GMOs in animal agriculture: time to consider both costs and benefits in regulatory evaluations

Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology

Alison L Van Eenennaam¹ 

[1] Department of Animal Science, 2113 Meyer Hall, University of California, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA

关键词: Safety;    Risk assessment;    Regulation;    GMO;    Genetic engineering;    Cost: benefit analysis;   

Others  :  805152
DOI  :  10.1186/2049-1891-4-37

 received in 2013-06-14, accepted in 2013-09-12,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

In 2012, genetically engineered (GE) crops were grown by 17.3 million farmers on over 170 million hectares. Over 70% of harvested GE biomass is fed to food producing animals, making them the major consumers of GE crops for the past 15 plus years. Prior to commercialization, GE crops go through an extensive regulatory evaluation. Over one hundred regulatory submissions have shown compositional equivalence, and comparable levels of safety, between GE crops and their conventional counterparts. One component of regulatory compliance is whole GE food/feed animal feeding studies. Both regulatory studies and independent peer-reviewed studies have shown that GE crops can be safely used in animal feed, and rDNA fragments have never been detected in products (e.g. milk, meat, eggs) derived from animals that consumed GE feed. Despite the fact that the scientific weight of evidence from these hundreds of studies have not revealed unique risks associated with GE feed, some groups are calling for more animal feeding studies, including long-term rodent studies and studies in target livestock species for the approval of GE crops. It is an opportune time to review the results of such studies as have been done to date to evaluate the value of the additional information obtained. Requiring long-term and target animal feeding studies would sharply increase regulatory compliance costs and prolong the regulatory process associated with the commercialization of GE crops. Such costs may impede the development of feed crops with enhanced nutritional characteristics and durability, particularly in the local varieties in small and poor developing countries. More generally it is time for regulatory evaluations to more explicitly consider both the reasonable and unique risks and benefits associated with the use of both GE plants and animals in agricultural systems, and weigh them against those associated with existing systems, and those of regulatory inaction. This would represent a shift away from a GE evaluation process that currently focuses only on risk assessment and identifying ever diminishing marginal hazards, to a regulatory approach that more objectively evaluates and communicates the likely impact of approving a new GE plant or animal on agricultural production systems.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Van Eenennaam; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

Figure 2.

Figure 3.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]James C: Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2012. 44th edition. Ithaca, NY: ISAA: ISAAA Brief; 2012.
• [2]Flachowsky G, Schafft H, Meyer U: Animal feeding studies for nutritional and safety assessments of feeds from genetically modified plants: a review. J Verbraucherschutz Lebensmittelsicherh (J Consum Prot Food Saf) 2012, 7:179-194.
• [3]Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD): Safety evaluation of foods derived by modern biotechnology : concepts and principles. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; 1993.
• [4]Hollingworth RM, Bjeldanes LF, Bolger M, Kimber I, Meade BJ, Taylor SL, Wallace KB, Society of Toxicology ad hoc Working G: The safety of genetically modified foods produced through biotechnology. Toxicol Sci 2003, 71:2-8.
• [5]European Food Safety Authority (EFSA): Guidance for risk assessment of food and feed from genetically modified plants. EFSA J 2011, 9:2150-2187.
• [6]European Food Safety Authority (EFSA): Considerations on the applicability of OECD TG 453 to whole food/feed testing. EFSA J 2013, 11:3347-3365.
• [7]Kalaitzandonakes N, Alston J, Bradford K: Compliance costs for regulatory approval of new biotech crops. Nat Biotechnol 2007, 25:509-511.
• [8]Séralini GE, Clair E, Mesnage R, Gress S, Defarge N, Malatesta M, Hennequin D, de Vendomois JS: Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. Food Chem Toxicol 2012, 50:4221-4231.
• [9]Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD): Section 4(Part 408), Health Effects: Repeated Dose 90-d Oral Toxicity Study in Rodents, Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; 1998.
• [10]Cheng KC, Beaulieu J, Iquira E, Belzile FJ, Fortin MG, Stromvik MV: Effect of transgenes on global gene expression in soybean is within the natural range of variation of conventional cultivars. J Agric Food Chem 2008, 56:3057-3067.
• [11]Batista R, Saibo N, Lourenço T, Oliveira MM: Microarray analyses reveal that plant mutagenesis may induce more transcriptomic changes than transgene insertion. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008, 105:3640-3645.
