Food safety and quality
| share
 

OECD Unique Identifier details

MON-ØØ1Ø1-8
Commodity: Alfalfa / Lucerne
Traits: Glyphosate tolerance
Australia
Name of product applicant: Monsanto Australia Ltd
Summary of application:
Two distinct lines of glyphosate-tolerant lucerne, J101 and J163, have been developed using the same transgene (cp4 epsps). Each line has a separate insertion event at different, independently segregating loci. These two events were then combined through conventional breeding methods to optimise the number of plants carrying at least one copy of the gene conferring herbicide tolerance. Glyphosate-tolerant lucerne populations will contain a mixture of plants containing transformation event J101, J163 and both J101 x J163 due to the genetics of lucerne breeding. Lucerne is an autotetraploid plant that is propagated by outcrossing and is adversely affected by inbreeding. Because of this, lucerne varieties are comprised of heterogeneous populations of lucerne breeding lines. In order to develop lucerne varieties displaying high trait purity while minimising inbreeding depression, a conventional breeding method has been developed that relies on glyphosate-tolerant plants carrying different, independently segregating transgenic events. The two independent events are subsequently combined via traditional F1 crossing between two non-related plants that each contains one of the independent events resulting in populations with more than 95% trait purity. The glyphosate tolerance trait in lucerne lines J101 and J163 is due to the expression of the bacterial enzyme 5-enolpyruvyl-3-shikimate phosphate synthase (EPSPS) from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4. The EPSPS enzyme is present in all plants, bacteria and fungi and is essential for aromatic amino acid biosynthesis. The normal mode of action of glyphosate is to bind to the endogenous plant EPSPS, blocking its enzymatic activity which subsequently leads to the death of the plant. The bacterial EPSPS enzyme has a lower binding affinity for glyphosate, and therefore expression of CP4 EPSPS in the plant allows continued production of aromatic amino acids in the presence of the herbicide. Lucerne has a long history of use as animal forage and feed, both in grazing systems and as hay processed from cut and dried swards. Glyphosate-tolerant lucerne will enable the use of herbicides to provide effective weed control during forage and seed production. As weed infestations are a major limiting factor in the production of high-quality forage, superior weed control is expected to improve forage quality and allow higher yields. Availability of weed control at early, pre-plant, pre-emergence, and post-emergence timings will allow greater success in stand establishment and longer stand life. In Australia and New Zealand, food uses of lucerne are referred to as alfalfa. There is a long history of food use of alfalfa, primarily as sprouted seeds and in alfalfa teas. Alfalfa would be expected to be consumed in minor quantities and on an occasional basis.
Upload:
Date of authorization: 15/02/2007
Scope of authorization: Food
Links to the information on the same product in other databases maintained by relevant international organizations, as appropriate. (We recommend providing links to only those databases to which your country has officially contributed.): OECD BioTrack Database
Summary of the safety assessment (food safety):
Upload:
Where detection method protocols and appropriate reference material (non-viable, or in certain circumstances, viable) suitable for low-level situation may be obtained:
Relevant links to documents and information prepared by the competent authority responsible for the safety assessment: Application A575 - Food derived from Glyphosate- tolerant lucerne J101and J163
Upload:
Authorization expiration date (a blank field means there is no expiration date)
E-mail:
janet.gorst@foodstandards.gov.au
Organization/agency name (Full name):
Food Standards Australia New Zealand
Contact person name:
Janet Gorst
Website:
Physical full address:
Boeing Building, 55 Blackall Street, Barton ACT 2600, Australia
Phone number:
+61 2 6271 2266
Fax number:
+61 2 6271 2278
Country introduction:

Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) is the regulatory agency responsible for the development of food standards in Australia and New Zealand. The main office (approximately 120 staff) is located in Canberra (in the Australian Capital Territory) and the smaller New Zealand office (approximately 15 staff) is located in Wellington on the North Island.

Useful links
Relevant documents
Stacked events:

FSANZ does not: Separately assess food from stacked event lines where food from the GM parents has already been approved; Mandate notification of stacked events by developers; Notify the public of stacked event ‘approvals’; List food derived from stacked event lines in the Code, unless the stacked event line has been separately assessed as a single line e.g. Application A518: MXB-13 cotton (DAS-21023-5 x DAS-24236-5)

No separate approval or safety assessment is necessary for foods derived from a stacked GM line that is the result of traditional breeding between a number of GM parent lines for which food has already been approved. Food from the parent lines must be listed in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code. The parent lines may contain any number of different genes. If food from any of the GM parent lines has not been approved, then a full pre-market safety assessment of food from the stacked line must be undertaken.

No separate approval is required for food derived from a line that is the product of a GM line, for which food has been approved, crossed traditionally with a non-GM line.

Where a single line containing a number of genes has been produced as a result of direct gene technology methods (rather than traditional crossing) then food derived from the line must undergo a full pre-market safety assessment before approval can be given

Contact details of the competent authority(s) responsible for the safety assessment and the product applicant:

Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) (http://www.foodstandards.gov.au)

Japan
Name of product applicant: Monsanto Japan Ltd.
Summary of application:

Alfalfa tolerant to glyphosate herbicide (cp4 epsps, Medicago sativa L.).

Upload:
Date of authorization: 14/10/2005
Scope of authorization: Food and feed
Links to the information on the same product in other databases maintained by relevant international organizations, as appropriate. (We recommend providing links to only those databases to which your country has officially contributed.): OECD BioTrack Product Database
Summary of the safety assessment (food safety):
Please see the links below (in Japanese).
Upload:
Where detection method protocols and appropriate reference material (non-viable, or in certain circumstances, viable) suitable for low-level situation may be obtained:
Relevant links to documents and information prepared by the competent authority responsible for the safety assessment: Food safety assessment performed by Food Safety Commission of Japan (in Japanese), Food
Food safety assessment performed by Food Safety Commission of Japan (in Japanese), Feed
Upload:
Authorization expiration date (a blank field means there is no expiration date)
E-mail:
fscj-secretariat@cao.go.jp
Organization/agency name (Full name):
Food Safety Commission Secretariat,Cabinet Office,GOJ
Contact person name:
Emi Takagi
Website:
Physical full address:
Akasaka 5-2-20 Minato Ward,Tokyo,Japan
Phone number:
81 3 6234 1122
Fax number:
81 3 3584 7392
Country introduction:
Useful links
Relevant documents
Stacked events:

With regard to stacked events, FSCJ conducts the safety assessment of GM food based on the “Policies Regarding the Safety Assessment of Stacked Varieties of Genetically Modified Plants”.

Even if single events that are stacked have already approved, some products will be considered as new products and some will not.

Please refer to Article 5 and 6 of the MHLW’s notice, which is available at the following URL, for the details.

http://www.mhlw.go.jp/file/06-Seisakujouhou-11130500-Shokuhinanzenbu/0000053519.pdf

Article 6 was modified in 2014, and the modified version is available at the following URL.

http://www.mhlw.go.jp/file/06-Seisakujouhou-11130500-Shokuhinanzenbu/0000049695.pdf

Contact details of the competent authority(s) responsible for the safety assessment and the product applicant:

Food Safety Commission of Japan (http://www.fsc.go.jp/english/index.html), Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/policy/health-medical/food/index.html)

New Zealand
Name of product applicant: Monsanto Australia Ltd
Summary of application:

Two distinct lines of glyphosate-tolerant lucerne, J101 and J163, have been developed using the same transgene (cp4 epsps). Each line has a separate insertion event at different, independently segregating loci. These two events were then combined through conventional breeding methods to optimise the number of plants carrying at least one copy of the gene conferring herbicide tolerance. Glyphosate-tolerant lucerne populations will contain a mixture of plants containing transformation event J101, J163 and both J101 x J163 due to the genetics of lucerne breeding. Lucerne is an autotetraploid plant that is propagated by outcrossing and is adversely affected by inbreeding. Because of this, lucerne varieties are comprised of heterogeneous populations of lucerne breeding lines. In order to develop lucerne varieties displaying high trait purity while minimising inbreeding depression, a conventional breeding method has been developed that relies on glyphosate-tolerant plants carrying different, independently segregating transgenic events. The two independent events are subsequently combined via traditional F1 crossing between two non-related plants that each contains one of the independent events resulting in populations with more than 95% trait purity. The glyphosate tolerance trait in lucerne lines J101 and J163 is due to the expression of the bacterial enzyme 5-enolpyruvyl-3-shikimate phosphate synthase (EPSPS) from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4. The EPSPS enzyme is present in all plants, bacteria and fungi and is essential for aromatic amino acid biosynthesis. The normal mode of action of glyphosate is to bind to the endogenous plant EPSPS, blocking its enzymatic activity which subsequently leads to the death of the plant. The bacterial EPSPS enzyme has a lower binding affinity for glyphosate, and therefore expression of CP4 EPSPS in the plant allows continued production of aromatic amino acids in the presence of the herbicide. Lucerne has a long history of use as animal forage and feed, both in grazing systems and as hay processed from cut and dried swards. Glyphosate-tolerant lucerne will enable the use of herbicides to provide effective weed control during forage and seed production. As weed infestations are a major limiting factor in the production of high-quality forage, superior weed control is expected to improve forage quality and allow higher yields. Availability of weed control at early, pre-plant, pre-emergence, and post-emergence timings will allow greater success in stand establishment and longer stand life. In Australia and New Zealand, food uses of lucerne are referred to as alfalfa. There is a long history of food use of alfalfa, primarily as sprouted seeds and in alfalfa teas. Alfalfa would be expected to be consumed in minor quantities and on an occasional basis.

Upload:
Date of authorization: 11/05/2007
Scope of authorization: Food
Links to the information on the same product in other databases maintained by relevant international organizations, as appropriate. (We recommend providing links to only those databases to which your country has officially contributed.): OECD BioTrack Product Database
Summary of the safety assessment (food safety):
FSANZ has completed a comprehensive safety assessment of food derived from glyphosate tolerant lucerne J101 and J163, as required under Standard 1.5.2 in the Code. The assessment included consideration of (i) the genetic modification to the plant; (ii) the potential toxicity and allergenicity of the novel protein; and (iii) the composition of glyphosate-tolerant lucerne J101 and J163 compared with that of conventional lucerne. The assessment of this Application identified no public health and safety concerns. On the basis of the available evidence, including detailed studies provided by the Applicant, food derived from glyphosate-tolerant lucerne J101 and J163 is considered as safe and wholesome as food derived from other commercial lucerne varieties.
Upload:
Where detection method protocols and appropriate reference material (non-viable, or in certain circumstances, viable) suitable for low-level situation may be obtained:
Relevant links to documents and information prepared by the competent authority responsible for the safety assessment: Application A575 - Food derived from Glyphosate- tolerant lucerne J101and J163
Upload:
Authorization expiration date (a blank field means there is no expiration date)
E-mail:
andrew.pearson@mpi.govt.nz
Organization/agency name (Full name):
Ministry for Primary Industries
Contact person name:
Andrew Pearson
Website:
Physical full address:
Pastoral House, 25 The Terrace, Wellington, 6012
Phone number:
+6448942535
Fax number:
Country introduction:

New Zealand and Australia share a joint food regulation system for the composition of labelling of most foods. Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) is the regulatory agency responsible for the development of the joint food standards in Australia and New Zealand. The main office (approximately 120 staff) is located in Canberra (in the Australian Capital Territory) and the smaller New Zealand office (approximately 15 staff) is located in Wellington on the North Island.

Useful links
Relevant documents
Stacked events:

FSANZ does not: Separately assess food from stacked event lines where food from the GM parents has already been approved; Mandate notification of stacked events by developers; Notify the public of stacked event ‘approvals’; List food derived from stacked event lines in the Code, unless the stacked event line has been separately assessed as a single line e.g. Application A518: MXB-13 cotton (DAS-21023-5 x DAS-24236-5)

Contact details of the competent authority(s) responsible for the safety assessment and the product applicant:

Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) (http://www.foodstandards.gov.au)

