Transgenic Research

, Volume 16, Issue 3, pp 261–280 | Cite as

Biosafety and risk assessment framework for selectable marker genes in transgenic crop plants: a case of the science not supporting the politics

  • Koreen Ramessar
  • Ariadna Peremarti
  • Sonia Gómez-Galera
  • Shaista Naqvi
  • Marian Moralejo
  • Pilar Muñoz
  • Teresa Capell
  • Paul Christou


Selectable marker gene systems are vital for the development of transgenic crops. Since the creation of the first transgenic plants in the early 1980s and their subsequent commercialization worldwide over almost an entire decade, antibiotic and herbicide resistance selectable marker gene systems have been an integral feature of plant genetic modification. Without them, creating transgenic crops is not feasible on purely economic and practical terms. These systems allow the relatively straightforward identification and selection of plants that have stably incorporated not only the marker genes but also genes of interest, for example herbicide tolerance and pest resistance. Bacterial antibiotic resistance genes are also crucial in molecular biology manipulations in the laboratory. An unprecedented debate has accompanied the development and commercialization of transgenic crops. Divergent policies and their implementation in the European Union on one hand and the rest of the world on the other (industrialized and developing countries alike), have resulted in disputes with serious consequences on agricultural policy, world trade and food security. A lot of research effort has been directed towards the development of marker-free transformation or systems to remove selectable markers. Such research has been in a large part motivated by perceived problems with antibiotic resistance selectable markers; however, it is not justified from a safety point of view. The aim of this review is to discuss in some detail the currently available scientific evidence that overwhelmingly argues for the safety of these marker gene systems. Our conclusion, supported by numerous studies, most of which are commissioned by some of the very parties that have taken a position against the use of antibiotic selectable marker gene systems, is that there is no scientific basis to argue against the use and presence of selectable marker genes as a class in transgenic plants.


Selectable markers Plant transformation Antibiotic resistance Herbicide resistance Safety evaluation 



PC is an ICREA research professor at the Universitat de Lleida; TC is a recipient of a RyC fellowship from MEC, Spain; AP and SN are recipients of PhD fellowships from MEC, Spain; SGG is a recipient of a PhD fellowship from the Generalitat de Catalunya. We thank Dr. Hector Quemada for valuable comments and suggestions on the manuscript and two anonymous referees for their constructive and insightful comments. This work was funded in part through the EU FP6 Pharma-Planta project.


  1. Ames BN, Gold LS (1999). In: Morris, Bate R (eds) In Fearing Food. Oxford, Butterworth Heinemann, pp 18–38Google Scholar
  2. Ash JA, Scheideler E, Novak CL (2000) The fate of genetically modified protein from Roundup Ready® soybeans in the laying hen. Poultry Sciences 1:26; Palais de Congrès, Montreal Canada; August 18–21, 2000Google Scholar
  3. Ash J, Novak C, Scheideler SE (2003) The fate of genetically modified protein from Roundup Ready soybeans in the laying hens. J Appl Poult Res 12:242–245Google Scholar
  4. Aulrich K, Böehme H, Daenicke R, Halle I, Flachowsky G (2002) Novel feeds—a review of experiments at our institute. Food Res Int 35:285–293Google Scholar
  5. Aumaitre A (2004) Safety assessment and feeding value for pigs, poultry and ruminant animals of pest protected (Bt) plants and herbicide tolerant (glyphosate, glufosinate) plants: interpretation of experimental results observed worldwide on GM plants. Ital J Anim Sci 3:107–121Google Scholar
  6. Aumaitre A, Aulrich K, Chesson A, Flachowsky G, Piva G (2002) New feeds from genetically modified plants: substantial equivalence, nutritional equivalence, digestibility, and safety for animals and the food chain. Livest Prod Sci 74:223–238Google Scholar
  7. Baker JM, Hawkins ND, Ward JL, Lovegrove A, Napier JA, Shewry P, Beale MH (2006) A metabolomic study of substantial equivalence of field-grown genetically modified wheat. Plant Biotechnol J 4:381–392Google Scholar
  8. Batista R, Nunes B, Carmo M, Cardoso C, José H, de Almeida A, Manique A, Bento L, Ricardo C, Oliveira M (2005) Lack of detectable allergenicity of transgenic maize and soya samples. J Allergy Clin Immunol 116:403–410Google Scholar
