Stacked Trait Products Are As Safe As Non-Genetically Modified (GM) Products Developed By Conventional Breeding Practices
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21423/JRS-V09I1GOODWINKeywords:
stacked trait product, breeding stack, GM event, GM trait, single event, genetically modified plantAbstract
International safety assessments and independent publications conclude that stacking genetically modified (GM) traits (events) through conventional breeding poses no greater risk to food or feed safety than stacking multiple non-GM traits by conventional breeding. Stacked trait products are not substantially different from their conventional comparator or their GM parent plants. Additional safety assessment of a stacked trait product produced by conventional breeding should not be required unless there is a plausible and testable hypothesis for interaction of the traits. However, the different approaches employed for the regulation of stacked trait products between countries results in asynchronous approvals, increasing the potential for trade flow disruptions, and adds to the regulatory burden for product developers. Considering their proven safety and benefit over the past 20+ years, regulatory authorities in some countries do not regulate stacked trait products, while others have simplified the approval process based on experience and sound science, reducing or eliminating the need for additional regulatory oversight. Countries that choose to regulate stacked trait products should consider integrating the more than 20 years of safety assessment experience, history of safe use, and global regulatory experience, in their approach to reduce redundancy, simplify regulations, and minimize the likelihood for trade disruption.
doi: 10.21423/jrs-v09i1goodwin
References
Argentina Ministry of Production and Labor. Convocatoria CONABIA [in Spanish]. Retrieved July 2019 from https://www.argentina.gob.ar/agroindustria/bioeconomia/biotecnologia
Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing Office of the Gene Technology Regulator. (2007, April). Policy on licensing of plant GMOs in which different genetic modifications have been combined (or "stacked") by conventional breeding. Retrieved July 2019 from http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/Content/dirpolicy-3/$FILE/stacking1.pdf
Bell, E., Nakai, S., & Burzio, L. A. (2018). Stacked Genetically Engineered Trait Products Produced by Conventional Breeding Reflect the Compositional Profiles of Their Component Single Trait Products. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 66(29), 7794-7804. https://www.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.8b02317
Canadian Food Inspection Agency. (1994). Directive 94-08 (Dir 94-08) Assessment Criteria for Determining Environmental Safety of Plants With Novel Traits. Retrieved July 2019 from https://www.inspection.gc.ca/plants/plants-with-novel-traits/applicants/directive-94-08/eng/1512588596097/1512588596818
Codex Alimentarius Commission. (2009). Foods derived from modern biotechnology, Second edition. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and World Health Organization, Rome. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/3/a-a1554e.pdf
Convention on Biological Diversity. (2000). Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biological Diversity: Text and Annexes. Secretariat of the Convention of Biological Diversity.
CropLife International. (n.d.). Biotradestatus.com [Database]. Retrieved July 2019 from http://www.biotradestatus.com/
CropLife International. (2017). Compositional and Nutritional Safety Assessment of Stacked Trait Products and their Lower Order Combinations. Retrieved July 2019 from https://croplife.org/plant-biotechnology/regulatory-2/combined-events/
International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications. (2017). Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops in 2017: Biotech Crop Adoption Surges as Economic Benefits Accumulate in 22 Years (Brief 53). International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications. Retrieved from https://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/53/download/isaaa-brief-53-2017.pdf
Kok, E. J., Pedersen, J. W., Onori, R., Sowa, S., Schauzu, M., De Schrijver, A., & Teeri, T. H. (2014). Plants with stacked genetically modified events: to assess or not to assess? Trends in Biotechnology, 32(2), 70-73. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2013.12.001
Kramer, C., Brune, P., McDonald, J., Nesbitt, M., Sauve, A., & Storck‐Weyhermueller, S. (2016). Evolution of risk assessment strategies for food and feed uses of stacked GM events. Plant Biotechnology Journal, 14(9), 1899-1913. https://www.doi.org/10.1111/pbi.12551