Philippines
Name of product applicant: Monsanto Philippines
Summary of application:
Monsanto had developed varieties from Roundup Ready alfalfa that contain events J101 and J163 and are tolerant to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup agricultural herbicides. Roundup Ready alfalfa varieties were developed using Agrobacterium mediated transformation to stably incorporate into the alfalfa genome a coding sequence that produces a glyphosate-tolerant form of the enzyme 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS). This glyphosate-tolerant EPSPS was originally identified in the soil microorganism, Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4 and is designated as CP4EPSPS.
Upload:
Date of authorization: 09/08/2011
Scope of authorization: Food and feed
Links to the information on the same product in other databases maintained by relevant international organizations, as appropriate. (We recommend providing links to only those databases to which your country has officially contributed.):
Summary of the safety assessment (food safety):
Monsanto Philippines, Inc. has filed an application with attached technical dossiers to the Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) for a biosafety permit for direct use as food, feed and for processing under Administrative Order (AO) No. 8 Part 5 for Alfalfa events J101 and J163 which has been genetically modified for herbicide tolerance. Alfalfa Events J101 and J163 have been evaluated according to BPI’s safety assessment by concerned agencies [Bureau of Animal Industry (BAI), Bureau of Agriculture, Fisheries and Product Standards (BAFPS) and Scientific and Technical Review Panel (STRP)] members. The process involves an intensive analysis of the nature of the genetic modification together with the consideration of safety assessment paradigm which includes molecular characterization, protein characterization, and food/feed composition. The petitioner/applicant published the said application in two (2) widely circulated newspapers: for public comment/review. During the 30-day comment period, BPI had not received comment on the said application. Review of results of evaluation by the BPI Biotech Core Team completed the approval process.
Upload:
Where detection method protocols and appropriate reference material (non-viable, or in certain circumstances, viable) suitable for low-level situation may be obtained:
Relevant links to documents and information prepared by the competent authority responsible for the safety assessment:
Upload:
Authorization expiration date (a blank field means there is no expiration date)
E-mail:
bpibiotechsecretariat@yahoo.com
Organization/agency name (Full name):
Bureau of Plant Industry
Contact person name:
Merle B. Palacpac
Website:
Physical full address:
San Andres St., Malate, Manila
Phone number:
632 521 1080
Fax number:
632 521 1080
Country introduction:

The Philippines is the first ASEAN country to establish a modern regulatory system for modern biotechnology. The country's biosafety regulatory system follows strict scientific standards and has become a model for member-countries of the ASEAN seeking to become producers of agricultural biotechnology crops. Concerns on biosafety in the Philippines started as early as 1987 when scientists from the University of the Philippines Los Banos (UPLB) and International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), the Quarantine Officer of the Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) and the Director for Crops of the Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research and Development (PCARRD) recognized the potential for harm of the introduction of exotic species and genetic engineering.

Useful links
Relevant documents
Stacked events:

Gene stacking in plants can be conferred either through genetic engineering or conventional breeding A full risk assessment as to food and feed or for processing shall be conducted to plant products carrying stacked genes conferred through genetic engineering or conventional breeding, where the individual traits have no prior approval for direct use as food and feed or processing from the Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) A desktop or documentary risk assessment on the possible or expected interactions between the genes shall be conducted for stacked gene products with multiple traits conferred through conventional breeding and individual events granted prior approval by the Bureau of Plant Industry.

 

Plant Products Carrying Stacked Genes Conferred Through (a) Genetic Engineering or b) Conventional Breeding, with Individual Traits That Have No Prior Approval:

A full risk assessnent as to  food and feed or processing shall be conducted,consistent with Part V of AO No. 8,"Approval Process For the Importation of Regulated Articles for Direct Use as Food and Feed or For Processing for plant products with multiple traits conferred through:

(a) genetic engineering, or

(b) conventional breeding, where the individual traits have no prior approval from the Bureau of Plant Industry (BPI) for direct use as food and feed or processing.

Plant Products Carrying Stacked Genes Conferred through Conventional Breeding:

For plant products with multiple traits conferred through conventional breeding,with all individual events granted prior approval and included in the Approval Registry, a notlfication shall be submitted by the technology developer to the BPI, which shall conduct an evaluation in accordance with the relevant criteria in Annex I of this Memorandum Circular. The list of data contained in Annex I will not preclude the inclusion of other issues and concerns that will be raised by the BPI and the Scientific and Technical Review Panel (STRP) during the course of the desktop review.

Notificatlon Requirement for Plant Products Carrying Stacked Genes

All technology developers shall submit a notification to the Bureau of Plant Industry of their developed plant products carrying stacked genes and shall be required to comply with the relevant approval process listed above.

The Bureau of Plant Industry shall issue a certiflcate as to the approval of the stacked gene product and shall likewise include the transformation event in the official approval registry of plant products for food and feed or processing.

