SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • DNA;
  • genetically modified organisms;
  • protein;
  • standardization;
  • testing methods

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Labeling Regulations to GM Foods and Feed
  5. DNA-based Analytical Methods
  6. Protein-Based Methods
  7. Standardization of Testing Methods for GMOs
  8. Detection of Unauthorized GMOs
  9. GMO-Related Databases
  10. Future Perspectives
  11. Acknowledgements
  12. References

inline imageDabing Zhang (Corresponding author)

As the worldwide commercialization of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) increases and consumers concern the safety of GMOs, many countries and regions are issuing labeling regulations on GMOs and their products. Analytical methods and their standardization for GM ingredients in foods and feed are essential for the implementation of labeling regulations. To date, the GMO testing methods are mainly based on the inserted DNA sequences and newly produced proteins in GMOs. This paper presents an overview of GMO testing methods as well as their standardization.


Introduction

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Labeling Regulations to GM Foods and Feed
  5. DNA-based Analytical Methods
  6. Protein-Based Methods
  7. Standardization of Testing Methods for GMOs
  8. Detection of Unauthorized GMOs
  9. GMO-Related Databases
  10. Future Perspectives
  11. Acknowledgements
  12. References

Since the first commercial genetically modified (GM) plant (the FlavrSavr tomato) was approved for marketing in 1994, recombinant DNA technology has been widely used in modern agriculture. So far, 184 GM events have been authorized for food and feed production in 59 countries, and the planting region of GM crops reached 148 million hectares in 2010 (James 2011). However, owing to the ever-increasing global controversial issues on food safety, environmental risk and ethical concerns (Dlugosch and Whitton 2008), more and more countries and regions have required the labeling of food products and ingredients containing or derived from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) (Ruttink et al. 2010). In addition, with increasing international trade of food and feed, international harmonization of the detection methods of GMO analysis is necessary. Thus the development of reliable testing methods and their standardization for GMO detection, identification, traceability and quantification is a key step in GMO development and commercialization. Current analytical methods are mainly carried out by either detecting the transgenic DNA or the foreign protein(s) produced in GMOs using polymerase chain reaction (PCR), molecular hybridization, microarrays, biosensors, and sequencing methods, etc. (Holst-Jensen 2009). Some novel, high-throughput DNA amplification or PCR-free methods have also been reported (Morisset et al. 2008; Guan et al. 2010; Li et al. 2010; Guo et al. 2011).

Labeling Regulations to GM Foods and Feed

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Labeling Regulations to GM Foods and Feed
  5. DNA-based Analytical Methods
  6. Protein-Based Methods
  7. Standardization of Testing Methods for GMOs
  8. Detection of Unauthorized GMOs
  9. GMO-Related Databases
  10. Future Perspectives
  11. Acknowledgements
  12. References

The first labeling regulation (EU Regulation 258/97) of GMOs and GM products was introduced by the European Union (EU) for the consumers’ right to know the information of GM ingredients in foods in 1997. Since then, more than 40 countries and regions have introduced the regulations for tracing and/or labeling GM products. While the majority of these countries and regions are the members of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), few developing countries have implemented labeling regulations (Gruère and Rao SR 2007).

The established labeling regulations can be classified into two categories: voluntary (e.g., Canada, Hong Kong, and South Africa) and mandatory (e.g., Australia, the EU, Japan, Brazil, and China) (Gruère and Rao 2007). Among the countries with mandatory labeling, there are many different aspects among their regulations (Table 1). In China, the mandatory labeling regulation set zero tolerance as the threshold level of GM ingredients; while in Australia, European Union and Japan, their mandatory labeling regulations have the threshold levels of GM ingredients to certain ranges (from 0.9% to 5%). Furthermore, some countries (e.g., Korea and Japan) require the threshold levels for three or five individual ingredients in foods. In Japan, the threshold is based on the mass fraction as measurement unit when quantifying GMOs, whereas current EU (e.g., EC 2004/787) and some other countries recommend using “the percentage of GM target DNA copy numbers per corresponding target taxon-specific DNA copy numbers calculated in terms of haploid genomes” as the measurement unit (Marmiroli et al. 2008; Trapmann et al. 2010).

Table 1.  Status of the rules for labeling of genetically modified (GM) foods
Country/regionLabeling typeThreshold levelCountry/regionLabeling typeThreshold level
ChinaMandatory0%IndonesiaMandatory5%
EUMandatory0.9%TaiwanMandatory5%
RussiaMandatory0.9%ThailandMandatory5%
New ZealandMandatory1%the PhilippinesMandatory5%
BrazilMandatory1%ThailandMandatory5%
Saudi ArabiaMandatory1%CanadaVoluntary5%
KoreaMandatory3%Hong KongVoluntary5%
JapanMandatory5%South AfricaVoluntaryNo details
IsraelMandatory1%ArgentinaVoluntaryNo details
ChileMandatory2%USAVoluntaryNo details

DNA-based Analytical Methods

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Labeling Regulations to GM Foods and Feed
  5. DNA-based Analytical Methods
  6. Protein-Based Methods
  7. Standardization of Testing Methods for GMOs
  8. Detection of Unauthorized GMOs
  9. GMO-Related Databases
  10. Future Perspectives
  11. Acknowledgements
  12. References

The analysis procedure for GMOs and derived products consist of sampling, sample preparation, extraction of DNA and protein, examination, and result interpretation (Figure 1). The DNA-based method is relatively stable compared with the one formed on the basis of protein analysis, owing to the DNA retainable in the processed samples. At present, the DNA-based methods involve mainly molecular hybridization (e.g., Southern blot), PCR, and microarray. Among the methods, PCR is in fact the most commonly used tool for GMO detection and traceability, due to its rapid and relatively low-cost detection procedures. PCR can be carried out with qualitative and quantitative methods, including singleplex PCR, multiplex PCR, nested PCR, competitive PCR, and real-time quantitative PCR etc. (Holst-Jensen et al. 2003; Michelini et al. 2008; Querci et al. 2010). The targets for PCR-based GMO tests can be grouped into at least four categories corresponding to their levels of specificity: screening-specific sequences (e.g., p35S and tNOS) (Matsuoka et al. 2002; Dörries et al. 2010), gene-specific sequences (e.g., Cry1Ab and CP4-EPSPS) (Grohmann et al. 2009; Randhawa et al. 2009), construct-specific sequences (Waiblinger et al. 2007; Shrestha et al. 2008), event-specific sequences (Yang et al. 2008a; Guo et al. 2009a; Liu et al. 2009; Oguchi et al. 2010). An event-specific PCR detection strategy is based on the unique and specific integration flanking sequences between the host plant genome DNA and the inserted gene (Holst-Jensen 2003). Some event-specific PCRs have been accredited or validated for the nucleic acid detection by official bodies/reference laboratories, and are currently the most widely used DNA detection methods for determining the presence of GMOs content in processed food and feed samples (Dong et al. 2008).

image

Figure 1. Strategies of genetically modified organism (GMO) detection.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Endogenous reference gene

According to the principle of GMO quantification, one endogenous reference gene should have three typical characters, i.e. species specificity, no allelic variation among various cultivars and low or stable copy number in haploid genome (Ding et al. 2004; Chaouachi et al. 2007). In real-time quantitative PCR analysis, initial amounts of GM and non-GM DNA templates are quantified by standard curves, and GM contents (%) can be calculated by the ratios of specific GMOs target sequence to species-specific endogenous reference gene sequence (Ding et al. 2004; Yang et al. 2005a; Guo et al. 2009b). Consequently, validation of an appropriate endogenous reference gene for each GM plant is necessary for GMO analysis as well as identification of plant ingredients in the mixed samples. So far, great efforts have been made in obtaining reference genes of different crops for detection of GMOs, as shown in Table 2.

Table 2.  Endogenous reference genes used in genetically modified organism (GMO) detection
TargetsSpeciesGenBank No.Reference
ZeinZea mays (maize)X07535Hernandez et al. 2004
zSSIIb AF019297Yoshimura et al. 2005
hmg-A (high mobility group protein) AJ131373Hernandez et al. 2004
Ivr1 (Invertase 1) U16123Hernandez et al. 2004
Adh1 (alcohol dehydrogenase 1) X04050Hernandez et al. 2004
LectinGlycine max (soybean)K00821Hernandez et al. 2005
BnACCg8 (acetyl CoA carboxylase)Brassica napus (rapeseed)X77576James et al. 2003
Cruciferin X59294James et al. 2003
Hmg I/Y (high mobility group protein) AF127919Weng et al. 2005
ApxSolanum lycopersicum (tomato)Y16773Mason et al. 2002
Mcpi (metallo-carboxypeptidase inhibitor) X59282Hernandez et al. 2003a
Lat52 (putative proteine 18 kDa) 19263Yang et al. 2005b
Sad1 (stearoyl-ACP desaturase)Gossypium hirsutum (cotton)AJ132636Yang et al. 2005a
ChymopapainCarica papaya (papaya)AY803756Guo et al. 2009b
Papain M15203.1Goda et al. 2001
SPS (sucrose-6-phosphate synthtase)Oryza sativa (rice)U33175Ding et al. 2004
gos9 X51909Hernandez et al. 2005
Oryzain β D90407Hernandez et al. 2005
UGPase (uridine diphosphate (UDP)-glucose pyrophosphorylase)Solanum tuberosum (potato)U20345Watanabe et al. 2004
Pci (metallo-carboxypeptidase inhibitor) AF060551Hernandez et al. 2003a
γ-hordeinHordeum vulgare (barley)M36378Hernandez et al. 2005
Pkaba1 (serine/threonine protein kinase) AB058924Ronning et al. 2006
Acc1 (acetyl CoA carboxylase1) AF029895Hernandez et al. 2005
Pkaba1 (serine/threonine protein kinase)Triticum aestivum (wheat)M94726Ronning et al. 2006
RALyase AB032124Hernandez et al. 2005
waxy-D1 F113844Iida et al. 2005
Helhianthin (11s storage protein)Helianthus annuus (sunflower)M28832Hernandez et al. 2005

Certified reference material

Certified reference material (CRM) includes values of the materials and techniques used, and the choice of CRMs for construction of calibration curves is very important in GMO quantification (ISO 24276: 2006). Generally, the labeling threshold in most countries (usually from 0.9 to 5%) for GMO events in legislation has been widely interpreted as being the mass/mass or DNA copy ratio, but the available methods for GMO quantization mainly depend on the copy number ratios, which should be converted to mass/mass using CRMs (Rodríguez-Lázaro et al. 2007). The availability of suitable CRMs is a fundamental requirement for the validation of GMO detection methods, and can be used as the calibrant and quality control material in PCR amplification (Trapmann et al. 2010). For such purposes, some countries and regions such as EU, USA, China, Japan etc. strengthen the research and applicability of CRMs. The JRC Institute for Reference Materials and Measurements (IRMM, Geel, Belgium) is an institute responsible for the production of appropriate CRMs in Europe.

However, current CRMs have some limitations in practical application, such as the inadequate availability of GM crop materials, limited quantitative ranges, and high costs (Li et al. 2009). The reference molecules, usually the plasmids containing one or more functional fragments suitable for GM crop event detection, have been developed and proved to be a good alternative for CRM in GMO detection (Yang et al. 2007; Zhang et al. 2008). So far, over 20 reference molecules have been reported and used in the detection of several GM crops, for instance MON159855 and MON88913 cotton, GTS 40–3-2 soybean, GT73 canola, MON863, GA21, TC1507, T25, MON810, NK603, Bt176, E-3272, and 59122 maize (Taverniers et al. 2005; Burns et al. 2006; Lee et al. 2007; Yang et al. 2007; Zhang et al. 2008; Li et al. 2009; Shen et al. 2010) etc.

Qualitative PCR-based detection

To detect GMOs, qualitative PCR technologies are mainly used to screen and/or identify single or multiple transgenic DNA fragments, including singleplex PCR, multiplex PCR, and nested PCR etc. In multiplex PCR, several primer pairs are included to permit the simultaneous detection of multiple target sequences. Generally, the qualitative PCR products are distinguished by size in agarose gel electrophoresis. Randhawa et al. (2009) developed a multiplex PCR assay with six marker/reporter genes (aadA, bar, hpt, nptII, pat, and uidA) that have already been introduced into GMOs. This assay could be immensely used to test unintentional mixing of GM seeds with non-GM seed lots. Onishi et al. (2005) and Shrestha et al. (2008) reported respectively applications of multiplex PCR assay for simultaneous detection of up to eight events of GM maize and endogenous reference gene (zSSIIb or zein) within a single reaction. The limits of detection (LODs) were approximately 0.25% in both assays.

However, the sensitivity and resolution are limited in agarose gel electrophoresis: the requirement of amplicons with apparent differences in size and the longer separation time. Recently, the combination of PCR and capillary gel electrophoresis (CGE) was developed for simultaneous detection of multiple DNA targets. The CGE assay accomplishes higher resolutions compared with agarose gel electrophoresis, and the sample separation time in the assay is shorter. Additionally, this assay has sensitivity and the reproducibility similar to real-time PCR (RT-PCR) (Nadal et al. 2006, 2009), and might be the most prospective analytical method for GMO detection. Nadal et al. (2009) presented the development of the CGE technology for the simultaneous detection of up to eight amplicons. The application offers an alternative tool for routine GMO identification. Recently, Guo et al. (2011) developed a robust high-throughput analytical approach named multiplex microdroplet PCR implemented capillary gel electrophoresis (MPIC) (Figure 2). This assay combines the advantages of bipartite primers, microdroplet PCR and CGE for multiple target DNA analysis, and at least 24 different targets can be simultaneously detected and identified. Furthermore, the microarray is a reliable method for amplicon analysis, but it is also time-consuming and costly (Leimanis et al. 2006; Xu et al. 2007). Another alternative is application of combinations of screening methods and matrix table (Table 3), forming the basis of decision tools to conclude which GMP is present in a sample (Holst-Jensen 2009, Querci et al. 2010). The matrix method has been adopted by many laboratories as part of their general GMO screening strategy.

image

Figure 2. Schematic diagram of the microdroplet PCR implemented capillary gel electrophoresis (MPIC) assay (reproduced from Guo et al. 2011). CGE, capillary gel electrophoresis; PCR, polymerase chain reaction.

Download figure to PowerPoint

Table 3.  Matrix description of the authorized genetically modified (GM) crops in China (2009)
SpeciesGM eventsp35StNOSpFMV35pNOSt35SnptIImCry3ACry3Bb1Cry1FbarpatCry1AbCry1AcmEPSPSCP4-EPSPS
MaizeBt 176X   X    X X   
Bt 11XX        XX   
MON 810X          X   
TC1507X   X     X    
DAS59122X   X   X X    
T 25X   X     X    
MIR 604 X    X        
MON 88017XX     X      X
MON 863XX   X X       
NK 603XX   X        X
GA 21 X           X 
SoybeanGTS 40–3-2XX            X
MON 89788  X           X
A 2704–12X   X     X    
A 5547–127X   X     X    
CanolaRT 73  X           X
T 45X   X     X    
Topas19/2X   X     X    
MS1×RF1 X X X   X     
MS1×RF2 X X X   X     
MS8×RF3 X       X     
OXY-235XX             
CottonMON 531XX   X      X  
MON15985XX XXX      X  
MON 1445XXX  X        X
MON 88913X             X
LL25XX       X     

Quantitative PCR-based detection

Generally, the purpose of GMO quantification is to calculate the fraction of a certain species that comes from GM materials relying on quantitative PCR (Buh Gasparic et al. 2010). In the quantitative PCR assay, the number of initial template molecules can be calculated based on the amount of the products through the standard curves. There are two specific targets needed in GMO quantification: reference gene sequence and exogenous gene sequence. The total number of taxon-specific haploid genomes and GM-specific haploid genomes that are present in the sample were estimated, respectively. The early quantitative PCR tests were based on double competitive PCR (DC-PCR), but quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR), representing the most powerful current means of quantifying GM ingredients, is the most widely used method for GMO detection (Buh Gasparic et al. 2008).

Real time-PCR allows for the real-time monitoring of the amplification reaction through fluorescence signal corresponding to increased amounts of amplification products at each reaction cycle. Because of its ease of use, high throughput ability, decreased post-PCR manipulation, and lack of cross-contamination of PCR amplicons, the RT-PCR method is becoming the new gold standard method for nucleic acid quantification (Yang et al. 2008b). Currently, a number of RT-PCR fluorogenic signal reagents have been developed and applied for quantitative purposes (Buh Gasparic et al. 2008, 2010), for instance sequence unspecific DNA-binding dyes (e.g., SYBR Green I) (Hernandez et al. 2003b), fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET) probes (Wittwer et al. 1997), TaqMan/MGB probes (Terry et al. 2002), LNA (locked nucleic acid) probe (Salvi et al. 2008), Plexor technology (Buh Gasparic et al. 2008), light upon extension (LUX) probe (Nazarenko et al. 2002), molecular beacons (Andersen et al. 2006) and their derivatives (Amplifluor, Sunrise, and scorpion primers) (Whitcombe et al. 1999; Thelwell et al. 2000; Li et al. 2002), and universal template (UT) probe (Zhang et al. 2003) etc. Among them, TaqMan/MGB probes and SYBR green I are the most commonly used RT-PCR chemistries. With the development of detection technology, multiplex TaqMan quantitative PCRs have been recently reported (Bahrdt et al. 2010). Yang et al (2008b) reported a novel set of fluorescent signal devices named Attached Universal Duplex Probes (AUDP), that can not only be used for different target DNA sequences in single PCR assays, but also in duplex PCR assays with higher fluorescent intensity. Moreover, amplified target DNA fragments as long as 1.5 kb can be detected with high efficiency.

Microarrays-based methods

Microarrays, also called “DNA chips”, have the advantages of automation, miniaturization and high-throughput. The microarray consists of glass supports containing thousands of specific oligonucleotide capture probes being spotted in array format to their surface. Subsequently, the detection of the target(s) of interest (DNA or RNA) labeled with a fluorescent marker is performed by direct hybridization (Miraglia et al. 2004; Querci et al. 2010). Sometimes, in order to increase the sensitivity of GMO detection and quantification, an amplification step of the DNA targets is also applied prior to hybridization on microarrays (Morisset et al. 2008). Ultimately, the microarray is scanned for individual fluorescence intensity of each spot by computer and the resultant data are analyzed.

Several assays with microarrays combined with multiplex PCR methods have been reported for detection of GM maize, canola, cotton and soybean events (Leimanis et al. 2006; Xu et al. 2007; Kim et al. 2010) by using fluorescent probes. The strategy of padlock probe ligation-microarray detection of multiple (non-authorized) GMOs was reported (Prins et al. 2008). Prins et al. (2008) demonstrated that the method was suitable for large-scale detection of GMOs in real-life samples. Morisset et al. (2008) developed a novel multiplex quantitative DNA-based target amplification method suitable for use in combination with microarray detection (NAIMA). This fast and simple integrated method allows sensitive, specific and fully quantitative on-chip GMO detection in a multiplex format. Although the microarray analytical approach is relatively expensive, it is also one of the most promising discrimination platforms at present for GMO detection owing to its flexibility and automatic and high-throughput capability.

DNA biosensors

Biosensor technology has been applied in a variety of molecular reactions including protein- and DNA-based testing, showing the advantages of simplicity, speed and cost (Elenis et al. 2008; Holst-Jensen 2009). For DNA biosensor technology, the single-stranded specific oligonucleotide probes (recognition layer) used as capture probes attached to the surface of the sensor is the most widely used. Other DNA biosensor methods based on optical, electrochemical, and piezoelectric transduction have been reported for the detection of amplified or non-amplified GMO-related sequences (Stobiecka et al. 2007; Ahmed et al. 2009; Bai et al. 2010).

Surface plasmon resonance (SPR) is the typical optical biosensors-based method. Gambari and Feriotto (2006) reported the SPR-based assay for rapid (about 40 min), easy, and automatable analysis of GM Roundup Ready soybean in foods. The hybridization of the target DNA with capture probe attached to the surface results in a change in the refractive index of the solution near the surface, and shows a linear relationship to the mass of target DNA hybridized. Enzyme-based electrochemical sensors were developed using disposable oligonucleotide-modified screen-printed gold electrodes. A probe carrying an -SH group at the 5’-end is attached to the gold surface. After the PCR product being denatured is hybridized with a biotinylated probe in solution, the solution is then pipetted onto the electrode and allowed to hybridize with the immobilized probe. The sensor is washed and a streptavidin-alkaline phosphatase conjugate is added. The enzyme catalyzes the hydrolysis of naphthyl phosphate substrate to the electro active naphthol, which is then detected by differential pulse voltammetry (Lucarelli et al. 2005; Elenis et al. 2008). In piezoelectric biosensors assays such as Quartz crystal microbalance (QCM) sensors (Stobiecka et al. 2007), the increase in mass due to hybridization causes a decrease in the resonance frequency, thereby allowing target detection.

Protein-Based Methods

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Labeling Regulations to GM Foods and Feed
  5. DNA-based Analytical Methods
  6. Protein-Based Methods
  7. Standardization of Testing Methods for GMOs
  8. Detection of Unauthorized GMOs
  9. GMO-Related Databases
  10. Future Perspectives
  11. Acknowledgements
  12. References

Foreign proteins produced in GMOs can be detected by application of immunological and physicochemical techniques (Holst-Jensen 2009). The most common protein based assays are immunoassays: the target proteins are detected by specific monoclonal or polyclonal antibodies followed by immunochemical analysis (Michelini et al. 2008). The Lateral flow devices (LFD) and plate-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISA) are the most widely used methods (Fantozzi et al. 2007; Shim et al. 2007). Multiplex protein detection using immunological methods can be also achieved using microarray formats or flow cytometry by colored beads coated with the antibodies (Fantozzi et al. 2007; Ling et al. 2007). In order to increase the sensitivity of immunoassays, Allen et al. (2006) developed a novel immunoassay method in combination with PCR amplification. A sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (S-ELISA) method for the pat and bar genes in GM pepper was developed, showing a detection limit of 0.01 μg/mL in real samples examination (Shim et al. 2007). Other alternative protein-based methods include the use of immunomagnetic electrochemical sensors, 2-dimensional gel electrophoresis, and mass spectrometry (Kim et al. 2006; Volpe et al. 2006; Ocana et al. 2007). However, protein-based methods are not suitable for processed foods because of denaturation occurring during processing. In addition, the higher costs for developing specific antibodies and the fact that antibodies cannot be synthesized simply in comparison to oligonucleotides limits the method's evolution.

Standardization of Testing Methods for GMOs

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Labeling Regulations to GM Foods and Feed
  5. DNA-based Analytical Methods
  6. Protein-Based Methods
  7. Standardization of Testing Methods for GMOs
  8. Detection of Unauthorized GMOs
  9. GMO-Related Databases
  10. Future Perspectives
  11. Acknowledgements
  12. References

To date, up to 184 kinds of events have been developed and approved for application in 59 countries worldwide (James 2011), and many countries have issued GMO labeling and traceability policies. With the quick development of economic globalization and international trade, much effort was taken to develop standard methods for GMO detection to reduce national and international trade disputes. Some organizations, such as International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the Community Reference Laboratory for GM Food and Feed (CRL-GMFF), and Standardization Committee for Agricultural GMOs of China have made significant efforts to initiate the validation and standardization of GMO testing methods. ISO provides some international standard for GMO sampling, DNA extraction, and PCR detection (ISO 21569: 2005; ISO 21570: 2005; ISO 21571: 2005; ISO/TS 21098: 2005; ISO 24276: 2006). In the EU, CRL-GMFF and others have also organized some deliberate collaborative ring trials for p35S and tNOS quantitative detection methods (Feinberg et al. 2005; Fernandez et al. 2005; Waiblinger et al. 2007) and event-specific quantitative detection methods for TC1507, MON863, GA21, and MON810 maize events (http://gmo-crl.jrc.ec.europa.eu/).

In China, significant attention has been devoted to standardization of GMO testing methods. The Standardization Committee for Agricultural GMOs is engaged in large numbers of research projects and the development of GM molecular characterization, analytical methods, and CRM etc. Several endogenous reference genes including rice SPS, tamato Lat52, (Ding et al. 2004; Weng et al. 2005; Yang et al. 2005a, 2005b; Guo et al. 2009a) suitable for GMO detection and event-specific qualitative and quantitative PCR detection methods were validated (http://gmdd.shgmo.org/), and about 40 technical standards were developed (http://www.stee.agri.gov.cn/biosafety/). Several international collaborative validations for GM detection methods were also organized for the international harmonization of the detection. For instance Pan et al. (2007) reported the results of a collaborative ring trial for RT73 event-specific detection method, Jiang et al. (2009) and Yang et al. (2008c) respectively organized the international collaborative validations for the SPS and LAT52 gene. These should greatly assist the international harmonization of GMO identification and quantification.

Detection of Unauthorized GMOs

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Labeling Regulations to GM Foods and Feed
  5. DNA-based Analytical Methods
  6. Protein-Based Methods
  7. Standardization of Testing Methods for GMOs
  8. Detection of Unauthorized GMOs
  9. GMO-Related Databases
  10. Future Perspectives
  11. Acknowledgements
  12. References

With the increase of more developed GMOs and international trade, some unauthorized GMOs have been monitored in the market during recent years (Dorey et al. 2000; Vermij et al. 2006; Holst-Jensen et al. 2008; Cao et al. 2009). Unauthorized GMOs are divided into two classes: (i) GMOs authorized for commercialization in some countries, but not in other countries (also called asynchronous approval); and (ii) GMOs that are not (yet) authorized in any countries or regions (Ruttink et al. 2010). The unauthorized GMOs have been shown to greatly affect domestic supplies, international trade, reduce the trust in industry and authorities, or pose significant risks to human and animal health and the environment (Holst-Jensen et al. 2008, 2009; Michelini et al. 2008). Owing to the lack of available information about the molecular inserts in unauthorized GMOs, the effective way to inspect unauthorized GMOs is a big challenge for detection laboratories.

Currently, the screening method of combining with the matrix table (also referred to as matrix approach) (Table 3) has been used to discriminate an unauthorized GMO from an authorized GMO (Chaouachi et al. 2008; Waiblinger et al. 2008; Ruttink et al. 2010). However, the evidence for the presence of unauthorized GMOs can only be indirectly inferred from the matrix approach because of the non-specificity of the screening method. To overcome this weakness, various approaches have been developed as alternative methods to identify GM events, including the use of differential quantitative PCR (Cankar et al. 2008), DNA insert fingerprinting (Raymond et al. 2010) or anchor-PCR GM fingerprinting method (Ruttink et al. 2010), microarray-based method (Tengs et al. 2007; Prins et al. 2008) etc.

GMO-Related Databases

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Labeling Regulations to GM Foods and Feed
  5. DNA-based Analytical Methods
  6. Protein-Based Methods
  7. Standardization of Testing Methods for GMOs
  8. Detection of Unauthorized GMOs
  9. GMO-Related Databases
  10. Future Perspectives
  11. Acknowledgements
  12. References

Owing to the increasing development of approved GM crop events and more and more GM-derived products being introduced into the market, the detection of GMOs faces increasing challenges. Additionally, hundreds of GMOs detection methods have been developed, and the number is continuously increasing. Rapidly and accurately obtaining the information of GMO background, such as correct inserted gene sequences, validated methods, and reference materials is a fundamental prerequisite for setting up an effective strategy. The development of a GMO database is extremely important. Accordingly, several databases related to GMO safety and risk assessment, application, development, and labeling and regulation etc., have been established. These databases include GMO compass (http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/home/), Agbios GM Crop Database (http://www.cera-gmc.org/?action=gm_crop_database), Living Modified Organism (LMO) Registry (http://bch.cbd.int/database/lmo-registry/), and Agbioforum (http://www.agbioforum.org/) etc. Recently, Dong et al. (2008) reported the development of a database for GMO detection methods (http://gmdd.shgmo.org/). In this database, almost all the previous developed GMOs detection methods were collected, thus providing a user-friendly search service for GMOs by event name, gene, and protein information, etc. In particular, the database supplies sequence information of exogenous inserts, if available, as well as endogenous reference genes, and standard reference materials for GMOs analysis. Furthermore, registered users can submit new GMO detection methods or sequences to this database, which makes this database open. These databases will certainly be a useful tool for method developers, detection laboratories, and regulatory officers from both industry and governments.

Future Perspectives

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Labeling Regulations to GM Foods and Feed
  5. DNA-based Analytical Methods
  6. Protein-Based Methods
  7. Standardization of Testing Methods for GMOs
  8. Detection of Unauthorized GMOs
  9. GMO-Related Databases
  10. Future Perspectives
  11. Acknowledgements
  12. References

With the development of modern biotechnology, numerous GMOs have been approved for commercial production. Specially, some unauthorized or unknown GMOs are possibly present in the market owing to unintentional release of seed lots with unauthorized GMOs. Demands for testing GMO foods and development of reliable GMO analytical methods have been dramatically increasing. For this reason, many countries especially those in EU have recently issued restricted safety rules for import of GM foods. Various protein- and nucleic acid-based analytical methods have been developed and collected in various databases (http://gmdd.shgmo.org/). In addition, current testing methods also need improvements in their cost, in-field application and specificity and ability to quantify the commercial GMOs. The development of faster, cheaper analytical methods allowing for high-throughput, miniaturization, automation, and quantization will be the future trend. On the another hand, owing to the differences in labeling regulations among different countries, the standardization, exchange of information, and international cooperation on GMO analytical methods will be also extremely important: not only will it facilitate monitoring GMOs, but also reduce possible disputes for global trade.

(Co-Editor: Weicai Yang)

Acknowledgements

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Labeling Regulations to GM Foods and Feed
  5. DNA-based Analytical Methods
  6. Protein-Based Methods
  7. Standardization of Testing Methods for GMOs
  8. Detection of Unauthorized GMOs
  9. GMO-Related Databases
  10. Future Perspectives
  11. Acknowledgements
  12. References

This work was supported by the National Transgenic Plant Special Fund. This work was also supported by the National Special Project of Transgenic Organisms (2008ZX8012-002).

References

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. Introduction
  4. Labeling Regulations to GM Foods and Feed
  5. DNA-based Analytical Methods
  6. Protein-Based Methods
  7. Standardization of Testing Methods for GMOs
  8. Detection of Unauthorized GMOs
  9. GMO-Related Databases
  10. Future Perspectives
  11. Acknowledgements
  12. References
  • Ahmed MU, Saito M, Hossain MM, Rao SR, Furui S, Hino A, Takamura Y, Takagi M, Tamiya E (2009) Electrochemical genosensor for the rapid detection of GMO using loop-mediated isothermal amplification. Analyst 134, 966972.
  • Allen RC, Rogelj S, Cordova SE, Kieft TL (2006) An immuno-PCR method for detecting Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1Ac toxin. J. Immunol. Methods 308, 109115.
  • Andersen CB, Jensen AH, Berdal KG, Thorstensen T, Tengs T (2006) Equal performance of TaqMan, MGB, molecular beacon, and SYBR green-based detection assays in detection and quantification of roundup ready Soybean. J. Agric. Food Chem. 54, 96589663.
  • Bahrdt C, Krech AB, Wurz A, Wulff D (2010) Validation of a newly developed hexaplex real-time PCR assay for screening for presence of GMOs in food, feed and seed. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 396, 21032112.
  • Bai S, Zhang J, Li S, Chen H, Terzaghi W, Zhang X, Chi X, Tian J, Luo H, Huang W, Chen Y, Zhang Y (2010) Detection of six genetically modified maize lines using optical thin-film biosensor chips. J. Agric. Food Chem. 58, 84908494.
  • Buh Gasparic M, Cankar K, Zel J, Gruden K (2008) Comparison of different real-time PCR chemistries and their suitability for detection and quantification of genetically modified organisms. BMC Biotechnol. 8, 26.
  • Buh Gasparic M, Tengs T, La Paz JL, Holst-Jensen A, Pla M, Esteve T, Zel J, Gruden K (2010) Comparison of nine different real-time PCR chemistries for qualitative and quantitative applications in GMO detection. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 396, 20232029.
  • Burns M, Corbisier P, Wiseman G, Valdivia H, McDonald P, Bowler P (2006) Comparison of plasmid and genomic DNA calibrants for the quantification of genetically modified ingredients. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 224, 249258.
  • Cankar K, Chauvensy-Ancel V, Fortabat MN, Gruden K, Kobilinsky A, Zel J, Bertheau Y (2008) Detection of nonauthorized genetically modified organisms using differential quantitative polymerase chain reaction: Application to 35S in maize. Anal. Biochem. 376, 189199.
  • Cao QJ, Xia H, Yang X, Lu BR (2009) Performance of hybrids between weedy rice and insect-resistant transgenic rice under field experiments: Implication for environmental biosafety assessment. J. Integr. Plant Biol. 51, 11381148.
  • Chaouachi M, Chupeau G, Berard A, McKhann H, Romaniuk M, Giancola S, Laval V, Bertheau Y, Brunel D (2008) A high-throughput multiplex method adapted for GMO detection. J. Agric. Food Chem. 56, 1159611606.
  • Chaouachi M, Giancola S, Romaniuk M, Laval V, Bertheau Y, Brunel D (2007) A strategy for designing multi-taxa specific reference gene systems. example of application-ppi phosphofructokinase (ppi-PPF) used for the detection and quantification of three taxa: maize (Zea mays), cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) and rice (Oryza sativa). J. Agric. Food Chem. 55, 80038010.
  • China Order 10 (2002) Ministry of Agriculture of the People's Republic of China, Beijing , China .
  • Li YD, Chu ZZ, Liu XG, Jing HC, Liu YG, Hao DY (2010) A cost-effective high-resolution melting approach using the EvaGreen dye for DNA polymorphism detection and genotyping in plants. J. Integr. Plant Biol. 52, 10361042.
  • Ding J, Jia J, Yang L, Wen H, Zhang C, Liu W, Zhang D (2004) Validation of a rice-specific gene, sucrose-phosphate synthase, used as the endogenous reference gene for qualitative and real-time quantitative PCR detection of transgenes. J. Agric. Food Chem. 52, 33723377.
  • Dlugosch KM, Whitton J (2008) Can we stop transgenes from taking a walk on the wild side? Mol. Ecol. 17, 11671169.
  • Dong W, Yang L, Shen K, Kim B, Kleter GA, Marvin HJ, Guo R, Liang W, Zhang D (2008) GMDD: A database of GMO detection methods. BMC Bioinformatics 9, 260.
  • Dörries HH, Remus I, Grönewald A, Grönewald C, Berghof-Jäger K (2010) Development of a qualitative, multiplex real-time PCR kit for screening of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 396, 20432054.
  • Dorey E (2000) Taco dispute underscores need for standardized tests. Nat. Biotechnol. 18, 11361137.
  • Elenis DS, Kalogianni DP, Glynou K, Ioannou PC, Christopoulos TK (2008) Advances in molecular techniques for the detection and quantification of genetically modified organisms. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 392, 347354.
  • European Commission Regulation (EC) (2003) 1829/2003 and 1830/2003. Off. J. Eur. Communities L 268, 128.
  • Fantozzi A, Ermolli M, Marini M, Scotti D, Balla B, Querci M, Langrell SR, Van Den Eede G (2007) First application of a microsphere-based immunoassay to the detection of genetically modified organisms (GMOs): Quantification of Cry1Ab protein in genetically modified maize. J. Agric. Food Chem. 55, 10711076.
  • Feinberg M, Fernandez S, Cassard S, Bertheau Y (2005) Quantitation of 35S promoter in maize DNA extracts from genetically modified organisms using real-time polymerase chain reaction, part 2: interlaboratory study. J. AOAC Int. 88, 558573.
  • Fernandez S, Charles-Delobel C, Geldreich A, Berthier G, Boyer F, Collonnier C, Coué-Philippe G, Diolez A, Duplan MN, Kebdani N, Romaniuk M, Feinberg M, Bertheau Y (2005) Quantification of the 35S promoter in DNA extracts from genetically modified organisms using real-time polymerase chain reaction and specificity assessment on various genetically modified organisms, part I: operating procedure. J AOAC Int. 88, 547557.
  • Gambari R, Feriotto G (2006) Surface plasmon resonance for detection of genetically modified organisms in the food supply. J. AOAC Int. 89, 893897.
  • Goda Y, Asano T, Shibuya M, Hino A, Toyoda M (2001) Detection of recombinant DNA from genetically modified papaya. J. Food Hyg. Soc. Jpn. 42, 231236.
  • Guan X, Guo J, Shen P, Yang L, Zhang D (2010) Visual and rapid detection of two genetically modified soybean events using loop-mediated isothermal amplification method. Food Anal. Methods 4, 313320.
  • Guo J, Yang L, Chen L, Morisset D, Li X, Pan L, Zhang D (2011) MPIC: One high-throughput analytical method for multiple DNA targets. Anal. Chem. 83, 15791586.
  • Guo J, Yang L, Liu X, Guan X, Jiang L, Zhang D (2009a) Characterization of the exogenous insert and development of event-specific PCR detection methods for genetically modified Huanong No. 1 papaya. J. Agric. Food Chem. 57, 72057212.
  • Guo J, Yang L, Liu X, Zhang H, Qian B, Zhang D (2009b) Applicability of the chymopapain gene used as endogenous reference gene for transgenic huanong no. 1 papaya detection. J. Agric. Food Chem. 57, 65026509.
  • Grohmann L, Brünen-Nieweler C, Nemeth A, Waiblinger HU (2009) Collaborative trial validation studies of real-time PCR-based GMO screening methods for detection of the bar gene and the ctp2-cp4epsps construct. J. Agric. Food Chem. 57, 89138920.
  • Gruère GP, Rao SR (2007) A review of international labeling policies of genetically modified food to evaluate India's proposed rule. AgBioForum 10, 5164. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.agbioforum.org.
  • Hernandez M, Duplan MN, Berthier G, Vaïtilingom M, Hauser W, Freyer R, Pla M, Bertheau Y (2004) Development and comparison of four real-time polymerase chain reaction systems for specific detection and quantification of Zea mays. J. Agric. Food Chem. 52, 46324637.
  • Hernandez M, Esteve T, Pla M (2005) Real-time polymerase chain reaction based assays for quantitative detection of barley, rice, sunflower, and wheat. J. Agric. Food Chem. 53, 70037009.
  • Hernandez M, Ferrando A, Esteve T, Puigdomènech P, Prat S, Pla M (2003a) Real-time and conventional polymerase chain reaction systems based on the metallo-carboxypeptidase inhibitor gene for specific detection and quantification of potato and tomato in processed food. J. Food Prot. 66, 10631070.
  • Hernandez M, Rodríguez-Lázaro D, Esteve T, Prat S, Pla M (2003b) Development of melting temperature-based SYBR Green I polymerase chain reaction methods for multiplex genetically modified organism detection. Anal. Biochem. 323, 164170.
  • Holst-Jensen A, Rønning SB, Løvseth A, Berdal KG (2003) PCR technology for screening and quantification of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 375, 985993.
  • Holst-Jensen A (2008) GMO testing: Trade, labeling or safety first? Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 858859.
  • Holst-Jensen A (2009) Testing for genetically modified organisms (GMOs): Past, present and future perspectives. Biotechnol. Adv. 27, 10711082.
  • Iida M, Yamashiro S, Yamakawa H, Hayakawa K, Kuribara H, Kodama T, Furui S, Akiyama H, Maitani T, Hino A (2005) Development of taxon-specific sequences of common wheat for the detection of genetically modified wheat. J. Agric. Food Chem. 53, 62946300.
  • ISO 21569 (2005) Foodstuffs – Methods of analysis for the detection of genetically modified organisms and derived products – Qualitative nucleic acid based methods. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=34614
  • ISO 21570 (2005) Foodstuffs – Methods of analysis for the detection of genetically modified organisms and derived products – Quantitative nucleic acid based methods. (ISO 21570:2005/Cor 1:2006). Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=45305
  • ISO 21571 (2005) Foodstuffs – Methods of analysis for the detection of genetically modified organisms and derived products – Nucleic acid extraction. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=34616
  • ISO/TS 21098 (2005) Foodstuffs – Nucleic acid based methods of analysis of genetically modified organisms and derived products – Information to be supplied and procedure for the addition of methods to ISO 21569,ISO 21570 orISO 21571. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=40004
  • ISO 24276 (2006) Foodstuffs – Nucleic acid based methods of analysis for the detection of genetically modified organisms and derived products – General requirements and definitions. Available on the World Wide Web: http://www.iso.org/iso/catalogue_detail?csnumber=37125
  • James C (2011) Global status of commercialised biotech/GM crops: 2010. ISAAA Briefs No. 42.
  • James D, Schmidt AM, Wall E, Green M, Masri S (2003) Reliable detection and identification of genetically modified maize, soybean and canola by multiplex PCR analysis. J. Agric. Food Chem. 51, 58295834.
  • Jiang L, Yang L, Zhang H, Guo J, Mazzara M, Van Den Eede G, Zhang D (2009) International collaborative study of the endogenous reference gene, sucrose phosphate synthase (SPS), used for qualitative and quantitative analysis of genetically modified rice. J. Agric. Food Chem. 57, 35253532.
  • Kim VH, Choi SJ, Lee HA, Moon TW (2006) Quantitation of CP4 5-enolpyruvyishikimate-3-phosphate synthase in soybean by two-dimensional gel electrophoresis. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 16, 2531.
  • Kim JH, Kim SY, Lee H, Kim YR, Kim HY (2010) An event-specific DNA microarray to identify genetically modified organisms in processed foods. J. Agric. Food Chem. 58, 60186026.
  • Lee SH, Kim JK, Yi BY (2007) Detection methods for biotech cotton MON 15985 and MON 88913 by PCR. J. Agric. Food Chem. 55, 33513357.
  • Leimanis S, Hernández M, Fernández S, Boyer F, Burns M, Bruderer S, Glouden T, Harris N, Kaeppeli O, Philipp P, Pla M, Puigdomènech P, Vaitilingom M, Bertheau Y, Remacle J (2006) A microarray-based detection system for genetically modified (GM) food ingredients. Plant Mol. Biol. 61, 123139.
  • Li Q, Luan G, Guo Q, Liang J (2002) A new class of homogeneous nucleic acid probes based on specific displacement hybridization. Nucleic Acids Res. 30, e5.
  • Li X, Yang L, Zhang J, Wang S, Shen K, Pan L, Zhang D (2009) Simplex and duplex polymerase chain reaction analysis of Herculex RW (59122) maize based on one reference molecule including separated fragments of 5’ integration site and endogenous gene. J. AOAC Int. 92, 14721483.
  • Ling M, Ricks C, Lea P (2007) Multiplexing molecular diagnostics and immunoassays using emerging microarray technologies. Expert Rev. Mol. Diagn. 7, 8798.
  • Liu J, Guo J, Zhang H, Li N, Yang L, Zhang D (2009) Development and in-house validation of the event-specific polymerase chain reaction detection methods for genetically modified soybean MON89788 based on the cloned integration flanking sequence. J. Agric. Food Chem. 57, 1052410530.
  • Lucarelli F, Marrazza G, Mascini M (2005) Enzyme-based impedimetric detection of PCR products using oligonucleotide-modified screen-printed gold electrodes. Biosens. Bioelectron. 20, 20012009.
  • Marmiroli N, Maestri E, Gullì M, Malcevschi A, Peano C, Bordoni R, De Bellis G (2008) Methods for detection of GMOs in food and feed. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 392, 36984.
  • Mason G, Provero P, Vaira AM, Accotto GP (2002) Estimating the number of integrations in transformed plants by quantitative real-time PCR. BMC Biotechnol. 2, 20.
  • Matsuoka T, Kuribara H, Takubo K, Akiyama H, Miura H, Goda Y, Kusakabe Y, Isshiki K, Toyoda M, Hino A (2002) Detection of recombinant DNA segments introduced to genetically modified maize (Zea mays). J. Agric. Food Chem. 50, 21002109.
  • Michelini E, Simoni P, Cevenini L, Mezzanotte L, Roda A (2008) New trends in bioanalytical tools for the detection of genetically modified organisms: an update. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 392, 355367.
  • Miraglia M, Berdal KG, Brera C, Corbisier P, Holst-Jensen A, Kok EJ, Marvin HJ, Schimmel H, Rentsch J, van Rie JP, Zagon J (2004) Detection and traceability of genetically modified organisms in the food production chain. Food Chem. Toxicol. 42, 11571180.
  • Morisset D, Dobnik D, Hamels S, Zel J, Gruden K (2008) NAIMA: target amplification strategy allowing quantitative on-chip detection of GMOs. Nucleic Acids Res. 36, e118.
  • Nadal A, Coll A, La Paz JL, Esteve T, Pla M (2006) A new PCR-CGE (size and color) method for simultaneous detection of genetically modified maize events. Electrophoresis 27, 38793888.
  • Nadal A, Esteve T, Pla M (2009) Multiplex polymerase chain reaction-capillary gel electrophoresis: a promising tool for GMO screening-assay for simultaneous detection of five genetically modified cotton events and species. J. AOAC Int. 92, 765772.
  • Nazarenko I, Pires R, Lowe B, Obaidy M, Rashtchian A (2002) Effect of primary and secondary structure of oligodeoxyribonucleotides on the fluorescent properties of conjugated dyes. Nucleic Acids Res. 30, 20892095.
  • Ocana MF, Fraser PD, Patel RKP, Halket JM, Bramley PM (2007) Mass spectrometric detection of CP4 EPSPS in genetically modified soya and maize. Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom. 21, 319328.
  • Oguchi T, Onishi M, Mano J, Akiyama H, Teshima R, Futo S, Furui S, Kitta K (2010) Development of multiplex PCR method for simultaneous detection of four events of genetically modified maize: DAS-59122–7, MIR604, MON863 and MON88017. Shokuhin Eiseigaku Zasshi. 51, 92100.
  • Onishi M, Matsuoka T, Kodama T, Kashiwaba K, Futo S, Akiyama H, Maitani T, Furui S, Oguchi T, Hino A (2005) Development of a multiplex polymerase chain reaction method for simultaneous detection of eight events of genetically modified maize. J. Agric. Food Chem. 53, 97139721.
  • Pan L, Zhang S, Yang L, Broll H, Tian F, Zhang D (2007) Interlaboratory trial validation of an event-specific qualitative polymerase chain reaction-based detection method for genetically modified RT73 rapeseed. J. AOAC Int. 90, 16391646.
  • Prins TW, van Dijk JP, Beenen HG, Van Hoef AA, Voorhuijzen MM, Schoen CD, Aarts HJ, Kok EJ (2008) Optimised padlock probe ligation and microarray detection of multiple (non-authorised) GMOs in a single reaction. BMC Genomics 9, 584.
  • Querci M, Van Den Bulcke M, Zel J, Van Den Eede G, Broll H (2010) New approaches in GMO detection. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 396, 19912002.
  • Randhawa GJ, Chhabra R, Singh M (2009) Multiplex PCR-based simultaneous amplification of selectable marker and reporter genes for the screening of genetically modified crops. J. Agric. Food Chem. 57, 51675172.
  • Raymond P, Gendron L, Khalf M, Paul S, Dibley KL, Bhat S, Xie VR, Partis L, Moreau ME, Dollard C, Coté MJ, Laberge S, Emslie KR (2010) Detection and identification of multiple genetically modified events using DNA insert fingerprinting. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 396, 20912102.
  • Rodríguez-Lázaro D, Lombard B, Smith H, Rzezutka A, D’Agostino M, Helmuth R, Schroeter A, Malorny B, Miko A, Guerra B, Davison J, Kobilinsky A, Hernández M, Bertheau Y, Cook N (2007) Trends in analytical methodology in food safety and quality: Monitoring microorganisms and genetically modified organisms. Trends Food Sci. Tech. 18, 306319.
  • Rønning SB, Berdal KG, Andersen CB, Holst-Jensen A (2006) Novel reference gene, PKABA1, used in a duplex real-time polymerase chain reaction for detection and quantitation of wheat and barley-derived DNA. J. Agric. Food Chem. 54, 682687.
  • Ruttink T, Demeyer R, Van Gulck E, Van Droogenbroeck B, Querci M, Taverniers I, De Loose M (2010) Molecular toolbox for the identification of unknown genetically modified organisms. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 396, 20732089.
  • Salvi S, D’Orso F, Morelli G (2008) Detection and quantification of genetically modified organisms using very short, locked nucleic acid TaqMan probes. J. Agric. Food Chem. 56, 43204327.
  • Shen K, Li X, Wang S, Pan Y, Shi Z, Sun Y, Yang L (2010) Establishment and in-house validation of simplex and duplex PCR methods for event-specific detection of maize SYN-E3272–5 using a new reference molecule. J. AOAC Int. 93, 663675.
  • Shim YY, Shin WS, Moon GS, Kim KH (2007) Quantitative analysis of phosphinothricin-N-acetyltransferase in genetically modified herbicide tolerant pepper by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. J. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 17, 681684.
  • Shrestha HK, Hwu KK, Wang SJ, Liu LF, Chang MC (2008) Simultaneous detection of eight genetically modified maize lines using a combination of event- and construct-specific multiplex-PCR technique. J. Agric. Food Chem. 56, 89628968.
  • Stobiecka M, Cieśla JM, Janowska B, Tudek B, Radecka H (2007) Piezoelectric sensor for determination of genetically modified soybean roundup ready in samples not amplified by PCR. Sensors 7, 14621479.
  • Taverniers I, Windels P, Vaïtilingom M, Milcamps A, Van Bockstaele E, Van Den Eede G, De Loose M (2005) Event-specific plasmid standards and real-time PCR methods for transgenic Bt11, Bt176, and GA21 maize and transgenic GT73 canola. J. Agric. Food Chem. 53, 30413052.
  • Tengs T, Kristoffersen AB, Berdal KG, Thorstensen T, Butenko MA, Nesvold H, Holst-Jensen A (2007) Microarray-based method for detection of unknown genetic modifications. BMC Biotechnol. 7, 91.
  • Terry CF, Shanahan DJ, Ballam LD, Harris N, McDowell DG, Parkes HC (2002) Real-time detection of genetically modified soya using Lightcycler and ABI 7700 platforms with TaqMan, Scorpion, and SYBR Green I chemistries. J. AOAC Int. 85, 938944.
  • Thelwell N, Millington S, Solinas A, Booth J, Brown T (2000) Mode of action and application of Scorpion primers to mutation detection. Nucleic Acids Res. 28, 37523761.
  • Trapmann S, Corbisier P, Schimmel H, Emons H (2010) Towards future reference systems for GM analysis. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 396, 19691975.
  • Vermij P (2006) Liberty Link rice raises specter of tightened regulations. Nat Biotechnol. Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 13011302.
  • Volpe G, Ammid NH, Moscone D, Occhigrossi L, Palleschi G (2006) Development of an immunomagnetic electrochemical sensor for detection of BT-CRY1AB/CRY1AC proteins in genetically modified corn samples. Anal. Lett. 39, 1599609.
  • Waiblinger H, Boernsen B, Pietsch K (2008) GMO routine analysis – screening table for detection of genetically modified plants in food and feed. Dtsch. Lebensm. Rundsch. 104, 261264.
  • Waiblinger HU, Ernst B, Anderson A, Pietsch K (2007) Validation and collaborative study of a P35S and T-nos duplex real-time PCR screening method to detect genetically modified organisms in food products. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 226, 12211228.
  • Watanabe T, Kuribara H, Mishima T, Kikuchi H, Kodama T, Futo S, Kasama K, Toyota A, Nouno M, Saita A, Takahashi K, Hino A, Akiyama H, Maitani T, Kubo M (2004) New qualitative detection methods of genetically modified potatoes. Biol. Pharm. Bull. 27, 13331339.
  • Weng H, Yang L, Liu Z, Ding J, Pan A, Zhang D (2005) Novel reference gene, High-mobility-group protein I/Y, used in qualitative and real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction detection of transgenic rapeseed cultivars. J. AOAC Int. 88, 577584.
  • Whitcombe D, Theaker J, Guy SP, Brown T, Little S (1999) Detection of PCR products using self-probing amplicons and fluorescence. Nat. Biotechnol. 17, 804807.
  • Wittwer CT, Herrmann MG, Moss AA, Rasmussen RP (1997) Continuous fluorescence monitoring of rapid cycle DNA amplification. Biotechniques 22, 130131, 134–138.
  • Xu J, Zhu S, Miao H, Huang W, Qiu M, Huang Y, Fu X, Li Y (2007) Event-specific detection of seven genetically modified soybean and maizes using multiplex-PCR coupled with oligonucleotide microarray. J. Agric. Food Chem. 55, 55755579.
  • Yang L, Chen J, Huang C, Liu Y, Jia S, Pan L, Zhang D (2005a) Validation of a cotton – specific gene, sad1, used as an endogenous reference gene in qualitative and real-time quantitative PCR detection of transgenic cottons. Plant Cell Rep. 24, 237245.
  • Yang L, Guo J, Pan A, Zhang H, Zhang K, Wang Z, Zhang D (2007) Event-specific quantitative detection of nine genetically modified maizes using one novel standard reference molecule. J. Agric. Food Chem. 55, 1524.
  • Yang L, Guo J, Zhang H, Liu J, Zhang D (2008a) Qualitative and quantitative event-specific PCR detection methods for oxy-235 canola based on the 3’ integration flanking sequence. J. Agric. Food Chem. 56, 18041809.
  • Yang L, Liang W, Jiang L, Li W, Cao W, Wilson ZA, Zhang D (2008b) A novel universal real-time PCR system using the attached universal duplex probes for quantitative analysis of nucleic acids. BMC Mol. Biol. 9, 54.
  • Yang L, Pan A, Jia J, Ding J, Chen J, Cheng H, Zhang C, Zhang D (2005b) Validation of a tomato specific gene, LAT52, used as an endogenous reference gene in qualitative and real-time quantitative PCR detection of transgenic tomatoes. J. Agric. Food Chem. 53, 183190.
  • Yang L, Zhang H, Guo J, Pan L, Zhang D (2008c) International collaborative study of the endogenous reference gene LAT52 used for qualitative and quantitative analyses of genetically modified tomato. J. Agric. Food Chem. 56, 34383443.
  • Yoshimura T, Kuribara H, Matsuoka T, Kodama T, Iida M, Watanabe T, Akiyama H, Maitani T, Furui S, Hino A (2005) Applicability of quantification of genetically modified organisms to foods processed from maize and soy. J. Agric. Food Chem. 53, 20522059.
  • Zhang H, Yang L, Guo J, Li X, Jiang L, Zhang D (2008) Development of one novel multiple-target plasmid for duplex quantitative PCR analysis of roundup ready soybean. J. Agric. Food Chem. 56, 55145520.
  • Zhang Y, Zhang D, Li W, Chen J, Peng Y, Cao W (2003) A novel real-time quantitative PCR method using attached universal template probe. Nucleic Acids Res. 31, e123.