Pilacinski, W., Crawford, A., Downey, R., Harvey, B., Huber, S., Hunst, P., Lahman, L. K., MacIntosh, S., Pohl, M., Rickard, C., Tagliani, L., & Weber, N. (2011). Plants with genetically modified events combined by conventional breeding: An assessment of the need for additional regulatory data. Food and Chemical Toxicology, 49(1), 1-7. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2010.11.004
Raybould, A., Graser, G., Hill, K., & Ward, K. (2012). Ecological risk assessments for transgenic crops with combined insect‐resistance traits: the example of Bt11x MIR604 maize. Journal of Applied Entomology, 136(1‐2), 27-37. https://www.doi.org/10.1111/j.1439-0418.2010.01601.x
Romeis, J., Naranjo, S. E., Meissle, M., & Shelton, A. M. (2018). Genetically engineered crops help support conservation biological control. Biological Control, 130, 136-154. https://www.doi.org/10.1016/j.biocontrol.2018.10.001
Steiner, H-Y., Halpin, C., Jez, J. M., Kough, J., Parrott, W., Underhill, L., Weber, N., & Hannah, L. C. (2013). Editor's Choice: Evaluating the Potential for Adverse Interactions within Genetically Engineered Breeding Stacks. Plant Physiology, 161(4), 1587-1594. https://www.doi.org/10.1104/pp.112.209817
U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service. (2019). Recent Trends in GE Adoption. Retrieved July 2019 from https://www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/adoption-of-genetically-engineered-crops-in-the-us/recent-trends-in-ge-adoption.aspx
U.S. Department of Agriculture Foreign Agricultural Service. (2015). Japan's regulatory system for GE crops continues to improve. Retrieved March 2019 from https://apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainapi/api/report/downloadreportbyfilename?filename=Agricultural%20Biotechnology%20Annual_Tokyo_Japan_7-13-2015.pdf
U.S. Department of Agriculture Foreign Agricultural Service. (2019). Agricultural Biotechnology Annual. Retrieved July 2019 https://apps.fas.usda.gov/newgainapi/api/report/downloadreportbyfilename?filename=Agricultural%20Biotechnology%20Annual_Buenos%20Aires_Argentina_2-15-2019.pdf
U.S. Food and Drug Administration. (2001). Premarket Notice Concerning Bioengineered Foods, 66 FR 4706. Retrieved July 2019 from https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2001/01/18/01-1046/premarket-notice-concerning-bioengineered-foods
Weber, N., Halpin, C., Hannah, L. C., Jez, J. M., Kough, J., & Parrott, W. (2012). Editor's Choice: Crop Genome Plasticity and Its Relevance to Food and Feed Safety of Genetically Engineered Breeding Stacks. Plant Physiology, 160(4), 1842-1853. https://www.doi.org/10.1104/pp.112.204271
World Health Organization. (1995). Application of the principles of substantial equivalence to the safety evaluation of foods or food components from plants derived by modern biotechnology: Report of a WHO Workshop. World Health Organization, Geneva.
World Health Organization & Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. (2001, January 22-25). Evaluation of Allergenicity of Genetically Modified Foods: Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation of Allergenicity of Foods Derived from Biotechnology. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome. Retrieved from http://www.fao.org/fileadmin/templates/agns/pdf/topics/ec_jan2001.pdf
Wu, A-J., Chapman, K., Sathischandra, S., Massengill, J., Araujo, R., Soria, M., Bugas, M., Bishop, Z., Haas, C., Holliday, B., Cisneros, K., Lor, J., Canez, C., New, S., Mackie, S., Ghoshal, D., Privalle, L., Hunst, P., & Pallet, K. (2018). GHB614 x T304-40 x GHB119 x COT102 Cotton: Protein Expression Analyses of Field-Grown Samples. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, 67(1), 275-281. https://www.doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.8b05395
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Laurie Goodwin, Penny Hunst, Luis Burzio, Laura Rowe, Stephanie Money, Suma Chakravarthy
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
By submitting content to the Journal of Regulatory Science (JRS), authors agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the JRS the right of first publication. Authors retain patent, trademark, and other intellectual property rights (including research data) and grant third parties the right to use, reproduce, and share the article according to the Creative Commons — Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International — CC BY-NC 4.0 license agreement. The JRS is an open access journal and, as a result, articles are free to use with proper acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process.
- If excerpts from other copyrighted works are included, the author(s) must obtain written permission from the copyright owners and credit the source(s) in the article.
- The publication of the submission has been approved by all co-authors and responsible authorities at the institute or organization where the work has been carried out.
- Copyright has not been breached in seeking publication of the submission.