  9. Baudo MM, Lyons R, Powers S, Pastori GM, Edwards KJ, Holdsworth MJ, Shewry PR (2006) Transgenesis has less impact on the transcriptome of wheat grain than conventional breeding. Plant Biotechnol J 4:369–380PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Bennett PM, Livesey CT, Nathwani D, Reeves DS, Saunders JR, Wise R (2004) An assessment of the risks associated with the use of antibiotic resistance genes in genetically modified plants: report of the Workig Party of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. J Antimicrob Chemother 53:418–431PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Bertolla F, Simonet P (1999) Horizontal gene transfers in the environment: natural transformation as a putative process for gene transfers between trangenic plants and microorganisms. Res Microbiol 150(6):375–384PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Bertrand JA, Sudduth TQ, Condon A, Jenkins TC, Calhoun MC (2005) Nutrient content of whole cottonseed. J Dairy Sci 88:1470–1477PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Blaese RM, Anderson WF, Culver KW (1990) Treatment of severe combined immunodeficiency disease (SCID) due to adenosine deaminase (ADA) deficiency with autologous lymphocytes transduced with a human ADA gene. Hum Gene Ther 1:327Google Scholar
  14. Bohme H, Aulrich K, Daenicke R, Flachowsky G (2001) Genetically modified feeds in animal nutrition. 2nd communication: glufosinate tolerant sugarbeet (roots and silage) and maize grains for ruminants and pigs. Arch Tierernahr 54(3):197–207PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Brake J, Faust MA, Stein J (2003) Evaluation of transgenic event Bt11 hybrid corn in broiler chickens. Poultry Sci 82(4):551–559Google Scholar
  16. Brake DG, Evenson DP (2004) A generational study of glyphosate-tolerant soybeans on mouse fetal, postnatal, pubertal and adult testicular development. Food Chem Toxicol 42:29–36PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Brookes F, Barfoot P (2005) GM Crops: the global economic and environmental impact–the first nine years 1996–2004. AgBioForum 8:187–196Google Scholar
  18. Burks A, Fuchs R (1995) Assessment of the endogenous allergens in glyphosate-tolerant and commercial soybean varieties. J Allergy Clin Immunol 96(6): 1008–1010PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Council for Agricultural Science and Technology (CAST). 2006. Safety of meat, milk, and eggs from animals fed crops derived from modern biotechnology. Issue paper 34. CAST, Ames, IowaGoogle Scholar
  20. Castillo AR, Gallardo MR, Maciel M, Giordano JM, Conti GA, Gaggiotti MC, Quaino O, Gianni C, Hartnell GF (2004) Effects of feeding rations with genetically modified whole cottonseed to lactating dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 87:1778–1785PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Chambers PA, Duggan PS, Heritage J, Forbers JM (2002) The fate of antibiotic resistance marker genes in transgenic plant feed material fed to chickens. J Antimicrob Chemother 49:161–164PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Chang HS, Kim NH, Park MJ, Lim SK, Kim SC, Kim JY, Kim JA, Oh HY, Lee CH, Huh K, Jeong TC, Nam DH (2003) The 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase of glyphosate-tolerant soybean expressed in Escherichia coli shows no severe allergenicity. Mol Cells 15(1): 20–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Chesson A, Flachowsky G (2003) Transgenic plants in poultry nutrition. Worlds Poult Sci J 59(2): 201–207Google Scholar
  24. Christou P, Ford TL, Kofron M (1991) Genotype-independent stable transformation of rice (Oryza sativa) plants. Biotechnology (N Y) 9:957–962Google Scholar
  25. Christou P (1996) Transformation technology. Trends Plant Sci 1:423–431Google Scholar
  26. Christou P, Twyman RM (2004) The potential of genetically enhanced plants to address food insecurity. Nutr Res Rev 17:23–42PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Christou P, Capell T, Kohli A, Gatehouse JA, Gatehouse AMR (2006) Recent developments and future prospects in insect pest control in transgenic crops. Trends Plant Sci 11:302–308PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Clark JH, Ipharraguerre IR (2001) Livestock performance: Feeding biotech crops. J Dairy Sci 84(E. Suppl.):E9–E18Google Scholar
  29. Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) (2001) Codex guidelines (ALINORM 01/22). FAO/WHO, Rome, Italy. Available on the World Wide Web: Scholar