Contact details of the competent authority(s) responsible for the safety assessment and the product applicant:

Bureau of Plant Industry 692 San Andres St, Malate, Manila 1004

United States of America
Name of product applicant: Monsanto Company and Forage Genetics
Summary of application:
Alfalfa
Trait 1 Added Protein: 5-Enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS)
Source: Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4
Intended Effect: Tolerance to the herbicide glyphosate
Upload:
Date of authorization: 10/12/2004
Scope of authorization: Food and feed
Links to the information on the same product in other databases maintained by relevant international organizations, as appropriate. (We recommend providing links to only those databases to which your country has officially contributed.):
Summary of the safety assessment (food safety):
Please consult the FDA website links below.
Upload:
Where detection method protocols and appropriate reference material (non-viable, or in certain circumstances, viable) suitable for low-level situation may be obtained:
Relevant links to documents and information prepared by the competent authority responsible for the safety assessment: FDA's webpage regarding this variety
Upload:
Authorization expiration date (a blank field means there is no expiration date)
E-mail:
jason.dietz@fda.hhs.gov
Organization/agency name (Full name):
Food and Drug Administration
Contact person name:
Jason Dietz
Website:
Physical full address:
5100 Paint Branch Parkway, College Park MD 20740
Phone number:
240-402-2282
Fax number:
Country introduction:

The United States is currently in the process of populating this database. The Food and Drug Administration regulates food and feed (food for humans and animals) from genetically engineered crops in conjunction with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). EPA regulates pesticides, including those that are plant incorporated protectants genetically engineered into food crops, to make sure that pesticide residues are safe for human and animal consumption and do not pose unreasonable risks of harm to human health or the environment. FDA In the Federal Register of May 29, 1992 (57 FR 22984), FDA published its "Statement of Policy: Foods Derived from New Plant Varieties" (the 1992 policy). The 1992 policy clarified the agency's interpretation of the application of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act with respect to human and animal foods derived from new plant varieties and provided guidance to industry on scientific and regulatory issues related to these foods. The 1992 policy applied to all foods derived from all new plant varieties, including varieties that are developed using genetic engineering (also known as recombinant deoxyribonucleic acid (rDNA) technology). In the 1992 policy, FDA recommended that developers consult with FDA about foods from genetically engineered plants under development and developers have routinely done so. In June 1996, FDA provided additional guidance to industry on procedures for these consultations (the consultation procedures). These procedures describe a process in which a developer who intends to commercialize food from a genetically engineered plant meets with the agency to identify and discuss relevant safety, nutritional, or other regulatory issues regarding the genetically engineered food and then submits to FDA a summary of its scientific and regulatory assessment of the food. FDA evaluates the submission and if FDA has questions about the summary provided, it requests clarification from the developer. At the conclusion of the consultation FDA responds to the developer by letter. The approach to the safety assessment of genetically engineered food recommended by FDA during consultations, including data and information evaluated, is consistent with that described in the Codex Alimentarius Guideline for the Conduct of Food Safety Assessment of Foods Derived from Recombinant-DNA Plants. EPA The safe use of pesticidal substances is regulated by EPA. Food from a genetically engineered plant that is the subject of a consultation with FDA may contain an introduced pesticidal substance, also known as a plant-incorporated protectant (PIP), that is subject to food (food for humans and animals) safety and environmental review by EPA. PIPs are pesticidal substances produced by plants and the genetic material necessary for the plant to produce the substance. Both the PIP protein and its genetic material are regulated by EPA. When assessing the potential risks of PIPs, EPA requires studies examining numerous factors, such as risks to human health, non-target organisms and the environment, potential for gene flow, and insect resistance management plans, if needed. In regulating PIPs, decisions are based on scientific standards and input from academia, industry, other Federal agencies, and the public. Before the first PIP product was registered in 1995, EPA required that PIP products be thoroughly tested against human safety standards before they were used on human food and livestock feed crops. EPA scientists assessed a wide variety of potential effects associated with the use of PIPs, including toxicity, and allergenicity. These potential effects were evaluated in light of the public's potential exposures to these pesticides, taking into account all potential combined sources of the exposure (food, drinking water, etc.) to determine the likelihood that a person exposed at these levels would be predisposed to a health risk. Based on its reviews of the scientific studies and often peer reviews by the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Scientific Advisory Panel, EPA determined that these genetically engineered PIP products, when used in accordance with approved label directions and use restrictions, would not pose unreasonable risk to human health and the environment during their time-limited registration.

Useful links
Relevant documents
Stacked events:

Stacked events that are each plant incorporated protectants, as defined by the Environmental Protection Agency, must be registered by the Envriornmental Protection Agency before they can be commercialized.  Food/feed safety asssessment of single events are generally sufficient to ensure the safety of food/feed from stacked events.   

Contact details of the competent authority(s) responsible for the safety assessment and the product applicant:

Food and Drug Administration (premarkt@fda.hhs.gov); Environmental Protection Agency