Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Risk assessment strategies for transgenic plants

  • Review
  • Published:
Acta Physiologiae Plantarum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Advances in recombinant DNA technology have created advantages for the development of plants with high agro-economical values. Since the production of transgenic plants, some issues concerning the safe use of these plants and their products have been under debate throughout the world. In this respect, the potential risks and benefits of transgenic plants need to be evaluated objectively. Risk assessment of transgenic crops is a basic prerequisite for monitoring the possible risks that could arise upon the release and use of transgenic plants. To get a meaningful tool for decision making, risk assessment needs to be carried out in a scientific sound and transparent manner. There are specific governmental regulations in many countries for the safety assessment of genetically modified (GM) crops. Furthermore, there are some international agreements, which regulate the cultivation and commercialization of transgenic plants and their derivatives. Internationally accepted risk assessment strategies have been performed to evaluate the safe use of a large variety of GM crops. The main objectives of these regulations and risk assessment strategies are focused to protect human/animal health and the environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ahmad A, Wilde GE, Zhu KY (2005) Detectability of coleopteran-specific Cry3Bb1 protein in soil and its effect on nontarget surface and below-ground arthropods. Environ Entomol 34:385–394

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Andow DA, Zwahlen C (2006) Assessing anvironmental risks of transgenic plants. Ecol Lett 9:196–214

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Baker JM, Hawkins ND, Ward JL, Lovegrove A, Napie JA, Shewry PR, Beale MH (2006) A metabolomic study of substantial equivalance of field-grown GM wheat. Plant Biotechnol J 4:381–392

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bakke-McKellep AM, Koppang EO, Gunnes G, Senden M, Hemre G-I, Landsverk T, Krogdahl A (2007) Histological, digestive, metabolic, hormonal and some immune factor responses in Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., fed genetically modified soybeans. J Fish Dis 30:65–79

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Barber D, Rodríguez R, Salcedo G (2008) Molecular profiles: a new tool to substantiate serum banks for evaluation of potential allergenicity of GMO. Food Chem Toxicol 46:35–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berg P, Baltimore D, Brenner S, Roblin ROR, Singer MF (1975) Asilomar conference on recombinant DNA molecules. Science 188:991–994

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bondzio A, Stumpff F, Schön J, Martens H, Einspanier R (2008) Impact of Bacillus thuringiensis toxin Cry1Ab on rumen epithelial cells (REC)—a new in vitro model for safety assessment of recombinant food compounds. Food Chem Toxicol 46:1976–1984

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) (2003) FAO/WHO: principles for the risk analysis of food derived from modern biotechnology. CAC/GL 44-2003. http://www.who.int/foodsafety/biotech/codex_taskforce/en/

  • Council of Agricultural Science and Technology (CAST) (2006) Safety of meat, milk, and eggs from animals fed crops derived from modern biotechnology. Council for agricultural science and technology (issue paper 34)

  • Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBP) (2000) Secretariat of the convention on biological diversity, Montreal, Canada. http://www.biodiv.org/biosafety/protocol.asp

  • Cellini F, Chesson A, Colquhoun I, Constable A, Davies HV, Engel KH, Gatehouse AM, Karenlampi S, Kok EJ, Leguay JJ, Lehesranta S, Noteborn H, Pedersen J, Smith M (2004) Unintended effects and their detection in genetically modified crops. Food Chem Toxicol 42:1089–1125

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Chandler S, Dunwell JM (2008) Gene flow, risk assessment and the environmental release of transgenic plants. Crit Rev Plant Sci 27:25–49

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Conner AJ, Glare TR, Nap JP (2003) The release of genetically modified crops into the environment: Part II. Overview of ecological risk assessment. Plant J 33:9–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craig W, Tepfer M, Degrassi G, Ripandelli D (2008) An overview of general features of risk assessments of genetically modified crops. Euphytica 164:853–880

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daniell H (2007) Transgene containment by maternal inheritance: effective or elusive? Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:6879–6880

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Delhaize E, Hebb DM, Richards KD, Lin J-M, Ryan PR, Gardner RC (1999) Cloning and expression of a wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) phosphatidylserine synthase cDNA. J Biol Chem 274:7082–7088

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Domingo JL (2007) Toxicity studies of genetically modified plants: a review of the published literature. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 47:721–733

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • European Commission (EC) (2001) Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organism and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC.Off J Eur Commun 106:1–39

    Google Scholar 

  • EFSA (2004) Guidance document of the scientific panel on genetically modified organisms for the risk assessment of genetically modified plants and derived food and feed. EFSA J 99:1–94. http://www.efsa.eu.int

