i 

Monsanto Petition (09-SY-2000U) for Determination 

of Non-regulated Status of (MON 87769) Stearidonic 

Acid Soybean 

OECD Unique Identifier: 

MON 87769-7 

Draft Environmental Assessment 

October 2011

Agency Contact 

Cindy Eck

Biotechnology Regulatory Services 

4700 River Road 

USDA, APHIS 

Riverdale, MD 20737 

Fax: (301) 734-8669

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of 

race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, or marital or family status. 

(Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for 

communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’S TARGET Center 

at (202) 720–2600 (voice and TDD). 

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326–W, Whitten Building, 1400 

Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250–9410 or call (202) 720–5964 (voice and TDD). USDA is an equal 

opportunity provider and employer. 

 

Mention of companies or commercial products in this report does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the 

U.S. Department of Agriculture over others not mentioned. USDA neither guarantees nor warrants the standard of any 

product mentioned. Product names are mentioned solely to report factually on available data and to provide specific 

information. 

 

 

This publication reports research involving pesticides. All uses of pesticides must be registered by appropriate State 

and/or Federal agencies before they can be recommended. 

 
ii 
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 

i 

1 PURPOSE AND NEED .............................................................................................. 1

1.1 Regulatory Authority............................................................................................ 1

1.2 Regulated Organisms ........................................................................................... 2

1.3 Petition for Determination of Nonregulated Status: MON 87769 Soybean ......... 2

1.4 Purpose of Product ............................................................................................... 3

1.5 APHIS Response to Petition for Nonregulated Status ......................................... 5

1.6 Coordinated Framework Review ......................................................................... 6

1.6.1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ........................................................ 6

1.6.2 Food and Drug Administration ..................................................................... 6

1.7 Public Involvement .............................................................................................. 7

1.8 Issues Considered ................................................................................................. 7

2 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT .................................................................................. 9

2.1 Soybean Products and Composition ..................................................................... 9

2.1.1 Soybean Use.................................................................................................. 9

2.1.2 Soybean Composition ................................................................................. 12

2.2 Agricultural Production of Soybean ................................................................... 13

2.2.1 Acreage and Area of Soybean Production .................................................. 14

2.2.2 Agronomic Practices ................................................................................... 16

2.2.3 Soybean Seed Production ........................................................................... 23

2.2.4 Organic Soybean Production ...................................................................... 24

2.2.5 Specialty Soybean Production .................................................................. 26

2.3 Physical Environment ........................................................................................ 30

2.3.1 Water Resources ......................................................................................... 30

2.3.2 Soil Quality ................................................................................................. 33

2.3.3 Air Quality .................................................................................................. 35

2.3.4 Climate Change ........................................................................................... 38

2.4 Biological Resources .......................................................................................... 40

2.4.1 Animal Communities .................................................................................. 40

2.4.2 Plant Communities ...................................................................................... 41

2.4.3 Gene Flow and Weediness .......................................................................... 42

2.4.4 Microorganisms .......................................................................................... 45

2.4.5 Biodiversity ................................................................................................. 46

2.5 Human Health .................................................................................................... 49

2.5.1 Public Health ............................................................................................... 49

2.5.2 Human Dietary Health ................................................................................ 50

2.5.3 Worker Safety ............................................................................................. 53

2.6 Animal Feed ....................................................................................................... 53

2.7 Socioeconomic ................................................................................................... 54

2.7.1 Domestic Economic Environment .............................................................. 54
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 

ii 

2.7.2 Trade Economic Environment .................................................................... 59

2.7.3 Social Environment ..................................................................................... 60

3 ALTERNATIVES..................................................................................................... 62

3.1 No Action Alternative: Continuation as a Regulated Article ............................ 62

3.2 Preferred Alternative: Determination that MON 87769 Soybean is No Longer a 

Regulated Article ............................................................................................... 62

3.3 Alternatives Considered But Rejected from Further Consideration .................. 63

3.3.1 Prohibit Any MON 87769 Soybean from Being Released ......................... 63

3.3.2 Approve the Petition in Part ........................................................................ 64

3.3.3 Isolation Distance between MON 87769 Soybean and Non-GE Soybean 

Production and Geographical Restrictions ................................................. 64

3.3.4 Requirement of Testing for MON 87769 Soybean ..................................... 65

3.4 Comparison of Alternatives ............................................................................... 65

4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ............................................................... 67

4.1 Scope of Analysis ............................................................................................... 67

4.2 Agricultural Production of Soybean ................................................................... 68

4.2.1 Acreage and Area of Soybean Production .................................................. 68

4.2.2 Agronomic Practices ................................................................................... 70

4.2.3 Soybean Seed Production ........................................................................... 72

4.2.4 Organic Soybean Production ...................................................................... 72

4.2.5 Specialty Soybean Production .................................................................... 74

4.3 Physical Environment ........................................................................................ 75

4.3.1 Water Resources ......................................................................................... 75

4.3.2 Soil Quality ................................................................................................. 76

4.3.3 Air Quality .................................................................................................. 77

4.3.4 Climate Change ........................................................................................... 77

4.4 Biological Resources .......................................................................................... 78

4.4.1 Animal Communities .................................................................................. 78

4.4.2 Plant Communities ...................................................................................... 80

4.4.3 Gene Flow and Weediness .......................................................................... 81

4.4.4 Microorganisms .......................................................................................... 84

4.4.5 Biodiversity ................................................................................................. 85

4.5 Human Health .................................................................................................... 87

4.5.1 No Action Alternative ................................................................................. 87

4.5.2 Preferred Alternative: Human Health ......................................................... 87

4.6 Animal Feed ....................................................................................................... 91

4.6.1 No Action Alternative: Animal Feed .......................................................... 91

4.6.2 Preferred Alternative: Animal Feed ............................................................ 91

4.7 Socioeconomic Impacts ...................................................................................... 92

4.7.1 Domestic Economic Environment .............................................................. 92

4.7.2 Trade Economic Environment .................................................................... 98
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 

iii 

4.7.3 Social Environment ................................................................................... 101

5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS .................................................................................... 103

5.1 Assumptions Used for Cumulative Impacts Analysis ...................................... 103

5.2 Cumulative Impacts: Acreage and Area of Soybean Production ..................... 104

5.3 Cumulative Impacts: Agronomic Practices ...................................................... 104

5.4 Cumulative Impacts: Soybean Seed Production .............................................. 105

5.5 Cumulative Impacts: Organic Soybean Production ......................................... 106

5.6 Cumulative Impacts: Specialty Soybean Production ....................................... 106

5.7 Cumulative Impacts: Water Resources ............................................................ 106

5.8 Cumulative Impacts: Soil Quality .................................................................... 107

5.9 Cumulative Impacts: Air Quality ..................................................................... 108

5.10 Cumulative Impacts: Climate Change .............................................................. 108

5.11 Cumulative Impacts: Animal Communities ..................................................... 108

5.12 Cumulative Impacts: Plant Communities ......................................................... 108

5.13 Cumulative Impacts: Microorganisms ............................................................. 109

5.14 Cumulative Impacts: Biodiversity .................................................................... 110

5.15 Cumulative Impacts: Human Health ................................................................ 111

5.15.1 Cumulative Impacts: Worker Safety ......................................................... 111

5.15.2 Cumulative Effects: Public Health ........................................................... 112

5.16 Cumulative Impacts: Animal Feed ................................................................... 113

5.17 Cumulative Impacts: Domestic Economic Environment ................................. 113

5.18 Cumulative Impacts: Trade Economic Environment ....................................... 114

5.19 Cumulative Impacts: Social Environment ........................................................ 115

6 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES ................................................ 116

6.1 Cumulative Impacts of Stacking MON 87768 Soybean with a Glyphosate 

Tolerant Trait on TES ...................................................................................... 119

7 CONSIDERATION OF EXECUTIVE ORDERS, STANDARDS, AND TREATIES 

RELATING TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................................... 122

7.1 Executive Orders with Domestic Implications ................................................. 122

7.2 Compliance with Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act .................................... 126

7.3 Impacts on Unique Characteristics of Geographic Areas ................................ 126

7.4 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 as Amended .................. 126

8 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 128
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 

iv 

APPENDICES 

Appendix A FDA Substances Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) – Agency Response 

Letter GRAS Notice No. GRN 000283 

Appendix B APHIS Threatened and Endangered Species Decision Tree for FWS 

Consultations 

Appendix C Addendum 1 to the Petition. Market Impact of MON 87769 High Oleic 

Soybean Oil. Monsanto Petition No. 09-SY-201U 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 1: Fatty acid composition of conventional soybean oil. .........................................11 

Table 2: U.S. soybean production in Northern Tier states in 2010. ..................................16 

Table 3: Rank of soybean production in Northern Tier states and the U.S. in 2007 

along with other principal crops. ........................................................................16 

Table 4: First and second most frequent rotational crops following soybean. .................20 

Table 5: Principle herbicides used in soybean production and percentage of acres 

applied--selected states. ......................................................................................23 

Table 6: Certified organic soybean acreage, 2007 and 2008 ............................................26 

Table 7: Irrigation of soybean acres in Northern Tier states ............................................31 

Table 8: Water sources used for irrigation of soybean acres in Northern Tier states .......32 

Table 9: Percentages of linoleic and linolenic acid in various vegetable oil sources 

and U.S. consumption. ........................................................................................51 

Table 10: Properties of select fatty acids ...........................................................................56 

Table 11: Industrial soybean products 2009 ......................................................................59 

Table 12: World soybean products 2009 ...........................................................................60 

Table 13: Summary of issues of potential impacts and consequences of alternatives .......65 

Table 14: Comparison of fatty acid profiles for oil derived from MON 87769 soybean 

with several other oil sources ..............................................................................79 

Table 15: Comparison of percentage fatty acid in MON 87769 soybean with 

conventinal control (A3535) and commercial range ..........................................88 

Table 16: U.S. vegetable oil prices ..................................................................................114 

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 1: Pathways for the synthesis of EPA and DHA from Linoleic and alphaLinolenic Acid ......................................................................................................4 

Figure 2: Fatty acid biosynthesis in plants and the introduced changes in MON 87769 

soybean .................................................................................................................5 
v 

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 

AIA advanced informed agreement 

ALA alpha-linolenic acid 

ALS Acetolactate Synthase 

AOSCA Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies 

APHIS Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 

BRS Biotechnology Regulatory Services (within USDA–APHIS) 

Bt Bacillus thuringiensis protein 

CAA Clean Air Act 

CBD Convention on Biological Diversity 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations (United States) 

CH4 methane 

CLSS closed loop stewardship system 

CO carbon monoxide 

CO2 carbon dioxide 

CT conservation tillage 

DNA deoxyribonucleic acid 

DHA docosahexaenoic acid 

EA environmental assessment 

E. coli Escherichia coli

ECOS Environmental Conservation Online System (USFWS) 

EIS environmental impact statement 

EO Executive Order 

EPA eicosapentaenoic acid 

EPSPS 5- enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase 

ESA Endangered Species Act of 1973 

EU European Union 

FDA U.S. Food and Drug Administration 

FFDCA Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act 

FFP food, feed, or processing 

FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 

FR Federal Register 

g/kg grams per kilogram 
vi 

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 

GE genetically engineered 

GHG greenhouse gas 

GLA gamma-linolenic acid 

GMO genetically modified organism 

GRAS generally recognized as safe 

HDL high-density lipoprotein 

IP Identity Preservation 

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 

ISPM International Standard for Phytosanitary Measure

IPPC International Plant Protection Convention

ISO International Organization for Standards 

LA linoleic acid 

lb(s) pound(s) 

LDL low-density lipoprotein 

LMO Living Modified Organism 

m meters 

MG maturity group 

mg milligrams 

NO2 nitrogen dioxide 

N2O nitrous oxide 

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

NABI North American Biotechnology Initiative

NAPPO North American Plant Protection Organization

Nc.Fad3 Neurospora crassa ∆15 desaturase gene 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and subsequent amendments 

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act 

NMFS National Marine and Fisheries Service 

NOP National Organic Program 

NPS non-point source 

NRC National Research Council 

O3 ozone 

OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development 
vii 

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 

PIPs plant incorporated protectants 

Pj.D6D Primula juliae ∆6 desaturase gene 

PM2.5 particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 

micrometers 

PM10 particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 10 

micrometers 

POEA polyethoxylated alkyl amine 

PPRA Plant Pest Risk Assessment 

PPA Plant Protection Act 

PRA Pest Risk Analysis 

RNA ribonucleic acid 

SDA stearidonic acid 

SO2 sulfur dioxide 

STS sulfonylurea soybeans 

TES threatened and endangered species 

TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act 

U.S. United States 

USC United States Code 

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture 

USDA-AMS U.S. Department of Agriculture-American marketing Service 

USDA-ERS U.S. Department of Agriculture-Economic Research Service 

USDA-NASS U.S. Department of Agriculture-National Agricultural Statistics Service 

U.S. EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services 

VOC volatile organic compound 

WPS Worker Protection Standard for Agricultural Pesticides 

μm micrometers 

°F degrees Fahrenheit 
viii 
1 

1 PURPOSE AND NEED 

1.1 Regulatory Authority 

"Protecting American agriculture" is the basic charge of the United States Department of 

Agriculture's (USDA) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS). APHIS 

provides leadership in ensuring the health and care of plants and animals. The agency 

improves agricultural productivity and competitiveness, and contributes to the national 

economy and the public health. USDA asserts that all methods of agricultural production 

(conventional, organic, or the use of genetically engineered varieties) can provide benefits to 

the environment, consumers, and farm income. 

Since 1986, the United States (U.S.) government has regulated genetically engineered (GE) 

organisms pursuant to a regulatory framework known as the Coordinated Framework for the 

Regulation of Biotechnology (Coordinated Framework) (51 FR 23302, 57 FR 22984). The 

Coordinated Framework, published by the Office of Science and Technology Policy, 

describes the comprehensive federal regulatory policy for ensuring the safety of 

biotechnology research and products and explains how federal agencies will use existing 

Federal statutes in a manner to ensure public health and environmental safety while 

maintaining regulatory flexibility to avoid impeding the growth of the biotechnology 

industry. The Coordinated Framework is based on several important guiding principles: (1) 

agencies should define those transgenic organisms subject to review to the extent permitted 

by their respective statutory authorities; (2) agencies are required to focus on the 

characteristics and risks of the biotechnology product, not the process by which it is created; 

(3) agencies are mandated to exercise oversight of GE organisms only when there is evidence 

of “unreasonable” risk. 

The Coordinated Framework explains the regulatory roles and authorities for the three major 

agencies involved in regulating GE organisms: USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection 

Service (APHIS), the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA). 

APHIS is responsible for regulating GE organisms and plants under the plant pest provision 

in the Plant Protection Act of 2000, as amended (7 USC § 7701 et seq.) to ensure that they do 

not pose a plant pest risk to the environment. 

The FDA regulates GE organisms under the authority of the Federal Food, Drug, and 

Cosmetic Act (FFDCA). The FDA is responsible for ensuring the safety and proper labeling 

of all plant-derived foods and feeds, including those that are genetically engineered. To help 

developers of food and feed derived from GE crops comply with their obligations under 

Federal food safety laws, FDA encourages them to participate in a voluntary consultation 

process. All food and feed derived from GE crops currently on the market in the United 

States have successfully completed this consultation process. The FDA policy statement 

concerning regulation of products derived from new plant varieties, including those 

genetically engineered, was published in the Federal Register (FR) on May 29, 1992 (57 FR 

22984-23005). Under this policy, FDA uses what is termed a consultation process to ensure 

that human food and animal feed safety issues or other regulatory issues (e.g., labeling) are 

resolved prior to commercial distribution of bioengineered food. 
2 

The U.S. EPA regulates plant-incorporated protectants (PIPs) under the Federal Insecticide, 

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). U.S. EPA also sets tolerance limits for residues of 

pesticides on and in food and animal feed, or establishes an exemption from the requirement 

for a tolerance, under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA) and regulates 

certain biological control organisms under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The 

U.S. EPA is responsible for regulating the sale, distribution and use of pesticides, including 

pesticides that are produced by an organism through techniques of modern biotechnology. 

1.2 Regulated Organisms 

The APHIS Biotechnology Regulatory Service’s (BRS) mission is to protect America’s 

agriculture and environment using a dynamic and science-based regulatory framework that 

allows for the safe development and use of GE organisms. APHIS regulations at 7 Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) part 340, which were promulgated pursuant to authority granted 

by the Plant Protection Act, as amended (7 United States Code (U.S.C.) 7701–7772), regulate 

the introduction (importation, interstate movement, or release into the environment) of 

certain GE organisms and products. A GE organism is no longer subject to the plant pest 

provisions of the Plant Protection Act or to the regulatory requirements of 7 CFR part 340 

when APHIS determines that it is unlikely to pose a plant pest risk. A GE organism is 

considered a regulated article if the donor organism, recipient organism, vector, or vector 

agent used in engineering the organism belongs to one of the taxa listed in the regulation (7 

CFR 340.2) and is also considered a plant pest. A GE organism is also regulated under part 

340 when APHIS has reason to believe that the GE organism may be a plant pest or APHIS 

does not have information to determine if the GE organism is unlikely to pose a plant pest 

risk. 

A person may petition the agency that a particular regulated article is unlikely to pose a plant 

pest risk, and, therefore, is no longer regulated under the plant pest provisions of the Plant 

Protection Act or the regulations at 7 CFR 340. Under § 340.6(c)(4), the petitioner is 

required to provide information related to plant pest risk that the agency may use to 

determine whether the regulated article is unlikely to present a greater plant pest risk than the 

unmodified organism. A GE organism is no longer subject to the regulatory requirements of 

7 CFR part 340 or the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act when APHIS 

determines that it is unlikely to pose a plant pest risk. 

1.3 Petition for Determination of Nonregulated Status: MON 87769 Soybean 

Monsanto Company of St. Louis, MO (Monsanto), submitted a petition (APHIS Number 09-

183-01p) to APHIS in 2009 seeking a determination of nonregulated status for Event MON 

87769 soybean that is engineered to express high levels of the fatty acid stearidonic acid 

(SDA) in soybean seed. As detailed in the petition, smaller amounts of three other fatty acids 

are produced in addition to the SDA, and expression of linoleic acid is reduced (Monsanto, 

2010b). In the event of a determination of nonregulated status, the nonregulated status for 

MON 87769 soybean would include MON 87769 soybean, any progeny derived from crosses 

between MON 87769 soybean and conventional soybean, and crosses of MON 87769 

soybean with other biotechnology-derived soybean that have been determined to be no longer 

subject to the requirements of Part 340 or the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection 

Act. MON 87769 soybean is currently regulated under 7 CFR part 340. 
3 

Interstate movements and field trials of MON 87769 soybean have been conducted under 

permits issued or notifications acknowledged by APHIS from 2003 through 2008. Data 

resulting from these field trials are described in the petition (Monsanto, 2010b). 

Notifications acknowledged and permits issued by APHIS are listed in the petition 

(Monsanto, 2010b). The test sites represent diverse regions of the U.S., including the major 

growing areas of the Midwest (Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota Missouri, Iowa, Illinois, 

Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Nebraska, South Dakota, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Arkansas), 

and winter nurseries in Puerto Rico and Hawaii. Field tests conducted under APHIS 

oversight allow for evaluation in agricultural settings under confinement measures designed 

to minimize the likelihood of persistence in the environment after completion of the field 

trial. Under confined field trial conditions, data are gathered on multiple parameters and used 

by applicants to evaluate agronomic characteristics and product performance. These data are 

also valuable to APHIS for assessing the potential for a new variety to pose a plant pest risk. 

The data evaluated for MON 87769 soybean may be found in the APHIS Plant Pest Risk 

Assessment (PPRA) (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). 

1.4 Purpose of Product 

Monsanto seeks a determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean, a specialty 

trait soybean characterized by a fatty acid profile containing SDA, an omega-3 fatty acid, 

which is not found in conventional soybean. SDA (an 18-carbon fatty acid with four double 

bonds or 18:4) is metabolically converted in humans to eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA; 20:5) 

and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA; 22:6), both of which may be involved in promoting heart 

health and other physiologically healthful conditions. These fatty acids may commonly be 

derived from fish oils, but a soybean source containing SDA that provides a precursor to 

these would be more efficiently produced in human nutrition. Since SDA has fewer double 

bonds than the omega-3 fatty acids, EPA (20:5) or DHA (22:6), SDA soybean oil is more 

stable to oxidation (i.e., less prone to fishy or rancid odors and taste) than fish oils, thereby 

expanding the potential formulation options for food companies and food products for 

consumers. The biosynthetic pathways for interconversions of the linoleic, linolenic and 

SDA to EPA and DHA are shown in Figure 1. 

SDA production in MON 87769 soybean is accomplished by inserting two desaturase genes, 

Primula juliae Δ6 desaturase (Pj.D6D) and Neurospora crassa Δ15 desaturase (Nc.Fad3), 

into a conventional soybean variety. The Pj∆6D and Nc∆15D proteins found in MON 87769 

soybean also produce gamma-linolenic acid (GLA), another fatty acid not in conventional 

soybean. In MON 87769, the NcΔ15D protein converts linoleic acid (LA) to alpha-linolenic 

acid (ALA) and the protein PjΔ6D converts the ALA to SDA and LA to gamma linolenic 

acid (GLA) (Monsanto, 2010). Figure 2 shows the existing pathways by which desaturases 

form fatty acids in conventional soybeans and how the pathways are altered when the two 

desaturase genes, Primula juliae Δ6 desaturase (Pj.D6D) and Neurospora crassa Δ15 

desaturase (Nc.Fad3) inserted into MON 87769 soybean form fatty acids. 
4 

Source: 

Source: (Council for Responsible Nutrition, 2005). 

Figure 1. Pathways for the synthesis of EPA and DHA from Linoleic and alphaLinolenic Acid. 

MON 87769 soybean would not be grown for the commodity soybean market; instead, it is 

anticipated that a specialty soybean oil from MON 87769 soybean would be produced. 

Compared to commodity soybean oil, SDA soybean oil contains two additional fatty acids, 

SDA and GLA. SDA omega-3 soybean oil produced from MON 87769 soybean contains 

approximately 20 to 30% SDA (weight percent of total fatty acids), 5 to 8% gamma-linolenic 

acid (GLA), and slightly higher levels of alpha-linolenic acid (ALA) and palmitic acid than 

in conventional soybean oil (Monsanto, 2010b). It also contains lower levels of oleic acid 

and linoleic acid (LA) than those present in conventional soybean oil. Since oleic acid, 

linoleic acid, and alpha-linolenic acid are directly involved in the pathway to SDA, their 

concentrations are inter-related with those of other fatty acids and, therefore, were expected 

to be different in MON 87769 soybean seed. 
5 

Figure 2. Fatty acid biosynthesis in plants and the introduced changes in MON 

87769 soybean 

SDA omega-3 soybean oil produced from MON 87769 soybean can be included in a 

range of food products for health benefits. The use of SDA soybean oil in selected food 

categories could provide a wide range of dietary alternatives for increasing human 

omega-3 fatty acid intake. SDA soybean oil is intended for use in a variety of food 

products including baked goods and baking mixes, breakfast cereals and grains, cheeses, 

dairy product analogs, fats and oils, fish products, frozen dairy desserts and mixes, grain 

products and pastas, gravies and sauces, meat products, milk products, nuts and nut 

products, poultry products, processed fruit juices, processed vegetable products, puddings 

and fillings, snack foods, soft candy, and soups and soup mixes at levels that will provide 

375 milligrams (mg) SDA per serving. Fish and plant oils rich in omega-3 fatty acids 

also are used in feed applications such as aquaculture and poultry feeds. SDA soybean oil 

from MON 87769 soybean may eventually be used in aquaculture and feed applications 

as an alternative to fish oil and other omega-3 rich feed components. 

It is anticipated that MON 87769 soybean will have low production acreage (< 5% of 

total U.S. soybean acreage or up to 3 to 3.5 million acres) in North America. In order to 

derive commercial value from this product, the SDA soybean crop will be grown a 

closed-loop production and marketing system in the soybean growing region of the 

Northern U.S (Monsanto, 2010b). 

1.5 APHIS Response to Petition for Nonregulated Status 

Under the authority of the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act and 7 CFR 

part 340, APHIS has issued regulations for the safe development and use of GE 

organisms. As required by 7 CFR 340.6, APHIS must respond to petitioners that request 

a determination of the regulated status of genetically engineered organisms, including GE 

plants such as MON 87769 soybean. When a petition for nonregulated status is 

submitted, APHIS must make a determination if the genetically engineered organism is 

18:0

stearic

acid 

18:1 

oleic 

acid 

Δ9 18:3 

α-linolenic 

acid 

Δ12

18:3 

γ-linolenic

acid 

18:2 

linoleic 

acid

Δ15

18:4 

stearidonic acid

Δ6 Δ6 

Δ15 

Pathways where soybean’s existing desaturases form fatty acid 

Pathways where desaturases introduced in MON 87769 form fatty acids 
6 

unlikely to pose a plant pest risk. If APHIS determines based on its PPRA that the 

genetically engineered organism is unlikely to pose a plant pest risk, the genetically 

engineered organism is no longer subject the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection 

Act and 7 CFR part 340. 

APHIS has prepared this environmental assessment (EA) to consider the potential 

environmental effects of an agency determination of nonregulated status consistent with 

Council of Environmental Quality’s National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

regulations and the USDA and APHIS NEPA implementing regulations and procedures 

(40 CFR parts 1500-1508, 7 CFR part 1b, and 7 CFR part 372). This EA has been 

prepared in order to specifically evaluate the effects on the quality of the human 

environment1

 that may result from a determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 

soybean. 

1.6 Coordinated Framework Review 

1.6.1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

The U.S. EPA regulates plant-incorporated protectants (PIPs) under FIFRA (7 U.S.C. 136 

et seq.) and certain biological control organisms under TSCA (15 U.S.C. 53 et seq.). 

MON 87769 soybean does not express a pesticidal property, and, accordingly, is not 

regulated by the U.S. EPA. 

1.6.2 Food and Drug Administration 

FDA regulates GE organisms under the authority of the FFDCA (21 U.S.C. 301 et seq.). 

The FDA published its policy statement concerning regulation of products derived from 

new plant varieties, including those that are GE, in the Federal Register on May 29, 1992 

(57 FR 22984). Under this policy, FDA implements a voluntary consultation process to 

ensure that human food and animal feed safety issues or other regulatory issues, such as 

labeling, are resolved before commercial distribution of bioengineered food. 

MON 87769 soybean is within the scope of the FDA policy statement concerning 

regulation of products derived from new plant varieties, including those produced 

through genetic engineering. Monsanto initiated the consultation process with FDA for 

the commercial distribution of MON 87769 soybean and submitted a safety and 

nutritional assessment of food and feed derived from MON 87769 soybean to the FDA on 

March 23, 2009 (BNF No. 00117) (Monsanto, 2010b). FDA is currently evaluating the 

submission. 