  30. Cromwell GL, Lindemann MD, Randolph JH, Parker GR, Coffey RD, Laurent KM, Armstrong CL, Mikel WB, Stanisiewski EP, Hartnell GF (2002) Soybean meal from Roundup Ready or convencional soybeans in diets for growing-finishing swine. J Anim Sci 80:708–715PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Cromwell GL, Henry BJ, Scout AL, Gerngross MF, Dusek DL, Fletcher DW (2005) Glufosinate herbicide-tolerant (LiberyLink) rice vs. Convencional rice in diets for growing-finishing swine. J Anim Sci 83:1068–1074PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Dale PJ, Clarke B, Fontes EMG (2002) Potential for the environmental impact of transgenic crops. Nat Biotechol 20:567–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. DANMAP (2001) Use of antimicrobial agents and occurrence of antimicrobial resistance in bacteria from food animals, foods and humans in Denmark. ISSN 1600–2032Google Scholar
  34. D’Costa VM, McGrann KM, Hughes DW, Wright GD (2006) Sampling the antibiotic resistome. Science 311:374–377PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. de Vries J, Heine M, Harms K, Wackernagel W (2003) Spread of recombinant DNA by roots and pollen of transgenic potato plants, identified by highly specific biomonitoring using natural transformation of an Acinetobacter sp. Appl Environ Microbiol 69:4455–4462PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Donkin SS, Velez JC, Totten AK, Stanisiewski EP, Hartnell GF (2003) Effects of feeding silage and grain from glyphosate-tolerant or insect-protected corn hybrids on feed intake ruminal digestión, and milk production in dairy cattle. J Dairy Sci 86:1780–1788PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Duggan PS, Chambers PA, Heritage J amd Forbes JM (2000) Survival of free DNA encoding antibiotic resistance from transgenic maize and the transformation activity of DNA in ovine saliva, ovine rumen fluid and silage effluent. FEMS Microbiol Lett 191:71–77PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. EC (2001) Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 March 2001 on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repealing Council Directive 90/220/EEC. Official J Eur Commun L106:1–39. Scholar
  39. EC (2002) Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety. Official Journal of the European Communities L31, 1–24. Scholar
  40. EC (2003) European Commission, Health & Consumer protection directorate-general: guidance document for the risk assessment of genetically modified plants and derived food and feed. 6–7 March 2003Google Scholar
  41. EC Research (2001) EC-sponsored research on safety of genetically modified organisms: a review of results, Scholar
  42. EFB (2001) European Federation of Biotechnology. Antibiotic resistance markers in genetically modified (GM) crops, task group on public perceptions of biotechnology briefing paper 10, September 2001Google Scholar
  43. EFSA (2004a) Guidance document of the scientific panel on genetically modified organisms for the risk assessment of genetically modified plants and derived food and feed. The EFSA Journal 99:1–94Google Scholar
  44. EFSA (2004b) Opinion of the scientific panel on genetically modified organisms on the use of antibiotic resistance genes as marker genes in genetically modified plants. EFSA J 48:1–18Google Scholar
  45. EFSA (2005) Opinion of the scientific panel on genetically modified organisms on a request from the Commission related to the notification (Reference C/ES/01/01) for the placing on the market of insect-tolerant genetically modified maize 1507, for import, feed and industrial processing and cultivation, under Part C of Directive 2001/18/EC from Pioneer Hi-Bred International/Mycogen Seeds. The EFSA Journal 181: 1–33Google Scholar
  46. Einspanier R, Klotz A, Kraft J, Aulrich K, Poser R, Schwagele F, Jahreis G, Flachowski G (2001) The fate of forage plant DNA in farm animals: a collaborative case-study investigating cattle and chicken fed recombinant plant material. Eur Food Res Technol 212:129–134Google Scholar
  47. Entransfood, the European network on safety assessment of genetically modified food crops (2004) Genetically modified crops in the EU: food safety assessment, regulation, and public concerns. Overarching report. European commission. (Site accessed May 2006) Scholar
  48. EU Regulation 1829/2003: EU rules for the authorization and monitoring of genetically modified food and feed (ex 258/97); EU Regulation 1830/2003: traceability and labelling of genetically modified organisms (ex 49 and 50/2000). Scholar
  49. FAO (2001) Statistics on food production and consumption, FAO Food balance sheets. Scholar
  50. FAO/WHO (1996) Biotechnology and food safety. Report of a joint Food and Agriculture Organisation/World Health Organisation Consultation. FAO/WHO: RomeGoogle Scholar
  51. FAO/WHO (2000) Safety aspects of genetically modified foods of plant origin, FAO/WHO consultation 29 May–2 June 2000. World Health Organization, Geneva, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  52. FASS (2006) Federation of animal science societies. (Site accessed May 2006) Scholar