• [12]Garcia-Villalba R, Leon C, Dinelli G, Segura-Carretero A, Fernandez-Gutierrez A, Garcia-Canas V, Cifuentes A: Comparative metabolomic study of transgenic versus conventional soybean using capillary electrophoresis-time-of-flight mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr, A 2008, 1195:164-173.
• [13]European Food Safety Authority (EFSA): Safety and nutritional assessment of GM plants and derived food and feed: the role of animal feeding trials. Food Chem Toxicol 2008, 46:S2-S70.
• [14]Ricroch AE: Assessment of GE food safety using '-omics’ techniques and long-term animal feeding studies. N Biotechnol 2012, 30:349-354.
• [15]Snell C, Bernheim A, Berge JB, Kuntz M, Pascal G, Paris A, Ricroch AE: Assessment of the health impact of GM plant diets in long-term and multigenerational animal feeding trials: a literature review. Food Chem Toxicol 2012, 50:1134-1148.
• [16]Zhang W, Shi F: Do genetically modified crops affect animal reproduction? A review of the ongoing debate. Animal 2011, 5:1048-1059.
• [17]Buzoianu SG, Walsh MC, Gardiner GE, Rea MC, Ross RP, Lawlor PG: Effect of feeding Bt (MON810) maize to pigs from 12 d post-weaning for 110 d on growth performance, body composition, carcass characteristics, organ weights and intestinal morphology. J Anim Sci 2011, 89(1):461. Abstract 446
• [18]Buzoianu SG, Walsh MC, Gardiner GE, Rea MC, Ross RP, Lawlor PG: Effect of feeding genetically modified Bt (MON810) maize to pigs from 12 d post-weaning for 110 d on serum and urine biochemistry. J Anim Sci 2011, 89(1):462. Abstract 447
• [19]Buzoianu SG, Walsh MC, Rea MC, Cassidy JP, Ross RP, Gardiner GE, Lawlor PG: Effect of feeding genetically modified Bt MON810 maize to approximately 40-d-old pigs for 110 d on growth and health indicators. Animal 2012, 6:1609-1619.
• [20]Sakamoto Y, Tada Y, Fukumori N, Tayama K, Ando H, Takahashi H, Kubo Y, Nagasawa A, Yano N, Yuzawa K, Ogata A: A 104-week feeding study of genetically modified soybeans in F344 rats. Shokuhin Eiseigaku Zasshi 2008, 49:272-282.
• [21]Flachowsky G, Halle I, Aulrich K: Long term feeding of Bt-corn–a ten-generation study with quails. Arch Anim Nutr 2005, 59:449-451.
• [22]Hammond B, Dudek R, Lemen J, Nemeth M: Results of a 13 week safety assurance study with rats fed grain from glyphosate tolerant corn. Food Chem Toxicol 2004, 42:1003-1014.
• [23]Hammond B, Lemen J, Dudek R, Ward D, Jiang C, Nemeth M, Burns J: Results of a 90-d safety assurance study with rats fed grain from corn rootworm-protected corn. Food Chem Toxicol 2006, 44:147-160.
• [24]Hammond BG, Dudek R, Lemen JK, Nemeth MA: Results of a 90-d safety assurance study with rats fed grain from corn borer-protected corn. Food Chem Toxicol 2006, 44:1092-1099.
• [25]MacKenzie SA, Lamb I, Schmidt J, Deege L, Morrisey MJ, Harper M, Layton RJ, Prochaska LM, Sanders C, Locke M, et al.: Thirteen week feeding study with transgenic maize grain containing event DAS-O15O7-1 in Sprague–Dawley rats. Food Chem Toxicol 2007, 45:551-562.
• [26]Malley LA, Everds NE, Reynolds J, Mann PC, Lamb I, Rood T, Schmidt J, Layton RJ, Prochaska LM, Hinds M, et al.: Subchronic feeding study of DAS-59122-7 maize grain in Sprague–Dawley rats. Food Chem Toxicol 2007, 45:1277-1292.
• [27]Poulsen M, Kroghsbo S, Schrøder M, Wilcks A, Jacobsen H, Miller A, Frenzel T, Danier J, Rychlik M, Shu Q, et al.: A 90-d safety study in Wistar rats fed genetically modified rice expressing snowdrop lectin Galanthus nivalis (GNA). Food Chem Toxicol 2007, 45:350-363.
• [28]Wang Z-h, Wang Y, Cui H-r, Xia Y-w, Altosaar I, Shu Q-y: Toxicological evaluation of transgenic rice flour with a synthetic cry1Ab gene from Bacillus thuringiensis. J Sci Food Agric 2002, 82:738-744.
