DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Current status of comparative compositional analysis for GM crop biosafety assessment

유전자변형작물 안전성평가를 위한 영양성분 비교연구 동향

  • Kim, Eun-Ha (Biosafety Division, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences) ;
  • Oh, Seon-Woo (R&D Coordination Division, Rural Development Administration) ;
  • Lee, Sang-Gu (Biosafety Division, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences) ;
  • Lee, Sung-Kon (Biosafety Division, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences) ;
  • Ryu, Tae-Hun (Biosafety Division, National Institute of Agricultural Sciences)
  • 김은하 (국립농업과학원 생물안전성과) ;
  • 오선우 (농촌진흥청 연구운영과) ;
  • 이상구 (국립농업과학원 생물안전성과) ;
  • 이성곤 (국립농업과학원 생물안전성과) ;
  • 류태훈 (국립농업과학원 생물안전성과)
  • Received : 2020.11.04
  • Accepted : 2020.12.03
  • Published : 2020.12.31

Abstract

Approvals for cultivation and import of genetically modified (GM) crops have dramatically increased around the world. Comparative compositional studies are an important aspect of safety assessments of products from GM crops and are based on substantial equivalence. Compositional analyses focus on determining similarities and differences between the compositions of the GM crops and their conventional counterparts, and thereby assessing the compositional equivalence of GM crops and their conventional comparators. The analytes, such as major constituents, key nutrients, and antinutrients, are generally determined on a crop-specific basis according to the OECD consensus document. The use of standard methods throughout the processes, such as selection of comparators, field trials, analytical methods, and statistical data analysis, is crucial. In this study, we showed the general framework of compositional studies. Literature for compositional studies of GM crops conducted abroad and in Korea was reviewed to obtain information about analytes, conventional counterparts, cultivation year, location, and statistical methods. The studies conducted abroad assessed for commercial release of GM crops such as soybean, maize, and cotton, while domestic studies were mainly performed for research in rice. In addition, we suggested a guidance for conventional comparators and field trials applicable to the domestic situation.

전세계적으로 유전자변형(GM)작물의 재배와 수입에 대한 승인이 급격히 증가하고 있다. 영양성분 비교평가는 실질적 동등성에 기반하여 GM작물의 안전성 평가에서 중요한 역할을 담당하고 있다. 영양성분 비교평가는 GM작물과 대조작물 사이의 성분함량에서 차이와 유사성을, 그리고 GM작물과 상업품종간의 성분함량의 동등성을 결정하는데 중점을 두고 있다. 분석항목은 일반성분, 주요 영양성분과 항영양소 등이며 일반적으로 OECD 합의문에서 작물별로 제안하고 있는 항목들을 포함한다. 영양성분 비교평가를 위해서는 비교군의 선정, 포장 시험, 분석방법, 데이터 통계 처리 등의 전 과정에 걸쳐 표준화된 방법을 이용하는 것이 중요하다. 본 연구에서는 코덱스와 유럽식품안전청의 식품용 GM작물의 영양성분 비교평가를 위한 가이드라인을 소개하였다. 그리고 국내외의 GM작물 영양성분 비교평가 연구 논문들에 나타난 분석항목과 대조작물, 참조군 품종, 재배연도, 재배지역, 통계방법 등을 검토하였다. 해외의 경우 대두와 옥수수, 면화 GM작물에서 여러 나라 수출을 위한 규제기관의 가이드라인에 따른 연구가 많았다. 반면 국내의 경우는 GM작물 실험연구적 측면에서 비교평가 진행되었으며 주로 GM벼에서의 연구가 많았다. 마지막으로 국내에서 GM작물의 영양성분 비교평가 연구 수행에 적용할 수 있는 참조군 선정과 포장재배에 대한 가이드를 제시하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Anderson JA, Hong B, Moellring E, TeRonde S, Walker C, Wang Y, Maxwell C (2019) Composition of forage and grain from genetically modified DP202216 maize is equivalent to nonmodified conventional maize (Zea mays L.). GM Crops & Food 10:77-89
  2. Brune PD, Culler AH, Ridley WP, Waler K (2013) Safety of GM crops: Compositional analysis. J Agric Food Chem 61:8243-8247
  3. Cho DW, Oh JP, Park KW, Lee DJ, Chung KH (2010) Comparison of the plant characteristics and nutritional components between GM and non-GM Chinese cabbages grown in the central and northern parts of Korea. Kor J Hort Sci Technol 28:836-844
