Rod Townsend

This article provides a science-based, decision tree approach to assess the allergenic concerns associated with the introduction of gene products into new plant varieties. The assessment focuses on the source from which the transferred gene was derived. Sources fall into three general categories: common allergenic food proteins; less common allergenic foods or other known allergen sources; and sources with no history of allergenicity. Information concerning the amino acid sequence identity to known allergenic proteins, in vitro and/or in vivo immunologic assays, and assessment of key physiochemical properties are included in reaching a recommendation on whether food derived from the genetically modified plant variety should be labeled as to the source of the transferred gene. In the end, a balanced judgement of all the available data generated during allergenicity assessment will assure the safety of foods derived from genetically engineered crops. Using the approaches described here, new plant varieties generated by genetic modification should be introduced into the marketplace with the same confidence that new plant varieties developed by traditional breeding have been introduced for decades.

In addition to the major encapsidated DNA species found in preparations of cassava latent virus (genomic DNAs 1 and 2) there are minor DNA populations of twice (dimeric) and approximately half genome length. Both minor species resemble the genomic DNAs in that they are composed of predominantly circular single-stranded DNA. All of these size groups have a corresponding covalently-closed circular double-stranded DNA form in infected tissue. Infectivity studies using cloned DNAs 1 and 2 show that dimeric DNA routinely appears, suggesting it to be an intermediate in the DNA replicative cycle that can be encapsidated at low efficiency. In contrast, half unit length DNA has not yet been detected after multiple passaging of virus derived from the cloned DNA inoculum. Half unit length DNAs appear to be derived exclusively from DNA 2 and consist of a population of molecules exhibiting a relatively specific deletion. As they have an inhibitory effect on virus multiplication, their encapsidated forms are analogous to defective interfering particles associated with other eukaryotic DNA containing viruses. Small primer molecules associated with the genomic single-stranded DNAs, as reported for another geminivirus, have not been detected in CLV.

Intact recombinant DNAs containing single copies of either component of the cassava latent virus genome can elicit infection when mechanically inoculated to host plants in the presence of the appropriate second component. Characterisation of infectious mutant progeny viruses, by analysis of virus-specific supercoiled DNA intermediates, indicates that most if not all of the cloning vector has been deleted, achieved at least in some cases by intermolecular recombination in vivo between DNAs 1 and 2. Significant rearrangements within the intergenic region of DNA 2, predominantly external to the common region, can be tolerated without loss of infectivity suggesting a somewhat passive role in virus multiplication for the sequences in question. Although packaging constraints might impose limits on the amount of DNA within geminate particles, isolation of an infectious coat protein mutant defective in virion production suggests that packaging is not essential for systemic spread of the viral DNA.

Totipotent leaf mesophyll protoplasts of Nicotiana plumbaginifolia, Viviani were inoculated with cassava latent virus (CLV) or with full length copies of CLV genomic DNAs 1 and 2 excised from replicative forms of M13 clones. Virus specific DNAs began to appear 48-72h after inoculation with virus or cloned DNAs, coincident with the onset of host cell division. Infected cells accumulated supercoiled forms of DNAs 1 and 2 as well as progeny single-stranded (ss) virion (+) sense DNAs representing each component of the genome. Both supercoiled and ss molecules were synthesised by cells inoculated with cloned DNA 1 alone but DNA 2 failed to replicate independently.