• [29]Zhu Y, Li D, Wang F, Yin J, Jin H: Nutritional assessment and fate of DNA of soybean meal from roundup ready or conventional soybeans using rats. Arch Anim Nutr 2004, 58:295-310.
• [30]Daleprane JB, Chagas MA, Vellarde GC, Ramos CF, Boaventura GT: The impact of non- and genetically modified soybean diets in aorta wall remodeling. J Food Sci 2010, 75:T126-T131.
• [31]Daleprane JB, Feijo TS, Boaventura GT: Organic and genetically modified soybean diets: consequences in growth and in hematological indicators of aged rats. Plant Foods Hum Nutr 2009, 64:1-5.
• [32]Sakamoto Y, Tada Y, Fukumori N, Tayama K, Ando H, Takahashi H, Kubo Y, Nagasawa A, Yano N, Yuzawa K, et al.: A 52-Week Feeding Study of Genetially Modified Soybeans in F344 Rats. Shokuhin Eiseigaku Zasshi 2007, 48:41-50.
• [33]Malatesta M, Boraldi F, Annovi G, Baldelli B, Battistelli S, Biggiogera M, Quaglino D: A long-term study on female mice fed on a genetically modified soybean: effects on liver ageing. Histochem Cell Biol 2008, 130:967-977.
• [34]Malatesta M, Caporaloni C, Rossi L, Battistelli S, Rocchi M, Tonucci F, Gazzanelli G: Ultrastructural analysis of pancreatic acinar cells from mice fed on genetically modified soybean. J Anat 2002, 201:409-415.
• [35]Malatesta M, Biggiogera M, Manuali E, Rocchi MB, Baldelli B, Gazzanelli G: Fine structural analyses of pancreatic acinar cell nuclei from mice fed on genetically modified soybean. Eur J Histochem 2003, 47:385-388.
• [36]Malatesta M, Caporaloni C, Gavaudan S, Rocchi MB, Serafini S, Tiberi C, Gazzanelli G: Ultrastructural morphometrical and immunocytochemical analyses of hepatocyte nuclei from mice fed on genetically modified soybean. Cell Struct Funct 2002, 27:173-180.
• [37]Vecchio L, Cisterna B, Malatesta M, Martin TE, Biggiogera M: Ultrastructural analysis of testes from mice fed on genetically modified soybean. Eur J Histochem 2004, 48:448-454.
• [38]Sissener N, Bakke A, Gu J, Penn M, Eie E, Krogdahl A, Sanden M, Hemre G-I: An assessment of organ and intestinal histomorphology and cellular stress response in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) fed genetically modified Roundup Ready Soy. Aquaculture 2009, 298:101-110.
• [39]Bakke-McKellep A, Sanden M, Danieli A, Acierno R, Hemre G-I, Maffia M, Krogdahl A: Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) parr fed genetically modified soybeans and maize: histological, digestive, metabolic, and immunological investigations. Res Vet Sci 2008, 84:395-408.
• [40]Aulrich K, Bohme H, Daenicke R, Halle I, Flachowsky G: Genetically modified feeds in animal nutrition. 1st communication: Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) corn in poultry, pig and ruminant nutrition. Arch Tierernahr 2001, 54:183-195.
• [41]Steinke K, Guertler P, Paul V, Wiedemann S, Ettle T, Albrecht C, Meyer HH, Spiekers H, Schwarz FJ: Effects of long-term feeding of genetically modified corn (event MON810) on the performance of lactating dairy cows. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr (Berl) 2010, 94:e185-e193.
• [42]Domon E, Takagi H, Hirose S, Sugita K, Kasahara S, Ebinuma H, Takaiwa F: 26-Week oral safety study in macaques for transgenic rice containing major human T-cell epitope peptides from Japanese cedar pollen allergens. J Agric Food Chem 2009, 57:5633-5638.
• [43]Scholtz N, Halle I, Danicke S, Hartmann G, Zur B, Sauerwein H: Effects of an active immunization on the immune response of laying Japanese quail (Coturnix coturnix japonica) fed with or without genetically modified Bacillus thuringensis-maize. Poultry Sci 2010, 89:1122-1128.
• [44]Tyshko N, Zhminchenko V, Pashorina V, Seliaskin K, Saprykin V, Utembaeva N, Tutel’an V: Assessment of the impact of GMO of plant origin on rat progeny development in 3 generations. Vopr Pitan 2011, 80:14-28.
