Open Veterinary Journal, (2025), Vol. 15(4): 1536-1541

Review Article

10.5455/OVJ.2025.v15.i4.3

Impact of genetically modified organisms on meat quality

Muntaha G. Hasan^*

Department of Veterinary Public Health, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq

*Corresponding Author: Muntaha. G. Hasan, Department of Veterinary Public Health, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Mosul, Mosul, Iraq. Email: mghassan99 [at] uomosul.edu.iq

Submitted: 05/01/2025 Accepted: 24/3/2025 Published: 30/04/2025

---

Abstract

A unique class of gene biotechnology known as genetic modification modifies the genetic makeup of living things such as microbes, plants, and animals. Several possible advantages and hazards are associated with gene biotechnology. Due to increased food demands and improved food quality, interest in using gene technology to produce food has grown. Genetically modified (GM) foods have the potential to address a large number of hunger and malnutrition problems worldwide. In addition to helping to maintain the environment by boosting yield and lowering dependency on artificial pesticides and herbicides, concerns and debates around GM foods and crops typically center on issues including food security, consumer choice and labeling, human and environmental safety, and preservation. Some significant issues related to the safety, ecological, and environmental threats, as well as the health risks associated with GM foods and recombinant technology, will also be covered in this review. We concluded that it is important to consider the detrimental effects of gene technology on humans, animals, and the environment. Adequate regulations should be in place before GM food is introduced into food markets to ensure consumer safety and the necessity of continuing research to track the long-term impacts of GM technologies on human health and environment, addressing worries about unforeseen consequences. Also, the efforts of scientists and legislators are essential for the global future of GM ingredients.

Keywords: Genetics, GMOs, Meat, Transgenic DNA.

---

Introduction

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agriculture, including genetically modified (GM) crops that are used as feed for livestock, and become a significant factor in meeting the rising global demand for meat. The demand for meat has been steadily increasing worldwide, driven by population growth, rising incomes, and changing diets. GMOs, particularly in the form of GM crops like soybean, corn, and alfalfa, play an important role in this context (Duke and Cerdeira, 2005). GMOs explain the modification of the genetic material of an organism experimentally using biotechnology to introduce genes in unrelated species to reach genetic transformation and express a new protein (Turnbull et al., 2021; Raza et al., 2022). Plants were exposed to transgenic genetic modification earlier through Agrobacterium tumefaciens which is naturally infected some plants including cereals (Matveeva and Otten, 2019). The genetic transformation process of these plants makes these plants acquire new characteristics such as resistance to insects and adaptation to the stress of soil acidity and 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3phosphate synthase (EPSPS) gene, isolated from A. tumefaciens strain CP4 and after genetic modification, they produced a glyphosate as a competitive inhibitor of EPSPS, this process is under the regulation of regulatory elements which can be used to detect GMOs in feeds included both 35S promoter and nopal in synthase terminator (nos) (Funke et al., 2006; Wu et al., 2012). Glyphosate is harmless to aquatic, bird, animal, and human nonplant life forms (Malik et al., 1989). Soybean is the first GM crops used commercially as a Roundup ready soybean made by Monsanto with high tolerance to herbicides (Mandaci et al., 2014).

Research has indicated that GM crops have the potential to produce greater yields than traditional types, for example, in Argentina, GM corn and soybeans have increased yields by 10%–20% because of their superior herbicide tolerance and pest resistance (Otegui et al., 2021; Abdulrahman et al., 2023). It should be mentioned that the presence of transgenic constructions in the genome may cause unforeseen alterations in the nucleic acid content and the balance of gene expression, which may cause transgenic cultures to exhibit an increase in the following: toxicity and allergenicity, the risk of turning into a dangerous weed, and biological aggression (either by displacing rare and important aboriginal species or by contaminating them with DNA from a transgenic plant), and produce harmful impacts on species that are not the goal (Saini et al., 2020; Farokhian et al., 2021).

