Regulating transgenic crops sensibly: Lessons from plant breeding, biotechnology and genomics

Nature Biotechnology

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 439-444

  Bradford, Kent J ^a   Van Deynze, Allen ^a   Gutterson, Neal ^b   Parrott, Wayne ^c   Steven, Strauss ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b Mendel Biotechnology   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^d OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCIDENT PREVENTION; BIOTECHNOLOGY; COSTS; GENES; PLANTS (BOTANY); REGULATORY COMPLIANCE;

COMMERCIALIZATION; PLANT GENOME STRUCTURE; TRANSGENIC CROPS;

CROPS;

ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE; BIOTECHNOLOGY; BREEDING METHOD; COST MINIMIZATION ANALYSIS; DNA MODIFICATION; GENE REPRESSION; GENETIC ENGINEERING; GENOME; GENOMICS; PHENOTYPE; PLANT BREEDING; PLANT VIRUS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; RHIZOBIUM; TECHNIQUE; TRANSGENIC PLANT; AGRICULTURE; ARTICLE; BREEDING; CROP; ECONOMICS; GENETICS; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; LEGAL ASPECT;

BIOTECHNOLOGY; COSTS; FARM CROPS; GENES; PLANTS; SAFETY;

RHIZOBIUM;

AGRICULTURE; BIOTECHNOLOGY; BREEDING; CROPS, AGRICULTURAL; GENETIC ENGINEERING; GENOME, PLANT; GENOMICS; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; PLANTS, GENETICALLY MODIFIED;

EID: 23044487923     PISSN: 10870156     EISSN: 15461696     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nbt1084     Document Type: Review

References (69)

