkli DM, Lenzi P, Camargo AM, Neri FM, Raffaello T. Assessment of genetically modified maize Bt11 × MIR162 × MIR604 × MON 89034 × 5307 × GA21 and 30 subcombinations, for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-DE-2018-149). EFSA J 2023; 21:e08011. [PMID: 37284025 PMCID: PMC10240405 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2023.8011] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Genetically modified maize Bt11 × MIR162 × MIR604 × MON 89034 × 5307 × GA21 was developed by crossing to combine six single events: Bt11, MIR162, MIR604, MON 89034, 5307 and GA21, the GMO Panel previously assessed the 6 single maize events and 27 out of the 56 possible 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 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 six-event stack maize does not give rise to food and feed safety and nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel concludes that six-event stack maize, as described in this application, is as safe as the conventional counterpart and non-GM maize varieties tested, and no post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable six-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 29 of the maize subcombinations not previously assessed and covered by the scope of this application 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 maize Bt11 × MIR162 × MIR604 × MON 89034 × 5307 × GA21. The GMO Panel concludes that six-event stack maize and the 30 subcombinations covered by the scope of the application are as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non-GM maize varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.
Collapse
|
10
|
Mullins E, Bresson JL, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, Camargo AM, Fernandez A, Goumperis T, Lenzi P, Lewandowska A, Raffaello T, Streissl F. Assessment of genetically modified oilseed rape MS8, RF3 and MS8 × RF3 for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-RX-024). EFSA J 2023; 21:e07934. [PMID: 37122285 PMCID: PMC10131089 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7934] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 05/02/2023] Open
Abstract
Following the submission of application EFSA-GMO-RX-024 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from BASF Agricultural Solutions Seed US LLC, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the context of the renewal of authorisation application for the herbicide tolerant genetically modified oilseed rape MS8, RF3 and MS8 × RF3, for food and feed uses, excluding cultivation within the European Union. The data received in the context of this renewal application contained post-market environmental monitoring reports, a systematic search and evaluation of literature, updated bioinformatic analyses, and additional documents or studies performed by or on behalf of the applicant. The GMO Panel assessed these data for possible new hazards, modified exposure or new scientific uncertainties identified during the authorisation period and not previously assessed in the context of the original application. Under the assumption that the DNA sequences of the events in oilseed rape MS8, RF3 and MS8 × RF3 considered for renewal are identical to the sequences of the originally assessed events, the GMO Panel concludes that there is no evidence in renewal application EFSA-GMO-RX-024 for new hazards, modified exposure or scientific uncertainties that would change the conclusions of the original risk assessment on oilseed rape MS8, RF3 and MS8 × RF3.
Collapse
|
11
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Gennaro A, Neri FM, Papadopoulou N. Risk assessment of additional information on maize MIR162. EFSA J 2023; 21:e07935. [PMID: 37077301 PMCID: PMC10107383 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7935] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/21/2023] Open
Abstract
The European Commission requested the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA GMO Panel) to assess new scientific information on maize MIR162, and to indicate whether the previous conclusions on the safety of maize MIR162 as a single event and as a part of stacked events remain valid. The new information is included in a European patent that reports a decrease in male fertility in some MIR162 inbred lines, pointing to a potential link between such decrease and the Vip3 protein expressed by maize MIR162. The EFSA GMO Panel evaluated the data provided by the patent owner and found scarce support for a causal link between Vip3 and decreased fertility. The general hypothesis of an association between event MIR162 and altered fertility could not be confirmed. The EFSA GMO Panel conducted the safety assessment based on the conservative assumption that such an association exists. The EFSA GMO Panel concluded that a decrease in male fertility would have no impact on the previous conclusions on maize MIR162 and stacked events containing MIR162.
Collapse
|
12
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Serrano JJS, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, De Sanctis G, Federici S, Fernandez Dumont A, Gennaro A, Gómez Ruiz JÁ, Goumperis T, Lanzoni A, Lenzi P, Lewandowska A, Camargo AM, Neri FM, Papadopoulou N, Paraskevopoulos K, Raffaello T. Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 87419 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2017-140). EFSA J 2023; 21:e07730. [PMID: 36698492 PMCID: PMC9853084 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7730] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Genetically modified maize MON 87419 was developed to confer tolerance to dicamba- and glufosinate-based herbicides. These properties were achieved by introducing the dmo and pat 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 MON 87419 and its conventional counterpart needed further assessment, except for the levels of arginine and protein in grains which did not raise safety and nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel does not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the dicamba mono-oxygenase (DMO) and phosphinothricin N-acetyltransferase (PAT) proteins as expressed in maize MON 87419. The GMO Panel finds no evidence that the genetic modification impacts the overall safety of maize MON 87419. In the context of this application, the consumption of food and feed from maize MON 87419 does not represent a nutritional concern in humans and animals. The GMO Panel concludes that maize MON 87419 is as safe as the conventional counterpart and non-GM maize varieties tested, and no post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable maize MON 87419 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 MON 87419. The GMO Panel concludes that maize MON 87419 is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non-GM maize varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.
Collapse
|
13
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Dumont AF, Ardizzone M. Animal dietary exposure in the risk assessment of feed derived from genetically modified plants. EFSA J 2023; 21:e07732. [PMID: 36698485 PMCID: PMC9850603 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7732] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/20/2023] Open
Abstract
EFSA carries out the risk assessment of genetically modified plants for food and feed uses under Regulation (EU) No 503/2013. Exposure assessment - anticipated intake/extend of use shall be an essential element of the risk assessment of genetically modified feeds, as required by Regulation (EU) No 503/2013. Estimates of animal dietary exposure to newly expressed proteins should be determined to cover average consumption across all the different species, age, physiological and productive phases of farmed and companion animals, and identify and consider particular consumer groups with expected higher exposure. This statement is aimed at facilitating the reporting of the information that applicants need to provide on expected animal dietary exposure to newly expressed proteins and to increase harmonisation of the application dossiers to be assessed by the EFSA GMO Panel. Advice is provided on the selection of proper feed consumption and feed concentration data, and on the reporting of exposure's estimates. An overview of the different uncertainties that may be linked to the estimations is provided. This statement also explains how to access an Excel calculator which should be used in future applications as basis to provide a more consistent presentation of estimates of expected animal dietary exposure.
Collapse
|
14
|
Nguyen TX, Agazzi A, McGill S, Weidt S, Han QH, Gelemanović A, McLaughlin M, Savoini G, Eckersall PD, Burchmore R. Proteomic changes associated with maternal dietary low ω6:ω3 ratio in piglets supplemented with seaweed Part II: Ileum proteomes. J Proteomics 2023; 270:104739. [PMID: 36174954 DOI: 10.1016/j.jprot.2022.104739] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2022] [Revised: 09/14/2022] [Accepted: 09/16/2022] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
Abstract
This study evaluates how long-term dietary low ω6:ω3 ratio in sows and offspring's seaweed (SW) intake affects piglet intestinal function and growth through modifying ileum proteome. Sows were assigned to either control diet (CR, ω6:ω3 ratio = 13:1) or treatment diet (LR, ω6:ω3 = 4:1) during gestation and lactation (n = 8 each). The male weaned offspring were received a basal diet with or without SW powder supplementation (4 g/kg) for 21 days, denoted as SW and CT groups, respectively. In total, four groups of weaned piglets were formed following maternal and offspring's diets combination, represented by CRCT, CRSW, LRCT, and LRSW (n = 10 each). Piglet ileum tissue was collected on day 22 post-weaning and analysed using TMT-based quantitative proteomics. The differentially abundant proteins (n = 300) showed the influence of maternal LR diet on protein synthesis, cell proliferation, and cell cycle regulation. In contrast, the SW diet lowered the inflammation severity and promoted ileal tissue development in CRSW piglets but reduced the fat absorption capacity in LRSW piglets. These results uncovered the mechanism behind the anti-inflammation and intestinal-boosting effects of maternal LR diet in piglets supplemented with SW.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thi Xuan Nguyen
- Università degli Studi di Milano, Via dell'Università, 6, 26900 Lodi, Italy; University of Glasgow, Bearsden Rd, G61 1QH, United Kingdom; Vietnam National University of Agriculture, Hanoi, Viet Nam.
| | - Alessandro Agazzi
- Università degli Studi di Milano, Via dell'Università, 6, 26900 Lodi, Italy
| | - Suzanne McGill
- University of Glasgow, Bearsden Rd, G61 1QH, United Kingdom
| | - Stefan Weidt
- University of Glasgow, Bearsden Rd, G61 1QH, United Kingdom
| | - Quang Hanh Han
- University of Glasgow, Bearsden Rd, G61 1QH, United Kingdom; Vietnam National University of Agriculture, Hanoi, Viet Nam
| | - Andrea Gelemanović
- Mediterranean Institute for Life Sciences (MedILS), Meštrovićevo šetalište 45, 21000 Split, Croatia
| | | | - Giovanni Savoini
- Università degli Studi di Milano, Via dell'Università, 6, 26900 Lodi, Italy
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Manaig YJY, Mármol-Sánchez E, Castelló A, Esteve-Codina A, Sandrini S, Savoini G, Agazzi A, Sánchez A, Folch JM. Exon-intron split analysis reveals posttranscriptional regulatory signals induced by high and low n-6/n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid ratio diets in piglets. J Anim Sci 2023; 101:skad271. [PMID: 37561402 PMCID: PMC10503648 DOI: 10.1093/jas/skad271] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/06/2023] [Accepted: 08/08/2023] [Indexed: 08/11/2023] Open
Abstract
Polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA), such as omega-6 (n-6) and omega-3 (n-3), play a vital role in nutrient metabolism, inflammatory response, and gene regulation. microRNAs (miRNA), which can potentially degrade targeted messenger RNAs (mRNA) and/or inhibit their translation, might play a relevant role in PUFA-related changes in gene expression. Although differential expression analyses can provide a comprehensive picture of gene expression variation, they are unable to disentangle when in the mRNA life cycle the regulation of expression is taking place, including any putative functional miRNA-driven repression. To capture this, we used an exon-intron split analysis (EISA) approach to account for posttranscriptional changes in response to extreme values of n-6/n-3 PUFA ratio. Longissimus dorsi muscle samples of male and female piglets from sows fed with n-6/n-3 PUFA ratio of 13:1 (SOY) or 4:1 (LIN), were analyzed in a bidirectional contrast (LIN vs. SOY, SOY vs. LIN). Our results allowed the identification of genes showing strong posttranscriptional downregulation signals putatively targeted by significantly upregulated miRNA. Moreover, we identified genes primarily involved in the regulation of lipid-related metabolism and immune response, which may be associated with the pro- and anti-inflammatory functions of the n-6 and n-3 PUFA, respectively. EISA allowed us to uncover regulatory networks complementing canonical differential expression analyses, thus providing a more comprehensive view of muscle metabolic changes in response to PUFA concentration.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yron Joseph Yabut Manaig
- Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona 08193, Spain
- Plant and Animal Genomics, Centre for Research in Agricultural Genomics (CRAG), CSIC-IRTA-UAB-UB, Campus Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona 08193, Spain
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, Lodi 26900, Italy
| | - Emilio Mármol-Sánchez
- Science for Life Laboratory, Department of Molecular Biosciences, The Wenner-Gren Institute, Stockholm University, Stockholm 11418, Sweden
- Centre for Palaeogenetics, Stockholm 10691, Sweden
| | - Anna Castelló
- Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona 08193, Spain
- Plant and Animal Genomics, Centre for Research in Agricultural Genomics (CRAG), CSIC-IRTA-UAB-UB, Campus Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona 08193, Spain
| | - Anna Esteve-Codina
- Functional Genomics, CNAG-CRG, Centre for Genomic Regulation (CRG), Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology (BIST), Barcelona 08028, Spain
| | - Silvia Sandrini
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, Lodi 26900, Italy
| | - Giovanni Savoini
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, Lodi 26900, Italy
| | - Alessandro Agazzi
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, Lodi 26900, Italy
| | - Armand Sánchez
- Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona 08193, Spain
- Plant and Animal Genomics, Centre for Research in Agricultural Genomics (CRAG), CSIC-IRTA-UAB-UB, Campus Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona 08193, Spain
| | - Josep M Folch
- Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona 08193, Spain
- Plant and Animal Genomics, Centre for Research in Agricultural Genomics (CRAG), CSIC-IRTA-UAB-UB, Campus Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona 08193, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Serrano JJS, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Álvarez F, Ardizzone M, De Sanctis G, Devos Y, Federici S, Fernandez Dumont A, Gennaro A, Gómez Ruiz JÁ, Goumperis T, Kagkli DM, Lanzoni A, Lenzi P, Camargo AM, Neri FM, Papadopoulou N, Paraskevopoulos K, Raffaello T, Streissl F. Assessment of genetically modified maize GA21 × T25 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-DE-2016-137). EFSA J 2023; 21:e07729. [PMID: 36721864 PMCID: PMC9880721 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2023.7729] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Genetically modified maize GA21 × T25 was developed by crossing to combine two single events: GA21 and T25. The GMO Panel previously assessed the two single maize events and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single maize events 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 in maize GA21 × T25 does not give rise to food and feed safety and nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel concludes that maize GA21 × T25, as described in this application, is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the non-GM reference varieties tested, and no post-market monitoring of food and feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable maize GA21 × T25 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 GA21 × T25. Post-market monitoring of food and feed is not considered necessary. The GMO Panel concludes that maize GA21 × T25 is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the non-GM reference varieties tested, with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.
Collapse
|
17
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Camargo AM, Goumperis T, Lewandowska A, Raffaello T, Streissl F. Assessment of genetically modified soybean MON 87701 × MON 89788 for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-RX-022). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07684. [PMID: 36545567 PMCID: PMC9761338 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7684] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Following the submission of application EFSA-GMO-RX-022 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Bayer CropScience LP, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the context of the renewal of authorisation application for the insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant genetically modified soybean MON 87701 × MON 89788, for food and feed uses, excluding cultivation within the European Union. The data received in the context of this renewal application contained post-market environmental monitoring reports, a systematic search and evaluation of literature, updated bioinformatic analyses, and additional documents or studies performed by or on behalf of the applicant. The GMO Panel assessed these data for possible new hazards, modified exposure or new scientific uncertainties identified during the authorisation period and not previously assessed in the context of the original application. Under the assumption that the DNA sequences of the events in soybean MON 87701 × MON 89788 considered for renewal are identical to the sequences of the originally assessed event, the GMO Panel concludes that there is no evidence in renewal application EFSA-GMO-RX-022 for new hazards, modified exposure or scientific uncertainties that would change the conclusions of the original risk assessment on soybean MON 87701 × MON 89788.
Collapse
|
18
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Camargo AM, Goumperis T, Lenzi P, Lewandowska A, Raffaello T, Streissl F. Assessment of genetically modified soybean 40-3-2 for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-RX-023). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07685. [PMID: 36545569 PMCID: PMC9761337 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7685] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Following the submission of application EFSA-GMO-RX-023 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Bayer Agriculture BV on behalf of Bayer CropScience LP, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the context of the renewal of authorisation application for the herbicide-tolerant genetically modified soybean 40-3-2, for food and feed uses, excluding cultivation within the European Union. The data received in the context of this renewal application contained post-market environmental monitoring reports, a systematic search and evaluation of literature, updated bioinformatic analyses, and additional documents or studies performed by or on behalf of the applicant. The GMO Panel assessed these data for possible new hazards, modified exposure or new scientific uncertainties identified during the authorisation period and not previously assessed in the context of the original application. Under the assumption that the DNA sequence of the event in soybean 40-3-2 considered for renewal is identical to the sequence of the originally assessed event, the GMO Panel concludes that there is no evidence in renewal application EFSA-GMO-RX-023 for new hazards, modified exposure or scientific uncertainties that would change the conclusions of the original risk assessment on soybean 40-3-2.
Collapse
|
19
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Camargo AM, Goumperis T, Lewandowska A, Raffaello T, Streissl F. Assessment of genetically modified soybean MON 87701 for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-RX-021). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07683. [PMID: 36545571 PMCID: PMC9761336 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7683] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/23/2022] Open
Abstract
Following the submission of application EFSA-GMO-RX-021 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Bayer CropScience LP, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the context of the renewal of authorisation application for the insect-resistant genetically modified soybean MON 87701, for food and feed uses, excluding cultivation within the European Union. The data received in the context of this renewal application contained post-market environmental monitoring reports, a systematic search and evaluation of literature, updated bioinformatic analyses and additional documents or studies performed by or on behalf of the applicant. The GMO Panel assessed these data for possible new hazards, modified exposure or new scientific uncertainties identified during the authorisation period and not previously assessed in the context of the original application. Under the assumption that the DNA sequences of the event in soybean MON 87701 considered for renewal is identical to the sequences of the originally assessed event, the GMO Panel concludes that there is no evidence in renewal application EFSA-GMO-RX-021 for new hazards, modified exposure or scientific uncertainties that would change the conclusions of the original risk assessment on soybean MON 87701.
Collapse
|
20
|
Perricone V, Sandrini S, Irshad N, Comi M, Lecchi C, Savoini G, Agazzi A. The Role of Yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae in Supporting Gut Health in Horses: An Updated Review on Its Effects on Digestibility and Intestinal and Fecal Microbiota. Animals (Basel) 2022; 12:ani12243475. [PMID: 36552396 PMCID: PMC9774806 DOI: 10.3390/ani12243475] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/20/2022] [Revised: 12/03/2022] [Accepted: 12/06/2022] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
To support the overall health of horses, it is essential to maintain an optimal gut health (GH) status, which encompasses several physiological and functional aspects, including the balance and functionality of intestinal microbial populations and, accordingly, the effective digestion and absorption of nutrients. Numerous biotic and abiotic stressors can lead to an imbalance of GH, such as the quality of forages and the composition of diet, e.g., the inclusion of high energy-dense feeds to meet the energy requirements of performance horses. To support the digestive function and the intestinal microbial populations, the diet can be supplemented with feed additives, such as probiotic yeasts, that promote the ability of cellulolytic bacteria in the hindgut to digest the available fiber fractions, finally increasing feed efficiency. Among the different yeasts available, S. cerevisiae is the most used in horses' nutrition; however, results of digestibility trials, as well as data on intestinal and fecal microbial populations, are sometimes contradictory. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to summarize the effects of S. cerevisiae on in vivo and in vitro digestibility, providing an updated overview of its effects on the intestinal and fecal microbial population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Vera Perricone
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, University of Milan, Via dell’Università 6, 26900 Lodi, Italy
| | - Silvia Sandrini
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, University of Milan, Via dell’Università 6, 26900 Lodi, Italy
| | - Nida Irshad
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, University of Milan, Via dell’Università 6, 26900 Lodi, Italy
| | - Marcello Comi
- Department of Human Science and Quality of Life Promotion, Università Telematica San Raffaele, Via di Val Cannuta 247, 00166 Rome, Italy
| | - Cristina Lecchi
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, University of Milan, Via dell’Università 6, 26900 Lodi, Italy
| | - Giovanni Savoini
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, University of Milan, Via dell’Università 6, 26900 Lodi, Italy
| | - Alessandro Agazzi
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, University of Milan, Via dell’Università 6, 26900 Lodi, Italy
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +39-02-50334506
| |
Collapse
|
21
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, Martin Camargo A, De Sanctis G, Fernandez Dumont A, Gennaro A, Gómez Ruiz JÁ, Goumperis T, Kagkli DM, Neri FM, Papadopoulou N, Raffaello T, Streissl F. Assessment of genetically modified maize DP4114 × MON 89034 × MON 87411 × DAS‐40278‐9 and subcombinations, for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA GMO‐NL‐2020‐171). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07619. [PMCID: PMC9644921 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7619] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Genetically modified maize DP4114 × MON 89034 × MON 87411 × DAS‐40278‐9 was developed by crossing to combine four single events: DP4114, MON 89034, MON 87411 and DAS‐40278‐9. The GMO Panel previously assessed the four single maize events and two 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 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 four‐event stack maize does not give rise to food and feed safety and nutritional concerns. Therefore, no post‐market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable four‐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 eight 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 four‐event stack maize. The post‐market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of maize DP4114 × MON 89034 × MON 87411 × DAS‐40278‐9. 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 the tested non‐GM maize varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.
Collapse
|
22
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Serrano JJS, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, Camargo AM, de Sanctis G, Federici S, Dumont AF, Gennaro A, Ruiz JAG, Goumperis T, Kagkli DM, Lanzoni A, Lewandowska A, Lenzi P, Neri FM, Papadopoulou N, Paraskevopoulos K, Piffanelli P, Raffaello T, Streissl F. Assessment of genetically modified Maize MON 87429 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2019‐161). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07589. [DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7589] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
|
23
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Fernandez A, Gennaro A, Gomez Ruiz JA, Lenzi P, Martin Camargo A, Lewandowska A, Piffanelli P, Raffaello T. Assessment of genetically modified oilseed rape GT73 for placing on the market of isolated seed protein for food under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA‐GMO‐RX‐026/2). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07590. [PMID: 36349281 PMCID: PMC9634491 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7590] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022] Open
Abstract
Genetically modified oilseed rape GT73 was developed to confer herbicide tolerance; this property was achieved by introducing the single insert containing one copy of goxv247 and the CP4 epsps expression cassettes. The scope of the application EFSA‐GMO‐RX‐026/2 is for the modification of the terms of the authorisation regarding the placing on the market of isolated seed protein from oilseed rape GT73 for food. Considering previous opinions on this event of the GMO Panel, the molecular characterisation data do not identify issues requiring additional food safety assessment. Based on previous assessments, no biologically relevant differences were identified in the compositional, agronomic and phenotypic characteristics of oilseed rape GT73 compared with its conventional counterpart, except for the newly expressed proteins. No new agronomic, phenotypic and compositional data in support of the comparative analysis were considered necessary in the context of this application. The GMO Panel did not identify indications of safety concern regarding toxicity, allergenicity or adjuvanticity related to the presence of the newly expressed proteins CP4 EPSPS and GOXv247 in oilseed rape GT73. Therefore, the GMO Panel concludes that in the context of this application, the consumption of oilseed rape GT73 does not represent any nutritional concern and is as safe as the conventional counterpart. No post‐market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable oilseed rape GT73 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 oilseed rape GT73. The GMO Panel concludes that oilseed rape GT73 is as safe as its conventional counterpart with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment. These conclusions also apply to the placing on the food market of isolated seed protein produced from oilseed rape GT73.
Collapse
|
24
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, Camargo AM, De Sanctis G, Fernandez A, Gennaro A, Gomez Ruiz JA, Goumperis T, Kagkli DM, Lenzi P, Neri FM, Raffaello T, Streissl F. Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 95379 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2020‐170). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07588. [DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7588] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
|
25
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Camargo AM, Goumperis T, Lenzi P, Lewandowska A, Raffaello T, Streissl F. Assessment of genetically modified cotton 281‐24‐236 × 3006‐210‐23 for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA‐GMO‐RX‐019). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07587. [DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7587] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
|
26
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Fernandez A, Gennaro A, Papadopoulou N, Raffaello T, Schoonjans R. Criteria for risk assessment of plants produced by targeted mutagenesis, cisgenesis and intragenesis. EFSA J 2022; 20:e07618. [PMID: 36274984 PMCID: PMC9583736 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7618] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
EFSA was asked by the european Commission to develop criteria as advice for consideration for the risk assessment of plants produced by targeted mutagenesis, cisgenesis and intragenesis. EFSA proposes in this statement six main criteria to assist the risk assessment of these plants. The first four criteria are related to the molecular characterisation of the genetic modification introduced in the recipient plant. The four criteria evaluate whether any exogenous DNA sequence(s) is/are present (Criterion 1), whether such sequence derives from the breeders' gene pool (Criterion 2), the type of integration (Criterion 3) and whether any endogenous plant gene is interrupted (Criterion 4). Depending on the evaluation of the above criteria, the product can be a genome edited plant where no exogenous DNA sequence is present, or a cisgenic or intragenic plant where the cisgenic and intragenic sequence are introduced by targeted insertion and no plant endogenous genes are interrupted. In these cases, two more criteria are assessed to evaluate the history of safe use (Criterion 5) and the structure and function of the new allele (Criterion 6). If cisgenic and intragenic sequence are introduced by random integration without interruption of an endogenous gene, or when no risk is identified when an endogenous gene is interrupted, the criteria 5 and 6 will also be assessed. Evaluating the history of safe use is an important part of the proportionate risk assessment of cisgenic, intragenic and genome‐edited plants since the newly introduced allele may already be present in nature. However, when the history of safe use cannot be sufficiently demonstrated, the function and structure of the introduced allele should be carefully assessed. Recommendations are also included on the aspects that need further elaboration for full applicability of the criteria proposed herein are also included. This publication is linked to the following EFSA Journal article: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7621/full
Collapse
|
27
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Serrano JJS, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Casacuberta J, Dumont AF, Gennaro A, Lenzi P, Lewandowska A, Guajardo IPM, Papadopoulou N, Rostoks N. Updated scientific opinion on plants developed through cisgenesis and intragenesis. EFSA J 2022; 20:e07621. [PMID: 36274982 PMCID: PMC9583739 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7621] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/27/2022] Open
Abstract