  4. Cho JI, Park SH, Lee GS, Kim SM, Kim YS, Park SC (2020) Current status of GM crop development and commercialization. Korean J Breed Sci 52:40-48
  5. Christ B, Pluskal T, Aubry S, Weng JK (2018) Contribution of untargeted metabolomics for future assessment of biotech crops. Trends Plant Sci 23:1047-1056
  6. Clarke JD, Alexander DC, Ward DP, Ryals JA, Mitchell MW, Wulff JE, Guo L (2013) Assessment of genetically modified soybean in relation to natural variation in the soybean seed metabolome. Sci Rep 3:3082
  7. Codex Alimentarius (2003) Guideline for the conduct of food safety assessment of foods derived from recombinant-DNA plants; CAC/GL45-2003
  8. EFSA (2010) Panel on genetically modified organisms (GMO). Scientific opinion on statistical considerations for the safety evaluation of GMOs. EFSA J 8:1250
  9. EFSA (2011a) Panel on genetically modified organisms (GMO). Guidance document on selection of comparators for the risk assessment of GM plants. EFSA J 9:2149
  10. EFSA (2011b) Panel on genetically modified organisms (GMO). Scientific opinion on guidance for risk assessment of food and feed from genetically modified plants. EFSA J 9: 2150
  11. Fraser PD, Aharoni A, Hal RD, Huang S, Glovannoni JJ, Sonnewald U, Fernie AR (2020) Metabolomics should be deployed in the identification and characterization of gene-edited crops. Plant J doi: 10.1111/tpj.14679
  12. Gayen D, Sarkar SN, Datta SK, Datta K (2013) Comparative analysis of nutritional compositions of transgenic high iron rice with its non-transgenic counterpart. Food Chem 138:835-840
  13. Harrigan GG, Ridley WP, Riordan SG, Nemeth MA, Sorbet R, Trujillo WA, Breeze ML, Schneider RW (2007) Chemical composition of glyphosate-tolerant soybean 40-3-2 grown in Europe remains equivalent with that of conventional soybean (Glycine max L.). J Agric Food Chem 55:6160-6168
  14. Harrigan GG, Ridley WP, Miller KD, Sorbet R, Riordan SG, Nemeth MA, Reeves W, Pester TA (2009) The forage and grain of MON87460, a drought tolerant corn hybrid, are compositionally equivalent to that of conventional corn. J Agric Food Chem 57:9754-9763
  15. Herman RA, Storer NP, Phillips AM, Prochaska LM, Windels P (2007) Compositional assessment of event DAS-59122-7 maize using substantial equivalence. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 47:37-47
  16. Herman RA, Phillips AM, Lepping MD, Sabbatini J (2011) The composition of transgenic DAS-68416-4 soybean seed and forage was compared with those of non-transgenic soybean. J Agric Food Chem 1:1-16
  17. Herman RA, Fast BJ, Johnson TY, Sabbatini J, Rudgers GW (2013) Compositional safety of herbicide-tolerant DAS-819107 cotton. J Agric Food Chem 61:11683-11692
  18. Herman RA, Price WD (2013) Unintended compositional changes in genetically modified (GM) crops: 20 years of research. J Agric Food Chem 61:11695-11701
  19. Herman RA, Fast BJ, Mathesius C, Delaney B (2018) Isoline use in crop composition studies with genetically modified crops under EFSA guidance-short communication. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 95:204-206
  20. Hong B, Fisher TL, Sult TS, Maxwell CA, Mickelson JA, Kishino H, Locke MEH (2014) Model-based tolerance intervals derived from cumulative historical composition data: application for substantial equivalence assessment of a genetically modified crop. J Agric Food Chem 62:9916-9926
