Cargando…

Update of environmental risk assessment conclusions and risk management recommendations of EFSA (2016) on EU teosinte

Teosinte, wild maize relatives originating from Mexico and Central America, emerged as a noxious agricultural weed in France and Spain. In 2016, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued a technical report that assessed the available scientific information on teosinte for its relevance for th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Devos, Yann, Aiassa, Elisa, Muñoz‐Guajardo, Irene, Messéan, Antoine, Mullins, Ewen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8972220/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35386925
http://dx.doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7228
_version_ 1784679794750783488
author Devos, Yann
Aiassa, Elisa
Muñoz‐Guajardo, Irene
Messéan, Antoine
Mullins, Ewen
author_facet Devos, Yann
Aiassa, Elisa
Muñoz‐Guajardo, Irene
Messéan, Antoine
Mullins, Ewen
collection PubMed
description Teosinte, wild maize relatives originating from Mexico and Central America, emerged as a noxious agricultural weed in France and Spain. In 2016, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued a technical report that assessed the available scientific information on teosinte for its relevance for the environmental risk assessment (ERA) and risk management (RM) of genetically modified (GM) maize MON810, Bt11, 1507 and GA21 for cultivation. It was concluded that the impact of insect resistance and/or herbicide tolerance in GM teosinte hybrid progeny (potentially acquired through hybridisation between GM maize and teosinte) on target and non‐target organisms, the abiotic environment and biogeochemical cycles would be very low under EU conditions. Following a request of the European Commission, EFSA evaluated whether the ERA conclusions and RM recommendations of EFSA (2016) remain applicable, or require revision in light of new scientific evidence on teosinte that has become available since the publication of EFSA (2016). A protocol was developed to clarify the interpretation of the terms of reference of the mandate and make them operational. The assessment relied on evidence retrieved via an extensive literature search and from reports of the Competent Authorities of France and Spain, and on hearing expert testimonies. A limited collection of 18 publications of varying relevance and quality was retrieved and assessed. Based on this evidence, it is concluded that the ERA conclusions and RM recommendations of EFSA (2016) remain applicable, except those pertaining to the use of glyphosate‐based herbicides on maize GA21 which should be considered under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. In infested agricultural areas (especially in regions where maize MON810 is widely grown), weed management measures implemented to monitor, control and/or eradicate teosinte must remain in place, as they will contribute to further reduce the low vertical gene flow potential between GM maize and EU teosinte.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8972220
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89722202022-04-05 Update of environmental risk assessment conclusions and risk management recommendations of EFSA (2016) on EU teosinte Devos, Yann Aiassa, Elisa Muñoz‐Guajardo, Irene Messéan, Antoine Mullins, Ewen EFSA J Statement Teosinte, wild maize relatives originating from Mexico and Central America, emerged as a noxious agricultural weed in France and Spain. In 2016, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued a technical report that assessed the available scientific information on teosinte for its relevance for the environmental risk assessment (ERA) and risk management (RM) of genetically modified (GM) maize MON810, Bt11, 1507 and GA21 for cultivation. It was concluded that the impact of insect resistance and/or herbicide tolerance in GM teosinte hybrid progeny (potentially acquired through hybridisation between GM maize and teosinte) on target and non‐target organisms, the abiotic environment and biogeochemical cycles would be very low under EU conditions. Following a request of the European Commission, EFSA evaluated whether the ERA conclusions and RM recommendations of EFSA (2016) remain applicable, or require revision in light of new scientific evidence on teosinte that has become available since the publication of EFSA (2016). A protocol was developed to clarify the interpretation of the terms of reference of the mandate and make them operational. The assessment relied on evidence retrieved via an extensive literature search and from reports of the Competent Authorities of France and Spain, and on hearing expert testimonies. A limited collection of 18 publications of varying relevance and quality was retrieved and assessed. Based on this evidence, it is concluded that the ERA conclusions and RM recommendations of EFSA (2016) remain applicable, except those pertaining to the use of glyphosate‐based herbicides on maize GA21 which should be considered under Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009. In infested agricultural areas (especially in regions where maize MON810 is widely grown), weed management measures implemented to monitor, control and/or eradicate teosinte must remain in place, as they will contribute to further reduce the low vertical gene flow potential between GM maize and EU teosinte. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC8972220/ /pubmed/35386925 http://dx.doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7228 Text en © 2022 Wiley‐VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KgaA on behalf of the European Food Safety Authority. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Statement
Devos, Yann
Aiassa, Elisa
Muñoz‐Guajardo, Irene
Messéan, Antoine
Mullins, Ewen
Update of environmental risk assessment conclusions and risk management recommendations of EFSA (2016) on EU teosinte
title Update of environmental risk assessment conclusions and risk management recommendations of EFSA (2016) on EU teosinte
title_full Update of environmental risk assessment conclusions and risk management recommendations of EFSA (2016) on EU teosinte
title_fullStr Update of environmental risk assessment conclusions and risk management recommendations of EFSA (2016) on EU teosinte
title_full_unstemmed Update of environmental risk assessment conclusions and risk management recommendations of EFSA (2016) on EU teosinte
title_short Update of environmental risk assessment conclusions and risk management recommendations of EFSA (2016) on EU teosinte
title_sort update of environmental risk assessment conclusions and risk management recommendations of efsa (2016) on eu teosinte
topic Statement
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8972220/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35386925
http://dx.doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7228
work_keys_str_mv AT updateofenvironmentalriskassessmentconclusionsandriskmanagementrecommendationsofefsa2016oneuteosinte
AT devosyann updateofenvironmentalriskassessmentconclusionsandriskmanagementrecommendationsofefsa2016oneuteosinte
AT aiassaelisa updateofenvironmentalriskassessmentconclusionsandriskmanagementrecommendationsofefsa2016oneuteosinte
AT munozguajardoirene updateofenvironmentalriskassessmentconclusionsandriskmanagementrecommendationsofefsa2016oneuteosinte
AT messeanantoine updateofenvironmentalriskassessmentconclusionsandriskmanagementrecommendationsofefsa2016oneuteosinte
AT mullinsewen updateofenvironmentalriskassessmentconclusionsandriskmanagementrecommendationsofefsa2016oneuteosinte