DOCSLIB.ORG

FDA Assessment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
FDA Assessment and and regime. AG Bayer property protectionpublishing of contents its parties.data therefore and/oror affiliates. property intellectualthird may its the as of and owner. Safety, is regulatory According a document Conclusion any such its Insect-Protected reproductiondocument owner this of Compositional under of rightsthe this documentand/or rights to of fall use of to Based the FDA's This may distribution,and rights owner subject Corn Policyon be the violate and copy of Studies and Lines may documentpublication, Nutritional It exploitation on this any Foodsand MON permission prohibited Information 809 the from Aspects commercial be and Furthermore,any New 810: Consequently,without of Prepared PlantEvaluated Varieties by June Monsanto 6,1996 # 96·102F The Agricultural Submitted 700 Chesterfield Chesterfield, GroupRegulatory by of ParkwayMonsanto MO Affairs 63198 North CompanyManager TABLE OF CONTENTS "" Page Title Page 1 Table of Contents 2 List of Abbreviations 7 L Introduction 8 A. Subject of Request 8 B. Application of FDA Food Policy 8 C. The CryIA(b) Protein and the Selectable Marker 9 and D. Consultations with FDA and regime.10 AG II. Rationale for the Development of Insect-Protected Corn 11 Bayer property publishing A. Rationale for the Development of Insect-Protectedprotection Corn contents 11 B. Benefits of Insect-Protectedof Corn 13 its parties.data therefore m. Molecular Characterization of Insect-Protectedand/or Cornor affiliates. Lines MON 809 and 810property intellectualthird may 15 its as the of and Introduction is regulatory owner. 15 a document A. The Donor Genesany such its 15 cryIA(b) reproductiondocument 1. gene owner this of 15 2. CP4 EPSPS marker undergene of 15 3. gox markerrights genethe this 16 documentand/or rights 4. nptII bacterialto of markerfall geneuse of 16 B. Particle Acceleration Transformationthe System 16 This may distribution,and C. Constructionrights of the Plasmid Vectors,owner PV-ZMBK07 and PV-ZMGT10,subject Utilized for Transformation 17 1. the violate be Plantcopy expression vector - PV-ZMBK07 17 2. Plant expression vectorof - PV-ZMGT10 20 and mayD. Genetic document Analysispublication, of Insect-Protected Corn Line It MON809 exploitation 23 1. thisSummary any 23 2. Discussionpermission and results 24 a. Southern blotprohibited results 24 the b.commercial Insert number be 24 c. Insert composition 24 Furthermore,any3. Conclusions 26 Consequently,E. Geneticwithout Analysis of Insect-Protected Corn Line MON 810 32 1. Summary 32 2. Discussion and results 32 a. Insert number 32 b. Insert composition 33 ,.. 3. Conclusions 34 - TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) "" , - " Page F. Segregation Data and Stability of Gene Transfer 39 1. Insect-protected corn line MON 809 39 2. Insect-protected corn line MON 810 40 G. Conclusion 41 IV. Safety of the New Corn Variety 45 A. Safety Assessment of New Varieties: the Host Plant, Corn regime.45and 1. The History and utilization of modern cornand 45 2. Corn as a food source in the UnitedAG States 45 3. Corn and animal nutrition in the United States 46 4. Compositional analysis of insect-protected corn Bayer property protectionpublishing lines MON 809 and 810of contents46 a. Proximate analysis ofMON 809 and 810 cornits parties.data therefore grain and/oror 46 b. Amino acid compositionaffiliates. ofMON 809 and 810 property intellectualthird may corn grain its 47 as c. Fattythe acid of composition and ofMON 809 ad 810 corn grainis regulatory owner. 