LeadForward Vol.1 No. 1

2. PCR and sequence comparison of DNA samples were conducted to confirm the stability of the inheritability of the insertion across generations. Plants were bred to determine if the purple phenotype was inherited in a Mendelian segregation fashion. The company stated the purple phenotype was inheritable. 3. Compositional analysis was conducted to determine whether the purple tomato contained similar nutrients at similar levels to non-GMO tomatoes, including protein, fat, carbohydrate, fiber, minerals, carotenoids, vitamins, and alpha-tomatine. The company determined the levels of most of the nutritional components to be similar or with “minor differences.”

4. Norfolk Plant Sciences assessed dietary exposure levels assuming the complete replacement of red tomatoes in the human diet with the purple tomato for two days. The company concluded that the level of dietary exposure to anthocyanins is the same as consuming high anthocyanin foods. For example, consuming 8 ounces of purple tomato juice is equivalent to consuming 1 cup of blueberries. The Controversial Tests 1. Bioinformatic analyses were utilized to determine if any open reading frames were generated or disrupted by inserting the foreign DNA. Norfolk Plant Sciences searched the DNA sequences flanking the insertion sequence in the tomatoes. The company reported no open reading frames flanking the insertion location. Since Norfolk Plant Sciences did not assess possible damage to the entire genome using advanced laboratory techniques, geneticist Michael Antoniou expressed concern in a statement published by GM Watch. “There’s no evidence that the developers of the GM purple tomato have carried out the kind of molecular analyses (proteomics and metabolomics) that could help establish whether they only got the change they want, with no unintended changes. As a result, we don’t know if these tomatoes are safe to eat,” Mr. Antoniou said.

20