Investigations and Concerns about the Fate of Transgenic DNA and Protein in Livestock

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jacob Matovu ◽  
Ahmet Alçiçek
Keyword(s):  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Rumen Fluid ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Small Ruminants ◽  
Farm Animals ◽  
Animal Cells ◽  
Feed Processing ◽  
Gm Plants ◽  
Reported Data ◽  
Gastro Intestinal Tract

The fate of transgenic DNA (tDNA) and protein from feed derived from Genetically Modified organisms (GMOs) in animals has been a major issue since their commercialization in 1996. Several studies have investigated the risks of horizontal gene transfer (HGT) of tDNA and protein to bacteria or animal cells/tissues, but some of the reported data are controversial. Previous reports showed that tDNA fragments or proteins derived from GM plants could not be detected in tissues, fluids, or edible products from livestock. Other researchers have shown that there is a possibility of small fragments entering animal tissues, fluids and organs. This motivated us to update our knowledge about these concerns. Therefore, this review aimed to evaluate the probable transfer and accumulation of tDNA/proteins from transgenic feeds in animal samples (ruminant and non-ruminant) by evaluating the available experimental studies published scientifically. This study found that the tDNA/protein is not completely degraded during feed processing and digestion in Gastro-Intestinal Tract (GIT). In large ruminants (cattle), tDNA fragments/proteins were detected in GIT digesta, rumen fluid, and faeces. In small ruminants (goats), traces of tDNA/proteins were detected in GIT digesta, blood, milk, liver, kidney, heart and muscle. In pigs, they were detected in blood, spleen, liver, kidney, and GIT digesta. In poultry, traces were detected in blood, liver and GIT digesta but not in meat and eggs. Notwithstanding some studies that have shown transfer of tDNA/protein fragments in animal samples, we cannot rely on these few studies to give general evidence for transfer into tissues/fluids and organs of farm animals. However, this study clearly shows that transfer is possible. Therefore, intensive and authentic research should be conducted on GM plants before they are approved for commercial use, investigating issues such as the fate of tDNA or proteins and the effects of feeding GM feed to livestock.

Lesion Detection on Skin Images Using Improved U-Net

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elif Işılay Ünlü ◽  
Ahmet Çınar
Keyword(s):  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Small Ruminants ◽  
Lesion Detection ◽  
Farm Animals ◽  
Animal Cells ◽  
Feed Processing ◽  
Protein Fragments ◽  
Gm Plants ◽  
Reported Data ◽  
Gastro Intestinal Tract

The fate of transgenic DNA (tDNA) and protein of feeds from Genetically Modified organisms (GMOs) in animals has been an important topic since their commercialization in 1996. Several studies have investigated about risks of horizontal gene transfer (HGT) of tDNA and proteins to bacteria or animal cells/tissues, however, the reported data is at times controversial. Earlier reports showed that tDNA fragments or protein derived from GM plants have not been detected in tissues, fluids, or edible products of farm animals. Other researchers have come out to demonstrate that there is the possibility of small fragments leaking out into the animal tissues, fluids and organs. This motivated us to update our knowledge about these concerns. Therefore, this review aimed at assessing the likely transfer and accumulation of tDNA/ proteins from transgenic feeds to animal (ruminants and non-ruminants) samples through evaluating the available experimental scientific published studies. This study has found out that the tDNA or protein is not completely degraded during feed processing and digestion in the Gastro-Intestinal Tract (GIT). In large ruminants (Cattle), tDNA fragments/protein have been detected in the GIT digesta, ruminal fluid and feces. In small ruminants (Goats), traces of tDNA/proteins have been detected in the GIT digesta, blood, milk, liver, kidney, heart and muscle. In pigs, they have been detected in blood, spleen, liver kidney and in the GIT digesta. In poultry, traces have been seen in blood, liver and GIT digesta but not in meat and Eggs. Regardless of some studies that have shown the transfer of tDNA/protein fragments to animal samples, we cannot base on these few studies to give a piece of general evidence about their transfer into tissues/fluids and organs of livestock animals. However, this study clearly shows possible transfer, hence intensive and authentic research on GM crops should be done before they are allowed for commercial use, studying issues like the fate of tDNA or proteins and the effect of feeding GM feeds to livestock.