• [45]Zhou XH, Dong Y, Wang Y, Xiao X, Xu Y, Xu B, Li X, Wei XS, Liu QQ: A three generation study with high-lysine transgenic rice in Sprague–Dawley rats. Food Chem Toxicol 2012, 50:1902-1910.
• [46]Kilic A, Akay MT: A three generation study with genetically modified Bt corn in rats: biochemical and histopathological investigation. Food Chem Toxicol 2008, 46:1164-1170.
• [47]Rhee GS, Cho DH, Won YH, Seok JH, Kim SS, Kwack SJ, Lee RD, Chae SY, Kim JW, Lee BM, et al.: Multigeneration reproductive and developmental toxicity study of bar gene inserted into genetically modified potato on rats. J Toxicol Environ Health A 2005, 68:2263-2276.
• [48]Daleprane JB, Pacheco J, Boaventura GT: Evaluation of protein quality from genetically modified and organic soybean in two consecutives generations of wistar rats. Braz Arch Biol Technol 2009, 52:841-847.
• [49]Krzyzowska M, Wincenciak M, Winnicka A, Baranowski A, Jaszczak K, Zimny J, Niemialtowski M: The effect of multigenerational diet containing genetically modified triticale on immune system in mice. Pol J Vet Sci 2010, 13:423-430.
• [50]Brake D, Thaler R, Evenson D: Evaluation of Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) Corn on mouse testicular development by dual parameter flow cytometry. J Agric Food Chem 2004, 52:2097-2102.
• [51]Brake DG, Evenson DP: A generational study of glyphosate-tolerant soybeans on mouse fetal, postnatal, pubertal and adult testicular development. Food Chem Toxicol 2004, 42:29-36.
• [52]Haryu Y, Taguchi Y, Itakura E, Mikami O, Miura K, Saeki T, Nakajima Y: Longterm biosafety assessment of a genetically modified (GM) plant: the genetically modified (GM) insect-resistant Bt11 corn does not affect the performance of multi-generations or life span of mice. Open Plant Sci J 2009, 3:49-53.
• [53]Baranowski A, Rosochacki S, Parada R, Jaszczak K, Zimny J, Poloszynowicz J: The effect of diet containing genetically modified triticale on growth and transgenic DNA fate in selected tissues of mice. Anim Sci Paper Rep 2006, 24:129-142.
• [54]Buzoianu SG, Walsh MC, Rea MC, O’Donovan O, Gelencser E, Ujhelyi G, Szabo E, Nagy A, Ross RP, Gardiner GE, Lawlor PG: Effects of feeding Bt maize to sows during gestation and lactation on maternal and offspring immunity and fate of transgenic material. PLoS One 2012, 7:e47851.
• [55]Buzoianu SG, Walsh MC, Rea MC, Cassidy JP, Ryan TP, Ross RP, Gardiner GE, Lawlor PG: Transgenerational effects of feeding genetically modified maize to nulliparous sows and offspring on offspring growth and health. J Anim Sci 2013, 91:318-330.
• [56]Flachowsky G, Aulrich K, Bohme H, Halle I: Studies on feeds from genetically modified plants (GMP) - contributions to nutritional and safety assessment. (Special Issue: Advances in feed safety.). Anim Feed Sci Technol 2007, 133:2-30.
• [57]Tudisco R, Mastellone V, Cutrignelli MI, Lombardi P, Bovera F, Mirabella N, Piccolo G, Calabro S, Avallone L, Infascelli F: Fate of transgenic DNA and evaluation of metabolic effects in goats fed genetically modified soybean and in their offsprings. Animal 2010, 4:1662-1671.
• [58]Trabalza-Marinucci M, Brandi G, Rondini C, Avellini L, Giammarini C, Costarelli S, Acuti G, Orlandi C, Filippini G, Chiaradia E, et al.: A three-year longitudinal study on the effects of a diet containing genetically modified Bt176 maize on the health status and performance of sheep. Livest Sci 2008, 113:178-190.
• [59]Brake J, Faust M, Stein J: Evaluation of transgenic event Bt11 hybrid corn in broiler chickens. Poult Sci 2003, 82:551-559.
• [60]Halle I, Aulrich K, Flachowsky G: Four generations feeding GMO-corn to laying hens. Proc Soc Nutr Physiol 2006, 15:114.
• [61]Halle I, Aulrich K, Flachowsky G: Four generations of feeding of GMO-corn to breeder quail. Proc Soc Nutr Physiol 2004, 13:124.
