A framework for postrelease environmental monitoring of second-generation crops with novel traits

Crop Science

Volumn 50, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 1587-1604

  Beckie, Hugh J ^a   Hall, Linda M ^b   Simard, Marie Josée ^c   Leeson, Julia Y ^a   Willenborg, Christian J ^b  

^a SASKATOON RESEARCH CENTRE   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^c AGRICULTURE AND AGRI FOOD CANADA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BRASSICA NAPUS; BRASSICA NAPUS VAR. NAPUS;

EID: 78650121946     PISSN: 0011183X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2135/cropsci2009.12.0743     Document Type: Review

References (83)

1. Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment. 2004. Guidance on best practice in the design of post-market monitoring plans in submissions to the Advisory Committee on Releases to the Environment. ACRE Guidance Note 16. Available at http://www.bfn.de/fileadmin/MDB/documents/ACRE_2004_Post-market_Guidance.pdf (verified 1 June 2010). Dep. Environ., Food and Rural Affairs, London.
2. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. 2003. A national ecological framework for Canada: GIS data. Available at http://sis.agr.gc.ca/cansis/nsdb/ecostrat/gis_data.html (verified 13 May 2010). Agric. and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
3. Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada. 2009. National Agri-Environmental Health and Reporting Program. Available at http://www4.agr.gc.ca/AAFC-AAC/display-afficher.do?id=1181580464260&lang=eng (verified 13 May 2010). Agric. and Agri-Food Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
4. Andow, D.A., and A.R. Ives. 2002. Monitoring and adaptive resistance management. Ecol. Appl. 12:1378-1390.
5. Bartsch, D., H.-J. Buhk, K.-H. Engel, C. Ewen, G. Flachowsky, A. Gathmann, P. Heinze, C. Koziolek, G. Leggewie, A. Meisner, G. Neemann, U. Rees, A. Scheepers, S. Schmidt, E. Schulte, K. Sinemus, and A. Vaasen. 2007. Long-term effects of genetically modified (GM) crops on health and the environment (including biodiversity): Prioritisation of potential risks and delimitation of uncertainties. BEETLE Final Rep. Available at http://ec.europa.eu/environment/biotechnology/pdf/beetle_report.pdf (verified 13 May 2010). Federal Office of Consumer Protection of Food Safety, BlaU Umweltstudien, and Genius Science & Communication, Berlin.
6. Beckie, H.J., W. Anderson, K. Finstad, and P. MacDonald. 2006a. Biosafety assessment of plants with novel traits in Canada. p. 101-110. In S.-C. Huang et al. (ed.) Ecological and environmental biosafety of transgenic plants. Spec. Publ. 126. Taiwan Agric. Res. Inst., Wufeng.
7. Beckie, H.J., and L.M. Hall. 2008. Simple to complex: Modelling crop pollen-mediated gene flow. Plant Sci. 175:615-628.
8. Beckie, H.J., K.N. Harker, L.M. Hall, S.I. Warwick, A. Légère, P.H. Sikkema, G.W. Clayton, A.G. Thomas, J.Y. Leeson, G. Séguin-Swartz, and M.-J. Simard. 2006b. A decade of herbicide-resistant crops in Canada. Can. J. Plant Sci. 86:1243-1264.
9. Beckie, H.J., J.Y. Leeson, A.G. Thomas, C.A. Brenzil, L.M. Hall, G. Holzgang, C. Lozinski, and S. Shirriff. 2008a. Weed resistance monitoring in the Canadian Prairies. Weed Technol. 22:530-543.
10. Beckie, H.J., J.Y. Leeson, A.G. Thomas, L.M. Hall, and C.A. Brenzil. 2008b. Risk assessment of weed resistance in the Canadian Prairies. Weed Technol. 22:741-746.
11. Beckie, H.J., A.P. Moulin, and D.J. Pennock. 1997. Strategies for variable rate nitrogen fertilization in hummocky terrain. Can. J. Soil Sci. 77:589-595.
12. Beckie, H.J., and M.D.K. Owen. 2007. Herbicide-resistant crops as weeds in North America. CAB Rev. Persp. Agric., Veter. Sci. Nutr. Nat. Resour 2(044):1-22.
