Metabolic Fingerprinting Study on the Substantial Equivalence of Genetically Modified (GM) Chinese Cabbage to Non-GM Cabbage

  • Jae Kwang Kim
  • Tae Hun Ryu
  • Soo In Sohn
  • Jun Heong Kim
  • Sang Mi Chu
  • Chang Yeon Yu
  • Hyung Jin Baek
Food Science/Microbiology

Abstract

Genetically modified (GM) Chinese cabbage containing the bar gene was compared to 24 non-GM Chinese cabbage varieties to evaluate unwanted changes in GM crops using HPLC-DAD-based metabolic fingerprinting to characterize polar metabolites containing flavonoids. No new compounds distinguishing GM crops from non-GM crops were observed using this technique. The GM crops had the similar flavonoid value as its nontransgenic counterpart (cv. Samjin). Moreover, the luteolin, quercetin, and kaempferol contents in GM Chinese cabbage were within the range of the 24 cultivars. The metabolome database included major 26 chemical species, which were analyzed with principal component analysis. The results clearly demonstrated that the time of sampling affects the metabolome. Moreover, the metabolic fingerprints showed a range of natural variability in the GM Chinese cabbage that was similar to that of the control at all times of sampling. Metabolic fingerprinting could potentially provide an innovative method for safety assessments of genetically modified organisms.

Key words

Chinese cabbage flavonoid genetically modified crop HPLC-DAD metabolic fingerprinting substantial equivalence 

Abbreviations

GM

genetically modified

PCA

principal component analysis

PC1

principal component 1

PC2

principal component 2

References

  1. Ainasoja MM, Pohjala LL, Tammela PS, Somervuo PJ, Vuorela PM, and Teeri TH (2008) Comparison of transgenic Gerbera hybrida lines and traditional varieties shows no differences in cytotoxicity or metabolic fingerprints. Transgenic Res 17, 793–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baek HJ, Won SY, Kim JK, Sohn SI, Lee KP, Cho MR, Song JK, Yoon MS, Lee JR, Jin YM, and Ryu TH (2008) Study on the gene introgression from GM Chinese cabbage to major crops in cruciferae. Korean J Intl Agric 20, 124–129.Google Scholar
  3. Baker JM, Hawkins ND, Ward JL, Lovegrove A, Napier JA, Shewry PR, and Beale MH (2006) A metabolomic study of substantial equivalence of field-grown genetically modified wheat. Plant Biotechnol J 4, 381–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Catchpole GS, Beckmann M, Enot DP, Mondhe M, Zywicki B, Taylor J, Hardy N, Smith A, King RD, Kell DB, Fiehn O, and Draper J (2005) Hierarchical metabolomics demonstrates substantial compositional similarity between genetically modified and conventional potato crops. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102, 14458–14462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cellini F, Chesson A, Colquhoun I, Constable A, Davies HV, Engel KH, Gatehouse AMR, Kärenlampi S, Kok EJ, Leguay JJ, Lehesranta S, Noteborn HPJM, Pedersen J, and Smith M (2004) Unintended effects and their detection in genetically modified crops. Food Chem Toxicol 42, 1089–1125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Harbaum B, Hubbermann EM, Wolff C, Herges R, Zhu Z, and Schwarz K (2007) Identification of flavonoids and hydroxycinnamic acids in pak choi varieties (Brassica campestris L. ssp. chinensis var. communis) by HPLCESI-MSn and NMR and their quantification by HPLCDAD. J Agric Food Chem 55, 8251–8260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Haslberger AG (2006) Need for an “integrated safety assessment” of GMOs, linking food safety and environmental considerations. J Agric Food Chem 54, 3173–3180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kim DO, Padilla-Zakour OI, and Griffiths PD (2004) Flavonoids and antioxidant capacity of various cabbage genotypes at juvenile stage. J Food Sci 69, 685–689.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kim JK, Bamba T, Harada K, Fukusaki E, and Kobayashi A (2007a) Time-course metabolic profiling in Arabidopsis thaliana cell cultures after salt stress treatment. J Exp Bot 58, 415–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kim JK, Cho MR, Baek HJ, Ryu TH, Yu CY, Kim MJ, Fukusaki E, and Kobayashi A (2007b) Analysis of metabolite profile data using batch-learning self-organizing maps. J Plant Biol 50, 517–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. König A, Cockburn A, Crevel RWR, Debruyne E, Grafstroem R, Hammerling U, Kimber I, Knudsen I, Kuiper HA, Peijnenburg AACM, Penninks AH, Poulsen M, Schauzu M, and Wal JM (2004) Assessment of the safety of foods derived from genetically modified (GM) crops. Food Chem Toxicol 42, 1047–1088.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kuiper HA, Kok EJ, and Engel KH (2003) Exploitation of molecular profiling techniques for GM food safety assessment. Curr Opin Biotechnol 14, 238–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Miean KH and Mohamed S (2001) Flavonoid (myricetin, quercetin, kaempferol, luteolin, and apigenin) content of edible tropical plants. J Agric Food Chem 49, 3106–3112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Oberdoerfer RB, Shillito RD, de Beuckeleer M, and 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ridley WP, Shillito RD, Coats I, Steiner H-Y, Shawgo M, Phillips A, Dussold P, and Kurtyka L (2004) Development of the international life sciences institute crop composition database. J Food Compost Anal 17, 423–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Vallejo F, Tomás-Barberán FA, and Ferreres F (2004) Characterisation of flavonols in broccoli (Brassica oleracea L. var. italica) by liquid chromatography-UV diode-array detection-electrospray ionisation mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A 1054, 181–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jae Kwang Kim
    • 1
  • Tae Hun Ryu
    • 1
  • Soo In Sohn
    • 1
  • Jun Heong Kim
    • 1
  • Sang Mi Chu
    • 1
  • Chang Yeon Yu
    • 2
  • Hyung Jin Baek
    • 1
  1. 1.RDANational Academy of Agricultural ScienceSuwonRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.College of Agriculture and Life ScienceKangwon National UniversityChunchonRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations