Genetically modified myths and realities

New Biotechnology

Volumn 27, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 545-551

  Parrott, Wayne ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIRTH DEFECTS; DNA REPAIR; ENGINEERED PLANTS; GENE FLOWS; GENETICALLY MODIFIED; INSERTION SITE; PLANT BREEDING; PLANT GENOMES; TRANSGENE; TRANSGENIC MAIZE;

BIODIVERSITY; CROPS; DNA; PLANTS (BOTANY);

GENES;

DOUBLE STRANDED DNA;

FOOD SAFETY; GENE DELETION; GENE FLOW; GENE INSERTION; GENE REARRANGEMENT; GENETICALLY MODIFIED FOOD; GENOME; HYBRIDIZATION; LITERATURE; MAIZE; PLANT BREEDING; PLANT GENETICS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; TRANSGENIC CROP;

BIODIVERSITY; BREEDING; CROPS, AGRICULTURAL; GENOME, PLANT; HUMANS; PLANTS; PLANTS, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; TRANSGENES; ZEA MAYS;

ZEA MAYS;

EID: 78649513491     PISSN: 18716784     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.nbt.2010.05.016     Document Type: Review

References (61)

1. Ladizinski G. Plant Evolution under Domestication 1998, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
2. Dixon J., et al. Farming Systems and Poverty 2001, FAO and World Bank.
3. WHO Global database on child growth and malnutrition 2009, World Health Organization, [18 Dec 2009]. Available from:. http://www.who.int/nutgrowthdb/database/countries/gtm/en/.
4. Garcia S., Heredia N. Mycotoxins in Mexico: epidemiology, management, and control strategies. Mycopathologia 2006, 162:255-264.
5. Julian A.M., et al. Fungal contamination and selected mycotoxins in preharvest and post harvest maize in Honduras. Mycopathologia 1995, 129:5-16.
6. Dowd P.F. Biotic and abiotic factors limiting efficacy of Bt corn in indirectly reducing mycotoxin levels in commercial fields. J. Econ. Entomol. 2001, 94:1067-1074.
7. Dowd P.F. Indirect reduction of ear molds and associated mycotoxins in Bacillus thuringiensis corn under controlled and open field conditions: utility and limitations. J. Econ. Entomol. 2000, 93:1669-1679.
8. Pazzi F., et al. Bt maize and mycotoxins: the current state of research. Ann. Microbiol. 2006, 56:223-230.
9. Wang E., et al. Inhibition of sphingolipid biosynthesis by fumonisins - implications for diseases associated with Fusarium moniliforme. J. Biol. Chem. 1991, 266:14486-14490.
10. Riley R.T., et al. Mechanism of fumonisin toxicity and carcinogenesis. J. Food Protect. 1994, 57:638-645.
11. Marasas W.F.O., et al. Fumonisins disrupt sphingolipid metabolism, folate transport, and neural tube development in embryo culture and in vivo: a potential risk factor for human neural tube defects among populations consuming fumonisin-contaminated maize. J. Nutr. 2004, 134:711-716.
12. Missmer S.A., et al. Exposure to fumonisins and the occurrence of neural tube defects along the Texas-Mexico border. Environ. Health Perspect. 2006, 114:237-241.
13. Dvorak N.J., et al. Fumonisin mycotoxin contamination of corn-based foods consumed by potentially pregnant women in southern California. J. Reprod. Med. 2008, 53:672-676.
14. Gong Y.Y., et al. Association between tortilla consumption and human urinary fumonisin B1 levels in a Mexican population. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prevent. 2008, 17:688-694.
15. Torres O.A., et al. Estimated fumonisin exposure in Guatemala is greatest in consumers of lowland maize. J. Nutr. 2007, 137:2723-2729.
16. Ramirez-Espitia J.A., et al. Mortality by neural tube defects in Mexico, 1980-1997. Salud Publica Mexico 2003, 45:356-364.
17. Bakan B., et al. Fungal growth and Fusarium mycotoxin content in isogenic traditional maize and genetically modified maize grown in France and Spain. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2002, 50:728-731.
18. Clements M.J., et al. Influence of Cry1Ab protein and hybrid genotype on fumonisin contamination and fusarium ear rot of corn. Crop Sci. 2003, 43:1283-1293.
19. Hammond B.G., et al. Lower fumonisin mycotoxin levels in the grain of Bt corn grown in the United States in 2000-2002. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2004, 52:1390-1397.
20. Munkvold G.P., et al. Comparison of fumonisin concentrations in kernels of transgenic Bt maize hybrids and nontransgenic hybrids. Plant Dis. 1999, 83:130-138.
21. Quist D., Chapela I.H. Transgenic DNA introgressed into traditional maize landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico. Nature 2001, 414:541-543.
22. Pineyro-Nelson A., et al. Transgenes in Mexican maize: molecular evidence and methodological considerations for GMO detection in landrace populations. Mol. Ecol. 2009, 18:750-761.
23. Ortiz-Garcia S., et al. Absence of detectable transgenes in local landraces of maize in Oaxaca, Mexico (2003-2004). Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2005, 102:12338-12343.
24. Schoel B., Fagan J. Insufficient evidence for the discovery of transgenes in Mexican landraces. Mol. Ecol. 2009, 18:4143-4144.
25. Kermicle J.L., Evans M.M.S. Pollen-pistil barriers to crossing in maize and teosinte result from incongruity rather than active rejection. Sex. Plant Reprod. 2005, 18:187-194.
26. Baltazar B.M., et al. Pollination between maize and teosinte: an important determinant of gene flow in Mexico. Theor. Appl. Genet. 2005, 110:519-526.