13. Beckie, H.J., S.I. Warwick, H. Nair, and G. Séguin-Swartz. 2003. Gene flow in commercial fields of herbicide-resistant canola (Brassica napus). Ecol. Appl. 13:1276-1294.
14. Blackshaw, R.E. 2006. Monitoring genetically modified crops in Canada. p. 82-84. In K. Ghosh and P.C. Jepson (ed.) Genetically modified organisms in crop production and their effects on the environment: Methodologies for monitoring and the way ahead. Available at ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/008/ ae738e/ae738e00.pdf (verified 13 May 2010). FAO, Rome.
15. Boutin, C. 2006. Comparison of the vegetation and seedbanks of soybean fields, adjacent boundaries, and hedgerows in Ontario. Can. J. Plant Sci. 86:557-567.
16. Canadian Food Inspection Agency. 2004. Directive 94-08: Assessment criteria for determining environmental safety of plants with novel traits (revised 2004). Available at http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/dir/dir9408e.shtml (verified 13 May 2010). Can. Food Insp. Agency, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
17. Canadian Food Inspection Agency. 2008. Summary tables of confined field trials for spring 2008. Available at http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/st/st_08e.shtml (verified 20 May 2010). Can. Food Insp. Agency, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
18. Clements, D.R., and S.J. Darbyshire (ed.) 2007. Invasive plants: Inventories, strategies and action. Topics in Can. Weed Sci. Vol. 5. Can. Weed Sci. Soc., Sainte Anne de Bellevue, QC, Canada.
19. Council of the European Union. 2002. Council decision establishing guidance notes supplementing Annex VII to Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the deliberate release into the environment of genetically modified organisms and repeating Council Directive 90/220/ EEC. Off. J. Eur. Union 18.10.2002, L280:27-36.
20. Crawley, M.J., R.S. Hails, M. Rees, D. Kohn, and J. Buxton. 1993. Ecology of transgenic oilseed rape in natural habitats. Nature 363:620-623.
21. Downey, R.K., and H.J. Beckie. 2002. Isolation effectiveness in canola pedigree seed production. Rep. to Can. Seed Growers' Assoc. Available at http://www.saskorganic.com/oapf/pdf/canola-study.pdf (verified 13 May 2010). Agric. and Agri-Food Canada, Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
22. Ellstrand, N.C. 2001. When transgene wander, should we worry? Plant Physiol. 125:1543-1545.
23. Environment Canada. 2009a. Ecological monitoring and assessment network. Available at http://www.ecoinfo.ec.gc.ca/eman/eman_e.cfm (accessed 1 June 2010). Environ. Can., Ottawa, ON, Canada.
24. Environment Canada. 2009b. Narrative descriptions of terrestrial ecozones and ecoregions of Canada. Available at http://ecozones.ca/english/zone/index.html (accessed 1 June 2010). Environ. Can., Ottawa, ON, Canada.
25. European Community. 2001. Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. Off. J. Eur. Comm. 2001/18/EC:1-64.
26. European Food Safety Authority. 2005. Guidance document of the Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms for the risk assessment of genetically modified plants and derived food and feed. EFSA J. 99:1-94.
27. European Food Safety Authority. 2006. Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms on the post market environmental monitoring (PMEM) of genetically modified plants. EFSA J. 319:1-27.
28. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. 2004. Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests including analysis of environmental risks of living modified organisms (LMO's). Int. Stand. for Phytosanitary Meas. 11. Available at https://www.ippc.int/IPP/En/default.htm (verified 13 May 2010). Secr. to the Int. Plant Prot. Conv., FAO, Rome.
29. Friesen, L.F., A.G. Nelson, and R.C. Van Acker. 2003. Evidence of contamination of pedigreed canola (Brassica napus) seedlots in western Canada with genetically engineered herbicide resistance traits. Agron. J. 95:1342-1347.
30. Ghosh, K., and P.C. Jepson (ed.) 2006. Genetically modified organisms in crop production and their effects on the environment: Methodologies for monitoring and the way ahead. Available at ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/008/ae738e/ae738e00.pdf (verified 13 May 2010). FAO, Rome.