48 a documentits :" d. Inorganicany componentssuch ofMON 809 and 810 reproductiondocument corn grain owner this of 49 ~ e. Compositional analysesunder ofof forage this from corn and/orrights the documentlines to MON 809fall and 810 grownof in therights 1995 Europeanof field trials use 50 the This 5. Conclusionsmay distribution,and 51 B. Safety Assessmentrights of New Varieties:owner the Donors 53 subject 1. Donor organisms 53 be the violate C. Safetycopy Assessment of Newof Varieties: Proteins Introduced from Donor(s)and 56 may documentpublication, It 1. Expressionexploitation levels of the CryIA(b), CP4 EPSPS, thisGOX and NPTII proteins 56 2. Assessmentany of the allergenic potential of the permission CryIA(b) andprohibited CP4 EPSPS proteins 57 the V. Conclusioncommercial for the be Safety Assessment of Insect-Protected Corn Lines MON 809 and 810 62 Furthermore,any Consequently,without VI. List of Supporting Studies and Submissions 63 A. Summary Assessments Previously Submitted to the FDA 63 003 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) ~. - - Page B. Studies Submitted to the EPA to Support the Registration and Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance of the CryIA(b) Protein as a Plant Pesticide 63 C. Studies Submitted to the EPA to Support the Exemption from the Requirement of a Tolerance for the CP4 EPSPS Protein as a Pesticide Inert Ingredient 65 D. Petitions Previously Submitted to the USDA in Support and ofa Determination of Nonregulated Status and regime.66 AG VII. References 67 Bayer property protectionpublishing List of Figures of contents its parties.data therefore Figure III.1 Plasmid map of PV-ZMBK07 and/oror 18 affiliates. Figure III.2 Plasmid mapproperty ofPV-ZMGT10 intellectualthird may 21 its as the of and Figure IIL3 Southernis blot analysis ofregulatory corn line MaN 809owner. a document ... DNA: insertany such number analysis its 27 reproductiondocument . owner this of Figure III.4 Southern blot analysisunder of cornof line MaN 809 rightsthe this documentDNA:and/or cryIA(b) gene analysis rights 28 to of fall use of the FigureThis III.5 Southernmay blot analysisdistribution,and of corn line MaN 809 DNA:rights CP4 EPSPS analysisowner 29 subject be the violate Figure III.6 copySouthern blot analysisof of corn line MaN 809 DNA: gox gene analysisand 30 may documentpublication, It exploitation Figure III. 7 this Southern blot analysis of corn line MaN 809 anyDNA: nptII and ori-pUC analysis 31 permission prohibited Figure IIL8 Southern blot analysis of corn line MaN 810 the commercialDNA: insert be number analysis 35 Furthermore,Figure III.9any Southern blot analysis of corn line MaN 810 Consequently,without DNA: cryIA(b) gene analysis 36 Figure IlL10 Southern blot analysis of corn line MaN 810 DNA: CP4 EPSPS and gox gene analysis 37 Figure III.11 Southern blot analysis of corn line MaN 810 "'-- DNA: nptII and ori-pUC analysis 38 -'""'- TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) - iT Page Figure IIf.12 Deduced amino acid sequence of the CryIA(b) protein 42 Figure III.13 Deduced amino acid sequence of the CP4 EPSPS 43 protein Figure IIL14 Deduced amino acid sequence of the GOX protein 43 regime.and Figure III.15 Deduced amino acid sequence of the NPTIIand protein 44 AG Figure IV.1 Safety Assessment of New Varieties: The Host Plant 52 Bayer property protectionpublishing of contents Figure IV.2 Safety Assessment of New Varieties: The Donorits 55 parties.data therefore and/oror Figure IV.3 Safety Assessmentaffiliates. of New Varieties: Proteins property intellectualthird may Introduced fromits Donor 61 as the of and is regulatory owner. a document List of Tables any such its reproductiondocument of ~ owner this Table IlL1 Summary of DNA elementsunder inof the plasmid 19 rightsthe this documentPV-ZMBK07and/or rights to of fall use of the Table ThisIII.2 Summary ofmay DNA distribution, elementsand in the plasmid 22 PV-ZMGT10rights owner subject be the violate Table IlL3 Segregationcopy data andof analysis of progeny of insect- 39 protected corn line MONand 809 may documentpublication, It exploitation Table IlIA thisStability of gene transfer based on segregation data forany backcross derivatives of insect- protected corn permission line MON 809prohibited in two unrelated in.bred lines (B73 and Mo17)the 39 commercial be Table IlL5 Segregation data and analysis of progeny of insect- Furthermore,any protected corn line MON 810 40 Consequently,without Table IlL6 Stability of gene transfer based on segregation data for backcross derivatives of insect- protected corn line MON 810 in two unrelated inbred lines (B73 and Mo17) 40 Table IV.1 Summary of proximate analysis of grain from corn .~ lines MON 809 and 810 47 ·005 TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) ......., - ~ Page Table IV.2 Amino acid composition of corn grain 48 Table IV.3 Fatty acid composition of corn grain 49 Tab:E IVA. Inorganic components of corn grain 49 Table HI.5 Compositional analyses on forage samples of corn line 810 from France field trials 50 and Table IV.6 Summary of specific protein levels measuredand in regime. tissues ofinsect-protected cornAG lines MON 809 and 810 57 Bayer property protectionpublishing Table IV.7 Characteristics of knownof allergenic proteins contents60 its parties.data therefore and/oror Appendices affiliates. property intellectualthird may its Appendix I. The History and asUtilization of Modern Corn 78 the of and is regulatory owner. a documentits - ~ Appendix H. Corn asany a Foodsuch Source in the United States 87 reproductiondocument owner this of Dr. Pamela White,under Dept.of of Food Science and " rightsthe this documentand/or Human Nutrition, and Dr.of Linda rights Pollak, Dept.to of of Agronomy,fall use Iowa State University. the This may distribution,and Appendix III. Cornrights and Animal Nutritionowner in the United States 124 subject be the violate copy Dr. Mark D. Newcomb,of University Extension, University of Missouri,and Columbia. may documentpublication, It exploitation Appendix IV.this anySummary of the Materials and Methods for the 154 Proximate Analysis, Amino Acid Composition, permission Fatty Acidprohibited Analyses, and Quantification of the commercialInorganic be Components of Grain and Silage Samples Furthermore,any Consequently,without ·006 - ... Abbreviations Used in this Summary of the Safety, CompositionaI, and Nutritional Aspects of fusect·Protected Corn Lines MON 809 and 810 2,4-D (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid APHIS Animal Plant Health Inspection Service bp,Kb Base pairs, kilobase pairs B.t.k. Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki CaMV Cauliflower mosaic virus CFR Code of federal regulations CP4 EPSPS EPSPS from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4 and and regime.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mon-810-Pollen
    mon-810-pollen Organisation: Dr. Steisslinger Consulting Country: Germany Type: Consultant a. Assessment: 3. Environmental risk assessment GMO plants do not belong into the environment!!! Safety has never been properly established. I oppose vehemntly any relaease into the environment. Organisation: E3D Country: France Type: Association a. Assessment: Molecular characterisation The implanted genes are truncated and therefore their expression is not identical to that produced and expressed by Bacillus Thurigensis as an insecticide. b. Food Safety Assessment: Toxicology No studies covering a period longer than three months have ever been produced by the breeder (Monsanto). A study over at least two years should have been necessary for the maize to gain appoval. Why is the pollen not tested over two years? Allergenicity Ditto Nutritional assessment Substantial equivalence is a complete fraud, accepted by the ..... of the US Food and Drug Administration. Why? 3. Environmental risk assessment No studies have ever been produced by Monsanto. 4. Conclusions and recommendations Definitive prohibition of any GMO on which a full study spanning at least two years (rats) has not been conducted. 6. Labelling proposal Irelevant. Organisation: Conservation Engineering Ltd Country: United Kingdom Type: Individual a. Assessment: 4. Conclusions and recommendations Please keep GM pollen out of the EU. Reject this proposal and application Organisation: Testbiotech Country: Germany Type: Non Profit Organisation a. Assessment: Molecular characterisation The EFSA risk assessment suffers from a lack of data on the actual Bt content in pollen. The original data from Monsanto are around 20 years old. Since then only very few data were made available. Further, the methods for measuring the Bt content were never evaluated for reliability and comparability (Szecaks, et al., 2011).