In 2012, EFSA issued an opinion on plants developed through cisgenesis and intragenesis. With the development of New Genomic Techniques (NGTs) in the last decade, cisgenic and intragenic plants can now be obtained with the insertion of a desired sequence in a precise location of the genome. EFSA has been requested by European Commission to provide an updated scientific opinion on the safety and the risk assessment of plants developed through cisgenesis and intragenesis, in order to (i) identify potential risks, comparing them with those posed by plants obtained by conventional breeding and Established Genomic Techniques (EGTs) and (ii) to determine the applicability of current guidelines for the risk assessment of cisgenic and intragenic plants. The conclusions of the previous EFSA opinion were reviewed, taking into consideration the new guidelines and the recent literature. The GMO panel concludes that no new risks are identified in cisgenic and intragenic plants obtained with NGTs, as compared with those already considered for plants obtained with conventional breeding and EGTs. There are no new data since the publication of the 2012 EFSA opinion that would challenge the conclusions raised in that document. The conclusions of the EFSA 2012 Scientific Opinion remain valid. The EFSA GMO Panel reiterates from these conclusions that with respect to the source of DNA and the safety of the gene product, the hazards arising from the use of a related plant‐derived gene by cisgenesis are similar to those from conventional plant breeding, whereas additional hazards may arise for intragenic plants. Furthermore, the EFSA GMO Panel considers that cisgenesis and intragenesis make use of the same transformation techniques as transgenesis, and therefore, with respect to the alterations to the host genome, cisgenic, intragenic and transgenic plants obtained by random insertion do not cause different hazards. Compared to that, the use of NGTs reduces the risks associated with potential unintended modifications of the host genome. Thus, fewer requirements may be needed for the assessment of cisgenic and intragenic plants obtained through NGTs, due to site‐directed integration of the added genetic material. Moreover, the GMO panel concludes that the current guidelines are partially applicable and sufficient. On a case‐by‐case basis, a lesser amount of data might be needed for the risk assessment of cisgenic or intragenic plants obtained through NGTs. This publication is linked to the following EFSA Journal article: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7618/full
Collapse
|
28
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez‐Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Camargo AM, Goumperis T, Lenzi P, Lewandowska A, Raffaello T. Assessment of genetically modified oilseed rape GT73 for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-RX-026/1). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07563. [PMID: 36237418 PMCID: PMC9536181 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7563] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Following the submission of application EFSA‐GMO‐RX‐026/1 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Bayer Agriculture BV on behalf of Bayer CropScience LP, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the context of the renewal of authorisation application for foods and food ingredients containing, consisting of, or produced from oilseed rape GT73 with the exception of isolated seed protein, and feed produced from this GM oilseed rape, excluding cultivation in the EU. The data received in the context of this renewal application contained post‐market environmental monitoring reports, a systematic search and evaluation of literature, updated bioinformatic analyses, and a search for additional documents or studies performed by or on behalf of the applicant. The GMO Panel assessed these data for possible new hazards, modified exposure or new scientific uncertainties identified during the authorisation period and not previously assessed in the context of the original application. Under the assumption that the DNA sequences of the events in oilseed rape GT73 considered for renewal are identical to the sequences of the originally assessed event, the GMO Panel concludes that there is no evidence in renewal application EFSA‐GMO‐RX‐026/1 for new hazards, modified exposure or scientific uncertainties that would change the conclusions of the original risk assessment on oilseed rape GT73.
Collapse
|
29
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Camargo AM, Goumperis T, Kagkli DM, Lenzi P, Lewandowska A, Raffaello T, Streissl F. Assessment of genetically modified maize MIR162 for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-RX-025). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07562. [PMID: 36188067 PMCID: PMC9494202 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7562] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Following the submission of application EFSA-GMO-RX-025 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Syngenta Crop Protection NV/SA, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the context of the renewal of authorisation application for the insect-resistant genetically modified maize MIR162, for food and feed uses, excluding cultivation within the EU. The data received in the context of this renewal application contained post-market environmental monitoring reports, a systematic search and evaluation of literature, updated bioinformatic analyses, and additional documents or studies performed by or on behalf of the applicant. The GMO Panel assessed these data for possible new hazards, modified exposure or new scientific uncertainties identified during the authorisation period and not previously assessed in the context of the original application. The GMO Panel concludes that there is no evidence in renewal application EFSA-GMO-RX-025 for new hazards, modified exposure or scientific uncertainties that would change the conclusions of the original risk assessment on maize MIR162.
Collapse
|
30
|
Mullins E, Bresson JL, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Naegeli H, Moreno FJ, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, De Sanctis G, Dumont AF, Federici S, Gennaro A, Gomez Ruiz JA, Goumperis T, Kagkli DM, Lanzoni A, Lenzi P, Lewandowska A, Neri FM, Paraskevopoulos K, Raffaello T, Streissl F. 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). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07451. [PMID: 35978615 PMCID: PMC9373840 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7451] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
31
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Nogue F, Rostoks N, Sanchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Casacuberta J, Zurbriggen MD, Fernandez A, Gomez Ruiz JA, Gennaro A, Papadopoulou N, Lanzoni A, Naegeli H. Evaluation of existing guidelines for their adequacy for the food and feed risk assessment of genetically modified plants obtained through synthetic biology. EFSA J 2022; 20:e07410. [PMID: 35873722 PMCID: PMC9297787 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7410] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Synthetic biology (SynBio) is an interdisciplinary field at the interface of molecular engineering and biology aiming to develop new biological systems and impart new functions to living cells, tissues and organisms. EFSA has been asked by the European Commission to evaluate SynBio developments in agri-food with the aim of identifying the adequacy and sufficiency of existing guidelines for risk assessment and determine if updated guidance is needed. In this context, the GMO Panel has previously adopted an Opinion evaluating the SynBio developments in agri-food/feed and the adequacy and sufficiency of existing guidelines for the molecular characterisation and environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants (GMPs) obtained through SynBio and reaching the market in the next decade. Complementing the above, in this Opinion, the GMO Panel evaluated the adequacy and sufficiency of existing guidelines for the food and feed risk assessment of GMPs obtained through SynBio. Using selected hypothetical case studies, the GMO Panel did not identify novel potential hazards and risks that could be posed by food and feed from GMPs obtained through current and near future SynBio approaches; considers that the existing guidelines are adequate and sufficient in some Synbio applications; in other cases, existing guidelines may be just adequate and hence need updating; areas needing updating include those related to the safety assessment of new proteins and the comparative analysis. The GMO Panel recommends that future guidance documents provide indications on how to integrate the knowledge available from the SynBio design and modelling in the food and feed risk assessment and encourages due consideration to be given to food and feed safety aspects throughout the SynBio design process as a way to facilitate the risk assessment of SynBio GMPs and reduce the amount of data required.
Collapse
|
32
|
Mullins E, Bresson JL, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Goumperis T, Raffaello T. Risk assessment of a new bioinformatics evaluation of the insertion sites of genetically modified soybean event 40-3-2. EFSA J 2022; 20:e07412. [PMID: 35898294 PMCID: PMC9305392 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7412] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Genetically modified (GM) soybean 40‐3‐2 expresses a 5‐enolpyruvylshikimate‐3‐phosphate synthase protein from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4 (CP4 EPSPS), which confers tolerance to glyphosate. This event was previously assessed by the GMO Panel as a single event and as part of a two‐event stack and was found to be as safe as its conventional counterparts and other appropriate comparators with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment. On September 2021, the European Commission requested EFSA to evaluate a new bioinformatics study which revealed predicted genomic deletions at the insertion sites using the available soybean reference genome. Considering the variability of the soybean genome, with a number of structural variants such as presence/absence variants and copy number variants including genic regions, as well as the fact that a number of genes are present only in particular varieties, the GMO Panel concludes that comparing only to the reference genome does not allow to conclude that the transformation event resulted in gene loss. In support of this, the transcriptomic analysis did not show major differences in gene expression when comparing the soybean 40‐3‐2 with the most closely related conventional variety, indicating that the genetic redundancy may compensate for the potential gene loss. Moreover, the composition, phenotypic and agronomic analyses already assessed by the GMO Panel in previous opinions did not show differences between soybean 40‐3‐2 and its comparators suggesting that the potential gene loss may not have a significant phenotypic effect in soybean 40‐3‐2. For these reasons, the EFSA GMO Panel concludes that the new information provided by the applicant on soybean 40‐3‐2 does not alter EFSA's previous conclusions.