GMO_S and meat quality

The main goal of using GM ingredients in meat processing and production is to enhance meat quality and cover consumers demands to eat healthier meat products due to GM additives improving various parameters such as tenderness, juiciness, flavor, and nutritional content, and GM enzymes arising from Bacillus subtilis or other microorganisms can help in breaking down collagen and muscle fibers, making tougher cuts of meat to be more tender (Wang et al., 2024). This is particularly useful in processed meat products such as sausages and jerky, where tenderness is a key quality attribute (Abril et al., 2023). Also, the GM ingredients in meat may participate in increasing the nutritional value of meat, GM plants or microorganisms might be engineered to produce higher levels of vitamins, omega-3 fatty acids, or other beneficial compounds, and GM soy or canola can be used as feed to increase the omega-3 content in livestock, and subsequently in meat products. Studies have demonstrated that feeding animals GM feed with altered lipid profiles can result in meat with higher levels of healthy omega-3 fatty acids (Wang et al., 2024). GM additives can contribute to improved meat flavor either by producing some compounds like aldehydes and esters and aromatic compounds, especially in some processed meat including sausage, or by reducing off flavor from lipid oxidation (Lee et al., 2022). Other researchers referred to the fact that the adding of GM ingredients to meat and meat products increases the shelf life of meat products through the role of some enzymes as preservatives and delays the spoilage of meat such as bacteriocins which inhibit the growth of microorganisms in meat production chain like lactobacillus strains that affect the growth of listeria in meat (Hanlon and Sewalt, 2020). Also, some GM crops like soybean may have an antioxidant affecting meat lipids and reducing rancidity (Petcu et al., 2023). Soybean proteins lower the cost of formulating meat products and enhance the technological procedures employed in their production (Criado et al., 2005). Additionally, the usage of soybean proteins as fat substitutes in processed meat products has increased due to consumer demands for safer and healthier goods (Castro-Rubio et al., 2005). Soy proteins are also commonly used in emulsified meat products due to their unique functional properties, such as their capacity to bind water and fat, their texture and emulsifying ability, and their organoleptic properties, which include their firmness, slicing ability, (Belloque et al., 2002). Many researchers studied the existence of GMO_S ingredients in meat sold in their markets to evaluate the risk of these additives on public health and all of them concluded that there is a necessity for labeling any products including the levels of GMO_Singredients in processed meat to preserve consumer health and confidence (Taski-Ajdukovic et al., 2009; Elsanhoty, 2013; Aljabryn, 2022).

Evaluation of feeding GMO_S to livestock

Animals feeding on herbicide-tolerant crops were conducted to evaluate their impact on some performance properties in animals, especially in poultry, both broiler and layers (Tufarelli et al., 2015). Because of their quick growth period, broilers were used as a suitable model in several studies due to their sensitivity to changes in nutrient quality, reduced growth, carcass yields, as well as changes in the composition of meat, which would be directly caused by deficiencies or decreased bioavailability of nutrients in the diet (Swiatkiewicz and Arczewska-Włosek, 2011). Broilers displayed no differences between feeding on GMO crops and non-GMO, they had a similar feed intake, body weight gain, and feed conversion ratio (Mireles et al., 2000; Brake et al., 2003; Kan and Hartnell, 2004). With no effect on feed efficiency (Czerwiński et al., 2015) but the intestinal morphology could be considered as an indicator of GMO additives effect on gut health (Zhang et al., 2014; Jwher and Ezzulddin, 2022). Pathologically GM crops especially round-ready soybeans may have a cytotoxic effect on keratinocytes by altering antioxidant capacity and may induce necrosis and apoptosis in testicular cells of rats (Clair et al., 2012; Heu et al., 2012). Investigation of GMO additives in ruminants concluded that the plant DNA will be detected in milk, urine, and feces after feeding especially the lectins gene and maize gene (Einspanier et al., 2001; Phipps et al., 2003). Detection of GMO-related DNA in animals depends on the level of GMO in the ingested feed as well as the transgene’s copy number. DNA fragments derived from the foreign DNA introduced into GMOs have been detected in the gastrointestinal tract and feces but occasionally in organs (Nadal et al., 2018). To ensure accurate transgenic identification at threshold levels established by the relevant laws, there must be enough DNA accessible. For a GMO analysis to be considered adequate, performance requirements must be fulfilled, the first one is screening of GMOs in some food and feed products in many countries, and the second is that the DNA must be intact and long enough to be amplified by PCR. Also, the lack of any material that could inhibit Taq DNA polymerase during DNA amplification, such as phenolic compounds, polysaccharides, humic substances, contaminants, extraction chemicals, and other secondary metabolites from plants (Nadal et al., 2018). Indian supermarkets revealed that 16.66% of the total examined feeds were positive for GMO, and 33.33% of them were imported (Dayal et al., 2020). In Tunisian markets, the GMOs products were positive for GMO at 1.9% (Chaouachi et al., 2013).

GMO_S and consumer health

One of the most important topics to be addressed in the near future, especially in the area of GMO analysis, is food safety and process control (Ahmed and Al-Mahmood, 2023). Today many foods are sold in our markets containing ingredients derived from GMOs (Ahmed, 2002). Concerns about human and animal health arising from the use of biotechnology-derived food and feeds especially allergenicity (Su et al., 2020). Numerous international food organizations, including the World Health Organisation, have endorsed the principle for the safety evaluation of foods generated from biotechnology (World Health Organization (WHO), 1995), the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO, 1996), and the International Life Sciences Institute (Jonas et al., 1997).

Many countries like the European Union (EU) have imposed regulations of GMO foods with effective labeling of GMOs to save consumer health, in 1990, the original regulatory system was modified by the European Commission, the European Council Directive 90/220/EC of 23 April 1990 (Zimny, 2023). Transgenic DNA may be built up in the food items from animal origin eggs, meat, and milk of animals fed on crops originating from GM, with the possibility of consumption of such products may cause adverse human health effects (Ezzulddin et al., 2020). The interpretation of this possibility could be due to that the transgenic DNA after digestion will be cleaved into small parts of nucleotides, Usually, nucleotides undergo deamination before being quickly absorbed and further absorption they are catabolized to secondary metabolites, and nitrogenous bases, and any remaining parts will be phagocytized by the immune system (Beever and Kemp, 2000; Betz et al., 2000). It is necessary to view that labeling feeds with GMOs additives to preserve public health, although there is no complete view about the safety and toxicity of these transgenic products when consumed by humans; therefore, effective communication with producers and consumers is needed to stand with GMO products (Boldura et al., 2015; Teferra et al., 2021).

Some authors claim that GM plants can be used safely in food production (Snell et al.,2012), and the consumers choice of GMO foods is affected by price, family preferences, habits, and taste (Petrovici et al.,2004); few of them considered organic food. In a number of nations, laws, and public awareness mandate that the public be informed when food products include GM ingredients. Food producers are fully informed about the primary and secondary materials they use. To ensure the safe use of GMOs, control laboratories must be established, and all transgenic structures must be tested for stability before being put on the market (Chaouachi et al.,2013).

