Identification of GMOs in Common Food Products and Critical Discussion of the Genetics of Foods

Some studies commonly refer genetically modified organisms (GMOs) as transgenic or instead genetically engineered creatures, that are utilized as sources of food for humans or feeds for animals regularly employed in current days (Wong & Chan, 2016). Besides, they represent crops that are superior agricultural food commodities around the world, in respect to their predominant production. Consequently, a total of 357 genetically modified crops have been authorized all around the world between 1996 and 2014 and contributed to 35% of the global financial seed market that was internationally valued at 15.7 billion dollars (Lin & Pan, 2016). Moreover, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) situated in the United States made a public acceptance on November 19, 2015, of virtually the first genetically modified animal as food to humans (FDA, 2015). The licensing did indicate a new step for GM resources and also re-awaken the public declaration for evaluation of wellbeing and transparency aspects of the GM products. Indeed, it is crucial to prevent controversies associated with the rapid development of GM crop through productive regulation founded on extensive GM crop identification (Lin & Pan, 2016). This concern forms the underlying aim of this paper to evaluate the presence of GMOs in approved non-GMO maize product while applying papaya as the test food.

Background of Study

Genetic enhancement is a capability of biology that impacts changes in the genetic mechanisms for various forms of living entities. In essence, the acronym GMO implies organisms such as flora, fauna or microorganisms, which have their genetic components (DNA) transformed in a manner that fails to happen intrinsically via mating or instead through inherent recombination ( Zhang, Wohlhueter, & Zhang, 2016). The inception of the technology in DNA alteration can be followed from 1944 when scientists determined that the hereditary component can be shifted among various species. Consequently, numerous publications contributed to the evolution of the current specialty of molecular biology (Avery, Macleod, & McCArty, 1944).

The initially the primary plant that was genetically altered, antibiotic immune petunias and tobacco, that were manufactured by three independent study teams in 1983. Progressively, researchers from China initially trade in the early 1990s with the genetically improved nicotine. While the United States developed the premier GM of tomato species in 1994, with an attribute of an extended ripening period, it legitimized the product through FDA. Consequently, numerous transgenic plants have been authorized by the FDA, which also comprises canola with improved oil structure, cotton, and soybeans resilient herbicides. The GM products that are readily present for trade includes of potatoes, carrots, strawberries, eggplants among others that are in the pipeline (Bawa & Anilakumar, 2013).

Rationale

Accordingly, the underlying DNA techniques that include time-period quantitative PCR (qPCR) stands out as a success in the application of determining GM crops for more than two decades. Nevertheless, the progressive accelerated advancement of the phenomenon of GM crops has overpowered the potential of operations of traditional procedures. Besides, the efficacy of control for the GM crops has continued to degenerate owing to the emergence of unapproved foods or plants from GM products into the food chain. It is apparent that to overcome such issues; there is a need to implement a heightened-efficiency system to investigate GM crop (Lin & Pan, 2016). During the 1st International Conference on an evaluation of GMO in 2008, in Italy, stipulated an assembly to investigate and negotiate about the development of suitable approaches. These were sampling techniques, extraction procedures, reference resources, multiplexing, current targets and problems, financial effects of trials among others (Marmiroli, Maestri, Gully, Malcevschi, Peano, Bordoni, & De Bellis, 2008).

Beginning in the 1998, Hawaii saw the first GM Papaya as a commercial product that was developed to overcome the papaya ringspot virus (PRSV), by Dr. Richard Manshardt and colleagues. The new GM plant was resilient and underwent various trials with the PRSV impact in Puna, which is the central location for papaya cultivation in Hawaii (Bondera & Query, 2006). However, despite the immunity to PRSV, it is arguable that the GM plant resulted in more disadvantages that outweighed its benefits. Consequently, the GM Papaya terminated its lucrative trade and interfered with the organic markets that and also reduced their value cost. Besides, the contamination of GMO elements in products of crops and foods has dramatically been associated with papaya, and the situation in Hawaii by 2003 emerged as a considerable concern of the gene flow from the GM papaya (Bondera & Query, 2006).

Consequently, significant steps to identify the pollution levels of GM components were affected, starting with the GUS gene trial to assess the measure of contamination present in cultivating lands and in the society. Consistently, the outcome articulated about 30% to 50% of plant twigs and seeds polluted (Bondera & Query, 2006). However, the urge to pursue several tests is inevitable, as well as a comprehensive review of the detection processes for GMO Papaya presence.

The Four Classifications of GM Plants

The 1st Category: Single Characteristic

Necessarily, a majority of GM crops traded nowadays are mainly from the first class or the second grouping. Besides, a considerable number of the GM plants in the first generation comprises of transgene components, such as the 35S promoter (CaMV35S-P), cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV), phosphinothricin acetyltransferase gene (pat/bar) and many others. As a result, due to the deficiency in increased performance trans-gene components, approximately 90% of financial GM plants includes a single or several of the transgene substances mentioned above (Lu, Lin, & Pan, 2010).