31. Government of Canada. 2009. Species at risk public registry. Available at http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/default_e.cfm (verified 13 May 2010). Gov. Can., Ottawa, ON, Canada.
32. Graef, F., W. Zughart, A. Benzler, F. Berhorn, and U. Sukopp. 2007. Monitoring genetically modified plants (GMP): Data harmonisation and coordination on multiple levels to ensure data quality and comparability. J. Verbr. Lebensm. 2(Suppl.):2-75.
33. Graef, F., W. Zughart, B. Hommel, U. Heinrich, U. Stachow, and A. Werner. 2005. Methodological scheme for designing the monitoring of genetically modified crops at the regional scale. Environ. Monit. Assess. 111:1-26.
34. Gulden, R.H., S.J. Shirtliffe, and A.G. Thomas. 2003a. Harvest losses of canola (Brassica napus) cause large seedbank inputs. Weed Sci. 51:83-86.
35. Gulden, R.H., S.J. Shirtliffe, and A.G. Thomas. 2003b. Secondary seed dormancy prolongs persistence of volunteer canola (Brassica napus) in western Canada. Weed Sci. 51:904-913.
36. Gulden, R.H., A.G. Thomas, and S.J. Shirtliffe. 2004. Relative contribution of genotype, seed size and environment to secondary seed dormancy potential in Canadian spring oilseed rape (Brassica napus). Weed Res. 44:97-106.
37. Hall, L.M., K. Topinka, J. Huffman, L. Davis, and A. Good. 2000. Pollen flow between herbicide-resistant Brassica napus is the cause of multiple-resistant B. napus volunteers. Weed Sci. 48:688-694.
38. Harker, K.N. 2001. Survey of yield losses due to weeds in central Alberta. Can. J. Plant Sci. 81:339-342.
39. Harker, K.N., G.W. Clayton, R.E. Blackshaw, J.T. O'Donovan, E.N. Johnson, Y. Gan, F.A. Holm, K.L. Sapsford, R.B. Irvine, and R.C. Van Acker. 2006. Persistence of glyphosate-resistant canola in western Canadian cropping systems. Agron. J. 98:107-119.
40. Hellawell, J.M. 1991. Development of a rationale for monitoring. p. 1-14. In B. Goldsmith (ed.) Monitoring for conservation and ecology. Chapman and Hall, London.
41. Hilbeck, A., M. Meier, and A. Benzler. 2008. Identifying indicator species for post-release monitoring of genetically modified, herbicide resistant crops. Euphytica 164:903-912.
42. James, C. 2009. Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2009. ISAAA Brief 41. Available at http://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/briefs/41/executivesummary/ default.asp (verified 13 May 2010). Int. Serv. for the Acquis. of Agri-biotech Applic., Ithaca, NY.
43. Jepson, P.C. 2006. Challenges to the design and implementation of effective monitoring for GM crop impacts: Lessons from conventional agriculture. p. 33-56. In K. Ghosh and P.C. Jepson (ed.) Genetically modified organisms in crop production and their effects on the environment: Methodologies for monitoring and the way ahead. Available at ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/008/ ae738e/ae738e00.pdf (verified 13 May 2010). FAO, Rome.
44. Kareiva, P., I.M. Parker, and M. Pascual. 1996. Can we use experiments and models in predicting the invasiveness of genetically engineered organisms? Ecology 77:1670-1675.
45. Kjellsson, G., and M. Strandberg. 2001. Monitoring and surveillance of genetically modified higher plants: Guidelines for procedures and analysis of environmental effects. Birkhauser Verlag, Berlin.
46. Knispel, A.L., S.M. McLachlan, R.C. Van Acker, and L.F. Friesen. 2008. Gene flow and multiple herbicide resistance in escaped canola populations. Weed Sci. 56:72-80.
47. Layton, R. 2006. Monitoring strategies and management of GM crops: An industry perspective. p. 114-120. In K. Ghosh and P.C. Jepson (ed.) Genetically modified organisms in crop production and their effects on the environment: Methodologies for monitoring and the way ahead. Available at ftp://ftp.fao. org/docrep/fao/008/ae738e/ae738e00.pdf (verified 13 May 2010). FAO, Rome.