Detection of GMO_S in meat

Traditionally, we can assess whether GMOs are present in crops or not by two assays that have been mostly used to identify GM crops, including corn, soybeans, and others, the first one is PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction), based on the detection of DNA inserted into the plant genome, PCR as a molecular tool is considered a highly sensitive method and possesses the capacity to distinguish between different kinds of genetic alteration (Holst-Jensen et al., 2003). The many mechanical, thermal, and chemical processes used in meat production, all of which operate to break down DNA impact the ability of target DNA sequences’ to be amplified. In terms of DNA yield, inhibitor presence, sample cost, and extraction time, different DNA extraction techniques were examined (Hernandez et al., 2005). Therefore, the cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) protocol, which was first developed by Murray and Thompson (1980), which is a suitable way for plant DNA extraction and purification (Lipp et al., 2001). The principle of this method is to lyse plant contents and exclude the polysaccharides and phenolic compounds and precipitation of plant DNA using high salt concentrations and isopropanol. This approach (CTAB) provides good DNA production and is less expensive than commercial kits because it uses items that are often found in molecular biology labs. One approach makes use of multiplex PCR, which permits the simultaneous detection of several target sequences using many primer pairs in the PCR process. These systems were developed to achieve unique construct-specific objectives. Due to the ease of use and affordability of this platform, differential migration of the PCR products over agarose gels is typically used to separate them from one another (Germini et al., 2004; Peano et al., 2005). The most effective technique for measuring GM content in meat and meat products currently is quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR). It works by continuously observing the amplification process and finding the amount of amplicon present by measuring the fluorescence signal’s strength (Chen et al., 2020; Al Mazrooei and Alreshidi, 2024). The specificity of qRT-PCR is influenced by both the chemical used to track amplification and the apparatus used to track the signal. Numerous chemistries for detection have been created, of which TaqMan® and SYBR Green are the most utilized (Marmiroli and Maestri, 2007). In this case, amplicon quantity is monitored by melting curves of the two different amplicon sequences, which can be found by applying a temperature gradient. The melting temperature of the two amplicons can be used to differentiate them because they are sequence specific. Sensitivity and reproducibility, especially, lowering the potential for misleading negative results, are two of multiplex qRT-PCR’s main challenges (Marmiroli et al., 2008). The third one is ELISA (Enzyme-Linked ImmunoSorbent Assay) to detect the presence of specific proteins by binding between the target antibody and the expressed antigen, this approach is less susceptible and time consuming, also its unable to detect genetic modification in processed samples (Asensio et al., 2008).

Other methods include surface plasmon resonance, mass spectrometry, and microarrays. One of the challenges in detecting GMOs is identifying transgenic material in materials with different numbers of chromosomes (Bawa and Anilakumar,2013). The transgenic DNA that has been introduced or the novel protein produced in organisms that have undergone genetic modification are the two targets of GMO analysis in food products (Holst-Jensen et al., 2011).

---

Conclusion

The necessity of managing GM crops to reduce any possible negative effects on the ecosystem is one important factor to take into account. Current GM plants have been used in livestock feeding commercially with no significant effects on performance, safety levels of transgenic DNA would not detect any adverse effect on a short-term study. These findings will be utilized to evaluate the environmental, and agrobiodiversity hazards related to GM crops. They will also be considered in the process of improving GMO biosafety regulations and controls. However, there may be significant dangers associated with genetic engineering operations that need to be evaluated and eliminated. Despite these hazards, specific biosafety precautions must be taken. GMOs in meat have the potential to improve many characteristics of meat quality represented by tenderness, flavor, and nutritional value. Consumer acceptance and consumer education are essential to improve the GM additives in meat processing while minimizing risks take in account the level of GM ingredients in these products.

Conflict of interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

---

References

Abdulrahman, N., Hamasalim, H., Mohammed, H. and Arkwazee, H. 2023. Effects of pesticide residues in animal by-products relating to public health. J. Appl. Vet. Sci. 8(4), 95–103; doi:10.21608/javs.2023.226130.1260

Abril, B., Bou, R., García-Pérez, J.V. and Benedito, J. 2023. Role of enzymatic reactions in meat processing and use of emerging technologies for process intensification. Foods. 10;12(10):1940. doi:10.3390/foods12101940.

Ahmed, A. and Al-Mahmood, O. 2023. Food safety programs that should be implemented in slaughterhouses: review. J. Appl. Vet. Sci. 8(2), 80–88; doi:10.21608/javs.2023. 185918.1208

Ahmed, F. 2002. Detection of genetically modified organisms in foods. Trend Biotechnol. 20(5), 215–223.

Al Mazrooei, S.S. and Alreshidi, D.R. 2024. PCR-screening of genetically modified organisms in food and feed products sold in Kuwait’s market, Kuwait. J. Sci. 51(1), 3275–3280; doi.org/10.1016/j.kjs.2023.06.004.

