Open Access
Issue
Environ. Biosafety Res.
Volume 8, Number 3, July-September 2009
Page(s) 153 - 159
Section Case study
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/ebr/2009008
Published online 24 September 2009
  • Commission Recommendation 2003/556/EC of 23 July 2003 on guidelines for the development of national strategies and best practices to ensure the coexistence of genetically modified crops with conventional and organic farming. Off. J. Eur. Communities L 189: 36–47 [Google Scholar]
  • Devos Y, Reheul D, De Schrijver A (2005) The coexistence between transgenic and non-transgenic maize in the European Union: a focus on pollen flow and cross-fertilization. Environ. Biosafety Res. 4: 71–87 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Gryson N, Messens K, Van Laere D, Eeckhout M (2007) Co-existence and traceability of GM and non-GM products in the feed chain. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 226: 81–85 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • ISO 2859. Sampling procedures for inspection by attributes. ISO, Geneva [Google Scholar]
  • James C (2006) Preview: Global status of commercialized transgenic crops: 2006. ISAAA Briefs 35, Ithaca, USA [Google Scholar]
  • Messéan A, Angevin F, Gómez-Barbero M, Menrad K, Rodríguez-Cerezo E (2006) New case studies on the coexistence of GM and non-GM-crops in European agriculture. European Commission, Directorate General, Joint Research Centre, Technical Report EUR 22102 [Google Scholar]
  • Oehen B, Costa-Font M, Morgner M, Gil JM, Stolze M (2007) Co-existence in maize supply chains in Spain and Switzerland. Proceedings of the 3rd QLIF Congress, Hohenheim, Germany, March 20–23. http://orgprints.org/10379/ [Google Scholar]
  • Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 on genetically modified food and feed. Off. J. Eur. Communities L 268: 1–23 [Google Scholar]
  • Regulation (EC) No 1830/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2003 concerning the traceability and labelling of genetically modified organisms and the traceability of food and feed products produced from genetically modified organisms and amending Directive 2001/18/EC. Off. J. Eur. Communities L 268: 24–28 [Google Scholar]
  • Shoemaker R, Harwood J, Day-Rubenstein K, Dunahay T, Heisey P, Hoffman L, Klotz-Ingham C, Lin W, Mitchell L, McBride W, Fernandez-Cornejo J (2001) Economic issues in agricultural biotechnology. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Agriculture Information Bulletin 762. http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/aib762 [Google Scholar]
  • Van Gelder JW, Dros JM (2002) Corporate actors in the South American soy production chain. A research paper prepared for World Wide Fund for Nature Switzerland. Profundo/AIDEnvironment, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 82 p [Google Scholar]
  • Waiblinger H-U, Graf N, Mäde D, Woll K, Busch U, Holland B, Pilsl H, Naeumann G, Reiting R, Ehrentreich B, Schulze M, Tschirdewahn B, Brünen-Nieweler C, Hempel G, Weidner M, Winterstein AR (2007) “Technically unavoidable” in terms of genetically modified organisms – an approach for food control. Journal of Consumer Protection and Food Safety 2: 126–129 [Google Scholar]