Alterations in Ruminal Fluid and Serum Biochemical Constituents in Goats Affected with Ruminal Acidosis

2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (03) ◽  
Author(s):  
P. R. Chavelikar ◽  
G. and Neha Rao C. Mandali ◽  
Neha Rao
Keyword(s):  
Rumen Fluid ◽  
Clinical Signs ◽  
Small Ruminants ◽  
Ruminal Fluid ◽  
Mean Values ◽  
Biochemical Constituents ◽  
Ruminal Acidosis ◽  
Methylene Blue Reduction ◽  
Serum Biochemical ◽  
The Mean

Ruminal acidosis is an important clinical emergency in small ruminants. In this study, eight healthy farm goats and 24 goats presented at TVCC of the college of Veterinary Sciences and A.H., Anand with clinical signs of ruminal acidosis and having rumen liquor pH below 6 were examined for alterations in the ruminal fluid and serum biochemical parameters. Among various rumen fluid parameters evaluated, the mean values of rumen fluid pH decreased significantly (4.71±0.11 vs. 6.90±0.10), while sediment activity time (46.67±1.20 vs. 24.50±0.78 min) and methylene blue reduction time (29.50±0.73 vs. 10.03±0.27 min) increased significantly in acidotic goats. The normal greenish, aromatic viscous color, odour and consistency of rumen fluid of healthy goats also changed to milky grey/creamy, sour/pungent watery in acidotic goats. The rumen protozoal activity decreased to nil in acidotic goats as compared to the healthy goats. Among various serum biochemical constituents, the mean values of glucose (92.43±1.37 vs. 74.13±1.83 mg/dl), BUN (26.49±0.47 vs. 22.63±1.19 mg/dl), serum creatinine (01.01±0.02 vs. 00.83±0.02 mg/dl) and albumin (03.22±0.03 vs. 03.05±0.05 g/dl), ALT (56.75±1.55 vs. 27.88±1.14 IU/L) and AST (93.25±1.82 vs. 54.00±1.75 IU/L), increased significantly, while there was significant decrease in serum calcium (09.09±0.14 vs. 10.29±0.08 mg/dl) in acidotic goats. The mean values of alkaline phosphatase (IU/L) in acidotic goats increased non-significantly from the base values of healthy goats.

scholarly journals Do Animals Play a Role in the Transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2)? A Commentary

Animals ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 16
Author(s):  
Anna Costagliola ◽  
Giovanna Liguori ◽  
Danila d’Angelo ◽  
Caterina Costa ◽  
Francesca Ciani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome ◽  
Neutralizing Antibodies ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Infectious Agent ◽  
Human Infection ◽  
Farm Animals ◽  
Partial Protection ◽  
Management Measures ◽  
First Case ◽  
And Behavior

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) belongs to the Beta-coronavirus genus. It is 96.2% homologous to bat CoV RaTG13 and 88% homologous to two bat SARS-like coronaviruses. SARS-CoV-2 is the infectious agent responsible for the coronavirus disease (COVID-19), which was first reported in the Hubei province of Wuhan, China, at the beginning of December 2019. Human transmission from COVID-19 patients or incubation carriers occurs via coughing, sneezing, speaking, discharge from the nose, or fecal contamination. Various strains of the virus have been reported around the world, with different virulence and behavior. In addition, SARS-CoV-2 shares certain epitopes with some taxonomically related viruses, with tropism for the most common synanthropic animals. By elucidating the immunological properties of the circulating SARS-CoV-2, a partial protection due to human–animal interactions could be supposed in some situations. In addition, differential epitopes could be used for the differential diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection. There have been cases of transmission from people with COVID-19 to pets such as cats and dogs. In addition, wild felines were infected. All These animals were either asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic and recovered spontaneously. Experimental studies showed cats and ferrets to be more susceptible to COVID-19. COVID-19 positive dogs and felines do not transmit the infection to humans. In contrast, minks at farms were severely infected from people with COVID-19. A SARS-Cov-2 variant in the Danish farmed mink that had been previously infected by COVID-19 positive workers, spread to mink workers causing the first case of animal-to-human infection transmission that causes a moderate decreased sensitivity to neutralizing antibodies. Thus, more investigations are necessary. It remains important to understand the risk that people with COVID-19 pose to their pets, as well as wild or farm animals so effective recommendations and risk management measures against COVID-19 can be made. A One Health unit that facilitates collaboration between public health and veterinary services is recommended.

Biosafety of Genome Editing Applications in Plant Breeding: Considerations for a Focused Case-Specific Risk Assessment in the EU

BioTech ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 10
Author(s):  
Michael F. Eckerstorfer ◽  
Marcin Grabowski ◽  
Matteo Lener ◽  
Margret Engelhard ◽  
Samson Simon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Genome Editing ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Unintended Effects ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Gm Plants ◽  
European Court ◽  
Assessment Approach ◽  
Deliberate Release ◽  
Specific Assessment

An intensely debated question is whether or how a mandatory environmental risk assessment (ERA) should be conducted for plants obtained through novel genomic techniques, including genome editing (GE). Some countries have already exempted certain types of GE applications from their regulations addressing genetically modified organisms (GMOs). In the European Union, the European Court of Justice confirmed in 2018 that plants developed by novel genomic techniques for directed mutagenesis are regulated as GMOs. Thus, they have to undergo an ERA prior to deliberate release or being placed on the market. Recently, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published two opinions on the relevance of the current EU ERA framework for GM plants obtained through novel genomic techniques (NGTs). Regarding GE plants, the opinions confirmed that the existing ERA framework is suitable in general and that the current ERA requirements need to be applied in a case specific manner. Since EFSA did not provide further guidance, this review addresses a couple of issues relevant for the case-specific assessment of GE plants. We discuss the suitability of general denominators of risk/safety and address characteristics of GE plants which require particular assessment approaches. We suggest integrating the following two sets of considerations into the ERA: considerations related to the traits developed by GE and considerations addressing the assessment of method-related unintended effects, e.g., due to off-target modifications. In conclusion, we recommend that further specific guidance for the ERA and monitoring should be developed to facilitate a focused assessment approach for GE plants.

scholarly journals Development of polyvalent toxoid Clostridium perfringens against anaerobic enterotoxaemia in young cattle and small ruminants

2021 ◽  
Vol 282 ◽  
pp. 04009
Author(s):  
F.Kh. Pulotov ◽  
O.D. Nazarova ◽  
N.A. Akhmadov ◽  
A.I. Karimzoda
Keyword(s):  
Nutrient Medium ◽  
Small Ruminants ◽  
Farm Animals ◽  
Drug Preparation ◽  
Type D ◽  
Industrial Strains ◽  
Type C ◽  
Young Cattle ◽  
C 30 ◽  
Selection Of

The authors of the article presents the results of the development of a polyvalent toxoid from C.perfringens strains against anaerobic enterotoxaemia of young cattle and small ruminants and an assessment of its effectiveness. It is presented the data on the selection of the recipe composition of the nutrient medium, the cultivation of industrial strains, the process of drug preparation, the selection of the optimal ratio of components and the method of controlling the effectiveness. Sequential cultivation of industrial strains of C.perfringens was carried out by cultivating them in flasks, bottles and bioreactors in the nutrient medium developed by the authors, consisting of: 12.0 g/l - liver extract; 25.0 g/l - casein-peptone; 3.2g/l –K2HPO4; 1.8 g/l – KH2PO4; 0.5 g/l – MgSO4. The development of the drug included the selection of optimal and balanced ratios of C. perfringens type A toxoids - 15 IU/ml, C.perfringens type B - 20 IU/ml, C.perfringens type C - 30 IU/ml, C. perfringens type D - 30 IU/ml, which ensured 100% protection of the immunized animals. Studies on laboratory and farm animals revealed the harmlessness, areactogenicity of the drug, which stimulated the development of immunity and resistance to the toxic effects of all strains of C.perfringens.