Collapse
|
33
|
Mullins E, Bresson JL, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, De Sanctis G, Federici S, Fernandez Dumont A, Gennaro A, Gomez Ruiz JA, Goumperis T, Lanzoni A, Lenzi P, Neri FM, Papadopoulou N, Raffaello T, Streissl F. Assessment of genetically modified oilseed rape MON 94100 for food and feed uses, under regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2020-169). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07411. [PMID: 35898295 PMCID: PMC9305391 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7411] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022] Open
Abstract
Oilseed rape MON 94100 was developed to confer tolerance to dicamba herbicide. 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 oilseed rape MON 94100 and its conventional counterpart needs further assessment, except for the levels of carbohydrates, calcium and ADF in seeds, which do not raise nutritional and safety concerns. The GMO Panel does not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the dicamba mono‐oxygenase (DMO) protein as expressed in oilseed rape MON 94100. The GMO Panel finds no evidence that the genetic modification impacts the overall safety of oilseed rape MON 94100. In the context of this application, the consumption of food and feed from oilseed rape MON 94100 does not represent a nutritional concern in humans and animals. The GMO Panel concludes that oilseed rape MON 94100 is as safe as the conventional counterpart and non‐GM oilseed rape reference varieties tested, and no post‐market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable oilseed rape MON 94100 seeds 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 oilseed rape MON 94100. The GMO Panel concludes that oilseed rape MON 94100 is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non‐GM oilseed rape reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.
Collapse
|
34
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, Fernandez A, Kagkli DM, Lewandowska A, Raffaello T, Streissl F. Assessment of genetically modified soybean A5547‐127 for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA‐GMO‐RX‐020). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07340. [PMID: 35765378 PMCID: PMC9207747 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7340] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Following the submission of application EFSA‐GMO‐RX‐020 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from BASF Agricultural Solutions Seed US LLC, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the EFSA was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the context of the renewal of authorisation application for the herbicide‐tolerant genetically modified soybean A5547‐127, for food and feed uses, excluding cultivation within the European Union. The data received in the context of this renewal application contained post‐market environmental monitoring reports, a systematic search and evaluation of literature, updated bioinformatic analyses and additional documents or studies performed by or on behalf of the applicant. The GMO Panel assessed these data for possible new hazards, modified exposure or new scientific uncertainties identified during the authorisation period and not previously assessed in the context of the original application. The GMO Panel concludes that there is no evidence in renewal application EFSA‐GMO‐RX‐020 for new hazards, modified exposure or scientific uncertainties that would change the conclusions of the original risk assessment on soybean A5547‐127.
Collapse
|
35
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Naegeli H, Moreno FJ, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Fernandez Dumont A, Federici S, Kagkli DM, Lanzoni A, Papadopoulou N, Raffaello T. Assessment of new sequencing information for genetically modified cotton DAS‐24236‐5 × DAS‐21Ø23‐5. EFSA J 2022; 20:e07345. [PMID: 35784822 PMCID: PMC9234918 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7345] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/04/2022] Open
Abstract
The GMO Panel has previously assessed genetically modified (GM) cotton DAS‐24236‐5 × DAS‐21Ø23‐5 and concluded that it is as safe as its conventional counterpart and other appropriate comparators with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment in the context of its intended uses. On 17 November 2020, the European Commission requested EFSA to evaluate new DNA sequence information and updated bioinformatics data for cotton DAS‐24236‐5 × DAS‐21Ø23‐5 and to indicate whether the conclusions of the GMO Panel on the previously assessed cotton DAS‐24236‐5 × DAS‐21Ø23‐5 remain valid. The new sequence data of DAS‐24236‐5 showed the change of one nucleotide that results in one amino acid substitution, in the newly expressed Cry1F (synpro_L620Q) compared to the sequence originally reported. The GMO Panel concludes that this amino acid substitution in the protein is a mutation. Nonetheless with the exception of the bioinformatics analysis, the studies performed for the risk assessment of Cry1F in cotton DAS‐24236‐5 × DAS‐21Ø23‐5 remain valid. In addition, the new sequencing data showed a change in one nucleotide in the 5′ flanking region of DAS‐21Ø23‐5 compared to the original sequence reported on the stack cotton DAS‐24236‐5 × DAS‐21Ø23‐5. The bioinformatic analyses of the newly sequenced DAS‐21Ø23‐5 event in the stack DAS‐24236‐5 × DAS‐21Ø23‐5 shows that the nucleotide difference is in the 5′ flanking region outside the ORFs that span the 5′ junction and is therefore not considered further in the safety assessment. Based on the information provided, the GMO Panel concludes that the corrected sequence does not give rise to any safety concerns, and therefore, the original risk assessment of cotton DAS‐24236‐5 × DAS‐21Ø23‐5 remains valid.
Collapse
|
36
|
Manaig YJY, Sandrini S, Panseri S, Tedeschi G, Folch JM, Sánchez A, Savoini G, Agazzi A. Low n-6/n-3 Gestation and Lactation Diets Influence Early Performance, Muscle and Adipose Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid Content and Deposition, and Relative Abundance of Proteins in Suckling Piglets. Molecules 2022; 27:2925. [PMID: 35566276 PMCID: PMC9103047 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27092925] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2022] [Revised: 04/27/2022] [Accepted: 04/28/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Elevated omega-6 (n-6) and omega-3 (n-3) polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs) ratios in swine diets can potentially impose a higher risk of inflammatory and metabolic diseases in swine. A low ratio between the two omega PUFAs has beneficial effects on sows' and piglets' production performance and immunity status. At present, there are few studies on how sow nutrition directly affects the protein and fat deposition in suckling piglets. Two groups of sows were fed diets with high or low n-6/n-3 polyunsaturated ratios of 13:1 (SOY) and 4:1 (LIN), respectively, during gestation and lactation. Longissimus dorsi muscle and adipose tissue from newborn piglets, nourished only with sow's milk, were subjected to fatty acid profiling by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) and to proteomics assays based on nano-liquid chromatography coupled to high-resolution tandem mass spectrometry (nLC-HRMS). Fatty acid profiles on both muscle and adipose tissues resembled the magnitude of the differences between fatty acid across diets. Proteomic analysis revealed overabundance of 4 muscle and 11 adipose tissue proteins in SOY compared to LIN in both piglet tissues. The detected overabundance of haptoglobin, an acute-phase protein, and the stimulation of protein-coding genes and proteins related to the innate immune response and acute inflammatory response could be associated with the pro-inflammatory role of n-6 PUFAs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yron Joseph Yabut Manaig
- Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain; (J.M.F.); (A.S.)
- Plant and Animal Genomics, Centre for Research in Agricultural Genomics (CRAG), CSIC-IRTA-UAB-UB Consortium, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, 26900 Lodi, Italy; (S.S.); (S.P.); (G.S.); (A.A.)
| | - Silvia Sandrini
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, 26900 Lodi, Italy; (S.S.); (S.P.); (G.S.); (A.A.)
| | - Sara Panseri
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, 26900 Lodi, Italy; (S.S.); (S.P.); (G.S.); (A.A.)
| | - Gabriella Tedeschi
- CRC “Innovation for Well-Being and Environment” (I-WE), Università degli Studi di Milano, 20122 Milano, Italy;
| | - Josep M. Folch
- Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain; (J.M.F.); (A.S.)
- Plant and Animal Genomics, Centre for Research in Agricultural Genomics (CRAG), CSIC-IRTA-UAB-UB Consortium, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Armand Sánchez
- Departament de Ciència Animal i dels Aliments, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain; (J.M.F.); (A.S.)
- Plant and Animal Genomics, Centre for Research in Agricultural Genomics (CRAG), CSIC-IRTA-UAB-UB Consortium, 08193 Bellaterra, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Giovanni Savoini
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, 26900 Lodi, Italy; (S.S.); (S.P.); (G.S.); (A.A.)
| | - Alessandro Agazzi
- Department of Veterinary Medicine and Animal Sciences, Università degli Studi di Milano, 26900 Lodi, Italy; (S.S.); (S.P.); (G.S.); (A.A.)
| |
Collapse
|
37
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Naegeli H, Moreno FJ, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Gennaro A, Neri FM. Statement complementing the EFSA Scientific Opinion on the assessment of genetically modified oilseed rape MS11 for food and feed uses, import and processing, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA‐GMO‐BE‐2016‐138). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07190. [PMID: 35311007 PMCID: PMC8914582 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7190] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
In a previous scientific opinion on application EFSA‐GMO‐BE‐2016‐138, the EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO Panel) could not conclude on the comparative analysis and on the food/feed safety assessment of genetically modified (GM) oilseed rape (OSR) MS11 because of the lack of an appropriate compositional data set. Following a request from the European Commission, the GMO Panel assessed additional information related to OSR MS11 to complement the original scientific opinion. The GMO Panel concluded that the information submitted (on the composition of the two‐event stack MS11 × RF3) could not be used for the assessment of the composition of OSR MS11 and requested the applicant to perform a complementary set of field trials to generate additional data. The applicant did not perform the requested field trials and did not provide any new experimental data on the composition of OSR MS11. Hence, the GMO Panel is still not in the position to conclude on either the compositional analysis or the toxicological, allergenicity or nutritional assessment of OSR MS11. Therefore, the previous conclusions of the GMO Panel still hold.
Collapse
|
38
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Naegeli H, Moreno FJ, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, Dumont AF, Federici S, Gennaro A, Gómez Ruiz JÁ, Goumperis T, Kagkli DM, Lanzoni A, Lenzi P, Neri FM, Papadopoulou N, Paraskevopoulos K, Raffaello T, Streissl F, De Sanctis G. Assessment of genetically modified maize DP4114 × MON 810 × MIR604 × NK603 and subcombinations, for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2018‐150). EFSA J 2022; 20:e07134. [PMID: 35281656 PMCID: PMC8900121 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7134] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Maize DP4114 × MON 810 × MIR604 × NK603 (four‐event stack maize) was produced by conventional crossing to combine four single events: DP4114, MON 810, MIR604 and NK603. The GMO Panel previously assessed the four single maize events and one of the subcombinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single maize events or the assessed subcombination 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 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, is as safe as the comparator and the selected non‐GM reference varieties. 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 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 subcombination and the four‐event stack maize. Post‐market monitoring of food/feed is not considered necessary. The post‐market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of the four‐event stack maize. The GMO Panel concludes that the four‐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.
Collapse
|
39
|
Lopez A, Bellagamba F, Savoini G, Moretti VM, Cattaneo D. Characterization of Fat Quality in Cow Milk from Alpine Farms as Influenced by Seasonal Variations of Diets. Animals (Basel) 2022; 12:ani12040515. [PMID: 35203223 PMCID: PMC8868097 DOI: 10.3390/ani12040515] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/18/2022] [Revised: 02/09/2022] [Accepted: 02/16/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Milk produced in Alpine farms under pasture- and-grass-based feeding systems is characterized by beneficial nutritional traits, which are linked to its high fat quality. In this study, milk samples collected in two alpine farms set in the Italian Piedmont region were analyzed together with samples of feedstuffs (pasture, fresh grass, concentrates and total mixed ration) furnished to cows during summer and winter, when the feeding strategy was modified. The results suggested a favorable fat composition of all samples analyzed, with some differences detected between the seasons and the farms. The milk obtained following a pasture- or fresh-grass-based feeding strategy (during summer) showed a higher fat quality, which was characterized by higher amounts of beneficial fatty acids. Particularly, a distinctive fat composition of milk samples coming from cows exclusively fed on pasture during the summer season was evidenced. The outcomes obtained in this study contributed toward evaluating and promoting alpine dairy products from the Alpine region as products associated with an added value, with beneficial effects for both producers and consumers. Abstract The production systems linked to mountain animal husbandry have had an environmental, social and cultural role in recent years. Zootechnical systems based on feeding strategies, such as pasture grazing and grass-fed strategies, contribute to a significant increase in the relative amounts of favorable fatty acids (FAs) in animal products, indicating their ability to improve the long-term health of consumers. In this study, we compared different feeding strategies in two small mountain farms in the Piedmont Alpine region, Italy. Particularly, during the summer season, the two farms were distinguished by the exclusive employment of Alpine pasture (farm A), assumed as the best way to improve the quality of the FA profile in milk vs. the supply of daily fresh cut mountain grass plus a reduced implementation with hay and concentrates directly in the barn (farm B). The milk fatty acid profile was analyzed using gas chromatography. The results showed the high quality of alpine milk collected in the two farms. Even with some differences, particularly evidenced when comparing the summer diets, the milk FA profiles in farm A and farm B were favorable from a nutritional point of view in both seasons. Milk samples obtained using the exclusive employment of alpine grazing during summer were represented by an FA profile of higher quality (lower saturated FAs, higher branched FAs and monounsaturated FA, favorable n6/n3 ratio). However, milk obtained using the integrated strategy (fresh grass plus concentrates in the barn farm B) resulted in a more homogenous composition during the summer season, with a higher concentration of polyunsaturated FAs. These outcomes suggested that the integrated strategy, even if related to a lower ability in improving milk FA profile, could represent a valid and cost-effective alternative for mountain farmers to obtain an overall superior quality of milk, which was not strictly linked to the grazing practice. The multivariate analysis showed that information contained in the milk FA profile may provide a valuable tool that can distinguish mountain-grass-based diet.
Collapse
|
40
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, George Firbank L, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Fernandez Dumont A, Moreno FJ. Scientific Opinion on development needs for the allergenicity and protein safety assessment of food and feed products derived from biotechnology. EFSA J 2022; 20:e07044. [PMID: 35106091 PMCID: PMC8787593 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7044] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
This Scientific Opinion addresses the formulation of specific development needs, including research requirements for allergenicity assessment and protein safety, in general, which is urgently needed in a world that demands more sustainable food systems. Current allergenicity risk assessment strategies are based on the principles and guidelines of the Codex Alimentarius for the safety assessment of foods derived from 'modern' biotechnology initially published in 2003. The core approach for the safety assessment is based on a 'weight-of-evidence' approach because no single piece of information or experimental method provides sufficient evidence to predict allergenicity. Although the Codex Alimentarius and EFSA guidance documents successfully addressed allergenicity assessments of single/stacked event GM applications, experience gained and new developments in the field call for a modernisation of some key elements of the risk assessment. These should include the consideration of clinical relevance, route of exposure and potential threshold values of food allergens, the update of in silico tools used with more targeted databases and better integration and standardisation of test materials and in vitro/in vivo protocols. Furthermore, more complex future products will likely challenge the overall practical implementation of current guidelines, which were mainly targeted to assess a few newly expressed proteins. Therefore, it is timely to review and clarify the main purpose of the allergenicity risk assessment and the vital role it plays in protecting consumers' health. A roadmap to (re)define the allergenicity safety objectives and risk assessment needs will be required to inform a series of key questions for risk assessors and risk managers such as 'what is the purpose of the allergenicity risk assessment?' or 'what level of confidence is necessary for the predictions?'.
Collapse
|
41
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Naegeli H, Moreno FJ, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, De Sanctis G, Fernandez Dumont A, Federici S, Gennaro A, Gomez Ruiz JA, Kagkli DM, Lanzoni A, Neri FM, Papadopoulou N, Paraskevopoulos K, Raffaello T. Assessment of genetically modified maize NK603 × T25 × DAS-40278-9 and subcombinations, for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2019-164). EFSA J 2021; 19:e06942. [PMID: 34938370 PMCID: PMC8666937 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6942] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Maize NK603 × T25 × DAS-40278-9 (three-event stack maize) was produced by conventional crossing to combine three single events: NK603, T25 and DAS-40278-9. The GMO Panel previously assessed the three single maize events and two of the subcombinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single maize events or the two 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 in the three-event stack maize does not give rise to food and feed safety and nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel concludes that the three-event stack maize, as described in this application, is as safe as the non-GM comparator and the selected non-GM reference varieties. In the case of accidental release of viable grains of the three-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 one 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 three-event stack maize. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of the three-event stack maize. Post-market monitoring of food/feed is not considered necessary. The GMO Panel concludes that the three-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.
