Fingerprinting of the fine detail in plant composition indicates trangenisis has less impact on crop composition than has conventional breeding and environmental influences
Evaluation of genetically engineered crops using transcriptomic, proteomic and metabolomic profiling techniques
Transcriptomic, proteomic, and metabolomic profiling techniques have been increasingly applied to the analysis of genetically engineered (GE) crop plants with regard to their food safety and nutritional equivalence. This literature survey is based on 44 recent “omic” comparisons between GE and non-GE crop lines with or without deliberate modification of metabolic pathways. Metabolomics is becoming the prevalent approach but does not yet provide added value for food safety assessment compared to the currently used analytical methods.
All three “omic” approaches, on either crop plants or on Arabidopsis thaliana, a research model organism, converge in their conclusions when the effects of a genetic modification itself is compared to inter-variety variation or environmental effects.
Transgenesis has less impact on the expression of genomes or on protein and metabolite levels than conventional breeding or plant (non-directed) mutagenesis when comparison is available. In addition, environmental conditions usually have a larger impact.
The present update highlights the need to place pair-wise differences between GE crops and their comparators in a wider context of natural variation. None of the published “omic” assessments has raised new safety concerns about marketed GE cultivars. From a scientific point of view, these observations indicate that the current regulatory burden on GE crops should be lowered. Mandatory use of “omics” techniques in reglementary GE food safety assessment cannot be recommended. More basic research is required before non-targeted large-scale methodologies can be internationally certified and accepted.
Copyright © 2011 Biofortified
