Verification of analytical methods for GMO testing when implementing interlaboratory validated methods: Version 2

In the EU, method validation is an essential part of the process that regulates the introduction of new GMOs as food and/or feed into the market. When the inter-laboratory validation study is completed, the method is ready to be implemented in routine testing laboratories. When implementing the new method, the laboratory has to verify that the method can be used for its intended purpose (method verification). The scope of this document is to provide guidance on how to carry out the method verification of inter-laboratory validated methods for the qualitative and quantitative detection of GMOs. Considering that the Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) is the method of choice in the EU for the identification and quantification of GMOs, this document refers exclusively to real time PCR. However, if novel methods are subsequently developed that fulfil legal requirements, then this document will be amended accordingly.JRC.F.5-Food and Feed Complianc

Kernel Lot Distribution Assessment (KeLDA): a Comparative Study of Protein and DNA-Based Detection Methods for GMO Testing

Monitoring of market products for detection of genetically modified organisms (GMO) is needed to comply with legislation in force in many regions of the world, to enforce traceability and to allow official control along the production and the distribution chains. This objective can be more easily achieved if reliable, time and cost-effective analytical methods are available. A GMO can be detected using either DNA-based or protein-based methods; both present advantages and disadvantages. The objective of this work was to assess the performance of a protein-based (lateral flow strips—LFT) and of a DNA-based (polymerase chain reaction—PCR) detection method for GMO analysis. One thousand five hundred samples of soybean, deriving from the sampling of 15 independent bulk lots in large shipments, were analysed to assess and compare the performance of the analytical methods and evaluate their suitability for GMO testing. Several indicators were used to compare the performance of the methods, including the percentage correlation between the PCR and LFT results. The GMO content of the samples ranged from 0 up to 100 %, allowing a full assessment of both analytical approaches with respect to all possible GMO content scenarios. The study revealed a very similar performance of the two methodologies, with low false-negative and false-positive results, and a very satisfactory capacity of both methods in detecting low amounts of target. While determining the fitness for purpose of both analytical approaches, this study also underlines the importance of alternative method characteristics, like costs and time.JRC.I.3-Molecular Biology and Genomic

Kernel Lot Distribution Assessment (KeLDA): a Comparative Study of Protein and DNA-Based Detection Methods for GMO Testing

Monitoring of market products for detection of genetically modified organisms (GMO) is needed to comply with legislation in force in many regions of the world, to enforce traceability and to allow official control along the production and the distribution chains. This objective can be more easily achieved if reliable, time and cost-effective analytical methods are available. A GMO can be detected using either DNA-based or protein-based methods; both present advantages and disadvantages. The objective of this work was to assess the performance of a protein-based (lateral flow strips—LFT) and of a DNA-based (polymerase chain reaction—PCR) detection method for GMO analysis. One thousand five hundred samples of soybean, deriving from the sampling of 15 independent bulk lots in large shipments, were analysed to assess and compare the performance of the analytical methods and evaluate their suitability for GMO testing. Several indicators were used to compare the performance of the methods, including the percentage correlation between the PCR and LFT results. The GMO content of the samples ranged from 0 up to 100 %, allowing a full assessment of both analytical approaches with respect to all possible GMO content scenarios. The study revealed a very similar performance of the two methodologies, with low false-negative and false-positive results, and a very satisfactory capacity of both methods in detecting low amounts of target. While determining the fitness for purpose of both analytical approaches, this study also underlines the importance of alternative method characteristics, like costs and time