Collapse
|
42
|
Mullins E, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Naegeli H, Nogué F, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Casacuberta J, Lenzi P, Munoz Guajardo I, Raffaello T, Rostoks N. In vivo and in vitro random mutagenesis techniques in plants. EFSA J 2021; 19:e06611. [PMID: 34804231 PMCID: PMC8585642 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6611] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Mutations are changes in the genetic material that may be transmitted to subsequent generations. Mutations appear spontaneously in nature and are one of the underlying driving forces of evolution. In plants, in vivo and in vitro random mutagenesis relies on the application of physical and chemical mutagens to increase the frequency of mutations thus accelerating the selection of varieties with important agronomic traits. The European Commission has requested EFSA to provide a more detailed description of in vivo and in vitro random mutagenesis techniques and the types of mutations and mechanisms involved, to be able to conclude on whether in vivo and in vitro random mutagenesis techniques are to be considered different techniques. To address the European Commission request, a literature search was conducted to collect information on the random mutagenesis techniques used in plants both in vivo and in vitro, on the type of mutations generated by such techniques and on the molecular mechanisms underlying formation of those mutations. The GMO Panel concludes that most physical and chemical mutagenesis techniques have been applied both in vivo and in vitro; the mutation process and the repair mechanisms act at cellular level and thus there is no difference between application of the mutagen in vivo or in vitro; and the type of mutations induced by a specific mutagen are expected to be the same, regardless of whether such mutagen is applied in vivo or in vitro. Indeed, the same mutation and the derived trait in a given plant species can be potentially obtained using both in vivo and in vitro random mutagenesis and the resulting mutants would be indistinguishable. Therefore, the GMO Panel concludes that the distinction between plants obtained by in vitro or in vivo approaches is not justified.
Collapse
|
43
|
Naegeli H, Bresson JL, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Mullins E, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, De Sanctis G, Fernandez A, Federici S, Gennaro A, Gómez Ruiz JÁ, Lanzoni A, Neri FM, Paraskevopoulos K, Raffaello T. Assessment of genetically modified cotton GHB811 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-ES-2018-154). EFSA J 2021; 19:e06781. [PMID: 34429778 PMCID: PMC8365404 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6781] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
Cotton GHB811 was developed to confer tolerance to glyphosate and HPPD inhibitor herbicides. 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 cotton GHB811 and its conventional counterpart needs further assessment, except for % lint, lint length and dihydrosterculic acid, which do not raise nutritional and safety concerns. The GMO Panel does not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the 2mEPSPS and HPPD W336 proteins as expressed in cotton GHB811 and finds no evidence that the genetic modification would change the overall allergenicity of cotton GHB811. In the context of this application, the consumption of food and feed from cotton GHB811 does not represent a nutritional concern in humans and animals. The GMO Panel concludes that cotton GHB811 is as safe as the conventional counterpart and non-GM cotton reference varieties tested, and no post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable cotton GHB811 seeds 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 cotton GHB811. The GMO Panel concludes that cotton GHB811 is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non-GM cotton reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.
Collapse
|
44
|
Ferreira RF, Blees T, Shakeri F, Buness A, Sylvester M, Savoini G, Agazzi A, Mrljak V, Sauerwein H. Comparative proteome profiling in exosomes derived from porcine colostrum versus mature milk reveals distinct functional proteomes. J Proteomics 2021; 249:104338. [PMID: 34343709 DOI: 10.1016/j.jprot.2021.104338] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2021] [Revised: 07/17/2021] [Accepted: 07/19/2021] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Abstract
Exosomes are membranous vesicles of endocytic origin, recently been considered as major players in cell-cell communication. Milk is highly complex, and diverse biocomponents provide adequate nutrition, transfer immunity, and promote adequate neonate development. Milk exosomes are suggested to have a key role in these processes, yet to be further explored, and the alteration of the exosomes' cargo in different stages of lactation stages is important for understanding the factors relevant in nursing and also for improving milk replacer products both for humans and animals. We isolated exosomes from porcine milk in different lactation stages and analyzed their content using a TMT-based high-resolution quantitative proteomic approach. Exosomes were isolated using ultracentrifugation coupled with size exclusion chromatography to enrich milk-derived exosomes in samples obtained at day 0, 7, and 14 after parturition, and characterized by nanoparticle tracking analysis, transmission electron microscopy, and Western blotting. Quantitative proteomics analysis revealed different proteome profiles for colostrum exosomes and milk exosomes. The functional analysis highlighted pathways related to the regulation of homeostasis to be upregulated in colostrum exosomes, and pathways such as endothelial cell development and lipid metabolism to be upregulated in mature milk exosomes. This study endorses the importance of exosomes as active biocomponents of milk and provides knowledge for future studies exploring their role in the regulation of immunity and growth of the newborn. SIGNIFICANCE: The identified functional proteome and protein-protein interaction networks identified in our study help to elucidate the role of milk exosomes in different lactation periods. The results generated herein are of relevance for the basic understanding of their impact on the infant's development but also for bringing forward the manufacturing of milk replacers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rafaela Furioso Ferreira
- Institute of Animal Science, Physiology Unit, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany; Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia.
| | - Thomas Blees
- Institute of Animal Science, Physiology Unit, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - Farhad Shakeri
- Institute for Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology, Medical Faculty, University of Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127 Bonn, Germany; Institute for Genomic Statistics and Bioinformatics, Medical Faculty, University of Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127 Bonn, Germany; Core Unit for Bioinformatics Analysis, Medical Faculty, University of Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127 Bonn, Germany
| | - Andreas Buness
- Institute for Medical Biometry, Informatics and Epidemiology, Medical Faculty, University of Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127 Bonn, Germany; Institute for Genomic Statistics and Bioinformatics, Medical Faculty, University of Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127 Bonn, Germany; Core Unit for Bioinformatics Analysis, Medical Faculty, University of Bonn, Venusberg-Campus 1, 53127 Bonn, Germany
| | - Marc Sylvester
- Institute of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Core Facility Mass Spectrometry, Medical Faculty, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| | - Giovanni Savoini
- Department of Health, Animal Science and Food Safety 'Carlo Cantoni' (VESPA), Università degli Studi di Milano, Lodi, Italy
| | - Alessandro Agazzi
- Department of Health, Animal Science and Food Safety 'Carlo Cantoni' (VESPA), Università degli Studi di Milano, Lodi, Italy
| | - Vladimir Mrljak
- Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
| | - Helga Sauerwein
- Institute of Animal Science, Physiology Unit, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
45
|
Nasuelli NA, De Marchi F, Cecchin M, De Paoli I, Onorato S, Pettinaroli R, Savoini G, Godi L. A case of acute demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy with bilateral facial palsy after ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine. Neurol Sci 2021; 42:4747-4749. [PMID: 34272622 PMCID: PMC8285283 DOI: 10.1007/s10072-021-05467-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 12.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/05/2021] [Accepted: 07/04/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) global pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), began in late 2019. Researchers around the world are aggressively working to develop a vaccine. One of the vaccines approved against COVID-19 is Oxford–AstraZeneca chimpanzee adenovirus vectored vaccine ChAdOx1 nCoV-19. Case report We described a patient who developed four limb distal paraesthesia, postural instability, and facial diplegia, ten days after vaccination with ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (ABW1277). The electrophysiological findings were compatible with acute demyelinating motor polyneuropathy (Guillain-Barrè syndrome). Discussion We therefore want to describe a temporal correlation between administration of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (ABW1277) vaccine and GBS without evidence of other predisposing infectious or autoimmune factors. This paper aims to highlight the importance of pharmacovigilance and subsequent reports will be needed to evaluate the possible correlation between these two events.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nicola Alessandro Nasuelli
- Department of Neurology, ASL NO, Borgomanero Hospital, Viale Zoppis 10, 28021, Borgomanero, Novara, Italy.
| | - Fabiola De Marchi
- Department of Neurology, ASL NO, Borgomanero Hospital, Viale Zoppis 10, 28021, Borgomanero, Novara, Italy.,Department of Neurology and ALS Centre, Traslational Medicine, University of Piemonte Orientale, Maggiore Della Carità Hospital, Novara, Italy
| | - Michela Cecchin
- Department of Neurology, ASL NO, Borgomanero Hospital, Viale Zoppis 10, 28021, Borgomanero, Novara, Italy
| | - Irene De Paoli
- Department of Neurology, ASL NO, Borgomanero Hospital, Viale Zoppis 10, 28021, Borgomanero, Novara, Italy
| | - Susanna Onorato
- Department of Neurology, ASL NO, Borgomanero Hospital, Viale Zoppis 10, 28021, Borgomanero, Novara, Italy
| | - Roberto Pettinaroli
- Department of Neurology, ASL NO, Borgomanero Hospital, Viale Zoppis 10, 28021, Borgomanero, Novara, Italy
| | - Giovanni Savoini
- Department of Neurology, ASL NO, Borgomanero Hospital, Viale Zoppis 10, 28021, Borgomanero, Novara, Italy
| | - Laura Godi
- Department of Neurology, ASL NO, Borgomanero Hospital, Viale Zoppis 10, 28021, Borgomanero, Novara, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
46
|
Naegeli H, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Mullins E, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Álvarez F, Ardizzone M, Raffaello T. Assessment of genetically modified cotton GHB614 for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-RX-018). EFSA J 2021; 19:e06671. [PMID: 34257729 PMCID: PMC8262139 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6671] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/01/2022] Open
Abstract
Following the submission of application EFSA-GMO-RX-018 under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from BASF Agricultural Solutions Seed US LLC, the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority was asked to deliver a scientific risk assessment on the data submitted in the context of the renewal of authorisation application for the herbicide-tolerant genetically modified cotton GHB614, for food and feed uses, excluding cultivation within the European Union. The data received in the context of this renewal application contained post-market environmental monitoring reports, a systematic search and evaluation of literature, updated bioinformatic analyses, and additional documents or studies performed by or on behalf of the applicant. The GMO Panel assessed these data for possible new hazards, modified exposure or new scientific uncertainties identified during the authorisation period and not previously assessed in the context of the original application. The GMO Panel concludes that there is no evidence in renewal application EFSA-GMO-RX-018 for new hazards, modified exposure or scientific uncertainties that would change the conclusions of the original risk assessment on cotton GHB614.