Aljabryn, D.H. 2022. Detection of genetically modified additives in meat products in Riyadh City. Curr. Res. Nutr. Food Sci. 10(1), 1–11; doi:10.12944/CRNFSJ.10.1.14

Asensio, L. Gonzãlez, I., García, T. and Martín, R. 2008. Determination of food authenticity by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Food Control 19(1), 1–8; doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2007.02.010.

Bawa, A.S. and Anilakumar, K.R. 2013. Genetically modified foods: safety, risks and public concerns-a review. J. Food Sci. Technol. 50(6), 1035–1046; doi:10.1007/s13197-012-0899-1.

Beever, D.E. and Kemp, C.F. 2000. Safety issues associated with the DNA in animal feed derived from genetically modified crops. A review of scientific and regulatory procedures. Nutr. Abstr. Rev. Series B. Livest. Feeds Feeding. 70, 175–182.

Belloque, J., Garcia, M.C., Torre, M. and Marina, M.L. 2002. Analysis of soybean proteins in meat products: a review. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 42, 507–532; doi: 10.1080/20024091054238.

Betz, F.S., Hammond, B.G. and Fuchs, R.L. 2000.Safety and advantages of Bacillus thuringiensis-protected plants to control insect pests. Regul. Toxicol. Pharmacol. Oct;32(2), 156–173; doi: 10.1006/rtph.2000.1426.

Boldura, O.M., Baltă, C., Ahmadi, M., Tulcan, C., Hut, U.I. and Mircu, C. 2015. Traceability of transgenic soybean from forage trough animal tissue till the food product. Lucrari Stiintifice-Universitatea de Stiinte Agricole a Banatului Timisoara, Medicina Veterinara. 48, 5–13.

Brake, J., Faust, M.A. and Stein, J. 2003. Evaluation of transgenic event Bt11 hybrid corn in broiler chickens. Poult. Sci. 82, 551–559.

Castro-Rubio, F., Garcia, M.C., Rodriguez, R. and Marina, M.L. 2005. Simple and inexpensive method for the reliable determination of additions of soybean proteins in heat-processed meat products: an alternative to the AOAC official method. J. Agri. Food. Chem. 53, 220–226; doi:10.1021/jf049557

Chaouachi, M., Nabi, N., Hafsa, A.B., Zellama, M.S., Skhiri, F.H. and Saãd, K. 2013. Monitoring of genetically modified food and feed in the Tunisian market using qualitative and quantitative real-time PCR. Food Sci. Biotechnol. 22, 1161–1170; doi:10.1007/s10068-013-0198-2

Chen, X., Lu, L., Xiong, X., Xiong, X. and Liu, Y. 2020. Development of a real-time PCR assay for the identification and quantification of bovine ingredient in processed meat products. Sci. Rep. 10(1):2052; doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-59010-6.

Clair, E., Mesnage, R., Travert, C. and Séralini, G.ã. 2012. A glyphosate-based herbicide induces necrosis and apoptosis in mature rat testicular cells in vitro, and testosterone decrease at lower levels. Toxicol In Vitro. 26(2), 269–279; doi: 10.1016/j.tiv.2011.12.009.

Criado, M., Castro-Rubio, F., Garcia-Ruiz, C., Garcia, M.C. and Marina, M.L. 2005. Detection and quantification of additions of soybean proteins in cured-meat products by perfusion reversed-phase highperformance liquid chromatography. J. Sep. Sci. 28, 987–995; doi: 10.1002/jssc.200500011.

Czerwiński J., Bogacki, M., Jalali, B.M., Konieczka, P. and Smulikowska, S. 2015. The use of genetically modified Roundup Ready soyabean meal and genetically modified MON 810 maize in broiler chicken diets. Part 1. Effects on performance and blood lymphocyte subpopulations. J. Anim. Feed Sci. 24:134–143. and doi:10.22358/jafs/65641/2015.

Duke, S.O. and Cerdeira, A.L. 2005. Transgenic herbicide-resistant crops: current status and potential future. Review Article. 16, 208–211; doi:10.156-1/16oct06.