48. Leeson, J.Y., J.W. Sheard, and A.G. Thomas. 1999. Multivariate classification of farming systems for use in integrated pest management studies. Can. J. Plant Sci. 79:647-654.
49. Leeson, J.Y., A.G. Thomas, L.M. Hall, C.A. Brenzil, T. Andrews, K.R. Brown, and R.C. Van Acker. 2005. Prairie weed surveys of cereal, oilseed and pulse crops from the 1970s to the 2000s. Weed Surv. Ser. Publ. 05-1. Agric. and Agri-Food Can., Saskatoon, SK, Canada.
50. Littel, R.C., G.A. Milliken, W.W. Stroup, and R.D. Wolfinger. 1996. SAS system for mixed models. SAS Inst., Cary, NC.
51. Marvier, M.A., E. Meir, and P.M. Kareiva. 2001. How do the design of monitoring and control strategies affect the chance of detecting and containing transgenic weeds? p. 108-122. In K. Ammann and Y. Jacot (ed.) Methods for risk assessment of transgenic plants. Birkhauser Press, Berne, Switzerland.
52. McDonald, T.L. 2003. Review of environmental monitoring methods: Survey designs. Environ. Monit. Assess. 85:277-292.
53. Mehta, M.D. 2003. Agricultural biotechnology and social cohesion: Is the social fabric of rural communities at risk? p. 151-156. In Proceedings of the 2002 Natl. Meeting, Can. Weed Sci. Soc. Available at http://www.cwss-scm.ca (verified 13 May 2010). Can. Weed Sci. Soc., Sainte Anne de Bellevue, QC, Canada.
54. Moir, W.H., and W.M. Block. 2001. Adaptive management on public lands in the United States: Commitment or rhetoric? Environ. Manage. 28:141-148.
55. Nickson, T.E. 2006. An industry view of post-market monitoring. J. Verbr. Lebensm. 1(Suppl.):55-57.
56. Nickson, T.E. 2008. Planning environmental risk assessment for genetically modified crops: Problem formulation for stresstolerant crops. Plant Physiol. 147:494-502.
57. Nickson, T.E., and G.P. Head. 1999. Environmental monitoring of genetically modified crops. J. Environ. Monit. 1:101N-105N.
58. Perry, J.N., P.S. Rothery, S.J. Clark, M.S. Heard, and C. Hawes. 2003. Design, analysis and statistical power of the Farm-Scale Evaluations of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. J. Appl. Ecol. 40:17-31.
59. Pheloung, P.C., P.A. Williams, and S.R. Halloy. 1999. A weed risk assessment model for use as a biosecurity tool evaluating plant introductions. J. Environ. Manage. 57:239-251.
60. Radosevich, S.R., and J.S. Holt. 1984. Weed ecology: Implications for vegetation management. John Wiley & Sons, New York.
61. Roelofs, D., M.G.M. Aarts, H. Schat, and N.M. van Straalen. 2008. Functional ecological genomics to demonstrate general and specific responses to abiotic stress. Funct. Ecol. 22:8-18.
62. Sanvido, O., J. Romeis, and F. Bigler. 2009. An approach for post-market monitoring of potential environmental effects of Bt-maize expressing Cry1Ab on natural enemies. J. Appl. Entomol. 133:236-248.
63. Sanvido, O., F. Widmer, M. Winzeler, and F. Bigler. 2005. A conceptual framework for the design of environmental postmarket monitoring of genetically modified plants. Environ. Biosafety Res. 4:13-27.
64. Schmidt, K., R. Wilhelm, J. Schmidtke, L. Beissner, W. Monkemeyer, P. Bottinger, J. Sweet, and J. Schiemann. 2008. Farm questionnaires for monitoring genetically modified crops: A case study using GM maize. Environ. Biosafety Res. 7:163-179.
65. Simard, M.-J., A. Légère, and S.I. Warwick. 2006. Transgenic Brassica napus fields and Brassica rapa weeds in Quebec: Sympatry and weed-crop in situ hybridization. Can. J. Bot. 84:1842-1851.
66. Simard, M.-J., A. Légère, and C.J. Willenborg. 2009. Reproductive phenology of transgenic Brassica napus cultivars: Effect on intraspecific gene flow. Environ. Biosafety Res. 8:123-131.