27. Bellon M.R., et al. Poor farmers' perceived benefits from different types of maize germplasm: the case of creolization in lowland tropical Mexico. World Dev. 2006, 34:113-129.
28. Chambers K.J., et al. Describing maize (Zea mays L.) landrace persistence in the Bajio of Mexico: a survey of 1940s and 1950s collection locations. Econ. Bot. 2007, 61:60-72.
29. Keleman A., et al. Maize diversity, rural development policy, and farmers' practices: lessons from Chiapas, Mexico. Geogr. J. 2009, 175:52-70.
30. Cooperation CfE Maize and Biodiversity: The Effects of Transgenic Maize in Mexico 2004, Communications Department of the CEC Secretariat.
31. Badstue L.B., et al. The dynamics of farmers' maize seed supply practices in the Central Valleys of Oaxaca, Mexico. World Dev. 2007, 35:1579-1593.
32. Bellon M.R., Berthaud J. Transgenic maize and the evolution of landrace diversity in Mexico. The importance of farmers' behavior. Plant Physiol. 2004, 134:883-888.
33. Lesseps R. Genetic engineering evaluated from the perspective of Christian and Ignatian creation spirituality. Promotio Iustitiae 2003, Kasisi Catholic Church.
34. Wilkinson J.Q., Crawford N.M. Identification of the Arabidopsis CHL3 gene as a nitrate reductase structural gene NIA2. Plant Cell 1991, 3:461-471.
35. Shirley B.W., et al. Effects of ionizing radiation on a plant genome: analysis of two arabidopsis transparent testa mutations. Plant Cell 1992, 4:333-347.
36. Wilson A.K., et al. Transformation-induced mutations in transgenic plants: analysis and biosafety implications. Biotechnol. Genet. Eng. Rev. 2006, 23:209-234.
37. Bennetzen J.L. The structure and evolution of angiosperm nuclear genomes. Curr. Opin. Plant Biol. 1998, 1:103-108.
38. Picault N., et al. Identification of an active LTR retrotransposon in rice. Plant J. 2009, 58:754-765.
39. Naito K., et al. Dramatic amplification of a rice transposable element during recent domestication. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2006, 103:17620-17625.
40. Lough A.N., et al. Mitochondrial DNA transfer to the nucleus generates extensive insertion site variation in maize. Genetics 2008, 178:47-55.
41. Huang C.Y., et al. Simple and complex nuclear loci created by newly transferred chloroplast DNA in tobacco. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2004, 101:9710-9715.
42. Huang C.Y., et al. Direct measurement of the transfer rate of chloroplast DNA into the nucleus. Nature 2003, 422:72-76.
43. Wessler S., et al. Filler DNA is associated with spontaneous deletions in maize. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1990, 87:8731-8735.
44. Gorbunova V., Levy A.A. Non-homologous DNA end joining in plant cells is associated with deletions and filler DNA insertions. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997, 25:4650-4657.
45. Gorbunova V., Levy A.A. How plants make ends meet: DNA double-strand break repair. Trends Plant Sci. 1999, 4:263-269.
46. Kirik A., et al. Species-specific double-strand break repair and genome evolution in plants. EMBO J. 2000, 19:5562-5566.
47. Windels P., et al. T-DNA integration in arabidopsis chromosomes. Presence and origin of filler DNA sequences. Plant Physiol. 2003, 133:2061-2068.
48. Shen Y., et al. Genomic rearrangement in endogenous long terminal repeat retrotransposons of rice lines introgressed by wild rice (Zizania latifolia Griseb.). J. Integr. Plant Biol. 2005, 47:998-1008.
49. Puchta H. The repair of double-strand breaks in plants: mechanisms and consequences for genome evolution. J. Exp. Bot. 2005, 56:1-14.
50. Ming R., et al. The draft genome of the transgenic tropical fruit tree papaya (Carica papaya Linnaeus). Nature 2008, 452:991-997.
51. Gaines T.A., et al. Gene amplification confers glyphosate resistance in Amaranthus palmeri. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2010, 107:1029-1034.
52. Zabala G., Vodkin L. Novel exon combinations generated by alternative splicing of gene fragments mobilized by a CACTA transposon in Glycine max. BMC Plant Biol. 2007, 7:38.
53. Zabala G., Vodkin L.O. The wp mutation of Glycine max carries a gene-fragment-rich transposon of the CACTA superfamily. Plant Cell 2005, 17:2619-2632.
54. Wang W., et al. High rate of chimeric gene origination by retroposition in plant genomes. Plant Cell 2006, 18:1791-1802.
55. Rasmusson D.C., Phillips R.L. Plant breeding progress and genetic diversity from de novo variation and elevated epistasis. Crop Sci. 1997, 37:303-310.
56. McClintock B. The significance of responses of the genome to challenge. Science 1984, 226:792-801.
57. Springer N.M., et al. Maize inbreds exhibit high levels of Copy Number Variation (CNV) and Presence/Absence Variation (PAV) in genome content. PLoS Genet. 2009, 5:e1000734.
58. Vielle-Calzada J.P., et al. The Palomero genome suggests metal effects on domestication. Science 2009, 326:1078.
59. Batista R., et al. Microarray analyses reveal that plant mutagenesis may induce more transcriptomic changes than transgene insertion. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2008, 105:3640-3645.
60. Baudo M.M., et al. Transgenesis has less impact on the transcriptome of wheat grain than conventional breeding. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2006, 4:369-380.
61. Shewry P.R., et al. Are GM and conventionally bred cereals really different?. Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2007, 18:201-209.