    [Show full text]
  • Instituto Politecnico Nacional
    INSTITUTO POLITECNICO NACIONAL ESCUELA NACIONAL DE CIENCIAS BIOLOGICAS SECCIÓN DE ESTUDIOS DE POSGRADO E INVESTIGACIÓN ESTUDIO DE CAMBIOS ESTRUCTURALES Y EN ALGUNOS COMPUESTOS FENÓLICOS DURANTE LA ELABORACIÓN DE TESGÜINO DE MAÍZ AZUL (Zea mays) TESI S QUE PARA OBTENER EL GRADO DE: DOCTOR E N C I E N C I A S EN ALIMENTOS PRESENTA : M. EN C. DENI NAVA ARENAS DIRECTORES DE TESIS: DR. HUMBERTO HERNANDEZ SANCHEZ DR. ANTONIO JIMENEZ APARICIO MÉXICO, D.F. MAYO 2009 El presente trabajo se llevo a cabo en el Laboratorio de Biotecnología de Alimentos del Departamento de Graduados en Alimentos, Sección de Estudios de Posgrado e Investigación de la Escuela Nacional de Ciencias Biológicas del Instituto Politécnico Nacional, con el apoyo de los proyectos: Estudio de algunos cambios en los CGPI 2005 compuestos fitoquímicos del maíz azul (Zea Clave 2005 0137 mays L) durante su procesamiento biotecnológico. Estudio de algunos cambios en compuestos CGPI 2006 fenólicos del maíz azul durante la Clave 2006 0568 elaboración de tesgüino Así como de: Beca Institucional para estudios de Febrero 2005 – Julio 2006 Doctorado. Beca CONACyT para estudios de Agosto 2006 – Diciembre Doctorado. 2008 Apoyo del Programa Institucional Febrero 2005 – Diciembre de Formación de Investigadores. 2007 Beca Institucional para Tesis de Febrero 2009 – Julio 2009 Doctorado. INSTITUTO POLITÉCNICO NACIONAL ESCUELA NACIONAL DE CIENCIAS BIOLÓGICAS SECCIÓN DE ESTUDIOS DE PORGRADO E INVESTIGACIÓN DOCTORADO EN ALIMENTOS ESTUDIO DE CAMBIOS ESTRUCTURALES Y EN ALGUNOS COMPUESTOS FENÓLICOS DURANTE LA ELABORACIÓN DE TESGÜINO DE MAIZ AZUL (Zea mays) TESIS DE DOCTORADO DIRECTOR DE TÉSIS Y CONSEJERO DE ESTUDIOS: DR. HUMBERTO HERNÁNDEZ SÁNCHEZ DIRECTOR: DR.
    [Show full text]
  • Submission to the French Comimission Du Genie Biomoleculaire
    Submission to the French Comimission du Genie Biomoleculaire Application to Place on the Market Genetically Modified Higher Plants: Insect-Protected Maize (MON 810) by Monsanto Company represented by Monsanto Europe S.A. List of Abbreviations 2,4-D (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acid APHIS Animal Plant Health Inspection Service bp, Kb Base pairs, kilobase pairs B. t.h. Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. kurstaki CaMV Cauliflower mosaic virus CaMVV E35S 35S promoter with enhancer sequence from CaMV CFR U S. Code of federal regulations CP4 EPSPS EPSPS from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4 cry JA(b) C"lass I (Lepidoptera-specific) crystal protein gene CTP Chloroplast transit peptide E. coli Escherichica colt ECB European corn borer ELISA Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPSPS 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase FDA U.S. Food and Drug Administration GLP Good Laboratory Practices GMO Genetically Modified Organism gox Gene for glyphosate oxidoreductase GOX Glyphosate oxidoreductase hsp70 Intron sequence from maize heat-shock protein 70 IPM Integrated Pest Management kD Kilodaltons N.A. Not analysed N.D. Not detected NOS 3' 3' transcriptional termination sequence from nopaline synthase NPTII Neomycin phosphotransferase II np tll Gene for neomycin phosphotransferase II 0 ri-p UC Bacterial origin of replication from the pUC plasmid PCR Polymerase chain reaction ppm parts per million SSUIA small subunit gene of ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase USDA United States Department of Agriculture W/W weight/weight 2 Table of Contents PART A: GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Details of notification ................ .. 7 2. Notifier/manufacturer/importer........ ........ 7 3. Characterization of the GMOs contained in the product.....
    [Show full text]
  • Application for Authorization of NK603 × MON 810 Maize for Cultivation in the European Union Under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on Genetically Modified Food and Feed
    Application for authorization of NK603 × MON 810 maize for cultivation in the European Union under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 on genetically modified food and feed Part II Summary October 2005 Part II - Summary A. GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Details of application a) Member State of application The Netherlands b) Notification number Not known at the time of application c) Name of the product (commercial and other names) The Monsanto development code for this genetically modified maize is: NK603 × MON 810. NK603 × MON 810 varieties are marketed under the name of the hybrid variety, in association with the trademarks YieldGard ® Corn Borer with Roundup Ready ® Corn 2, indicating clearly to growers that the hybrid is protected from specific lepidopteran insect pests and that it is tolerant to Roundup ® herbicide. d) Date of acknowledgement of notification Not known at the time of application 2. Applicant a) Name of applicant Monsanto Company, represented by Monsanto Europe S.A./N.V. b) Address of applicant Monsanto Europe S.A./N.V. Monsanto Company Avenue de Tervuren 270-272 800 N. Lindbergh Boulevard B-1150 Brussels St. Louis, Missouri 63167 BELGIUM U.S.A c) Name and address of the person established in the Community who is responsible for the placing on the market, whether it be the manufacturer, the importer or the distributor, if different from the applicant (Commission Decision 2004/204/EC Art 3(a)(ii)) NK603 × MON 810 maize 1 will be cultivated, traded and used in the European Union in the same manner as current commercial maize and by the same growers and operators currently involved in the planting, trade and use of traditional maize.
    [Show full text]
  • Stone-Boiling Maize with Limestone: Experimental Results and Implications for Nutrition Among SE Utah Preceramic Groups Emily C
    Agronomy Publications Agronomy 1-2013 Stone-boiling maize with limestone: experimental results and implications for nutrition among SE Utah preceramic groups Emily C. Ellwood Archaeological Investigations Northwest, Inc. M. Paul Scott United States Department of Agriculture, [email protected] William D. Lipe Washington State University R. G. Matson University of British Columbia John G. Jones WFoasllohinwgt thion Sst atnde U naiddveritsitiony al works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/agron_pubs Part of the Agricultural Science Commons, Agronomy and Crop Sciences Commons, Food Science Commons, and the Indigenous Studies Commons The ompc lete bibliographic information for this item can be found at http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ agron_pubs/172. For information on how to cite this item, please visit http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ howtocite.html. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Agronomy at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Agronomy Publications by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Journal of Archaeological Science 40 (2013) 35e44 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Journal of Archaeological Science journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jas Stone-boiling maize with limestone: experimental results and implications for nutrition among SE Utah preceramic groups Emily C. Ellwood a, M. Paul Scott b, William D. Lipe c,*, R.G. Matson d, John G. Jones c a Archaeological
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Monitoring Report on the Cultivation of MON 810 in 2008
    Annual Monitoring Report on the Cultivation of MON 810 in 2008 Czech Republic, Germany, Portugal, Slovakia, Poland, Romania and Spain Submitted by MONSANTO EUROPE S.A. Dept. Regulatory Affairs Avenue de Tervuren 270-272 Tervurenlaan 270-272 B-1150 Brussels BELGIUM VOLUME 1 OF 1 July 2009 Data protection. This application contains scientific data and other information which are protected in accordance with Art. 31 of Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003. © 2009 Monsanto Company. All Rights Reserved. This document is protected under copyright law. This document is for use only by the regulatory authority to which this has been submitted by Monsanto Company, and only in support of actions requested by Monsanto Company. Any other use of this material, without prior written consent of Monsanto Company, is strictly prohibited. By submitting this document, Monsanto Company does not grant any party or entity any right to license, or to use the information of intellectual property described in this document. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2008, Bt maize was planted in the EU on 107,719 hectares across seven countries (James, 2008). As part of stewardship of the technology, industry has implemented an Insect Resistance Management (IRM) plan to proactively avoid and/or delay the potential development of pest resistance to the Cry protein, as well as a voluntary general surveillance monitoring program. The adherence to these stewardship measures in the context of the cultivation of MON 810 maize in Europe is detailed in the Annual Monitoring Report on the Cultivation of MON 810 in 2008. The planting of MON 810 in the 2008 season was accompanied by a rigorous IRM plan involving three main elements: refuge implementation, monitoring and farmer education.
    [Show full text]
  • Estudio Preliminar Del Axokot, Bebida Tradicional Fermentada, Bajo Una Perspectiva Transdisciplinaria
    C i e n c i a y t e c n o l o g í a Estudio preliminar del Axokot, bebida tradicional fermentada, bajo una perspectiva transdisciplinaria María Guadalupe Sánchez Dirzo1, Clementina Esmeralda López Ferrer1,2, Martha Flores Valadez1,2, Ana Luisa Jofre Garfias1, José Antonio Aguirre Rodríguez1, Erika Jazmine Morales Cruz1, Ricardo Reyes Chilpa3. 1Universidad Simón Bolívar, 2Instituto Politécnico Nacional, 3Instituto de Química, UNAM. Resumen El Axokot es una bebida que preparan y consumen los nahuas de la Sierra Norte de Puebla. Se elabora con maíz nixtamalizado (Zea mays) y una pasta preparada con cal y axokotxihuit (Fleischmannia pycnocephala), cuya identidad botánica no había sido determinada. Su es- tudio se llevó a cabo a través de la entrevista y la observación directa de su elaboración en una comunidad nahua de Cuetzalan. Se exponen los avances realizados sobre su contenido nutricio y microbiota obtenidos mediante técnicas de normatividad vigentes para el análisis bromatológico y microbiológico. Palabras clave: Axokot, bebida tradicional fermentada, etnobotánica, microbiota, análisis bromatológico. Abstract The Axokot is a traditional fermented beverage made and drink by the nahuas from the North Mountains of Puebla. It is made by peeled corn (Zea mays) and a paste prepared with calcium oxide and axocotxihuit (Fleischmannia pycnocephala), which botanical species was not been determined previously. The study was made by direct interview with prepar- ing people and the observation of its elaboration. It is exposed the latest advances about its nutritional contents and microbiota obtained by actual normativity techniques for both bromatological and microbiological analysis. Keywords: Axokot, traditional fermented beverage, ethnobotany, microbiota, bromato- logical analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Nutrient Content
    USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard ReferenceRelease 28 Nutrients: 20:5 n-3 (EPA) (g) Food Subset: All Foods Ordered by: Nutrient Content Measured by: Household Report Run at: September 18, 2016 04:44 EDT 20:5 n-3 (EPA)(g) NDB_No Description Weight(g) Measure Per Measure 04591 Fish oil, menhaden 13.6 1.0 tbsp 1.791 15197 Fish, herring, Pacific, cooked, dry heat 144.0 1.0 fillet 1.788 04593 Fish oil, salmon 13.6 1.0 tbsp 1.771 04594 Fish oil, sardine 13.6 1.0 tbsp 1.379 15040 Fish, herring, Atlantic, cooked, dry heat 143.0 1.0 fillet 1.300 83110 Fish, mackerel, salted 80.0 1.0 piece (5-1/2" x 1-1/2" x 1/2") 1.295 15041 Fish, herring, Atlantic, pickled 140.0 1.0 cup 1.180 15046 