  53. Faust M, Miller L (1997) Study finds no Bt in milk. IC-478. Fall special livestock edition. Iowa State University Extension, Ames, Iowa, pp 6–7Google Scholar
  54. FDA (1992) Statement of policy: foods derived from new plant varieties. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. US Fed Regist 57(104):22984–23005Google Scholar
  55. FDA (1998) Guidance for industry: use of antibiotic resistance marker genes in transgenic plants. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Downloaded from Scholar
  56. FDA/CFSAN (1998) Draft guidance for industry: use of antibiotic resistance marker genes in transgenic plants—U. S. FDA Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (Office of Premarket Approval), September 4, 1998Google Scholar
  57. Ferry N, Edwards MG, Gatehouse J, Capell T, Christou P, Gatehouse AMR (2006) Transgenic plants for insect pest control. A forward looking scientific perspective Transgenic Res 15:13–19PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Fink R, Moran E (2005) Biosafety for large-scale containment level 1 operations using recombinant DNA technology: no emerging hazards. Appl Biosafety 10(1):30–39Google Scholar
  59. Flachowsky G, Aulrich K (2001) Nutritional assessment of feeds from genetically modified organism. J Anim Feed Sci 10(1):181–194Google Scholar
  60. Flachowsky G, Aulrich K (2002) Food of animal origin after feeding of feeds from genetically modified plants (GMP). Ernahrungs-Umschau 49(3):84–88Google Scholar
  61. Flavell R, Dart E, Fuchs R, Fraley F (1992) Selectable marker genes: safe for plants? Biol Technol 10:141–142Google Scholar
  62. Food Additive Petition (1993) Aminoglycoside 3′-Phosphotransferase II (APH(3′)II): safety and use in the production of genetically engineered plants, Calgene, Inc., Volume II: Environmental Assessment, Number 3A4364, June 3, 1993Google Scholar
  63. Frank SA (1994) Polymorphism of bacterial restriction modification systems: the advantage of diversity. Evolution 48:1470Google Scholar
  64. FSANZ, Food Standards Australia New Zealand (2003) Oil derived from glufosinate-ammonium tolerant and pollination controlled canola: a safety assessment. Technical report: series no. 16Google Scholar
  65. Fuchs RL (1996) In: Eisenbrand G, Aulepp H, Dayan AD, Elias PS, Grunow W, Ring J, Schlatter J, Köhl W, Baum M (eds) Assessment of the allergenic potential of foods derived from genetically engineered plants: glyphosate tolerant soybean as a case study, ch. 17. Food allergies and intolerances symposium. VCH Verlagsgesellschaft mbH, Weinheim, Germany, pp 212–221Google Scholar
  66. Fuchs RL, Ream JE, Hammond BG, Naylor MW, Leimgruber RM, Berberich SA (1993) Safety assessment of the neomycin phosphotransferase-II (NPTII) protein. Bio/Technol 11:1543–1547Google Scholar
  67. Garfinkel DJ, Simpson RB, Ream LW, White FF, Gordon MP, Nester EW (1981) Genetic analysis of crown gall; fine structure map of the T-DNA by site-directed mutagenesis. Cell 27:143–153PubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. Gay P, Gillespie S (2005) Antibiotic resistance markers in genetically modified plants: a risk to human health. Lancet Infect Dis 5:637–646PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Gebhard F, Smalla K (1998) Transformation of Acinetobacter sp. strain BD413 by transgenic sugar beet DNA. Appl Environ Microbiol 64:1550–1554PubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Gebhard F, Smalla K (1999) Monitoring field releases of genetically modified sugar beets for persistence of transgenic plant DNA and horizontal gene transfer. FEMS Microbiol Ecol 28:261–272Google Scholar
  71. Graham RD, Welch RM, Bouis HE (2001) Addressing micronutrient malnutrition through enhancing the nutritional quality of staple foods: principles, perspectives and knowledge gaps. Adv Agro 70:77–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Grant RJ, Fanning KC, Kleinschmit D, Stanisiewski EP, Hartnell GF (2003) Influence of glyphosate-tolerant (event nk 603) and corn rootworm protected (event MON863)corn silage and grain on feed consumption and milk production in holstein cattle. J Dairy Sci 86:1707–1715PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. Gritz L, Davis J (1983) Plasmid-encoded hygromycin B resistance: the sequence of hygromycin B phosphotransferase gene and its expression in Escherichia coli and Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Gene 25:179–188PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Halford NG, Shewry PR (2000) Genetically modified crops: methodology, benefits, regulation and public concerns. Br Med Bull 56(1):62–73PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. Hamilton KA, Pyla PD, Breeze M, Olson T, Li M, Robinson E, Gallagher SP, Sorbet R, Chen Y (2004) Bollgard II cotton: compositional analysis and feeding studies of cottonseed from insect-protected cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.) producing the Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab2 proteins. J Agric Food Chem 52:6969–6976PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. Hammond BG, Vicini JL, Hartnell GF, Naylor MW, Knight CD, Robinson E, Fuchs RL, Padgette SR (1996) The feeding value of soybeans fed to rats, chickens, catfish and dairy cattle is not altered by incorporation of glyphosate tolerance. J Nutr 126:717–727PubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. Hammond B, Dudek R, Lemen J, Nemeth M (2004) Results of a 13 week safety assurance study with rats fed grain from glyphosate tolerant corn. Food Chem Toxicol 42:1003–1014PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. Harrison LA, Bailey MR, Naylor MW, Ream JE, Hammond BG, Nida DL, Burnette BL, Nickson TE, Mitsky TA, Taylor ML, Fuchs RL, Padgette SR (1996) The expressed protein in glyphosate-tolerant soybean, 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4, is rapidly digested in vitro and is not toxic to acutely gavaged mice. J Nutriti 126:728–740Google Scholar
  79. Hartnell GF, Hvelplund T, Weisbjerg MR (2005) Nutrient digestibility in sheep fed diets containing Roundup Ready or conventional fodder beet, sugar beet, and beet pulp. J Anim Sci 83:400–407PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. Hérouet C, Esdaile DJ, Mallyon BA, Debruyne E, Schulz A, Currier T, Hendrickx K, van der Klis R, Rouan D (2005) Safety evaluation of the phosphinothricin acetyltransferase proteins encoded by the pat and bar sequences that confer tolerance to glufosinate-ammonium herbicide in transgenic plants. Reg Toxic Pharm 41:134–149Google Scholar
  81. High SM, Cohen MB, Shu QY, Altosaar I (2004) Achieving successful deployment of Bt rice. Trends Plant Sci 9(6):286–292PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. Huang J, Pray C, Rozelle S (2002) Enhancing the crops that feed the poor. Nature 418:618–684Google Scholar
  83. Huang J, Hu R, Rozelle S, Pray C (2005) Insect resistant GM rice in farmers fields: assessing productivity and health effects in China. Science 308:688–690PubMedGoogle Scholar
  84. Hyun Y, Bressner GE, Fischer RL, Miller PS, Ellis M, Peterson BA, Stanisiewski EP, Hartnell GF (2005) Performance of growing-finishing pigs fed diets containing YieldGard Rootworm corn (MON 863), a non transgenic genetically similar corn, or conventional corn hybrids. J Anim Sci 83:1581–1590PubMedGoogle Scholar
  85. Ipharraguerre IR, Younker RS, Clark JH, Stanisiewski EP, Hartnell GF (2003) Performance of lactating dairy cows fed corn as whole plant silage and grain produced form a glyphosate-tolerant hybrid (event NK603). J Dairy Sci 86:1734–1741PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. Jacoby GA, Medeiros AA (1991) More extended-spectrum β-lactamases. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 35:1697–1704PubMedGoogle Scholar
  87. James C (2005) Preview: Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops ISAAA Briefs No 34. ISAAA: Ithaca, NY Scholar
  88. Jennings JC, Kolwyck DC, Kays SB, Whetsell AJ, Surber JB, Cromwell GL, Lirette RP, Glenn KC (2003) Determining whether transgenic and endogenous plant DNA and transgenic protein are detectable in muscle from swine fed roundup ready soybean meal. J Anim Sci 81:1447–1455PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. Jonas DA, Elmadfa I, Engel KH, Heller KJ, Kozianowski G, Konig A, Muller D, Narbonne JF, Wackernagel W, Kleiner J (2001) Safety considerations of DNA in food. Ann Nutr Metab 45:235–254PubMedGoogle Scholar
  90. Kan C, Hartnell G (2004) Evaluation of broiler performance when fed roundup-ready wheat (event MON 71800), control, and commercial wheat varieties. Poultry Sci 83:1325–1333Google Scholar
  91. Kasid A, Morecki S, Aebersold P, Kasid A, Morecki S, Aebersold P, Cornetta K, Culver K, Freeman S, Director E, Lotze MT, Blaese RM, Anderson WF (1990) Human gene transfer: Characterization of human tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes as vehicles for retroviral-mediated gene transfer in man. Proc Natl Acad Sci 87:473–477PubMedGoogle Scholar
  92. Kay E, Vogel TM, Bertola F, Nalin R, Simonet P (2002) In situ transfer of antibiotic resistance genes from transgenic (transplastomic) tobacco plants to bacteria. Appl Env Microbiol 68:3345–3351Google Scholar
  93. Kok EJ, Kuiper HA (2003) Comparative safety assessment for biotech crops. Trends in Biotechnol 21:439–444Google Scholar