FDA also administers the Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) Notification Program 

(US-FDA, 2011). A substance that will be added to food is subject to premarket approval 

by FDA unless qualified experts determine its use is generally recognized as safe 

 

1 Under NEPA regulations, the “human environment” includes “the natural and physical environment and 

the relationship of people with that environment” (40 CFR §1508.14).
7 

(GRAS). Under the GRAS program (62 FR 18938), a notification procedure is 

established whereby FDA is notified by a person that they have made a determination 

that a particular use of a substance is GRAS. FDA evaluates the submission to determine 

whether a sufficient basis for a GRAS determination has been provided or issues exist on 

whether use of the substance is GRAS. Monsanto submitted a GRAS Notice for SDA 

soybean oil (No. GRN 000283) to FDA on February 25, 2009 (US-FDA, 2009b). FDA 

issued a response letter on September 4, 2009, indicating the agency has no further 

questions about the characteristics of the oil, and the safety of its use in foods (US-FDA, 

2009a). 

1.7 Public Involvement 

APHIS routinely seeks public comment on draft EAs prepared in response to petitions for 

nonregulated status of GE organisms. APHIS does this through a notice published in the 

Federal Register. The issues discussed in this EA were developed by considering the 

public concerns as well as issues raised in public comments submitted for other EAs of 

GE organisms, concerns raised in lawsuits, as well as those issues of concern that have 

been raised by various stakeholders. These issues, including those regarding the 

agricultural production of soybeans using various production methods and the 

environmental and food/feed safety of GE plants were addressed to analyze the potential 

environmental impacts of MON 87769 soybean. 

This EA, the petition submitted by Monsanto, and APHIS’s PPRA will be available for 

public comment for a period of 60 days (7 CFR § 340.6(d)(2)). Comments received by 

the end of the 60-day period will be analyzed and used to inform APHIS’ determination 

decision of the regulated status of MON 87769 soybean and to assist APHIS in 

determining whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required prior to the 

determination decision of the regulated status of this soybean variety. 

1.8 Issues Considered 

The list of resource areas considered in this draft EA were developed by APHIS through 

experience in considering public concerns and issues raised in public comments 

submitted for other EAs of GE organisms. The resource areas considered also address 

concerns raised in previous and unrelated lawsuits, as well as issues that have been raised 

by various stakeholders in the past. The resource areas considered in this EA can be 

categorized as follows: 

Agricultural Production Considerations: 

 Acreage and Areas of Soybean Production 

 Agronomic/Cropping Practices 

 Soybean Seed Production 

 Organic Soybean Production 

 Specialty Soybean Production 

Environmental Considerations: 
8 

 Water Resources 

 Soil and Land Use 

 Air Quality 

 Climate Change 

 Animals 

 Plants 

 Gene Flow 

 Microorganisms 

 Biological Diversity 

Human Health Considerations: 

 Public Health 

 Worker Safety 

Livestock Health Considerations: 

 Livestock Health/Animal Feed 

Socioeconomic Considerations: 

 Domestic Economic Environment 

o Implications for Food Use 

o Implications for Industrial Use 

 Trade Economic Environment 

 Social Environment 
9 

2 AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 

The Affected Environment section provides an overview of the use and composition of 

soybeans, followed by a discussion of the current conditions of those aspects of the 

human environment potentially impacted by a determination of nonregulated status of 

MON 87769 soybean. For the purposes of this draft EA, those aspects of the human 

environment are: soybean production practices, the physical environment, biological 

resources, human health, animal feed, and socioeconomic issues. Because production of 

MON 87769 soybean is expected to be limited by actions taken by Monsanto, the 

affected environment assessed in this EA will primarily focus on those geographical areas 

where MON 87769 soybean would potentially be planted. As indicated by Monsanto, the 

area to which production will be limited includes the Northern Tier states of North and 

South Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan (Monsanto, 2010d) and a 

combination of geographically delimited seed sales, released maturity groups and 

soybean purchases, and contracts will provide a means to define the production area. 

2.1 Soybean Products and Composition 

The soybean is an economically important leguminous crop providing oil and protein. 

Soybean plants are grown for their seed, which is further processed to yield oil for a 

variety of uses and meal for livestock feed and human dietary products. Soybean uses in 

the U.S. include edible soybean oil, soy-based biodiesel, animal feed, tofu, and industrial 

chemicals (SoyStats, 2010a). This subsection provides an overview of the various uses 

and associated composition of soybean. 

2.1.1 Soybean Use 

Approximately 50% of the world soybean seed supply in 2009 was crushed to produce 

soybean meal and oil (Soyatech, 2008). Most of the seed was used to supply the feed 

industry for livestock use or the food industry for edible vegetable oil and soybean 

protein products. Another 34% of the world soybean seed supply was traded to other 

geographies, with China, the European Union (EU), Japan, and Mexico being the top 

soybean seed importers (SoyStats, 2010h). The remainder of the soybean seed produced 

was used as certified seed, feed, or stocks. Industrial uses of soybean range from a 

carbon/nitrogen source in the production of yeasts via fermentation to the manufacture of 

soaps, inks, paints, disinfectants, and biodiesel (see, e.g., (Cahoon, 2003); (SoyStats, 

2010a)). 

Soybean oil generally has a smaller contribution to soybean’s overall value compared to 

soybean meal because the oil constitutes just 18 to 19% of the soybean's weight. 

Nonetheless, soybean oil accounted for approximately 30% of all the vegetable oils 

consumed globally and was the second largest source of vegetable oil worldwide, slightly 

behind palm oil representing approximately 32% of global consumption (Soyatech, 

2010). Soybean oil also has industrial applications, including feedstock in manufacture 

of inks, paints, varnishes, resins, plastics, and biodiesel ((Cahoon, 2003); (SoyStats, 

2010a)). Soybean meal is used as a supplement in feed rations for livestock. Soybean 
10 

meal is the world's most important protein feed, accounting for nearly 69% of world 

protein meal supplies (SoyStats, 2010f). 

Soybean is grown as a commercial crop in more than 40 countries (those with greater 

than 10,000 hectares) (FAO, 2010). Processed soybeans supply the largest world source 

of protein animal feed and the second largest source of vegetable oil (USDA-ERS, 

2010e)U.S. total oilseed production consists of more than 90% by weight of soybeans 

while the remainder is other oilseeds—such as cottonseed, sunflower seed, canola, and 

peanuts (USDA-ERS, 2010e). 

Soybean Meal 

Following solvent extraction of the oil, the remaining solid soybean flakes are toasted 

and ground to produce soybean meal (Soyatech, 2008). Soybean seed (at 13% moisture) 

with about 18% oil will contain 34.6 to 36.7% protein, and the derived soybean meal will 

contain 47.5 to 48.8 % protein by dry weight (Brumm and Hurburgh Jr, 2006). Only a 

small proportion (1%) of the soybean is consumed directly by humans as protein; most 

domestic soybean meal is used by the American livestock industry (USB, 2011a). The 

mixed rations for poultry, hogs, cattle, dairy cows, domestic pets, and farmed fish often 

are formulated with soybean meal. In 2010, poultry were the largest consumers of 

soybean meal (49%), followed by hogs (25%) and then cattle (12%) (Soystats, 2011a). 

Other animal consumers include farmed fish and domestic pets. 

Soybean Oil 

Soybean oil is used in a wide variety of food applications. Until 2005, soybean oil was 

the largest source of vegetable oil worldwide (USDA-ERS, 2010e). Since 2005, palm oil 

has overtaken soybean oil in volume of worldwide vegetable oil production (USDA-ERS, 

2010e). Conventional soybean oil is composed of a mixture of fatty acids. Fatty acids 

are identified based on the number of carbons and the degree to which they are saturated. 

Table 1 presents the fatty acid composition of soybean. 

The five major fatty acids in conventional soybean oil are linoleic acid, oleic acid, 

palmitic acid, linolenic acid, and stearic acid (CODEX, 2010). Linoleic and linolenic are 

classified as polyunsaturated fatty acids, oleic acid is a monounsaturated fatty acid, and 

palmitic and stearic acids are saturated fatty acids (CODEX, 2010). 

The physical and chemical properties of conventional soybean oil limit its use for many 

food and industrial applications (Cahoon, 2003). As noted in Table 1, untreated soybean 

oil has high concentrations of the linolenic and linoleic acids, both polyunsaturated fatty 

acids (US-FDA, 1996). These polyunsaturated fatty acids are subject to oxidation, which 

affects flavor and product stability, and thus shortens its shelf life (US-FDA, 1996). To 

enhance stability, selective hydrogenation has been used to decrease the percentage of 

polyunsaturated fatty acids in the soy oil blend (US-FDA, 1996). The selective 

hydrogenation dramatically improves shelf life and provides stability during deep-frying 

and other high temperature applications (Mozzaffarian et al., 2006). Although the 
11 

hydrogenation process does increase the percentage of monounsaturated oleic acids, the 

hydrogenation process produces substantial quantities of the trans isomer of oleic acid. 

Such trans-fats have been identified as negatively impacting human cholesterol levels by 

raising the low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and lowering the high-density 

lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol. This association with trans-fatty acids has resulted in a 

decline in soybean oil consumption in the U.S. (USDA-ERS, 2006a). 

Table 1. Fatty acid composition of conventional soybean oil. 

Fatty Acid 

Lipid Number Fatty Acid Common Name 

Percentage of 

Total Fatty Acid 

in Conventional 

Soybean Oil 

C6:0* Caproic Acid ND 

C8:0 Caprylic Acid ND 

C10:0 Capric Acid (Decanoic) ND 

C12:0 Lauric Acid ND – 0.1 

C14:0 Myristic Acid (Tetradecanoic) ND – 0.2 

C16:0 Palmitic Acid 8.0 – 13.5 

C16:1 Palmitoleic Acid ND – 0.2 

C17:0 Margaric Acid (Heptadecanoic) ND – 0.1 

C17:1 Cis-10 Heptadecanoic Acid ND – 0.1 

C18:0 Stearic Acid 2.0 – 5.4 

C18:1 Oleic Acid 17 - 30 

C18:2 Linoleic Acid 48 – 59 

C18:3 Linolenic Acid 4.5 – 11 

C20:0 Arachidic Acid (Eicosanoic) 0.1 – 0.6 

C20:1 Eicosenoic Acid ND – 0.5 

C20:2 Eicosadienoic Acid ND – 0.1 

C22:0 Behenic Acid (Docosanoic) ND – 0.7 

C22:1 Docosenoic Acid ND – 0.3 

C22:2 Docosadienoic Acid ND 

C24:0 Lignoceric Acid (Tetracosanoic) ND – 0.5 

C24:1 Cis-tetracosenoic Acid ND 

Source: (CODEX, 2010). 

Notes: 

*Fatty acids are identified based on the number of carbon atoms and the number of double bonds in 

that fatty acid. Hence, oleic acid is identified as C18:1, indicating that this fatty acid is comprised 

of 18 carbon atoms with a single double bond. 

ND – Not detectable 
12 

Soybean Food Products 

Soybean is used in various food products, including tofu, soybean sauce, soymilk, energy 

bars, and meat products. A significant fraction of the soybean market is dedicated to 

production of purified oil for food use and industrial applications (Cahoon, 2003). Food 

uses include margarines, shortenings, and cooking and salad oils (OECD, 2000). 

2.1.2 Soybean Composition 

Generally, soybean seed consists of oil (about 20%), protein (about 40%), carbohydrate 

(about 35%), and ash (about 5%) (Liu, 1997)Various constituents have importance to the 

health and nutrition value of soybean, such as the isoflavonoids. Others are anti-nutritive, 

and many of these can be eliminated by the routine heating of the protein or meal fraction 

during processing for animals or humans. The oil fraction is composed of triglycerides 

with associated fatty acids, whose profile has significant consequences for human health 

and nutrition. The protein fraction is the most valued part of the soybean, and represents 

a complete protein that is important in human diets and feeding of livestock, poultry and 

farmed fish. The carbohydrate fraction of soybean flours can include both nutritive sugars 

(glucose, sucrose, galactose and others) and those that cannot be processed by human 

digestive enzymes (raffinose, stachyose) (see (Eldridge et al., 1979)). 

Protein 

Soybean is considered to be a source of complete protein. A complete protein is one that 

contains significant amounts of all the essential amino acids that must be provided to the 

human body because of the body’s inability to synthesize them. The ten essential amino 

acids are arginine, histidine, isoleucine, leucine, lysine, methionine, phenylalanine, 

threonine, tryptophan, and valine (Kuiken and Lyman, 1949). Soybean provides these 

ten essential amino acids necessary for human nutrition, which is in addition to another 

10 which can by synthesized by human metabolism from other nitrogen containing 

precursors (Kuiken and Lyman, 1949). The essential amino acid composition of soybean 

and soy-based products is provided in the USDA National Nutrient Database for 

Standard Reference (USDA-ARS, 2008b). 

Isoflavones 

Soybeans contain isoflavone compounds, polyphenol compounds closely related to the 

antioxidant flavonoids found in other plants (Manach et al., 2004). Soybean isoflavones 

are described as phytoestrogens because they exhibit estrogenic activity similar to 

estradiol hormones (Rostagno, 2009). These isoflavones may provide both benefits and 

negative impacts, as they are variously reported to exhibit estrogenic and anti-estrogenic 

effects, influence cardiovascular disease, impact cancer rates, and possibly slow the rates 

of osteoporosis. The major soybean isoflavones include genistein and daidzein. 

Isoflavones are produced primarily by beans and other legumes such as peanuts and 

chickpeas. (See Higdon and Drake (Higdon and Drake, 2009) for a summary of recent 

research on soy isoflavones.) The negative impacts of isoflavones are those that have 
13 

been shown to have some adverse consequences to pest insects that feed on them, such as 

feeding inhibition for larvae of the moth Spodoptera litura among others (Zhou et al., 

2011). 

Antinutrients 

Antinutrients are components of a food product which may be toxic at high 

concentrations, bind nutrients, or otherwise prevent their digestion. Soybeans contain 

several key antinutrients, such as oligosaccharides, lectins, phytic acid, and protease 

inhibitors (OECD, 2001). Protease inhibitors include trypsin and chymotrypsins (OECD, 

2001). Lectins are sugar-binding protein inhibitors. The activity of these inhibitors is 

destroyed during the heat processing of soybean products. The carbohydrates stachyose 

and raffinose which are oligosaccharides can cause flatulence when consumed (Rackis, 

1974). Phytic acid binds most of the phosphorus in soybean, preventing its absorption by 

an animal. It is common practice to add phytic acid-degrading enzymes to the animal 

feed formula (Monsanto, 2010c). Protease inhibitors interfere with the digestion of 

proteins, resulting in decreased animal growth (OECD, 2001). The antinutrients are 

destroyed during the heat treatment processing of the soybean products (OECD, 2001). 

Fatty Acids 

Saturated fatty acids in soybean include palmitic and stearic; whereas palmitic acid raises 

total cholesterol and low density lipoprotein (associated with adverse cardiovascular 

events) stearic does not (see review in (Micha and Mozaffarian, 2010)). Polyunsaturated 

fatty acids in soybean include linoleic and linolenic, and the monounsaturated fat is oleic. 

Evidence from the best human studies show that when polyunsaturated fatty acids 

replace saturated ones in the diet, the risk of cardiovascular heart disease declines (but 

not when caloric replacement is carbohydrate) (Micha and Mozaffarian, 2010). When 

monounsaturated fatty acids (e.g., oleic acid) replace saturated fatty acids, effects are 

uncertain because of mixed evidence at present (Micha and Mozaffarian, 2010). Transfats in the diet are unhealthy; these are produced when soybean fatty acids such as 

linolenic and linoleic are subjected to hydrogenation because of inherent low stability, or 

because properties of soybean oils are unsuitable for certain food uses. Incorporation of 

resulting trans-fats in foods result in known undesirable effects on blood lipid parameters 

(lowering HDLs, increasing triglycerides, and increasing LDLs). In turn, these measured 

parameters of human health correlate with adverse effects on cardiovascular health (see 

review in (Micha and Mozaffarian, 2008)). 

2.2 Agricultural Production of Soybean 

Soybean (Glycine max (L.) Merr.) plants are grown for their seed, which is further 

processed to yield oil and meal. In the U.S., the majority of soybean is cultivated as a 

commodity crop for animal feed and soybean meal (Monsanto, 2010b). Soybean is 

ranked number one in oil production (58 percent) among the major oil seed crops 

production in the world (ASA, 2011). Recently, there has been an increase in the 

percentage of the crop dedicated to specialty soybean produced for a specific market or 
14 

use. These specialty, value-added products may be the whole bean or a fraction, such as 

the oil (Lee and Herbek, 2004). The production of specialty soybean is discussed in more 

detail in Subsection 2.2.5. 

2.2.1 Acreage and Area of Soybean Production 

Soybean production in the U.S. extends over a wide range of geographies and regions, 

and is grown from North Dakota to Louisiana and from the Great Plains states to the 

Eastern Seaboard (USDA-NASS, 1997). In the U.S., soybeans were harvested on 76.4 

million acres in 2009 and 76.6 million in 2010 (USDA-NASS, 2011a). At least 31 states 

grew soybean as an annual crop in 2010 (USDA-NASS, 2011a). For the 2010 growing 

season, more than one million acres of soybeans were grown in each of the following 18 

states (from highest to lowest acreage): Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, Indiana, Missouri, 

Nebraska, Ohio, Kansas, South Dakota, North Dakota, Arkansas, Michigan, Mississippi, 

Wisconsin, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Louisiana (USDA-NASS, 2011a). 

Harvested soybean is projected to slightly increase to nearly 80 million acres by 2020 

(USDA-NASS, 2011b; USDA-OCE, 2011). 

Although soybean acreage has increased from 2005 to 2010 by about 7% (USDA-NASS, 

2011a), the potential for an increase into uncultivated acreage is low because soybean is 

profitably grown on high quality agricultural land, not lands of lower productivity (EIA, 

2007; USDA-NASS, 2011a). Much of the high quality land in the U.S. is already 

committed to agricultural production (US-EPA, 2007) and in 2002, USDA- Economic 

Research Service (USDA-ERS) estimated that only 2.1% of cropland was idle in 2002 

(Lubowski et al., 2006). At the same time, U.S. crop and agricultural acreage is 

declining through replacement by urban and other developed areas (EIA, 2007). It is 

unlikely that “new” previously uncultivated land will be brought into soybean 

production, but rather that growth of soybean production will compete with other 

agricultural uses (EIA, 2007). 

Genetically modified plants, including soybeans, have been widely planted, with 

increasing frequency after their commercial introduction in the late 1990s. GE soybeans 

currently are planted on the majority of soybean acres in the U.S. (93% of acreage in 

2010) (USDA-ERS, 2011a). All these GE soybean varieties are herbicide resistant. 

Besides genetically modified soybean varieties with crop production traits, such as 

herbicide tolerance, varieties expressing altered fatty acids are also available to growers 

(e.g., low linolenic varieties, see Specialty Soybean Production, Soybean Varieties with 

Altered Fatty Acids in Section 2.2.5 and (Fehr, 2007)). At present, these fatty acid 

modified lines are non-transgenic products, but new GE varieties are being developed 

(Cahoon, 2003). 

Monsanto plans to channel production of SDA soybean into a limited region using 

several strategies identified below (Monsanto, 2010d). Constraints on production areas 

will be imposed by the seed provider (see first bullet below) and, to some extent, also by 

the biology of the specialty crop (see third bullet). Several measures are currently used in 

the production of specialty soybeans, including contracts specifying details of production 
15 

and sales between growers and soybean purchasers (see second bullet). These measures 

will be used by Monsanto to limit the production area of MON 87769 soybean: 

 The relative maturity groups (MG) in which the developer releases the traits. 

Growers must use varieties which are best adapted to the local season. Day length, 

temperature and length of the growing season may affect the time of flowering and 

seed formation (Setiyono et al., 2007) and soybean maturity is affected by the local 

day length (Cober et al., 1996). Thus, soybean yield, and therefore, commercial 

value, is a consequence of the MG and planting location. 

 The area in which designated elevators and specialty oil crushers are located. 

Soybean growers will sign contracts with elevators and processors which will be 

designated in advance by the trait developer. These businesses would have 

compartmented storage available for specialty oilseed crops, and would agree to 

conditions specified in Monsanto’s management plan, which would be required for 

segregating the crop. If soybean buyers are located too distant from production sites, 

cost of transport increases and profits decline; economic penalties further constrain 

soybean movement. 

 The environment in which the soybeans are grown determines desired properties of 

the soybeans. Monsanto has determined that states located in the northern U.S. 

provide the optimal environment for maximal expression of SDA from MON 87769 

soybean (Monsanto, 2010b). 

Through these means, Monsanto will be able to limit where growers produce MON 

87769 soybean which will be the states of North and South Dakota, Minnesota, 

Wisconsin, and Michigan (Monsanto, 2010d). Some of the largest soybean production 

areas, such as Illinois, Iowa, Indiana and Missouri, would not be included in Monsanto’s 

targeted production area. The area of production will include the northern-most area of 

the Heartland (McKnight, 2004). This area south of the Great Lakes encompasses 

Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, and parts of South Dakota, which is characterized as 

lowland, level with some hills, and with fertile soils (McKnight, 2004). Corn, soybean, 

alfalfa, hay, fruit, beef cattle, hogs and dairy cattle are produced here. The other area 

where Monsanto plans to target production of MON 87769 soybean is the eastern-most 

fringes of the Great Plains and prairies, which includes parts of North and South Dakota. 

These lands are characterized as flat or sloping land (McKnight, 2004). Wheat, but also 

corn, soybean, sorghum, canola, sunflower, edible beans and peas, barley and rye, 

flaxseed, oats and sugar beets are grown here; cattle may be produced in this region; 

areas that are under irrigation allow vegetable and fruit production for cities (truck crops). 

These areas targeted by Monsanto for MON 87769 soybean production are areas where 

considerable commodity soybean is already produced (Tables 2 and 3). 

 
16 

Table 2. U.S. soybean production in Northern Tier states in 2010. 

State Acres Harvested 

(x 1000)

Production 

(x 1,000 bushels)

Yield (bushels 

per acre) 

Michigan 2,090 91,960 44 

Minnesota 7,310 328,950 45 

North Dakota 4,050 149,850 37 

South Dakota 4,150 166,000 40 

Wisconsin 1,630 79,870 49 

Total U.S. 76,823 3,408,211 44 

Source: Crop Production. Soybean, October 10, 2010. (USDA-NASS, 2010a) 

Table 3. Rank of soybean production in Northern Tier states and the U.S. in 2007 

along with other principal crops. 

State First Rank Crop Rank of Soybean 

Crop in State 

Rank of State 

Soybean Production 

in U.S. 

Michigan Corn (for grain) 2 3 

Minnesota Corn (for grain) 2 12 

North Dakota Wheat (for grain) 2 9 

South Dakota Corn (for grain) 4* 34 

Wisconsin Corn (for grain) 3 15 

Source: 2007 Census of Agriculture (USDA-NASS, 2009) 

Note: *Wheat, forage and soybean acreage nearly equal 

2.2.2 Agronomic Practices 

In this EA, “conventional farming” includes any farming system where synthetic 

pesticides or fertilizers may be used. Conventional farming covers a broad scope of 

farming practices, ranging from farmers who only occasionally use synthetic pesticides 

and fertilizers to those farmers whose harvest depends on regular pesticide and fertilizer 

inputs. Conventional farming also includes the use of genetically engineered (GE) 

varieties that are no longer subject to the regulatory requirements of 7 CFR part 340 or 

the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act. 

Soybean self-pollinates and is propagated by seed (OECD, 2000). Proper seedbed 

preparation, appropriate variety selection, appropriate planting dates and plant 

population, and good integrated pest management practices are important for optimizing 
17 

the yield potential and economic returns of soybean (Barrentine, 1989; USDA-APHIS, 

2010b). 

Soybean Maturity Groups 

Soybean varieties are developed and adapted to certain geographical zones (bands about 

100-150 miles north to south) and are separated into ten maturity groups – Group 00 to 

Group VIII: Group 00 through Group IV soybean varieties are planted in the Midwest 

and Eastern Coastal regions; Groups IV through VIII are planted in the southern states 

(Helsel and Minor, 1993; Hodges and French, 1985; Pioneer, 2011). To adapt to the 

local growing season, producers typically plant seed of an appropriate maturity group so 

that its development and harvest coordinates with the seasonality of the location. To 

avoid frosts and maximize yield and oil content, the grower’s priority is to plant soybean 

as early as possible and to use the early maturing varieties (North Dakota) (Berglund and 

Helms, 2003). In the five Northern Tier states, the 0-2 maturity groups would be 

generally planted (Zhang et al., 2007), but University of Wisconsin Extension (UWExtension, 2008 ) has tested maturity groups between 0.1 and 2.8 in various parts of 

Wisconsin to match local conditions. In parts of Michigan, a maturity group as high as 

3.4 might be planted (MSU-Extension, 2010) and in parts of North Dakota 00 or even 

000 might be planted (Kandel, 2008). 

Pre-Season Preparation 

Crop rotation, tillage system, row spacing, planting equipment, seed or trait selection(s), 

herbicide choices and details of soil fertility require production decisions well in advance 

of planting the soybean crop. 

Planting and Early Season 

Adequate soil moisture and warm temperatures facilitate rapid seed germination and 

emergence. Planting date has the greatest impact on yield (Hoeft et al., 2000). Soybean 

can germinate at a soil temperature of 50 degrees Fahrenheit (oF) when planted at a depth 

of two inches, with the ideal soil temperature for soybean germination and emergence at 

77oF (Pedersen, 2010; Pedersen and Lauer, 2004). However, waiting for soils to reach 

this soil temperature will delay planting beyond the optimum planting date that will 

maximize yield. 

Highest soybean planting activity begins in mid-May (as early as the 10th in some states) 

and continues through early June, with Wisconsin planting as late as June 20 (USDANASS, 1997). As an example, in Wisconsin, although the highest yield comes from 

planting before May 20, delayed planting to June 1 could reduce yield to an estimated 89 

per cent and by June 10 to 75 percent (with a plant population of 200,000) (Conley and 

Gaska, 2011). 

Recommended herbicide use in Roundup Ready Soybean (NDSU Weed Science): 
18 

 Strategy 1: Pre-emergent herbicide or pre-plant incorporated metolochlor, 

pendimethalin, Fierce, or metribuzin, etc. used. Most require rain for activation. 

 Strategy 2: Glyphosate applied to early emerged weeds. 

 Strategy 3: Glyphosate applied to 2-4 inch weeds. 

For tillage practices in early season, see Tillage section, below. 