  21. ILSI (2004) Nutritional and safety assessments of foods and feeds nutritionally improved through biotechnology. Comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety, prepared by the ILSI Europe Novel Food Task Force. Vol. 3, Issue 2, pp 35-104
  22. ISAAA Brief 53 (2018) Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops in 2017
  23. Kang YS (2019) Safety evaluation and approval status of genetically modified foods in Korea. Food Sci Ind 52:130-139
  24. Kim JK, Park SY, Ha SH, Lee SM, Im SH, Kim HJ, Ko HS, Oh SD, Park JS, Suh SC (2012) Compositional assessment of carotenoidbiofortified rice using substantial equivalence. Afr J Biotechnol 11:9330-9335
  25. Kim MS, Baek SA, Park SY, Baek SH, Lee SM, Ha SH, Lee YT, Choi J, Im KH, Kim JK (2016) Comparison of the grain composition in resveratrol-enriched and glufosinate-tolerant rice (Oryza sativa) to conventional rice using univariate and multivariate analysis. J Food Compost Anal 52:58-67
  26. Kim EH, Lee SK, Park SY, Lee SG, Oh SW (2018) Development of the conventional crop composition database for new genetically engineered crop safety assessment. J Plant Biotechnol 45:289-298
  27. Kok EJ, Kuiper HA (2003) Comparative safety assessment for biotech crops. Trends Biotechnol 21:439-444
  28. Kuiper HA, Kleter GA, Noteborn HPJM, Kok EJ (2001) Assessment of the food safety issues related to genetically modified foods. Plant J 27:503-528
  29. Kusano M, Redestig H, Hirai T, Oikawa A, Matsuda F, Fukushima A, Arita M, Watanabe S, Yano M, Hiwasa-Tanase K, Ezura H, Saito K (2011) Covering chemical diversity of geneticallymodified tomatoes using metabolomics for objective substantial equivalence assessment. Plos One 6:e16989
  30. Lassoued R, Macall DM, Smyth SJ, Phillips PW, Hesseln H (2019) Risk and safety consideration of genome edited crops: expert opinion. Curr Res Biotechnol 1:11-21
  31. Lee SH, Park HJ, Cho SM, Chun HK, Kim DH, Ryu TH, Cho MC (2004) Comparison of major nutrients and mineral contents in genetically modified herbicide-tolerant red pepper and its parental cultivars. Food Sci Biotechnol 13:830-833
  32. Lee YT, Lee HM, Ahn BO, Cho HS, Suh SC (2013) Nutritional composition of drought-tolerant transgenci rice. J Korean Soc Food Sci Nutr 42:730-735
  33. Lee SY, Park SY, Shin KS, Lee JH, Lim MH, Lee SM, Oh SW, Jeong EG, Yeo Y (2014) Analysis of key nutrients and anti-nutrients in insect-resistant transgenic rice. Korean J Breed Sci 46:400-407
  34. Lee SW, Kim YH (2020) Scientific considerations for the biosafety of the off-target effects of gene editing crops. J Plant Biotechnol 47:185-193
  35. MacKenzie DJ (2016) Provitamin A biofortified rice event GR2E. foodstandards.gov.au/code/applications/Documents/A1138%20Application_Redacted.pdf
  36. Mesnage R, Agapito-Tenfen SZ, Vilperte V, Renney G, Ward M, Seralini G-E, Nodari RO, Antoniou MN (2016) An integrated multi-omics analysis of the NK603 Roundup-tolerant GM maize reveals metabolism disturbances caused by the transformation process. Sci Rep 6:37855
  37. Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) (2015) Guidance for risk assessment of foods, ect. from genetically modified plants III (Nutrition). pp 1-46
  38. Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) (2018) Regulation for risk assessment of foods, ect. From genetically modified food, etc. MFDS notification 2018-6
  39. Ministry of Food and Drug Safety (MFDS) (2020) Notification of the Transboundary Movement, ETC. of Living Modified Organisms ACT 2020-12(2020.2.25.)
