USDA OKs Deregulation Of Two GM Apple Varieties

Arctic apples

Arctic apples

Based on a final plant pest risk assessment, the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has announced its plans to deregulate Arctic Granny and Arctic Golden apples, developed by Okanagan Specialty Fruits, Inc.

These apples are genetically engineered to suppress the apple’s release of polyphenol oxidase, the enzyme involved in browning when the fruit is bitten, bruised, or cut.

APHIS conducted a thorough review to evaluate whether the Arctic Granny and Arctic Golden apples would pose a risk to agricultural crops or other plants or plant products. As part of the Plant Protection Act, if APHIS finds that a new plant is unlikely to pose a risk, it is required to deregulate it. APHIS also completed an environmental assessment to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act that finds deregulation is not likely to have a significant impact on the human environment.

Okanagan Specialty Fruits is currently working with the FDA on a voluntary food safety assessment consultation.

Top Articles
A New Biopesticide in the Making To Fight Spotted Wing Drosophila

Neal Carter, president and founder of Okanagan Specialty Fruits, expressed his excitement about the announcement in a company news release, saying, “The commercial approval of Arctic apples, our company’s flagship product, is the biggest milestone yet for us, and we can’t wait until they’re available for consumers.”

That won’t be for some time, obviously, as it will take a number of years to get trees in the ground in significant numbers, in production, and, finally, have fruit successfully marketed to consumers. Carter’s estimate is that Arctic apples could first be available in late 2016 in small, test-market quantities.

There are near-term hurdles to clear in order to reach that goal, not the least of which is building demand with growers for the varieties. While there is enthusiasm that a useful trait like non-browning will be attractive to consumers, the public has generally been hesitant to accept genetically modified produce. That means apple growers and the industry may take more of a wait-and-see stance for now.

“Certainly we are not surprised by APHIS’s news today.  In the face of no clear reason following USDA’s scientific review process to deny approval, we knew that deregulation was likely,” says Jim Bair, president and CEO of USApple. “Our primary goal has been making sure that when deregulation did happen that we would be ready to act quickly on behalf of our industry to help them have accurate, relevant data should they get customer inquiries — either retail or consumer — and that we are positioned to help subdue any public concerns regarding safety.”

Carter emphasized in the company release that consumers can feel confident in the rigorous review of Arctic apples, which have been grown in field trials for over a decade now, and are likely the most tested apples on the planet. The USDA’s publicly available risk assessment documents (see a document prepared by Okanagan Specialty Fruits here) concluded that Arctic apples are just as safe and healthful as any other apple.

“All we’ve done is reduce the expression of a single enzyme; there are no novel proteins in Arctic fruit and their nutrition and composition is equivalent to their conventional counterparts,” Carter said. “We’ve completed focus groups, online surveys, mall intercept studies and more, and all have demonstrated a remarkably consistent result — a strong majority of apple eaters are interested in buying non-browning apples.”

Bair agrees that consumer demand will inevitably determine the future of GMO apples in the U.S. marketplace.

“In the meantime, we will continue encouraging people to eat all U.S.-grown apples as part of a healthy, nutritious lifestyle,” Bair says.

1

Leave a Reply

Avatar for Matt Matt says:

And now most apples growers can add NON-GMO to their apples and get a 1%-2% bump in price. There will be a push on McDonald’s and other large chains by those who oppose GMOs to ban GMO apples. If any large purchaser does this, you will never see these apple’s mass marketed. Remember the flavor savr tomato or Monsanto’s GMO potatoes. No McDonald’s meant no sales and growers said no.

I personally don’t want to see these on the market. I prefer to know when an apple has been bruised before I eat it. This trait is one NOT for consumers, but rather for growers and processors who may be less than careful in the handling.

Avatar for Russell Russell says:

Conventional apple growers may not be able to use a NON-GMO label once their trees become cross pollinated with this new intellectual property.

Avatar for whitappleDan whitappleDan says:

But cross pollination will only affect the seed DNA and not the actual part of the apple that is eaten unlike something like wheat or corn where we eat the part that contains the GMO genes. As an apple grower however I will NEVER grow these GMO apples . There is absolutely ZERO real need for this!

Avatar for DisasterLooms DisasterLooms says:

Would rather have a brown apple than a laboratory modified one. I hope this gets rejected by consumers so companies determine that food engineering is a poor business venture.

Corn and Soy have already been destroyed. It is sad that apples may be next. We need more nutrition, not less browning. I will pray every day that this company fails big.

[…] apple that resists browningReutersApples That Do Not Brown Will Be Sold In The USThe Monitor DailyGrowing Produce -Yakima Herald-Republic -The Seattle Timesall 64 news […]

Avatar for Russell Russell says:

Unless the GMO apples can be identified by the consumer then parents will boycott all apples fearing that their children will eat a modified apple unknowingly. People want to know that their fruit has not been tinkered with and this will effect the credibility of the entire apple industry.

Avatar for Nogmos Nogmos says:

Guess I won’t be eating these apples-no GMO’s

Avatar for walt walt says:

As a grower, I read the comments on these articles and don’t see many (if any) coming forward to support this variety(s)…think the wave of negative press toward GMO (whether fact based or not) is enough to kill it commercially…why take the risk? The cross pollination issue is interesting, that has been one of the arguments with corn for years. Would love to see the focus group info in detail, especially how the questions were asked relating to GMO, from my experience in farmers markets and on farm sales, don’t see the up side and we are always looking for new or interesting varieties.

Avatar for Montana Farmer Montana Farmer says:

Seems like the only thing affected by GMO cross pollination in apples would be the seeds of the non GMO variety.
Since no one eats the seeds and they are rarely used for growing trees anymore that it would be a non-issue.

Avatar for Russell Russell says:

All I know is that my trees spew pollen. The GMO trees spew patented intellectual property. I would like to say that if their intellectual property gets into my trees then they don’t own it any more. But case law may not support my wishes.

Avatar for Montana Farmer Montana Farmer says:

The majority of commercial apple growers were against these apple varieties being approved. All that needs to happen is no grower interest in planting them and the GM company will go out of business. My feeling is this will happen naturally without any organized effort.

Avatar for Martin Martin says:

And we should believe that an apple that will not decompose is good for your digestion! Shame on the USDA and the apple packers who see this as a benefit. Dear GMO backers, I will never buy your product. Never believe your lies, and yes that does mean i will not believe your truth either because when trust is lost you just kind of shy away from lies.

Avatar for Montana Farmer Montana Farmer says:

Braeburn and Cortland apples, which have been around for decades, don’t brown naturally. There may be others that I don’t know of.
Never heard of any digestive problems from them. If the developers wanted to breed the anti-browning trait into their apples with conventional crossing they could of. Difference is it would have taken a very long time.
No difference, as an apple grower I won’t be planting these GM apples are any more that may come around.

Avatar for Thomas Mitchell Thomas Mitchell says:

I here what you guys are saying but I think many folks are very confused with the concept of genetically modified food. I believe in order to be able to feed the expanding world population genetic modification will become necessary. Is there any common sense that when modifying only a single enzyme, it is going to cause any problems especially after rigorous testing. I know a few years ago when a large sample of our population was polled as to whether 1/1,000 or 1/1,000,000 was larger 60% of our population answered 1/1,000,000. WE need more education and for goodness sake more common sense!