1. James, C. Preview: Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2004 (The International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-biotech Applications, ISAAA Briefs No. 32, 2004). http://www.isaaa.org
2. Kalaitzandonakes, N. Another look at biotech regulation. Regulation 27, 44-50 (2004).
3. Redenbaugh, K. & McHughen, A. Regulatory challenges reduce opportunities for horticultural biotechnology. Calif. Agric. 58, 106-119 (2004).
4. Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. Issues in the Regulation of Genetically Engineered Plants and Animals (Washington, DC, 2004). http://pewagbiotech.org/research/regulation/Regulation.pdf
5. Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. Impacts of Biotech Regulation on Small Business and University Research: Possible Barriers and Potential Solutions (Washington, DC, 2004). http://pewagbiotech.org/events/0602/ proceedings.pdf.
6. Clearfield Production System (BASF Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC, 2003). http://www.clearfieldsystem.com.
7. McElroy, D. Sustaining biotechnology through lean times. Nat. Biotechnol. 21, 996-1002 (2003).
8. Kalaitzandonakes, N. Strategies and structure in the emerging global seed industry. Biofutur 215, 38-42 (2001).
9. Economic Research Service. Farm income and costs: 2003 farm income estimates (Washington, DC, 2003). http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/FarmIncome/ 2003incomeaccounts.htm
10. Gianessi, L. Biotechnology expands pest-management options for horticulture. Calif. Agric. 58, 94-95 (2004).
11. Clark, D., Klee, H. & Dandekar, A. Despite benefits, commercialization of transgenic horticultural crops lags. Calif. Agric. 58, 89-98 (2004).
12. James, J.S. Consumer knowledge and acceptance of agricultural biotechnology vary. Calif. Agric. 58, 99-105 (2004).
13. Graff, G.D., Wright, B.D., Bennett, A.B. & Zilberman, D. Access to intellectual property is a major obstacle to developing transgenic horticultural crops. Calif. Agric. 58, 120-126 (2004).
14. Jaffe, G. Withering on the Vine: Will Agricultural Biotech's Promises Bear Fruit? (Center for Science in the Public Interest, Washington, DC, 2005). http://cspinet. org/new/pdf/withering_on_the_vine.pdf.
15. Miller, H.I. & Conko, G. The Frankenfood Myth: How Protest and Politics Threaten the Biotech Revolution (Praeger Publishers, Westport, CT, 2004).
16. Barton, J. Crandon, J., Kennedy, D. & Miller, H. A model protocol to assess the risks of agricultural introductions. Nat. Biotechnol. 15, 845-848 (1997).
17. Strauss, S.H. Regulation of biotechnology as though gene function mattered. BioScience 53, 453-454 (2003).
18. Strauss, S.H. Genomics, genetic engineering, and domestication of crops. Science 300, 61-62 (2003).
19. Strauss, S.H., Merkle, S. & Parrott, W. Comments on proposed revisions to USDA regulations - 7 C.F.R. PART 340. Environmental Impact Statement; Introduction of Genetically Engineered Organisms. http://www.cropsoil.uga.edu/~parrottlab/APHIS/index.htm
20. Federoff, N.V. & Brown, N.M. Mendel in the Kitchen. A Scientist's View of Genetically Modified Foods (Joseph Henry Press, Washington, DC, 2004).
21. National Research Council. Field-Testing Genetically Modified Organisms: Framework for Decision (National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1989).
22. National Research Council. Genetically Modified Pest-Protected Plants: Science and Regulation (National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 2000).
23. National Research Council. Environmental effects of transgenic plants. The scope and adequacy of regulation (National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 2002).
24. Office of Science and Technology Policy. Exercise of federal oversight within scope of statutory authority: planned introductions of biotechnology products into the environment. Federal Register 57, 6753-6762 (1992).
25. Harper, G., Hull, R., Lockhart, B. & Olszewski, N. Viral sequences integrated into plant genomes. Annu. Rev. Phytopathol. 40, 119-136 (2002).
26. Hardwick, N.V., Davies, J.M.L. & Wright, D.M. The incidence of three virus diseases of winter oilseed rape in England and Wales in the 1991/02 and 1992/93 growing season. Plant Path. 43, 1045-1049 (1994).
27. Ho, M.-W., Ryan, A. & Cummins, J. Cauliflower mosaic viral promoter-a recipe for disaster? Microb. Ecol. Health Dis. 11, 194-197 (1999).
28. Hodgson, J. Scientists avert new GMO crisis. Nat. Biotechnol. 18, 13 (2000).
29. Carrington, J.C. & Ambros, V. Role of microRNAs in plant and animal development. Science 301, 336-338 (2003).
30. Redenbaugh, K. et al. Safety Assessment of Genetically Engineered Fruits and Vegetables: A Case Study of the Flavr Savr Tomato (CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, FL, 1992).
31. Fuchs, R.L. et al. Safety assessment of the neomycin phosphotransferase II (NPTII) protein. Bio/Technology 11, 1543-1547 (1993).
32. Bennett, P.M. et al. An assessment of the risks associated with the use of antibiotic resistance genes in genetically modified plants: report of the Working Party of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. J. Antimicrob. Chemother. 53, 418-31 (2004).
33. Flavell, R.B., Dart, E., Fuchs, R.L. & Fraley, R.T. Selectable marker genes: safe for plants? Bio/Technology 10, 141-144 (1992).
34. FDA. Guidance for Industry: Use of Antibiotic Resistance Marker Genes in Transgenic Plants (US Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Office of Premarket Approval, College Park, MD, 1998).
35. Gilissen, L.J.W., Metz, P.L.J., Stiekema, W.J. & Nap, J.-P. Biosafety of E. coli β-glucuronidase (GUS) in plants. Transgen. Res. 7, 157-163 (1998).
