Characterization of Roundup Ready Flex Cotton, ‘MON 88913’, for Use in Ecological Risk Assessment: Evaluation of Seed Germination, Vegetative and Reproductive Growth, and Ecological Interactions

Abstract

Biological and ecological data collected on a genetically modified crop and an appropriate control are useful for assessing potential ecological risk. Specific characteristics studied are selected on the basis of relevance to potential ecological effects, are well known, and are accepted by plant breeders. In these studies, germination, vegetative and reproductive growth, or ecological characteristics of Roundup Ready Flex cotton, MON 88913 were compared with a negative control, MON 88913(‐). Statistically significant differences, when detected, were considered in the context of the genetic variation known to occur in cotton and their potential impact on plant pest (weed) potential (ecological risk). Experimental results revealed no effects of the genetic modification that would result in increased pest potential or ecological risk of MON 88913 compared with MON 88913(‐).

Transportability of confined field trial data from cultivation to import countries for environmental risk assessment of genetically modified crops

“…Both the US and Japan rely on the concept of familiarity (Horak et al 2007 , 2015 ) when interpreting statistical differences identified between the GM crop and a conventional control in confined field trials. As described by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), familiarity is a concept coming from the knowledge and experience gained over time (Nickson and Horak 2006 ; OECD 1993 ).…”

“…In the US, data from GM crops and non-GM controls are compared at a single location (pollen study) or across locations (germination study and growth and development studies) (Steps 1 and 2 in Fig. 1 ) as the initial steps (Horak et al 2007 , 2015 ). If a statistically significant difference between the GM crops and non-GM controls is detected, the mean value of GM crop is compared with the range of means obtained for the reference varieties grown in that study (Step 3 in Fig.…”

“…1 ), the characteristic would be assessed for the magnitude of the change and for whether or not it is adverse in terms of weediness potential or other ecological impact (Step 5 in Fig. 1 ) (Horak et al 2007 , 2015 ). In the case of confined field trials in Japan, there are often an insufficient number of non-GM control values to allow the development of a reference range.…”

Plant characterization of genetically modified maize hybrids MON-89Ø34-3 × MON-88Ø17-3, MON-89Ø34-3 × MON-ØØ6Ø3-6, and MON-ØØ6Ø3-6: alternatives for maize production in Mexico

“…Phenotypic and agronomic characterization of GM crops relative to conventional crops provides a comparative context that is used within the natural variation of the crop to establish “familiarity” (Nickson and Horak 2006). Ultimately, this comparative assessment is used to assess potential risks that may be hypothesized regarding the cultivation of GM crops (Horak et al 2007, 2015; Raybould et al 2012; Sammons et al 2014) and that are assessed on the basis of specific environmental protection goals (Nickson 2008). The concept of familiarity is useful to decision makers and regulators because it comes from preexisting general knowledge of the biology and agronomic characteristics of a crop, previous field cultivation results, expert opinions, historical agronomic experience, and the characteristics of the trait(s) introduced, the receiving environment, and their interactions (Nickson and Horak 2006).…”

Introduction to ISBGMO12: biosafety research past, present and future

“…A weight of evidence from field studies of GM crops in uncultivated land (e.g., Crawley et al 1993 ; 2001 ), phenotypic comparisons of GM crops with non-GM near isolines (e.g., Horak et al 2007 ), and molecular analysis of genetic changes induced by transformation and other breeding methods (e.g., Ricroch et al 2011 ) suggests that GM crops are no more likely to be serious weeds than are other new crop varieties. Nevertheless, new data are often required to complete regulatory assessments of the weediness and invasiveness of GM crops (e.g., Raybould et al 2012 ).…”