中国农业科学 ›› 2018, Vol. 51 ›› Issue (4): 601-612.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2018.04.001

• 作物遗传育种·种质资源·分子遗传学 •    下一篇

基因工程作物的安全评估与监管:历史回顾与改革思考

贾士荣   

  1. 中国农业科学院生物技术研究所,北京 100081
  • 收稿日期:2017-08-29 出版日期:2018-02-16 发布日期:2018-02-16
  • 作者简介:贾士荣,E-mail:srjia@126.com
  • 基金资助:
    转基因重大专项(2016ZX08011-001)

Risk Assessment and Regulation of Genetically Engineered Crops: History and Reformation

JIA ShiRong   

  1. Biotechnology Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081
  • Received:2017-08-29 Online:2018-02-16 Published:2018-02-16

摘要: 基因工程(genetically engineered,GE)作物育种或精准育种(precise breeding)可按人类的意愿做到基因序列、蛋白序列、功能和插入位点四精准。2016年,GE作物的全球种植面积达1.851×109 hm2,30年增加了近100倍,成为农业史上发展最快的技术,产生了巨大的经济、社会和环境效益。GE作物的安全性评估和监管,30年来已积累了海量的科学数据和丰富经验,存在的问题需要认真思考,特别是近年基因组编辑技术的飞速发展,又提出了如何安评监管的新课题。GE育种技术只是一种工具或手段,本身并无固有的特殊风险,与常规育种技术相比,并不增加新的风险。从科学角度看,过去30年中普遍存在监管失当或过度监管问题,没有真正做到以风险为基础的分类监管,欧盟“以技术过程为基础”的监管应当摒弃,即使美国“以产品为基础”的监管也存在需要改进的空间。安评监管必须以科学为基础,如何创新、改革已成为国际发展的共同趋势。本文对GE作物环境和食品安全性评估中的一些科学问题进行了分析讨论,包括评价对象,对靶生物和非靶生物的影响,转基因飘流,毒性、过敏性、营养成分及非预期效应,GE作物中的标记基因及植物病原DNA序列等。根据现有科学知识,讨论了安评监管的重点。文章最后建议按物种、基因、环境三位一体,构建“以风险为基础”的分类管理框架,列出了属于低、中、高风险类别的可能产品。按物种分,重点考察基因供体或受体物种是否有长期安全食用的历史,是否含有已知的毒性物质、过敏原或抗营养因子等。按基因来源分,可分为种内转基因(intragenesis)、近缘转基因(cisgenesis)和远缘转基因(transgenesis)。种内转基因是指同种植物内的基因修饰和转移,如大多数基因组编辑技术改良的作物,将种内的某个或某些基因沉默、敲除或插入、修饰,风险极低。近缘转基因是在有性可交配物种之间转基因,风险类别低。远缘转基因则是转入有性不可交配物种的基因,风险类别中或高。按环境分类,重点考察GE作物释放环境中是否存在有性可交配的近缘野生种或杂草,是否会引起基因渐渗,导致杂种有生存竞争选择优势,以及释放环境是否为该物种的起源中心等。以上应作为GE作物风险评估和监管的重点。

关键词: 基因工程作物, 基因组编辑, 风险分析, 环境安全, 食品安全, 监管框架

Abstract: The crop breeding by genetic engineering (GE) or the widely accepted terms of ‘Precise Breeding’ are the techniques based on the human desire to modify crop traits with precise characteristics of known inserted DNA and protein sequences, anticipated function, and defined insertion sites in the genome of a given species. The acreage of GE crops has reached to 185.1 million hectares world-wide in 2016, which increased almost 100 folds compared with that in 1996, the year of starting commercialization of GE crops. This indicates that the GE is the fastest developing technology in the history of agriculture, which has provided significant economic, social and environmental benefit to the world. In the process of development and commercialization of GE crops during recent three decades, huge amount of scientific data and experiences have also been accumulated regarding their risk assessment and regulation. However, many unscientific burdens still exist that needs to be further reformed. In particular, the rapid development of new products derived from such as genome editing has also raised questions on how to evaluate and regulate them. Theoretically and practically, the GE as a technique, has posed no intrinsic unique or incremental risks comparing with that of the traditional breeding techniques. From scientific point of view, it is common that the GE crops are inadequate- or over-regulated in the recent 30 years. In fact, so far, a risk-based classification and regulation on GE crops has not been fully implemented. Not only the European ‘Process-based’ regulation should be eliminated, but also the US ‘Product-based’ regulation has a space for further improvement. Nowadays, the innovation and reformation in this field based on science has become a common trend internationally. In this paper, some scientific issues associated with environmental and food safety of GE crops are addressed, including what is the proper object for risk assessment (transformed event, variety or species?), the effect of Bt protein on target and non-target organisms, the potential impact of transgene flow, the toxin, allergenicity, compositional change and un-expected effects, and the marker genes and plant pathogen derived DNA sequences in the GE cops. All of these are discussed based on the current scientific knowledge, by which the major focus point in the risk assessment are discussed. Finally, a regulatory framework based on risk classification, which integrally determined by the species that either used as donor or recipient, the genes that confer specific traits and the environment into which the GE crop introduced, is proposed. The possible products belonging to the category of low, mediate or high risk are listed individually. In terms of species, whether the donor or recipient of a transgene has a long history of safe use, does it contain any known toxins, allergens or anti-nutrients should be carefully assayed. Considering the source of transgene, the GE crops can be classified into three categories of intragenesis, cisgenesis and transgenesis. The intragenesis are the gene modifications or transfers within the same species, e.g. the most crops derived from genome editing exhibiting gene silence, knock-out, modification or insertion with no or very low risk. The cisgenesis are the gene transfers between sexual compatible species that may pose low risk. While the transgenesis transfer genes between sexual incompatible species that may present mediate or higher risk. In terms of environmental safety, the risk assessment should be focused on whether there is any sexual compatible wild species or weeds existed in the environment in which the GE crops are going to be released, whether the crossing and backcrossing between crop-to-wild would cause gene introgression that may lead to the selective competitiveness of the hybrids, whether the region in which the GE crops are intend to release is the origin of a given species, etc. All of these issues have to be considered as major focuses in the risk assessment and regulation of GE crops.

Key words: genetically engineered crops, genome editing, risk assessment, environmental safety, food safety, regulatory framework