Transgenesis affects endogenous soybean allergen levels less than traditional breeding

Hill, Ryan C.; Fast, Brandon J.; Herman, Rod A.

doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2017.07.013

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Here, we report empirical transgene expression data for breeding stacks compared to their individual component events across multiple crops and tissue types. We plot the expression level of each transgene product in each tissue/crop stage for the single events against the stack and quantify the predictive capability for the single-event expression to predict stack expression by calculating the percent of variation (coefficient of identity) captured by the line of identity ( y = x ). , Because of the importance of grain/seed in trade and the food and feed safety assessment, we also plot the grain/seed expression levels for each transgene product for the single events against the breeding stacks across transgene products and calculate the coefficient of identity ( I 2 ) for these relationships in each crop/stack. These results help visualize and quantify the predictability of expression in the breeding stacks based on expression in the single events and evaluate the usefulness of transgene expression data for breeding stacks in their safety assessment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single-Event Transgene Product Levels Predict Levels in Genetically Modified Breeding Stacks

Gampala¹,

Fast²,

Richey³

et al. 2017

J. Agric. Food Chem.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concentration of transgene products (proteins and double-stranded RNA) in genetically modified (GM) crop tissues is measured to support food, feed, and environmental risk assessments. Measurement of transgene product concentrations in breeding stacks of previously assessed and approved GM events is required by many regulatory authorities to evaluate unexpected transgene interactions that might affect expression. Research was conducted to determine how well concentrations of transgene products in single GM events predict levels in breeding stacks composed of these events. The concentrations of transgene products were compared between GM maize, soybean, and cotton breeding stacks (MON-87427 × MON-89034 × DAS-Ø15Ø7-1 × MON-87411 × DAS-59122-7 × DAS-40278-9 corn, DAS-81419-2 × DAS-44406-6 soybean, and DAS-21023-5 × DAS-24236-5 × SYN-IR102-7 × MON-88913-8 × DAS-81910-7 cotton) and their component single events (MON-87427, MON-89034, DAS-Ø15Ø7-1, MON-87411, DAS-59122-7, and DAS-40278-9 corn, DAS-81419-2, and DAS-44406-6 soybean, and DAS-21023-5, DAS-24236-5, SYN-IR102-7, MON-88913-8, and DAS-81910-7 cotton). Comparisons were made within a crop and transgene product across plant tissue types and were also made across transgene products in each breeding stack for grain/seed. Scatter plots were generated comparing expression in the stacks to their component events, and the percent of variability accounted for by the line of identity (y = x) was calculated (coefficient of identity, I). Results support transgene concentrations in single events predicting similar concentrations in breeding stacks containing the single events. Therefore, food, feed, and environmental risk assessments based on concentrations of transgene products in single GM events are generally applicable to breeding stacks composed of these events.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Single-Event Transgene Product Levels Predict Levels in Genetically Modified Breeding Stacks

Gampala¹,

Fast²,

Richey³

et al. 2017

J. Agric. Food Chem.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, MS is amenable to harsh extraction buffers and solvents but requires additional steps. Hill et al (2017) demonstrated the use of buffer containing 5 M urea, 2 M thiourea, 50 mM Tris-HCl, and 65 mM dithiothreitol to extract proteins. Diluted extracts were denatured and reduced, followed by overnight incubation with enzyme.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Due to the increasing numbers of endogenous soybean allergens being requested for the GM crop safety assessment, multiplexing protein detection methods such as LC–MS/MS have been investigated. For example, Hill et al (2017) showed that mass spectrometric analysis is ideal for endogenous protein assays due its high specificity. While there are differences in the specific methodology between the two protocols, and the growing seasons and soybean varieties are different for these two studies, endogenous allergen levels detected by Hill et al, using the described LC–MS/MS protocols are in the range of data from the ELISA methodologies , published by Geng et al This agreement between methodologies demonstrates the acceptability of both techniques for collecting quantitative endogenous allergen data to address EFSA requirements.…”

Section: Description Of Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Immunoassays and Mass Spectrometry for Determination of Protein Concentrations in Genetically Modified Crops

Wang,

Bednarcik,

Ament

et al. 2024

J. Agric. Food Chem.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantifying protein levels in genetically modified (GM) crops is crucial in every phase of development, deregulation, and seed production. Immunoassays, particularly enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, have been the primary protein quantitation techniques for decades within the industry due to their efficiency, adaptability, and credibility. Newer immunoassay technologies like Meso Scale Discovery and Luminex offer enhanced sensitivity and multiplexing capabilities. While mass spectrometry (MS) has been widely used for small molecules and protein detection in the pharmaceutical and agricultural industries (e.g., biomarkers, endogenous allergens), its use in quantifying protein levels in GM crops has been limited. However, as trait portfolios for GM crop have expanded, MS has been increasingly adopted due to its comparable sensitivity, increased specificity, and multiplexing capabilities. This review contrasts the benefits and limitations of immunoassays and MS technologies for protein measurement in GM crops, considering factors such as cost, convenience, and specific analytical needs. Ultimately, both techniques are suitable for assessing protein concentrations in GM crops, with MS offering complementary capabilities to immunoassays. This comparison aims to provide insights into selecting between these techniques based on the user's end point needs.

show abstract

“…Although the potentially wider taxonomic sourcing of transgenes could be expected to allow for a greater array of expressed transgene products, the accompanying greater understanding of GE traits and their mechanism makes unexpected effects less likely than those anticipated and observed for non-GE breeding methods [45,[56][57][58]. Likewise, the limited genetic disruption expected and observed for transgenesis, compared with the random mutagenesis that accompanies several non-GE breeding methods, reduces unintended genetic changes in GE crops versus non-GE crops [43].…”

Section: Misattributed Risksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk-Only Assessment of Genetically Engineered Crops Is Risky

Herman

Zhuang

Storer

et al. 2019

Trends in Plant Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Transgenesis affects endogenous soybean allergen levels less than traditional breeding

Cited by 9 publications

References 9 publications

Single-Event Transgene Product Levels Predict Levels in Genetically Modified Breeding Stacks

Single-Event Transgene Product Levels Predict Levels in Genetically Modified Breeding Stacks

Immunoassays and Mass Spectrometry for Determination of Protein Concentrations in Genetically Modified Crops

Risk-Only Assessment of Genetically Engineered Crops Is Risky

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About