Search

In 2009 and 2010, the EFSA GMO Panel concluded the assessment of genetically modified (GM) maizes MIR604, MIR604 × GA21, MIR604 × Bt11 and MIR604 × GA21 × Bt11. These maizes were found to be as safe as their conventional counterparts and other appropriate comparators with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment. On 23 July 2015, the European Commission (EC) received from Syngenta new nucleic acid sequencing data on maize event MIR604 and updated bioinformatic analyses using the new sequencing data. EC tasked EFSA to analyse these data and to indicate whether the previous conclusions of the EFSA GMO Panel on the above-listed GM maizes remain valid. The EFSA GMO Panel used the appropriate principles described in its guidelines for the risk assessment of GM plants to analyse the received data. The new sequencing data indicated a single base pair difference compared to the sequencing data originally provided, located in a non-coding region of the insert. which had already been present in the original plant material used for the risk assessment. Thus, with the exception of bioinformatics analyses, the studies performed for the risk assessment remain valid. The new sequencing data and the bioinformatic analyses performed on the new sequence did not give rise to safety issues. Therefore, the GMO Panel concludes that the original risk assessment of event MIR604 as a single and as a part of stacked events remains valid.

The EFSA GMO Panel previously assessed the four single events combined to produce a four-event stack maize Bt11 × MIR162 × MIR604 × GA21 and did not identify safety concerns. In this opinion, the EFSA GMO Panel assesses the four-event stack maize and all its subcombinations independently of their origin. No new data on the single events, leading to modification of the original conclusions on their safety, were identified. The molecular, agronomic, phenotypic and compositional data on the four-event stack maize did not give rise to safety concerns and there is no reason to expect interactions between the single events impacting on the food and feed safety of the four-event stack maize. Considering the routes of exposure and limited exposure levels, the Panel concludes that this four-event stack maize would not raise safety concerns in the event of accidental release of viable grains into the environment. The EFSA GMO Panel concludes that the four-event stack maize is as safe and as nutritious as its conventional counterpart in the context of its scope. Among the 10 subcombinations, four have been assessed previously and no safety concerns were identified. For the remaining six subcombinations, the EFSA GMO Panel followed a weight-of-evidence approach, and concluded they are expected to be as safe as the four-event stack maize. For some subcombinations that could be produced by conventional crossing through targeted breeding approaches, little or no specific data were submitted, giving rise to uncertainties due to data gaps. To reduce these uncertainties and to confirm assumptions made for the assessment of these subcombinations, the EFSA GMO Panel recommends that the applicant collate relevant information, if these subcombinations were to be created via targeted breeding approaches and commercialised in the future. In this case, this information should focus on expression levels of the newly expressed proteins.

The EFSA GMO Panel previously assessed the two single events combined to produce soybean MON 87705 × MON 89788 and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single events affecting the previous conclusions were identified. No differences in composition requiring further assessment were observed between soybean MON 87705 × MON 89788 and its comparator, except for the intended trait i.e. an altered fatty acid profile. Nutritional assessment on soybean MON 87705 × MON 89788 oil and oil-containing food products did not identify concerns on human health and nutrition. There are no concerns regarding the use of feedingstuffs from defatted soybean meal MON 87705 × MON 89788. The EFSA GMO Panel is of the opinion that soybean MON 87705 × MON 89788 is as safe, and at least as nutritious, as its comparator and commercial soybean varieties. There is no reason to expect interactions between the single events that could impact on the food and feed safety and the nutritional properties of soybean MON 87705 × MON 89788. There are no indications of an increased likelihood of establishment and spread of feral soybean plants. Potential interactions with the biotic and abiotic environment were not considered to be a relevant issue. The unlikely but theoretically possible transfer of the recombinant genes from soybean MON 87705 × MON 89788 to environmental bacteria does not give rise to any safety concern. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the scope of the application. The EFSA GMO Panel considers that the information available for soybean MON 87705 × MON 89788 addresses the scientific comments raised by Member States. The EFSA GMO Panel concludes, considering the scope of the application, that soybean MON 87705 × MON 89788 is as safe as its comparator and non-GM soybean reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment. The GMO Panel recommends a post-market monitoring pla

The Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA GMO Panel) has evaluated the overall safety of genetically modified (GM) carnation SHD-27531-4 cut flowers to be imported into the European Union (EU) for ornamental use. The genetic modification results in the flowers having purple petals. The stability of the new colour trait was observed over multiple vegetative generations. The purple colour of the petals comes from the altered expression levels of anthocyanins, common pigments found in edible fruits and vegetables. Considering the intended use of the GM carnation and the possible routes of exposure, the EFSA GMO Panel did not find indications that the genetic modification will increase the risk of allergy among those coming into contact with carnations. Overall there are no reasons for safety concerns of carnation SHD-27351-4 for humans. The EFSA GMO Panel also considered whether viable seed or pollen from GM carnation cut flowers could be dispersed into the environment and whether GM carnation can be propagated by rooting. Owing to the limited environmental exposure and the biology of the plant, the EFSA GMO Panel did not identify any environmental safety concerns and agrees with the scope of the post-market environmental monitoring plan. The EFSA GMO Panel concludes that the import, distribution and retailing of the GM carnation will not cause adverse effects on human health or the environment.

The EFSA GMO Panel previously assessed the two single events that are combined to produce soybean MON 87769 × MON 89788 and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on these single events, leading to a modification of the original conclusions on safety, were identified. The molecular, agronomic, phenotypic and compositional data on soybean MON 87769 × MON 89788 did not give rise to safety concerns. The Panel considers that there is no reason to expect interactions between the single events to impact on food and feed safety. There were no concerns regarding the potential toxicity or allergenicity of soybean MON 87769 × MON 89788, and no evidence that the genetic modification significantly changes the overall allergenicity. Because of the lack of data on dietary exposure to refined bleached deodorised oil from soybean MON 87769 × MON 89788, the EFSA GMO Panel could not complete the human health and nutrition assessment. There are no concerns regarding the use of feedingstuffs derived from defatted toasted MON 87769 × MON 89788 soybean meal. There are no indications of an increased likelihood of establishment and spread of feral soybean plants. Potential interactions of soybean MON 87769 × MON 89788 with biotic and abiotic environments were not considered relevant to this application. The unlikely, but theoretically possible, transfer of recombinant genes from soybean MON 87769 × MON 89788 to environmental bacteria is not of safety concern. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals conform with the scope of this application. In conclusion, the Panel could not complete the food and feed safety assessment of soybean MON 87769 × MON 89788 because of the lack of an appropriate nutritional assessment. The Panel concludes that soybean MON 87769 × MON 89788 is unlikely to have adverse effects on the environment in the context of application EFSA-GMO-NL-2010-85.

In 2007, 2010 and 2011, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO Panel) concluded the assessment of genetically modified (GM) maize GA21, MIR604 x GA21 and MIR604 x GA21 x Bt11. These were xfound to be as safe as their conventional counterparts and other appropriate comparators with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment. On 23 July 2015, the European Commission (EC) received from Syngenta new nucleic acid sequencing data on maize event GA21 and updated bioinformatic analyses using the new sequencing data. The EC tasked EFSA to analyse these data and to indicate whether the previous conclusions of the EFSA GMO Panel on the above-listed GM maizes remain valid. The EFSA GMO Panel used the appropriate principles described in its guidelines for the risk assessment of GM plants to analyse the received data. Compared with the sequencing data originally provided, the new sequencing data indicated a one-base pair addition in a non-coding region of the insert, a three-base pair deletion in the 3’ flanking region of the insert, and a difference in the number of functional copies of the mepsps expression cassette. These differences were only recently identified, but it was confirmed that they had been present in the original plant material used for the risk assessment. Thus, with the exception of bioinformatics analyses, the studies performed for the risk assessment remain valid. The bioinformatic analyses performed on the new sequence did not give rise to safety issues. Therefore, the GMO Panel concludes that the original risk assessment of event GA21 as a single event, and as a part of stacked events, remains valid.

Cotton MON 15985 was developed by biolistic transformation of cotton MON 531 to express Cry2Ab2 and GUS in addition to the Cry1Ac and NPTII proteins. Cry proteins in MON 15985 confer resistance to major lepidopteran cotton pests, whereas the GUS and NPTII proteins were used as markers during product development. Molecular characterisation of MON 15985 did not give rise to safety issues. The EFSA GMO Panel could not conclude on the potential occurrence of unintended effects for agronomic and phenotypic characteristics owing to data limitations. Compositional data gave no indication of unintended effects for which further assessment was needed. The Panel concludes that cotton MON 15985, as described in these applications, is as safe and nutritious as its conventional counterpart and other non-genetically modified varieties, and considers it unlikely that the overall allergenicity of the whole plant is changed. Environmental risk assessment was restricted to the exposure through faecal material from animals fed with cotton products of MON 15985 and its accidental spillage. Following a weight of evidence approach and considering the poor ability of cotton to survive outside cultivated land, despite the agronomic and phenotypic data limitations, the Panel concludes that there is very low likelihood of any adverse environmental impacts. The aadA and oriV sequences in MON 15985 may facilitate the stabilisation of nptII through double homologous recombination. However, considering the limited presence of intact DNA from MON 15985 in feed and the limited occurrence of horizontal transfer of DNA from plant material to bacteria, the Panel concludes that it is highly unlikely that nptII from MON 15985 will be transferred to bacteria.

Following a request from the European Commission, a set of assessment criteria was developed to support the selection of existing environmental surveillance networks for post-market environmental monitoring (PMEM) of genetically modified plants (GMPs). In compliance with these criteria, some networks and associated programmes were identified as being of potential use subject to further case-by-case analysis. When considering PMEM of GMPs, the approach would also require comparing sites monitored by the networks and the locations where GMPs are cultivated. The reporting of the sites surveyed by networks and locations of cultivated GMPs should thus follow the same standards in order to ensure interoperability and to potentially establish a causal link between a change observed and the GMPs. In this respect, technical support might be required by networks to transform their data records into workable standards. Moreover, the EFSA GMO Panel was asked by the European Commission to examine the sensitivity of statistical analyses used by the networks to detect change. A decision tree is provided for selecting the optimal method for statistical analysis based on the study design and the datasets from networks. Sufficient statistical power needs to be ensured to detect an effect for a particular indicator. Sample size is one of the main contributing factors in determining the power of any network to detect an effect of a product release into the environment. Increasing the sample size implies variable extra-costs depending on whether data are collected by volunteers or professionals. A more powerful statistical analysis can also be achieved by pooling datasets collected by different networks; this needs further investigation because of important covariates leading to differentiated responses. In general, PMEM would benefit from a move towards ‘open data’ policies for re-analysis or pooling data collected by different networks.

The European Commission asked the Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA GMO Panel) to address the objections of Cyprus to the placing on the market of the genetically modified (GM) carnation SHD-27531-4. The GM carnation cut flowers, with a modified petal colour, are intended to be imported and distributed in the European Union for ornamental use only. The EFSA GMO Panel responded to the objections of Cyprus, taking into account the limited intended use of carnation SHD-27531-4 and the information available. First, the EFSA GMO Panel concludes that the propagation of carnation SHD-27531-4 by individuals cannot be excluded. However, should this occur, carnation SHD-27531-4 would not show any potential for increased survival, fitness or weediness compared with its parental line. Second, the EFSA GMO Panel is of the opinion that the potential spread of pollen of the GM carnation SHD-27531-4 by Lepidoptera to wild Dianthus species cannot be eliminated but is highly unlikely to occur and, if it did occur, it is very unlikely that viable hybrids would be produced, survive and result in adverse environmental effects. Third, considering the very low potentials for hybridisation and/or seed production of (GM) carnations, the EFSA GMO Panel concludes that plant-to-plant gene transfer of the introduced genes is very unlikely and, if it did occur, it is unlikely to result in viable seed production leading to adverse environmental effects.