Mid- to Late Season 

Ideal daytime temperatures for soybean growth are between 75oF and 85oF (Hoeft et al., 

2000). Warmer temperatures result in larger plants and earlier flowering. Sustained 

temperatures below 75oF will delay the beginning of flowering significantly. Seed set 

also is affected by temperature. Seed set is generally ideal when pollination follows night 

temperatures around 70oF. Soybean varieties differ in their response and tolerance to 

temperatures. 

The first appearance of flowers signals the beginning of the reproductive stage (Hoeft et 

al., 2000). The reproductive period consists of flowering, pod set, and seed formation. 

Climatic conditions such as temperature and moisture supply during the flowering period 

will affect the number of flowers. The soybean plant does not form a pod for each 

flower. It is common for a soybean plant to have 75% of its flowers fail to develop a pod 

(Monsanto, 2010b; Scott and Aldrich, 1970). 

Recommended herbicide use in Roundup Ready Soybean (NDSU Weed Science): 

 Strategy 1: Glyphosate applied to soybean post-emergent (follows early preemergent soil-applied or -incorporated herbicide). 

 Strategy 2: Post emergent herbicide acetochlor, imazamox, bentazon/sethoxydim, 

acifluorifen (follows glyphosate applied pre- emergent to soybean). 

 Strategy 3: Roundup/glyphosate 14-21 days after first application (follows 

glyphosate applied to pre-emergent soybean). 

For tillage practices in mid and late season, see Tillage section, below. 

Harvest Season 

At maturity, the seed moisture content is approximately 55 to 60%. At this stage, at least 

one pod on the plant reaches maturity (Hoeft et al., 2000). Under warm and dry weather 

conditions, seed moisture content will drop to 13 to 14% in 10 to 14 days from 

physiological maturity (Hoeft et al., 2000). Soybean is harvested when the moisture 

content drops below 15%. From preharvest through combining, soybean loss can vary 

between 3 and 10% and greater, depending upon operating processes and equipment 

adjustment (Bennett et al., 2011). 

Harvesting activity is highest in the five states of South Dakota, North Dakota, 

Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin between late September (North Dakota) and mid- to 

late-October (Wisconsin: early November) (USDA-NASS, 1997). 
19 

Recommended fall herbicide use in Roundup Resistant Soybean for next season soybean 

(MSU, 2011): 

 1: Burndown without residual activity: glyphosate, gramoxone, 2,4-D. 

 2: Burndown with residual activity: Authority Assist, Canopy, Autumn, Extreme. 

Crop Rotation 

Soybean crop rotation is an important management practice for managing weeds, to 

control volunteer soybeans, and to limit the potential for weeds to develop resistance to 

herbicides (e.g., glyphosate-resistant pigweed). According to USDA-ERS, 95% of the 

soybean-planted acreage has been in some form of a crop rotation system since 1991 

(USDA-ERS, 2010c). 

The benefits of soybean rotation with, for example, corn are many and include: 

• Improved yield and profitability of one or both crops; 

• Decreased need for additional nitrogen on the crop following soybean; 

• Increased residue cover; 

• Mitigation or disruption of disease, insect, and weed cycles; 

• Reduced soil erosion; 

• Increased soil organic matter; 

• Improved soil tilth and soil physical properties; and 

• Reduced runoff of nutrients, herbicides, and insecticides (Al-Kaisi et al., 2003). 

Agronomic practices for soybean rotations vary from state to state. Continuous (i.e., nonrotation) soybean production is discouraged by most extension soybean specialists to 

reduce the risk of diseases and nematodes (Al-Kaisi et al., 2003). In a survey of major 

corn/soybean production states, corn and soybean were alternated on 72 to 80% of 

acreage, other rotations were grown on 16 to 20 % of acreage, and soybean was grown 

continuously on 5 to 12% of acreage during the years 1996-2002 (Sandretto and Payne, 

2008). In another analysis, the majority of the U.S. soybean acreage (68.6%) is rotated to 

corn ((Monsanto, 2010c) at page 157, et seq.). Approximately 14.5% of the soybean 

acreage is rotated back to soybean the following year. Wheat follows soybean on 

approximately 11.2% of the U.S. soybean acreage, with cotton, rice, and sorghum the 

next largest rotational crops following soybean (4.6% of the soybean acreage). Other 

minor rotational crops that follow soybean production include barley, rice, oats, and dry 

beans. 

In the Northern Tier states where MON 87769 soybean would likely be grown, corn is 

often grown following soybean, but other crops may be added to the basic rotation, often 

small grains (Table 4) (UW-Extension, 2004). In eastern South Dakota, a corn-soybean 

rotation when coupled with a wheat crop is advantageous, since it may reduce yield 

losses caused by corn-soybean adapted Diabrotica species (corn rootworm), soybean cyst 

nematode, and weeds that proliferate in soybean and corn (Anderson, 2008). In 

southwestern Michigan, increasing crop diversity in crop rotations has been shown to 
20 

increase corn grain yield (Smith et al., 2008). Double cropping (i.e., plantings two crops 

in the same field within one year) of soybean with wheat is discouraged, since a 

predictable rate of return on late planted soybean cannot be established (Conley et al., 

2008). 

Table 4. First and second most frequent rotational crop following soybean 

State Rotational Crop 

Following Soybean 

Percentage of 

rotational crop planted 

Michigan Corn 70 

Wheat 25 

Minnesota Corn 76 

Wheat 18 

North Dakota Corn 30 

Wheat 45 

South Dakota Corn 72 

Wheat 20 

Wisconsin Corn 85 

Alfalfa 4 

Source: Table IX-8, column G, based on personal communications with state extension specialists and 

Monsanto Technology Development Representatives (Monsanto, 2010c). 

Tillage 

Mechanical weed control by means of tillage is an important aspect of soybean 

cultivation, and in 2006, no-till production ranged from 9.2 to 47.7% of soybean 

production in the five Northern Tier states in 2006 (Horowitz et al., 2010). Other types 

of conservation tillage, reduced and conventional tillage, made up the remainder. 

Conservation tillage practices have seen increased use throughout the U.S. in recent 

years, especially in the Midwest where wind and water erosion are often important farm 

issues. The percentage of planted land in the U.S. managed in conservation tillage 

increased from 26% in 1990 to 41% in 2004 (Sandretto and Payne, 2008). Soybean 

tillage has been summarized in five categories, with two groups, one of “conservation 

tillage” (no-till, ridge-till and mulch-till) or “other tillage practices” (reduced till and 

intensive till) (CTIC, 2010b). Conventional tillage is associated with intensive plowing 

and less than 15 percent crop residue; reduced tillage is associated with 15 to 30 percent 

crop residue; and conservation tillage, including no-till practices requiring herbicide 

application on the plant residue from the previous season, is associated with at least 30 

percent crop residue and substantially less soil erosion than other tillage practices (USEPA, 2009). Almost 40% of full season soybean acreage is under no-till practice, while 

another 23% is under a specialized type of conservation tillage. Another 20% of soybean 

acres are intensively tilled. 

In addition to preplant tillage preparations, cultivation for weeds might also be 

undertaken because a preplant residual herbicide was not activated by precipitation, and 

immediate control is required (IPMCenters, 2011). Pre-emergence herbicides may also 
21 

need activation, and failing adequate rainfall, rotary hoes or harrows may be deployed at 

soybean emergence (IPMCenters, 2011). Weed escapes from herbicide treatment may 

also be remedied with shallow cultivation (IPMCenters, 2011). 

Nitrogen Fertilization 

Soybeans remove up to 70 pounds of nitrogen from the soil when a 50-bushel yield of 

soybean is attained, with only about 35% of that originating from soil (Hoeft et al., 2000). 

The remaining nitrogen needs of soybean come from symbiotic nodulating bacteria of the 

families Rhizobiaceae and Bradyrhizobiaceae, and these form a symbiotic relationship 

with soybean (Gage, 2004). The symbiosis between nitrogen-fixing plant-microbe and 

the plant results in the formation of root nodules, providing an environment in which 

differentiated bacteria reduce or fix atmospheric nitrogen. The product of nitrogen 

fixation, ammonia, then can be used by the plant (Gage, 2004). USDA-ERS (USDAERS, 2010e) estimates that less than 40% of soybean acres in the U.S. receive nitrogen 

fertilizer. Given the important role of these bacteria for meeting nitrogen needs of 

soybean, commercial sources of inoculants such as multiple strains of Bradyrhizobium

can be applied to soybean seeds just before planting (Beuerlein, 2005). These bacteria 

must be supplied if a soybean crop has not been recently grown on the field (Bottomley, 

1992), and if nodulation is inadequate, supplemental nitrogen may be required for the 

developing crop (Ferguson et al., 2006). Maintaining an optimal pH is important to 

proper initiation of nodulation, and in a typical corn-soybean rotation, pH of about 6 is a 

good target (Hoeft et al., 2000). 

Weed Control 

One of the highest priorities in soybean production is weed management (Hoeft et al., 

2000). Weeds compete with soybean for water, soil nutrients and light, and may 

ultimately reduce yield. Growers use cultural methods, cultivation and herbicides to 

control crop competitors, and, depending on the strategies chosen, different herbaceous 

annuals, perennials, or even woody species can become established (Hoeft et al., 2000). 

Weeds present during an entire growing season can result in soybean yield losses ranging 

from 12 to 80% (Barrentine, 1989). 

U.S. soybean farmers began augmenting tillage with herbicides to control weeds in the 

late 1950s, but tillage in crop production remained an important strategy (Gunsolus, 

1990). By the early 1990s, there were over 70 individual herbicides or combination 

products registered for weed control in soybean (Gianessi et al., 2002). As additional 

herbicides became available, the possibility of the conservation-enhancing use of reduced 

tillage or no-till became feasible (Givens et al., 2009). Next, as herbicide-tolerant GE 

crops were no longer subject to the regulatory requirements of 7 CFR part 340 or the 

plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act beginning in 1996, a larger number of 

growers were able to adopt conservation tillage strategies (Givens et al., 2009). 

The use of herbicides is directly related to choices made by soybean producers for tillage 

options. Herbicides can directly substitute for tillage, and their use often offers better 
22 

management than tillage alone (Gianessi and Reigner, 2007). Consequently, as noted, 

there has been a trend towards less tillage as a greater number of herbicide choices and 

options have become available. As herbicide-resistant crops were offered and deployed, 

increased amounts of conservation tillage began to be practiced, since particularly wide 

spectrum herbicides (such as glyphosate) could be used on soybean. Although herbicidetolerant varieties have become the most widely planted soybean in the U.S. (94% of all 

soybean acreage in 2011 (USDA-ERS, 2011a)), especially Roundup Ready® varieties, 

the developer of the technology still recommends that growers add tillage or other 

herbicides, as appropriate, in their Roundup Ready® soybean production methods 

(Monsanto, 2011). 

Foxtail spp., pigweed, velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti), lambs quarters (Chenopodium 

album), and cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) are common annual weeds in Midwest 

corn and soybean fields. However, growers consider giant ragweed (Ambrosia 

artemisiifolia), lambs quarters, Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), cocklebur, and 

velvetleaf to be the top five most problematic weeds in corn and soybean because of the 

difficulty of controlling these weeds (Nice and Johnson, 2005). For Minnesota soybean, 

yellow foxtail, common ragweed and common lambsquarters are prominent, with winter 

annuals such as mustards, horseweed, and biennials such as wormwood important weeds; 

perennial broadleaf weeds include Canada thistle, common milkweed and hemp dogbane 

which can be difficult to manage in soybean (Potter and Ostlie, 2003). Eighty-six 

common weeds of soybean across three growing regions (Midwest, Mid-South, and 

Eastern Coastal) were identified in another soybean petition for nonregulated status 

(pages 150-151 in (Monsanto, 2010a)). 

Commercial soybean production may require at least one herbicide application for 

effective weed control. Most commonly, weeds are controlled by planting glyphosatetolerant soybean varieties, and applying glyphosate at least once during production. In 

some places glyphosate resistant weeds have been reported, such as pigweed and 

morning glory (Heatherly et al., 2009; Woodruff et al., 2010). These resistant weeds can 

be managed by applying herbicide combinations with different modes of action, as well 

as crop rotation, varying row spacing, and mechanical removal of weeds (Woodruff et al., 

2010). In 2002, it was calculated that 96 percent of all planted soybeans were treated 

with at least one type of herbicide, ranging from 0.04 to 0.71 pounds (lbs) of product per 

acre. In 2006, herbicides were used on 98 percent of soybean acres of surveyed states 

(USDA-NASS, 2007b). Table 5 shows principle herbicides used on soybean in two 

Northern Tier states. Weed species are also discussed in Section 2.4.2, Plant 

Communities. 

 
23 

Table 5. Principal herbicides used in soybean production and percentage of 

acres applied—selected states. 

State 

Herbicide 

Glyphosate 2,4-D Imazathapyr Pendimethalin Clethodim Trifluralin 

Percent of total acres applied 

Wisconsin* 

(2006) 85 11 9 9 -- -- 

Minnesota** 

(2007) 91 -- -- -- 2 2 

Sources: 

* NASS, Wisconsin Field Office (USDA-NASS_Wisconsin-Field-Office, 2009 download). 

** Minnesota Department of Agriculture (MDA, 2009). 

Various other pesticides may also be used for soybean production, including insecticides, 

fungicides, and nematicides. In 2006, insecticides were used on 16 percent of soybean 

acres. The three most common insecticides, lambda-cyhalothrin, chlorpyrifos, and 

esfenvalerate, were applied to 6, 5, and 3 percent of the planted acres, respectively 

(USDA-NASS, 2007b). In addition to these three insecticides, a total of 10 other 

insecticides are recommended for use on soybeans for aphid control (UM, 2011). 

2.2.3 Soybean Seed Production 

Soybean seed is separated into four seed classes: 1) Breeder; 2) Foundation; 3) 

Registered; and 4) Certified (see, e.g., (MCIA, 2009, 2010)). Each class of seed is 

identified to designate the seed generation from the original breeder source (Hartman and 

Kester, 1975). The original seed breeder seed stock is controlled by the developer of the 

variety (Adam, 2005; Hartman and Kester, 1975). The Breeder stock is used to produce 

Foundation seed stock (Adam, 2005). Foundation seed stock, in turn, is used to produce 

Registered seed for distribution to licensees, such as seed companies (Adam, 2005). 

Registered seed is used by seed companies to produce large quantities of Certified seed 

(Adam, 2005; Hartman and Kester, 1975). The Certified (or Select) seed is then sold to 

growers through commercial channels (Adam, 2005; Hartman and Kester, 1975). 

Seed quality (including genetic purity, vigor, and presence of weed seed, seed-borne 

diseases, and inert materials such as dirt) is a major requirement for successful seed crop 

production. If natural variability and environmental effects upon seed production are not 

carefully controlled, the value of a new variety or cultivar may be lost (Hartman and 

Kester, 1975). Genetic purity in commercial seed production is generally regulated 

through a system of seed certification which is intended to ensure that the desired traits in 

the seed are maintained throughout all stages in cultivation (Hartman and Kester, 1975). 

States have developed seed laws and certification agencies to ensure that purchasers who 

received certified seed can be assured that the seed meets established seed quality 

standards (Bradford, 2006). The U.S. Federal Seed Act of 1939 recognizes seed 

certification and official certifying agencies. Implementing regulations further recognize 

land history, field isolation, and varietal purity standards for Foundation, Registered, and 

Certified seed. 
24 

Foundation seed, Registered seed, and Certified seed production is controlled by public 

or private seed certification programs (AOSCA, 2009). Commercially certified soybean 

seed must meet state and Federal seed standards and labeling requirements. Federal Seed 

Act regulations are detailed in 7 CFR 201. State seed certification standards may vary 

slightly from state to state and can be more restrictive than the seed standards of AOSCA 

(Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies) (GCIA, 1988; NCCIA, 2011; Seed 

Certification Department, 2001). The values for certified soybean seed standards from 

AOSCA are as follows (AOSCA, 2009): 

 98% pure seed (minimum); 

 2% inert matter (maximum); 

 0.05% weed seed (maximum; not to exceed 10 per pound (lb)); 

 0.60% total of other crop seeds (maximum); 

 0.5% other varieties (maximum; includes off-colored beans and off-type seeds); 

 0.10% other crop seeds (maximum; not to exceed three per lb); and 

 80% germination and hard seed (minimum). 

In addition to these specific factors, soybean certification standards identify land 

requirements and field practices that must be followed. Soybeans must be grown on land 

on which the previous crop grown was of a different type, certified seed of the same 

variety, or a variety having noticeable characteristic differences. In addition, for every 

200 certified soybean plants, only one off-type or other variety is allowed (AOSCA, 

2009). Certified seed crop is subject to field inspections by certifying agencies at harvest 

and other times in order to observe factors related to seed certification and determine 

genetic purity and identity. Harvested seeds may be inspected and sampled at any time 

(AOSCA, 2009). 

All soybean seed sold may not be officially certified; however, commercial soybean seed 

sold and planted for normal soybean production is produced predominately to meet or 

exceed certified seed standards. 

Seed certification systems should be distinguished from identity preservation systems for 

certain agricultural commodities. Soybean Identity Preservation (IP) refers to a system of 

production, handling, and marketing practices that maintains the integrity and purity of 

specialty crop products (Sundstrom et al., 2002). MON 87769 soybean is expected to be 

handled and marketed within the practices of the certified seed system, and is expected to 

meet all state and federal seed standards and labeling requirements. 

2.2.4 Organic Soybean Production 

In the U.S., only products produced using specific methods and certified under the 

USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) National Organic Program (NOP) 

definition of organic farming can be marketed and labeled as “organic” (USDA-AMS, 

2010). Organic certification is a process-based certification, not a certification of the end 
25 

product; the certification process specifies and audits the methods and procedures by 

which the product is produced. 

In accordance with NOP, an accredited organic certifying agent conducts an annual 

review of the certified operation’s organic system plan and makes on-site inspections of 

the certified operation and its records. Organic growers must maintain records to show 

that production and handling procedures comply with USDA organic standards. 

The NOP regulations preclude the use of excluded methods. The NOP provides the 

following guidance under 7 CFR Section 205.105: 

...to be sold or labeled as “100 percent organic”, “organic” or “made with organic 

(specified ingredients or group(s)),” the product must be produced and handled 

without the use of:... 

(a) Synthetic substances and ingredients,... 

(e) Excluded methods,... 

Excluded methods are then defined at 7 CFR Section 205.2 as: 

A variety of methods used to genetically modify organisms or influence 

their growth and development by means that are not possible under 

natural conditions or processes and are not considered compatible with 

organic production. Such methods include cell fusion, 

microencapsulation and macroencapsulation, and recombinant DNA 

[deoxyribonucleic acid] technology (including gene deletion, gene 

doubling, introducing a foreign gene, and changing the positions of genes 

when achieved by recombinant DNA technology). Such methods do not 

include the use of traditional breeding, conjugation, fermentation, 

hybridization, in vitro fertilization, or tissue culture. 

Organic farming operations, as described by the NOP, are required to have distinct, 

defined boundaries and buffer zones to prevent unintended contact with excluded 

methods from adjoining land that is not under organic management. Organic production 

operations must also develop and maintain an organic production system plan approved 

by their accredited certifying agent. This plan enables the production operation to 

achieve and document compliance with the National Organic Standards, including the 

prohibition on the use of excluded methods (USDA-AMS, 2010). 

Common practices organic growers may use to exclude GE products include planting 

only organic seed, planting earlier or later than neighboring farmers who may be using 

GE crops so that the crops will flower at different times, and employing adequate 

isolation distances between the organic fields and the fields of neighbors to minimize the 

chance that pollen will be carried between the fields (Baier, 2008; Bradford, 2006; 

NCAT, 2003; Sundstrom et al., 2002). 

Although the National Organic Standards prohibit the use of excluded methods, they do 

not require testing of inputs or products for the presence of excluded methods. The 
26 

presence of a detectable residue of a product of excluded methods alone does not 

necessarily constitute a violation of the National Organic Standards (USDA-AMS, 2010). 

The current NOP regulations do not specify an acceptable threshold level for the 

adventitious presence of GE materials in an organic-labeled product. The unintentional 

presence of the products of excluded methods will not affect the status of an organic 

product or operation when the operation has not used excluded methods and has taken 

reasonable steps to avoid contact with the products of excluded methods as detailed in 

their approved organic system plan (Ronald and Fouche, 2006; USDA-AMS, 2010). 

The production of organic soybeans represents between 0.17% and 0.22% of total U.S. 

soybean production (USDA-ERS, 2010d). In 2005 and 2008, 122,217 and 125, 621 acres 

of soybean in the U.S., respectively, were certified organic (USDA-ERS, 2010d). In the 

Northern Tier states for 2008, approximately 50,500 acres were certified organic (Table 

6), which represents less than 0.3% of the total soybean crop in the region (USDA-ERS, 

2010d). Organic soybean markets typically enjoy a market premium offsetting the 

additional production and record-keeping costs associated with this production method. 

Table 6. Certified organic soybean acreage, 2007 and 2008. 

State 2007 

Acreage 

2008 

Acreage 

Percent of total 

U.S. organic 

soybean acreage 

(2008) 

Michigan 11,320 11,251 9.0 

Minnesota 25,518 21,229 17 

North Dakota 3,308 3,773 3.0 

South Dakota 4,531 4,786 3.8 

Wisconsin 8,381 9,369 7.5 

Total Northern Tier states 53,058 50,408 41 

Total U.S. 100,390 125,621 

Source: (USDA-ERS, 2010d). 

2.2.5 Specialty Soybean Production 

Identity Preservation (IP) refers to a system of production, handling, and marketing 

practices that maintains the integrity and purity of specialty crop products (Sundstrom et 

al., 2002). Commodity grains are marketed en masse according to USDA grading 

standards. Specialty crops require some form of segregation or IP to keep these grains 

separate from commodity grains (Elbehri, 2007). This segmentation helps preserve a 

specified purity of the product. With certain specialty crops (e.g., organic or designated 

industrial-uses), IP is required to prevent accidental or unintended commingling. Should 
27 

the IP crop be admixed with a different variety, contracts between growers and 

purchasers define acceptable limits of such admixture. If defined purity is not attained, 

the buyer can reject the crop, and the grower would not receive the premium price 

specified by the contract. Thus, financial penalty encourages the grower to maintain 

standards expected by the buyer and by those users further along in the supply chain. 

Comments submitted in previous environmental assessments have identified issues 

pertaining to management practices designed to prevent accidental or unintended 

commingling of crops. Many of these practices are already well established in the 

soybean industry as part of the crop cultivation practices necessary to maintain IP. The 

need for segregation and IP production systems has increased with the development of 

specialty crops or crops with special output traits, such as high oil corn, high oleic 

sunflower, and low-linolenic soybean (Sundstrom et al., 2002). MON 87769 soybean is 

expected to be handled and marketed within the practices of a Closed Loop IP production 

system (Monsanto, 2010b). 

Specialty Soybean Types 

The U.S. soybean IP production and distribution systems accommodate differences 

between commodity and specialty soybean. Production systems designed prior to the 

introduction of MON 87769 soybean or even prior to the introduction of 

biotechnology-derived soybean allow for production of specialty soybean varieties to 

meet varied customer demands. Although soybeans are primarily a commodity crop, 

there is an existing specialty soybean market. Distinct identity-preserved specialty 

soybean with such traits as clear hilum or high protein have been grown and 

successfully marketed for specific food uses in domestic and export markets for 

many years (Cui et al., 2004). 

Specialty soybeans can be grouped into several broad categories (Monsanto, 2010c; 

UK, 2010) including: 

 non-biotechnology-derived, 

 certified seed, 

 organic food-grade, 

 low saturated fat, 

 clear hilum, 

 tofu, 

 natto, 

 high sucrose, 

 high oleic, 

 low linolenic, and 

 high protein. 

The categories refer to soybean with characteristics such as altered seed composition 

(e.g., low saturated fat, high sucrose, high oleic, low linolenic, and high protein), 
28 

varieties of soybean with unique physical characteristics suited to their specific uses 

(e.g., clear hilum for direct human consumption), or refer to a production process 

(e.g., organic, certified seed). The categories are not meant to be exclusive; for 

example, soybean used to produce natto or tofu may employ organic production 

processes. Moreover, soybeans of all specialty categories are often derived from 

varieties produced according to certified seed production practices. Tofu and 

soymilk produced from the tofu soybean category represent a large segment of the 

specialty soybean market and are produced from unique soybean varieties that have 

clear hilum and large seed size (Lee and Herbek, 2004). Tofu varieties also must be 

high in protein (40% or higher) and low in oil concentration compared with 

commodity soybean. Clear hilum (i.e., the small scar marking the seeds former place 

of attachment to the pod) and other characteristic are required for soybean used in the 

production of other soybean food products consumed directly by humans such as 

natto, soybean sprouts, edamame (vegetable soybean), and soy nuts (Lee and Herbek, 

2004; UK, 2010). 

The majority of these specialty soybean varieties are offered in Maturity Group II 

and early Group III varieties which are adapted to the upper Midwest/Great Plains 

region (Lee and Herbek, 2004). Vistive® soybean with low linolenic traits are 

offered by Asgrow in Maturity Groups 2.0 to 3.6 (Asgrow, 2011). 

Specialty Soybean Production 

Specialty soybean varieties are specified by buyers and end-users of soybean for 

production, and premiums are paid for delivering a product that meets purity and 

quality standards for the soybean variety. Product differentiation and market 

segmentation in the specialty soybean industry includes mechanisms to keep track of 

the soybean (traceability), methods for IP, such as quality assurance processes (e.g., 

ISO 9001-2000 certification), as well as contracts between growers and buyers that 

specify delivery agreements. 

The distinction between the commodity soybean and the specialty soybean involves 

both certified seed production as well as IP of the harvested crop. The majority of 

soybean in the U.S. is cultivated and marketed as a commodity for the oil and protein 

markets (Monsanto, 2010c). The goal of the commodity supply chain is to supply a 

homogenous product to the end user. Although the grower producing soybean for 

this chain may choose from many different varieties for cultivation, the harvested 

soybean is viewed to be the same for all commodity soybean varieties (Monsanto, 

2010c). 

At harvest, the grower either delivers soybean to a handler or stores them on farm for 

later delivery. The commodity soybean is not differentiated for later use. 

Commodity soybean handlers typically have large volume storage capacity, and 

commodity soybean processors crush large volumes of soybean to produce 

homogeneous oil and meal products. The commodity system is designed to 

maximize efficiency at a low profit margin and results in comingling of different 
29 

sources of soybean. The beneficial consequence of mixing soybean in the initial 

crush, increased homogeneity, is also one that does not affect the price received for 

the final product. This production system has been in place in the U.S. since the 

production of soybean began in earnest in the 1960s (Sonka et al., 2004). 

The specialty soybean market produces soybeans that have specific physical or chemical 

characteristics to meet specific buyer requirements. As a result of these special needs, a 

separate specialty soybean channel has developed for the specialty soybean product that 

involves much smaller volumes than commodity soybean (Smyth and Phillips, 2002; 

Sonka et al., 2004). Specialty soybean varieties are produced on approximately 12% of 

the U.S. soybean acreage and, according to the Midwest Shippers Association (MSA, 

2009), this acreage could grow to over 25% of the crop acreage in certain states within 

the next decade. In Iowa, 13.5% of soybean acres were planted to specialty soybean, and 

about half of these acres were either non-GE crops or for seed production (Goldsmith et 

al., 2008). Fehr (2007) reported that in 2006, about 700,000 acres in the U.S. were 

planted to low and ultralow linolenic acid varieties (Fehr, 2007). 

The specialty soybean supply chain typically start with a firm that contracts production of 

a specific variety and sets standards for quality of the harvested soybean (Lee and 

Herbek, 2004). In return, growers receive a premium over the price paid for commodity 

soybean. Growers may store harvested soybean on farm or deliver the product directly to 

an approved processor or to special containers for international shipment. 

The IP practices used in specialty soybean production require that all equipment and 

storage facilities for specialty soybean must be clean of seed from other soybean 

varieties or plants, dirt, pathogens, and other foreign material (Hanna and Jarboe, 

2005). Some soybean contracts may require a special inspection of the handling and 

storage facilities. The specialty soybean for soybean foods may require special 

harvesting equipment because some of these soybeans are harvested before full 

maturity (e.g., edamame or vegetable soybean) (Ernst and McNulty, 2011 

download). 

For specialty soybean, weed control is extremely important in order to maintain a 

high yield potential. Weeds, such as nightshade (Solanum nigrum), can stain 

harvested soybean, which is particularly undesirable in food-grade soybean (TCM, 

2008)

Soybean Varieties with Altered Fatty Acids 

The genetic changes in soybeans that resulted in altered soybean oil composition have 

been achieved by both conventional and genetic engineering techniques. Varieties were 

improved conventionally by genetic selection and mutagenesis techniques. Among the 

cultivars currently grown for commercial production are those for reduced palmitic and 

linolenic acids (Fehr, 2007; Goldsmith et al., 2008). Conventional soybean breeders also 

have obtained varieties with greater than 70% oleic acid by selection and intercrossing 

(Alt et al., 2005). 
30 

Nontransgenic lines include those which express low linolenic acid, an oil trait which 

does not require trans-hydrogenation to improve oil properties and increase product 

stability. Asoyia formerly offered an ultralow linolenic variety at 1% of fatty acids 

(Qualisoy, 2011; Wilkes, 2008) and Iowa State has made some lines available to growers 

(http://www.notrans.iastate.edu/). Low saturated fat soybeans are also available from 

Iowa Natural (1% linolenic, 7% saturated fats of total oil) (American Heart Association, 

2011; NYC-DOH, 2009). Low linolenic soybeans with GE herbicide tolerance are 

marketed by Monsanto (‘Vistive’) and Pioneer (‘Plenish’) seed companies, with linolenic 

acid expressed at less than 3%. The Vistive line was planted on 1.5 million acres in 2008 

(Monsanto, 2008). 

Genetic engineering techniques have been used to increase oleic acid composition in 

soybean to near 80%, but the first altered fatty acid variety no longer subject to the 

regulatory requirements of 7 CFR part 340 or the plant pest provisions of the Plant 

Protection Act (APHIS Petition # 97-008-01p (USDA-APHIS, 1997)) has not been 

planted on a large commercial scale since 2005 because the developer changed its market 

strategy. This line is no longer commercially available. Another GE high oleic acid 

variety, DP-304423-1 with a high oleic phenotype conferred by introduction of the 

soybean omega-6 desaturase gene 1 (fad2-1 gene) was no longer subject to the regulatory 

requirements of 7 CFR part 340 or the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act, 

but will not be released commercially until 2012 (Plenish (Pioneer Hi-Bred, 2011)). 

Other soybean with altered fatty acids have also been petitioned for non-regulated status 

(MON 87705 high oleic soybean). 

Non-herbicide Tolerant Soybean 

In the US, non-herbicide tolerant soybean varieties (conventional, nontransgenic) in the 

U.S. were planted on approximately 8% of the total soybean acres in 2008 (FernandezCornejo et al., 2002), and many of these are specialty soybeans (Lee and Herbek, 2004). 

Specialty soybean varieties include tofu, natto, bean sprouts, edamame, soynuts, as well 

as those with unique chemical identities, such as those with modified fatty acid profiles, 

high protein or high sucrose content. Farm production of these soybeans is essentially 

the same as for conventional soybeans, although for specific varieties, there may be less 

tolerance for accidental admixture with weed seeds such as nightshade and pokeweed 

seeds which can stain the soybean seed (Lee and Herbek, 2004). 

2.3 Physical Environment 

2.3.1 Water Resources 

The typical amount of water required for a high-yielding soybean crop is approximately 

20 inches during the growing season (Hoeft et al., 2000). Annual state-wide precipitation 

data collected for the 5-state region where MON 87769 soybean may be grown (i.e., 

North and South Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan) ranges from 

approximately 18 to 33 inches (NOAA, 2011 download). While normal climatic 

conditions may provide sufficient water to produce a soybean crop, precipitation may 
31 

vary across a state and from year to year and irrigation may be needed to supplement 

precipitation amounts. Irrigation of soybean acres, according to data from the USDA 

2007 Census of Agriculture, is used on 4.6 to 15% of soybean acres in the five-state 

region where MON 87769 soybean may be cultivated (USDA-NASS, 2007c, 2010 ). In 

some limited areas, such as central Minnesota, soybean is usually produced under 

irrigated conditions (deJensen et al, 2004), and this may be a consequence of the soil 

characteristics in specific areas. Soybean acres that are irrigated are a small portion of 

total soybean acres, much less than those acres irrigated for corn (Table 7) (USDANASS, 2007c).

Table 7. Irrigation of soybean acres in Northern Tier states. 

State 

Harvested acresa Irrigated harvested 

acresb,c

Percent 

of 

soybean 

acres 

irrigatedc

All crops Soybeans All crops Soybeans 

Michigan 6,859,081 1,715,427 1,434,358 66,556 4.6 

Minnesota 19,267,018 6,273,919 1,416,247 92,347 6.5 

North 

Dakota 

22,035,717 3,073,981 233,171 12,513 5.4 

South 

Dakota 

15,278,709 3,222,872 358,807 52,661 15 

Wisconsin 8,884,628 1,363,124 373,680 24,855 6.6 

United States 309,607,601 63,915,821 86,529,391 2,175,069 2.5 

a. Table 1, State Summary Highlights: 2007 (USDA-NASS, 2009) 

b. Source: Soybean Irrigated Harvested Acres: Table 33, 2007 Census of Agriculture – State Data (USDA-NASS, 

2007c) 

c. Total acres from (USDA-NASS, 2007c). 

In most states, irrigation water comes predominantly from groundwater sources, with in 

comparatively little derived from surface water sources (Table 8). 

 
32 

Table 8. Water sources used for irrigation of soybean acres in Northern Tier states. 

State 

Irrigated 

harvested 

soybean acresa

Water Sourcea

Acres irrigated 

with groundwater 

from wells 

 (% of total) 

Acres irrigated 

with on-farm 

surface water 

(% of total) 

Acres irrigated 

with water from 

off-farm suppliers 

(% of total) 

Michigan 73,986 46,851 (63) 26,155 (35) 1,220 (2) 

Minnesota 100,513 100,076 (99) 3,489 (3) -- (NA) 

North Dakota 18,939 15,019 (79) 1,802 (10) 2,738 (14) 

South Dakota 79,296 57,533 (72) 5,420 (7) 16,733 

Wisconsin ND (NA) ND (NA) ND (NA) ND (NA) 

United States 7,044,546 6,448,846 619,824 136,708 

Source: 

a. Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey 2008, Table 29 (USDA-NASS, 2010b). 

Notes: 

Some farms may obtain water from multiple sources. 

-- – No irrigation 

NA – Not applicable 

ND – No data available. 

Agricultural non-point source (NPS) pollution is the primary source of discharge 

pollutants to rivers and lakes and a major contributor to groundwater contamination. 

Management practices that contribute to NPS pollution include the type of crop 

cultivated, plowing and tillage, and the application of pesticides, herbicides, and 

fertilizers. Agricultural pollutants released by soil erosion include sediments, fertilizers, 

and pesticides that are introduced to area lakes and streams when they are carried off of 

fields by rain or irrigation waters (US-EPA, 2005). Excess sediment can directly affect 

fish and other wildlife mortality and reduce the amount of light penetration into a body of 

water. Indirectly, soil erosion-mediated sedimentation can increase fertilizer runoff, and 

facilitate algal blooms and oxygen depletion in a body of water (US-EPA, 2005). 

Agriculture may contribute to several types of chemicals found in water resources. These 

include nitrogen and phosphorus from applied fertilizers, which, when present at high 

concentrations, may lead to eutrophication of surface water, resulting in changes in 

dissolved oxygen concentrations and frequent algal blooms (Carpenter et al., 1998). 

Other chemicals found in surface water runoff may include various pesticides (both 

herbicides and insecticides) which, at high concentrations, may impact humans, plants 

and animals that are exposed to the affected water (Domagalski et al., 2008; Vogel et al., 

2008). Some pesticides used on soybeans were detected by Vogel et al. (2008) in 

rainwater, such as chlorpyrifos (64% of samples in a four state pattern). In addition to 

direct impacts to surface water, agricultural chemicals may eventually impact 

groundwater when transported by infiltrating surface or irrigation water. Irrigation with 

locally pumped water tends to reduce transport of chemicals in ground water because it 

avoids connecting streams with groundwater (Domagalski et al., 2008). 
33 

Ground water and aquifers may be impacted by agricultural chemicals via infiltration as 

well. In areas where soybean and corn are grown in rotation, such as Nebraska, and 

where ground water is a principle source of water for human consumption, this can be a 

critical issue (Stanton et al., 2007). In other areas, surface water movement of 

contaminants is at issue, and agricultural tile drainage systems have been shown to be a 

source of nitrate entering streams and rivers (Randall and Mulla, 2001). In areas where 

water retention in fields is high, periodically impeding crop production, such subsurface 

drainage systems are commonly employed (Hoeft et al., 2000). 

Conservation tillage and no-till practice have been shown to minimize surface water 

runoff and soil erosion, and as a result, help reduce the effects of nutrient runoff on water 

resources. By improving soil quality, the consequent increase in soil organic matter 

promotes the binding of nutrients, as well as pesticides and herbicides, to soil and 

prevents their loss to surface waters and groundwater from runoff, erosion, and leaching 

(Leep et al., 2003). 

2.3.2 Soil Quality 

Arable land supports a rich and complex community of below-ground microorganisms 

and arthropods. The interaction between the below-ground community, plant root suture, 

and organic residues in the soil is central to a variety of dynamic soil ecological 

processes, including the decomposition of organic material, subsequent nutrient cycling 

and release, and the associated maintenance of soil structure and composition. 

Soil Type 

Soil texture and structure are key components determining water availability in soils 

which, in turn, affects soybean root depth and density. Soybeans are grown on a variety 

of soil types, ranging from small particles (clay), medium particles (silt), and large 

particles (sand). Silt loam particles’ medium size, good aeration, fertility, high waterholding capacity and abundance of organic matter make it the ideal soil for soybean 

cultivation (Hoeft et al., 2000). As medium-textured soils are able to hold more available 

water, the soybean roots in medium textured soils are denser and extend to a typical depth 

of 1.2 meters. By contrast, soils that are more compact (e.g., clayey soils) hold less water 

and, as a result, the soybean plant root mass is less dense and shallower. The 

disadvantages of clay soils include their tendency to clump and impede drainage when 

tilled at too low or too high moisture levels, leading to less aeration and a tendency 

toward erosion (Hoeft et al., 2000). The ideal pH for soybean growth is 6.0, with yield 

declining at a pH less than or equal to 5.8 (Heatherly et al., 2009; Hoeft et al., 2000) 

The soils found in the Northern Tier states are of varying types but predominately 

Mollisols and Alfisols. Soil surface layers of Mollisols are generally thick and dark and 

are among some of the most important soil types in both world and U.S. agriculture 

(McDaniel, 2011). Alfisols may typically have a layer of clay beneath a surface layer of 

relatively high fertility (McDaniel, 2011; Soil Survey Staff, 1999, 2010; US-EPA, 2009). 

Additionally, another type of soils found in the five states of interest are Vertisols which 
34 

are clay soils that expand when wet and shrink with cracking when drying (Soil Survey 

Staff, 1999). Also, other soils present in this region include Entisols, many of which are 

sandy or have very shallow surface layers, and Histosols, having high organic material in 

upper layers, and which overlay rock, cinders or pumice. 

Soil Disturbance/Degradation 

Cultivation of soybean directly impacts the qualitative and quantitative attributes of soil. 

For example, conventional tillage and mechanized harvesting machinery may disturb and 

expose the top soil surface layer, leaving the land prone to degradation. In turn, 

degradation of soil structure and composition may lead to decreased water retention, a 

decrease in soil carbon aggregation and net positive carbon sequestration, and increased 

emission of radiatively-active gases that contribute to the greenhouse effect (e.g., carbon 

dioxide (CO2) and nitrous oxide (N2O)) (Lal and Bruce, 1999; US-EPA, 2010a). 

Additionally, land that is prone to degradation is also more likely to negatively affect 

water resource quality and communities of organisms dependent on those water 

resources. 

Soil Biota 

Mutualistic relationships with beneficial microorganisms are essential to soybean growth. 

Being a legume plant, the soybean plant fixes a significant portion of its own nitrogen 

through the symbiotic relationship with the nitrogen-fixing Bradyrhizobia bacteria 

(Bradyrhizobium japonicum) that live in soybean root nodules (Hoeft et al., 2000). The 

soybean root nodules contain colonies of bacteria which take gaseous nitrogen from the 

atmosphere and fix it in forms easily used by the soybean plant. Because the nitrogenfixing bacteria are not native to U.S. soils and would not normally be found in these soils, 

soybeans are frequently inoculated with these bacteria prior to planting, especially if 

soybean has not been grown in a field for three to five years (Pedersen, 2007). 

In addition to Rhizobium, beneficial microorganisms to the soybean plant include 

mycorrhizal fungi that attach to soybean roots and extend hyphae deep into the soil, 

effectively increasing soybean access to nutrients and water (Purves et al., 2004). In 

addition to increasing soybean access to water and nutrients, mycorrhizal hyphae also 

facilitates pore creation in soil through particle aggregation, an important effect in clay 

soils that do not aerate well (Heatherly and Hodges, 1999). 

Both Rhizobium and mycorrhizae aid plant survival during drought. Mycorrhizalcolonized non-irrigated soybeans have shown a 10 percent increase in yield compared to 

non-colonized non-irrigated soybeans during a drought period. These two mutualistic 

symbioses have been shown to occur concurrently, with mycorrhizae having a positive 

impact on Rhizobium nodulation and the nitrogen-fixing activity of nodules present on 

the soybean plant. These soybean plants also provided a greater yield (Heatherly and 

Hodges, 1999). 
35 

2.3.3 Air Quality 

Agricultural Air Pollutants and Emissions Sources 

Agricultural impacts on air quality can be measured by concentrations of specific air 

pollutants, such as the Clean Air Act (CAA) National Ambient Air Quality Standards 

(NAAQS) criteria pollutants, greenhouse gases (GHGs), volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs), pesticides, odors, and airborne allergens. The seven NAAQS criteria pollutants 

are carbon monoxide (CO), lead, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), particulate matter between a 

nominal 2.5 and 10 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter (PM10), particulate matter less 

than a nominal 2.5 micrometers in aerodynamic diameter (PM2.5), ozone (O3), and sulfur 

dioxide (SO2) (US-EPA, 2010c). The main GHGs that enter the atmosphere because of 

agricultural activities include: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), and nitrous oxide 

(N2O). In addition to CO2, ammonia is also another trace gas from agriculture (Krupa et 

al., 2006). 

Emissions from crop agriculture can be broken down into two main categories 

emissions related to working fields, such as dust and equipment emissions, and emissions 

from the soil and plants. Emissions released from agricultural equipment (e.g., irrigation 

pumps and tractors) include CO, nitrogen oxides, reactive organic gases, particulate 

matter, and sulfur oxides (US-EPA, 2010b). Agriculture activities (e.g., field preparation, 

planting, and harvesting) may generate dust plumes (PM10 and PM2.5) (Holmén et al., 

2006). For example, peak levels of particulate concentrations coincide with the peak 

agricultural harvest season in California’s Central Valley (Giles et al., 2006). 

Primary agricultural air emission sources of other pollutants include soil particulates 

associated with tillage; smoke from agricultural burning, pesticide drift from spraying; 

and aerial application of pesticides which all may cause air quality impacts by drift and 

diffusion. Atmospheric wet and dry deposition of nitrogen, mineral nutrients, and 

organic compounds to cropping systems can have feedback effects on trace gas emissions 

from fields (Krupa et al., 2006). Agricultural pesticides may also enter the atmosphere 

through volatilization from soil and plant surfaces and through wind erosion and can be 

returned to the surface through precipitation or dry deposition processes (Vogel et al., 

2008). 

Primary agricultural air emission sources of GHGs include: CO2 from agricultural 

burning; vehicle exhaust associated with equipment used in tillage and harvest; and N2O 

emissions from the use of nitrogen fertilizer (Aneja et al., 2009; Hoeft et al., 2000; USEPA, 2010a; USDA-NRCS, 2006a). Agriculture, including land-use changes for 

farming, is responsible for an estimated 17 to 32 percent of all human-induced GHG 

emissions. Herro (Herro, 2008) proposes that if agriculture practices were modified, 

significant reductions in the release of GHGs would be expected. Compliance and 

enforcement of emission rules may be regulated at state, local, and federal levels, but for 

most GHGs there are no applicable regulations of these gases arising from agricultural 

burning. 
36 

Agricultural burning generates smoke that consists of particulate matter, including a 

complex mixture of carbon, tars, liquids, and different gases that are harmful to the 

human environment (US-EPA, 2011a) The major pollutants from burning on natural 

lands are particulates, carbon monoxide, and volatile organics. Nitrogen oxides are 

emitted at rates of from 1 to 4 grams per kilogram (g/kg) burned, depending on 

combustion temperatures (US-EPA, 2011a) 

Burning of soybean crops is usually not recommended by State Extension Services, but 

burning of corn preceding a corn crop in a corn-soybean rotation is sometimes indicated 

(Minnesota (Rehm, 2009); North Dakota, (Franzen and Nowatzki, 2009)). More likely, 

agricultural fires in soybean acreage occur as accidental events in hot and dry fall 

conditions (Sawyer, 2000). These fires are more likely to occur in corn, but fires in 

rotation crops such as wheat and soybean may also occur (Gelderman, 2009). Field 

burning of corn produces particulate matter of 11.7 g/kg PM2.5, defined by EPA as those 

fine particles ≤ 2.5 micrometers (μm) in diameter (Li et al., 2007). Within the affected 

area for this EA, there are only two non-attainment areas for PM2.5: three-county 

Milwaukee-Racine, WI area and the seven-county Detroit-Ann Arbor, MI area (US-EPA, 

2011b). 

Greenhouse Gases 

Primary agricultural air emission sources of GHG include: CO2 from agricultural 

burning; vehicle exhaust associated with equipment used in tillage and harvest; and 

nitrous oxide emissions from the use of nitrogen fertilizer (Aneja et al., 2009; Hoeft et al., 

2000; US-EPA, 2010a; USDA-NRCS, 2006a). Agriculture, including land-use changes 

for farming, is responsible for an estimated 6% of all human-induced greenhouse gas 

(GHG) emissions in the U.S. (US-EPA, 2010a). Agricultural emissions sources of GHGs 

include: 

 Livestock are responsible for the largest fraction of methane emissions (80% of 

total methane via enteric fermentation and manure management) (US-EPA, 

2010a). 

 Agricultural equipment (e.g., irrigation pumps and tractors) release carbon 

monoxide, nitrogen oxides, reactive organic gases, particulate matter, and sulfur 

oxides (US-EPA, 2010a). 

 Agricultural soil management practices, including nitrogen-based fertilizer 

application and cropping practices, are the largest source of U.S. N2O emissions. 

Croplands account for 69% of the total N2O emissions attributable to agricultural 

land uses (US-EPA, 2010a). 

 Carbon dioxide (CO2) is also a significant GHG gas associated with several 

agricultural practices, including classes of crops, location and soil types 

associated with the practices, and energy consumption (Cole et al., 1997; USEPA, 2010a). 
37 

GHG may be indirectly affected by the class of crop planted and soil types; trees, grasses 

and field crops each play a slightly different role in the global cycle of GHG (Cole et al., 

1997; Freibauer et al., 2004; US-EPA, 2010a). For example, emissions of nitrous oxide, 

produced naturally in soils through microbial nitrification and denitrification, can be 

dramatically influenced by fertilization, introduction of grazing animals, cultivation of 

nitrogen-fixing crops and forage, retention of crop residues (i.e., no-till conservation), 

irrigation, and fallowing of land (US-EPA, 2010a). These same agricultural practices can 

influence the decomposition of carbon-containing organic matter sequestered in soil, 

resulting in conversion to carbon dioxide loss to the atmosphere (US-EPA, 2010a). 

Conversion of cropland to pasture results in an increase in carbon and nitrogen 

sequestration in soils (US-EPA, 2010a). 

The EPA has also identified regional differences in GHG emissions associated with 

agricultural practices on different soil types, with high mineral content soils responding 

to GHG differently than high-organic content soils (US-EPA, 2010a). Mineral soils 

contain from 1 to 6% organic carbon by weight; conversion of such soils from their 

native state to agricultural uses can cause as much as 50% of the natural organic carbon 

to decompose and be released to the atmosphere (US-EPA, 2010a). In contrast, organic 

soils may contain as much as 20% carbon by weight (US-EPA, 2010a). When such 

organic soils are prepared for agricultural use, the soils are aerated, accelerating 

decomposition and release of CO2 to the atmosphere (US-EPA, 2010a). 

Tillage, Fertilization and Greenhouse Gases. Tillage contributes to the release of GHG 

because of the loss of CO2 to the atmosphere and the exposure and oxidation of soil 

organic matter (Baker et al., 2005). Herbicide-tolerant crops may encourage increases in 

the adoption of conservation tillage programs whose consequences may include 

reductions of many of these emission concerns. Special conservation tillage field 

equipment can often perform the equivalent functions of several standard implements, 

reducing the necessity for multiple passes through the field. Implementing CT practices 

can lead to both economic and production quality benefits, as well as having positive 

environmental impacts (USDA-NRCS, 2006b). Tillage contributes to the release of GHG 

because carbon is lost as CO2 to the atmosphere, and because of exposure and then 

oxidation of soil organic matter (Baker et al., 2005). 

GHGs and Nitrogen Fertilizer. Nitrous oxide emissions are released following use of 

nitrogen fertilizer and the action of soil microbes on soil constituents. Massive overuse 

of fertilizers is the biggest contributor to these emissions within the industry; more than 

half of all fertilizer applied to fields ends up in the atmosphere or local waterways each 

year. The equivalent of 2.1 billion tons of carbon dioxide in the form of nitrous oxide, a 

GHG almost 300 times more potent than CO2, is emitted because of fertilizer use (Herro, 

2008). 

Because soybean is able to fix atmospheric nitrogen by means of symbiotic nodulating 

bacteria, nitrogen fertilization is often not indicated as a good management practice 

(Rehm et al., 2001; Staton and Warncke, 2009). Less than 40% of soybean acres across 
38 

the U.S. receive fertilizer application, which is appreciably lower than other major crops, 

such as corn and cotton (USDA-ERS, 2010e). Considering these observations and 

recommendations, soybean production is most likely not a large contributor to GHG 

emission through nitrogen fertilizer application. 

Pesticide Application 

Aerial application of pesticides may cause impacts from drift and diffusion. Pesticides 

may volatilize after application to soil or plant surfaces and move following wind erosion 

(Vogel et al., 2008). Airborne chemicals may partition between gas and particle phase, 

be transported through wind, and then be deposited again by rainfall or particulate 

settling. Vogel et al.(Vogel et al., 2008) from measurements of pesticide content in 4 

states estimate that 2% of all applied agricultural chemicals are re-deposited via rainfall. 

The persistence of pesticides in the atmosphere may be an air quality issue. Air 

concentrations of pesticides are typically greatest within the immediate treatment area, 

although, evidence also indicates that airborne chemicals may be detected at distances 

further from treated fields. When rainwater is sampled, pesticides that were used beyond 

the local watershed, that is, from the intermediate and larger watersheds may be well 

represented among the analytes (Vogel et al., 2008). Whether pesticides are applied by 

ground or aerial spraying or by mechanical application to the plant surface, chemicals 

move to their intended and unintended targets through air, moving as droplets, dry 

particles or vapors (Carlsen et al., 2006 ; Ravier et al., 2005). The distance traveled 

depends upon their chemical and physical nature, method of application, and the 

atmospheric conditions at time of treatment. All these influence their concentration and 

ultimate fate (Carlsen et al., 2006 ). 

2.3.4 Climate Change 

Climate change represents a statistical change in climate conditions, and may be 

measured across both time and geographic space. U.S. agriculture may affect climate 

change through various facets of the crop cultivation process. Combustion of fossil fuels 

in mechanized farm equipment, fertilizer application, and decomposition of agricultural 

waste products may all contribute GHGs to the atmosphere (Aneja et al., 2009). GHGs 

collectively function as retainers of solar radiation, and agricultural related activities are 

recognized as both direct (e.g., exhaust from equipment) and indirect (e.g., agriculturalrelated soil disturbance) sources of CO2, CH4, and N2O (US-EPA, 2010a) 

As summarized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPPC) (Technical 

Summary, Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis (IPCC, 2007)), the atmospheric 

persistence of long-lived GHGs, including CO2, CH4, and NO2, may lead to extensive 

climate change because of altered cycling between atmosphere, ocean and land and 

radiative forcing causing climate change (IPCC, 2007). The U.S. agricultural sector is 

identified as the second largest contributor to GHG emissions, ranking only behind the 

energy sector (i.e., electricity production, transportation, and related activities) (US-EPA, 

2010a). 
39 

Agricultural crop commodities may also affect dynamic geophysical soil processes, such 

as carbon turnover and sequestration, through tillage and cropping system practices. In 

general, reduced/conservation tillage practices favor more stable and increased carbon 

sequestration in the agro-environment (Lal, 2011). The impacts of GE crop varieties on 

climate change are most likely dependent on the selected cropping systems and 

production practices, geographic distribution of activities, and individual grower 

decisions. 

Climate Change Impacts on Crop Production 

Climate change may also affect agricultural crop production. These potential impacts on 

the agro-environment and individual crops may be direct, including changing patterns in 

precipitation, temperature, and duration of growing season, or may cause indirect impacts 

influencing weed and pest pressure (Hatfield et al., 2011a; Rosenzweig et al., 2002). 

