Correction to: Fungal diversity and metabolomic profiles in GM and isogenic non-GM maize cultivars from Brazil (original) (raw)

Fungal diversity and metabolomic profiles in GM and isogenic non-GM maize cultivars from Brazil

There is little knowledge of the microbial diversity, mycotoxins and associated secondary metabolites in GM maize and isogenic non-GM cultivars (cvs). This study has quantified the microbial populations and dominant fungal genera in 6 cvs of each type representative of herbicide, pesticide or stacked resistance to both. The predominant mycotoxins and targeted metabolomics profiles were also compared between the two sets of cvs. This showed that the overall fungal populations were 8.8 CFUs g −1 maize. The dominant genera, isolated from maize samples, whether surface-sterilised or not, in all maize cvs were Fusarium, followed by Penicillium, Aspergillus and occasionally Cladosporium and Alternaria. The analysis of the targeted metabolomics showed that approx. 29 different metabolites were detected. These were dominated by fumonisins and minor Penicillium spp. metabolites (questiomycin A and rugulovasine A). Interestingly, the range and number of mycotoxins present in the GM cvs were significantly lower than in the non-GM maize samples. This suggests that while the fungal diversity of the two types of maize appeared to be very similar, the major contaminant mycotoxins and range of toxic secondary metabolites were much lower in the GM cvs.

Naegeli et al. - 2018 - Assessment of genetically modified maize MZHG0JG f.pdf

EFSA Journal, 2018

The scope of application EFSA-GMO-DE-2016-133 is for food and feed uses, import and processing of genetically modified (GM) maize MZHG0JG in the European Union. Maize MZHG0JG was developed to confer tolerance to the herbicidal active substances glyphosate and glufosinate-ammonium. 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 MZHG0JG and its conventional counterpart needs further assessment, except for early stand count (pre-thinning). The GMO Panel does not identify safety concerns regarding the toxicity and allergenicity of the mEPSPS and PAT proteins as expressed in maize MZHG0JG, and finds no evidence that the genetic modification would change the overall allergenicity of maize MZHG0JG. The nutritional impact of food/feed derived from maize MZHG0JG is expected to be the same as that of food/feed derived from the conventional counterpart and commercial non-GM maize reference varieties. The GMO Panel concludes that maize MZHG0JG is nutritionally equivalent to and as safe as the conventional counterpart and non-GM maize reference varieties tested, and no post-market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. In the case of accidental release of viable maize MZHG0JG grains into the environment, maize MZHG0JG would not raise environmental safety concerns. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of maize MZHG0JG. In conclusion, the GMO Panel considers that maize MZHG0JG, as described in this application, is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non-GM maize reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.

Naegeli et al. - 2019 - Assessment of genetically modified maize MON 89034.pdf

EFSA Journal, 2019

Maize MON 89034 9 1507 9 NK603 9 DAS-40278-9 (four-event stack maize) was produced by conventional crossing to combine four single events: MON 89034, 1507, NK603 and DAS-40278-9. The GMO Panel previously assessed the four single events and four of their subcombinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the maize single events or their four subcombinations that could lead to modification of the original conclusions on their safety have been identified. The molecular characterisation, comparative analysis (agronomic, phenotypic and compositional characteristics) and the outcome of the toxicological, allergenicity and nutritional assessment indicates 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/feed safety and nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel concludes that the four-event stack maize, as described in this application, is as safe as and nutritionally equivalent to its non-GM comparator and the non-GM reference varieties tested. 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 the six maize subcombinations for which no experimental data were provided, and concludes that these are expected to be as safe as and nutritionally equivalent to 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 the four-event stack maize. No post-market monitoring for food/feed is 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 reference varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.