Subchronic feeding study of herbicide–tolerant soybean DP-356Ø43-5 in Sprague–Dawley rats

Appenzeller, Laura M.; Munley, Susan M.; Hoban, Denise; Sykes, Greg P.; Malley, Linda A.; Delaney, Bryan

doi:10.1016/j.fct.2008.02.017

Cited by 68 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Long-term and multigenerational feeding studies Long-term feeding studies. In a 90-day or 13-weeks feeding studies on rats, several groups have reported that there were no effects on male reproductive organs such as testes, epididymides and prostate in rodents compared with rats receiving non-GM food in long-term study when the diet was treated with different GM foods (Hammond et al, 2006;MacKenzie et al, 2007;Schroder et al, 2007;Appenzeller et al, 2008Appenzeller et al, , 2009aAppenzeller et al, and 2009bDelaney et al, 2008b;Healy et al, 2008;He et al, 2008 and No apparent differences in percentages of testicular cell populations (haploid, diploid and tetraploid).…”

Section: Velimirov Et Al (2008)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the 90-day or 13-week feeding studies in rats, no statistical difference was uncovered in either the relative body and ovary weight of rats fed transgenic corns (Hammond et al, 2006;Healy et al, 2008), maize (MacKenzie et al, 2007;He et al, 2009;Appenzeller et al, 2009a and2009b), rice (Schroder et al, 2007) or soybeans (Appenzeller et al, 2008;Delaney et al, 2008b); and there were no histopathologic lesions in ovaries from rats fed DAS-59122-7 maize (Cry34Ab1 and Cry35Ab1 proteins; He et al, 2008). Furthermore, Malley et al (2007) reported higher mean uterus weight during the estrous stage of rats fed maize DAS-59122-7 (Cry34Ab1 and Cry35Ab1 proteins) or 5002B (commercial rodent diets) v. the 33R77 group (non-transgenic reference maize grain), 091 group (non-transgenic nearisogenic maize grain) or 5002A (commercial rodent diets); however, this might be due to the fact that the proportion of rats in proestrus and estrus in the 59122 and 5002B groups was greater than that in the 5002A, 091 and 33R77 maize grain groups, in which a greater proportion of rats were in metestrus and diestrus.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Do genetically modified crops affect animal reproduction? A review of the ongoing debate

Zhang

Shi

2011

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past few years, genetically modified (GM) crops aimed at producing food/feed that became part of the regular agriculture in many areas of the world. However, we are uncertain whether GM food and feed can exert potential adverse effects on humans or animals. Of importance, the reproductive toxicology of GM crops has been studied using a number of methods, and by feeding GM crops to a number species of animals to ensure the safety assessment of GM food and feed. It appears that there are no adverse effects of GM crops on many species of animals in acute and short-term feeding studies, but serious debates of effects of long-term and multigenerational feeding studies remain. The aims of this review are to focus on the latest (last 3 to 4 years) findings and debates on reproduction of male and female animals after feeding daily diets containing the GM crops, and to present the possible mechanism(s) to explain their influences.

show abstract

Section: Velimirov Et Al (2008)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Do genetically modified crops affect animal reproduction? A review of the ongoing debate

Zhang

Shi

2011

Animal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A large number of feeding studies on rodents use standard response variables and are designed to determine whether feeds containing GM crops are substantially equivalent to non-transgenic control feeds in nutrition and composition. Many GM crops have undergone studies that aim to detect adverse effects, including soybeans (Appenzeller et al, 2008;Chukwudebe et al, 2012;Sissener et al, 2009;Wang et al, 2013), tomatoes (Noteborn et al, 1995), cottonseed (Dryzga et al, 2007), rice (Kroghsbo et al, 2008), and maize grain (He et al, 2008(He et al, , 2009Zhu, 2013). The results showed that one or more GM genes were inserted into the plants' genomes without adverse effects.…”

Section: Toxicologic Evaluation Of Chronic Feeding Of Glyphosateresismentioning

confidence: 99%

Toxicologic evaluation of chronic feeding of glyphosate-resistant transgenic soybean GTS40-3-2 meal to rats