36. Gonsalves, D. Control of papaya ringspot virus in papaya: a case study. Annu. Rev. Phytopath. 36, 415-437 (1998).
37. Richards, H.A. et al. Safety assessment of green fluorescent protein orally administered to weaned rats. J. Nutr. 133, 1909-1912 (2003).
38. Stewart, C.N. Jr. The utility of green fluorescent protein in transgenic plants. Plant Cell Rep. 20, 376-382 (2001).
39. National Research Council. Biological confinement of genetically engineered organisms (The National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 2004).
40. Alonso, J.M. et al. Genome-wide insertional mutagenesis of Arabidopsis thaliana. Science 301, 653-657 (2003).
41. Schubert, D. et al. Silencing in Arabidopsis T-DNA transformants: the predominant role of a gene-specific RNA sensing mechanism versus position effects. Plant Cell 16, 2561-2572 (2004).
42. van Harten, A.M. Mutation Breeding. Theory and Practical Applications (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1998).
43. National Research Council. Safety of Genetically Engineered Foods: Approaches to Assessing Unintended Health Effects (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2004). http://books.nap.edu/catalog/10977.html
44. Haslberger, A.G. Codex guidelines for GM foods include the analysis of unintended effects. Nat. Biotechnol. 21, 739-741 (2003).
45. Kuiper, H.A., Kleter, G.A., Noteborn, H.P.J.M. & Kok, E.J. Assessment of the food safety issues related to genetically modified foods. Plant J. 27, 503-528 (2001).
46. Ozcan, H., Levy, A.A. & Feldman, M. Allopolyploidy-induced rapid genome evolution in the wheat (Aegilops-Triticum} group. Plant Cell 13, 1735-1747 (2001).
47. Sakamato, T. & Matsuoka, M. Generating high-yielding varieties by genetic manipulation of plant architecture. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 15, 144-147 (2004).
48. Tanksley, S.D. The genetic, developmental, and molecular bases of fruit size and shape variation in tomato. Plant Cell 16, S181-S189 (2004).
49. Ho, J.Y. et al. The root-knot nematode resistance gene (Mi) in tomato: construction of a molecular linkage map and identification of dominant cDNA markers in resistant genotypes. Plant J. 2, 971-982 (1992).
50. Young, N.D. & Tanksley, S.D. RFLP analysis of the size of chromosomal segments retained around the Tm-2 locus of tomato during backcross breeding. Theor. Appl. Genet. 77, 353-359 (1989).
51. USDA. Guide for Preparing and Submitting a Petition for Genetically Engineered Plants (US Department of Agriculture, Washington, DC, 1996). http://www.aphis. usda.gov/brs/user.html#agro
52. Wilson, A., Latham, J. & Steinbrecher, R. Genome scrambling - myth or reality? Transformation-induced mutations in transgenic crop plants (EcoNexus, Brighton, UK, 2004).
53. Arumuganathan, K. & Earle, E.D. Nuclear DNA content of some important plant species. Plant Mol. Biol. Rep. 9, 208-219 (1991).
54. Fu, H.H. & Dooner, H.K. Intraspecific violation of genetic colinearity and its implications in maize. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99, 9573-9578 (2002).
55. Song, R. & Messing, J. Gene expression of a gene family in maize based on noncollinear haplotypes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100, 9055-9060 (2003).
56. Graham, M.J., Nickell, C.D. & Rayburn, A.L. Relationship between genome size and maturity group in soybean. Theor. Appl. Genet. 88, 429-432 (1994).
57. Mukherjee, S. & Sharma, A.K. Intraspecific variation of nuclear DNA in Capsicum annuum L. Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. USA 100, 1-6 (1990).
58. Rayburn, A.L., Auger, J.A., Benzinger, E.A. & Hepburn, A.G. Detection of intraspecific DNA content variation in Zea mays L. by flow cytometry. J. Exp. Bot. 40, 1179-1183 (1989).
59. Ilic, K., San Miguel, P.J. & Bennetzen, J.L. A complex history of rearrangement in an orthologous region of the maize, sorghum, and rice genomes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 100, 12265-12270 (2003).
60. Song, R., Llaca, V. & Messing, J. Mosaic organization of orthologous sequences in grass genomes. Genome Res. 12, 1549-1555(2003).
61. Ching, A. et al. SNP frequency, haplotype structure and linkage disequilibrium in elite maize inbred lines. BMC Genet. 3, 19 (2002).
62. Wessler, S.R. Plant transposable elements. A hard act to follow. Plant Physiol. 125, 149-151 (2001).
63. San Miguel, P., et al. Nested retrotransposons in the intergenic regions of the maize genome. Science 274, 765-768 (1996).
64. Ceccarelli, M., Giordani, T., Natali, L., Cavallini, A. & Cionini P.G. Genome plasticity during seed germination in Festuca arundinacea. Theor. Appl. Genet. 94, 309-315 (1997).
65. Shirasu, K., Schulman, A.M., Lahaye, T. & Shulze-Lefert, P. A contiguous 66-kb barley DNA sequence provides evidence for reversible genome expansion. Genome Res. 10, 908-915 (2000).
66. Ellstrand, N.C. Dangerous Liaisons? When Cultivated Plants Mate with Their Wild Relatives (Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD, 2003).
67. Hoa, T.T.C., Al-Babili, S., Potrykus, I. & Beyer, P. Golden indica and japonica rice lines amenable to deregulation. Plant Physiol. 133, 161-169(2003).
68. Landsmann, J., van der Hoeven, C. & Dietz-Pfeilstter, A. Variability of organ-specific expression of reporter genes in transgenic plants. in Transgenic Organisms and Biosafety (eds. Schmidt, E.R. & Hankein, T.) 223-230 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1996).
69. Jain, S.M. Tissue culture-derived variation in crop improvement. Euphytica 118, 153-166 (2001).