|
Health
Scientific Committees
Scientific Committee on Food
Previous outcome of discussions
Opinion On The Potential For Adverse
Health Effects From The Consumption Of Genetically
Modified Maize (Zea Mays L) (Expressed On 13 December
1996)
N.B. Updated to include references 21
February 1997
Terms of Reference
To consider whether there is reason to
believe that the genetic modification of the maize lines of
Zea mays L. will have adverse effects on the health of
human consumers of the maize. The Committee is asked to
give particular attention to the concerns raised by certain
Member States with respect to any potential toxic or
allergenic effects associated with the introduced genes and
any potential adverse effects from the non-expressed b
-lactamase gene.
Background
The Commission has submitted a proposal
for a Council Decision concerning the placing on the market
of genetically modified maize (Zea mays L.) with the
combined modification for insecticidal properties conferred
by the Bt-endotoxin gene and increased tolerance to the
herbicide glufosinate ammonium pursuant to Council
Directive 90/220/EEC.
Member States have expressed a variety
of concerns which have led the Commission to request the
opinions of the Scientific Committee for Food, the
Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition (SCAN) and the
Scientific Committee on Pesticides to examine the dossier
as concerns safety matters within their remits.
Evaluation
This evaluation addresses transgenic
maize CG-00526-176. The submission included the
administrative data necessary for its unique identification
and for record keeping purposes
(1).
1. Characterisation of the inserted
genes and their expression
On the basis of the information
provided, the inserted genes (CRY1A(b), bar and bla)
and their expression are characterised as follows:
-
two plasmids have been inserted into
the same locus in two to five gene copies.Their presence
has been demonstrated by southern blotting.
-
the product of the inserted genes, the
CRYIA(b) protein (Bt-delta-endotoxin) from
the two genes is expressed in the leaves and in
pollen respectively but its concentration is below 5 ppb.
However the toxin is apparently expressed in the kernel
since in a bioassay study with the European corn borer,
insecticidal activity was observed in fresh, but not in
dried or re-hydrated kernels. Phosphinothricin acetyl
transferase (PAT), responsible for the increased
tolerance to the herbicide glufosinate ammonium, was not
detectable in kernels, but traces were found in the
plant. On the basis of current knowledge the prokaryotic
bla gene construct (b -lactam antibiotic
resistance) would not be expected to be expressed in the
maize plant.
2. Toxicological assessment
2.1 Products of the
cryIA(b) gene encoding
Bt-delta-endotoxin:
Both the truncated maize
cryIA(b) gene and the native
cryIA(b) gene produce protoxins which undergo
proteolytic cleavage in the mid-gut of insects resulting
in the same active toxin. The native CRYIA(b) protein and
the corresponding protein from transgenic maize, have
similar target range effects thereby demonstrating the
likelihood of similar biological properties for the two
proteins.
The native CRYIA(b) protein (65%
purity) has been tested for acute toxicity in mice and no
mortality has been reported at a dose of 5 g per kg body
weight. Furthermore, reports in the literature
(2) of a 28 day study with mice on CRYIA(b)
protein, did not reveal any mammalian toxicity at 1.5 g
per kg body weight, the only dose level tested. Moreover,
it was demonstrated that CRYIA(b) was rapidly degraded
in vitro in simulated gastric fluid containing
pepsin at pH 1-1.2. Since the CRYIA(b) product level in
kernels is below 5 ppb, dietary exposure to CRYIA(b) from
maize kernels is expected to be very low.
2.2 Products of the
bar gene encoding phosphinothricin acetyl
transferase (PAT)
The enzyme phosphinothricin acetyl
transferase (PAT) is not likely to present safety
problems. The quantitative level of PAT in kernels is
very low. Its enzymatic function is specific to a
substrate which is not naturally present in humans,
namely phosphinothricin, and furthermore, it is degraded
and inactivated in simulated gastric fluid containing
pepsin at pH 1-1.2. It is therefore unlikely to retain
any enzymatic activity
in vivo. Furthermore, no sequence homology between
the PAT protein and known toxins has been found. The
native PAT protein (51% purity) has been tested for acute
toxicity in mice and no toxicity has been reported at a
dose of 5 g per kg body weight.