The 2nd Classification Involving Stacked Characteristics

These are hybrid matches between mercantile first generation GM crops, for example, MIR604 maize and 59122 (Holst-Jensen et al., 2012). Given their reduced costs of development, the significance and distribution of second-class GM crops are rising. Notwithstanding, the challenges associated with the detection that emerged concerning the nature of stacked GM food organisms. These include a comprehensive evaluation of genes that could demand the capability to distinguish between stacked attribute GM crops as well as inadvertent stacked GM plants that could be generated through cross-pollination involving two single GM plants incidences in adjoining fields. Also, the differentiation of combined occurrences from separate stack features was only limited via trials conducted to individual plants or grains, which averts the procedure from being applied on operated GM plant resources like corn flour. Indeed, the discovery of second-classification GM plants experiences these challenges that pose a significant risk to perspective control measures of GM crops (Lu, Lin, & Pan, 2010).

The 3rd and 4th Classes that Include of Near-Intragenic, Cisgenic and Intragenic

Considerably, the third classification of GM plants contains near-transgenics or rather GM crops that the transgenic and installed components that failed the application in various recognized crops of GM. Furthermore, transgene have structures with partial-transgenic that were derived from the body and had endured the enhancement processor recombination. Thus, causes them to be more strenuous to detect compared to the classification GM crops of first-and-second (Lu, Lin, & Pan, 2010).

On the other hand, cisgenic and right intragenic forms the fourth group of classification for the GM crops. Considerably, the components of transgenic are original host genetic material for GM crops in the fourth generation. Hence, vegetables or food materials in the 4th group can only be discovered through assessment of insertion loci and distinct pattern of the transgenes for all consumable materials and plants in the fourth classification (Lu, Lin, & Pan, 2010).

Research Design

Overview

From the review of the literature, it is arguable that genetic improvements of foods remain a disputable problem because of the issues of contradiction across safety and environmental well-being. This analysis presents practical knowledge of ways to detect the DNA of food genetically, and enabling skilled construction of decisions about the welfare and probable disasters of implementing GMOs in food resources. Considerably, the PCR process is employed to amplify the investigation of the food DNA for the availability of genetically reformed DNA in food materials (Lin & Pan, 2016).

The observation of particular bands of DNA can be identified through application of gel electrophoresis to extract the food DNA via an estimated agarose gel of 3%, which is a quantification that is sufficiently dense to split the DNA bands that encompass the genetically enhanced DNA (JoVE Science Education Database (JSED), 2017). Many employed benchmarks occur in electrophoresis method for DNA validation if efficiently removed food substance being tested like a plant primer and to dispense recognizable specimens of advanced hereditary DNA (commercial genetic improved DNA). Also, DNA that is not advanced genetically (commercial approved non-GMO product control) (JSED, 2017).

Study Design Principles

PCR discovers series of DNA which have been installed into a GM crop, and as indicated above the stability of DNA molecule establishes an advantage over proteins such that its constituents can be separated from an increasingly refined product and emerges substantially intact for PCR amplification. Consequently, specialists in genetics employ a limited quantity of control series such as the sequences of terminator and promoter, to regulate the manifestation of the embedded genes and thus, these arrangements are regular to a number of GM plants (Oliveira, Kommers, Lehman, Fonseca, Ikuta & Lunge, 2016). These two mechanisms investigated in this approach are the primary two regularly controlled series, for instance, the Agrobacterium tumefaciens produces the terminator gene known as the nopaline synthase (NOS). The second one is generated from the cauliflower mosaic virus (CaMV) and is recognized as 35S promoter gene.

In essence, PCR encompasses patterns of repetition, whereby every cycle involves denaturing of a template, annealing of primers, and application of Taq DNA polymerase to progress the annealed primer. After the removal of the DNA from the food item, a heat cycler is employed to increasingly control temperature, creating the phases of the CPR patterns. The phase of denaturing happens when specimens are expeditiously heated until 94 degrees Celsius, prompting the DNA fragments to split. It is followed swiftly with cooling to 59 degrees Celsius which permits the primers to anneal to the discreet DNA elements, subsequently, induce heating again to 72 degrees Celsius for primer elongation through Taq DNA polymerase, then establishing ultimate structure of every DNA component as well as terminating a single heating pattern (Holst-Jensen et al., 2012).

Afterwards, by manipulating agarose gel in the electrophoresis system, enlarged DNA undergoes disconnection of the DNA that creates detectable stripes which comprise 35S promoter as well as the NOS terminator genes. After that, the enlarged D...