1.054
IF5
1.150
IF
Q3
JCR
1.7
CiteScore
0.396
SJR
Q2
SJR
40
MNiSW
165.24
ICV
ORIGINAL PAPER
 
CC-BY 4.0
 
 

Carry-over of DNA from genetically modified soyabean and maize to cow’s milk

M. De Giacomo 1  ,  
B. De Santis 1,  
F. Debegnach 1,  
R. Onori 1,  
 
1
Italian National Institute for Health, Department of Veterinary Public Health and Food Safety, GMO and Mycotoxin Unit, Viale Regina Elena 299, Rome, Italy
J. Anim. Feed Sci. 2016;25(2):109–115
Publication date: 2016-05-19
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
The objective of this study was to evaluate the carry-over of transgenic soyabean and maize DNA in samples of milk deriving from different groups of cows fed with either genetically modified (GM) or GM-free feed. Also, to understand the possible source of such contamination of milk which can be of endogenous or exogenous origin (contamination from GM feed containing ‘dust or aerosols’). The milk and feed samples were taken during routine practices of the dairy farms in order to be as close as possible to real condition. In total 66 samples of cow’s milk and 120 samples of feed (GM, GM-free and organic feed) were collected in six Italian farms with different farming systems (organic and conventional) and types of barn stalls (milking area contiguous or separated from feeding station). The quantitative Real-Time PCR analysis of samples confirmed the presence of GM soya and maize in GM labeled feed and their absence in organic/GM-free feed. In the latter group, neither transgenic nor endogenous soyabean DNA was detected in the milk samples as expected. The limit of detection was estimated by spiking whole milk samples with GM plant DNA before DNA extraction. The smallest concentration of soyabean DNA required for detection was 1 ng · ml–1 of milk for lectin gene which corresponded to about 900 copies per ml of milk. No milk samples of GM-fed cows was found suspicious for the presence of recombinant DNA within the limit of detection. This means that neither transfer of genetic material nor aerosol contamination from feed to milk can be shown in the investigated husbandry system.
CORRESPONDING AUTHOR
M. De Giacomo   
Italian National Institute for Health, Department of Veterinary Public Health and Food Safety, GMO and Mycotoxin Unit, Viale Regina Elena 299, Rome, Italy
 