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To assess the safety of glyphosate-resistant transgenic soybean, the transgenic soybean GTS40-3-2 meal and its non-transgenic counterpart parent A5403 were fed to first- and second-generation Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats (Rattus norvegicus) for 195 days. The soybean meal made up 20% of the total weight of the feed. Body weight, food consumption, hematology, blood biochemistry, and pathological observations were monitored weekly. The results showed that rats of each group experienced good growth and development, and although results of some organ weight ratios and serum biochemistry between the groups were significantly different (P<0.05), they were of no biological significance because the variations were within the normal range. These results indicate that glyphosate-resistant transgenic soybean GTS40-3-2 meal is as safe as its non-transgenic parent soybean A5403 in a long-term SD rat feeding study. The study provides experimental evidence for the safe usage of transgenic soybean GTS40-3-2.

show abstract

“…Meanwhile, the results of our study show that no biologically meaningful differences occur in the in vivo nutritional response variables of body weight, body weight gain and food consumption when comparing the testing groups to negative controls and when comparing groups with the same concentration of soybeans in the diet. These response variables serve as a sensitive indicator of general animal well being 3 . These results suggest that, under our experimental conditions, the four varieties of soy (two conventional and two transgenic) were nutritionally equivalent, providing evidence that the transgenic strains did not have cause unintended deleterious nutritional changes in the animals.…”

Section: Kok Et Almentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Safety assessment of genetically modified crops initially focuses on comparisons with the nearest isogenic relative using agronomic performance metric and compositional analysis to determine whether the particular genetic modification produces unintended effects 3 . Therefore, nutritional and safety assessments of GMO foods are one of the key measures that nutritionists can take to allay the fears of the public.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transgenic and conventional Brazilian soybeans don't cause or prevent preneoplastic colon lesions or oxidative stress in a 90-day in vivo study

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResultsThe results indicate that glyphosate-tolerant soy varieties neither induce nor prevent aberrant crypt foci induction, nor do their conventional counterparts. Similarly, none of the four soybean varieties tested induced changes in the digestive tract, liver or kidney. Serum biochemical parameters were also unchanged. ConclusionThe consumption of both, conventional and transgenic soybeans, were insufficient to ameliorate dimethylhydrazine-induced oxidative stress.Indexing terms: Aberrant crypt foci. Colon carcinogenesis. Dimethlyhydrazine. Free radicals. Genetically Modified Organisms. Transgenic soybean. R E S U M O Objetivo Este estudo apresenta os resultados de um experimento de 90 dias com o objetivo de avaliar a segurança de quatro variedades de grãos de soja: BRS 245 RR e BRS Valiosa RR (transgênicas), BRS 133 e MG BR46 Conquista (não transgênicas). Métodos As dietas foram preparadas incorporando farinha de grãos de soja à dieta comercial (FRI-LAB Ratos II) a 1%, 10% ou 20% m/m. O peso corpóreo dos animais, o ganho de peso, o consumo de dieta, o número de focos de criptas aberrantes e os níveis de marcadores de estresse oxidativo, de creatinina e de ureia foram comparados entre os grupos experimentais, assim como as observações histopatológicas (trato digestivo, fígado e rins). Resultados Os resultados indicaram que as variantes glifosato-tolerantes não induziram ou preveniram a indução de focos

show abstract

Subchronic feeding study of herbicide–tolerant soybean DP-356Ø43-5 in Sprague–Dawley rats

Cited by 68 publications

References 31 publications

Do genetically modified crops affect animal reproduction? A review of the ongoing debate

Do genetically modified crops affect animal reproduction? A review of the ongoing debate

Toxicologic evaluation of chronic feeding of glyphosate-resistant transgenic soybean GTS40-3-2 meal to rats

Transgenic and conventional Brazilian soybeans don't cause or prevent preneoplastic colon lesions or oxidative stress in a 90-day in vivo study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About