Fish, mackerel, Atlantic, raw 112.0 1.0 fillet 1.006 35190 Salmon, red (sockeye), filets with skin, smoked (Alaska Native) 108.0 1.0 filet 0.977 15094 Fish, shad, american, raw 85.0 3.0 oz 0.923 15210 Fish, salmon, chinook, cooked, dry heat 85.0 3.0 oz 0.858 15078 Fish, salmon, chinook, raw 85.0 3.0 oz 0.857 04590 Fish oil, herring 13.6 1.0 tbsp 0.853 15043 Fish, herring, Pacific, raw 85.0 3.0 oz 0.824 15208 Fish, sablefish, cooked, dry heat 85.0 3.0 oz 0.737 15236 Fish, salmon, Atlantic, farmed, raw 85.0 3.0 oz 0.733 15181 Fish, salmon, pink, canned, without salt, solids with bone and liquid 85.0 3.0 oz 0.718 15088 Fish, sardine, Atlantic, canned in oil, drained solids with bone 149.0 1.0 cup, drained 0.705 15116 Fish, trout, rainbow, wild, cooked, dry heat 143.0 1.0 fillet 0.669 15237 Fish, salmon, Atlantic, farmed, cooked, dry heat 85.0 3.0 oz 0.586 15239
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 5.3 MON 810 Literature Review – List of All Hits (June 2016
    Appendix 5.3 MON 810 literature review – List of all hits (June 2016-May 2017) -Web of ScienceTM Core Collection database 12/8/2016 Web of Science [v.5.23] ­ Export Transfer Service Web of Science™ Page 1 (Records 1 ­­ 50) [ 1 ] Record 1 of 50 Title: Ground beetle acquisition of Cry1Ab from plant­ and residue­based food webs Author(s): Andow, DA (Andow, D. A.); Zwahlen, C (Zwahlen, C.) Source: BIOLOGICAL CONTROL Volume: 103 Pages: 204­209 DOI: 10.1016/j.biocontrol.2016.09.009 Published: DEC 2016 Abstract: Ground beetles are significant predators in agricultural habitats. While many studies have characterized effects of Bt maize on various carabid species, few have examined the potential acquisition of Cry toxins from live plants versus plant residue. In this study, we examined how live Bt maize and Bt maize residue affect acquisition of Cry1Ab in six species. Adult beetles were collected live from fields with either current­year Bt maize, one­year­old Bt maize residue, two­year­old Bt maize residue, or fields without any Bt crops or residue for the past two years, and specimens were analyzed using ELISA. Observed Cry1Ab concentrations in the beetles were similar to that reported in previously published studies. Only one specimen of Cyclotrachelus iowensis acquired Cry1Ab from two­year­old maize residue. Three species acquired Cry1Ab from fields with either live plants or plant residue (Cyclotrachelus iowensis, Poecilus lucublandus, Poecilus chalcites), implying participation in both live­plant and residue­based food webs. Two species acquired toxin from fields with live plants, but not from fields with residue (Bembidion quadrimaculatum, Elaphropus incurvus), suggesting participation only in live plant­based food webs.
