Scientific Opinion on an application (EFSA‐GMO‐NL‐2005‐24) for the placing on the market of the herbicide tolerant genetically modified soybean 40‐3‐2 for cultivation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Monsanto
Open accessAbstract
This Scientific Opinion reports on an evaluation of a risk assessment for the placing on the market for cultivation of genetically modified soybean 40-3-2, and updates the previous EFSA GMO Panel Scientific Opinion on the renewal applications for the continued marketing of soybean 40-3-2. The EFSA GMO Panel considered that soybean 40-3-2 is unlikely to raise additional environmental safety concerns compared with conventional soybean, but that the management of its cultivation could result in environmental harm under certain conditions. The Panel therefore recommended managing the use of glyphosate on soybean 40-3-2 in ways that result in similar or reduced environmental impacts compared with conventional soybean cultivation. There is no evidence of adverse effects on non-target organisms (including pollinators) due to the expression of the CP4 EPSPS protein, and there are no indications of the occurrence of adverse effects on non-target predators, herbivores and decomposers due to potential unintended changes in soybean 40-3-2. Owing to the lack of event-specific data on plant-pollinator interactions, scientific uncertainty on the occurrence of adverse effects on pollinators, due to potential unintended changes in soybean 40-3-2, remains, and strategies for resolving this uncertainty are discussed. The Panel recommended the deployment of case-specific monitoring to address: (1) changes in weed community diversity; and (2) the evolution of resistance to glyphosate in weeds due to changes in herbicide and cutivation regimes. The Panel agreed with the general surveillance plan of the applicant, but requested that the Panel's proposals to strengthen general surveillance are implemented. The Panel concluded that the information available for soybean 40-3-2 addresses the scientific comments raised by Member States and that soybean 40-3-2, as described in this application, is as safe as its conventional counterpart and commercial non-GM soybean varieties with respect to potential adverse effects on human and animal health. If subjected to appropriate management measures, the cultivation of soybean 40-3-2 is unlikely to have environmental effects any more adverse than those associated with conventional soybean cultivation.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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 European Food Safety Authority assessed the environmental impact of HT maize and soybean and concluded that their cultivation is unlikely to raise additional environmental safety concerns compared to conventional maize or soybean in most conditions.
“The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) assessed the environmental impact of HT maize and soybean and concluded that their cultivation is unlikely to raise additional environmental safety concerns compared to conventional maize or soybean in most conditions”
From Genetically engineered crops help support conservation biological control (2019) · cites this paper as EFSA, 2012
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 480 · Cited by 19
- Authors
- (GMO), E. P. O. G. M. O.
- Corresponding author
- EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)
- Venue
- EFSA Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2012-06
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 6
- ISSN
- 1831-4732 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2953874760
- Cited by
- 19
- References
- 480
- Citations by year
- 2022: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- EFSA Journal (publishedVersion, cc-by-nd)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- OpenAgrar (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- 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 › Molecular Biology › Insect Resistance and Genetics
- Keywords
- transgenic soybean, herbicide tolerance, glyphosate, CP4 EPSPS, environmental risk assessment, non-target organisms, pollinators, glyphosate resistance, weed control, cultivation management, human and animal health
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