Collapse
|
47
|
Naegeli H, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Mullins E, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Ardizzone M, Devos Y, Federici S, Dumont AF, Gennaro A, Gómez Ruiz JÁ, Neri FM, Papadopoulou N, Paraskevopoulos K, Lanzoni A. Assessment of genetically modified oilseed rape 73496 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2012-109). EFSA J 2021; 19:e06610. [PMID: 34178155 PMCID: PMC8209597 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6610] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022] Open
Abstract
Oilseed rape 73496 was developed to confer tolerance to the herbicidal active substance glyphosate through the expression of the glyphosate acetyltransferase protein GAT4621. The molecular characterisation data and bioinformatic analyses identify no issues requiring food/feed safety assessment. None of the identified differences between oilseed rape 73496 and its conventional counterpart in the agronomic/phenotypic endpoints tested needs further assessment. Differences identified in seed composition of oilseed rape 73496 as compared to its conventional counterpart raise no safety and nutritional concerns in the context of the scope of this application. No safety concerns are identified regarding toxicity and allergenicity of the GAT4621 protein as expressed in oilseed rape 73496. No evidence is found that the genetic modification would change the overall allergenicity of oilseed rape 73496. Based on the outcome of the comparative and nutritional assessments, the consumption of oilseed rape 73496 does not represent any nutritional concern, in the context of the scope of this application. The implementation of a post-market monitoring plan is recommended to confirm the predicted consumption data and to verify that the conditions of use are those considered during the pre-market risk assessment. In the case of accidental release of viable oilseed rape 73496 seeds into the environment, oilseed rape 73496 would not raise environmental safety concerns. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of oilseed rape 73496. The GMO Panel concludes that oilseed rape 73496, as described in this application, is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the non-genetically modified oilseed rape reference varieties tested with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.
Collapse
|
48
|
Naegeli H, Bresson JL, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Mullins E, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Frenzel T, Gómez Ruiz JÁ. Statement complementing the EFSA Scientific Opinion on application (EFSA-GMO-NL-2010-85) for authorisation of food and feed containing, consisting of and produced from genetically modified soybean MON 87769 × MON 89788. EFSA J 2021; 19:e06589. [PMID: 34012490 PMCID: PMC8114199 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6589] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
The European Commission mandated EFSA to complement its original scientific opinion on soybean MON 87769 × MON 89788 (EFSA-GMO-NL-2010-85) considering additional information on the human nutritional assessment of refined bleached deodorised oil produced from the two-event stack soybean (RBD GM-oil). The assessment was mainly based on a replacement scenario with a list of target foods where RBD GM-oil is intended to be added. Intake estimations for several fatty acids present in the RBD GM-oil, in particular γ-linolenic acid (GLA), stearidonic acid (SDA) and linoleic acid (LA) were based on the consumption of the corresponding foods that are likely to be displaced. The assessment of LA considered the established adequate intake of 4% of total energy intake (E%) and that LA deficiency has not been observed with intakes > 1 E%. The assessment of GLA and SDA was conducted using maximum doses without adverse effects from intervention human studies as reference (4.2 grams/day for SDA and 2.8 grams/day for GLA) since no tolerable upper intake levels are set for these fatty acids. The decrease observed in the levels of LA in RBD GM-oil as compared to oil from conventional soybean does not represent a nutritional concern as intakes were in all cases above 1 E%. For GLA, all intake estimations were below the reference dose indicating no safety concern. SDA intake estimations do not pose any safety concerns based on the overly conservative nature of the estimates, the absence of toxicological hazards and the rapid metabolism of SDA in humans. The GMO Panel concluded that the consumption of soybean MON 87769 × MON 89788 and their derived products, in particular its RBD oil, does not represent a nutritional concern in humans. A post-market monitoring plan is recommended to confirm the predicted consumption and the application of conditions of uses considered during the pre-market risk assessment.
Collapse
|
49
|
Naegeli H, Bresson JL, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Mullins E, Nogué F, Rostoks N, Sánchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Álvarez F, Ardizzone M, Fernandez A, Gennaro A, Gómez Ruiz JÁ, Kagkli DM, Lanzoni A, Neri FM, Papadopoulou N, Paraskevopoulos K, Raffaello T, Streissl F, De Sanctis G. Assessment of genetically modified soybean GMB151 for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2018-153). EFSA J 2021; 19:e06424. [PMID: 33897857 PMCID: PMC8054566 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6424] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Soybean GMB151 was developed to confer tolerance to 4-hydroxyphenylpyruvate dioxygenase (HPPD) inhibitor herbicides and resistance to nematodes. 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 soybean GMB151 and its conventional counterpart needs further assessment, except for palmitic acid and heptadecenoic acid in seeds and carbohydrate and crude protein in forage, which does not raise nutritional and safety concerns. The GMO Panel does not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the HPPD-4 and Cry14Ab-1 proteins as expressed in soybean GMB151, and finds no evidence that the genetic modification would change the overall allergenicity of soybean GMB151. In the context of this application, the consumption of food and feed from soybean GMB151 does not represent a nutritional concern in humans and animals. The GMO Panel concludes that soybean GMB151 is as safe as the conventional counterpart and non-GM soybean reference varieties tested, and no post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable soybean GMB151 seeds 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 soybean GMB151. The GMO Panel concludes that soybean GMB151 is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non-GM soybean reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.
Collapse
|
50
|
Naegeli H, Bresson J, Dalmay T, Dewhurst IC, Epstein MM, Firbank LG, Guerche P, Hejatko J, Moreno FJ, Nogue F, Rostoks N, Sanchez Serrano JJ, Savoini G, Veromann E, Veronesi F, Casacuberta J, De Schrijver A, Messean A, Patron N, Zurbriggen M, Alvarez F, Devos Y, Gennaro A, Streissl F, Papadopoulou N, Mullins E. Evaluation of existing guidelines for their adequacy for the molecular characterisation and environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants obtained through synthetic biology. EFSA J 2021; 19:e06301. [PMID: 33598046 PMCID: PMC7863006 DOI: 10.2903/j.efsa.2021.6301] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Synthetic Biology (SynBio) is an interdisciplinary field at the interface of engineering and biology aiming to develop new biological systems and impart new functions to living cells. EFSA has been asked by the European Commission to evaluate SynBio developments in agri-food with the aim of identifying the adequacy of existing guidelines for risk assessment and determine if updated guidance is needed. The scope of this opinion covers the molecular characterisation and environmental risk assessment of such genetically modified plants obtained through SynBio, meant to be for cultivation or food and feed purposes. The previous work on SynBio by the non-food scientific Committees (2014, 2015) was used and complemented with the output of a horizon scanning exercise, which was commissioned by the EFSA to identify the most realistic and forthcoming SynBio cases of relevance to this remit. The horizon scan did not identify other sectors/advances in addition to the six SynBio categories previously identified by the non-food scientific committees of the European Commission. The exercise did show that plant SynBio products reaching the market in the near future (next decade) are likely to apply SynBio approaches to their development using existing genetic modification and genome editing technologies. In addition, three hypothetical SynBio case studies were selected by the working group of the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO), to further support the scoping exercise of this Scientific Opinion. Using the selected cases, the GMO Panel concludes that the requirements of the EU regulatory framework and existing EFSA guidelines are adequate for the risk assessment of SynBio products to be developed in the next 10 years, although specific requirements may not apply to all products. The GMO Panel acknowledges that as SynBio developments evolve, a need may exist to adjust the guidelines to ensure they are adequate and sufficient.
Collapse
|