  40. Nam KH, Kim DY, Shin HJ, An JH, Pack IS, Park JH, Jeong SC, Kim HB, Kim CG (2014) Drought stress-induced compositional changes in tolerant transgenic rice and its wild type. Food Chem 153:145-150
  41. Nam KH, Park KW, Han SM, Kim SW, Lee JH, Kim CG (2016) Compositional analysis of protoporphyrinogen oxidaseinhibiting herbicide-tolerant rice and conventional rice. Int J Food Sci Technol 51:1010-1017
  42. National Research Council (2004) Safety of genetically engineered food approaches to assessing unintended health effects: Framework, Findings, and Recommendations (Washington, DC: The National Academies Press) pp175-187
  43. Obert RB, Shillito RD, De Beuckeleer M, Mitten DH (2005) Rice (Oryza sativa L.) Containing the bar gene Is compositionally equivalent to the nontransgenic counterpart. J Agric Food Chem 53:1457-1465
  44. OECD (1993) Safety evaluation of foods derived by modern biotechnology; Concepts and Principles; Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD): Paris, France
  45. OECD consensus document on compositional considerations. oecd.org/chemicalsafety/biotrack/consensus-document-for-work-on-safety-novel-and foods-feeds-plants. htm
  46. Oh SW, Park SY, Yeo Y, Park SK, Kim HY (2015) Comparative analysis of genetically modified brown rice with conventional rice varieties for the safety assessment. Int J Food Sci Technol 50:1244-1254
  47. Oh SW, Park SY, Lee SM, Oh SD, Cho HS, Park SK, Lee HJ, Kim HY, Yeo YS (2016) Multivariate analysis for the safety assessment of genetically modified rices in the anti-nutrients and phenolic compounds. Int J Food Sci Technol 51:765-776
  48. Park H, Lee S, Jeong H, Cho S, Chun H, Back O, Kim D, Lillehoj HS (2006) The nutrient composition of the herbicide-tolerant green pepper is equivalent to that of the conventional green pepper. Nutr Res 26:546-548
  49. Park SY, Kim JK, Jang JS, Lee SY, Oh S, Lee SM, Yang CI, Yeo Y (2015) Comparative analysis of nutritional composition between the disease-resistant rice variety OsCK1 and conventional comparators. Food Sci Biotechnol 24:225-231
  50. Park SH, Cho JI, Kim YS, Kim SM, Lim SM, Lee GS, Park SC (2018) National program for developing biotech crops in Korea. Plant Breed Biotech 6:171-176
  51. Qin Y, Park SY, Oh SW, Lim MH, Shin KS, Cho HS, Lee SK, Woo HJ (2017) Nutritional composition analysis for beta-carotene-enhanced transgenic soybeans (Glycine max L.). Appl Biol Chem 60:299-309
  52. Qin F, Kang L, Guo L, Lin J, Song J, Zhao Y (2011) Composition of transgenic soybean seeds with higher -linolenic acid content is equivalent to that of conventional control. J Agric Food Chem 60:2200-2204
  53. Sottosanto J, Andre C, Arias DI, Bhatti M, Breazeale S, Fu H, Klucinec J. Lassen A, Lipscomb EA, Martin C, Moore CR, Olson AL, Roberts DW, Senger T, Settlage S, Wandelt C, Wenderoth I, Wu P, Wyrick MK (2018) Petition for the determination of nonregulatory status for EPA+DHA canola event LBFLFK. https://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/17_32101p.pdf
  54. Swamy BPM, Samia M, Boncodin R, Marundan S, Rebong DB, Ordonio RL, Miranda RT, Rebong ATO, Alibuyog AY, Adeva CC, Reinke R, MacKenzie DJ (2019) Compositional analysis of genetically engineered GR2E "Golden Rice" in comparison to that of conventional rice. J Agric Food Chem 67:7986-7994
  55. Taylor M, Bickel A. Mannion R, Bell E, Harrigan GG (2017) Dicamba-tolerant soybeans (Glycine max L.) MON 87708 and MON 87708 × MON 89788 are compositionally equivalent to conventional soybean. J Agric Food Chem 65:8037-8045
  56. Xin L, Xiaoyun H, Yunbo L, Guoying X, Xianbion J, Kunlun H (2008) Comparative analysis of nutritional composition between herbicide-tolerant rice with bar gene and its non-transgenic counterpart. J Food Compost Anal 21:535-539