• [62]Brix AE, Nyska A, Haseman JK, Sells DM, Jokinen MP, Walker NJ: Incidences of selected lesions in control female harlan sprague–dawley rats from two-year studies performed by the national toxicology program. Toxicol Pathol 2005, 33:477-483.
• [63]Arjo G, Portero M, Pinol C, Vinas J, Matias-Guiu X, Capell T, Bartholomaeus A, Parrott W, Christou P: Plurality of opinion, scientific discourse and pseudoscience: an in depth analysis of the Seralini et al: study claiming that roundup ready corn or the herbicide roundup cause cancer in rats. Transgenic Res 2013, 22:255-267.
• [64]Schorsch F: Serious inadequacies regarding the pathology data presented in the paper by Séralini et al. (2012). Food Chem Toxicol 2013, 53:465-466.
• [65]Food and Drug Administration (FDA): Redbook. Guidance for industry and other stakeholders, toxicological principles for the safety assessment of food ingredients. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, FDA: Centre for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition; 2007.
• [66]Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD): OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals, Section 4: Health Effects Test No. 451: Carcinogenicity Studies. Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; 2009.
• [67]Agence nationale de securite sanitaire de l’alimentation dleedt (ANSES): AVIS de l’Agence nationale de securite sanitaire de l’alimantation, de l’environnement et du travail relatif a l’analyse de l’etude de Séralini et al. 2012. 2012. http://www.anses.fr/Documents/BIOT2012sa0227.pdf webcite
• [68]Belgian Biosafety Advisory Council: Advice of the Belgian Biosafety Advisory Council on the article by Séralini et al., 2012, on toxicity of GM maize NK603. 2012, 1-10. http://www.bio-council.be/docs/BAC_2012_0898_CONSOLIDE.pdf webcite
• [69]Brazilian National Biosafety Technical Commission (Ministry of Science Technology and Innovation National Biosafety Technical Commission): Considered opinion. 2012. http://www.cibiogem.gob.mx/sala-prensa/Documents/CTNBIO-Brasil-Seralini1725.pdf webcite
• [70]European Food Safety Authority (EFSA): Review of the Seralini et al. (2012) publication on a 2-year rodent feeding study with glyphosate formulations and GM maize NK603 as published online on 19 September 2012 in food and chemical toxicology. EFSA J 2012, 10:2910.
• [71]Health Canada and Canadian Food Inspection Agency: Statement on the Séralini et al. (2012) publication on a 2-year rodent feeding study with glyphosate formulations and GM maize NK603. 2012. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/gmf-agm/seralini-eng.php webcite
• [72]Nederlandse Voedsel-en Warenautoriteit (NVWA): Wetenschappelijke beoordeling door de Nederlandse Voedsel- en Warenautoriteit van een onderzoek naar de gezondheidsrisico’s voor mens en dier van Roundup-tolerante GGO-mais en Roundup herbicide aan ratten. 2012. http://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten-en-publicaties/notas/2012/10/03/advies-vwa-bij-onderzoek-naar-gezondheidsgevolgen-ggo-mais-en-roundup.html webcite
• [73]Bundesinstitute fur Risikobewertung: Feeding study in rats with genetically modified NK603 maize and with a gly-phosate containing formulation (Roundup) published by Séralini et al. (2012). 2012. http://www.epsoweb.org/file/1095 webcite
• [74]The Australian and New Zealand Food Standards Agency (FSANZ): Response to Séralini paper on the long term toxicity of Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize. 2012. http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/consumer/gmfood/seralini/Pages/default.aspx webcite
• [75]The High Council of Biotechnologies (HCB: Opinion of the HCD Scientific Committee on the Séralini Study (2012). 2012. http://www.hautconseildesbiotechnologies.fr/IMG/pdf/Executive_Summary_121022.pdf webcite
• [76]Ewen SW, Pusztai A: Effect of diets containing genetically modified potatoes expressing Galanthus nivalis lectin on rat small intestine. Lancet 1999, 354:1353-1354.
• [77]The Royal Society: Review of data on possible toxicity of GM potatoes. 1999. http://royalsociety.org/uploadedFiles/Royal_Society_Content/policy/publications/1999/10092.pdf webcite
• [78]EFSA (European Food Safety Authority): Safety and nutritional assessment of GM plants and derived food and feed: the role of animal feeding trials. Food Chem Toxicol 2008, 46(1):S2-S70.
• [79]Flachowsky G, Wenk C: The role of animal feeding trials for the nutritional and safety assessment of feeds from genetically modified plants - present stage and future challenges. J Anim Feed Sci 2010, 19:149-170.
