4.4 Article Proceedings Paper

Assessing the natural variability in crop composition

Journal

REGULATORY TOXICOLOGY AND PHARMACOLOGY
Volume 58, Issue 3, Pages S13-S20

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.yrtph.2010.08.023

Keywords

Crop composition; Natural variability; Nutrients; Soybean; Maize; ILSI

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The number of evaluations of the nutrient composition of food and feed crops has increased over the past 15 years due to the introduction of new crops using the tools of modern biotechnology. The composition of these crops has been extensively compared with conventional (non-transgenic) controls as an integral part of the comparative safety assessment process. Following guidelines outlined in the Organization of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Consensus Documents, most of these studies have incorporated field trials at multiple geographies and a diverse range of commercially available varieties/hybrids that are analyzed to understand natural variability in composition due to genetic and environmental influences. Using studies conducted in the US, Argentina and Brazil over multiple growing seasons, this report documents the effect of geography, growing season, and genetic background on soybean composition where fatty acids and isoflavones were shown to be particularly variable. A separate investigation of 96 different maize hybrids grown at three locations in the US demonstrated that levels of free amino acids, sugars/polyols, and molecules associated with stress response can vary to a greater degree than that observed for more abundant components. The International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) crop composition database has proven to be an important resource for collecting and disseminating nutrient composition data to promote a further understanding of the variability that occurs naturally in crops used for food and feed. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available