Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T14:59:38.448Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Assessment of risk of GM contamination in flaxseed accessions imported from Canada: a case study to restrict the unauthorized GM events from entering India

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2022

Monika Singh
Affiliation:
Division of Genomic Resources, ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, New Delhi 110012, India
Kushaldeep Kaur
Affiliation:
Division of Genomic Resources, ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, New Delhi 110012, India
Shilpi Sharma
Affiliation:
Division of Genomic Resources, ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, New Delhi 110012, India
Aparna Paliwal
Affiliation:
Division of Genomic Resources, ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, New Delhi 110012, India
Mamta Singh
Affiliation:
Division of Germplasm Evaluation, ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, New Delhi 110012, India
Raghavendra Aminedi
Affiliation:
Division of Genomic Resources, ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, New Delhi 110012, India
Vikender Kaur
Affiliation:
Division of Germplasm Evaluation, ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, New Delhi 110012, India
Gurinderjit Randhawa*
Affiliation:
Division of Genomic Resources, ICAR-National Bureau of Plant Genetic Resources, New Delhi 110012, India
*
Authors for correspondence: Monika Singh, E-mail: [email protected]; [email protected]; Gurinderjit Randhawa, E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

In India, the restriction of genetically modified (GM) crops and derived products not approved in the country necessitates surveillance for transgene(s) in plant material/products imported into the country. CDC Triffid expressing acetolactate synthase (ALS) conferring tolerance to sulphonylurea herbicide is the only GM flax event that has got approval in Canada in 1990s and subsequently deregistered in 2001. In spite of deregistration, the unexpected and unauthorized detection of traces of GM flax in the consignments imported from Canada to Europe has further necessitated the stringent monitoring of flax shipments from Canada for suspected GM incidents. This study reports on the detection of transgenic elements being present in GM flax employing polymerase chain reaction assays, in a set of 123 flaxseed accessions imported from Canada for research purpose. Based on the tests conducted, none of the transgenic elements, namely, nos promoter (P-nos), nos terminator (T-nos), nptII marker gene, ALS transgene, as present in the GM flax CDC Triffid were detected in any of the tested accessions. The well-known herbicide tolerance gene cp4-epsps, being employed in Roundup® Ready events of other crops, was also not detected in these samples. This case study has demonstrated the importance of monitoring the presence of transgene(s) in flaxseed imports, and such studies need to be carried out for the imported seeds from the country where GM events of respective crop are being approved whereas they have not been approved in the country of import as a part of precautionary approach.

Type
Short Communication
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of NIAB

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Hardegger, M, Brodmann, P and Herrmann, A (1999) Quantitative detection of the 35S promoter and the NOS terminator using quantitative competitive PCR. European Food Research Technology 209, 8387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hird, H, Powell, J, Johnson, ML and Oehlschlager, S (2003) Determination of percentage of RoundUp Ready® soya in soya flour using real-time polymerase chain reaction: interlaboratory study. Journal of AOAC International 86, 6671. https://www.isaaa.org/resources/publications/pocketk/document/Doc-Pocket%20K10.pdf (Last accessed on 31 May 2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McHughen, A (1998) USDA petition for non regulated status under 7 CFR 340.6. Available at https://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/98_33501p.pdf (Last accessed on 17 March 2021).Google Scholar
Nakamura, K, Akiyama, H, Yamada, C, Satoh, R, Makiyama, D, Sakata, K, Kawakami, H, Mano, J, Kitta, K and Teshima, R (2010) Novel method to detect a construct-specific sequence of the acetolactate synthase gene in genetically-modified flax CDC Triffid (FP967). Biological and Pharmaceutical Bulletin 33, 532534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pansiot, J, Chaouachi, M, Cavellini, L, Romaniuk, M, Ayadi, M, Bertheau, Y and Laval, V (2011) Development of two screening duplex PCR assays for genetically modified organism quantification using multiplex real-time PCR master mixes. European Food Research Technology 232, 327334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rules (1989) Rules for the manufacture, use/import/export and storage of hazardous microorganisms/genetically engineered organisms or cells. Notification by Ministry of Environment & Forests, Govt. of India dated 5 December 1989Google Scholar
Ryan, CD and Smyth, SJ (2012) Economic implications of low-level presence in a zero-tolerance European import market: the case of Canadian Triffid flax. AgBioForum 15, 2130.Google Scholar
Singh, CK, Ojha, A, Bhatnagar, RK and Kachru, DN (2008) Detection and characterization of recombinant DNA expressing vip3A-type insecticidal gene in GMOs-standard single, multiplex and construct-specific PCR assays. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 390, 377387.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taberlet, P, Gielly, L, Pautou, G and Bouvet, J (1991) Universal primers for amplification of three non-coding regions of chloroplast DNA. Plant Molecular Biology 17, 11051109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Young, L, Hammerlindl, J, Babic, V, McLeod, J, Sharpe, A, Matsalla, C, Bekkaoui, F, Marquess, L and Booker, HM (2015) Genetics, structure, and prevalence of FP967 (CDC Triffid) T-DNA in flax. Springer Plus 4, 146.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Singh et al. supplementary material

Singh et al. supplementary material

Download Singh et al. supplementary material(File)
File 33.6 KB