Quantifying Dicamba Volatility under Field Conditions: Part II, Comparative Analysis of 23 Dicamba Volatility Field Trials.

This study summarizes 23 field trials (over six geographic locations, with each trial composed of a separate field site and an application event) for quantifying the postapplication volatilization of dicamba from fields treated with an array of dicamba-containing formulations and tank adjuvants at an application rate of 0.56 or 1.12 kg dicamba acid equivalents (a.e.) per hectare (0.5 or 1.0 lb dicamba a.e. per acre). The data span 3 years of testing over a range of locations, field types, and environmental conditions. The aerodynamic and the integrated horizontal flux methodologies were employed (and then averaged) for estimating the vertical flux from the field for periods extending to approximately 72 h post application. In all cases, the vertical flux peaked within 24 h of application and then decayed to much lower levels by day 3. Total volatile losses among all formulations and conditions ranged from 0.023 ± 0.003 to 0.302 ± 0.045% of the applied dicamba (median = 0.08%). Analysis of the recorded meteorological and soil conditions for each field trial failed to identify any single soil or weather parameter as a dominant driver of total volatile losses. Air concentrations of dicamba observed in the course of these trials were all below the no observed adverse effect concentration for conventional soybean plant height or yield, indicating that air concentrations directly above or outside of the dicamba-treated area would not cause a reduction in plant height or yield of conventional soybean.

Comparative analysis of genetically-modified crops: Part 1. Conditional difference testing with a given genetic background.

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) mandates two sets of statistical tests in the comparative assessment of a genetically-modified (GM) crop: difference testing to demonstrate whether the GM crop is different from its appropriate non-traited control; and equivalence testing to demonstrate whether it is equivalent to conventional references with an history-of-safe-use. The equivalence testing method prescribed by EFSA confounds the so-called GM trait effect with genotypic differences between the reference varieties and non-traited control. Critically, these genotypic differences, which we define as a 'control background effect', are the result of conventional plant breeding. Thus, the result of EFSA equivalence testing often has little or nothing to do with the GM trait effect, which should be the sole focus of the comparative assessment. Here, an integrated method is introduced for both difference and equivalence testing that considers the differences of the three genotype groups (GM, control, and references) as a two-dimensional random variable. A novel statistical model is proposed, called the trait model, that treats the effects of the GM and control materials as fixed for their difference, and as random for their common background. For significance testing, the covariance structure of the three genotype groups is utilized to decompose the differences into the trait effect and the control background effect. The trait difference is then derived as a conditional mean, given the background effect. The comparative assessment can then focus on the conditional mean difference, which is independent of the control background effect. Furthermore, the trait model is flexible enough to include various types of genotype-by-environment (G×E) interactions inherent to the experimental design of the trial. Numerical evaluations and simulations show that this new method is substantially more efficient than the current EFSA method in reducing both Type I and Type II errors (protecting both the consumer and producer risk) after the background effect is removed from the test statistic, and successfully addresses two major criticisms (i.e. statistical model lack of G×E, and study-specific equivalence criterion) that have been raised.

Variability of CP4 EPSPS expression in genetically engineered soybean (Glycine max L. Merrill).

The expression of the CP4 EPSPS protein in genetically engineered (GE) soybean confers tolerance to the Roundup® family of agricultural herbicides. This study evaluated the variability of CP4 EPSPS expression using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in soybean tissues collected across diverse germplasm and 74 different environments in Argentina, Brazil and the USA. Evaluated material included single and combined (stacked) trait products with other GE traits in entries with cp4 epsps gene at one or two loci. The highest level of CP4 EPSPS was observed in leaf tissues, intermediate in forage and seed, and lowest in root tissues. Varieties with two loci had approximately twice the level of CP4 EPSPS expression compared to one locus entries. Variable and non-directional level of CP4 EPSPS was observed with other factors like genetic background, trait stacking, growing region or season. The maximum and average CP4 EPSPS expression levels in seed provided large margins of exposure (MOE of approximately 4000 and 11,000, respectively), mitigating concerns over exposure to this protein in food and feed from soybean varieties tolerant to Roundup® herbicides.

Pollen-Mediated Gene Flow in Maize: Implications for Isolation Requirements and Coexistence in Mexico, the Center of Origin of Maize.

Mexico, the center of origin of maize (Zea mays L.), has taken actions to preserve the identity and diversity of maize landraces and wild relatives. Historically, spatial isolation has been used in seed production to maintain seed purity. Spatial isolation can also be a key component for a strategy to minimize pollen-mediated gene flow in Mexico between transgenic maize and sexually compatible plants of maize conventional hybrids, landraces, and wild relatives. The objective of this research was to generate field maize-to-maize outcrossing data to help guide coexistence discussions in Mexico. In this study, outcrossing rates were determined and modeled from eight locations in six northern states, which represent the most economically important areas for the cultivation of hybrid maize in Mexico. At each site, pollen source plots were planted with a yellow-kernel maize hybrid and surrounded by plots with a white-kernel conventional maize hybrid (pollen recipient) of the same maturity. Outcrossing rates were then quantified by assessing the number of yellow kernels harvested from white-kernel hybrid plots. The highest outcrossing values were observed near the pollen source (12.9% at 1 m distance). The outcrossing levels declined sharply to 4.6, 2.7, 1.4, 1.0, 0.9, 0.5, and 0.5% as the distance from the pollen source increased to 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 25 m, respectively. At distances beyond 20 m outcrossing values at all locations were below 1%. These trends are consistent with studies conducted in other world regions. The results suggest that coexistence measures that have been implemented in other geographies, such as spatial isolation, would be successful in Mexico to minimize transgenic maize pollen flow to conventional maize hybrids, landraces and wild relatives.

Analysis of EPA's endocrine screening battery and recommendations for further review.

EPA's Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program Tier 1 battery consists of eleven assays intended to identify the potential of a chemical to interact with the estrogen, androgen, thyroid, or steroidogenesis systems. We have collected control data from a subset of test order recipients from the first round of screening. The analysis undertaken herein demonstrates that the EPA should review all testing methods prior to issuing further test orders. Given the frequency with which certain performance criteria were violated, a primary focus of that review should consider adjustments to these standards to better reflect biological variability. A second focus should be to provide detailed, assay-specific direction on when results should be discarded; no clear guidance exists on the degree to which assays need to be re-run for failing to meet performance criteria. A third focus should be to identify permissible differences in study design and execution that have a large influence on endpoint variance. Experimental guidelines could then be re-defined such that endpoint variances are reduced and performance criteria are violated less frequently. It must be emphasized that because we were restricted to a subset (approximately half) of the control data, our analyses serve only as examples to underscore the importance of a detailed, rigorous, and comprehensive evaluation of the performance of the battery.