Methodological scheme for designing the monitoring of genetically modified crops at the regional scale

Abstract

According to EC regulations the deliberate release of genetically modified (GM) crops into the agro-environment needs to be accompanied by environmental monitoring to detect potential adverse effects, e.g. unacceptable levels of gene flow from GM to non-GM crops, or adverse effects on single species or species groups thus reducing biodiversity. There is, however, considerable scientific and public debate on how GM crops should be monitored with sufficient accuracy, discussing questions of potential adverse effects, agro-environmental variables or indicators to be monitored and respective detection methods; Another basic component, the appropriate number and location of monitoring sites, is hardly considered. Currently, no consistent GM crop monitoring approach combines these components systematically. This study focuses on and integrates spatial agro-environmental aspects at a landscape level in order to design monitoring networks. Based on examples of environmental variables associated with the cropping of Bt-Maize (Zea maize L.), herbicide-tolerant (HT) winter oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.), HT sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.), and starch-modified potato (Solanum tuberosum L.), we develop a transferable framework and assessment scheme that comprises anticipated adverse environmental effects, variables to be measured and monitoring methods. These we integrate with a rule-based GIS (geographic information system) analysis, applying widely available spatial area and point information from existing environmental networks. This is used to develop scenarios with optimised regional GM crop monitoring networks.

Standardised methods for the GMO monitoring of butterflies and moths: the whys and hows

“…Most important, adverse effects of genetically modified (GM) plants on Lepidoptera have already been reported, which strongly supports their quality and significance for an appropriate GMO monitoring (Graef et al 2005). Currently, the major events of GM plants developed and being cropped worldwide are insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant (Kvakkestad 2009).…”

A framework for a European network for a systematic environmental impact assessment of genetically modified organisms (GMO)

“…Methodologies for designing regionally representative field tests are scarce (e.g. Stein and Ettema 2003;Graef et al 2005); and networks for carrying out these studies do not exist yet. Both ERA and PMEM require a representation of the variable European agro-environment (EFSA 2010a).…”

“…Such research and monitoring methods require better standardisation among laboratories (Székács et al 2011) and should also respect particular characteristics of the different receiving environments. Also, the insufficient consideration of regional particularities (Schermer and Hoppichler 2004;Graef et al 2005) and of the socio-economic context of European farming systems (Ohl et al 2007;Binimelis et al 2009) in many cases has contributed to questionable relevance of field studies submitted in dossiers seeking approval from European authorities for field trials, cultivation or import. Previous EU research in this area (European Commission 2010Biota 2011) has placed little emphasis on these issues, despite the critical importance of these aspects for achieving the desired outcomes from the EU Directives.…”

Soybean in the European Union, Status and Perspective

“…This difference between 2006 and 2010 version may represent both the change into the EFSA GMO panel composition as well as an attempt of EU-MS, of their enforcement agencies and of the EC to master and retrieve the leadership in a scientific, but also highly political, issue. For several years now, important scientific conceptual and practical works have indeed been developed in several EU-MS along with reports from national committees in charge of GMO approvals (ACRE, 2004;Breckling and Reuter, 2006;Garcia-Alonso et al, 2006;Graef et al, 2005;Monkemeyer et al, 2006;Wilhelm et al, 2009;Wolt et al, 2010;Zughart et al, 2008). Most of these scientific works focused on environmental effects, while the effects on human health are roughly "delegated" by the consent holders to national health monitoring networks (Bakshi, 2003;Cellini et al, 2004;Covelli and Hohots, 2003;D'Agnolo, 2005;EFSA GMO panel, 2006b;Filip et al, 2004;Hepburn et al, 2008;Wal et al, 2003).…”