3. Nutritional assessment
The newly expressed proteins have no
nutritional significance and the composition of the
transgenic maize is within the known biological variation
of the composition of the host plant.
It is concluded that transgenic maize
(event 176) is substantially equivalent to the
corresponding non-transgenic maize from a nutritional point
of view.
4. Allergenicity
The Committee expressed an opinion
covering general aspects of food intolerance including
allergenicity at its 98th Meeting ON 21/22 September 1995
(3).
The amino acid sequences of the proteins
CRY1A(b) and PAT do not show any homology with proteins of
known allergenic potential. Moreover, the new gene products
appear to be readily degraded by simulated gastric fluid
in vitro
(1,4). Comparison of the protein profiles of the
transgenic maize and the native maize by SDS gel
electrophoresis and iso-electric focusing give no
indication that the maize protein have been changed. There
are no indications that the prolamine proteins have been
altered which is of relevance for patients with coeliac
disease, but this possibility cannot be excluded. It is
therefore concluded that it is unlikely that the genetic
modification changes the potential for allergenicity in the
kernel of the transgenic maize. This does not exclude the
possibility that there will be individuals allergic to this
variant of maize, just as there are individuals who are
allergic to traditionally produced variants of
maize.
5. Horizontal gene transfer
Studies of the transfer of intact genes
from plant materials to micro-organisms have demonstrated
an extremely low likelihood of transfer, suggesting that
the probability of this event occurring in practice is very
small
(5). There is no evidence that genes from plants
have ever been transferred under natural conditions to
bacteria. In addition, the degradation of DNA occurring
during processing of maize and its intestinal passage
reduces this possibility even further. Bacteria with
natural ampicillin resistance exist in the environment as
well as in human intestines. Nevertheless, in the view of
the SCF, the acquisition of additional resistance from this
transgenic maize by intestinal bacteria needed special
attention
(6,7,8). The Commission convened an expert
consultation on the subject, where SCF and SCAN together
posed a number of questions to the specialised experts
(9). From this consultation it is confirmed that
the degeneration of DNA through processing of maize and its
products and the enzymatic decomposition of DNA in the
gastrointestinal tract of man and animal makes the residual
amount of intact DNA which could contain a gene very small.
Furthermore, the probability for transfer of plant DNA by
transformation to bacteria is small, as is the chance for
the transformed DNA to become functional in the bacteria.
Even if this unlikely sequence of events, each of which has
a very low probability, were to take place, it would have
no detectable additional effect as the
bla gene is already widely spread in nature
including human and animal gastrointestinal tracts
. Should transformed bacteria harbouring the high
copy plasmid pUC18 of the transgenic maize arise, they
would not have a competitive advantage and therefore would
not lead to their spread and interference with therapy by
beta-lactam antibiotics.
6. Assessment of secondary
changes
In addition to the products of the
inserted genes, a number of comparisons between the
transgenic maize plant and the equivalent non-transgenic
plant have been performed. A series of morphological
parameters were examined as well as yield. DIMBOA (2,4-
dihydroxy-7-methoxy-1,4-benzoxazin-3-one), one of the
natural defence compounds of the maize plant towards, for
example, the European corn borer was also examined. No
significant differences in morphology, yield or DIMBOA
content were observed. Differences between the
concentrations of other components of toxicological or
nutritional relevance in the genetically modified plant and
the parent plant were statistically significant in some
instances but, even so, the measured levels were still
within the published reference biological variation for
maize. Animal feeding studies with the genetically modified
maize supported its substantial equivalence
.
Conclusions
On the basis of the information provided
the Committee draws the following conclusions:
-
The transgenic maize is, except for
the inserted traits, substantially equivalent to maize
presently on the market.
-
Animal feeding studies with the
genetically modified maize support its substantial
equivalence to the parent plant.
-
No nutritional concerns are
associated with the use of this transgenic
maize.
-
It is unlikely that the genetic
changes introduce any new potential for
allergenicity.
-
No human toxicological concerns
arise regarding the inserted traits based upon the
toxicological and degradation data considered.