67. Snow, A.A., D.A. Andow, P. Gepts, E.M. Hallerman, A. Power, J.M. Tiedje, and L.L. Wolfenbarger. 2005. Ecological Society of America report. Genetically engineered organisms and the environment: Current status and recommendations. Ecol. Appl. 15:377-404.
68. Statistics Canada. 2009. November estimate of production of principal field crops, Canada. Field Crop Rep. Ser. 22-002-X. Available at http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/22-002-x/22-002-x2009008-eng.pdf (verified 13 May 2010). Stat. Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
69. Stroup, W.W. 1999. Mixed model procedures to assess power, precision, and sample size in the design of experiments. p. 15-24. In Proc. Biopharmaceutical Section. Am. Stat. Assoc., Alexandria, VA.
70. Tinland, B., P. Delzenne, and A. Pleysier. 2007. Implementation of a post-market monitoring for insect-protected maize MON 810 in the EU. J. Verbr. Lebensm. 2:7-10.
71. United Nations. 2000. Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety to the Convention on Biodiversity. Available at http://www.un.org/millennium/law/cartagena.htm (verified 13 May 2010). United Nations, New York.
72. United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1998. Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. USEPA Risk Assessment Forum. Available at http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimsapi.dispdetail?deid=12460 (verified 13 May 2010). USEPA, Washington, DC.
73. U.S. National Research Council. 2002. Environmental effects of transgenic plants: The scope and adequacy of regulation. Natl. Acad. Press, Washington, DC.
74. Walley, F.L., C. van Kessel, and D.J. Pennock. 1996. Landscape-scale variability of N mineralization in forest soils. Soil Biol. Biochem. 28:383-391.
75. Warwick, S.I., H.J. Beckie, and L.M. Hall. 2009. Gene flow, invasiveness and ecological impact of GM crops. The Year in Evolutionary Biology 2009. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1168:72-99.
76. Warwick, S.I., A. Francis, and J. La Fleche. 2000. Guide to wild germplasm of Brassica and allied crops (tribe Brassiceae, Brassicaceae). 2nd ed. Available at http://www.brassica.info (verified 13 May 2010). Agric. and Agri-Food Can. Res. Branch, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
77. Warwick, S.I., A. Légère, M.-J. Simard, and T. James. 2008. Do escaped transgenes persist in nature? The case of an herbicide resistance transgene in a weedy Brassica rapa population. Mol. Ecol. 17:1387-1395.
78. Warwick, S.I., M.-J. Simard, A. Légère, H.J. Beckie, L. Braun, B. Zhu, P. Mason, G. Séguin-Swartz, and C.N. Stewart. 2003. Hybridization between transgenic Brassica napus L. and its wild relatives: Brassica rapa L., Raphanus raphanistrum L., Sinapis arvensis L., and Erucastrum gallicum (Willd.). O.E. Schulz. Theor. Appl. Genet. 107:528-539.
79. Wilhelm, R., L. Beissner, and J. Schiemann. 2003. Concept for the realisation of a GMO monitoring in Germany. Updated English version of "Konzept zur Umsetzung eines GVOmonitoring in Deutschland." Nachrichtenbl. Dtsch. Pflanzenschutzdienstes 55:258-272. Available at http://www.biosicherheit.de/pdf/dokumente/bba_monitoring.pdf (verified 13 May 2010).
80. Wilkinson, M., and M. Tepfer. 2009. Fitness and beyond: Preparing for the arrival of GM crops with ecologically important novel characters. Environ. Biosafety Res. 8:1-14.
81. Willenborg, C.J., A.L. Brûlé-Babel, and R.C. Van Acker. 2009. Low crop plant population densities promote pollen-mediated gene flow in spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Transgenic Res. 18:841-854.
82. Yoshimura, Y., H.J. Beckie, and K. Matsuo. 2006. Transgenic oilseed rape along transportation routes and port of Vancouver in western Canada. Environ. Biosafety Res. 5:67-75.
83. Zughart, W., A. Benzler, F. Berhorn, U. Sukopp, and F. Graef. 2008. Determining indicators, methods and sites for monitoring potential adverse effects of genetically modified plants to the environment: The legal and conceptional framework for implementation. Euphytica 164:845-852.