Einspanier, R., Klotz, A., Kraft, J., Aulrich, K., Poser, R. and Schw€ Agele, F. 2001. The fate of forage plant DNA in farm animals: a collaborative case-study investigating cattle and chicken fed recombinant plant material. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 212, 129–134; doi:10.1007/s002170000248

Elsanhoty, R.M. 2013. Genetically modified roundup ready soybean in processed meat products in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Annals Agric. Sci. 58(2), 231–237; doi:10.1016/j.aoas.2013.07.013

Ezzulddin, T.A., Jwher, D.M. and Dabdoub, S.A. 2020. Detection of similarity and genetic distance between Iraqi chicken varieties and different standard strains. Iraqi J. Vet. Sci. Technol. 212, 497–504.

FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations). 1996. Biotechnology and Food Safety. FAO Food and Nutrition Paper 61. Report of a Joint FAO/WHO Consultation. FAO, Rome, Italy.

Farokhian, S., Nejad, E.T. and Nejad, G.M. 2021. Studying the effect of biofertilizers on the yield of Sesamum indicum genotypes under drought stress. Cent. Asian J. Plant Sci. 1, 32–38; doi:10.22034/CAJPSI.2021.01.04

Funke, T., Han, H.M., Healy-Fried, L., Fischer, M. and Schönbrunn, E. 2006. Molecular basis for the herbicide resistance of Roundup Ready crops. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 103(35):13010–13015. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0603638103.

Germini, A., Zanetti, A., Salati, C., Rossi, S., Forre, C., Schmid, S., Fogher, C. and Marchelli, R. 2004. Development of a seven-target multiplex PCR for the simultaneous detection of transgenic soybean and maize in feeds and Foods. J. Agric. Food Chem. 52, 3275–3280; doi: 10.1021/jf035052x.

Hanlon, P. and Sewalt, V. 2020. GEMs: genetically engineered microorganisms and the regulatory oversight of their uses in modern food production. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 61(6), 959–970; doi:10.1080/10408398.2020.1749026

Hernandez, M., Rodriguez-Lazaro, D., Zhang, D., Esteve, T., Pla, M. and Prat, S. 2005. Inter-laboratory transfer of a PCR multiplex method for simultaneous detection of four genetically modified maize lines: Bt11, MON810, T25 and GA21. J. Agric. Food Chem. 53, 3333–3337; doi: 10.1021/jf049192y.

Heu, C., Berquand, A., Elie-Caille, C., Nicod, L., 2012. Glyphosateinduced stiffening of HaCaT keratinocytes, a peak force tapping study on living cells. J. Struct. Biol. 178, 1–7; doi: 10.1016/j.jsb.2012.02.007

Holst-Jensen, A., Bertheau, Y., Alnutt, T. and Morisset, D. 2011, Overview on the detection, interpretation and reporting on the presence of unauthorised genetically modified materials: guidance document from the European Network of GMO Laboratories Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, pp: 1–58.

Holst-Jensen, A., Rnning, S.B., Vseth, A. and Berdal, K.G. 2003. PCR technology for screening and quantification of genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 375, 985–993; doi: 10.1007/s00216-003-1767-7

Jonas, D.A., Antignac, E., Antoine, J.M., Classen, H.G., Huggett, A., Knudsen, I., Mahler, J., Ockhuizen, T., Smith, M., Teuber, M., Walker, R., De Vogel, P; ILSI (International Life Sciences Institute). 1997. Europe novel foods task force. The safety assessment of novel foods. Food Chem. Toxicol. 34, 931–940; doi: 10.1016/s0278-6915(96)00061-0

Jwher, D. and Ezzulddin, T. 2022. Beneficial Microorganisms in Animal Production and environment. J. Appl. Vet. Sci. 7(3), 64–71; doi: 10.21608/javs.2022.137968.1147

Kan, C.A. and Hartnell, G.F. 2004. Evaluation of broiler performance when fed insect-protected, control, or commercial varieties of dehulled soybean meal. Poult. Sci. 83, 2029–2038; doi: 10.1093/ps/83.12.2029.

