Literature DB >> 25184846

Prevalence and impacts of genetically engineered feedstuffs on livestock populations.

A L Van Eenennaam1, A E Young2.   

Abstract

Globally, food-producing animals consume 70 to 90% of genetically engineered (GE) crop biomass. This review briefly summarizes the scientific literature on performance and health of animals consuming feed containing GE ingredients and composition of products derived from them. It also discusses the field experience of feeding GE feed sources to commercial livestock populations and summarizes the suppliers of GE and non-GE animal feed in global trade. Numerous experimental studies have consistently revealed that the performance and health of GE-fed animals are comparable with those fed isogenic non-GE crop lines. United States animal agriculture produces over 9 billion food-producing animals annually, and more than 95% of these animals consume feed containing GE ingredients. Data on livestock productivity and health were collated from publicly available sources from 1983, before the introduction of GE crops in 1996, and subsequently through 2011, a period with high levels of predominately GE animal feed. These field data sets, representing over 100 billion animals following the introduction of GE crops, did not reveal unfavorable or perturbed trends in livestock health and productivity. No study has revealed any differences in the nutritional profile of animal products derived from GE-fed animals. Because DNA and protein are normal components of the diet that are digested, there are no detectable or reliably quantifiable traces of GE components in milk, meat, and eggs following consumption of GE feed. Globally, countries that are cultivating GE corn and soy are the major livestock feed exporters. Asynchronous regulatory approvals (i.e., cultivation approvals of GE varieties in exporting countries occurring before food and feed approvals in importing countries) have resulted in trade disruptions. This is likely to be increasingly problematic in the future as there are a large number of "second generation" GE crops with altered output traits for improved livestock feed in the developmental and regulatory pipelines. Additionally, advanced techniques to affect targeted genome modifications are emerging, and it is not clear whether these will be encompassed by the current GE process-based trigger for regulatory oversight. There is a pressing need for international harmonization of both regulatory frameworks for GE crops and governance of advanced breeding techniques to prevent widespread disruptions in international trade of livestock feedstuffs in the future.

Entities:  

Keywords:  genetic engineering; genetically modified organisms; livestock feed; safety

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25184846     DOI: 10.2527/jas.2014-8124

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Anim Sci        ISSN: 0021-8812            Impact factor:   3.159


  21 in total

1.  Regulation of genome edited technologies in India.

Authors:  Murali Krishna Chimata; Gyanesh Bharti
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 2.788

Review 2.  New GMO regulations for old: Determining a new future for EU crop biotechnology.

Authors:  John Davison; Klaus Ammann
Journal:  GM Crops Food       Date:  2017-01-02       Impact factor: 3.074

3.  A risk-based approach to the regulation of genetically engineered organisms.

Authors:  Gregory Conko; Drew L Kershen; Henry Miller; Wayne A Parrott
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2016-05-06       Impact factor: 54.908

Review 4.  Dietary and Policy Priorities for Cardiovascular Disease, Diabetes, and Obesity: A Comprehensive Review.

Authors:  Dariush Mozaffarian
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 29.690

Review 5.  Public Acceptance of Plant Biotechnology and GM Crops.

Authors:  Jan M Lucht
Journal:  Viruses       Date:  2015-07-30       Impact factor: 5.048

6.  Transcriptomic Analysis of Intestinal Tissues from Two 90-Day Feeding Studies in Rats Using Genetically Modified MON810 Maize Varieties.

Authors:  Jutta Sharbati; Marc Bohmer; Nils Bohmer; Andreas Keller; Christina Backes; Andre Franke; Pablo Steinberg; Dagmar Zeljenková; Ralf Einspanier
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2017-12-19       Impact factor: 4.599

Review 7.  Characterization of scientific studies usually cited as evidence of adverse effects of GM food/feed.

Authors:  Miguel A Sánchez; Wayne A Parrott
Journal:  Plant Biotechnol J       Date:  2017-08-16       Impact factor: 9.803

Review 8.  Removing politics from innovations that improve food security.

Authors:  Stuart J Smyth; Alan McHughen; Jon Entine; Drew Kershen; Carl Ramage; Wayne Parrott
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2021-05-30       Impact factor: 2.788

9.  Planting seeds for the future of food.

Authors:  Hilary Green; Pierre Broun; Ismail Cakmak; Liam Condon; Nina Fedoroff; Juan Gonzalez-Valero; Ian Graham; Josette Lewis; Maurice Moloney; Ruth K Oniang'o; Nteranya Sanginga; Peter Shewry; Anne Roulin
Journal:  J Sci Food Agric       Date:  2016-01-05       Impact factor: 3.638

Review 10.  Development of a construct-based risk assessment framework for genetic engineered crops.

Authors:  M P Beker; P Boari; M Burachik; V Cuadrado; M Junco; S Lede; M A Lema; D Lewi; A Maggi; I Meoniz; G Noé; C Roca; C Robredo; C Rubinstein; C Vicien; A Whelan
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2016-06-23       Impact factor: 2.788

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.