Plant Molecular Biology

, Volume 73, Issue 3, pp 349–362

Natural variation explains most transcriptomic changes among maize plants of MON810 and comparable non-GM varieties subjected to two N-fertilization farming practices

  • Anna Coll
  • Anna Nadal
  • Rosa Collado
  • Gemma Capellades
  • Mikael Kubista
  • Joaquima Messeguer
  • Maria Pla
Article

DOI: 10.1007/s11103-010-9624-5

Cite this article as:
Coll, A., Nadal, A., Collado, R. et al. Plant Mol Biol (2010) 73: 349. doi:10.1007/s11103-010-9624-5

Abstract

The introduction of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in many countries follows strict regulations to ensure that only safety-tested products are marketed. Over the last few years, targeted approaches have been complemented by profiling methods to assess possible unintended effects of transformation. Here we used a commercial (Affymertix) microarray platform (i.e. allowing assessing the expression of ~1/3 of the genes of maize) to evaluate transcriptional differences between commercial MON810 GM maize and non-transgenic crops in real agricultural conditions, in a region where about 70% of the maize grown was MON810. To consider natural variation in gene expression in relation to biotech plants we took two common MON810/non-GM variety pairs as examples, and two farming practices (conventional and low-nitrogen fertilization). MON810 and comparable non-GM varieties grown in the field have very low numbers of sequences with differential expression, and their identity differs among varieties. Furthermore, we show that the differences between a given MON810 variety and the non-GM counterpart do not appear to depend to any major extent on the assayed cultural conditions, even though these differences may slightly vary between the conditions. In our study, natural variation explained most of the variability in gene expression among the samples. Up to 37.4% was dependent upon the variety (obtained by conventional breeding) and 31.9% a result of the fertilization treatment. In contrast, the MON810 GM character had a very minor effect (9.7%) on gene expression in the analyzed varieties and conditions, even though similar cryIA(b) expression levels were detected in the two MON810 varieties and nitrogen treatments. This indicates that transcriptional differences of conventionally-bred varieties and under different environmental conditions should be taken into account in safety assessment studies of GM plants.

Keywords

GMO (Genetically Modified Organism) MON810 Maize Nitrogen stress Transcriptome Unintended effects Agricultural field Natural variation 

Abbreviations

cDNA

Complementary DNA

CRM

Certified reference material

E

Efficiency

EBI

European Bioinformatics Institute

EU

European Union

GM

Genetically Modified

GMO

Genetically Modified Organism

GS2

Glutamine Synthase 2

ISAAA

International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications

mRNA

Messenger RNA

N

Nitrogen

OECD

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

PCA

Principal Component Analysis

RT-qPCR

Reverse transcription—real-time polymerase chain reaction

RMA

Robust Multichip Average

rRNA

Ribosomal RNA

SOM

Self-organizing Map

V6

Vegetative six-leaf stage

V8

Vegetative eight-leaf stage

VT

Vegetative Tasseling

Supplementary material

11103_2010_9624_MOESM1_ESM.doc (32 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOC 31 kb)
11103_2010_9624_MOESM2_ESM.doc (30 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOC 31 kb)
11103_2010_9624_MOESM3_ESM.doc (28 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (DOC 28 kb)

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anna Coll
    • 1
  • Anna Nadal
    • 2
  • Rosa Collado
    • 1
  • Gemma Capellades
    • 3
  • Mikael Kubista
    • 4
    • 5
  • Joaquima Messeguer
    • 6
  • Maria Pla
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut de Tecnologia Agroalimentària (INTEA)Universitat de GironaGironaSpain
  2. 2.Departament Genètica MolecularCentre de Recerca en Agrigenòmica, CSIC-IRTA-UABBarcelonaSpain
  3. 3.Fundació Mas BadiaLa Tallada d’Empordà, GironaSpain
  4. 4.Institute of BiotechnologyAcademy of Sciences of the Czech RepublicPrague 4Czech Republic
  5. 5.TATAA Biocenter ABGoteborgSweden
  6. 6.Departament Genètica VegetalCentre de Recerca en Agrigenòmica. CSIC-IRTA-UABBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations