Unintended phenotypic effects of single gene insertions in potatoes – assessing developmental dynamics and leaf morphology

Elemente der Naturwissenschaft 95, 2011, P. 9-24 | DOI: 10.18756/edn.95.9


Unintended phenotypic effects of insertion of the viscotoxin gene from mistletoe and the aminolevulinate synthase gene from yeast into the potato (solanum tuberosum), cultivar Bintje have been assessed under two different growth conditions. The genetically modified plants exhibit deviations in developmental dynamics and plant senescence. Changes in plant and tuber shape, leaf metamorphosis and leaf architecture are reported. A few traits of leaf architecture reveal plant-environment interactions, and thus hint at a divergent plasticity of the transgenic variants compared to the non-modified controls. Assessment of phenotypic differences between the cultivars Bintje, Appell and Naturella indicates that the set of morphological characters used in this study is suited to discriminate phenotypes of commercial cultivars. The results show that unintended phenotypic changes due to gene insertion are as pronounced as those due to the different genetic backgrounds. The present study contrasts analyses of profiling studies of the proteome and metabolome of potatoes, which show that compositional differences between genetically modified and non-modified variants are smaller than those between varieties and landraces.

  • Bergelson, J., Purrington, C.B., Wichmann, G. (1998): Promiscuity in transgenic plants. Nature 395, S. 25
  • Bockemühl, J. (1980): In Partnership with Nature, Biodynamic Literature, Wyoming
  • Catchpole, G.S., Beckmann, M., Enot, D.P.E., Mondhe, M., Zywicki, B., Taylor, J., Hardy, N., Smith, A., King, R.D., Kell, B.K., Fiehn, O. and Draper, J. (2005): Hierarchical metabolomics demonstrates substantial compositional similarity between genetically modified and conventional potato crops. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102, S. 14458-14462
  • Cellini, F., Chesson, A., Colquhoun, I., Constable, A., Davies, H.V., Engel, K.H., Gatehouse, A.M.R., Karenlampi, S., Kok, E.J., Leguay, J.J. (2004): Unintended effects and their detection in genetically modified crops. Food Chem Toxicol 42, S. 1089-1125
  • Charlton, A., Allnutt, T., Holmes, S., Chisholm, J., Bean, S., Ellis, N., Mullineaux, P., Oehlschlager, S. (2004): NMR profiling of transgenic peas. Plant Biotechnology Journal 2 (1), S 27–35
  • Conner, A.J., Williams, MK., Abernethy, D.J., Fletcher, P.J., Genet, R.A. (1994): Field performance of transgenic potatoes. New Zealand Journal of Crop and Horticultural Science 22, S 361-371
  • Dale, P.J., McPartlan, C. (1992): Field performance of transgenic potato plants compared with controls regenerated from tuber discs and shoot cuttings. Theor Appl Genet 84, S. 585-591
  • Fray, R.G., Wallace, A., Fraser, P.D., Valero, D., Hedden, P. (1995): Constitutive expression of a fruit-synthase gene in transgenic tomatoes causes dwarfism by redirecting metabolites from the gibberellin pathway. Plant J 8, S. 693-701
  • Gertz, J.M. Jr., Vencill, W.K., Hil,l N.S. (1999): Tolerance of transgenic soybean (glycine max) to heat stress. In: The 1999 Brighton Conference: Weed ssp. The Council of Forkham, Surrey, UK, S. 835-840
  • Griffin, J.L. (2003): Metabolic profiles to define genomes: can we hear the phenotypes? Philos Trans R Soc London [Biol] 359, S. 857-871
  • Haslberger, A.G. (2003): Codex guidelines for GM foods include the analysis of unintended effects. Nature Biotechnol 21, S. 739-741
  • Hebeisen, T., Speiser, B., Reust, W. (2000): Resistance against Phytophtora infestans – an important task in the Swiss variety testing. In: Alföldi T, Lockeretz W, Niggli, U (eds) Proceedings 13th IFOAM Scientific Confer- ence. Hochschulverlag AG an der ETH, Zürich, S. 229
  • Holdrege, C. (1996): Genetics and the manipulation of life: the forgotten factor of context, Hudson, NY
  • Holtorf, H., Guitton, M-C., Reski, R. (2004): Plant functional genomics. Naturwissenschaften 89/6, S. 235-249
  • Holtorf, S., Ludwig-Müller, J., Apel, K., Bohlmann, H. (1998): High-level expression of viscotoxin in Arabidopsis thaliana gives enhanced resis- tance against Plasmodiophora brassicae. Plant Mol Biol 36, S. 673-680
  • Kuiper, H.A., Kleter, G.A., Noteborn, H.P.J.M., Kok, E.J. (2001): Assessment of the food safety issues related to genetically modified foods. Plant J 27(6), S. 503-528
  • Le Gall, G., Colquhoun, I.J., Davis, A. L., Collins, G.J., Verhoeyen, M.E. (2003): Metabolite profiling of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) using H NMR spectroscopy as a tool to detect potential unintended effects following genetic modification. J Agricult Food Chem 51, S 2447-2456
  • Lehesranta, S.J., Davies, H.V., Shepherd, L.H.V., Nunan, N., McNicol, J.M., Auriola, S., Koistinen, K.M., Suomalainen, S., Kokko, I., Kärenlampi, S.O. (2005): Comparison of tuber proteosome of potato varieties, landraces, and genetically modified lines. Plant Physiol 138, S. 1690-1699
  • Purrington, C.B., Bergelson, J. (1999): Exploring the physiological basis of costs to herbicide resistance in Arabidopsis thaliana. Amer Nat, 154 (supl.), S. 82-91
  • Richter, R. (2002): Phenomenological studies on transgenic potatoes: genetic modification adds more than intended traits. In: Heaf D., Wirz J. (eds) Genetic engineering and the intrinsic value and integrity of animals and plants – Proceedings of a workshop at the Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, UK, S 27-32
  • Roessner, U., Luedemann, A., Brust, D., Fiehn, O., Linke, T., Willmitzer, L., Ferenie, A.R. (2001): Metabolite profiling allows comprehensive phenotyping of genetically or environmentally modified plant systems. Plant Cell 13, S 11-29
  • Shepherd, L.V.T., McNicol, J.W., Razzo, R., Taylor, M.A., Davies, H.V. (2006): Assessing the potential for unintended effects in genetically modified potatoes perturbed in metabolic and developmental processes. Targeted analysis of key nutrients and anti-nutrients. Transgenic Res15, S. 409-425
  • Tretheway, R. (2004): Metabolite profiling as an aid to metabolic engineering in plants. Curr Op Plant Biol 7, S. 196-201
  • UPOV (1986): International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants: Guidelines for the conduct of tests for distinctness, homogeneity and stability. http://www.upov.int