There are currently 402 studies in the GENERA database.

Advanced Search

General Information

Document type
  • Peer-reviewed journal article
GE organism
  • wheat
GE trait
  • herbicide tolerance
  • USA


Safety for consumption
  • no effect
Safety for environment
  • no effect

A comparative risk assessment of genetically engineered, mutagenic, and conventional wheat production systems

Peterson, RK; Shama, LM
Transgenic Research. 2005 December. 14(6):859-875

Link to full text (journal may charge for access)

PMID: 16315092 DOI: 10.1007/s11248-005-1411-8 ISSN: 0962-8819


Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) varieties produced using modern biotechnologies, such as genetic engineering and mutagenic techniques, have lagged behind other crop species, but are now being developed and, in the case of mutagenic wheat, commercially grown around the world. Because these wheat varieties have emerged recently, there is a unique opportunity to assess comparatively the potential environmental risks (human health, ecological, and livestock risks) associated with genetically engineered, mutagenic, and conventional wheat production systems. Replacement of traditional herbicides with glyphosate in a glyphosate-tolerant (genetically engineered) wheat system or imazamox in an imidazolinone-tolerant (mutagenic) wheat system may alter environmental risks associated with weed management. Additionally, because both systems rely on plants that express novel proteins, the proteins and plants themselves may impose risks. The purpose of our study was to examine comparatively the multiple aspects of risk associated with different wheat production systems in the US and Canada using the risk assessment paradigm. Specifically, we used tier 1 quantitative and qualitative risk assessment methods to compare specific environmental risks associated with the different wheat production systems. Both glyphosate and imazamox present lower human health and ecological risks than many other herbicides associated with conventional wheat production systems evaluated in this study. The differences in risks were most pronounced when comparing glyphosate and imazamox to herbicides currently with substantial market share. Current weight-of-evidence suggests that the transgenic CP4 EPSPS protein present in glyphosate-tolerant wheat poses negligible risk to humans, livestock, and wildlife. Risk for mutated AHAS protein in imidazolinone-tolerant wheat most likely would be low, but there are not sufficient effect and exposure data to adequately characterize risk. Environmental risks for herbicides were more amenable to quantitative assessments than for the transgenic CP4 EPSPS protein and the mutated AHAS protein.


biotechnology, genetically engineered crops, GMO, herbicide exposure, herbicide toxicity, protein risk


Funding source
  • USDA
Funding country
  • United States
Funding type
  • government

Links to outside analysis of this resource

Please contact us if you know of an independent summary or analysis of this resource.

Cite this study


Peterson, RK, LM Shama. "A comparative risk assessment of genetically engineered, mutagenic, and conventional wheat production systems." Transgenic Research 14.6 (2005): 859-875. Web. 4 Mar. 2024.


Peterson, RK., & Shama, LM. (2005). A comparative risk assessment of genetically engineered, mutagenic, and conventional wheat production systems. Transgenic Research, 14(6), 859-875. doi:10.1007/s11248-005-1411-8

Please verify citations before use, citations are automatically generated based on information stored within the GENERA database and therefore may or may not be correct.