INTRODUCTIONThe potential allergenicity of novel proteins introduced into genetically engineered crops and that of proteins generated during the biotechnological process of food production is an important issue for the evaluation for safety of the food crops and products. Many approaches for assessing the allergenicity of such proteins have been proposed; these can be broadly classified into four areas, namely, the analysis of protein structure to predict allergenicity, serum screening of allergic proteins, new animal models, and proteomics (Selgrade et al., 2009;Ahuja et al., 2010).The biochemical approaches for the assessment of allergenic proteins are grounded on comparisons of the serologic identity of the novel protein with human allergens, taking into account factors such as structural similarity, amino acid sequence homology, resistance to proteolytic digestion in a simulated gastric fluid, and immunochemical reactivity with serum of subjects with allergy (Ladics, 2008). Although such investigations provide important information, they do not directly assess the inherent sensitizing potential of proteins. Animal models of food allergy are required for evaluating the sensitizing potential of allergenic proteins and to investigate mechanisms of food allergy. It is generally recognized that it is hard to reproduce food allergy in animals by oral feeding of a model allergenic protein at ABSTRACT -It is important to evaluate the ability of novel proteins in food crops and products to elicit potentially harmful immunologic responses, including allergic hypersensitivity. We developed a novel mouse model of food allergy involving an oral challenge of a protein antigen after feeding of the antigen in combination with modulating factors often ingested in daily life, namely, dietary oil emulsion and salicylate. In the model, BALB/c mice were sensitized orally for three weeks with ovalbumin (OVA) in linoleic acid/lecithin emulsion, followed immediately by intraperitoneal injection of sodium salicylate. At the end of the sensitization, the incidence of mice positive for serum OVA-specific IgG1 but not IgE had significantly increased in the combined-sensitization group. After the 3-week sensitization, a single or double oral challenge with OVA effectively and significantly caused severe anaphylaxis, as compared with the groups sensitized with OVA in the emulsion or the vehicle alone. Moderate increase of plasma histamine and intestinal abnormality in histology was found only in the combined-sensitization group. Anaphylaxis symptoms in the sensitized mice were induced more by oral challenge than by intravenous challenge, suggesting a critical role for the mucosal system. This is the first model for successful induction of oral anaphylaxis in mice sensitized by feeding of food protein without adjuvant. It will be useful to elucidate the mechanism of food allergy and to detect modulating factors of oral allergy at sensitization using this model, which simulates real life conditions.