Safety assessment of plant varieties using transcriptomics profiling and a one-class classifier

Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology

Volumn 70, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 297-303

  van Dijk, Jeroen P ^a   de Mello, Carla Souza ^a,b   Voorhuijzen, Marleen M ^a   Hutten, Ronald C B ^a   Arisi, Ana Carolina Maisonnave ^b   Jansen, Jeroen J ^c   Buydens, Lutgarde M C ^c   van der Voet, Hilko ^a   Kok, Esther J ^b  

^a WAGENINGEN UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

^b FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF SANTA CATARINA   (Brazil)

^c RADBOUD UNIVERSITY NIJMEGEN   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Chemometrics; Food safety evaluation; GM plants; One class classifiers; Profiling; Transcriptomics

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FOOD ANALYSIS; FOOD SAFETY; GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION; HARVEST; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; MACHINE LEARNING; MATHEMATICAL MODEL; NONHUMAN; ONE CLASS CLASSIFIER; PLANT BREEDING; POTATO; PRINCIPAL COMPONENT ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RNA ISOLATION; TRANSCRIPTOMICS; TRANSGENIC PLANT; VALIDATION STUDY; VARIETAS; GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; GENETICS; THEORETICAL MODEL; TOXICITY;

TRANSCRIPTOME;

GENE EXPRESSION PROFILING; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PLANTS, GENETICALLY MODIFIED; SOLANUM TUBEROSUM; TRANSCRIPTOME;

EID: 84938996738     PISSN: 02732300     EISSN: 10960295     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2014.07.013     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Barros E., et al. Comparison of two GM maize varieties with a near-isogenic non-GM variety using transcriptomics, proteomics and metabolomics. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2010, 8:436-451.
2. 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.
3. Benjamini Y., Hochberg Y. Controlling the false discovery rate - a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J. R. Stat. Soc. B-Methodol. 1995, 57:289-300.
4. Berrueta L.A., et al. Supervised pattern recognition in food analysis. J. Chromatogr. A 2007, 1158:196-214.
5. Brazma A., et al. One-stop shop for microarray data. Nature 2000, 403:699-700.
6. Cheng K.C., et al. Effect of transgenes on global gene expression in soybean is within the natural range of variation of conventional cultivars. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2008, 56:3057-3067.
7. Coll A., et al. Natural variation explains most transcriptomic changes among maize plants of MON810 and comparable non-GM varieties subjected to two N-fertilization farming practices. Plant Mol. Biol. 2010, 73:349-362.
8. De Maesschalck R., et al. Decision criteria for soft independent modelling of class analogy applied to near infrared data. Chemometrics Intell. Lab. Syst. 1999, 47:65-77.
9. DeFrancesco, L., 2013. How safe does transgenic food need to be? 31, 794-802.
10. EFSA 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. 2006, 99:1-100.
11. EFSA Guidance for risk assessment of food and feed from genetically modified plants. EFSA J. 2011, 9(5):2150. 1-37.
12. El Sanhoty R., et al. 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. Food/Nahrung 2004, 48:13-18.
13. European Commission, 2013. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 503/2013 of 3 April 2013 on applications for authorisation of genetically modified food and feed in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council and amending Commission Regulations (EC) No 641/2004 and (EC) No 1981/2006. Official J. European Union. 8.6.2013, No. L 157/1.
14. FAO, 1996. Biotechnology and Food Safety. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Consultation. FAO Food and Nutrition Paper 61.
15. Herman R.A., Price W.D. Unintended compositional changes in genetically modified (GM) crops: 20 years of research. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2013, 61:11695-11701.
16. Kloosterman B., et al. Genes driving potato tuber initiation and growth: identification based on transcriptional changes using the POCI array. Funct. Integr. Genomics 2008, 8:329-340.
17. Knudsen I., et al. Risk management and risk assessment of novel plant foods: concepts and principles. Food Chem. Toxicol. 2008, 46:1681-1705.
18. Kok E.J., et al. Comparative safety assessment of plant-derived foods. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2008, 50:98-113.
19. Kok E.J., Kuiper H.A. Comparative safety assessment for biotech crops. Trends Biotechnol. 2003, 21:439-444.
20. Kosorok M.R., Ma S. Marginal asymptotics for the "Large P, Small N" paradigm: with applications to microarray data. Ann. Stat. 2007, 35:1456-1486.
21. Kuiper H.A., et al. New EU legislation for risk assessment of GM food: no scientific justification for mandatory animal feeding trials. Plant Biotechnol. J. 2013, 11:781-784.
22. Lehesranta S.J., et al. Effects of agricultural production systems and their components on protein profiles of potato tubers. Proteomics 2007, 7:597-604.
23. Massart D.L., et al. Handbook of Chemometrics and Qualimetrics: Part A 1997, Elsevier, Amsterdam.
24. OECD Guidelines for the Testing of Chemicals 1993, Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris.
25. OECD, 2002. Consensus document on compositional considerations for new varieties of potatoes: key food and feed nutrients, anti-nutrients and toxicants. Series on the Safety of Novel Foods and Feeds, 4.
26. Renwick A.G. Risk characterisation of chemicals in food. Toxicol. Lett. 2004, 149:163-176.
27. Storey J.D., Tibshirani R. Statistical significance for genomewide studies. PNAS 2003, 100:9440-9445.
28. Tax D.M.J. One-Class Classification: Concept-Learning in the Absence of Counter-Examples 2001, Technical University of Delft, Delft, the Netherlands.
29. van der Voet H., et al. A statistical assessment of differences and equivalences between genetically modified and reference plant varieties. BMC Biotechnol. 2011, 11(15):1-20.
30. van Dijk J.P., et al. The identification and interpretation of differences in the transcriptomes of organically and conventionally grown potato tubers. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2012, 60:2090-2101.
31. van Dijk J.P., et al. Transcriptome analysis of potato tubers-effects of different agricultural practices. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2009, 57:1612-1623.
32. Vandeginste B.G.M., et al. Handbook of Chemometrics and Qualimetrics: Part B 1998, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam.
33. Westerhuis J.A., et al. Assessment of PLSDA cross validation. Metabolomics 2008, 4:81-89.
34. Wold S. Cross-validatory estimation of the number of components in factor and principal components models. Technometrics 1978, 20:397-405.
35. Wold S., Sjöström M. SIMCA: A Method for Analyzing Chemical Data in Terms of Similarity and Analogy. Chemometrics: Theory and Application 1977, vol. 52:243-282. American Chemical Society.
36. Zorb C., et al. Levels of compounds and metabolites in wheat ears and grains in organic and conventional agriculture. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2009, 57:9555-9562.