In response to climate change, the current range of weeds and pests of agriculture is 

expected to change. In response to these new ranges, current agricultural practices may 

be required to change (IPCC, 2007). Climate change may potentially provide a positive 

impact to agriculture. The IPCC predicts that potential climate change in North America 

may result in an increase in crop yield by 5 to 20% for this century (IPCC, 2007). 

However, this positive impact will not be observed across all growing regions. The IPCC 

report notes that certain regions of the U.S. will be negatively impacted because available 

water resources may be substantially reduced. Note that the extent of climate change 

effects on agriculture is highly speculative. Nevertheless, North American production is 

expected to adapt to climate change impacts with improved cultivars and responsive farm 

management (IPCC, 2007). 

Climate Change Impacts on Soybean Production 

A number of impacts of increased temperature have been inferred from models of climate 

change. More than one model suggests that soybean yields will decline in the U.S., 

mediated by increased temperature and declining precipitation during key periods of the 

growing season (Goldblum, 2009). Besides yield penalties, increased temperatures could 

result in early season flooding and increased precipitation (which in past seasons may 

either delay planting, or prevent harvest). The changes in precipitation patterns would 

lead to crop losses, including soybean, of up to 30% in 2030 and 65% in 2090 

(Rosenzweig et al., 2002). Other modeling efforts have suggested that before the end of 

the century, yields could be decreased 30 to 46%, under the slowest warming scenario, 

and up to 63 to 82% under a rapid warming scenario (Schlenker and Roberts, 2009). 

The cited models suggest that impacts of climate change (specifically, an overall deficit 

in total soybean yield) would exert pressure for land allocations for new soybean 

planting. However, the analysis by Mori et al. (Mori et al., 2010) suggests that land use 

conversion in the U.S. to mitigate the need for additional soybean would be unlikely. 

Mori et al. (Mori et al., 2010) also suggests that it would be Brazil, China and South 

America that would likely have large conversions to soybean production in response to 
40 

lower production efficiencies elsewhere in the world. However, some areas of the U.S. 

that may experience decreased soybean yield may show small levels of increased 

production, such as the Midwest states (+1.7%), because of increased CO2 stimulating 

plant growth and cultivars with improved water use efficiency (Hatfield et al., 2011b). 

Future impacts might be mitigated by selection of varieties that showed decreased 

responses to the changed climate. As Betzelberger et al. (Betzelberger et al., 2010) note, 

cultivar sensitivity to parameters such as increased ozone can have substantial deleterious 

impacts on soybean yield as well. Some tropical soybean is less susceptible than other 

varieties to the increased O3 that may typify future environmental concentrations, and the 

differences are measurable in several parameters of total biomass, crop yield and certain 

biochemical markers (Singh et al., 2010). In addition, if progress in developing drought 

resistant crops is maintained, additional soybean lines may be produced that will resist 

decreased precipitation expected over some U.S. soybean growing areas. Finally, use of 

different maturity group soybean with higher yield potential may be possible, especially 

if early spring occurs and the growing season is lengthened, and this and other 

management strategies could recover possible yield losses (Kucharik, 2008). From an 

analysis (Goldblum, 2009) of climate change impacts on yield of corn and soybean, 

timing of increased hot weather and of precipitation can cause county by county 

differences within a single state. As has been shown in such an analysis in Wisconsin, 

however, increased warming in spring and fall (producing increased precipitation) versus 

increased temperature in summer (along with drought) may produce opposite impacts on 

soybean yield, and empirical evidence is needed to establish overall impacts of the 

anticipated variations (Kucharik, 2008). 

2.4 Biological Resources 

This section provides a summary of the biological environment and includes an overview 

of animals, plants, gene transfer, weeds and weediness, microorganisms, and biodiversity. 

This summary provides the foundation to assess the potential impact to plant and animal 

communities, the potential for gene movement, and the potential for human health 

impacts. 

2.4.1 Animal Communities 

Deer and groundhogs feed on soybean and cause soybean damage, while Eastern 

cottontail, raccoon, Canada geese, squirrels, other rodents (such as ground squirrel) also 

feed on soybean but their damage is of less importance (MacGowan et al., 2006). Deer 

in large numbers, by browsing in soybean fields for forage, may significantly damage 

soybean in site specific circumstances, and in some areas, growers may be issued licenses 

to kill deer outside the regular hunting season to reduce crop damage (Berk A, 2008; 

Garrison and Lewis, 1987). Deer may also feed on seed left after harvest. Other animals 

that feed primarily on soybean include seed-feeding insects and rodents found in 

agricultural fields. Rodents, such as mice or squirrels, may seasonally feed exclusively 

on soybean seeds. Thus, these animals may have a diet containing significant amounts of 
41 

soybean seeds. Migratory birds feed on spilled soybean following crop harvest (Galle et 

al., 2009) although more birds fed on nearby corn and sunflower seed fields. As many as 

28 desirable bird species, as well as another five which can be crop pests in sunflower, 

have been identified as resident in soybean and corn fields in the Dakotas (Gamble et al., 

2002). 

The biodiversity of insect predators of a soybean aphid in soybean fields have been 

studied in four Northern Tier states, and relative to corn and soybean, environments with 

abundances of crop and non-crop plants provided greater “biocontrol services” than does 

soybean (Gardiner et al., 2009). Total insect diversity in GE glyphosate tolerant soybean 

has been compared to that in non-GE soybean, and although mostly similar, some slight 

decreases of insect diversity and numbers were observed between rows of soybean, but 

attributed to reduced abundance of weeds in glyphosate treated plots (Imura et al., 2010). 

Buckelew et al. (Buckelew et al., 2000) also conclude that insect abundance in soybean is 

more related to effectiveness of weed suppression, rather than use of glyphosate 

herbicide. 

Crop pest insects are considered less problematic than weeds in U.S. soybean production; 

nevertheless, insect injury can impact yield, plant maturity, and seed quality. 

Consequently, insect pests are managed during the growth and development of soybean 

to enhance soybean yield (Aref and Pike, 1998; Higley and Boethel, 1994). Insect injury 

in soybean seldom reaches levels that cause significant economic loss, as indicated by the 

low percentage (14%) of soybean acreage that receives an insecticide treatment(USDANASS, 2006). 

2.4.2 Plant Communities 

Soybean production systems in agriculture (i.e., the combination of management 

practices) are host to many plant species. The environment surrounding a soybean field 

varies in plant composition depending on the region. In certain areas, soybean fields may 

be bordered by other soybean varieties, corn, or other crops. In addition, fields may also 

be surrounded by woodlands and/or pasture/grassland areas, as well as aquatic 

environments. Therefore, the types of vegetation, including the variety of weeds, 

adjacent to a soybean field depend on the area where the soybean is planted. 

Annual weeds are perceived to be the greatest pest problem in soybean production, 

followed by perennial weeds (Aref and Pike, 1998). Weed control in soybean is essential 

to optimizing yields. Weeds compete with soybean for light, nutrients, and soil moisture. 

Weeds can harbor insects and diseases, and also can interfere with harvest, causing extra 

wear on harvest equipment (Loux et al., 2008). The primary factors affecting soybean 

yield loss from weed competition are the weed species, weed density, and the duration of 

the competition. When weeds are left to compete with soybean for the entire growing 

season, yield losses can exceed 75% (Dalley et al., 2001). 

Generally, the effects of competition increase with increasing weed density (Monsanto, 

2010c). The time period that weeds compete with the soybean crop influences the level 
42 

of yield loss. The later the weeds emerge, the less impact the weeds will have on yield. 

Soybean plants withstand early-season weed competition longer than corn as the soybean 

canopy closes earlier in soybean than in corn (Mallory-Smith and Zapiola, 2008). The 

extent of canopy closure regulates the availability of light to weeds and other plants that 

grow below the soybean. In addition, canopy closure occurs much sooner when soybean 

is drilled or planted in narrow rows. 

Eighty-six common weeds of soybean across three growing regions were identified in 

another soybean petition for nonregulated status ((Monsanto, 2010c) Tables XI-5 and XI6). Foxtail spp., pigweed, velvetleaf (Abutilon theophrasti), lambs quarters 

(Chenopodium album), and cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium) are common annual weeds 

in Midwest corn and soybean fields. However, growers consider giant ragweed 

(Ambrosia artemisiifolia), lambs quarters, Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense), cocklebur, 

and velvetleaf to be the top five most problematic weeds in corn and soybean because of 

the difficulty to control these weeds (Nice and Johnson, 2005). 

Crop rotations and environment have a significant impact on the adaptation and 

occurrence of weeds in soybean. Cultural and mechanical weed control practices are 

important components of an effective weed management program (Loux et al., 2008). 

Crop rotation, narrow row spacing, and planting date are a few of the crop management 

practices that are implemented to provide the crop with a competitive edge over weeds 

(Monsanto, 2010c). Although the primary purpose of tillage is for seedbed preparation, 

tillage is still used to supplement weed control with selective herbicides in soybean 

production. 

Herbicides provide effective and economical control of weeds in soybean. 

Approximately 98% of the soybean acreage received an herbicide application in 2006, 

indicating the importance of weed control in maximizing soybean yield (USDA-NASS, 

2007b). Herbicide-tolerant soybean was introduced to provide growers with additional 

options to improve crop safety and/or improve weed control. In 2011, herbicide-tolerant 

soybean varieties represented 94 percent of planted soybeans in the U.S. (USDA-ERS, 

2011a). The Roundup Ready® soybean system, i.e., planting Roundup Ready® soybean 

and applying glyphosate in crop, has become the standard weed control program in U.S. 

soybean production. In the 2006 crop year, for the surveyed states, 92 percent of the 

planted soybean acres were treated with glyphosate (USDA-NASS, 2007b). 

2.4.3 Gene Flow and Weediness 

Gene flow has been defined as the “incorporation of genes into the gene pool of one 

population from one or more populations” (Stewart, 2008). Gene flow is a basic 

biological process in plant evolution and in plant breeding. Gene flow, itself, does not 

pose a plant pest risk (USDA-APHIS, 2010a); it does so when specific genes with plant 

pest potential are incorporated into a cultivated plant. There are two types of gene flow: 

horizontal and vertical. Horizontal gene flow is the movement of genes between 

disparate, unrelated species, such as between plants and microbes or between plants from 
43 

different families (Stewart, 2008). There is no evidence that horizontal gene transfer can 

naturally occur between unrelated plant species (see, e.g., (Stewart, 2008; Twyman, 

2003)). 

In plant biology, when gene flow occurs between individuals from genetically distinct 

populations of the same species and a new plant is formed, this is called vertical gene 

flow and the new plant is called a hybrid (Stewart, 2008; USDA-APHIS, 2010a). 

Hybridization is usually thought of as the breeding of closely related species resulting in 

the creation of a plant that has characteristics different from either parent. When plants 

are moved to a new environment (with or without human intervention), they may 

hybridize with plants of a closely-related species or subspecies in that new location. For 

natural hybridization to occur between two distinct but related populations, the plants 

from the two populations must flower at the same time, they must be close enough so that 

the pollen can be carried from the male parent to the female parent, fertilization must 

occur, and the resulting embryo must be able to develop into a viable seed that can 

germinate and form a new plant (Ellstrand, 2003; USDA-APHIS, 2010a). 

Hybridization may occur in one generation, but in most cases, does not progress on its 

own through subsequent generations. If it does, and stable new populations result, the 

process is called introgression. For introgression to occur, hybridization of offspring with 

the parental types (backcrossing) must occur several times. Because hybrids of distantly 

related species may not produce viable seed, introgression is much less common than 

hybridization. For example, in studies done with canola and a weedy relative, 

backcrossing from the hybrids to the weeds occurred at one-hundredth to one-thousandth 

the rate of the original hybridization (Stewart, 2008). Nevertheless, when weed species 

are introduced to new areas, there is the potential that those introduced plants may 

hybridize with other closely related species. Novel hybrids therefore may be created. In 

addition, novel hybrids may be created through back-crossing (i.e., introgression) with 

parent species which may change the native species by incorporating non-native genetic 

material. Invasive weeds can result from hybridization events, which mix genetic 

material potentially producing a wide array of genotypes. Some of these genotypes may 

exhibit increased invasive properties (USDA-APHIS, 2010a; USDA-ARS, 2008a). 

Characteristics that favor natural hybridization between two populations include 

(Mallory-Smith and Zapiola, 2008; USDA-APHIS, 2010a): 

 Presence of feral populations (domestic populations gone wild) and uncontrolled 

volunteers; 

 Presence of a high number of highly compatible relatives; 

 Self-incompatibility; 

 Large pollen source; 

 Large amounts of pollen produced; 

 Lightweight pollen; 

 Strong winds (wind pollinated); 

 Large insect populations (insect pollinated); and 
44 

 Long pollen viability. 

Additionally, the creation of a hybrid depends on a series of events including: 

 A pathway for the gene of interest of one plant species to enter the population of the 

species to be hybridized (i.e., the parent plant and the receptor plant must be able to 

produce fertile offspring); and 

 The hybridization must confer a fitness advantage that allows the gene, over multiple 

generations, to develop into a sustainable, reproducing population. 

The rate and success of gene flow is dependent on numerous external factors in addition 

to the donor/recipient plant. General external factors related to pollen-mediated gene 

flow include the presence/abundance/distance of sexually-compatible plant species; 

overlap of flowering phenology between populations; the method of pollination; the 

biology and amount of pollen produced; and weather conditions, including temperature, 

wind, and humidity (Zapiola et al., 2008). Seed-mediated gene flow also depends on 

many factors, including the absence/presence/magnitude of seed dormancy; contribution 

and participation in various dispersal pathways; and environmental conditions and events. 

The genus Glycine consists of two subgenera, soja and glycine. The subgenus soja 

consists of three annual species: G. soja Sieb. and Zucc., the wild form of soybean; G. 

gracilis Skvortz., the weedy form of soybean; and G. max, the cultivated soybean. 

Cultivated soybean, G. max, can only hybridize with other members of the Glycine

subgenus soja (OECD, 2000). The wild and weedy relatives (G. soja and G. gracilis) of 

soybean do not occur in the U.S. (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). Consequently, there is no 

potential for gene flow from cultivated soybean plants to wild relatives in the U.S. 

(USDA-APHIS, 2010b). Glycine soja grows wild in China, Japan, Korea, the Russian 

Far East, and Taiwan and is commonly found in fields, hedgerows, roadsides, and 

riverbanks in those countries (OECD, 2000). 

Although there are no wild relatives with which soybean can share transgenes, such 

introduced genes have the potential to move within cultivated varieties of soybean. The 

potential for outcrossing can be defined as the ability of genes to escape to other soybean 

populations. Soybean is a highly self-pollinating species with a cross-pollination rate of 

less than one percent in plants grown in close proximity (Caviness, 1966; OECD, 2000). 

Cross-pollination at distances greater than 4.6 meters (m) from a pollen source has been 

rarely observed, although it has been reported that insects can sometimes transfer the 

pollen that distance or more (Caviness, 1966). 

Soybean is not native to the U.S. and there are no feral or weedy relatives. Soybean is a 

self-pollinated species, propagated by seed (OECD, 2000). Pollination typically takes 

place on the day the flower opens. The soybean flower stigma is receptive to pollen 

approximately 24 hours before anthesis (i.e., the period in which a flower is fully open 

and functional) and remains receptive for 48 hours after anthesis. Anthesis normally 

occurs in late morning, depending on the environmental conditions. The pollen usually 
45 

remains viable for two to four hours, and no viable pollen can be detected by late 

afternoon. Natural or artificial cross-pollination can only take place during the short time 

when the pollen is viable. As a result, soybean is considered to be a highly self-pollinated 

species, with cross-pollination to adjacent plants of other soybean varieties occurring at 

very low frequency (0 to 6.3%) in adjacent plants (Caviness, 1966; Ray et al., 2003; 

USDA-APHIS, 2010c; Yoshimura et al., 2006). 

Potential of soybean for weediness is low, and even if gene flow occurred from this 

variety to other commercial soybeans, the trait (fatty acid composition changes) would 

not likely confer a selective advantage to the recipient soybean. Specific traits of soybean 

also limit their potential as weeds. Mature soybean seeds have no innate dormancy, are 

sensitive to cold, and are not expected to survive in freezing winter conditions (Raper Jr. 

and Kramer, 1987). The only known propagation method for soybean is through seed 

germination. Because there are no reports of vegetative propagation under field 

conditions in the U.S., human movement of soybean seed is the only possible route to 

establishing the plant outside growing areas. Volunteer plants that might grow in 

previously planted fields or from spilled seed under some favorable environmental 

conditions can be easily controlled mechanically or with herbicides (Zollinger, 2010). 

Soybean is not weedy (Holm et al., 1977), is not found outside of cultivated areas, and 

does not compete well with other cultivated plants (Hymowitz and Singh, 1987). 

Horizontal gene transfer and expression of DNA from MON 87769 soybean to soil 

bacteria are unlikely to occur for several reasons (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). First, many 

genomes (or parts thereof) have been sequenced from bacteria that are closely associated 

with plants including Agrobacterium and Rhizobium (Kaneko et al., 2000; Kaneko et al., 

2002; Wood et al., 2001). There is no evidence that these bacteria contain genes derived 

from plants. Second, in cases where review of sequence data suggest that horizontal gene 

transfer might have occurred, these events are likely to have occurred over an 

evolutionary time scale, i.e., on the order of millions of years (Brown, 2003; Koonin et 

al., 2001; USDA-APHIS, 2010b). Third, transgene DNA promoters and coding 

sequences are optimized for plant expression, not prokaryotic bacterial expression. Thus, 

even if horizontal gene transfer were to occur, proteins corresponding to the transgenes 

are not likely to be produced. Fourth, the FDA has evaluated horizontal gene transfer 

from the use of antibiotic resistance marker genes, and concluded that the likelihood of 

transfer of antibiotic resistance genes from plant genomes to microorganisms in the 

gastrointestinal tract of humans or animals (e.g., E. coli), or in the environment, is remote 

(US-FDA, 1998). 

2.4.4 Microorganisms 

Soil microorganisms play a key role in soil structure formation, decomposition of organic 

matter, toxin removal, nutrient cycling, and most biochemical soil processes (Garbeva et 

al., 2004). They also suppress soil-borne plant diseases and promote plant growth (Doran 

et al., 1996). The main factors affecting microbial population size and diversity include 

soil type (texture, structure, organic matter, aggregate stability, pH, and nutrient content), 

plant type (providers of specific carbon and energy sources into the soil), and agricultural 
46 

management practices (crop rotation, tillage, herbicide and fertilizer application, and 

irrigation) (Garbeva et al., 2004). Plant roots, including those of soybean, release a 

variety of compounds into the soil creating a unique environment for microorganisms in 

the rhizosphere. Microbial diversity in the rhizosphere may be extensive and differs from 

the microbial community in the bulk soil (Garbeva et al., 2004). 

Members of the bacterial families Rhizobiaceae and Bradyrhizobiaceae form a highly 

complex and specific symbiotic relationship with leguminous plants, including soybean 

(Gage, 2004). The nitrogen-fixing plant-microbe symbiosis results in the formation of 

root nodules, providing an environment in which differentiated bacteria called bacteroids 

are capable of reducing or fixing atmospheric nitrogen. The product of nitrogen fixation, 

ammonia, then can be used by the plant. In soybean, atmospheric nitrogen is fixed into 

ammonia through a symbiotic association with the bacterium Bradyrhizobium japonicum. 

As a result of this relationship, nitrogen enhancement of soils may only be needed in a 

limited number of situations for maximal yield of soybean (Ferguson et al., 2006). 

It is necessary that an adequate soil population of nodulation-inducing bacteria be found 

in the soil planted to soybean. As noted in the earlier section on fertilization and effects 

on air and water, these bacteria must be supplied if a soybean crop has not been recently 

grown on the field. Although the bacteria persist for several years in soil, their numbers 

may not be sufficient to insure adequate nodulation (Bottomley, 1992). Various 

commercial sources of inoculants such as multiple strains of Bradyrhizobium can be 

applied to seeds just before planting, many with similar results (Beuerlein, 2005). From 

one season to the next, the inoculated bacteria in soil may change characteristics or 

phenotypes and diverge from traits expressed by the original culture (Farooq and Vessey, 

2009), and if nodulation is not adequately accomplished, growers may need supplemental 

nitrogen after plant growth has begun (Ferguson et al., 2006). 

2.4.5 Biodiversity 

Biodiversity refers to all plants, animals, and microorganisms interacting in an ecosystem 

(Wilson, 1988). In assessing the plant and animal species of the affected area, the animal 

and plant sections of this EA named the most common animal species, including 

mammals, avian species, invertebrates and soil dwelling biota and similarly, plant 

species that are represented by prominent weeds within the fields and by other non-crop 

plants at the margins. These are indicators of the overall environment, but do not 

identify the interaction of all plants, animals, and microorganisms in an ecosystem, 

which is the definition of biodiversity (Wilson, 1988). Biodiversity provides valuable 

genetic resources for crop improvement (Harlan, 1975) and also provides other functions 

beyond food, fiber, fuel, and income. These include pollination, genetic introgression, 

biological control, nutrient recycling, competition against natural enemies, soil structure, 

soil and water conservation, disease suppression, control of local microclimate, control of 

local hydrological processes, and detoxification of noxious chemicals (Altieri, 1999). 

The loss of biodiversity results in a need for costly management practices in order to 

provide these functions to the crop (Altieri, 1999). 
47 

The degree of biodiversity in an agroecosystem depends on four primary characteristics: 

1) diversity of vegetation within and around the agroecosystem; 2) permanence of 

various crops within the system; 3) intensity of management; and 4) extent of isolation 

of the agroecosystem from natural vegetation (Altieri, 1999; Palmer et al., 2010). The 

reintroduction of woodlots, fencerows, hedgerows, wetlands, etc., has been used to 

reintroduce biodiversity into large scale monocultures. Other enhancement strategies 

include intercropping (the planting of two or more crops simultaneously to occupy the 

same field), agroforestry, crop rotations, cover crops, no-tillage, composting, green 

manuring (growing a crop specifically for the purpose of incorporating it into the soil in 

order to provide nutrients and organic matter), addition of organic matter (compost, 

green manure, animal manure, etc.), and hedgerows and windbreaks (Altieri, 1999). 

Agricultural land subject to intensive farming practices, such as that used in crop 

production, generally has low levels of biodiversity compared with adjacent natural 

areas. The use of broad-spectrum insecticides/herbicides is one of the most severe 

constraints for biological diversity in crops (USDA-APHIS, 2010a). Tillage, seed bed 

preparation, planting of a monoculture crop, pesticide use, fertilizer use, and harvest may 

all limit the diversity of plants and animals (Lovett et al., 2003). 

Tillage practices may impact biodiversity, and the type of tillage may be dependent upon 

adoption of a GE herbicide tolerant crop. For example, while conventional production 

of a non-GE field crop may typically be accomplished using intensive tillage, a GE crop 

with herbicide tolerance traits may facilitate use of conservation tillage and thus the crop 

type may lead to the indirect effects observed with planting the GE crop. Thus, 

comparisons of tillage effects may actually reflect such indirect effects. The majority of 

soybeans are under some type of conservation tillage (~63% (CTIC, 2010b)); the 

conservation tillage rates for non-transgenic soybean would likely be substantially less if 

there were no herbicide tolerance traits facilitating use of this tillage. Weed management 

with herbicide-tolerant GE crops using over the top herbicides are more efficient than 

conventional tillage. Tillage alone changes bird species diversity, and in one analysis, 

four times as many species nested in no-till compared to tilled fields (Basore et al., 

1986). Waste soybean seed left in fields after harvest may in some cases be a source of 

food for birds and other wildlife in fall, winter or spring (Galle et al., 2009), and may 

total 48 to 63 kg/ha in untilled crops, and 12 kg/ha in tilled crops (Warner et al., 1985). 

Species diversity and abundance in soybean agro-ecosystems may differ between the 

three soybean production methods: conventional with herbicide-tolerant GE varieties 

(mostly using glyphosate), conventional with non-GE varieties (using a variety of 

herbicides), and organic (without the use of herbicides). Many studies over the last 10 

years have investigated the differences in biological diversity and abundance between 

GE and non-GE fields, particularly those GE crops that are resistant to insects (e.g., Bt 

crops) or herbicides (e.g., glyphosate-tolerant or glufosinate-tolerant crops.) Different 

studies have indicated potential decreases in biological diversity or abundance due to GE 

crops, or the presence of a pesticidal protein in some GE crops (Bt) (e.g., (Hansen Jesse 

and Obrycki, 2000; Pilcher et al., 2005; Ponsard et al., 2002). Other studies of GE crops, 
48 

such as Bt corn, when compared to non-GE crops sprayed with insecticides demonstrate 

that GE crops do not cause any changes in arthropod abundance or diversity (e.g., 

(Bitzer et al., 2005; Chen et al., 2008; Marvier et al., 2007; Romeis et al., 2006; Torres 

and Ruberson, 2005; Wolfenbarger et al., 2008)). While metastudies have noted an 

increase in abundances and of some species of organisms in organic crops, one 

conclusion has been that “positive effects of organic farming on abundance were 

prominent at the plot and field scales, but not for farms in matched landscapes” 

(Bengtsson et al., 2005). These authors propose that efforts to enhance biodiversity 

should be focused on landscapes, not smaller sites such as on fields. Given the small 

number of organic soybean farms, and that MON 87769 soybean will have no impacts 

on this production system, comparisons of biodiversity effects of organic and 

conventional agriculture will not be further analyzed in this EA. 

Farm-scale comparisons were made of three herbicide tolerant crops with conventionally 

managed controls—beets, winter oilseed rape and maize (Squire et al., 2003). In two 

herbicide tolerant crops (beets and winter oilseed rape), weed biomass was significantly 

reduced over those in the conventional varieties (Heard et al., 2003). Decreases were 

detected in invertebrate populations using the weeds as a food source or refuge in the 

rape and beet herbicide tolerant crops, but not in herbicide tolerant maize (Hawes et al., 

2003). As weed biomass was reduced (whether in GE plants or the conventional 

control) the herbivores, pollinators and natural enemies generally declined as well 

(Buckelew et al., 2000; Hawes et al., 2003). Abundance of yellowhammer and 

granivore birds was also greater on conventional than herbicide tolerant beet and rape 

crops (Chamberlain et al., 2007), but herbicide tolerant maize also showed the same 

pattern. Correlating weed diversity and changes in agricultural practices demonstrates 

that weeds have a broad role in supporting certain types of biological diversity within 

farmed fields (Marshall et al., 2003). 