Comparison of inocula from sheep and cattle for thein vitrogas production technique under tropical conditions

1999 ◽  
Vol 1999 ◽  
pp. 151-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
I.C.S. Bueno ◽  
A.L. Abdalla ◽  
S.L.S. Cabral Filho ◽  
D.M.S.S. Vitti ◽  
E. Owen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dry Matter ◽  
Rumen Fluid ◽  
Small Ruminants ◽  
Gas Production ◽  
Barley Straw ◽  
Tropical Conditions ◽  
Production Techniques ◽  
Microbial Mass

The use of small ruminants, such as sheep, in metabolism studies is more convenient as handling problems are reduced and their maintenance costs are lower, in comparison with cattle. However in vivo digestibility estimates obtained at maintenance are known to differ between these two species. With the increased use ofin vitrogas production techniques, to evaluate ruminant feedingstuffs, it is of great importance to identify whether the species from which the rumen fluid inoculum is obtained has a significant influence on the results obtained.Rumen fluid samples were obtained from a non-lactating Holstein cow (C) and six wether sheep (S) offered the same diet (80 % tropical grass and 20 % dairy concentrate) and prepared so as to have similar dry matter (DM) contents and therefore potentially the microbial mass. Nine substrates (two tropical grasses 1-2, tropical alfalfa 3, barley straw 4, and five temperate grasses 5-9) were examined.

Music Research in Inclusive School Settings

2014 ◽  
Vol 62 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Judith A. Jellison ◽  
Ellary A. Draper
Keyword(s):  
Music Education ◽  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
School Settings ◽  
Effective Teaching Strategies ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Inclusive School ◽  
Music Research ◽  
The Many ◽  
Reported Data

A search for music research in inclusive music school settings (1975–2013) resulted in 22 descriptive and experimental studies that can be classified and coded according to settings, participants, research variables, measures of generalization, and effectiveness of the interventions. Half of the studies reported data from both students with disabilities and typically developing students. All participants were at preschool or elementary levels; no participants were at secondary levels. Less than half of the studies were conducted in music classrooms, but few measured music knowledge or skills; most often, social skills were measured. Only a few studies reported the generalization of learned skills (music or other) to new situations. Participants with disabilities were most often described as having intellectual disabilities or autism; high-incidence populations (e.g., learning disabilities) were underrepresented. In a large majority of studies, authors reported effective outcomes for interventions (most were specifically designed music activities), and some reported partially effective results. Based on the results of this review, we conclude there is a pressing need to expand research in inclusive music education settings and answer the many questions about students’ participation and effective teaching strategies for classrooms and rehearsals that include a wide range of student abilities.

Agricultural and Food Controversies

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
F. Bailey Norwood ◽  
Michelle S. Calvo-Lorenzo ◽  
Sarah Lancaster ◽  
Pascal A. Oltenacu
Keyword(s):  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
Food System ◽  
Scientific Literature ◽  
Genetically Modified ◽  
Local Economy ◽  
Farm Animals ◽  
Genetically Modified Food ◽  
Farm Animal Welfare ◽  
Agricultural Technologies ◽  
Global Food Security

The public is more interested in agricultural and food issues than ever before, as is evident in the many agricultural controversies debated in the media. Why is it that some people embrace new agricultural technologies while others steadfastly defend traditional farming methods? Why do some prefer to buy food grown around the world while others patronize small, local farmers? In the debates about organic food, genetically modified organisms, and farm animal welfare, it is not always clear what the scientific literature actually says. To understand these controversies, the authors encourage readers to develop first an appreciation for why two equally intelligent and well-intentioned people can form radically different notions about food. Sometimes the disputes are scientific in nature, and sometimes they arise from conflicting ethical views. This book confronts the most controversial issues in agriculture by first explaining the principles of both sides of the debate, and then guiding readers through the scientific literature so that they may form their own educated opinions. Is food safe if the farm used pesticides, or are organic foods truly better for your health? Are chemical fertilizers sustainable, or are we producing cheap food today at the expense of future generations? What foods should we eat to have a smaller carbon footprint? Is genetically-modified food the key to global food security, and does it give corporations too much market power? Is the prevalence of corn throughout the food system the result of farm subsidies? Does buying local food stimulate the local economy? Why are so many farm animals raised indoors, and should antibiotics be given to livestock? These are the issues addressed in Agricultural and Food Controversies: What Everyone Needs to Know. While it doesn't claim to have all the answers, it provides a synthesis of research and popular opinions on both sides of these important issues, allowing readers to decide what they value and believe for themselves.

