Evaluation of compositional and nutritional equivalence of genetically modified rice to conventional rice using in situ and in vitro techniques

• Published in: Journal of the science of food and agriculture Vol. 89; no. 9; pp. 1490 - 1497
• Main Authors: Lin, Bo, Tan, Zhiliang, Xiao, Guoying, Wang, Min, Cong, Zhihui, Wang, Shuiping, Tang, Shaoxun, Zhou, Chuanshe, Sun, Zhihong, Wang, Wenjuan
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Chichester, UK John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 01.07.2009; Wiley; John Wiley and Sons, Limited
• Subjects: amino acid composition; Animal productions; Biological and medical sciences; Cereal and baking product industries; compositional and nutritional analysis; conventional rice; Degradation; Detergents; Equivalence; feed composition; Fermentation; Food industries; Food science; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Genetically altered foods; genetically modified rice; glufosinate; goat; Grains; herbicide resistance; Herbicides; hybridisation; In vitro testing; nutrient content; Oryza sativa; protein composition; Rice; rice straw; rumen fermentation; Straw; Studies; Terrestrial animal productions; transgenic plants; Vertebrates; Evaluation; Dairy animal; In situ; compositional and nutritional analysis; In vitro; Vertebrata; Mammalia; genetically modified rice; Analysis; Cereal; Goat; conventional rice; Artiodactyla; Genetically modified organism; hybridisation; Ungulata; Rice
• ISSN: 0022-5142; 1097-0010
• DOI: 10.1002/jsfa.3613

BACKGROUND: Concerns that genetically modified (GM) rice may pose nutritional risks have led to the need for studies comparing its nutritional composition with that of its isogenic counterpart. The present study explored the compositional and nutritional equivalence of rice grains and straw derived from a glufosinate herbicide-tolerant GM rice (Bar68), its non-transgenic conventional counterpart (D68) and a transgenic hybrid generation (X125S/Bar68) of Bar68 with conventional rice X125S.RESULTS: The chemical and nutritional composition, in vitro fermentation and in situ nylon bag degradation parameters were employed. Statistical comparisons to test the equivalence between D68, Bar68 and X125S/Bar68 were made with a criterion of maximum differences (scaled by D68) not exceeding 20%. The chemical and amino acid components of Bar68 and X125S/Bar68 were equivalent to those of D68, with the exception of Ca, P, K, Zn, cysteine and phenylalanine contents of grains and P and Mn contents of straw. Bar68 and X125S/Bar68 were equivalent to D68 in terms of in vitro fermentation and in situ degradation parameters of grains and straw, with the exception of the rapidly degradable component of neutral detergent fibre and the potentially degradable component of acid detergent fibre of straw. The maximum differences in some chemical components and nutritional indices were noted between D68 and X125S/Bar68.CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicated that grains and straw of the glufosinate herbicide-tolerant GM rice Bar68 and its transgenic hybrid generation X125S/Bar68 were essentially equivalent in chemical composition and nutritive value to those of its non-transgenic counterpart D68.