• [80]Ermakova IV: Influence of Genetically Modified-SOYA on the Birth-Weight and Survival of Rat Pups: Preliminary Study. 2013 edition. 2005. http://www.mindfully.org/GE/2005/Modified-Soya-Rats10oct05.htm webcite
• [81]Velmirov A, Binter C, Zentek J: Biological effects of transgenic maize NK603xMON810 fed in long term reproduction studies in mice. Report, Forschungsberichte der Sektion IV, Band 3. Institut für Ernährung, and Forschungsinttitut für biologischen Landbau, Vienna, Austria: Bundesministerium fur Gesundheit, Familie und Jugend; 2008:105.
• [82]Marshall A: GM soybeans and health safety - a controversy reexamined. Nat Biotech 2007, 25:981-987.
• [83]European Food Safety Authority (EFSA): GMO Panel deliberations on the Austrian report “Biological effects of transgenic maize NK603 x MON810 fed in long term reproduction studies in mice”. 2009. http://fbae.org/2009/FBAE/website/images/pdf/biosafety/EFSA-Opinion-on-teh-Austrian-Study.pdf webcite
• [84]Dona A, Arvanitoyannis IS: Health risks of genetically modified foods. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2009, 49:164-175.
• [85]Delaney B, Appenzeller LM, Munley SM, Hoban D, Sykes GP, Malley LA, Sanders C: Subchronic feeding study of high oleic acid soybeans (Event DP-3O5423-1) in Sprague–Dawley rats. Food Chem Toxicol 2008, 46:3808-3817.
• [86]Jacobs CM, Utterback PL, Parsons CM, Rice D, Smith B, Hinds M, Liebergesell M, Sauber T: Performance of laying hens fed diets containing DAS-59122-7 maize grain compared with diets containing nontransgenic maize grain. Poult Sci 2008, 87:475-479.
• [87]Juberg DR, Herman RA, Thomas J, Brooks KJ, Delaney B: Acute and repeated dose (28 d) mouse oral toxicology studies with Cry34Ab1 and Cry35Ab1 Bt proteins used in coleopteran resistant DAS-59122-7 corn. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2009, 54:154-163.
• [88]Rasmussen M, Cutler S, Wilhelms K, Scanes C: Effects of Bt (Bacillus thuringiensis) corn on reproductive performance in adult laying hens. Int J Poult Sci 2007, 6:169-171.
• [89]Appenzeller LM, Malley L, Mackenzie SA, Hoban D, Delaney B: Subchronic feeding study with genetically modified stacked trait lepidopteran and coleopteran resistant (DAS-O15O7-1xDAS-59122-7) maize grain in Sprague–Dawley rats. Food Chem Toxicol 2009, 47:1512-1520.
• [90]Appenzeller LM, Munley SM, Hoban D, Sykes GP, Malley LA, Delaney B: Subchronic feeding study of herbicide-tolerant soybean DP-356O43-5 in Sprague–Dawley rats. Food Chem Toxicol 2008, 46:2201-2213.
• [91]Appenzeller LM, Munley SM, Hoban D, Sykes GP, Malley LA, Delaney B: Subchronic feeding study of grain from herbicide-tolerant maize DP-O9814O-6 in Sprague–Dawley rats. Food Chem Toxicol 2009, 47:2269-2280.
• [92]He XY, Huang KL, Li X, Qin W, Delaney B, Luo YB: Comparison of grain from corn rootworm resistant transgenic DAS-59122-7 maize with non-transgenic maize grain in a 90-d feeding study in Sprague–Dawley rats. Food Chem Toxicol 2008, 46:1994-2002.
• [93]He XY, Tang MZ, Luo YB, Li X, Cao SS, Yu JJ, Delaney B, Huang KL: A 90-d toxicology study of transgenic lysine-rich maize grain (Y642) in Sprague–Dawley rats. Food Chem Toxicol 2009, 47:425-432.
• [94]Healy C, Hammond B, Kirkpatrick J: Results of a 13-week safety assurance study with rats fed grain from corn rootworm-protected, glyphosate-tolerant MON 88017 corn. Food Chem Toxicol 2008, 46:2517-2524.
• [95]Schroder M, Poulsen M, Wilcks A, Kroghsbo S, Miller A, Frenzel T, Danier J, Rychlik M, Emami K, Gatehouse A, et al.: A 90-d safety study of genetically modified rice expressing Cry1Ab protein (Bacillus thuringiensis toxin) in Wistar rats. Food Chem Toxicol 2007, 45:339-349.