  94. Kuhstoss S, Rao RN (1983) Expression in Streptomyces ambofaciens of an Escherichia coli K-12 gene which confers resistance to hygromycin B. Gene 26:295–299PubMedGoogle Scholar
  95. Leboul J, Davies J (1982) Enzymatic modification of hygromycin B in Streptomyces hygroscopicus. J Antibiot 35:527–528PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. Lee T, Leach J, Ledesma B, Hammond B, Naylor M, Fuchs R, Sindhu R, Rodriguez D, Aswood J (2001) Safety assessment of MEPSPS protein in roundup ready corn plants. Proc Soc Toxicol Annu Meet: 411Google Scholar
  97. MacKenzie D (1999) Unpalatable truths. New Scientist 162:18–19Google Scholar
  98. MacKenzie D, McLean M (2002) Who’s afraid of GM feeds? Feed Mix 10(3): 16–19Google Scholar
  99. Malpartida F, Zalacain M, Jimenen A, Davies J (1983) Molecular cloning and expression in Streptomyces lividans of a hygromycin B phosphotransferase geen from Streptomyces hygroscopicus. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 117:6–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  100. Martin-Orue SM, O’Donnell AG, Arin~o J, Netherwood T, Gilbert HJ, Mathers JC (2002) Degradation of transgenic DNA from genetically modified soya and maize in human intestinal simulations. Bri J Nutr 87(6):533–542PubMedGoogle Scholar
  101. Maryanski JH (1995) Food and Drug Administration policy for foods developed by biotechnology. In: Engel K-H, Takeoka GR, Teranishi R (eds) Genetically modified foods: safety issues. ACS Symposium Series No. 605:12–22. American Chemical Society, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  102. McAllan AB (1980) The degradation of nucleic acids in, and the removal of breakdown products form the small intestine of steers. Br J Nutr 44:99–112PubMedGoogle Scholar
  103. McAllan AB (1982) The fate of nucleic acids in ruminants. Proc Nutr Soc 41(3):309–317PubMedGoogle Scholar
  104. McCabe D.E., Swain W.F., Martinell B.J., Christou P (1988) Stable transformation of soybean (Glycine max) by particle acceleration. Bio Tech 6:923–926Google Scholar
  105. Miki B, McHugh S (2004) Selectable marker genes in transgenic plants: applications, alternatives and biosafety. J Biotech 107:193–232Google Scholar
  106. MRC (2000) Report of a Medical Research Council expert group on genetically modified (GM) foods. Medical Research Council: LondonGoogle Scholar
  107. Munkvold GP, RL Hellmich WB Showers (1997) Reduced Fusarium ear rot and symptomless infection in kernels of maize genetically engineered for European corn borer resistance. Phytopathol 87:1071–1077Google Scholar
  108. Munkvold GP, Hellmich RL, Rice LG (1999) Comparison of fumonisin concentration in kernels of transgenic Bt maize hybrids and non-transgenic hybrids. Plant Dis 83:130–138Google Scholar
  109. Murray IA, Shaw WV (1997) O-cetyltransferases for chloramphenicol and other natural products. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 41:1–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. Nair RS, Fuchs RL, Schuette SA (2002), Genetically modified food: hazard identification and risk assessment: current methods for assessing safety of genetically modified crops as exemplified by data on roundup ready1 soybeans. Toxicol Pathol 30(1):117–125PubMedGoogle Scholar
  111. Nap JP, Bijvoet J, Stikema WJ (1992) Biosafety of kanamycin-resistant transgenic plants: an overview. Transg Res 1:239–249Google Scholar
  112. Nida DL, Patzer S, Harvey P, Stipanovic R, Wood R, Fuchs RL (1996) Glyphosate-tolerant cotton: The composition of the cottonseed is equivalent to that of conventional cottonseed. J Agri Food Chem 44(7):1967–1974Google Scholar
  113. Nielsen KM, Bones AM, Smalla K, van Elsas JD (1998) Horizontal gene transfer from transgenic plants to terrestrial bacteria—a rare event? FEMS Microbiol Rev 22:79–103PubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. OECD (1993), Safety evaluation of foods produced by modern biotechnology—concepts and principles. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, ParisGoogle Scholar
  115. OECD (2000) GM food safety: facts, uncertainties and assessment. In: OECD Edinburgh conference on the scientific and health aspects of genetically modified foods, Edinburgh. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  116. Padgette SR, Re DB, Hammond BG, Fuchs RL, Rogers SG, Harrison LA, Nida DL, Naylor MW, Kolacz KH, Taylor NB and Ream JE (1994) Safety, compositional and nutritional aspects of glyphosate-tolerant soybeans: conclusion based on studies and information evaluated according to FDA’s consultation process. Monsanto Company, St. Louis: 1–107Google Scholar