REFERENCES (24):
1. ADAS, 2013. Review of the strategies for the comprehensive food and feed safety and nutritional assessment of GM plants per se. EFSA Supporting publication 2013:EN-480, pp. 115 (http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/s...).
2. Agodi A., Barchitta M., Grillo A., Sciacca S., 2006. Detection of genetically modified DNA sequences in milk from the Italian market. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 209, 81–88.
3. Arumuganathan K., Earle E.D., 1991. Nuclear DNA content of some important plant species. Plant Mol. Biol. Rep. 9, 208-218.
4. Beever D.E.,Kemp C.F., 2000. Safety issues associated with the DNA in animal feed derived from genetically modified crops. A review of scientific and regulatory procedures. Nutr. Abstr. Rev. Ser. B 70, 175–182.
5. EFSA, 2007. Statement on the fate of recombinant DNA or proteins in meat, milk and eggs from animals fed with GM feed. EFSA J. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2007.744.
6. EFSA, 2009. Consolidated presentation of the joint Scientific Opinion of the GMO and BIOHAZ Panels on the ‘Use of Antibiotic Resistance Genes as Marker Genes in Genetically Modified Plants’ and the Scientific Opinion of the GMO Panel on ‘Consequences of the Opinion on the Use of Antibiotic Resistance Genes as Marker Genes in Genetically Modified Plants on Previous EFSA Assessments of Individual GM Plants’ [1]. EFSA J. doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2009.1108.
7. ENGL (European Network of GMO Laboratories), 2015. RJC Technical Report. Definition of Minimum Performance Requirements for Analytical Methods of GMO Testing. Joint Research Centre. Ispra (Italy), pp. 24 (http://gmo-crl.jrc.ec.europa.e...).
8. European Commission, 2004. Commission Recommendation 2004/787/ EC of 4 October 2004 on technical guidance for sampling and detection of genetically modified organisms and material produced from genetically modified organisms as or in products in the context of Regulation (EC) No 1830/2003. Off. J. EU L348, 18–26.
9. GMO-Compass webpage, retrieved August 2015 from http://www.gmocompass.org/eng/....
  WWW
10. ISO 21571:2005 Foodstuffs: Methods of analysis for the detection of genetically modified organisms and derived products: Nucleic acid extraction.
11. James C., 2014. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2014. ISAAA Brief No. 49. ISAAA: Ithaca, NY (USA).
12. Jennings J.C., Kolwyck D.C., Kays S.B., Whetsell A.J., Surber J.B., Cromwell G.L., Lirette R.P., Glenn K.C., 2003. Determining whether transgenic and endogenous plant DNA and transgenic protein are detectable in muscle from swine fed Roundup Ready soybean meal. J. Anim. Sci. 81, 1447–1455.
13. Kuribara H., Shindo Y., Matsuoka T. et al., 2002. Novel reference molecules for quantitation of genetically modified maize and soybean. J. AOAC Int. 85, 1077–1089.
14. MARLON PROJECT ‘Monitoring of Animals for Feed-related Risks in the Long Term‘ FP7-KBBE; Retrieved 25 January 2016 from http://www.marlon-project.eu/a...; http://www.marlon-project.eu/i....
  WWW
15. Medrano J.F., Cordova E.-A., 1990. Genotyping of bovine kappacasein loci following DNA sequence amplification. Nat. Biotechnol. 8, 144–146.
16. Nordgård L., 2009. Survival and uptake of feed-derived DNA in the mammalian intestinal tract. PhD Thesis, Faculty of Medicine, University of Tromsø (Norway).
17. Poms R.E., Glössl J., Foissy H., 2001. Increased sensitivity for detection of specific target DNA in milk by concentration in milk fat. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 213, 361–365.
18. Popp J., Pető K., Magda R., Lakner Z., 2013. Economic impact of GM hysteria on EU feed market. Am. J. Plant Sci. 4, 1547–1553.
19. Querci M., Foti N., Bogni B., Kluga L., Broll H., Van den Eede G., 2009. Real-Time PCR based ready-to-use multi-target analytical system for GMO detection. Food Anal. Methods 2, 325–336.
20. Rizzi A., Raddadi N., Sorlini C., Nordgrd L., Nielsen K.M., Daffonchio D., 2012. The stability and degradation of dietary DNA in the gastrointestinal tract of mammals: Implications for horizontal gene transfer and the biosafety of GMOs. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 52, 142–161.
21. Rossen L., Nørskov P., Holmstrøm K., Rasmussen O.F., 1992. Inhibition of PCR by components of food samples, microbial diagnostic assays and DNA-extraction solutions. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 17, 37–45.
22. Swiatkiewicz S., Swiatkiewicz M., Arczewska-Wlosek A., Jozefiak D., 2014. Genetically modified feeds and their effect on the metabolic parameters of food-producing animals: A review of recent studies. Anim. Feed Sci. Tech. 198, 1–19.
23. Tudisco R., Mastellone V., Cutrignelli M.I., Lombardi P., Bovera F., Mirabella N., Piccolo G., Calabrò S., Avallone L.,Infascelli F., 2010. Fate of transgenic DNA and evaluation of metabolic effects in goats fed genetically modified and in their offsprings. Animal 4, 1662–1671.
24. Van Eenennaam A.L., Young A.E., 2014. Prevalence and impacts of genetically engineered feedstuffs on livestock populations. J. Anim. Sci. 92, 4255–4278.
 
CITATIONS (3):
1. Genetically Engineered Foods
Gerhard Flachowsky
2. Detection of dietary DNA, protein, and glyphosate in meat, milk, and eggs1
A. L. Van Eenennaam, A. E. Young
Journal of Animal Science
3. Safety Assessment of Genetically Modified Feed: Is There Any Difference From Food?
Paula Giraldo, Hiroshi Shinozuka, German Spangenberg, Noel Cogan, Kevin Smith
Frontiers in Plant Science
ISSN:1230-1388