Arthropod abundance may not depend upon crop variety (either herbicide-tolerant or 

non-GE corn) but either variety may increase species diversity during different times of 

the year (e.g., (Brooks et al., 2005; Haughton et al., 2003; Hawes et al., 2003; Roy et al., 

2003; Wolfenbarger et al., 2008)). Biodiversity of insect predators of a soybean aphid in 

soybean fields have been studied in four Northern Tier states, and relative to corn and 

soybean, environments with abundant crop types and non-crop plants provided greater 

“biocontrol services” than does extensively planted soybean (Gardiner et al., 2009). 

Total insect diversity in GE glyphosate tolerant soybean has been compared to that in 

non-GE soybean, and although mostly similar, some slight decreases of insect diversity 

and numbers were observed between rows of GE soybean, but attributed to reduced 

abundance of weeds in glyphosate treated plots (Imura et al., 2010). Buckelew et al. 

(Buckelew et al., 2000) also conclude that insect abundance in soybean is more related 

to effectiveness of weed suppression, rather than use of glyphosate herbicide. For some 

predator insects (biocontrol organisms) on soybean, the genetic diversity of the host 

soybean is relevant to predicting predator lifespan, and these impacts are not mediated 

by weeds (Lundgren et al., 2009). Additionally, the comparator chosen may be quite 

specific to certain relationships, and subtle impacts may be related to use of one specific 
49 

herbicide (such as Atrazine) (Brooks et al., 2005), as was demonstrated in the previous 

farm scale evaluations (Heard et al., 2003). 

Soil-inhabiting organisms also respond to changes imposed by constraints of the 

management system, such as those that include GE glyphosate tolerant crops. In the case 

of soil microorganisms, variations in number and species can be observed following 

many ‘normal’ agronomic interventions (Kowalchuk et al., 2003), but ascertaining those 

that are relevant to types of production systems require detailed analysis. From 10 years 

of observations, Kremer and Means (Kremer and Means, 2009) found increased 

colonization by Fusarium of glyphosate tolerant soybean roots following application of 

glyphosate, and increases of fluorescent Pseudomonas spp. Kremer and Means (Kremer 

and Means, 2009) also summarized findings of theirs and others that showed that GE 

glyphosate tolerant soybeans reduced nodulation and nitrogen fixation, but did not affect 

grain yields (Bohm et al., 2009). However, because many of the variations in soil 

microbial populations or diversity can be produced by many types of impacts, 

Kowalchuk et al. (Kowalchuk et al., 2003) propose that experimentally, systematic 

analysis of indicator groups representing different functions be assessed, and that 

rigorous methods of analysis be required to demonstrate impacts. 

Since biological diversity can be defined and measured in many ways, APHIS considers 

determining the level of biological diversity in any crop to be complex and difficult to 

achieve concurrence. Another complication with biodiversity studies is separating 

expected impacts from indirect impacts. For example, reductions of biological control 

organisms are seen in some Bt-expressing GE crops, but are caused by reduction of the 

pest host population following transgenic pesticide expression in the transformed crop 

plant. 

2.5 Human Health 

2.5.1 Public Health 

Public health concerns surrounding GE soybean primarily involve the human 

consumption of GE soybean products. Non-GE soybean varieties, both those developed 

for conventional use and for use in organic production systems, are not routinely required 

to be evaluated by any regulatory agency in the U.S. for food safety prior to release in the 

market. Under the FFDCA, it is the responsibility of food manufacturers to ensure that 

the products they market are safe and properly labeled. 

Food derived from GE soybean must be in compliance with all applicable legal and 

regulatory requirements. GE organisms for food may undergo a voluntary consultation 

process with the FDA prior to release onto the market. Although a voluntary process, 

thus far, all applicants who wish to commercialize a GE variety that will be included in 

the food supply have completed a consultation with the FDA. In a consultation, a 

developer who intends to commercialize a bioengineered food meets with the agency to 

identify and discuss relevant safety, nutritional, or other regulatory issues regarding the 

bioengineered food and then submits to FDA a summary of its scientific and regulatory 
50 

assessment of the food. FDA evaluates the submission and responds to the developer by 

letter. 

As noted by the National Research Council (NRC), unexpected and unintended 

compositional changes arise with all forms of genetic modification, including both 

conventional hybridizing and genetic engineering (NRC, 2004) The NRC also noted that 

at the time, no adverse health effects attributed to genetic engineering had been 

documented in the human population. Reviews on the nutritional quality of GE foods 

have generally concluded that there are no significant nutritional differences in 

conventional versus GE plants for food or animal feed (Faust, 2002; Flachowsky et al., 

2005). 

Monsanto has provided the FDA with information on the identity, function, and 

characterization of the genes, including expression of the gene products. The submittal to 

the FDA included information on the safety of the altered fatty acid profile in MON 

87769 soybean oil, including a dietary risk assessment. Monsanto initiated the 

consultation process with FDA for the commercial distribution of MON 87769 and 

submitted a safety and nutritional assessment of food and feed derived from MON 87769 

to the FDA on March 23, 2009 (BNF No. 00117). FDA is currently evaluating the 

submission (Monsanto, 2010b). SDA soybean has been accepted as GRAS (GRN No. 

000283) after FDA accepted the notice in September 2009 (US-FDA, 2009a); SDA is to 

be used as an ingredient in baked goods and baking mixes, breakfast cereals and grains, 

cheeses, dairy product analogs, fats and oils, and so forth that will have 375 mg of 

stearidonic soybean oil per serving (US-FDA, 2009b). 

2.5.2 Human Dietary Health 

Soybean protein is used in food production to enhance nutrition and also to supply 

functional properties. In breakfast cereals and pasta, it enhances protein content (United 

Soybean Board, 2009). In baked goods, soups, meats and poultry it may emulsify, absorb 

fats and water, provide adhesion or cohesion properties, and in many other products it 

may aerate, add texture, assist in film or dough formation, increase shelf life and improve 

richness. Besides uses of soybean for functional properties, other foods are 

predominantly soy, such as soy beverages, tofu, textured vegetable protein items 

(simulated meats), such as burgers, hot dogs, crumbles, nuggets, green vegetable 

soybeans (edamame), and soy flour as a primary constituent of many foods and numerous 

other products (USB, 2011c). 

Soybean oil achieved prominence as a food oil after cottonseed oil and lard were 

overtaken in the 1950s and by 2000, and soybean oil was found in almost 61% of the 

liquid oils, margarines, and shortening by 2000 (O'Brien, 2004). Thus, soybean oil is the 

principal food oil used in the U.S. The oil has high versatility for food processing and 

formulating, because it can be processed with low losses, and is high in essential fatty 

acids (O'Brien, 2004). 
51 

Table 9. Percentages of linoleic and linolenic acid in various vegetable oil 

sources and U.S. consumption. 

Oil type 

Linolenic acid 

as % fatty acid 

- typical value 

of omega-3 

Linoleic acid 

as % fatty acid 

 - typical value 

of omega-6 

U.S. 

consumption 

2000 

(millions 

pounds) 

Soybean 7.6 53.7 16,210 

Canola 8.8 21.0 1,744 

Canola-High Oleic* 3 14 NA 

Corn 1.2 59.6 1,711 

Sunflower* <1 65 -- 

Coconut 0.0 1.6 968 

Cottonseed 0.7 54.4 674 

Palm 0.4 10.1 375 

Sources: (O'Brien, 2004) and * (Orthoefer, 2005). 

Soybean contains two apparently essential polyunsaturated fatty acids, an omega-3 

(linolenic: C18:3) and an omega-6 (linoleic: C18:2), in appreciable quantities. Another 

principle fatty acid constituent is the monounsaturated fatty acid, oleic acid (C18:1). Two 

other principle fatty acids include saturated ones, stearic (C18) and palmitic (C16). 

DHA (22:6 n-4) and EPA (20:5 n-3) are highly beneficial fatty acids that may support 

good human health or correct health concerns, but are not represented in soy oil. In a 

review of the literature, Wijendran and Hayes (Wijendran and Hayes, 2004) showed that 

DHA and EPA are important contributors to good cardiovascular health. Additional 

benefits may include preventing aging-related cognitive decline according to Cunnane et 

al. (Cunnane et al., 2009). Hamer et al. (Hamer et al., 2005) summarized additional 

evidence that these fatty acids when added to the diet may improve health status for other 

conditions as well. The omega-3 oil, linolenic acid, can be metabolized by human 

biosynthetic processes to the fatty acids EPA and DHA, but not at sufficiently high rates 

to provide what may be healthful intake levels of the desirable EPA and DHA (Burdge 

and Calder, 2005). 

The biosynthesis of SDA to EPA in humans has been studied, and it is far more efficient 

than biosynthesis of EPA from alpha linolenic acid, a typical soybean fatty acid. Thus, 

James et al. (James et al., 2003) showed that if the incorporation of EPA into erythrocytes 

and plasma was assigned a value of 1.0, EPA incorporation following SDA 

administration occurred with an efficiency of 0.3, and incorporation following alpha 

linolenic acid (soybean constituent), 0.07. To attain recommended intake rates of EPA, 

populations should consume 1.5 g/day of SDA. These levels could be achieved if all 
52 

typical vegetable oils consumed, including cooking oil, margarine, salad oil and 

mayonnaise contained about 10% SDA (James et al., 2003). 

While fish oils are a practical source of EPA and DHA for human health, omega-3 fatty 

acids from vegetable sources are an ecologically sustainable alternative. This source 

relies on conversion of SDA by human metabolism into the healthful fatty acids. 

Sourcing these fatty acids from soybean spares fish which may be in reduced supply 

because of overfishing of resources in world oceans. About 80% of the market for food 

and supplement use of omega-3 fatty acids is provided by fish oils (Packaged Facts 

(Market Research Group LLC), cited in (Daniells, 2011)). Krill are also rich in EPA and 

DHA (some species with around 30% of these as a percentage of fatty acids (Linder et al, 

2010) and are becoming an increasing source of these highly unsaturated fatty acids 

(Starling, 2011). EPA and DHA are also produced by yeast such as Yarrowia lipolytica , 

a species which also synthesizes food grade citric acid (Du Pont, 2011). Algae produced 

in contained ponds are currently a source of DHA and other fatty acids in foods and 

supplements (Martek, 2010). SDA is an infrequent fatty acid in plants, but may be found 

in up to 14% concentrations in Ribes nigrum, and Primula and Echium species 

(Aitzetmüller and Werner, 1991). Soybean is one of the most economical oil sources, and 

development of these other plants as a SDA source would not be an option to be taken 

over a short term, nor likely to produce inexpensive specialty oil. In the U.S., the market 

for omega-3 fatty acids for functional foods is $4 billion and for supplements is $1.3 

billion (Packaged Facts (Market Research Group LLC), cited in (Daniells, 2011)). 

One issue that is relevant to human health is the more rapid oxidation of SDA and other 

polyunsaturated omega-3 fatty acids compared to the less unsaturated fatty acids 

(Jacobsen et al., 2008). A consequence of this oxidation is development of free radicals 

and bioactive aldehydes, and the production of off-flavors (Jacobsen et al., 2008). 

However, the stability of SDA can be improved by formulation with appropriate 

antioxidants (see review in (Jacobsen et al., 2008)). One such example is the use of citric 

acid which provided stability to SDA that was similar to that of oleic acid when subjected 

to 55 and 25 degree heat protocols and then fatty acid analysis (Appendix B-2 

(Monsanto, 2009)). 

The trend towards increasing use of oil from altered oilseed crops that produce 

diminished linolenic acid (and omega-3 fatty acid) or with increased oleic acids (high 

oleic sunflower, canola, safflower and soybean), is noted by Dubois et al. (Dubois et al., 

2007); these changes may have consequences for human health (see also Table 9 for 

omega-3 content in common vegetable oils). The need of food manufacturers for 

products with reduced linolenic acid has been met by either new sources of oils (reduced 

linolenic acid varieties in soybean) or trans hydrogenation (which destroys linolenic 

acid). Although these strategies increase oxidative stability and thus shelf-life (desirable 

properties for merchandising products containing oils), future trends may not provide for 

current content of omega-3 fatty acids in human diets, as recommended by multiple 

nutrition authorities (University of Connecticut, 2011). The essential fatty acid, linolenic 

acid, should continue to be available in food products to enhance content of healthful 
53 

DHA and EPA and the longer chain fatty acids, rather than be reduced (Dubois et al., 

2007); replacement with another omega-3 fatty acid such as stearidonic may be a useful 

dietary direction. At present, U.S. National Academy of Sciences (NAS) has not 

discerned any deficits in current U.S. dietary intake. NAS/Institute of Medicine advises 

an Acceptable Macronutrient Distribution Range (AMDR) of omega-3 polyunsaturated 

fatty acids as 0.6 to 1.2% of dietary energy, and ratios of omega-6 to omega-3 fatty acids 

between 5.1 and 10.1 for adults (Otten et al., 2006). These AMDRs are based on average 

consumption values for U.S. consumers, and there is no known deficiency of omega-3s in 

this population. 

2.5.3 Worker Safety 

Worker hazards in farming are common to all types of agricultural production, and 

include hazards of equipment, exposures to agricultural chemicals, and to plant materials. 

Production of soybean exposes workers to herbicides, and acceptable exposures are 

regulated by U.S. EPA labels. EPA’s Worker Protection Standard (WPS) (40 CFR part 

170) was published in 1992 requiring actions to reduce the risk of pesticide poisonings 

and injuries among agricultural workers and pesticide handlers. The WPS offers 

protection to more than two and a half million agricultural workers who work with 

pesticides at more than 560,000 workplaces on farms, forests, nurseries, and greenhouses. 

The WPS contains requirements for pesticide safety training, notification of pesticide 

applications, use of personal protective equipment, restricted entry intervals following 

pesticide application, decontamination supplies, and emergency medical assistance. 

Grower compliance with all U.S. EPA requirements is required. MON 87769 soybean 

has no added herbicide tolerance, so its cultivation would be similar to that of nonherbicide tolerant soybean. None of the agricultural chemicals that would be used with 

MON 87769 soybean differ from those used with other typical commercial soybean 

varieties. Although an allergenic potential of soybean exists, soybean allergy is typically 

a response to ingestion. Hull hypersensitivity following inhalation has been observed, as 

have asthma reactions of workers to soybean dust (Besler et al., 2000). Oils produced by 

soybean are typical of those produced by many other plants and are generally not 

allergenic (Hefle and Taylor, 1999), but rather are required human dietary constituents. 

2.6 Animal Feed 

Animal feed concerns surrounding GE soybean primarily involve the animal 

consumption of GE soybean products. Soybean meal is a substantial part of animal feed 

rations in the U.S. In 2009, approximately 39 million tons of soybean meal was 

produced, 27 million tons of which was marketed for animal feed, with the largest 

volumes consumed by poultry (48%), swine (26%), and beef (12%) (SoyStats, 2010c, 

2010e). 

Non-GE soybean varieties, both those developed for conventional use and for use in 

organic production systems, are not routinely required to be evaluated by any regulatory 

agency in the U.S. for feed safety prior to release in the market. Under the FFDCA, it is 
54 

the responsibility of feed manufacturers to ensure that the products they market are safe 

and properly labeled. Feed derived from GE soybean must be in compliance with all 

applicable legal and regulatory requirements. GE organisms for feed may undergo a 

voluntary consultation process with the FDA prior to release onto the market. 

Although a voluntary process, thus far all applicants who wish to commercialize a GE 

variety that will be included in the food supply have completed a consultation with the 

FDA. In a consultation, a developer who intends to commercialize a bioengineered food 

meets with the agency to identify and discuss relevant safety, nutritional, or other 

regulatory issues regarding the bioengineered food and then submits to FDA a summary 

of its scientific and regulatory assessment of the food. FDA evaluates the submission and 

responds to the developer by letter. 

Monsanto has provided the FDA with information on the identity, function, and 

characterization of the genes, including expression of the gene products in MON 87769 

soybean. The submittal to the FDA included information on the safety of the SDA and 

profile of other fatty acids in MON 87769 soybean oil, including a dietary risk 

assessment. Monsanto initiated the consultation process with FDA for the commercial 

distribution of MON 87769 soybean and submitted a safety and nutritional assessment of 

food and feed derived from MON 87769 soybean to the FDA on March 23, 2009 (BNF 

No. 00117) (Monsanto, 2010b). FDA is currently evaluating the submission. 

2.7 Socioeconomic 

2.7.1 Domestic Economic Environment 

Soybean first entered North America in the 18th century (Hoeft et al., 2000). Sometime 

during the 1930s, soybean was processed industrially in the U.S. for edible oil and 

protein meal. Currently, the U.S. produces approximately 38% of the global soybean 

supply (SoyStats, 2010h). In 2009, the U.S. exported 1.3 billion bushels (34.9 million 

metric tons) of soybean, which accounted for 46% of the world's soybean exports 

(SoyStats, 2010g). In total, the U.S. exported $16.5 billion worth of soybean and 

soybean products globally in 2009 (SoyStats, 2010b). China is the largest export market 

for U.S. soybean with purchases totaling $9.2 billion. Mexico is the second largest 

export market with sales of $1.3 billion in the same year (SoyStats, 2010b). Other 

significant markets include Japan and the EU. 

Soybean Production Operating Costs 

Managing production costs is a major component to the economics of producing a 

soybean crop. Key cost decisions include the choice of which soybean varieties to plant, 

the amount of fertilizer to apply, and which herbicide program to use. The average 

operating cost for producing soybean in the U.S. in 2006 was $93.41 per acre, with the 

value of the production less operating cost reported to be $161.43 per acre (USDA-ERS, 

2006b). 
55 

Soybean Products 

Soy meal typically contains about 50% protein by dry weight, and is the most important 

product of soybean production. From production and feeding statistics, in 2010 about 

67% of the domestic-crushed soybean meal was fed to domestic animals, and 28% of the 

meal was exported (most likely for animal feed in the international market) ((SoyStats, 

2011b); Table 8, 2009/2010 (USDA-FAS, 2011)). Of the domestically crushed soybean, 

53% of soybean by weight produces meal and 19% produces oil (SoyStats, 2011b). 

Thus, only a small proportion of the soybean crop is consumed directly by humans. 

Human food derives from whole soybean made into soymilk (including tofu), or from 

meal processed into soy flour (meat substitutes) or into isolates or concentrates (protein 

powder) or from processed whole soybeans (soynuts) or from fresh soybeans (edamame) 

(Soyconnection, 2011). The domestic food use of soybean oil is mainly in frying oils, 

salad and cooking oils, and margarines (SoyStats, 2010d). In 2009, these three categories 

represented approximately 85% of the soybean oil market in the U.S., with industrial uses 

consuming the remaining 15% (SoyStats, 2010d; USSEC, 2006). Soybean oil industrial 

uses include plastics, lubricants, coatings, printing inks and adhesives, emulsifiers, 

surfactants (industrial detergents and cleaners as well as solvents), resins, and biodiesel, 

among others (AGRA, 2009; USB, 2010b). Soy-based industrial oil products have many 

advantages in the marketplace, including being inherently biodegradable, having low 

ecotoxicity, and being derived from renewable resources (USSEC, 2006). The extraction 

of oil from soybeans also creates a highly valued solid, soybean meal, which is used for 

animal food in all sectors (swine, beef, poultry, dairy and fish). 

Prices for soybean oil typically are among the lowest among those for all vegetable oils. 

During the 10-year period 1996-2006 three months out of 12, only Malay palm oil prices 

were lower than U.S. sourced soybean oil (USDA-FAS, 2008). During the 12-month 

period October-September 2006/2007 corn oil prices were lower than soybean oil prices 

in only five months during the same period (USDA-FAS, 2008) Thus, both low cost and 

usability have led to soybean oil becoming the top choice of food processors and 

industrial processors for feedstock in these industries. 

Changes in fatty acid profile may impact food and industrial uses of the soybean oil. 

Fatty acid composition of the soybean oil affects melting point, oxidative stability, and 

chemical functionality, and changes in any of these can impact the market sector of the 

product (APAG, 2011). Table 10 illustrates several of the key physical properties of the 

fatty acid constituents of soybean oil. 

 
56 

Table 10. Properties of select fatty acids. 

Fatty Acid Fatty Acid 

Lipid 

Number1

Saturated Unsaturated Melting 

Point (oC) 

Boiling 

Point (oC) 

Palmitic acid C16 X 62.9 167 

Stearic acid C18 X 70 361.6 

Oleic acid C18:1 X 14 286 

Linoleic acid C18:2 X -5 228 

Linolenic acid C18-3 X -11 230 

Source: (CRC, 2011) 

1. As in Table 1, fatty acids are identified based on the number of carbon atoms and the number of double bonds in 

that fatty acid. 

2. oC = degrees Celsius 

Palmitic and stearic acids are considered saturated fatty acids, indicating that they do not 

have any carbon double bonds. Oleic acid is a mono-unsaturated fatty acid, containing a 

single double bond, and linoleic and linolenic acids are polyunsaturated fatty acids, 

containing 2 and 3 double bonds, respectively (Institute of Shortening and Edible Oils, 

2006). Generally, the longer the carbon chains for saturated fatty acids, the higher the 

melting point, and the more unsaturated, the lower the melting point (Berg et al., 2002). 

These fatty acid properties influence the market applications for the oil, and various foods 

and industrial products are formulated to take these properties into consideration. Many 

of the commercial vegetable oils are a carefully blended mix to take advantage of the 

properties of the constituent fatty acids (Cargill, 2011 ). A soy oil with a high content of 

oleic acid and low content of polyunsaturated fatty acids results in an oil with high 

oxidative stability, a critical property for industrial lubricants, as well as achieving the 

food industry needs for a soy-based oil without trans fatty acids (Cahoon, 2003; 

Soyconnection, 2011). 

Soy Industry Description 

Soybean industry comprises two main groups, commodity production businesses and the 

users of soybean products. The commodity production business begins with the 

providers and developers of the traits technology and the seed, retailers that sell seed to 

growers, the growers and their operations. Users of the soybean commodity include 

those who purchase the soybean seed and then crush, process and sell the basic products 

of seed, oil and meal, to the next set of soybean processors or users. The downstream 

purchasers are animal feed producers, food producers, oil users in food and industrial 

sectors, and industrial product manufacturers, such as those for biodiesel oil. 

Commodity Production Industry. Contracts are typically signed with growers when the 

specialty seed is purchased, obligating the growers to supply harvested seed under given 

conditions, such as all the soybean from a certain number of committed acres, specifying 
57 

methods of productions and where the seed may be sold, and establishing standards for 

the product when delivered. Contracts between the growers and an oil crusher maybe 

signed, and after oil is crushed, the bulk oil processer companies arrange for sale to food 

or industrial buyers (ADM, 2006). 

In the production of soybean seed for commodity or IP use, two industries are relevant. 

The first are businesses that sell seed for planting and applied chemicals, and the second 

are the buyers of soybean grain, the elevators. Both are needed to produce specialty soy 

products. When a grower purchases specialty seeds, he will be required to produce his 

soybeans for a designated elevator, and a contract with the elevator may specify means of 

production, crop performance and seed quality. 

Soybean meal is the most important product deriving from soybean seed and meal is the 

product that drives demand for soybean rather than oil. Oil comprises only 19% by 

weight of the soybean (Tyson et al., 2004). Thus, oil is a minor product of the crushing 

industry. As noted earlier, soybean meal is predominantly fed to animals while a small 

percentage is used for human consumption or industrial uses (see preceding section on 

“Soybean Products”). 

Fatty acid composition of soybean oil is affected by many variables, including genetics of 

the crop, details of the climate including temperature, available water and timing of 

applied water, and probably other facts about the planting site, including soil components 

(Lee and Herbek, 2004; Oliva et al., 2006; Primomo et al., 2002). Consequently, a range 

of values for soybean oil can be distinguished in soybean varieties planted in the U.S. 

See Table 1 for these ranges and a typical value found in a general textbook about U.S. 

oils. 

Animal Feed Users. Animal feeds are the major use for soybean meal, consuming about 

77% of the total meal produced (2007/2008 (USB, 2011a)). Oil from soybean used in 

animal feed is so limited that it is not summarized. The mixed rations for poultry, hogs, 

cattle, dairy cows, domestic pets, and farmed fish often are formulated with soybean 

meal. In 2008/2009, 10.3 million metric tons of meal was used in broiler rations, 9.1 

million tons in hog rations and 1.9 million tons in beef rations (USB, 2010a). The other 

animal industries used 7.7 million tons for feeding operations. A variety of industries 

prepares, formulates, manufactures and distributes animal feeds. 

Fresh and Processed Food Users. Various industries supply all types of processed and 

fresh foods deriving from soybean (USB, 2011c). Grain products from soy include 

flours, pasta, bread, waffles, and cereal. Oil products include margarines, salad and 

frying oils. Simulated ‘meats’ include soy burgers, hot dogs, nuggets, and tofu. 

Vegetable uses include edamame, and soynuts. Simulated ‘milk products’ include 

soymilk beverage, soy cheese, yoghurt, and ice cream. 

Oil Users. In the production of oils from oilseed such as soybean, two general industries 

can be identified (O'Brien, 2004). The first is the crusher/refiner whose focus may be oil 

feedstocks deriving from a single source of oilseed, and which processes the oil in a 
58 

continuous, automated mode. The crushing business, which extracts crude vegetable oil 

and meal, sends the oil to refiners, or may retain some for industrial and fuel users. The 

refiners may be separate physically from the crushing business and may subject oil to 

including degumming, refining, bleaching, dewaxing, fractionating, interesterifying, 

hydrogenating, changing the melting points of the oil, blending and deodorizing. The 

refiner may then package the liquid oil, produce margarines, shortening, and bulk fats or 

oils. In 2007, soybean receipts at oil crushing facilities attained to 54.4 million tons, with 

slightly more crushed than originating from receipts (US Census Bureau, 2008). 

Specialty oils when produced at facilities making commodity oils are produced in batches 

or only semi continuously and supply specialized needs of the food processing or other 

commercial products industries. The total value of products from the primary soybean 

processing industry were estimated at $18 billion (US Census Bureau, 2009a). 

The second industry comprises the many value-added businesses which may employ 

starting feedstocks from soyseed or other oilseed sources, and which manufacture 

products from commodity oil or a variety of specialized oils. These include food and 

industrial product manufacturers in a wide variety of offerings to businesses, retailers and 

consumers. 

Foods. The properties of oils that are used in foods may vary widely, and these result 

from the fatty acids that are incorporated into constituent triglycerides. The positions of 

the fatty acids within the triglycerides also may help determine these properties. Specific 

fatty acids have associated chemical properties (such as reactivity) and physical 

properties (such as melting points), as well as other functional properties which are taken 

into account when they are incorporated into foods. Oils high in unsaturated fatty acids 

(5-15%. such as those derived from hydrogenated soybean oil, stearin fractions of palm 

oil, etc.) are useful in making solid fat products such as baking shortenings (O'Brien, 

2009a), while oils low in saturated fats (and optimally, high in oleic acid) are useful for 

salad oils (O'Brien, 2009b). Trans-esterification may be used to change the positions of 

the fatty acids in the triglyceride, or exchange one for another, all of which can alter oil 

properties. 