    Google Scholar 

  • Einspanier R, Klotz A, Kraft J, Aulrich K, Poser R, Schwägele F, Jahreis G, Flachowsky G (2001) The fate of forage plant DNA in farm animals: a collaborative case-study investigating cattle and chicken fed recombinant plant material. Eur Food Res Technol 212:129–143

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ellstrand NC (2003) Current knowledge of gene flow in plants: implications for transgene flow. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B 358:1163–1170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ewen SWB, Pusztai A (1999) Effect of diets containing genetically modified potatoes expressing galanthus nivalis lectin on rat small ıntestine. Lancet 354:1353–1354

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • FAO/WHO (2003) Codex principles and guidelines on foods derived from biotechnology, Rome, Italy. Joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. http://ftp.fao.org/codex/standard/en/CodexTextsBiotechFoods.pdf

  • Flachowsky G, Aulrich K, Böhme H, Halle I (2007) Studies on feeds from genetically modified plants (GMP): contributions to nutritional and safety assessment. Anim Feed Sci Technol 133:2–30

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • García MC, García B, García-Ruiz C, Gómez A, Cifuentes A, Marina ML (2009) Rapid characterisation of (glyphosate tolerant) transgenic and non-transgenic soybeans using chromatographic protein profiles. Food Chem 113:1212–1217

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hansen JLC, Obrycki JJ (2000) Field deposition of Bt transgenic corn pollen: lethal effects on the monarch butterfly. Oecologia 125:241–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holzhauser T, van Ree R, Poulsen LK, Bannon GA (2008) Analytical criteria for performance characteristics of IgE binding methods for evaluating safety of biotech food products. Food Chem Toxicol 46:15–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins DW, Gregorich EG (2003) Detection and decay of the Bt endotoxin in soil from a field trial with genetically modified maize. Eur J Soil Sci 54:793–800

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu HY, Liu XX, Zha ZW, Sun JG, Zhang QW, Liu Z, Yong Y (2009) Effects of repeated cultivation of transgenic Bt cotton on functional bacterial populations in rhizosphere soil. World J Microbiol Biotech 25:357–366

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) (2004) Nutritional and safety assessments of foods and feeds nutritionally improved through biotechnology. Compr Rev Food Sci Safety 3:35–104

    Google Scholar 

  • International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications (ISAAA) (2009) Executive summary of global status of commercialised biotech/GM crops, ISAAA Brief No 41-2009. http://www.isaaa.org

  • Kim SH, Kim HM, Ye YM, Kim SH, Nahm DH, Park HS, Ryu SR, Lee BO (2006) Evaluating the allergic risk of genetically modified soybean. Yonsei Med J 47:505–512

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • König A, Cockburn A, Crevel RWR, Debruyne E, Grafstroem R, Hammerling U, Kimber I, Knudsen I, Kuiper HA, Peijnenburg AACM, Penninks AH, Poulsen M, Schauzu M, Wal JM (2004) Assessment of the safety of foods derived from genetically modified (GM) crops. Food Chem Toxicol 42:1047–1088

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuiper HA (2001) Exploitation of molecular profiling techniques for GM food safety assessment. Curr Opin Biotechnol 14:238–243

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liener IE (1994) Implications of anti-nutritional components in soybean foods. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 34:31–67

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Luber-Narod J, Smith B, Grant W, Jimeno JM, Lopez-Lazaro L, Faircloth GT (2001) Evaluation of the use of in vitro methodologies as tools for screening new compounds for potential in vivo toxicity. Toxicol In Vitro 15:571–577

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Lutz KA, Maliga P (2007) Construction of marker-free transplastomic plants. Curr Opin Biotechnol 18:107–114

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Netherwood T, Martin-Orue SM, O’Donnell AG, Gockling S, Graham J, Mathers JC, Gilbert HJ (2004) Assessing the survival of transgenic plant DNA in the human gastrointestinal tract. Nat Biotech 22:204–209

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen KM, Bones AM, Smalla K, van Elsas JD (1998) Horizontal gene transfer from transgenic plants to terrestrial bacteria—a rare event? FEMS Microbiol Rev 22:79–103

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC) (2002) Environmental effects of transgenic plants. National Academy Press, Washington, p 320

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Callaghan M, Glare TR, Burgess EPJ, Malone LA (2005) Effects of plants genetically modified for insect resistance on nontarget organisms. Annu Rev Entomol 50:271–292

