Commentary to Publications in Food Analytics Methods Journal as Related to Genetic Stability of Maize Event MON810

Abstract

Wewould like to expresssome commentsontwo publicationsrelated to genetic stability of MON810 published in thisJournal (Aguilera et al. 2008, 2009). In the first publication(Aguilera et al. 2008), it is reported that “Twenty-four out ofthe 26 analyzed varieties met the expected stability features.One variety gave negative results in all assays, and onevariety contained the necessary genetic elements for express-ing CryIA(b) protein although giving negative results for thelong PCR product. To our knowledge, this study is the firstpost-marketing stability analysis performed on GM commer-cial seed varieties”. In the second publication (Aguilera et al.2009), it is also reported that “Global results assessed andguaranteed the genetic intactness of the transgenic integrationper haploid genome for 24 out of the 26 commercial varietiesstudied, which showed no significant differences between2(-Delta Delta CT) values respect to the calibrator value.Conversely,twovarietiesshowednointacttransgenicinsertintheir genomes. This validated analytical method was suitablefor MON 810 detection and quantification purposes.”Upon our request, the authors informed us that theSpanish Instituto Nacional de Investigacion y TecnologiaAgraria y Alimentaria (www.inia.es) provided the JRC with26 MON810 maize varieties, without however providingdetails of the respective batch numbers. We can confirmthat the two deviating results are not related to intacttransgenic insertion as reported by the authors. Afterinvestigation, the conclusions were that the two varieties(entry 2 and entry 5) were in fact not MON810 maize.Variety CGS4540 (entry 5) was a Bt176 maize hybrid, andwe do not understand why the seed were provided asMON810. With regard to entry 2 (designated as Aristis Bt),we requested the Spanish Ministry to send a sample ofAristis Bt to its official Spanish laboratory CSIC for testing.The results were positive for MON810, as expected.However, the material that was provided to the JRC wasmostlikelyAristis,theconventionalcounterpartofAristisBt(MON810). The authors were not able to provide a correctchain of custody for the samples used in their analysesallowing to resolve the origin of these deviating results.The industry has invested significantly to provide qualityproducts to the marketplace, which includes selling com-pliant and stable products. Traits are tested for presenceand stability for many generations prior to release to themarket place. We are of the opinion that there is noscientific evidence for MON810 instability.