• [96]Delaney B, Zhang J, Carlson G, Schmidt J, Stagg B, Comstock B, Babb A, Finlay C, Cressman RF, Ladics G, et al.: A gene-shuffled glyphosate acetyltransferase protein from Bacillus licheniformis (GAT4601) shows no evidence of allergenicity or toxicity. Toxicol Sci 2008, 102:425-432.
• [97]Cisterna B, Flach F, Vecchio L, Barabino SM, Battistelli S, Martin TE, Malatesta M, Biggiogera M: Can a genetically-modified organism-containing diet influence embryo development? A preliminary study on pre-implantation mouse embryos. Eur J Histochem 2008, 52:263-267.
• [98]Batista R, Oliveira MM: Facts and fiction of genetically engineered food. Trends Biotechnol 2009, 27:277-286.
• [99]UK Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes: ACNFP minutes: 20 July 2006. Committee Paper for Discussion ACNFP/78/7 Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes, Minutes of the Meeting Held on 20 July 2006; 2006. http://acnfp.food.gov.uk/meetings/acnfpmeet2006/acnfpjul06/acnfpminsjuly2006 webcite
• [100]Nutritional and Safety Assessments of Foods and Feeds Nutritionally Improved through Biotechnology: An Executive Summary A Task Force Report by the International Life Sciences Institute. Washington, D.C: Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety; 2004:35-104.
• [101]International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI): Best Practices for the Conduct of Animal Studies to Evaluate Crops Genetically Modified for Input Traits. Washington, DC: International Life Sciences Institute; 2003:62.
• [102]International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI): Best Practices for the Conduct of Animal Studies to Evaluate Crops Genetically Modified for Output Traits. Washington, D.C: International Life Sciences Institute; 2007:202.
• [103]European Food Safety Authority (EFSA): Opinion of the scientific committee/ scientific panel. Statistical significance and biological relevance. EFSA Journal 2011, 9:2372.
• [104]Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y: Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Stat Soc Ser B Methodol 1995, 57:289-300.
• [105]Herman RA, Price WD: Unintended compositional changes in genetically modified (gm) crops: 20 years of research. J Agric Food Chem 2013. e-pub ahead of print
• [106]BEETLE: Long-term effects of genetically modified (GM) crops on health and the environment (including biodiversity). Federal Office of Consumer Protection and Food Safety (BVL): BLaU-Umweltstudien and Genius GmbH, Berlin: Executive Summary and Main Report; 2009.
• [107]Hammond BG, Campbell KW, Pilcher CD, Degooyer TA, Robinson AE, McMillen BL, Spangler SM, Riordan SG, Rice LG, Richard JL: Lower fumonisin mycotoxin levels in the grain of Bt corn grown in the United States in 2000–2002. J Agric Food Chem 2004, 52:1390-1397.
• [108]Llorente B, Alonso GD, Bravo-Almonacid F, Rodriguez V, Lopez MG, Carrari F, Torres HN, Flawia MM: Safety assessment of nonbrowning potatoes: opening the discussion about the relevance of substantial equivalence on next generation biotech crops. Plant Biotechnol J 2011, 9:136-150.
• [109]Flachowsky G, Bohme H: Proposals for nutritional assessments of feeds from genetically modified plants. J Animal and Feed Sci 2005, 14(Suppl 1):49-70.
• [110]Folmer J, Grant R, Milton C, Beck J: Utilization of Bt corn residues by grazing beef steers and Bt corn silage and grain by growing beef cattle and lactating dairy cows. J Anim Sci 2002, 80:1352-1361.
• [111]Llorente B, Rodriguez V, Guillermo DA, Torres HN, Flawia MM, Bravo-Almonacid FF: Improvement of aroma in transgenic potato as a consequence of impairing tuber browning. PLoS One 2010, 5:e14030.
• [112]Davidovich-Rikanati R, Sitrit Y, Tadmor Y, Iijima Y, Bilenko N, Bar E, Carmona B, Fallik E, Dudai N, Simon JE, et al.: Enrichment of tomato flavor by diversion of the early plastidial terpenoid pathway. Nat Biotech 2007, 25:899-901.
• [113]Rommens CM, Richael CM, Yan H, Navarre DA, Ye J, Krucker M, Swords K: Engineered native pathways for high kaempferol and caffeoylquinate production in potato. Plant Biotechnol J 2008, 6:870-886.
• [114]Park S, Elless MP, Park J, Jenkins A, Lim W, Chambers E, Hirschi KD: Sensory analysis of calcium-biofortified lettuce. Plant Biotechnol J 2009, 7:106-117.