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2003) Considerations for the safety assessment of animal feedstuffs derived from genetically modified plants. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris

  • Orruño E, Morgan MRA (2006) IgE binding to proetins from sesame and assessment of allergenicity: implications for biotechnology? Biotechnol Lett 28:1877–1888

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pizzuti F, Daroda L (2008) Investigating recombinant protein exudation from roots of transgenic tobacco. Environ. Biosafety Res. http://www.ebr-journal.org. doi:10.1051/ebr:2008020

  • Ramessar K, Capell T, Christou P (2008) Molecular pharming in cereal crops. Phytochem Rev 7:579–592

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rischer H, Oksman-Caldentey KM (2006) Unintended effects in genetically modified crops: revealed by metabolomics? Trends Biotechnol 24:102–104

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Romeis J, Dutton A, Bigler F (2004) Bacillus thuringiensis toxin (Cry1Ab) has no direct effect on larvae of the green lacewing Chrysoperla carnea (Neuroptera: Chrysopidae). J Insect Physiol 50:175–183

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ruf S, Karcher D, Bock R (2007) Determining the transgene containment level provided by chloroplast transformation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:6998–7002

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Saxena D, Stotzky G (2001) Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) toxin released from root exudates and biomass of Bt corn has no apparent effect on earthworms, nematodes, protozoa, bacteria and fungi in soil. Soil Biol Biochem 33:1225–1230

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Saxena D, Flores S, Stotzky G (2002) Bt toxin is released in root exudates from 12 transgenic corn hybrids representing three transformation events. Soil Biol Biochem 34:133–137

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt M, Bothma G (2006) Risk assessment for transgenic sorghum in Africa: crop-to-crop gene flow in Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench. Crop Sci 46:790–798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sears MK, Hellmich RL, Stanley-Horn DE, Oberhauser KS, Pleasants JM, Mattila HR, Siegfried BD, Dively GP (2001) Impact of Bt corn pollen on monarch butterfly populations: a risk assessment. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98:11937–11942

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma R, Damgaard D, Alexander TW, Dugan MER, Aalhus JL, Stanford K, McAllister TA (2006) Detection oftransgenic and endogenous plant DNA in digesta and tissues of sheep and pigs fed roundup ready canola meal. J Agric Food Chem 54:1699–1709

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Siciliano SD, Germida JJ (1999) Taxonomic diversity of bacteria associated with the roots of field-grown transgenic Brassica napus cv.Quest, compared to the non-transgenic B. napus cv. Excel and B. rapa cv. Parkland. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 29:263–272

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Stave JW (2002) Protein immunoassay methods for detection of biotech crops: applications, limitations, and practical considerations. J AOAC Int 85:780–786

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Thomson JA (2001) Horizontal transfer of DNA from GM crops to bacteria and to mammalian cells. J Food Sci 66:188–193

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Twyman RM, Schillberg S, Fischer R (2005) Transgenic plants in the biopharmaceutical market. Expert Opin Emerg Drugs 10:185–218

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • van den Eede G, Aarts H, Buhk H-J, Corthier G, Flint HJ, Hammes W, Jacobsen B, Midtvedt T, van der Vossen J, von Wright A, Wackernagel W, Wilcks A (2004) The relevance of gene transfer to the safety of food and feed derived from genetically modified (GM) plants. Food Chem Toxicol 42:1127–1156

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weekes R, Deppe C, Allnutt T, Boffey C, Morgan D, Morgan S, Bilton M, Daniels R, Henry C (2005) Crop-to-crop gene flow using farm scale sites of oilseed rape (Brassica napus) in the UK. Transgenic Res 14:749–759

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Weil JH (2005) Are genetically modified plants useful and safe? IUBMB Life 57:311–314

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • WHO (2000) Safety aspects of genetically modified foods of plant origin. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on foods derived from biotechnology. World Health Organization, Geneva

  • Zwahlen C, Hilbeck A, Gugerli P, Nentwig W (2003) Degradation of the Cry1Ab protein within Bacillus thuringiensis corn tissue in the field. Mol Ecol 12:765–775

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. TUBITAK, Marmara Research Center, Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology Institute, 41470, Gebze, Kocaeli, Turkey

    Tijen Talas-Oğraş

Authors
  1. Tijen Talas-Oğraş
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tijen Talas-Oğraş.

Additional information

Communicated by A. K. Kononowicz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Talas-Oğraş, T. Risk assessment strategies for transgenic plants. Acta Physiol Plant 33, 647–657 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-010-0624-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-010-0624-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation