Free Access
Review
Issue
Environ. Biosafety Res.
Volume 10, Number 1, January-March 2011
Page(s) 5 - 25
Section Review article
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/ebr/2012001
Published online 30 April 2012
  • Alibhai M.F. and Stallings W.C. (2001). Closing down on glyphosate inhibition – with a new structure for drug discovery. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 98:2944–2946. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Baker H.G. (1974). The evolution of weeds. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 5:1–24. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Beckie H.J., Seguin-Swartz G., Nair H., Warwick S.I., and Johnson E. (2004). Multiple herbicide-resistant canola can be controlled by alternative herbicides. Weed Science 52 (1) :152–157. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Deen W., Hamill A., Shropshire C., Soltani N., and Sikkema P. H. (2006). Control of volunteer glyphosate-resistant corn (Zea mays) in glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine max). Weed Technology 20:261–266. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Delannay X., Bauman T. T., Beighley D. H., Buettner M. J., Coble H. D., DeFelice M. S., Derting C. W., Diedrick T. J., Griffin J. L., Hagood E. S., Hancock F. G., Hart S. E., LaVallee B. J., Loux M. M., Lueschen W. E., Matson K. W., Moots C. K., Murdock E., Nickell A. D., Owen M. D. K., Paschall II E. H., Prochaska L. M., Raymond P. J., Reynolds D. B., Rhodes W. K., Roeth F. W., Sprankle P. L., Tarochione L. J., Tinius C. N., Walker R. H., Wax L. M., Weigelt H. D., and Padgette S. R. (1995). Yield evaluation of a glyphosate-tolerant soybean line after treatment with glyphosate. Crop Science 35:1461–1467. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Ellmore R. W., Roeth F. W., Klein N., Knezevic Z., Martin A., Nelson L. A., Shapiro C. A. (2001). Glyphosate-resistant soybean cultivar response to glyphosate. Agronomy Journal 93:404–407 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Franz, J.E., Mao M.K. and Sikorski J.A.. 1997. Glyphosate : A Unique Global Herbicide. ACS Monograph 189 (pp. 27–64). American Chemical Society, Washington D.C. [Google Scholar]
  • Harrison L.A., Bailey M.R., Naylor M.W., Ream J.E., Hammond B.G., Nida D.L., Burnette B.L., Nickson T.E., Mitsky T.A., Taylor M.L., Fuchs R.L. and Padgette S.R. (1996). The expressed protein in glyphosate-tolerant soybean, 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4, is rapidly digested in vitro and is not toxic to acutely gavaged mice. Journal of Nutrition 126:728–740. [Google Scholar]
  • Kishore, G., Shah D., Padgette S., dells-Cioppa G., Gasser C., Re D., Hironak C., Taylor M., Wibbenmeyer J. , Eichholtz D., Hayford M., Hoffmann N., Delannay X., Horsch R., Klee H., Rogers S., Rochester D., Brundage L., Sanders P. and Fraley R.T. (1988). 5-Enolpyruvylshikimate 3-Phosphate Synthase. From Biochemistry to Genetic Engineering of Glyphosate Tolerance. In Hedin P.A., Menn J.J., and Hollingworth R.M. (Eds.), Biotechnology for Crop Protection (pp 37–48). American Chemical Society, Series No. 379, Wahington, D.C. [Google Scholar]
  • Light G. G., Baughman T. A., Dotray P. A., Keeling J. W., Wester D. B. (2003). Yield of glyphosate-tolerant cotton as affected by topical glyphosate applications on the Texas high plains and rolling plains. Journal of Cotton Science 7:231–235 [Google Scholar]
  • Mallory-Smith C., and Zapiola M. (2008). Gene flow from glyphosate-resistant crops. Pest Management Science 64:428–440. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • NRC (1989). Field testing genetically modified organisms : framework for decisions. National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council (NRC) committee on Scientific Evaluation of the Introduction of Genetically Modified Microorganisms and Plants into the Environment. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. [Google Scholar]
  • NRC (1993). Issues in risk assessment. National Research Council (NRC). National Academy Press, Washington D.C. [Google Scholar]
  • Nida D.L., Patzer S., Harvey P., Stipanovic R., Wood R. and Fuchs R.L. (1996). Glyphosate-tolerant cotton : the composition of the cottonseed is equivalent to that of conventional cottonseed. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry 44:1967–1974. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Nickson T.E. and Hammond B.G. (2002). Case Study : Canola Tolerant to Roundup Herbicide, an Assessment of its Substantial Equivalence Compared to Nonmodified Canola. In Atherton K.T (ed.) Genetically Modified Crops : Assessing Safety, (pp. 138–163). Taylor and Francis, New York. [Google Scholar]
  • Padgette S.R., Biest-Taylor N., Nida D.L., Bailey M.R., MacDonald J., Holden L.R., and Fuchs R.L. (1996). The composition of glyphosate-tolerant soybean seeds is equivalent to that of conventional soybeans. Journal of Nutrition 126:702–716. [Google Scholar]
  • Ridley W.P., Sidhu R.S., P Pyla D., Nemeth M.A., Breeze M.L. and J Astwood D., (2002). Comparison of the nutritional profile of glyphosate-tolerant event NK603 with that of conventional corn (Zea mays L.). Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry, 50:7235–7243. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sjoblad R.D., McClintock J.T. and Engler R. (1992). Toxicological considerations for protein components of biological pesticide products. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology 15:3–9. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Steinrücken H.C. and Amrhein N. (1980). The herbicide glyphosate is a potent inhibitor of 5-enolpyruvyl-shikimic acid -3-phosphate synthase. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, 94:1207–1212. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Taylor N.B., Fuchs R.L., MacDonald J., Shariff A.R. and Padgette S.R. (1999). Compositional analysis of glyphosate-tolerant soybeans treated with glyphosate. Journal of Agriculture and Food Chemistry. 47:4469–4473. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Warwick S.I., Legere A., Simard M.-J., James T. (2008). Do escaped transgenes persist in nature? The case of an herbicide resistance transgene in a weedy Brassica rapa population. Mol. Ecol. 17:1387–1395. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • ANZFA (2000a). Final risk analysis report, application A363, food produced from glyphosate-tolerant canola line GT73. Australia New Zealand Food Authority (ANZFA), Canberra, Australia and Wellington, New Zealand. http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/A363{%}20draft{%}20IR.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • ANZFA (2000b). Draft risk analysis report, application A355, food produced from glyphosate-tolerant cotton line 1445. Australia New Zealand Food Authority (ANZFA), Canberra, Australia and Wellington, New Zealand. http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/A355{%}20FA.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • ANZFA (2001). Final assessment report, application A378, food derived from herbicide-tolerant sugar beet line 77. Australia New Zealand Food Authority (ANZFA), Canberra, Australia and Wellington, New Zealand. http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/A378{%}20Final{%}20AR.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • ANZFA (2002). Final assessment report, application A416, glyphosate-tolerant corn line NK603. Australia New Zealand Food Authority (ANZFA), Canberra, Australia and Wellington, New Zealand. http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/A416_FAR.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • CBD (2000a). Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Montreal. http://www.cbd.int/biosafety/protocol.shtml. [Google Scholar]
  • CBD (2000b). Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety Annex III : Risk Assessment. Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Montreal. http://www.cbd.int/biosafety/articles.shtml?a=cpb-43 [Google Scholar]
  • CFIA (1995). Determination of environmental safety of Monsanto Canada Inc.’s roundup herbicide-tolerant Brassica napus canola line GT73. Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Ottawa, Canada. http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/dd/dd9502e.shtml. [Google Scholar]
  • CFIA (1998). Determination of the safety of Monsanto Canada Inc.’s roundup herbicide-tolerant Brassica rapa canola lines ZSR500, ZSR502, and ZSR503. Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), Ottawa, Canada. http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/dd/dd9821e.shtml [Google Scholar]
  • CFIA (2002). Canada – U.S. bilateral agreement on agricultural biotechnology Appendix II : environmental characterization data for transgenic plants intended for unconfined release. http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/usda/appenannex2e.shtml [Google Scholar]
  • CFIA (2005). Determination of the safety of Monsanto Canada Inc. and KWS SAAT AG’s roundup ready sugar beet (Beta vulgaris ssp vulgaris L.) Event H7-1. Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), Ottawa, Canada http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/plaveg/bio/dd/dd0554e.shtml. [Google Scholar]
  • Codex (2003a). Principles for the risk analysis of foods derived through modern biotechnology. Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), Rome http://www.codexalimentarius.net/download/standards/10007/CXG_044e.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • Codex (2003b). Guideline for the conduct of food safety assessment of foods derived from recombinant DNA plants. Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex), Rome http://www.codexalimentarius.net/download/standards/10021/CXG_045e.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • EC (2001). Directive 2001/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. European Commission, Brussels Belgium. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/biotechnology/pdf/dir2001_18.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2003). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on genetically modified organisms [GMO] on a request from the Commission related to the Notification (Reference CE/ES/00/01) for the placing on the market of herbicide-tolerant genetically modified maize NK603, for import and processing, under Part C of Directive 2001/18/EC from Monsanto. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Brussels, Belgium. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/opinion_gmo_03_final_en1,2.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2004a). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on genetically modified organisms [GMO] on a request from the Commission related to the Notification (Reference C/NL/98/11) for the placing on the market of herbicide-tolerant oilseed rape GT73, for import and processing, under Part C of Directive 2001/18/EC from Monsanto. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Brussels, Belgium. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/opinion_gmo05_ej29_gt73_en1,3.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2004b). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on genetically modified organisms [GMO] on a request from the Commission related to the safety of foods and food ingredients derived from herbicide-tolerant genetically modified maize NK603, for which a request for placing on the market was submitted under Article 4 of the Novel Food Regulation (EC) No 258/97 by Monsanto. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Brussels, Belgium. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/opinion_gmo_02_final_en1,3.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2005a). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on genetically modified organisms [GMO] on an application (Reference EFSA GMO BE 2004 07) for the placing on the market of insect-protected glyphosate-tolerant genetically modified maize MON863 x MON810 x NK603, for food and feed uses, and import and processing under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Monsanto. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Brussels, Belgium. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/gmo_opinion_ej256_mon863xmon810xnk603_en1,3.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2005b). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on genetically modified organisms [GMO] on an application (Reference EFSA GMO UK 2004 06) for the placing on the market of insect-protected glyphosate-tolerant genetically modified maize MON863 x NK603, for food and feed uses, and import and processing under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Monsanto. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Brussels, Belgium. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/gmo_opinion_ej255_mon863xnk603_en1,3.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2006a). Guidance document of the scientific panel on genetically modified organisms for the risk assessment of genetically modified plants and derived food and feed. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Brussels, Belgium. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/gmo_ guidance_derived_feed_food.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2006b). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on genetically modified organisms [GMO] related on an application (Reference EFSA GMO UK 2004 08) for the placing on the market of products produced from glyphosate tolerant genetically modified sugar beet H7-1, for food and feed uses, under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from KWS SAAT AG and Monsanto. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Brussels, Belgium. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/gmo_op_ej431_sugar_%20beet_%20H7-1_en,3.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2006c). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on genetically modified organisms [GMO] on an application (Reference EFSA-GMO-UK-2004-05) for the placing on the market of insect-protected and glufosinate and glyphosate-tolerant genetically modified maize 1507 x NK603, for food and feed uses, and import and processing under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Pioneer Hi-Bred and Mycogen Seeds. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Brussels, Belgium. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/gmo_ov_op5_annexa_en1,3.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2008a). Scientific Opinion of the Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms on application (Reference EFSA-GMO-UK-2005-20) for the placing on the market of the insect-resistant and herbicide-tolerant genetically modified maize 59122 x NK603, for food and feed uses, and import and processing under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Pioneer Hi-Bred International. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Brussels, Belgium. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/gmo_op_ ej874_maize59122xNK603_en.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2008b). Opinion of the Scientific Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms on application (reference EFSA-GMO-NL-2006-36) for the placing on the market of the glyphosate-tolerant genetically modified soybean MON89788, for food and feed uses, import and processing under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Monsanto. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Brussels, Belgium. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/gmo_op_ej758_soybeanMON89788_en.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2009a). Scientific Opinion on applications (EFSA-GMO-RX-GT73) for renewal of the authorisation for continued marketing of existing (1) food and food ingredients produced from oilseed rape GT73; and of (2) feed materials, feed additives and food additives produced from oilseed rape GT73, all under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Monsanto. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Brussels, Belgium. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/1417.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • EFSA (2009b). Scientific Opinion on application (EFSA-GMO-NL-2007-38) for the placing on the market of insect resistant and/or herbicide tolerant genetically modified maize MON89034 x NK603 for food and feed uses, import and processing under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Monsanto. European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), Brussels, Belgium. http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/scdocs/doc/gmo_op_ej1320_GMmaize_MON89034xNK603_en.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • FAO/WHO (1996). Biotechnology and food safety. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Consultation. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)/ World Health Organization (WHO), Food and Nutrition Paper 61, Rome, Italy. http://www.fao.org/ag/agn/food/pdf/biotechnology.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • FAO/WHO (2006). Food safety risk analysis : a guide for national food safety authorities. Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and World Health Organization (WHO), Rome. http://www.who.int/entity/foodsafety/publications/micro/riskanalysis06.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • FSANZ (2005). Final assessment report, application A525, food derived from herbicide-tolerant sugar beet H7-1. Food Safety Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) Canberra, Australia and Wellington, New Zealand. http://www.foodstandards.gov.au/_srcfiles/A525{%}20GM{%}20Sugar{%}20beet{%}20FAR.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • Japan BCH (2003). Outline of the biological diversity risk assessment report (Brassica rapa GT73). Japan Biosafety Clearing House, Tokyo. [Google Scholar]
  • Japan BCH (2004). Outline of the biological diversity risk assessment report (Gossypium hirsutum 1445X531). Japan Biosafety Clearing House, Tokyo. http://www.bch.biodic.go.jp/download/en_lmo/1445_531enRi.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • Monsanto (2002). Safety assessment of Roundup ready canola event GT73. Monsanto Company, St. Louis. http://www.monsanto.com/monsanto/content/products/productivity/roundup/canola_pss.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • OECD (1992). Recombinant DNA safety considerations. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris, France. [Google Scholar]
  • OECD (1993). Safety considerations for biotechnology : scale-up of crop plants. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris, France. [Google Scholar]
  • OECD (1997). Consensus document on the biology of Brassica napus L. (oilseed rape). Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris, France. [Google Scholar]
  • OECD (2000) Consensus document on the biology of Glycine max (L.) Merr. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris, France. [Google Scholar]
  • OECD (2001). Consensus document on the biology of Beta vulgaris L. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris, France. [Google Scholar]
  • OECD (2003a). Consensus document on the biology of Zea mays subsp. Mays. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris, France. [Google Scholar]
  • OECD (2003b). Description of selected key generic terms used in chemical hazard/risk assessment. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris. http://www.olis.oecd.org/olis/2003doc.nsf/LinkTo/NT00004772/$FILE/JT00152557.PDF [Google Scholar]
  • OECD (2006). Points to consider for consensus documents on the biology of cultivated plants. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris, France. [Google Scholar]
  • OECD (2008). Consensus document on the biology of cotton (Gossypium spp.). Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Paris, France. [Google Scholar]
  • OGTR (2003a). DIR 020/2002 - canola licence application risk assessment and risk management plan. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR), Canberra, Australia. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/Content/dir020-3/$FILE/dir020finalrarmp.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • OGTR (2003b). DIR 023/2002 – Cotton license application risk assessment and risk management plan. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR), Canberra, Australia. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/Content/dir023-3/$FILE/dir023finalrarmp.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • OGTR (2006) DIR 059/2005 - Full Risk Assessment and Risk Management Plan for Commercial Release of Genetically Modified Cotton Lines. Office of the Gene Technology Regulator (OGTR), Canberra, Australia. http://www.ogtr.gov.au/internet/ogtr/publishing.nsf/Content/dir059-3/$FILE/dir059finalrarmp1.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • OGTR (2008). The biology of Gossypium hirsutum L. and Gossypium barbadense L. Office of the gene technology regulatory (OGTR) Department of Health and Ageing, Canberra, Australia. [Google Scholar]
  • OGTR (2009). Risk analysis framework. Office of the gene technology regulatory (OGTR) Department of Health and Ageing, Canberra, Australia. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (1993). 93-258-019 Monsanto petition for determination of nonregulated status : soybeans with a Roundup ready gene. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/93_25801p.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (1994). APHIS-USDA Petition 93-258-01 for determination of nonregulated status for glyphosate-tolerant soybean line 40-3-2, Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/93_25801p_com.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (1995a). Monsanto petition 95-045-01p to USDA/APHIS for determination of nonregulated status of glyphosate tolerant cotton (Roundup ready) lines 1445 and 1698. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/95_04501p.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (1995b). Monsanto petition 95-045-01p to USDA/APHIS for determination of nonregulated status of glyphosate tolerant cotton (Roundup ready) lines 1445 and 1698, Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/95_04501p_com.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (1995c). Monsanto Company petition for determination of nonregulated status : insect protected corn (Zea mays L.) with the cryIA(b) gene from Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. Kurstaki. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/95_09301p.pdf [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS(1995d). USDA/APHIS petition 95-093-01 for determination of nonregulated status for insect protected corn line MON 80100, Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/95_09301p_com.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (1996a) Monsanto Company petition for determination of nonregulated status : additional yieldgard corn (Zea mays L.) with the cryIA(b) gene from Bacillus thuringiensis subsp. Kurstaki. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/96_01701p.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (1996b). Monsanto Company petition for determination of non-regulated status : insect-protected Roundup ready corn line MON802. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/96_31701p.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (1997a). USDA/APHIS petition 96-317-01p for determination of nonregulated status for insect-resistant/glyphosate-toleran corn line MON 802, Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/96_31701p_com.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (1997b). Monsanto Company petition for determination of nonregulated status : Roundup ready corn line GA21. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/97_09901p.