Assessment of genetically modified maize 1507 × 59122 × MON810 × NK603 and subcombinations, for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (application EFSA-GMO-NL-2011-92).

Abstract In this opinion, the GMO Panel assessed the four‐event stack maize 1507 × 59122 × MON810 × NK603 and its ten subcombinations, independently of their origin. The GMO Panel previously assessed the four single events combined in this four‐event stack maize and five of their combinations and did not identify safety concerns. No new data on the single events or their previously assessed combinations leading to modification of the original conclusions were identified. Based on the molecular, agronomic, phenotypic and compositional characteristics, the combination of the single maize events and of the newly expressed proteins in the four‐event stack maize did not give rise to food and feed safety or nutritional issues. The GMO Panel concludes that the four‐event stack maize is as safe and as nutritious as its non‐GM comparator. In the case of accidental release of viable grains of maize 1507 × 59122 × MON810 × NK603 into the environment, this would not raise environmental safety concerns. For four of the subcombinations not previously assessed, protein expression data were provided and did not indicate an interaction affecting the levels of the newly expressed proteins in these subcombinations. The five subcombinations not previously assessed are expected to be as safe as the single maize events, the previously assessed subcombinations and the four‐event stack maize. The GMO Panel considers that post‐market monitoring of maize 1507 × 59122 ×MON810 × NK603 and its subcombinations is not necessary. The post‐market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of maize 1507 × 59122 × MON810 ×NK603 and its subcombinations.

[1]  R. Binimelis,et al.  Teosinte in Europe – Searching for the Origin of a Novel Weed , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[2]  A. Birch,et al.  Scientific opinion on an application for renewal of authorisation for continued marketing of maize 1507 and derived food and feed submitted under Articles 11 and 23 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 by Pioneer Overseas Corporation and Dow AgroSciences LLC , 2017, EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority.

[3]  K. Pascher Spread of volunteer and feral maize plants in Central Europe: recent data from Austria , 2016, Environmental Sciences Europe.

[4]  A. Birch,et al.  Risk assessment of new sequencing information on GM maize event DAS‐59122‐7 , 2016 .

[5]  J. Ward,et al.  The food and environmental safety of Bt crops , 2015, Front. Plant Sci..

[6]  Bruce Hammond,et al.  Toxicological evaluation of proteins introduced into food crops , 2013, Critical reviews in toxicology.

[7]  A. Chesson,et al.  Scientific Opinion on an application from Pioneer Hi-Bred International and Dow AgroSciences LLC (EFSA-GMO-NL-2005-23) for placing on the market of genetically modified maize 59122 for food and feed uses, import, processing and cultivation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 , 2013 .

[8]  Antoine Messéan,et al.  Guidance on the Post-Market Environmental Monitoring (PMEM) ofgenetically modified plants , 2011 .

[9]  H. Kuiper,et al.  Guidance for risk assessment of food and feed from genetically modified plants , 2011 .

[10]  Antoine Messéan,et al.  Guidance on the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants , 2010 .

[11]  B. Tinland,et al.  General Surveillance for Import and Processing: the EuropaBio approach , 2009, Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit.

[12]  Enric Melé,et al.  Effect of volunteers on maize gene flow , 2009, Transgenic Research.

[13]  Nathalie Colbach,et al.  Post-harvest gene escape and approaches for minimizing it , 2008 .

[14]  Joachim Schiemann,et al.  Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms , 2008 .

[15]  B. Tinland,et al.  General Surveillance: Roles and Responsibilities The Industry View , 2007, Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit.

[16]  R. V. Anrooy Foods derived from modern biotechnology , 2006 .

[17]  Joachim Schiemann,et al.  Guidance document of the scientific panel on genetically modified organisms for the risk assessment of genetically modified plants and derived food and feed: (Question No EFSA-Q-2003-005) , 2004 .

[18]  K. Narva,et al.  Novel Bacillus thuringiensis Binary Insecticidal Crystal Proteins Active on Western Corn Rootworm, Diabrotica virgifera virgifera LeConte , 2002, Applied and Environmental Microbiology.

[19]  Consensus Document on Compositional Considerations for New Varieties of Maize ( Zea Mays ) : Key Food and Feed Nutrients , 2002 .

[20]  Genetically modified organisms (GMOs): The significance of gene flow through pollen transfer , 2002 .

[21]  Vázquez,et al.  Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ac Protoxin is a Potent Systemic and Mucosal Adjuvant , 1999, Scandinavian journal of immunology.

[22]  N. Crickmore,et al.  Bacillus thuringiensis and Its Pesticidal Crystal Proteins , 1998, Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews.

[23]  K. Herrmann The Shikimate Pathway: Early Steps in the Biosynthesis of Aromatic Compounds. , 1995, The Plant cell.

[24]  A. Pühler,et al.  Nucleotide sequence of the phosphinothricin N-acetyltransferase gene from Streptomyces viridochromogenes Tü494 and its expression in Nicotiana tabacum. , 1988, Gene.