-
The possibility that the product
would add significantly to the already widespread
occurrence of ampicillin resistant bacteria in animals
and man is remote.
The latter conclusion was based on the
balance of evidence available at this time to the
Committee, which derived from theoretical considerations
and laboratory studies. A stepwise assessment regarding
the gene construct itself, its distribution and
persistence in maize and its products, the possibility of
its transfer from maize to gram negative bacteria, and
the possibility that it would function in such bacteria
led to the conclusion that the risk of bacterial
transformation is extremely low.
The Committee was conscious of the
general question of the use of genes coding for antibiotic
resistance in marker gene constructs in the development of
novel foods and proposes to scrutinise the future needs and
application of marker genes.
References:
1. Full dossier submitted by Ciba Geigy
in two volumes (Volume 1 consisting of parts A, B1-9 and
C1-11; Volume 2 consisting of parts C12-18, D and E1-15)
[CS/NF/MAIZE/1]
Maize genetically modified to protect
itself against corn borers and containing an ampicillin
resistance marker gene with a bacterial promoter.
Information by Ciba Geigy Limited.[ CS/NF/MAIZE/9]
Ciba Seeds responses to scientific
committees requests (dated September 19 and 20, 1996) for
additional information re:event 176 "BT" maize, prepared by
D. Vlachos.
2. Noteborn HUB, Kuiper HA 1995: Safety
evaluation of transgenic tomatoes expressing
Bt endotoxin. In: Application of the principles of
substantial equivalence to the safety evaluation of foods
or food components from plants derived by modern
technology. Report of a WHO workshop, Copenhagen, World
Health Organisation, Food Safety Unit.
3. Scientific Committee for Food (98
th Meeting); Report on adverse reactions to
foods and food ingredients. Opinion expressed on the 22
Sept 1995. European Commission, Brussels.
4. Metcalf DD, Astwood JD, Townsend R,
Sampson HA, Taylor SL, and Fuchs RL 1996: Assessment of the
Allergenic Potential fo Foods Derived from Genetically
Engineered Crop Plants. Crit Rev. Food Sci. Nutr.
36(S):S165-S186.
5. Schlüter K, Fütterer J, Potrykus I
1995: "Horizontal" gene transfer from a transgenic potato
line to a bacterial pathogen (
Erwina chrysanthemi) occurs - if at all- at an
extremely low frequency. Biotechnology 13: 1094-1098
6. Schubbert R, Lettmann C, Doerfler W
1994: Ingested foreign (phage M13) DNA survives transiently
in the gastrointestinal tract and enters the bloodstream of
mice. Mol. Gen. Genet. 242:495-504
7. Webb V, Davies J 1994: Accidental
release of antibiotic-resistence genes. Trends Biotechnol.
12(3):74-75
8. Ciba-Geigy genetically modified
maize. Additional information from MAFF, UK concerning the
risk of transfer of the intact
bla gene.[CS/NF/MAIZE/14]
9. Report of an expert hearing on
questions indentified by the Scientific Committee for Food
and Scientific Committee for Animal Nutrition (SCAN) on the
evaluation of the potential for increased ampicillin
resistance from GMO Maize (CG-00526-176). Brussels 6.
December 1996 [CS/NF/MAIZE/20]
Further references:
SCF opinions on the assessment of novel
foods I. Recommendations concerning the scientific aspects
of information necessary to support applications for
placing on the market of novel foods and novel food
ingredients. [CS/NF/GUID/1-FINAL]
SCF opinions on the assessment of novel
foods II. Recommendations concerning the scientific aspects
of the presentation of information necessary to support
applications for placing on the market of novel foods and
novel food ingredients.[CCS/NF/GUID/3]
SCF opinions on the assessment of novel
foods III. Recommendations concerning the scientific
aspects of the preparation of the initial assessment
reports on applications for placing on the market of novel
foods and novel food ingredients [CS/NF/GUID/4
Rev.2]
The scientific basis for the
classification of the PUC-plasmids according to Directive
90/219/EEC. [CS/NF/MAIZE/18]
[
©]
- [
HEALTH] - [
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEES] - [
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE ON
FOOD] - [
PREVIOUS OUTCOME OF
DISCUSSIONS]
|