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (1997c). Monsanto/Dekalb petition 97-099-01p for determination of nonregulated status for transgenic glyphosate tolerant corn line GA21, Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/97_09901p_com.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (1998a). Novartis Seed and Monsanto Company petition 98-173-01p for determination of nonregulated status for transgenic glyphosate tolerant sugar beet line GTSB77. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/98_17301p.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (1998b). Novartis Seed and Monsanto Company petition 98-173-01p for determination of nonregulated status for transgenic glyphosate tolerant sugar beet line GTSB77, Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/98_17301p_com.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (1998c). Monsanto petition 98-216-01p for determination of nonregulated status for glyphosate-tolerant canola line RT73. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/98_21601p.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (1999). Response to Monsanto petition 98-216-01p for determination of nonregulated status for glyphosate-tolerant canola line RT73, Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/98_21601p_com.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (2000a). Monsanto request (00-011-01p) seeking extension of determination of non-regulated status for glyphosate tolerant corn line NK603. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/00_01101p.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (2000b). Approval of Monsanto request (00-011-01p) seeking extension of determination of non-regulated status for glyphosate tolerant corn line NK603, Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/00_01101p_com.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (2001). Monsanto Company request (01-324-01p) seeking an extension of determination of nonregulated status for glyphosate tolerant canola event GT200. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/01_32401p.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (2002). USDA/APHIS decision on Monsanto Company request (01-324-01p) seeking an extension of determination of nonregulated status for glyphosate tolerant canola event GT200, Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/01_32401p_com.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (2003). Monsanto Company and KWS SAAT AG petition 03-323-01p for determination of nonregulated status for Roundup ready sugar beet event H7-1. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/03_32301p.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (2004a). Monsanto company request (04-086-01p) seeking a determination of non-regulated status for glyphosate tolerant cotton event MON 88913. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/04_08601p.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (2004b). Approval of Monsanto company request (04-086-01p) seeking a determination of non-regulated status for glyphosate tolerant cotton event MON 88913, Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/04_08601p_com.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (2004c). Monsanto Company and Forage Genetics International petition for determination of nonregulated status : Roundup ready alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) events J101 and J163. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/04_11001p.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (2004d). USDA/APHIS preliminary environmental assessment : Monsanto Company and Forage Genetics International petition 04-110-01p for determination of non-regulated status for Roundup ready alfalfa events J101 and J163. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/04_11001p_pea.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (2004e). Monsanto Company petition for the determination of nonregulated status for MON 88017 corn. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/04_12501p.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (2005a). Approval of Monsanto Company request 04-125-01 seeking a determination of non-regulated status for corn rootworm resistant corn MON 88017. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/04_12501p_com.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (2005b). Monsanto Company and KWS SAAT AG petition 03-323-01p for determination of nonregulated status for Roundup ready sugar beet event H7-1, Environmental assessment and finding of no significant impact. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/03_32301p_com.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (2006). Petition for the Determination of Nonregulated Status for Roundup Ready2Yield Soybean MON 89788. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/06_17801p.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USDA APHIS (2007a). Finding of no significant impact, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service petition for non-regulated status for soybean line MON 89788, Environmental assessment. United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA APHIS), Washington D.C. http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/06_17801p_com.pdf. [Google Scholar]
  • USEPA (1992). Framework for ecological risk assessment. Risk Assessment Forum, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Washington D. C. http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=36361 http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=30759. [Google Scholar]
  • USEPA (1998). Guidelines for ecological risk assessment. Risk Assessment Forum, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Washington D. C. http://oaspub.epa.gov/eims/eimscomm.getfile?p_download_id=36512. [Google Scholar]
  • WHO (1995). Application of the Principles of Substantial Equivalence to the Safety Evaluation of Foods or Food Components from Plants Derived by Modern Biotechnology. A Report of a WHO Workshop. World Health Organisation (WHO), Geneva. [Google Scholar]