Study of the effects of PR toxin, mycophenolic acid and roquefortine C on in vitro gas production parameters and their stability in the rumen environment

2014 ◽  
Vol 153 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-176 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. GALLO ◽  
G. GIUBERTI ◽  
T. BERTUZZI ◽  
M. MOSCHINI ◽  
F. MASOERO
Keyword(s):  
Mycophenolic Acid ◽  
Rumen Fluid ◽  
Rumen Fermentation ◽  
Gas Production ◽  
Farm Animals ◽  
Marginal Effect ◽  
Rumen Microorganisms ◽  
Marginal Effects ◽  
Roquefortine C

SUMMARYMoulds belonging to Penicillium section roqueforti are common contaminants of feedstuffs and produce several mycotoxins that can cause health hazards when ingested by farm animals. Among these, PR toxin (PR), mycophenolic acid (MY) and roquefortine C (RC) have been frequently detected in forages, particularly silages. The aims of the current trials were to study the effects of the presence of pure mycotoxins on in vitro rumen fermentation parameters and to assess their stability in the rumen environment. Two successive in vitro gas production experiments were carried out: a central composite design with four replications of central point (CCD) and a completely randomized design with a fully factorial arrangement of treatments (FFD). In CCD, the effects of PR, MY and RC concentrations in diluted rumen fluid (i.e. 0·01, 0·30, 1·01, 1·71 and 2·00 μg of each mycotoxin/ml) were tested. Gas volume produced after 48 h of incubation (Vf) decreased linearly as concentrations of RC and MY in diluted rumen fluid increased, with marginal effects similar for two mycotoxins, being respectively −14·6 and −13·4 ml/g organic matter (OM) for each 1·0 μg/ml of increment in mycotoxin concentration. Similarly, total volatile fatty acid (VFA) production decreased quadratically as concentrations of RC and MY increased, with marginal effects about two times higher for MY than RC, being −4·22 and −2·62 mmol/l for each 1·0 μg/ml of increment in mycotoxin concentration. With respect to maximum Vf (i.e. 410·6 ml/g OM) and VFA (98·06 mmol/l) values estimated by the model, decreases of 13·6 and 15·2% were obtained when incubating the highest RC and MY concentrations, respectively. The PR did not interfere with rumen fermentation pattern and it was not recovered after 48 h of incubation, whereas the stabilities of MY and RC in rumen fluid were similar and on average equal to about 50%. On the basis of CCD results, a second experiment (FFD) was carried out in which only effects of MY and RC concentrations (i.e. 0, 0·67, 1·33 and 2·00 μg of each mycotoxin/ml of diluted rumen fluid) were tested. Data from FFD showed Vf decreased linearly when concentrations of MY and RC increased, with marginal effect two-folds higher for MY than for RC (−11·1 ml/g OM and −6·7 ml/g OM, respectively). Similar marginal effects of MY and RC in decreasing VFA production were recorded: −2·38 and −2·86 mmol/l for each 1·0 μg/ml of increment in mycotoxin concentration, respectively. At the highest RC and MY tested concentrations, Vf and VFA decreased by 8·7 and 10·7%, respectively, over maximum estimated values. In FFD, the average amounts of MY and RC recovered in rumen fluid after 48 h of incubation were 79·0 and 40·6%, respectively. In conclusion, the MY and RC from standards interfered with rumen microorganisms at relatively low levels and were partially stable in the rumen environment after 48 h of incubation. These findings suggested that MY and RC could interfere with digestive processes and might represent a potential risk for ruminants fed diets containing feeds contaminated by mycotoxins produced by P. roqueforti.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document