# Assessment of genetically modified sugar beet KWS20‐1 (application GMFF‐2023‐14732)

## TL;DR

This paper evaluates the safety of genetically modified sugar beet KWS20-1, finding it as safe as conventional sugar beet for food, feed, and the environment.

## Contribution

The study provides a comprehensive safety assessment of sugar beet KWS20-1, confirming no significant risks from its genetic modifications.

## Key findings

- Sugar beet KWS20-1 is as safe as conventional and non-GM varieties for human and animal health.
- No safety concerns were identified regarding the introduced proteins or environmental risks.
- Pectin in roots was evaluated and found not to raise nutritional or safety concerns.

## Abstract

Genetically modified sugar beet KWS20‐1 was developed to confer tolerance to glyphosate‐, dicamba‐ and glufosinate‐ammonium‐based herbicides. These properties were achieved by introducing the cp4 epsps, dmo and pat expression cassettes. The molecular characterisation data and bioinformatic analyses do not identify issues requiring further safety assessment. None of the identified differences in the agronomic/phenotypic and compositional characteristics tested between sugar beet KWS20‐1 and its conventional counterpart need further assessment, except for pectin in roots, which underwent additional evaluation and was found not to raise any safety or nutritional concerns. The GMO Panel does not identify safety concerns regarding the potential toxicity and allergenicity of the CP4 EPSPS, DMO and PAT proteins as expressed in sugar beet KWS20‐1, and finds no evidence that the genetic modification would change the overall safety of sugar beet KWS20‐1 as food and feed. In the context of this application, the consumption of food and feed from sugar beet KWS20‐1 does not represent a nutritional concern in humans and animals. The GMO Panel concludes that sugar beet KWS20‐1 is as safe as the conventional counterpart and non‐GM sugar beet reference varieties tested, and no post‐market monitoring of food/feed is considered necessary. The scope of the application does not include cultivation and import of viable materials in the EU and the products would be expected to only contain residual amounts of DNA and protein. The environmental risk assessment was limited to the possible plant‐to‐bacteria horizontal gene transfer and the evaluation of potential interactions of KWS20‐1 sugar beet products with biogeochemical cycles, and neither of them indicates a safety concern. The GMO Panel concludes that the sugar beet KWS20‐1 is as safe as its conventional counterpart and the tested non‐GM reference sugar beet varieties with respect to potential effects on human and animal health and the environment.