  117. Padgette SR, Taylor NB, Nida DL, Bailey MR, MacDonald J, Holden LR, Fuchs RL (1996a) The composition of glyphosate-tolerant soybean seeds is equivalent to that of conventional soybeans. J Nutriti 126(3):702–716PubMedGoogle Scholar
  118. Padgette, SR, Re DB, Barry GF, Eichholtz, DE, Delannay X, Fuchs RL, Kishore GM, Fraley RT (1996b) New weed control opportunities: development of soybeans with a Roundup Ready® gene. In: Duke SO (ed) Herbicide resistant crops. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp 53–84Google Scholar
  119. Pastorello EA, Conti A, Pravettoni V, Farioli L, Rivolta F, Ansaloni R, Ispano M, Incorvaia C, Giuffrida MG, Ortolani C (1998) Identification of actinidin as the major allergen of kiwi fruit. J Allergy Clin Immunol 101:531–537PubMedGoogle Scholar
  120. Phipps RH, Beever DE, Humphries DJ (2002) Detection of transgenic DNA in milk from cows receiving herbicide tolerant (CP4 EPSPS) soyabean meal. Livest Prod Sci 74:269–273Google Scholar
  121. Phipps RH, Deaville ER, Maddison BC (2003) Detection of transgenic and endogenous plant DNA in rumen fluid, duodenal digesta, milk, blood, and feces of lactating dairy cows. J Dairy Sci 86:4070–4078PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Phipps RH, Jones AK, Tingey AP, Abeyasekera S (2005) Effect of corn silage from an herbicide-tolerant genetically modified variety on milk production and absence of transgenic DNA in milk. J Dairy Sci 88:2870–2878PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Pinstrup-Andersen P, Pandya-Lorch R, Rosegrant MW (1999) World food prospects: critical issues for the twenty-first century. Washington, IFPRIGoogle Scholar
  124. Proctor GN, Rownd RH (1982) Rosanilins. Indicator dyes for chloramphenicol-resistant enterobacteria containing chloramphenicol acetyltransferase. J Bacteriol 150:1375–1382PubMedGoogle Scholar
  125. Rao RN, Allen NE, Hobbs JN, Alborn WE, Kirst HA, Paschal JW (1983) Genetic and enzymatic basis of hygromycin B resistance in Escherichia coli. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 24:689–695PubMedGoogle Scholar
  126. Redenbaugh K, Hiatt W, Martineau B, Lindemann J, Emlay D (1994) Aminoglycoside 3′-phosphotransferase II (APH(3′)II): Review of its safety and use in the production of genetically engineered plants. Food Biotechnol 8:137–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. Royal Society (2002) Genetically modified plants for food use and human health-an update. Policy document 4/02. Royal Society: LondonGoogle Scholar
  128. Royal Society of Canada (2001) Elements of precaution: recommendations for the regulation of food biotechnology in Canada (Report of the expert panel on the future of food biotechnology). Royal Society of Canada, OttawaGoogle Scholar
  129. Sanden M, Krogdahl A, Bakke-Mckellep AM, Buddington RK (2006) Growth performance and organ development in Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L. parr fed genetically modified (GM) soybean and maize. Aquac Nutr 12:1–14Google Scholar
  130. Sanhoty RE, Abd El-Rahman AA, Bögl KW (2004) Quality and safety evaluation of genetically modified potatoes Spunta with Cry V gene: Compositional analysis, determination of some toxins, antinutrients compounds and feeding study in rats. Nahrung/Food 48(1): 13–18Google Scholar
  131. Sharma R, Alexander TW, John SJ, Forster RJ, McAllister TA (2004) Relative stability of transgene DNA fragments from GM rapeseed in mixed ruminal cultures. Br J Nutr 91:673–681PubMedGoogle Scholar
  132. Sharma R, Damgaard D, Alexander TW, Dugan MER, Aalhus JL, Stanford K, McAllister TA (2006) Detection of transgenic and endogenous plant DNA in digesta and tissues of sheep and pigs fed roundup ready canola meal. J Agric Food Chem 54:1699–1709PubMedGoogle Scholar
  133. Shaw KJ, Rather PN, Hare RS, Miller GH (1993) Molecular genetics of aminoglycoside resistance genes and familiar relationships of the aminoglycoside-modifying enzymes. Microbiol Rev 57:138–163PubMedGoogle Scholar
  134. Sidhu RS, Hammond BG, Fuchs RL, Mutz JN, Holden LR, George B, Olson T (2000) Glyphosate-tolerant corn: The composition and feeding value of grain from glyphosate- tolerant corn is equivalent to that of conventional corn (Zea mays L.). J Agric Food Chem 48:2305–2312PubMedGoogle Scholar
  135. Smalla K, Borin S, Heuer H, Gebhard F, van Elsas JD and Neilson K (2000) Horizontal transfer of antibiotic resistance genes from transgenic plants to bacteria. Are there new data to fuel the debate? In: Fairbairn G, Scoles G, McHugen A (eds) Proceeding of the 6th international symposium on the biosafety of genetically modified organisms. pp 146–154Google Scholar
  136. Standford K, Aalhus JL, Dugan MER, Wallins GL, Sharma R, McAllister TA (2003) Effects of feeding transgenic canola on apparent digestibility, growth performance and carcass characteristics of lambs. Can J Anim Sci 83:299–305Google Scholar