• [115]Butelli E, Titta L, Giorgio M, Mock H-P, Matros A, Peterek S, Schijlen EGWM, Hall RD, Bovy AG, Luo J, Martin C: Enrichment of tomato fruit with health-promoting anthocyanins by expression of select transcription factors. Nat Biotech 2008, 26:1301-1308.
• [116]Alexander TW, Reuter T, Aulrich K, Sharma R, Okine EK, Dixon WT, McAllister TA: A review of the detection and fate of novel plant molecules derived from biotechnology in livestock production. Anim Feed Sci Technol 2007, 133:31-62.
• [117]Council for Agricultural Science and Technology (CAST): Safety of meat, milk, and eggs from animals fed crops derived from modern biotechnology. Ames, Iowa: CAST 2006, 34:1-8.
• [118]Flachowsky G, Chesson A, Aulrich K: Animal nutrition with feeds from genetically modified plants. Arch Anim Nutr 2005, 59:1-40.
• [119]Guertler P, Paul V, Albrecht C, Meyer HH: Sensitive and highly specific quantitative real-time PCR and ELISA for recording a potential transfer of novel DNA and Cry1Ab protein from feed into bovine milk. Anal Bioanal Chem 2009, 393:1629-1638.
• [120]Guertler P, Paul V, Steinke K, Wiedemann S, Preißinger W, Albrecht C, Spiekers H, Schwarz FJ, Meyer HHD: Long-term feeding of genetically modified corn (MON810) — Fate of cry1Ab DNA and recombinant protein during the metabolism of the dairy cow. Livest Sci 2010, 131:250-259.
• [121]Bertheau Y, Helbling J, Fortabat M, Makhzami S, Sotinel I, Audeon C, Kobilinsky A, Petit L, Fach P, Brunschwig P, et al.: Persistence of plant dna sequences in the blood of dairy cows fed with genetically modified (bt176) and conventional corn silage. J Agric Food Chem 2009, 57:509-516.
• [122]Brookes G, Barfoot P: The global income and production effects of genetically modified (GM) crops 1996–2011. GM Crops and Food: Biotechnology in Agriculture and the Food Chain 2013, 4:74-83.
• [123]Masip G, Sabalza M, Pérez-Massot E, Banakar R, Cebrian D, Twyman RM, Capell T, Albajes R, Christou P: Paradoxical EU agricultural policies on genetically engineered crops. Trends in plant science 2013, 18:312-324.
• [124]Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS): GAIN Report: EU-27 Biotechnology Annual Report. USDA FAS 2013., Report number FR9142http://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Agricultural%20Biotechnology%20Annual_Paris_EU-27_7-12-2013.pdf webcite
• [125]Brookes G, Barfoot P: GM crops: global socio-economic and environmental impacts 1996–2011. UK: PG Economics Ltd; 2013. http://www.pgeconomics.co.uk/pdf/2013globalimpactstudyfinalreport.pdf webcite
• [126]Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS): GAIN report: People’s Republic of China agricultural biotechnology annual. USDA FAS 2012, Report number CH12046:1-15. http://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Agricultural%20Biotechnology%20Annual_Beijing_China%20-%20Peoples%20Republic%20of_7-13-2012.pdf webcite
• [127]Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS): GAIN report: Argentina biotechnology annual report. USDA FAS 2012, 1-14. http://gain.fas.usda.gov/Recent%20GAIN%20Publications/Agricultural%20Biotechnology%20Annual_Buenos%20Aires_Argentina_7-18-2012.pdf webcite
• [128]Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development: Economic impact of unapproved GMOs on EU feed imports and livestock production. 2007. http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/envir/gmo/economic_impactGMOs_en.pdf webcite
• [129]Paarlberg R: GMO foods and crops: Africa’s choice. N Biotechnol 2010, 27:609-613.
• [130]Carpenter JE: Peer-reviewed surveys indicate positive impact of commercialized GM crops. Nat Biotech 2010, 28:319-321.
• [131]Brookes G, Barfoot P: Key environmental impacts of global genetically modified (GM) crop use 1996–2011. GM Crops Food 2013, 4:109-119.
• [132]Mannion AM, Morse S: Biotechnology in agriculture: agronomic and environmental considerations and reflections based on 15 years of GM crops. Prog Phys Geogr 2012, 36:747-763.
• [133]Morris EJ: A semi-quantitative approach to GMO risk-benefit analysis. Transgenic Res 2011, 20:1055-1071.