GM Watch
  • Main Menu
    • Home
    • News
      • Newsletter subscription
      • News Reviews
      • News Languages
        • Notícias em Português
        • Nieuws in het Nederlands
        • Nachrichten in Deutsch
      • Archive
    • Articles
      • GM Myth Makers
      • GM Reports
      • GM Quotes
      • GM Myths
      • Non-GM successes
      • GM Firms
        • Monsanto: a history
        • Monsanto: resources
        • Bayer: a history
        • Bayer: resources
    • Videos
      • Latest Videos
      • Must see videos
      • Agriculture videos
      • Labeling videos
      • Animals videos
      • Corporations videos
      • Corporate takeover videos
      • Contamination videos
      • Latin America videos
      • India videos
      • Asia videos
      • Food safety videos
      • Songs videos
      • Protests videos
      • Biofuel myths videos
      • Index of GM crops and foods
      • Index of speakers
      • Health Effects
    • Contact
    • About
    • Donations
News and comment on genetically modified foods and their associated pesticides    
  • News
    • Newsletter subscription
    • News Reviews
    • News Languages
      • Notícias em Português
      • Nieuws in het Nederlands
      • Nachrichten in Deutsch
    • Archive
      • 2022 articles
  • Articles
    • GM Myth Makers
    • GM Reports
    • GM Quotes
    • GM Myths
    • Non-GM successes
    • GM Firms
      • Monsanto: a history
      • Monsanto: resources
      • Bayer: a history
      • Bayer: resources
  • Donations
  • Videos
    • Index of speakers
    • Glyphosate Videos
    • Latest Videos
    • Must see videos
    • Health Effects
    • Agriculture videos
    • Labeling videos
    • Animals videos
    • Corporations videos
    • Corporate takeover videos
    • Contamination videos
    • Latin America videos
    • India videos
    • Asia videos
    • Food safety videos
    • Songs videos
    • Protests videos
    • Biofuel myths videos
    • Index of GM crops and foods
  • Contact
  • About
SUBSCRIBE TO REVIEWS

GMWatch Facebook cornfield banner

INTRODUCTION TO GM

GMO Myths and Facts front page.jpg

SCIENCE SUPPORTS REGULATION OF GENE EDITING

Plant tissue cultures

GENE EDITING: UNEXPECTED OUTCOMES AND RISKS

Damaged DNA on fire

GENE EDITING MYTHS AND REALITY

A guide through the smokescreen

Gene Editing Myths and Reality

ON-TARGET EFFECTS OF GENE EDITING

Damaged DNA

News Menu

  • Latest News
  • News Reviews
  • Archive
  • Languages

News Archive

  • 2023 articles
  • 2022 articles
  • 2021 articles
  • 2020 articles
  • 2019 articles
  • 2018 articles
  • 2017 articles
  • 2016 articles
  • 2015 articles
  • 2014 articles
  • 2013 articles
  • 2012 articles
  • 2011 articles
  • 2010 articles
  • 2009 articles
  • 2008 articles
  • 2007 articles
  • 2006 articles
  • 2005 articles
  • 2004 articles
  • 2003 articles
  • 2002 articles
  • 2001 articles
  • 2000 articles

Please support GMWatch

Donations

You can donate via Paypal or credit/debit card.

Some of you have opted to give a regular donation. This is greatly appreciated as it helps place us on a more stable financial basis. Thank you for your support!

First application for approval of CRISPR/Cas plants in the EU

  • Print
  • Email
Details
Published: 22 April 2021
Twitter

Crop spraying of herbicides and pesticides

DowDupont (Corteva) maize is tolerant to herbicides and produces insecticides

The first application for approval of CRISPR/Cas plants is now in the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) register. Maize DP915635 is tolerant to the herbicide glufosinate and produces an insecticidal toxin found in specific ferns growing on trees. DowDupont is marketing its genetically engineered plants under the company name Corteva, and also has filed several patent applications for the plants, some of which have already been granted in Europe.

The maize was generated with a combination of old and new genetic engineering methods (GE). To deliver the CRISPR/Cas "gene scissors" into the plant cells, they are first bombarded with small particles with a gene gun (an "old GE" method). In consequence, the cells produced the enzyme for the gene scissors which then inserted a DNA sequence into the maize genome. This additional DNA sequence is meant to facilitate the insertion of other genes and therefore is called a "landing pad". In a next step, again involving "old GE", a further gene construct is inserted into the "landing pad" in the maize genome, conferring tolerance to the herbicide and producing the fern toxin.

This laborious way of transferring the genes is necessary because CRISPR/Cas is less efficient at inserting longer DNA sequences. In comparison to the methods of "old GE", the resulting plants do not represent any real progress with respect to their traits or lower risks. However, the "landing pad" might render the production of transgenic plants more efficient and could be seen as advantageous for the company.

“In the last 30 years, the biotech companies have mostly generated and marketed plants with herbicide tolerance and insecticidal toxins. In result, the environmental impact has been increased,” said Christoph Then for Testbiotech. “It is interesting to see that CRISPR/Cas does not bring real benefits in this case: The multistep process can result in many unintended changes of the genome that go along with risks. At the same time, the plant traits do not provide real advantage for the environment.”

DowDupont already has patent protection for its CRISPR/Cas plants in Europe: Patent EP3191595 covers gene scissor applications in maize and soybeans, including the resulting transgenic plants with the "landing pad". In addition, patents EP3102592 and EP3102684 cover transgenic plants with the fern toxin. Besides these three granted European patents, DowDupont has filed many other patent applications on the technology and the resulting plants.

Riddled with unintended mutations

Adding to Testbiotech's comments, GMWatch points out that the starting maize is a transgenic GMO with a glufosinate-tolerance gene inserted and that the subsequent addition of a landing pad to facilitate the insertion of transgenes makes it doubly a transgenic GMO.

The fact that CRISPR/Cas was used to target the integration of the landing pad is within this transgenic procedure context.

This product will likely be riddled with unintended mutations from the multiple GM procedures used:
1. The generation of the glufosinate-tolerant starting maize variety.
2. Plant tissue culture at all stages.
3. GM transformation process for insertion of the landing pad and insertion of the fern insecticide-encoding gene.
4. Off-target and on-target mutations from the CRISPR/Cas.

All these could combine into a genomic mess, with major unknown consequences to health and the environment. It is highly likely that Corteva hasn’t investigated these. It is EFSA's responsibility to tell it to do so.


Main source of comment: Testbiotech
https://www.testbiotech.org/en/press-release/first-application-approval-crisprcas-plants-eu
Additional comment by GMWatch

Further information:

The application of DowDupont
https://www.testbiotech.org/content/application-authorisation-maize-dp915635-pioneer

The patents of DowDupont
https://www.testbiotech.org/content/patents-crispr-maize-dowdupont

A publication on the "landing pad"
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpls.2020.00535/full

Menu

Home

Subscriptions

News Archive

News Reviews

Videos

Articles

GM Myth Makers

GM Reports

GM Myths

GM Quotes

Non-GM Successes

Contacts

Contact Us

About

Facebook

Twitter

Donations

Content 1999 - 2023 GMWatch.
Web Development By SCS Web Design