Cited by 124Genetically Modified Organisms ResearchAgricultural safety and regulationsCarcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment

Results of a 13 week safety assurance study with rats fed grain from glyphosate tolerant corn

Hammond, B, Dudek, R, Lemen, J, Nemeth, M·2004·Food and Chemical Toxicology

Abstract

The current study presents the results of a 13 week feeding study in rats with grain from Roundup Ready corn which is tolerant to the herbicide glyphosate. Herbicide tolerance was accomplished through the introduction of cp4 epsps coding sequences into the corn genome for in planta production of CP4 EPSPS enzymes. Unlike related corn EPSPS enzymes, CP4 EPSPS enzymes are not inhibited by the herbicide glyphosate. Purina TestDiets formulated Roundup Ready corn grain into rodent diets at levels of 11 and 33% (w/w). The responses of rats fed diets containing Roundup Ready corn grain were compared to that of rats fed diets containing non-transgenic grain (controls). All diets were nutritionally balanced and conformed to Purina Mills, Inc. specifications for Certified LabDiet 5002. There were 400 rats in the study divided into 10 groups of 20 rats/sex/group. Overall health, body weight, food consumption, clinical pathology parameters (hematology, blood chemistry, urinalysis), organ weights, gross and microscopic appearance of tissues were comparable between groups fed diets containing Roundup Ready and control corn grain. This study complements extensive agronomic, compositional and farm animal feeding studies with Roundup Ready corn grain, confirming it is as safe and nutritious as existing commercial corn hybrids.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.fct.2004.02.013

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The NK603 GM maize used in this study is engineered to overexpress a modified version of Agrobacterium tumefaciens EPSPS, allowing R tolerance.

    “A cause of the effects of the effects could be that the NK603 GM maize used in this study is engineered to overexpress a modified version of the Agrobacterium tumefaciens 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (EPSPS) (Hammond et al., 2004) allowing the R tolerance.”
  • Our study design was based on that of the Monsanto investigation in order to make the two experiments comparable, but we extended the period of observation from Monsanto's 90 days to 2 years.

    “Our study design was based on that of the Monsanto investigation in order to make the two experiments comparable, but we extended the period of observation from Monsanto's 90 days to 2 years.”
  • Our findings show that the differences in multiple organ functional parameters seen from the consumption of NK603 GM maize for 90 days escalated over 2 years into severe organ damage in all types of test diets.

    “Our findings show that the differences in multiple organ functional parameters seen from the consumption of NK603 GM maize for 90 days [3,7] escalated over 2 years into severe organ damage in all types of test diets.”
  • We used the Sprague-Dawley strain of rat, as recommended for chronic toxicology tests by the National Toxicology Program in the USA, and as used by Monsanto in its 90-day study.

    “We used the Sprague-Dawley strain of rat, as recommended for chronic toxicology tests by the National Toxicology Program in the USA [31], and as used by Monsanto in its 90-day study [3].”
  • A detailed analysis of the data in the subchronic toxicity studies has revealed statistically significant alterations in kidney and liver function that may constitute signs of the early onset of chronic toxicity.

    “A detailed analysis of the data in the subchronic toxicity studies [2–5] has revealed statistically significant alterations in kidney and liver function that may constitute signs of the early onset of chronic toxicity.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hammond, B., Dudek, R., Lemen, J., & Nemeth, M.
Corresponding author
Hammond, B
Venue
Food and Chemical Toxicology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2004-06
Volume
42
Issue
6
Pages
1003-1014
ISSN
0278-6915 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2158306630
Cited by
124
References
29
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 11
FWCI
5.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Food and Chemical Toxicology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural safety and regulations
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Keywords
glyphosate tolerance, CP4 EPSPS, herbicide-tolerant crops, safety assurance, long-term dietary exposure, rats, clinical pathology, organ weight, histopathology, food safety
MeSH terms
Glyphosate, Animals, Animal Feed, Body Weight, Zea mays, Drug Tolerance, Female, Glycine, Hematologic Tests, Hematology, Herbicides, Male, Safety, Urinalysis, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Plants, Genetically Modified, Food, Genetically Modified, Rats

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review