    [Show full text]
  • AP-42, CH 9.9.7: Corn Wet Milling
    9.9.7 Corn Wet Milling 9.9.7.1 General1 Establishments in corn wet milling are engaged primarily in producing starch, syrup, oil, sugar, and byproducts such as gluten feed and meal, from wet milling of corn and sorghum. These facilities may also produce starch from other vegetables and grains, such as potatoes and wheat. In 1994, 27 corn wet milling facilities were reported to be operating in the United States. 9.9.7.2 Process Description1-4 The corn wet milling industry has grown in its 150 years of existence into the most diversified and integrated of the grain processing industries. The corn refining industry produces hundreds of products and byproducts, such as high fructose corn syrup (HFCS), corn syrup, starches, animal feed, oil, and alcohol. In the corn wet milling process, the corn kernel (see Figure 9.9.7-1) is separated into 3 principal parts: (1) the outer skin, called the bran or hull; (2) the germ, containing most of the oil; and (3) the endosperm (gluten and starch). From an average bushel of corn weighing 25 kilograms (kg) (56 pounds [lb]), approximately 14 kg (32 lb) of starch is produced, about 6.6 kg (14.5 lb) of feed and feed products, about 0.9 kg (2 lb) of oil, and the remainder is water. The overall corn wet milling process consists of numerous steps or stages, as shown schematically in Figure 9.9.7-2. Shelled corn is delivered to the wet milling plant primarily by rail and truck and is unloaded into a receiving pit.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversity on the Farm How Traditional Crops Around the World Help to Feed Us All, and Why We Should Reward the People Who Grow Them
    Diversity on the Farm How traditional crops around the world help to feed us all, and why we should reward the people who grow them. FORD FOUNDATION By Charles C. Mann POLITICAL ECONOMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS Maize Front cover, left: Hector Diaz Castellano, a Zapotec small-holder, on his farm in the hills of southern Mexico; right: an array of native maize varieties. Above and right: Post-harvest survey of native maize varieties at INIFAP, an agricultural-research institute outside the city of Oaxaca; inside left: making the maize drink atole in a country market; inside right: rinsing off the lime used to process maize kernels for hand-made tortillas in Ítanoni, an unusual gourmet tortillería in Oaxaca city that may serve as one model for saving agricultural biodiversity. By Charles C. Mann Photographs by Peter Menzel Diversity on the Farm Subhead if any goes here for the development of wild corn and Maize heirloom varieties At Ítanoni, hand-made tortillas 2 Mission Statements 17 From the Stomach 23 The Best Tortillas from single varieties of native maize to the Heart in Mexico are cooked on traditional circular 3 Foreword clay griddles called comales. 25 Notes 5 Introduction 19 What We Can Do: Five Approaches 28 Credits 7 Building the Roof with 1. LABELING Stones from the Foundation 2. CROP IMPROVEMENT 3. REMOVING PERVERSE INCENTIVES 11 Conserving Agricultural Biodiversity 4. PAYING FOR CURRENTLY Copyright 2004 UNCOMPENSATED SERVICES by the Ford Foundation all rights reserved. 13 A Community Effort 5. INCREASING SOCIAL CAPITAL Mission Statements FORD FOUNDATION The Ford Foundation is a resource for innovative people and institutions worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • Hopi Crop Diversity and Change
    J. Ethtlobiol. 13(2);203-231 Winter 1993 HOPI CROP DIVERSITY AND CHANGE DANIELA SOLER I and DAVID A. CLEVELAND Center for People, Food, and Environment 344 South Third Ave. Thcson, AZ 85701 ABSTRACT.-There is increasing interest in conserving indigenous crop genetic diversity ex situ as a vital resource for industrial agriculture. However, crop diver­ sity is also important for conserving indigenously based, small-scale agriculture and the farm communities which practice it. Conservation of these resources may best be accomplished, therefore, by ensuring their survival in situ as part of local farming communities like the Hopi. The Hopi are foremost among Native Ameri­ can farmers in the United States in retaining their indigenous agriculture and folk crop varieties (FVs), yet little is known about the dynamics of change and persis­ tence in their crop repertoires. The purpose of our research was to investigate agricultural crop diversity in the form of individual Hopi farmers' crop reper­ toires, to establish the relative importance of Hopi FVs and non·Hopi crop vari­ eties in those repertoires, and to explore the reasons for change or persistence in these repertoires. We report data from a 1989 survey of a small (n "" 50), oppor­ tunistic sample of Hopi farmers and discuss the dynamics of change based on cross·sectional comparisons of the data on crop variety distribution, on farmers' answers to questions about change in their crop repertoires, and on the limited comparisons possible with a 1935 survey of Hopi seed sources. Because ours is a small, nonprobabilistic sample it is not possible to make valid extrapolations to Hopi farmers in general.
    [Show full text]