Lee, Y.G., Kim, B.Y., Bae, J.M., Wang, Y. and Jin, Y.S. 2022.Genome-edited Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains for improving quality, safety, and flavor of fermented foods. Food Microbiol. 104, 103971; doi: 10.1016/j.fm.2021.103971.

Lipp, M., Bluth, A., Eyquem, F., Kruse, L., Schimmel, H., Eede, G.V. and Anklam E. 2001. Validation of a method based on polymerase chain reaction for the detection of Vet. Sci.34, 333–337; doi:10.33899/IJVS.2019.126109.1235

Malik, J., Barry, G. and Kishore, G. 1989. The herbicide glyphosate. Biofactors. 2(1), 17–25.

Mandaci, M., ãakir, ã., Turgut Kara, N., Meric, S. and Ari, Ş. 2014. Detection of genetically modified organisms in soy products sold in Turkish market. Food Sci. and Technol. 4, 717-–722; doi: 10.1590/1678-457x.6441.

Marmiroli, N., Maestri, E., Gullã, M., Malcevschi, A., Peano, C., Bordoni, R. and De Bellis, G. 2008. Methods for detection of GMOs in food and feed. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 392(3), 369–384; doi: 10.1007/s00216-008-2303-6.

Marmiroli, N. and Maestri, E. 2007. In: Picò Y (ed) Food toxicants analysis techniques, strategies and development. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp: 147–187.

Matveeva, T.V. and Otten, L. 2019. Widespread occurrence of natural genetic transformation of plants by Agrobacterium. Plant Mol. Biol. 101, 415; doi: 10.1007/s11103-019-00913.

Mireles, A. Jr., Kim, S., Thompson, R.K. and Amundsen, B. 2000. GMO (Bt) corn is similar in composition and nutrient availability to broilers as non-GMO corn. Poult. Sci. 79, 65–66.

Nadal, A., De Giacomo, M., Einspanier, R., Kleter, G., Kok, E., Mcfarland, S., Onori, R., Paris, A., Toldrã, M., Van Dijk, J., Wal, J.M. and Pla, M. 2018. Exposure of livestock to GM feeds: detectability and measurement. Food Chem. Toxicol. 117, 13–35; doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2017.08.032.

Otegui, M.E., Riglos, M. and Mercau, J.L. 2021.Genetically modified maize hybrids and delayed sowing reduced drought effects across a rainfall gradient in temperate Argentina. J. Exp. Bot.72, 5180–5188; doi:10.1093/jxb/erab139

Peano, C., Bordoni, R., Gulli, M., Mezzelani ,AP., Samson, M.C., De Bellis, G. and Marmiroli, N. 2005. Multiplex polymerase chain reaction and ligation detection reaction/universal array technology for the traceability of genetically modified organisms in foods. Anal. Biochem. 346, 90–100; doi: 10.1016/j.ab.2005.08.004

Petcu, C.D., Tăpăloagă, D., Mihai, O.D., Gheorghe-Irimia, R.A., Negoiță, C., Georgescu, I.M., Tăpăloagă, P.R., Borda, C. and Ghimpețeanu, O. M. 2023. Harnessing natural antioxidants for enhancing food shelf life: exploring sources and applications in the food industry. Foods, 12(17), 3176; doi:10.3390/foods12173176.

Petrovici, D.A., Ritson, C., Ness, M. 2004.The theory of reasoned action and food choice: insights from a transitional economy. J. Int. Food Agribus. Mark. 16, 59–87; doi:10.1300/J047v16n01.

Phipps, R.H., Deaville, E.R. and Maddison, B.C. 2003. Detection of transgenic and endogenous plant DNA in rumen fluid, duodenal digesta, milk, blood, and feces of lactating dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 86(12), 4070–4078; doi: 10.3168/jds.S0022-0302(03)74019-3.

Raza, S., Hassanin, A., Pant, S., Bing, S., Sitohy, M., Abdelnour, S., Alotaibi, M., Al-Hazani, T., Abed-El-Aziz, A., Chong, G. and San, L. 2022. Potentials, prospects and applications of genome editing technologies in livestock production. Saudi J. Biol. Sci. 29(4), 1928–1935; doi: 10.1016/j.sjbs.2021.11.037.

Saini, D.K., Chakdar, H., Pabbi, S., Shukla, P. 2020. Enhancing production of microalgal biopigments through metabolic genetic engineering. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 60(3), 391-–405; doi:10.1080/10408398.2018.1533518.

Snell, C., Bernheim, A., Bergé, J.B., Kuntz, M., Pascal, G. and Paris, A. 2012. Assessment of the health impact of GM plant diets in long-term and multigenerational animal feeding trials: a literature review. Food Chem. Toxicol. 50, 1134–1148; doi: 10.1016/j.fct.2011.11.048.

Su, S., Ezhuthachan, I.D. and Ponda, P. 2020. Genetically modified foods and food allergy. J Food Allergy. 2(1), 111–114; doi: 10.2500/jfa.2020.2.200012.

Swiatkiewicz, S. and Arczewska-Włosek, A. 2011. Prospects for the use of genetically modified crops with improved nutritional properties as feed materials in poultry nutrition. World. Poult. Sci. J. 67:631–642. doi.org/10.1017/S0043933911000729.

Taski-Ajdukovic K, Nikolic Z, Vujakovic M, Milosevic M, Ignjatov M, Petrovic D. 2009. Detection of genetically modified organisms in processed meat products on the Serbian food market. Meat Sci. 81(1), 230–232; doi: 10.1016/j.meatsci.2008.07.024.

Teferra, T.F. 2021. Should we still worry about the safety of GMO foods? Why and why not? A review. Food Sci. Nutr. 9(9), 5324–5331; doi: 10.1002/fsn3.2499.

Tufarelli, V., Selvaggi, M., Dario, C. and Laudadio, V. 2015. Genetically modified feeds in poultry diet: safety,performance, and product quality. Crit. Rev. Food Sci. Nutr. 55(4), 562–569; doi: 10.1080/10408398.2012.667017.

Turnbull, C., Lillemo, M. and Hvoslef-Eide, T. 2021. Global regulation of genetically modified crops amid the gene edited crop boom - a review. Front. Plant Sci. 12, 630396; doi: 10.3389/fpls.2021.630396 .

Wang, H., Xiao, C., Li, J., Liang, R., Liu, Y., Song, Z., Buyse, J. and Zhu, L. 2024. Dietary Bacillus subtilis benefits meat quality by regulating the muscle fiber type and antioxidant capacity of broilers. Poult. Sci. 103(12), 104267; doi: 10.1016/j.psj.2024.104267.

WHO (World Health Organization). 1995. Application of the Principles of Substantial Equivalence to the Safety Evaluation of Foods and Food Components from Plants Derived by Modern Biotechnology. Report of a WHO Workshop: No. WHO/FNU/FOS/95. 1. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO..

Wu, H., Zhang, Y., Zhu, C., Xiao, X., Zhou, X., Xu, S., Shen, W. and Huang, M. 2012. Presence of CP4-EPSPS component in roundup ready soybean-derived food products. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 13(2), 1919–1932; doi: 10.3390/ijms13021919

Zhang, S., Peng, X., Fang, J., Cui, H., Zuo, Z. and Chen, Z. 2014. Effect of aflatoxin B1 exposure and sodium selenite supplementation on the histology, cell proliferation, and cell cycle of jejunum in jejunum in broilers. Biol. Tr. Elem. Res. 160, 32–40; doi:10.1007/s12011-014-0009-5.

Zimny, T. 2023. Regulation of GMO field trials in the EU and new genomic techniques: will the planned reform facilitate experimenting with gene-edited plants? BioTechnol. 104(1), 75–83; doi:10.5114/bta.2023.125086.