Horizontal gene transfer from genetically modified plants - Regulatory considerations

Gene technology regulators receive applications seeking permission for the environmental release of genetically modified (GM) plants, many of which possess beneficial traits such as improved production, enhanced nutrition and resistance to drought, pests and diseases. The regulators must assess the risks to human and animal health and to the environment from releasing these GM plants. One such consideration, of many, is the likelihood and potential consequence of the introduced or modified DNA being transferred to other organisms, including people. While such gene transfer is most likely to occur to sexually compatible relatives (vertical gene transfer), horizontal gene transfer (HGT), which is the acquisition of genetic material that has not been inherited from a parent, is also a possibility considered during these assessments. Advances in HGT detection, aided by next generation sequencing, have demonstrated that HGT occurrence may have been previously underestimated. In this review, we provide updated evidence on the likelihood, factors and the barriers for the introduced or modified DNA in GM plants to be horizontally transferred into a variety of recipients. We present the legislation and frameworks the Australian Gene Technology Regulator adheres to with respect to the consideration of risks posed by HGT. Such a perspective may generally be applicable to regulators in other jurisdictions as well as to commercial and research organisations who develop GM plants.

Addressing concerns over the fate of DNA derived from genetically modified food in the human body: A review

Global commercialization of GM food and feed has stimulated much debate over the fate of GM food-derived DNA in the body of the consumer and as to whether it poses any health risks. We reviewed the fate of DNA derived from GM food in the human body. During mechanical/chemical processing, integrity of DNA is compromised. Food-DNA can survive harsh processing and digestive conditions with fragments up to a few hundred bp detectable in the gastrointestinal tract. Compelling evidence supported the presence of food (also GM food) derived DNA in the blood and tissues of human/animal. There is limited evidence of food-born DNA integrating into the genome of the consumer and of horizontal transfer of GM crop DNA into gut-bacteria. We find no evidence that transgenes in GM crop-derived foods have a greater propensity for uptake and integration than the host DNA of the plant-food. We found no evidence of plant-food DNA function/expression following transfer to either the gut-bacteria or somatic cells. Strong evidence suggested that plant-food-miRNAs can survive digestion, enter the body and affect gene expression patterns. We envisage that this multi-dimensional review will address questions regarding the fate of GM food-derived DNA and gene-regulatory-RNA in the human body.

Detection of dietary DNA, protein, and glyphosate in meat, milk, and eggs

Products such as meat, milk, and eggs from animals that have consumed genetically engineered (GE) feed are not currently subject to mandatory GE labeling requirements. Some voluntary "non-genetically modified organism" labeling has been associated with such products, indicating that the animals were not fed GE crops, as there are no commercialized GE food animals. This review summarizes the available scientific literature on the detection of dietary DNA and protein in animal products and briefly discusses the implications of mandatory GE labeling for products from animals that have consumed GE feed. Because glyphosate is used on some GE crops, the available studies on glyphosate residues in animal products are also reviewed. In GE crops, recombinant DNA (rDNA) makes up a small percentage of the plant's total DNA. The final amount of DNA in food/feed depends on many factors including the variable number and density of cells in the edible parts, the DNA-containing matrix, environmental conditions, and the specific transgenic event. Processing treatments and animals' digestive systems degrade DNA into small fragments. Available reports conclude that endogenous DNA and rDNA are processed in exactly the same way in the gastrointestinal tract and that they account for a very small proportion of food intake by weight. Small pieces of high copy number endogenous plant genes have occasionally been detected in meat and milk. Similarly sized pieces of rDNA have also been identified in meat, primarily fish, although detection is inconsistent. Dietary rDNA fragments have not been detected in chicken or quail eggs or in fresh milk from cows or goats. Collectively, studies have failed to identify full-length endogenous or rDNA transcripts or recombinant proteins in meat, milk, or eggs. Similarly, because mammals do not bioaccumulate glyphosate and it is rapidly excreted, negligible levels of glyphosate in cattle, pig and poultry meat, milk, and eggs have been reported. Despite consumer concern about the presence of trace concentrations of glyphosate that might have been applied to feed crops and/or the presence of rDNA or recombinant proteins in meat, milk, and eggs, the available data do not provide evidence to suggest that products from animals that have consumed approved GE feed crops differ in any distinguishable way from those derived from animals fed conventional feed or that products from animals fed GE feedstuffs pose novel health risks.

Assessing the possibility of genetically modified DNA transfer from GM feed to broiler, laying hen, pig and calf tissues

The aim of this study was to assess the possibility of genetically modified DNA transfer from feed containing RR soybean or/and MON810 maize to animal tissues, gut bacterial flora, food of animal origin, and the fate of GM DNA in the animal digestive tract. The experiment was carried out on broilers, laying hens, pigs and calves. All animals were divided into four groups: I--control group (non-modified feed), II--GM soybean group (non-modified maize, RR soybean), III--GM maize group (MON810 maize, non-modified soybean), and IV--GM maize and soybean group (MON810 maize, RR soybean). Samples of blood, organs, tissues, digesta from the gastrointestinal tract, and eggs were analysed for the presence of plant species specific genes, and transgenic sequences of CaMV 35S promoter and NOS terminator. PCR amplifications of these GM sequences were conducted to investigate the GM DNA transfer from feed to animal tissues and bacterial gut flora. In none of the analysed samples of blood, organs, tissues, eggs, excreta and bacterial DNA were plant reference genes or GM DNA found. A GM crop diet did not affect bacterial gut flora as regards diversity of bacteria species, quantity of particular bacteria species in the animal gut, or incorporation of transgenic DNA to the bacteria genome. It can be concluded that MON810 maize and RR soybean used for animal feeding are substantially equivalent to their conventional counterparts. Genetically modified DNA from MON810 maize and RR soybean is digested in the same way as plant DNA, with no probability of its transfer to animal tissues or gut bacterial flora.

Detection of genetically modified DNA sequences in milk from the Italian market

The possible transfer and accumulation of novel DNA and/or proteins in food for human consumption derived from animals receiving genetically modified (GM) feed is at present the object of scientific dispute. A number of studies failed to identify GM DNA in milk, meat, or eggs derived from livestock receiving GM feed ingredients. The present study was performed in order to: (i) develop a valid protocol by PCR and multicomponent analysis for the detection of specific DNA sequences in milk, focused on GM maize and GM soybean; (ii) assess the stability of transgenic DNA after pasteurization treatment and (iii) determine the presence of GM DNA sequences in milk samples collected from the Italian market. Results from the screening of 60 samples of 12 different milk brands demonstrated the presence of GM maize sequences in 15 (25%) and of GM soybean sequences in 7 samples (11.7%). Our screening methodology shows a very high sensitivity and the use of an automatic identification of the amplified products increases its specificity and reliability. Moreover, we demonstrated that the pasteurization process is not able to degrade the DNA sequences in spiked milk samples. The detection of GM DNA in milk can be interpreted as an indicator of fecal or airborne contamination, respectively, with feed DNA or feed particles, although an alternative source of contamination, possibly recognizable in the natural environment can be suggested. Further studies, performed on a larger number of milk samples, are needed to understand the likely source of contamination of milk collected from the Italian market.