  137. Sten E, Skov PS, Andersen SB, Torp AM, Olesen A, Bindslev-Jensen U, Poulsen LK, Bindslev-Jensen C (2004) A comparative study of the allergenic potency of wild-type and glyphosate-tolerant gene-modified soybean cultivars. APMIS 112:21–28PubMedGoogle Scholar
  138. Stoger E, Sack M, Perrin Y, Vaquero C, Torres E, Twyman R, Christou P, Fischer R (2002) Practical considerations for pharmaceutical antibody production in different crop systems. Mol Breed 9:149–158Google Scholar
  139. Syvanen M (1999) In search of horizontal gene transfer. Nat Biotechnol 17:833PubMedGoogle Scholar
  140. Taylor ML, Hyun Y, Hartnell GF, Riordan SG, Nemeth MA, Karunanandaa K, George B, Astwood JD (2003) Comparison of broiler performance when fed diets containing grain from YieldGard Rootworm (MON 863), YieldGard Plus (MON 810xMON863), nontransgenic control, or commercial reference corn hybrids. Poult Sci 82:1948–1956PubMedGoogle Scholar
  141. Taylor M, Stanisiewski E, Riordan S, Nemeth M, George B, Hartnell G (2004) Comparison of broiler performance when feds diets containing Roundup Ready (Event RT73), nontransgenic control, or commercial canola meal. Poult Sci 83:456–461PubMedGoogle Scholar
  142. Taylor ML, Hartnell G, Nemeth M, Karunanandaa K, George B (2005) Comparison of broiler performance when fed diets containing corn grain with insect-protected (corn rootworm and European corn borer) and herbicide-tolerant (glyphosate) traits, control corn, or commercial reference corn. Poult Sci 84:587–593PubMedGoogle Scholar
  143. Tepfer D, Garcia-Gonzales R, Mansouri H, Seruga M, Message B, Leach F, Perica MC (2003) Homology-dependent DNA transfer from plants to a soil bacterium under aboratory conditions: implications in evolution and horizontal gene transfer. Transgenic Res 12:425–437Google Scholar
  144. Teshima R, Akiyama H, Okunuki H, Sakushima JI, Goda Y, Onodera H, Sawada JI, Toyoda M (2000) Effect of GM and non-GM soybeans on the immune system of BN rats and B10A mice. J Food Hyg Soc Jpn 41:188–193Google Scholar
  145. Toenniessen GH, O´ Tool JC, DeVries J (2003) Advances in Plant Biotechnology and its Adoption in Developing Countries. Curr Opin Plant Biol 6:191–198PubMedGoogle Scholar
  146. Tomalsky ME, Crosa JH (1987) Tn1331, a novel multiresistant transposon encoding resistance to amikasin and ampicillin in Klebsiella pneumoniae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 31:1955–1960Google Scholar
  147. Tutel’ian VA, Kravchenko LV, Lashneva NV, Avren’eva Ll, Guseva GV, Sorokina EIu, Chernysheva ON (1999) Medical and biological evaluation of safety of protein concentrate from genetically-modified soybeans. Biochemical studies. Vopr Pitan 68:9–12PubMedGoogle Scholar
  148. UNDP (2001) United Nations Development Programme, Human Development Report 2001: Making new technologies work for human development. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 65–78Google Scholar
  149. Van Gelder WMJ, Vinke JH, Scheffer JJC (1988) Steroidal glycoalkaloids in tubers and leaves of solanum species used in potato breeding. Euphytica 38:147–158Google Scholar
  150. Wang Y, Lai W, Chen J, Mei S (2000) Toxicity of anti-herbicide gene (BAR) transgenic rice. Wei Sheng Yan Jiu 29(3): 141–142PubMedGoogle Scholar
  151. Weber TE, Richert BT, Kendall DC, Bowers KA and Herr CT (2000) Grower-finisher performance and carcass characteristics of pigs fed genetically modified ‘‘Bt’’ corn. J Anim Sci 79(2):67(Abstr 162). Purdue university. Swine dayGoogle Scholar
  152. Wehrman A, Van Vliet A, Opsomer C, Botternan J, Schulz A (1996) The similarities of bar and pat gene products make them equally applicable for plant engineers. Nat Biotechnol 14:1274–1278Google Scholar
  153. Wu F (2006) Mycotoxin reduction in Bt corn: potential economic, health, and regulatory impacts. Transgen Res 15:277–289Google Scholar
  154. Zhu YZ, Li DF, Wang FL, Yin JD, Jin H (2004) Nutritional assessment and fate of DNA of soybean meal from roundup ready or conventional soybeans using rats. Arch Anim Nutr 58:295–310PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Koreen Ramessar
    • 1
  • Ariadna Peremarti
    • 1
  • Sonia Gómez-Galera
    • 1
  • Shaista Naqvi
    • 1
  • Marian Moralejo
    • 2
  • Pilar Muñoz
    • 2
  • Teresa Capell
    • 1
  • Paul Christou
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Departament de Produccio Vegetal i Ciencia ForestalUniversitat de LleidaLleidaSpain
  2. 2.Centre UdL-IRTALleida Spain
  3. 3.Institucio Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avancats (ICREA)BarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations