Focus

Environmental monitoring of genetically modified crops

Abstract

Genetically modified (GM) crops are now approved for commercial use in several world areas. In terms of commercial acreage, the majority of these products possess either herbicide tolerance or insect protection traits. Prior to commercialization, each product underwent a country specific review of environmental safety data by independent regulatory authorities. Registration was granted after review of the data allowed authorities to conclude that the risks were minimal or manageable when balanced with the benefits. As a condition of registration, insect resistance management (IRM) has been imposed for insect protected products in every country. Other world areas have reviewed similar data packages and have not yet been able to grant registration for commercial release. Post-registration environmental monitoring of GM crops is viewed in some world areas as a means of enabling approvals by addressing uncertainty that exists with this technology. Questions such as, who should monitor and who should pay for it, how should monitoring be conducted, what information is necessary to collect and how long should a given product be monitored are yet to be answered. Monitoring methods could be general (surveys and questionaires) or specific (scientific studies to address specific questions). Independent research currently underway in countries where GM crops are commercial involves monitoring the benefits as well as the risks of these products. Experience with other products has shown that monitoring of GM crops will be of value only if the questions are clearly defined, the methods are appropriate and the end-points (data collected) are interpretable.

References

1. C. James, Global Review of Commercialized Transgenic Crops, ISAAA Briefs No. 8.ISAAA, Ithaca, NY, USA, 1988.
2. AgbioS is a global database with a detailed compilation of regulatory approvals around the world found at http://www.agbios.com/default.asp.
3. In the United States, legal authority to the United Stated Department of Agriculture (USDA) is derived from the Plant Pest Act, and the Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) regulates GM crops under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). In the EU, the environmental aspects of GM crop safety are regulated under Directive 90/220.
4. Safety Considerations for Biotechnology, OECD, Paris, 1992, 50 pp.
5. P. J. Dale, J. A. Irwin and J. A. Scheffler, Plant Breeding, 1993, 111, 1.
6. Brazil and the EU now require monitoring on a product specific basis as part of their environmental regulations. In the EU, these conditions are stated in the revisions to directive 90/220.
7. K. W. Thornton and S. B. Paulsen, Human Ecol. Risk Assess., 1998, 4, 797 805.
8. Detailed guidance is provide by the USDA APHIS on their web site: http://www.usda.aphis.gov.
9. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Fed. Regist., 1992, 57, 53036 43.
10. J. H. Gentile and M. A. Harwell, Human Ecol. Risk Assess., 1998, 4, 815.
11. United Stated Environmental Protection Agency, Fed. Regist., 1992, 57, 55531 59.
12. Availability of Determination of Nonregulated Status of Monsanto Co., Genetically Engineered Soybean Line, Fed. Regist., May 24, 1994, 59, 59FR 26781.
13. Plant Pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis CryIA(c) Delta-Endotoxin and the Genetic Material Necessary for Its Production in Cotton; Exemption from Requirement of a Tolerance; Final Rule; Fed. Regist., September 15, 1995, 60, 60FR 47871.
14. Addition of Two Genetically Engineered Insect Resistant Corn Lines (MON 809 and MON 810) to Determination of Nonregulated Status; Final Rule, Fed. Regist., March 15, 1996, 61, 61 FR 10720.
15. Plant Pesticide Inert Ingredient CP4 Enolpyruvylshikimate-3-D and the Genetic Material Necessary for Its Production in All Plants; Exemption from Requirement of a Tolerance; Final Rule, Fed. Regist., August 2, 1996, 61, 61 FR 40338.
16. Bacillus thuringiensis CryIA(b) Delta-Endotoxin and the Genetic Material Necessary for Its Production in All Plants; Exemption from Requirement of a Tolerance; Final Rule, Fed. Regist., August 2, 1996, 61, 61 FR 40340.
17. Plant Pesticide Bacillus thuringiensis subspecies kurstaki CryIA(c) Protein and the Genetic Material Necessary for the Production of this Protein in or on All Raw Agricultural Commodities and the Inert Ingredient Plant Pesticide Phosphinothricin Acetyltransferase Protein and the Genetic Material Necessary for the Production of this Protein in or on All Raw Agricultural Commodities; Exemption from Requirement of a Tolerance; Final Rule, Fed. Regist., January 24, 1997, 62, 62 FR 3682.
18. Bacillus thuringiensis subspecies kurstaki CryIA(c) and the Genetic Material Necessary for Its Production in All Plants; Exemption from Requirement of a Tolerance on All Raw Agricultural Commodities; Final Rule, Fed. Regist., April 11, 1997, 62, 62 FR 17720.
19. Monsanto's Bacillus thuringiensis CryIA(b) Delta-Endotoxin and the Genetic Material Necessary for Its Production in Corn; Final Rule, Fed. Regist., September 10, 1997, 62, 62 FR 47664.
20. Availability of Determination of Nonregulated Status for Genetically Engineered Corn Line GA21; Final Rule, Fed. Regist., December 5, 1997, 62, 62 FR 64350.
21. US Environmental Protection Agency, Guidelines for Ecological Risk Assessment, USEPA, Washington, DC, 1998, EPA/630/R-95/002F.
22. J. R. Harlan, in The Biology and Ecology of Weeds, ed. W. Holzner and N. Numata, W. Junk Publishers, The Hague, Netherlands, 1982, pp. 91 96.
23. J. F. Hancock, R. Grumet and S. C. Hokanson, HortScience, 1996, 31, 1080.
24. R.-B. Jørgensen, T. Hauser, T. Mikkelsen and H. Østergård, Trends Plant Sci., 1996, 1, 356.
25. R.-B. Jørgensen and B. Andersen, Am. J. Bot., 1994, 81, 1620.
26. A. A. Snow, B. Andersen and R.-B. Jørgensen, Mol. Ecol., 1999, 8, 605.
27. R. K. Downey, 1999 BCPC Symposium Proceedings No. 72: Gene Flow and Agriculture: Relevance for Transgenic Crops, pp. 109 116.
28. C. D. Pilcher, J. J. Obrycki, M. E. Rice and L. C. Lewis, Biol. Control, 1997, 26, 446.
29. D. B. Orr and D. A. Landis, Biol. Microbial Control, 1997, 90(4), 905.
30. S. R. Sims, Southwest. Entomol., 1995, 20, 493.
31. A. Hilbeck, M. Baumgartner, P. M. Fried and F. Bigler, Environ. Entomol., 1998, 27, 480.
32. J. E. Losey, S. L. Raynor and M. E. Carter, Nature, 1999, 399, 214.
33. K. Smith and R. Heimlich, Impacts of Adopting Genetically Engineered Crops in the U.S. Preliminary Results, Economic Research Services, United States Department of Agriculture, 1999, http://www.econ.ag.gov/whatsnew/issues/gmo/.
34. J.-y. Xia, J. Cui-Jin, L.-h. Ma, S.-l. Dong and X.-f. Cui, Acta Gossypii Sinica, 1999, 11, 57.