When fatty acids are oxidized, flavor is adversely affected, and this is referred to as 

“reverted” oil. Reverted soybean oil has a “beany” or “grassy” flavor (O'Brien, 2004). 

Oils that are high in polyunsaturates are the most susceptible to such oxidation among 

food oils. Linoleic and particularly linolenic in traditional soybean oil are those fatty 

acids most easily oxidized. Hydrogenation of soybean salad oils reduces the content of 

linolenic acid, a polyunsaturated oil, and typically, will reduce it from 9% to 3% 

(O'Brien, 2004). Reducing the unsaturated linolenic acid decreases the possibility that 

off- flavors will develop. This process also produces “trans” fatty acids, which have been 

linked to deleterious consequences for human health, and have encouraged the 

development of other soybean lines with altered fatty acid content. 

Industrial (Non-Edible Products) Use. Soybean oil is a feed stock for numerous products 

used in several domestic industries. Biodiesel provides the largest market for soybean oil 

(see Table 11), with production at 822,000 metric tons in 2008/2009 (USB, 2011b). 
59 

Soybean biodiesel in 2007 had a value of $1.09 billion dollars. By comparison, fuel 

ethanol had a value of $6.6 billion (US Census Bureau, 2009a). Soaps, amines, fatty 

acids and oleo chemicals is the second largest consumer of industrial soybean oil at 

140,000 metric tons (see Table 11) (USB, 2011b). Paints, coatings and inks rank third, 

with 118,000 metric tons, and polyols and plastics with 115,000 metric tons. Lubricants 

and working fluids produced a total 26,000 metric tons, and solvents and specialty uses a 

total of 22,000 tons. A total of 15.8 billion pounds of refined soybean oil was processed 

in the U.S. in 2008 (US Census Bureau, 2009b). 

Table 11. Industrial soybean oil production 2008/2009. 

Product 

Soybean oil 

(million 

metric tons) 

Biodiesel 0.822 

Soaps, Amines, Fatty Acids & Oleo Chemicals 0.140 

Paints, Coatings & Inks 0.115 

Polyols & Plastics 0.127 

Total Industrial Meal 0.055 

Lubricants & Working Fluids 0.026 

Solvents & Specialty 0.022 

Other Industrial Products 0.010 

Total Industrial Whole Bean <0.001 

Source: (USB, 2011b). 

2.7.2 Trade Economic Environment 

The major producers of soybean are the U.S., Brazil, Argentina, China, and India, which 

accounted for approximately 91% of the global soybean production in 2007 (Soyatech, 

2010) (see Table 12). Soybeans produced in China and India are primarily for domestic 

use. A significant portion of soybean produced in the U.S., Brazil, and Argentina is 

traded globally in the form of soybean harvested seed, soybean meal, or soybean oil 

(Monsanto, 2010b). Globally, the U.S. was the largest soybean seed export country; 

whereas Argentina led the soybean meal and soybean oil export markets in 2007 

(Soyatech, 2010). 

 
60 

Table 12. World soybean production, 2009. 

Country 

Production 

(million metric tons) 

U.S. 80.7 

Brazil 57.0 

Argentina 32.0 

China 15.5 

Canada 9.3 

India 9.1 

Paraguay 3.9 

Other 9.3 

Total Production 210.9 

Source: (Soyatech, 2008, 2010; SoyStats, 2010h). 

2.7.3 Social Environment 

Data from the 2007 Census of Agriculture indicated that 279,110 U.S. farms raised 

soybeans in 2007, down from 511,000 in 1982 (USDA-ERS, 2010d; USDA-NASS, 

2007). Soybean farms with sales greater than $50,000 totaled 109, 269 (USDA-NASS, 

2007). Although acreage planted to soybeans was also lower in 2007 than in 2002 as 

growers shifted to corn production, harvested soybean acreage per farm increased from 

114 acres in 1978 to 229 acres in 2007 (USDA-ERS, 2010d). Although small farms with 

less than 250 acres accounted for 72% of the farms growing soybeans, these farms 

produced only 26% of the 2007 crop (USDA-ERS, 2010d). Irrigation was used on 5.2 

million acres of soybean, or 8% of U.S. soybean acreage in 2007 (USDA-ERS, 2010d). 

Individual or family farms accounted for 81% of all soybean farms in 2007 and 69% of 

soybean production, with the balance identified largely as partnerships and small familyheld corporations; corporations accounted for less than 1% of soybean farms and soybean 

production (USDA-ERS, 2010d). 

Farms which specialized in soybean production have been reported as generally smaller 

in terms of farm size and sales than farms which do not specialize in soybean cultivation 

(USDA-ERS, 2006b). Operators of many of the farms which specialize in soybean 

cultivation have reported non-farm incomes. Fewer than half of the growers specializing 

in soybean cultivation listed farming as their primary occupation (36%); whereas, 65% of 

growers who cultivated a wide variety of crops on less specialized soybean farms 

reported farming as the primary occupation (USDA-ERS, 2006b). 

Average acreage of all operated soybean farms is reported as approximately 623 acres; 

whereas, the average acreage of a more specialized soybean farm operator is reported at 

390 acres (USDA-ERS, 2006b). Nearly 60% of these specialty soybean farmers reported 
61 

annual income less than $40,000; whereas, 76% of commodity soybean farmers reported 

incomes exceeding $40,000 per year (USDA-ERS, 2006b). 

Industrial soybean crushers, as represented by membership in the National Oilseed 

Processors Association (which includes 90% of the U.S. oilseed crushers), identify 45 

oilseed processing plants in 19 states (NOPA, 2011). These may include locations that 

process oilseed other than soybean. For soybean blending and refining, the U.S. Census 

Bureau (US Census Bureau, 2007) noted that these operations employ 6,019 people with 

a total value of products of $19.2 billion. Statistics for other parts of the soybean industry 

are included in summaries for other oil products; additional details of soybean businesses 

from these Census Bureau statistics thus cannot be distinguished. To provide perspective 

about one soybean processor (South Dakota Soybean Processors), this business is a 

cooperative with 2,200 farmer/members. This crushing/refining business produces 

refined and bleached soy oil for industrial buyers, soybean meal and hulls and also partly 

owns an ancillary urethane/resin business The crusher processes 30 million bushels of 

soybean per year and has 83 employees (Hoover's, 2011). 

About 1.3 million metric tons of soybean derived non-food products were produced in 

2009 (see Table 11). APHIS is not aware of data for the numbers of employees engaged 

in various industrial production sectors using soybean products. However, the largest 

category of industrial products, biodiesel, was estimated in 2009 to include 1700 

manufacturing employees and 160 agricultural workers that were needed to supply the 

commodity soybean (Cardnoentrix, 2011). The same report identified a total of 21,000 

jobs as deriving from 2009 biodiesel production. Food production involving soybean 

products has reached $4.5 billion in 2009 (SANA, 2011download) and total employment 

in this industry is not readily available. 
62 

3 ALTERNATIVES 

This document analyzes the potential environmental consequences of a determination of 

nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean. To respond favorably to a petition for 

nonregulated status, APHIS must determine that MON 87769 soybean is unlikely to pose 

a plant pest risk. Based on its PPRA (USDA-APHIS, 2010c), APHIS has concluded that 

MON 87769 soybean is unlikely to pose a plant pest risk. Therefore APHIS must 

determine that MON 87769 soybean is no longer subject to 7 CFR part 340 or the plant 

pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act. 

Two alternatives are evaluated in this EA: (1) no action and (2) determination of 

nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean. APHIS has assessed the potential for 

environmental impacts for each alternative in the Environmental Consequences section. 

3.1 No Action Alternative: Continuation as a Regulated Article 

Under the No Action Alternative, APHIS would deny the petition. MON 87769 soybean 

and progeny derived from MON 87769 soybean would continue to be regulated articles 

under the regulations at 7 CFR part 340. Permits issued or notifications acknowledged 

by APHIS would still be required for introductions of MON 87769 soybean and measures 

to ensure physical and reproductive confinement would continue to be implemented. 

APHIS might choose this alternative if there were insufficient evidence to demonstrate 

the lack of plant pest risk from the unconfined cultivation of MON 87769 soybean. 

This alternative is not the Preferred Alternative because APHIS has concluded through a 

PPRA that MON 87769 soybean is unlikely to pose a plant pest risk (USDA-APHIS, 

2010c). Choosing this alternative would not satisfy the purpose and need of making a 

determination of plant pest risk status and responding to the petition for nonregulated 

status. 

3.2 Preferred Alternative: Determination that MON 87769 Soybean is No 

Longer a Regulated Article 

Under this alternative, MON 87769 soybean and progeny derived from them would no 

longer be regulated articles under the regulations at 7 CFR part 340. MON 87769 

soybean is unlikely to pose a plant pest risk (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). Permits issued or 

notifications acknowledged by APHIS would no longer be required for introductions of 

MON 87769 soybean and progeny derived from this event. This alternative best meets 

the purpose and need to respond appropriately to a petition for nonregulated status based 

on the requirements in 7 CFR part 340 and the agency’s authority under the plant pest 

provisions of the Plant Protection Act. Because the agency has concluded that MON 

87769 soybean is unlikely to pose a plant pest risk, a determination of nonregulated status 

of MON 87769 soybean is a response that is consistent with the plant pest provisions of 

the PPA, the regulations codified in 7 CFR part 340, and the biotechnology regulatory 

policies in the Coordinated Framework. 
63 

Under this alternative, growers may have future access to MON 87769 soybean and 

progeny derived from this event if the developer decides to commercialize MON 87769 

soybean. 

3.3 Alternatives Considered But Rejected from Further Consideration 

APHIS assembled a list of alternatives that might be considered for MON 87769 

soybean. The agency evaluated these alternatives, in light of the agency's authority under 

the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act, and the regulations at 7 CFR part 

340, with respect to environmental safety, efficacy, and practicality to identify which 

alternatives would be further considered for MON 87769 soybean. Based on this 

evaluation, APHIS rejected several alternatives. These alternatives are discussed briefly 

below along with the specific reasons for rejecting each. 

3.3.1 Prohibit Any MON 87769 Soybean from Being Released 

In response to public comments that stated a preference that no GE organisms enter the 

marketplace, APHIS considered prohibiting the release of MON 87769 soybean, 

including denying any permits associated with the field testing. APHIS determined that 

this alternative is not appropriate given that APHIS has concluded that MON 87769 

soybean is unlikely to pose a plant pest risk (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). 

In enacting the Plant Protection Act, Congress found that 

[D]ecisions affecting imports, exports, and interstate movement of products 

regulated under [the Plant Protection Act] shall be based on sound science...§ 

402(4). 

On March 11, 2011, in a Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and 

Agencies, the White House Emerging Technologies Interagency Policy Coordination 

Committee developed broad principles, consistent with Executive Order 13563, to guide 

the development and implementation of policies for oversight of emerging technologies 

(such as genetic engineering) at the agency level. In accordance with this memorandum, 

agencies should adhere to Executive Order 13563 and, consistent with that Executive 

Order, the following principle, among others, to the extent permitted by law, when 

regulating emerging technologies: 

“[D]ecisions should be based on the best reasonably obtainable scientific, 

technical, economic, and other information, within the boundaries of the 

authorities and mandates of each agency” 

Based on the PPRA (USDA-APHIS 2011) and the scientific data evaluated therein, 

APHIS concluded that MON 87769 soybean is unlikely to pose a plant pest risk. 

Accordingly, there is no basis in science for prohibiting the release of MON 87769 

soybean. 
64 

3.3.2 Approve the Petition in Part 

The regulations at 7 CFR 340.6(d)(3)(i) state that APHIS may "approve the petition in 

whole or in part." For example, a determination of nonregulated status in part may be 

appropriate if there is a plant pest risk associated with some, but not all lines described in 

a petition. Because APHIS has concluded that MON 87769 soybean is unlikely to pose a 

plant pest risk (USDA-APHIS, 2010c), there is no regulatory basis under the plant pest 

provisions of the Plant Protection Act for considering approval of the petition only in 

part. 

3.3.3 Isolation Distance between MON 87769 Soybean and Non-GE Soybean 

Production and Geographical Restrictions 

In response to public concerns of gene movement between GE and non-GE plants, 

APHIS considered requiring an isolation distance separating MON 87769 soybean from 

conventional or specialty soybean production. However, because APHIS has concluded 

that MON 87769 soybean is unlikely to pose a plant pest risk (USDA-APHIS, 2010c), an 

alternative based on requiring isolation distances would be inconsistent with the statutory 

authority under the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act and regulations in 7 

CFR part 340. 

APHIS also considered geographically restricting the production of MON 87769 soybean 

based on the location of production of non-GE soybean in organic production systems or 

production systems for GE-sensitive markets in response to public concerns regarding 

possible gene movement between GE and non-GE plants. However, as presented in 

APHIS’ PPRA for MON 87769 soybean, there are no geographic differences associated 

with any identifiable plant pest risks for MON 87769 soybean (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). 

This alternative was rejected and not analyzed in detail because APHIS has concluded 

that MON 87769 soybean does not pose a plant pest risk, and will not exhibit a greater 

plant pest risk in any geographically restricted area. Therefore, such an alternative would 

not be consistent with APHIS’ statutory authority under the plant pest provisions of the 

Plant Protection Act and regulations in Part 340 and the biotechnology regulatory policies 

embodied in the Coordinated Framework. 

Based on the foregoing, the imposition of isolation distances or geographic restrictions 

would not meet APHIS’ purpose and need to respond appropriately to a petition for 

nonregulated status based on the requirements in 7 CFR part 340 and the agency’s 

authority under the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act. However, 

individuals might choose on their own to geographically isolate their non-GE soybean 

production systems from MON 87769 soybean or to use isolation distances and other 

management practices to minimize gene movement between soybean fields. Information 

to assist growers in making informed management decisions for MON 87769 soybean is 

available from Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies (AOSCA, 2010). 
65 

3.3.4 Requirement of Testing for MON 87769 Soybean 

During the comment periods for other petitions for nonregulated status, some 

commenters requested USDA to require and provide testing for GE products in non-GE 

production systems. APHIS notes there are no nationally-established regulations 

involving testing, criteria, or limits of GE material in non-GE systems. Such a 

requirement would be extremely difficult to implement and maintain. Additionally, 

because MON 87769 soybean does not pose a plant pest risk (USDA-APHIS, 2010c), the 

imposition of any type of testing requirements is inconsistent with the plant pest 

provisions of the Plant Protection Act, the regulations at 7 CFR part 340 and 

biotechnology regulatory policies embodied in the Coordinated Framework. Therefore, 

imposing such a requirement for MON 87769 soybean would not meet APHIS’ purpose 

and need to respond appropriately to the petition in accordance with its regulatory 

authorities. 

3.4 Comparison of Alternatives 

Table 13 presents a summary of the potential impacts associated with selection of either 

of the alternatives evaluated in this EA. The impact assessment is presented in Section 4 

of this EA. 

Table 13. Summary of issues of potential impacts and consequences of alternatives.

Attribute/Measure Alternative A: 

No Action

Alternative B: 

Determination of 

Nonregulated Status

Meets Purpose and Need and 

Objectives No Yes 

Unlikely to pose a plant pest 

risk 

Satisfied through use of 

regulated field trials 

Satisfied – PPRA (USDAAPHIS, 2010c) 

Management Practices

Acreage and Areas of Soybean 

Production Unchanged Unchanged 

Seed Production Unchanged Unchanged 

Organic Farming Unchanged Unchanged 

Specialty Soybean Unchanged Unchanged 

Soybean Cultivation Practices Unchanged Unchanged 

Physical Environment

Water Resources Unchanged Unchanged 

Soil and Land Use Unchanged Unchanged 

Air Quality Unchanged Unchanged 

Climate Change Unchanged Unchanged 

 
66 

Biological Resources

Gene Movement and 

Weediness Unchanged Unchanged 

Animals Unchanged Unchanged 

Plants Unchanged Unchanged 

Microorganisms Unchanged Unchanged 

Biological Diversity Unchanged Unchanged 

Human and Animal Health

Worker Safety Unchanged Unchanged 

Risk to Human Health Unchanged Unchanged 

 (potential health benefits) 

Risk to Animal Feed Unchanged Unchanged 

Socioeconomic 

Domestic Economic 

Environment Unchanged Unchanged 

Trade Economic 

Environment Unchanged Unchanged 

Other Regulatory Approvals

Other U.S Regulatory 

Approvals

Unchanged for existing 

nonregulated GE 

organisms

FDA consultation pending, 

U.S. EPA tolerance 

exemptions and conditional 

pesticide registrations not 

required. 

Compliance with Other Laws

CWA, CAA, EOs Fully compliant Fully compliant 
67 

4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 

This analysis of potential environmental consequences addresses the potential impact to 

the human environment from the alternatives analyzed in this EA, namely taking no 

action and a determination by the agency that MON 87769 soybean does not pose a plant 

pest risk and therefore should no longer be regulated under 7 CFR 340. Potential 

environmental impacts from the No Action Alternative and the Preferred Alternative for 

MON 87769 soybean are described in detail throughout this section. A cumulative 

effects analysis is presented for each potentially affected environmental concern. Certain 

aspects of this product and its cultivation would be no different between the alternatives: 

those instances are described below. 

4.1 Scope of Analysis 

Potential environmental impacts from the No Action Alternative and the Preferred 

Alternative for MON 87769 soybean are described in detail throughout this section. An 

impact would be any change, positive or negative, from the existing (baseline) conditions 

of the affected environment (described for each resource area in Section 2.0). Impacts 

may be categorized as direct, indirect, or cumulative. A direct impact is an effect that 

results solely from a proposed action without intermediate steps or processes. Examples 

include soil disturbance, air emissions, and water use. An indirect impact may be an 

effect that is related to but removed from a proposed action by an intermediate step or 

process. Examples include surface water quality changes resulting from soil erosion due 

to increased tillage, and worker safety impacts resulting from an increase in herbicide 

use. 

A cumulative effects analysis is also included for each environmental issue. A 

cumulative impact may be an effect on the environment which results from the 

incremental impact of the proposed action when added to other past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable future actions. Examples include breeding MON 87769 soybean 

with other GE events that are no longer subject to the regulatory requirements of 7 CFR 

part 340 or the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act. If there are no direct or 

indirect impacts identified for a resource area, then there can be no cumulative impacts. 

Cumulative impacts are discussed in Section 5. 

Where it is not possible to quantify impacts, APHIS provides a qualitative assessment of 

potential impacts. Certain aspects of this product and its cultivation may be no different 

between the alternatives; those are described below. 

Although the preferred alternative would allow for new plantings of MON 87769 

soybean to occur anywhere in the U.S., the scope of analysis of the EA focuses on those 

areas that are expected to support production of MON 87769 soybean. According to the 

developer (Monsanto, 2010d), cultivation of MON 87769 soybean will be limited to the 

Northern Tier states of North and South Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan. 
68 

4.2 Agricultural Production of Soybean 

One of APHIS’s missions is to improve American agricultural productivity. Best 

management practices are commonly accepted, practical ways to grow soybean, 

regardless of whether the soybean farmer is using conventional practices with non-GE or 

GE varieties, or using organic practice. These management practices consider cropspecific planting dates, seeding rates, and harvest times, among others. Over the years, 

soybean production has resulted in well-established, widely-practiced management 

practices that are available through local Cooperative Extension Service offices and their 

respective websites. The National Information System for the Regional Integrated Pest 

Management Centers (IPM Centers) publishes crop profiles for major crops on a state-bystate basis. These crop profiles provide production guidance for local growers, including 

recommended practices for specific pest control. Crop profiles for many of the soybean 

production states are available at: www.ipmcenters.org/cropprofiles/index.cfm. 

Monsanto’s field trials have not demonstrated any agronomic or phenotypic differences 

between MON 87769 soybean and control varieties of soybean (Monsanto, 2010b). 

Based on the data provided by Monsanto for MON 87769 soybean (Monsanto 2010), as 

well as previous experience with other GE soybean varieties that have been widely 

adopted by growers since their introduction in 1996 (USDA-ERS, 2010b), APHIS has 

concluded that none of the best management practices for agricultural production of 

soybean are expected to change MON 87769 soybean is no longer subject to the 

regulatory requirements of 7 CFR part 340 or the plant pest provisions of the Plant 

Protection Act. Consistent with the lack of changes to agronomic properties, the 

potential impacts on agricultural production associated with the No Action and Preferred 

Alternatives are the same. 

4.2.1 Acreage and Area of Soybean Production 

GE and non-GE soybean varieties are continually under development. In 2009 and 2010, 

over 75 million acres in the U.S. were planted in soybean, with over 93% of the soybean 

expressing herbicide tolerance (USDA-ERS, 2010a, 2010b). 

No Action Alternative: Acreage and Area of Soybean Production 

Based on current acreage trends, commodity soybean production with GE varieties will 

likely continue to dominate. Cultivation of GE soybean increased from 17% of the U.S. 

soybean acreage in 1997, to over 93% in 2010. The continued cultivation of soybean and 

the penetration of the soybean market by GE varieties is not expected to change under the 

No Action Alternative. Soybeans are produced commercially in the Northern Tier states 

(USDA-NASS, 2011a) and under the No Action Alternative, this range of production is 

not expected to change. 
69 

Preferred Alternative: Acreage and Area of Soybean Production 

Monsanto has determined that the SDA content of MON 87769 soybean seed would be 

greatest when grown in the most northerly areas of soybean production in the US. Both 

genotype and environment can simultaneously influence ratios of multiple fatty acids in 

soybean (Hou et al., 2006). The effects of temperature may be most relevant during the 

final stages of seed maturation (Wilcox and Cavins, 1992). By limiting the proposed 

production area, Monsanto will keep the yield of SDA at the maximal attainable levels 

(Monsanto, 2010d). 

Production in the Northern Tier states will be encouraged by producing seed only for the 

lower maturity groups (Monsanto, 2010d). Monsanto currently produces Vistive® low 

linolenic specialty soybean lines, and has multiple years of experience with IP production 

of this variety. From a survey of six seed producers selling Vistive® seed, APHIS 

observed that Monsanto seed is available mostly in maturity groups 2-3.6, although one 

was a 1.5. By this means, Monsanto has both focused and restricted the growing area for 

the Vistive® low linolenic varieties (offered through various seed companies). Existing 

Vistive® varieties are mostly grown in areas where soybean is already extensively 

produced, while MON 87769 soybean will be grown in the more northerly parts of these 

areas. 

A second means seed companies employ to direct production of soybean varieties lines to 

a specific region is a contractual one. To produce the soybean crop and receive premium 

prices, growers must sign a contract with an authorized elevator or processor. For the 

Vistive® line, Monsanto lists at least 12 states where commodity seed is purchased or 

crushed with 127 elevators and 21 processors in major soybean production areas 

including Alabama, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Michigan, Missouri, 

Nebraska, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and South Dakota (Monsanto, 2010b). This 

area is partially coextensive with the five-state region proposed by the developer for 

MON 87769 soybean. If MON 87769 soybean seed becomes available, Monsanto would 

provide growers and the public a list of these elevators and crushers, and they will likely 

be restricted to the five states planned for production of this variety. The area proposed 

for MON 87769 soybean production will correlate with soybean oil processors capable of 

accommodating specialty soybean production. 

Economic considerations constrain growers from marketing their soybeans at too great a 

distance from the specialty soybean crusher or elevators. An Indiana survey determined 

that 80% of growers delivered their soybeans within 25 miles of the growing site. In the 

northern and central parts of the state, at least 50% of soybeans were delivered within 10 

miles (Purdue Extension. 2006). Thus, even if growers purchased the seed for the 

soybean variety outside of the expected optimal range, the high cost of transport would 

likely deter movement beyond that of authorized regional buyers. If Monsanto authorizes 

only certain elevators to receive the MON 87769 soybean, then MON 87769 soybean 

seed sales and delivery of harvested beans can be carefully constrained by the company. 
70 

Monsanto plans to market MON 87769 soybean as a specialty variety for producing the 

novel constituent SDA by this product (Monsanto, 2010b). Monsanto’s field trials have 

not demonstrated any agronomic or phenotypic differences between MON 87769 

soybean and control varieties of soybean (Monsanto, 2010b). The changes in fatty acid 

composition expressed in MON 87769 soybean do not require changes in cultivation 

practices when compared with other non-GE soybean varieties (Monsanto, 2010b). 

MON 87769 soybean does not confer an increase in cold tolerance, heat resistance, or 

drought tolerance (these issues are discussed again below in the subsection on gene flow) 

and therefore MON 87769 soybean is not anticipated to be cultivated in new regions 

outside of the current soybean production areas. MON 87769 soybean is anticipated to 

fill a small niche for an omega-3 fatty acid easily converted by human metabolism into 

desirable longer chain fatty acids. MON 87769 soybean is not expected to significantly 

replace plantings of conventional or existing GE varieties where those growers seek to 

cultivate a commodity soybean variety (Monsanto, 2010b). Under the Preferred 

Alternative, a determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean is not 

expected to increase soybean production, or result in an increase in overall GE soybean 

acreage or cultivation in new regions. Impacts would be similar to the No Action 

Alternative. 

4.2.2 Agronomic Practices 

Crop rotation in soybean is conducted to manage weeds, optimize soil nutrition and 

fertility, reduce pathogen loads, and control certain soybean pests (Al-Kaisi et al., 2003; 

University of Illinois, 2006). In crops that have no tolerance to herbicides, such as MON 

87769 soybean, various types of cultivation and herbicide use are typically employed by 

soybean growers. Besides tillage practices not always used in herbicide tolerant crops, 

herbicide use would generally include burndown, preplant and one or more post plant 

applications of herbicide (Loux et al., 2008). A more diverse pattern of herbicides would 

also be used in these situations, rather than principle use of a single herbicide 

(glyphosate, glufosinate or ALS) applied preplant or over the top, depending on the 

herbicide tolerant variety planted. 

No Acton Alternative: Agronomic Practices 

Under the No Action Alternative, soybean crop rotation practices and herbicide pesticide 

use will likely remain as it is practiced today by the farming community. Growers will 

continue to have access to existing herbicide-tolerant soybean products that are no longer 

subject to the regulatory requirements of 7 CFR part 340 or the plant pest provisions of 

the Plant Protection Act, as well as conventional soybean varieties. Agronomic practices 

associated with traditional and existing non-regulated GE soybean production would 

not be expected to change under the No Action Alternative. As a result, no changes 

are anticipated from the current agronomic practices associated with soybean production, 

including tillage, cultivation, fertilization, pesticide applications, fertilizer 

applications, or the use of agricultural equipment. 
71 

Preferred Alternative: Agronomic Practices 

Monsanto has determined that the SDA content of MON 87769 soybean seed would be 

greatest when grown in the most northerly areas of soybean production in the U.S. 

(Monsanto, 2010d). Both genotype and environment can simultaneously influence ratios 

of multiple fatty acids in soybean (Hou et al., 2006). The effects of temperature may be 

most relevant during the final stages of seed maturation (Wilcox and Cavins, 1992). By 

limiting the proposed production area, Monsanto will attempt to keep the yield of SDA at 

the maximal attainable levels. 

Monsanto will produce seed only for the lower maturity groups (Monsanto, 2010d) which 

will restrict the potential growing area for the MON 87769 soybean varieties (offered 

through various seed companies). As with other identity preserved soybeans, growers 

must sign a contract with an authorized elevator or processor and which will approve the 

soybean product quality before purchase. Elevators and crushers will be restricted to the 

five states planned for production of this variety. Many of the growers electing to plant 

MON 87769 soybean and also elevators and crushers chosen will likely already have 

extensive experience in strictly observing standard operating procedures (SOPs) to 

maintain segregation during storage and crush. Otherwise, new growers and producers 

will be provided with SOPs, and asked to agree to conditions of contracts so as to channel 

soybean and oil to purchasers seeking the special fatty acids offered by MON 87769 

soybean. 

Monsanto’s studies demonstrate MON 87769 soybean is essentially indistinguishable 

from other soybean varieties in terms of agronomic characteristics and cultivation 

practices (Monsanto, 2010b; USDA-APHIS, 2010c). Monsanto did not identify any 

differences between MON 87769 soybean and conventional A3525 control soybeans in 

dormancy, germination potential, disease or insect response, seedling vigor, or plant 

maturity (Monsanto, 2010b; USDA-APHIS, 2010c). The similarity in agronomic and 

phenotypic characteristics suggests that the changes in fatty acid profile do not impact the 

ability of soybean to overwinter or become a volunteer. 

A determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean is not expected to alter 

the use of herbicides currently being used for non-GE soybean production. A preplant 

burndown herbicide would be used, followed by a pre-emergence residual herbicide, with 

timely post plant herbicide applications (Sprague, 2006). The use of glyphosate as a 

post-emergent weed herbicide in other soybean varieties would continue to be the pattern 

for the majority of soybean production. The tillage procedures if used would be those 

already employed and include those noted in section 2.2.2 (Agronomic Practices). Use of 

pest control strategies, such as those for insects or pathogens would also be unchanged. 

If MON 87769 soybean is not stacked with herbicide tolerant traits, control of herbicide 

tolerant corn or soybean volunteers from the previous season would not be different from 

control of such volunteers arising after planting herbicide tolerant crops with typical 

rotational crops. Numerous other registered soybean herbicides are available to 

eliminate these volunteers (See Table IX-4 in Petition (Monsanto, 2010b)). 
72 

Monsanto’s field trial and laboratory analyses demonstrated that the agronomic 

performance of MON 87769 soybean was functionally identical to its non-transgenic 

counterpart (Monsanto, 2010b). No increases in fertilizers and pesticides were required, 

nor were any changes in cultivation, planting, harvesting, and volunteer control required 

(Monsanto, 2010b). It is expected that similar agronomic practices that are currently 

used for other commercially available GE soybean will also be used by growers of MON 

87769 soybean. Overall impacts would be similar to the No Action Alternative. 

4.2.3 Soybean Seed Production 

Soybean seed production is managed by seed producers using AOSCA standard methods 

to preclude gene flow between varieties (Bradford, 2006; Sundstrom et al., 2002). 

Soybean is considered a self-pollinated species, exhibiting a high-percentage of selffertilization (OECD, 2000). Common practices to preserve varietal identity include: 1) 

maintaining isolation distances to prevent pollen movement from other soybean sources; 

2) planting border or barrier rows to intercept pollen, employing natural barriers to 

pollen; and 3) field monitoring for off-types, other crops, weeds, and disease. 

No Action Alternative: Soybean Seed Production 

Under the No Action Alternative, current soybean seed production practices are not 

expected to change. 

Preferred Alternative: Soybean Seed Production 

Monsanto’s field trials have not demonstrated any agronomic or phenotypic differences 

between MON 87769 soybean and control varieties of soybean (Monsanto, 2010b), other 

than differences of fatty acid content. Based on the data provided by Monsanto for MON 

87769 soybean (Monsanto, 2010b), as well as previous experience with other GE 

soybean varieties that have been widely adopted by growers since their introduction in 

1996 (USDA-ERS, 2010b), APHIS has concluded that the availability of MON 87769 

soybean would not alter the agronomic practices, locations, and the production and 

quality characteristics of conventional and GE seed production (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). 

The overall impact of a determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean on 

the availability of conventional and GE seed, and the production practices used to grow 

soybean seeds would be similar to the No Action Alternative. Accordingly, there are no 

differences between the No Action and Preferred Alternatives with regard to seed 

production. 

4.2.4 Organic Soybean Production 

Organic production plans prepared pursuant to the National Organic Program (NOP) 

include practical methods to protect organically-produced crops from accidental 

contamination with genetically engineered materials. Typically, organic growers use 

more than one method to maintain organic certification and prevent unwanted material 

from entering their fields including: isolation of the farm, physical barriers or buffer 
73 

zones between organic production and non-organic production, as well as formal 

communications between neighboring farms (Baier, 2008; Kuepper, 2003; NCAT, 2003). 

These practices follow the same system as that used for the cultivation of certified seed 

under the AOSCA procedures. 

APHIS recognizes that producers of non-GE soybean, particularly producers who sell 

their products to markets sensitive to GE traits (e.g., organic or some export markets), can 

be reasonably assumed to be using practices on their farm to protect their crop from 

unwanted substances and maintain their price premium. APHIS will assume that 

growers of organic soybean are already using, or have the ability to use, these common 

practices as a baseline, which APHIS uses for the analyses of the alternatives. 

Historically, organic soybean production represents a small percentage of total U.S. 

soybean acreage (USDA-ERS, 2010f). In 2005, 122,217 acres of soybean in U.S. were 

certified organic, and in 2008, 125,621 acres were similarly certified (USDA-ERS, 

2010f), representing between 0.17% and 0.22%, respectively, of the soybean production 

in the U.S. In 2001, 68% of the soybean crop was herbicide-tolerant, and by 2010, 93% 

of the total acreage was herbicide-tolerant (USDA-ERS, 2010a, 2010b, 2010f). 

No Action Alternative: Organic Soybean Production 

Current availability of conventional (both GE and non-GE) soybean varieties, and those 

soybean varieties that are developed for organic production, are expected to remain the 

same under the No Action Alternative. Since 2001, GE varieties of soybean have 

dominated the market, representing 68% of the market in 2001, and 93% of the market in 

2010 (USDA-ERS, 2010b). Although organic soybeans have a place in the market, the 

respective share is small, and the dedicated acreage appears to be steady. Between 2005 

and 2008, the total acreage devoted to soybean fluctuated between 72 million and 64 

million acres, although organic soybeans ranged from 122,000 to 126,000 acres, less than 

1% of the total soybean acreage (USDA-ERS, 2010f). The market share for organic 

soybean varieties is not expected to change under the No Action Alternative (USDAERS, 2010b; USDA-NASS, 2007a, 2010e).

Preferred Alternative: Organic Soybean Production 

It is not likely that organic farmers, or other farmers who choose not to plant transgenic 

varieties or sell transgenic seed, will be substantially impacted by APHIS’ determination 

of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean. 

GE soybean varieties are currently cultivated on 93% of the U.S. soybean acreage 

(USDA-ERS, 2010b), and organic varieties comprise less than 1% of the total soybean 

acreage (USDA-ERS, 2010f). In the affected area, only 0.3% of soybean acreage is 

organic certified (see Affected Area analysis). MON 87769 soybean should not present 

any new or different issues and impacts for organic and other specialty soybean 

producers and consumers. 
74 

According to the petition, agronomic trials conducted in 2006 and 2007 at 21 field 

locations in the U.S. demonstrated that MON 87769 soybean in combined site analysis is 

not significantly different for plant growth, yield, and reproductive capacity from its 

nontransgenic counterpart (Monsanto, 2010b; USDA-APHIS, 2010c). No differences 

were observed in pollen diameter, and viability (Monsanto, 2010b; USDA-APHIS, 

2010c). Consistent with the lack of difference in agronomic properties, MON 87769 

soybean is not expected to have an increased ability to cross pollinate organic soybean 

varieties. 

The practices currently employed to preserve and maintain purity of organic production 

systems would not be required to change to accommodate the production of MON 87769 

soybean. Common production practices for soybean and the practical methods 

typically used by soybean farmers under organic conditions (NCAT, 2003) can greatly 

reduce the likelihood of accidental gene flow between MON 87769 soybean and non-GE 

soybean fields. 

MON 87769 soybean will be marketed by Monsanto as a specialty variety to take 

advantage of the high content of SDA (Monsanto, 2010b). Consistent with no 

required differences in agronomic practices, and the intention of Monsanto to 

produce soybean for a specialty market, MON 87769 soybean is not expected to 

displace current organic soybean production. 

The acreage devoted to organic soybean is expected to remain small regardless of 

whether new varieties of GE or non-GE soybean varieties, including MON 87769 

soybean, become available for commercial soybean production. As noted above for 

the time period of 2005 to 2008, when the total U.S. acreage dedicated to soybean 

fluctuated between 72 million and 64 million acres, the acreage devoted to organic 

soybeans was relatively stable, reported between 122,000 and 126,000 acres (USDAERS, 2010f). The percentage of the soybean acreage that was organic in the five 

state region identified as the affected area is only 0.3% (see affected area). 

Significant increases in soybean acreage are not expected, so increased GE or 

conventional soybean acreage adjacent to organic plantings is not expected. 

Consistent with these cultivation trends, a determination of nonregulated status of 

MON 87769 soybean is not expected to have a significant impact on organic soybean 

growers. 

4.2.5 Specialty Soybean Production 

The soybean industry, supplying both industrial and food products, has numerous 

products which can meet specialized needs. Established methods of IP have maintained 

these products, and as more such specialty products are introduced, will continue to 

provide them for customers willing to pay premiums beyond those prices given to 

commodity soybean producers. 
75 

No Action Alternative: Specialty Soybean Production 

Under the No Action Alternative, no changes to soybean production will occur. These 

products will continue to be produced for a variety of niche markets beyond that of 

commodity soybean. 

Preferred Alternative: Specialty Soybean Production 

In the event of a determination of nonregulated status, MON 87769 soybean would 

become an additional specialty soybean variety that would be produced and marketed as 

an IP oil. Monsanto plans to exercise product stewardship in a “closed loop” system 

(Monsanto, 2010b) and would supervise the sale and movement of the soybean from 

growers to designated buyers, and then after extraction, continue to oversee the product 

through a system of required SOPs, contracts and agreements to ultimate users. Under a 

full stewardship plan (see Appendix C of this EA; Appendix 1 (Monsanto, 2010b)) 

buyers and users of the oil would be given full information about maintaining product 

segregation, about necessary procedures and equipment, and Monsanto would make 

themselves available for consulting with entities in the supply chain. To meet market 

needs, additional procedures would be assessed, to be proposed for adoption by the 

principle users of the product in the marketplace. Because the closed loop system is a 

robust one, APHIS has concluded that the mechanism Monsanto has proposed would be 

capable of implementing effective isolation from other specialty oils, as well as 

commodity oils. APHIS concludes that other soybean specialty crops would not be 

affected by the new SDA producing line MON 87769 soybean. 

4.3 Physical Environment 

4.3.1 Water Resources 

The climate in the Heartland south and east of the Great Lakes, and Eastern portions of 

the Great Plains of the U.S. provide sufficient water under normal climatic conditions to 

produce a soybean crop. The adoption of herbicide-tolerant soybean varieties has been a 

factor in the adoption of conservation practices, including conservation tillage. 

Water quality is also preserved in modern soybean production systems. The increase in 

conservation tillage practices has resulted in a reduction of runoff from agricultural lands, 

decreasing non-point source pollution of fertilizer and pesticides. Intensive local 

monitoring of surface water and sub-soils has demonstrated the benefits of no-till 

soybean in protecting both ground and surface water resources (University of Illinois, 

2006). 

No Action Alternative: Water Resources 

Under the No Action Alternative, land acreage and agronomic practices, including 

irrigation, associated with soybean production would not be affected. Herbicide-tolerant 

soybeans, cultivated on 93% of the soybean acreage (USDA-ERS, 2010b), have resulted 
76 

in the adoption of increased conservation practices (Monsanto, 2010b). These 

conservation practices, including reduced tillage and precision agriculture, play a 

significant role in water conservation and maintaining water quality by minimizing soil 

erosion (USDA-NRCS, 2006c). Current application rates of glyphosate for weed control 

are not expected to change. 

Preferred Alternative: Water Resources 

The acreage on which MON 87769 soybean is grown might revert to full cultivation 

tillage if the new variety was not to be stacked with herbicide tolerance, given that such a 

high percentage of U.S. is currently growing herbicide tolerant soybeans. Conservation 

tillage, facilitated by herbicide tolerant crops (see Section 2.2.2, Weed Control), may 

decrease the likelihood of run-off carrying soil or undesirable pollutants into surface 

water sources (see Section 2.2.2, Tillage, and Section 2.3.1, Water Resources). The 

consequences of further crossing of MON 87769 soybean to incorporate other expressed 

traits is considered in Section 5.3 (Cumulative Impacts: Agronomic Practices). 

MON 87769 soybean does not change cultivation practices for soybean production, nor 

would it increase the total acres and range of U.S. soybean production areas. A 

determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean will not change water use 

in soybean production, as the MON 87769 soybean is expected to be used as an 

alternative crop to GE or non-GE soybean varieties already in use, offering no additional 

agronomic benefits to growers. 

4.3.2 Soil Quality 

No Action Alternative: Soil Quality 

Agronomic practices associated with traditional and existing non-regulated GE soybean 

production would not be expected to change under the No Action Alternative. As a 

result, no impacts to the soil environment are anticipated from the current agronomic 

practices associated with soybean production, including tillage, cultivation, 

fertilization, pesticide applications, fertilizer applications, and the use of agricultural 

equipment. 

Preferred Alternative: Soil Quality 

Monsanto’s field trial and laboratory analyses demonstrated that the agronomic 

performance of MON 87769 soybean was functionally identical to its non-transgenic 

counterpart (Monsanto, 2010b). No increases in fertilizers and pesticides were required, 

nor were any changes in cultivation, planting, harvesting, and volunteer control required 

(Monsanto, 2010b). It is expected that similar agronomic practices that are currently 

used for other commercially available GE soybean will also be used by growers of MON 

87769 soybean. Therefore, under the Preferred Alternative there are no expected impacts 

to soil quality. 
77 

4.3.3 Air Quality 

Traditional agricultural practices have the potential to cause negative impacts to air 

quality. Agricultural emission sources include smoke from agricultural burning, tillage, 

traffic and harvest emissions, pesticide drift from spraying, and nitrous oxide emissions 

from the use of nitrogen fertilizer (USDA-NRCS, 2006a). Other GHG emission sources 

associated with agricultural production include equipment emissions (contributing carbon 

monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and reactive organic gases), particulate matter, sulfur oxides, 

and direct emissions of N2O from fertilizer application (US-EPA, 2010a). 

Conservation practices, including conservation tillage associated with GE soybean 

production, requires fewer tractor passes across a field (Baker et al., 2005; USDA-NRCS, 

2006a). This results in a decrease in dust generation and tractor emissions (Baker et al., 

2005; USDA-NRCS, 2006a). Surface residues and untilled organic matter physically 

hold the soil in place thus decreasing wind erosion of soils and pesticide drift in winderoded soils (Baker et al., 2005; USDA-NRCS, 2006a). Reduced tillage also increases 

sequestration rates of potential carbon emissions from soils (Causarano et al., 2006). 

No Action: Air Quality 

Under the No Action Alternative, current impacts to air quality associated with land 

acreage and cultivation practices associated with soybean production would not be 

affected. Agronomic practices associated with conventional soybean production and 

current GE soybean varieties and which contribute to air quality and GHG emissions, 

including tillage, cultivation, irrigation, pesticide application, fertilizer applications 

and use of agriculture equipment, would not be expected to change. 

Preferred Alternative: Air Quality 

A determination of non-regulated status of MON 87769 soybean will not change the 

cultivation or agronomic practices, or agricultural land acreage associated with growing 

soybean, and is expected to have the same effect on air quality as the No Action 

Alternative. 

4.3.4 Climate Change 

No Action Alternative: Climate Chang 

Under the No Action Alternative, current impacts on climate change associated with 

soybean production would not be affected. Agronomic practices associated with 

soybean production such as tillage, cultivation, irrigation, pesticide application, fertilizer 

applications and use of agriculture equipment would continue on soybeans grown 

throughout the region. 
78 

Preferred Alternative: Climate Change 

There is unlikely to be a measurable change in an agricultural practice that might affect 

climate change in soybean fields where MON 87769 soybean would be grown. 

Agronomic practices associated with soybean production such as tillage, cultivation, 

irrigation, pesticide application, fertilizer applications and use of agriculture equipment 

would continue on soybeans grown throughout the region. Therefore, there would be no 

change in agricultural activities that might contribute to climate change. 

A determination of non-regulated status of MON 87769 soybean is expected to have the 

same effect on climate change as the No Action Alternative. 

4.4 Biological Resources 

4.4.1 Animal Communities 

Soybean production systems in agriculture are host to many animal species. Mammals 

and birds may use soybean fields and the surrounding vegetation for food and habitat 

throughout the year. Invertebrates can feed on soybean plants or prey upon other insects 

living on soybean plants as well as in the vegetation surrounding soybean fields. The 

cumulative effects analysis for the potential effects of the production of MON 87769 

soybean on plants and animals is found in Sections 5.11 (Animals), 5.12 (Plants), and 

5.15 (Biodiversity). 

No Action Alternative: Animal Communities 

Under the No Action Alternative, conventional and GE soybean production would 

continue while MON 87769 soybean remains a regulated article. Potential impacts of GE 

and non-GE soybean production practices on non-target animals would be unchanged. 

Preferred Alternative: Animal Communities 

Monsanto data indicate that the agronomic practices used to produce MON 87769 

soybean will be the same as those used to produce other conventionally grown GE and 

non-GE soybean. MON 87769 soybean production is not expected to change land 

acreage or any cultivation practices for soybean production. 

MON 87769 soybean provides a modified fatty acid profile based on the introduction of 

Primula juliae Δ6 desaturase (Pj.D6D) and Neurospora crassa Δ15 desaturase 

(Nc.Fad3). Changes in fatty acid composition resulting from the expression of these 

genes are not expected to cause impacts to animals consuming the soybean. MON 87769 

soybean contains two principle new fatty acids, stearidonic (26% of total fatty acids) and 

gamma-linolenic (7%). MON 87769 soybean contains modestly reduced oleic acid and 

substantially reduced linoleic fatty acids compared to the typical range of fatty acids 

found in commodity soybean oil (Table E-16 (Monsanto, 2010b)). MON 87769 soybean 

has a fatty acid profile that is comparable to commercial high oleic vegetable oils (e.g., 
79 

high oleic canola, high oleic safflower, high oleic sunflower), traditional oils such as 

olive oil that has a long-history of consumption in the diet, and canola oil that obtained 

FDA GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) status. Table 14 presents a comparison of 

fatty acid profiles of several plant sources of vegetable oil, including conventional 

soybean and MON 87769 soybean. 

Table 14. Comparison of fatty acid profiles for oil derived from MON 87769 

soybean with several other plant sources 

Vegetable Oil 

Type 

% 

Saturated 

Fat1

% Oleic 

Acid1

(18:1) 2

% Linoleic 

Acid1

(18:2) 

% 

Linolenic 

Acid1,4

(18:3) 

% 

Stearidonic 

Acid3 

(18:4) 

% PUFAs1

Canola 6 57 26 10 0 36 

MON 87769 

Soybean 

13 16 26 11 26 67 

MON 87705 

Soybean 

6 76 10 7 0 17 

Conventional 

Soybean5

15 23 53 8 0 60 

Olive 13 78 7 1 0 8 

Palm 50 38 11 1 0 12 

Coconut 92 6 2 0 0 2 

Source: Table P-3 and Table VII-2 (Monsanto, 2010c). 

Notes: 

1. Percent fatty acid presented as a percent (%) of total fatty acids. 

2. Ratios presented within parenthesis represent the lipid numbers for the subject fatty acid, one of the more 

common nomenclature systems. The first number, e.g., 18, indicates the number of carbon atoms in the fatty 

acid, and the second number, e.g., 1, indicates the number of double bonds in the fatty acid. A fatty acid is 

considered saturated when there are no double bonds in the carbon chain, hence the 18:3 linoleic acid would 

be considered a polyunsaturated fatty acid, presenting three double bonds across the 18 carbons. 

3. From Table VII-1 (Monsanto, 2010b); (Monsanto, 2010d). 

4. Alpha linolenic totals; add 7% additional for gamma linolenic in MON 87769 soybean 

5. A3525, the variety originally transformed, a conventional variety. 

Monsanto statistically analyzed 42 seed components and seven in forage. The samples 

were collected at five sites and included a combined site analysis. Some 28 differences 

between the MON 87795 and control observations for constituents were significantly 

different, but except for linoleic acid, were either within the published variability of 

existing commercial cultivars, or were actually within a 99% tolerance limit based on 

existing commercial cultivar values. Linoleic acid was expected to be different, because 

it is a substrate for the desaturases introduced into the soybean to make SDA. In seed, 

statistically significant differences were found in 19 nutrients other than fatty acids 

including amino acids in combined site analyses, and these were all of less than 10%, but 

were not outside the 99% tolerance level for commercial soybean properties. Differences 

in fatty acids (including linoleic acid) in combined-site analyses between MON 87769 

soybean and a conventional control included six fatty acids of the eight analyzed. Except 

for linoleic acid, a substrate for the introduced desaturases, all of these differences were 

within the 99% tolerance level for commercial content of these fatty acids (Monsanto, 

2010). 
80 

Animals are known to forage on soybean foliage and seed. With the exception of the 

introduction of the desaturase genes, genes to change fatty acid composition, no 

phenotypic or morphological differences have been identified between MON 87769 

soybean and conventional soybeans. Composition of MON 87769 soybean forage was 

compared to a conventional control (the host variety used in the transformed variety) and 

analyzed for fiber and no combined site differences were found, although one site of the 

five showed an increase. For proximates, fat was slightly decreased at one site of five; 

neither difference was outside the commercial tolerance range. No observable adverse 

effect of feeding up to 4 g of SDA oil/kg body weight per day was determined in a 90 

day, one-generation reproductive rat toxicity study (Hammond et al., 2008). The two 

new proteins in MON 87769 are homologous to many other desaturases found in food or 

feed, have no similarity to known toxins, are present at very low quantities in foods, and 

are readily digestible in simulated gastric and digestive fluids (Monsanto, 2010b). 

The potential risks to animals from the consumption of MON 87769 soybean with 

modified fatty acid composition will be evaluated by the FDA (Monsanto, 2010b). 

Soybean meal is the most common supplemental protein source in U.S. livestock and 

poultry rations due to its nutrient composition, availability, and price. Although MON 

87769 soybean is intended to be cultivated as a specialty soybean to take advantage of the 

SDA production, the soybean meal remaining after the extraction of the soybean oil may 

become a constituent of livestock or poultry food supplements. Monsanto is completing 

a consultation with FDA on the possible impacts on animals using feed containing MON 

87769. The analysis will compare the composition of MON 87769 soybean with the 

conventional non-transgenic soybean variety A3525 (also the original line used for the 

transformation), and evaluate the potential impacts to animal diets from the reduced 

intake of linoleic acid. Athough the soybean meal derived from MON 87769 soybean 

would have reduced levels of linoleic acid, the animal’s requirements for linoleic acid 

could be met by other ingredients in animal feed. 

Based on the above information, APHIS concludes that a determination of nonregulated 

status of MON 87769 soybean is not expected to have adverse effects on non-target 

animals. 

4.4.2 Plant Communities 

The landscape surrounding a soybean field may be bordered by other soybean (or 

any other crop) fields or may also be surrounded by woodland, rangelands, and/or 

pasture/grassland areas. These plant communities may be natural or managed plant 

habitats for the control of soil and wind erosion and/or serve as wildlife habitats. 

In this context, weeds are those plants which, when growing in the soybean field, 

compete with the soybean for space, water, nutrients and sunlight, and may thus include 

native species. The types of weeds in and around a soybean field will vary depending 

on the geographic region where the soybean is grown, as is apparent from control 

recommendations in various states (Aref and Pike, 1998; Byrd et al., 2003; Duke and 

Powles, 2009; Loux et al., 2009). 
81 

No Action Alternative: Plant Communities 

Plant species that typically inhabit soybean production systems will continue to be 

managed through the use of mechanical, cultural, and chemical control methods, 

including the use of glyphosate in those varieties already marketed as glyphosatetolerant. No changes to cultivation practices are expected in the No Action 

Alternative. 

Preferred Alternative: Plant Communities 

In the event of a determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean, the risks 

to wild plants and agricultural productivity from weedy soybean populations are low; 

volunteer soybean populations are easily managed and there are no feral or weedy 

relatives. Agronomic studies conducted by Monsanto tested the hypothesis that the 

weediness potential of MON 87769 soybean is unchanged with respect to conventional 

soybean (Monsanto, 2010b). No differences were detected between MON 87769 

soybean and nontransgenic soybean in growth, reproduction, or interactions with pests 

and diseases, other than the intended effect, which is production of SDA. Volunteer 

soybean is normally not a concern. Soybean is not winter hardy, and existing mechanical 

and chemical methods are available to manage the occasional volunteer soybean in 

cultivation areas (Carpenter et al., 2002; OECD, 2000). Several post-emergent herbicides 

are also widely used to control the presence of volunteer soybeans in subsequent 

rotational crops (See Table IX-4 (Monsanto, 2010b; Zollinger, 2010)). Based on these 

biological limitations, as well as readily available control practices, a determination of 

nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean is not likely to result in increased weediness. 

Overall impacts would be similar to the No Action Alternative. 

4.4.3 Gene Flow and Weediness 

Two forms of gene flow are evaluated: Vertical gene flow and horizontal gene flow. 

Vertical gene flow, or hybridization and associated introgression, is the movement of 

genes to sexually compatible relatives (Ellstrand, 2003; Quist, 2010). The soybean is 

considered self-pollinating, and has no wild relatives in the U.S. (Monsanto, 2010b; 

OECD, 2000). Although some cross-pollination can occur, AOSCA identity protection 

practices have been found adequate to protect against such gene flow (Monsanto, 2010b; 

OECD, 2000; USDA-APHIS, 2010c). The only relatives of soybean are other varieties 

currently cultivated. In assessing the risk of gene introgression from MON 87769 

soybean to its sexually compatible relatives, APHIS considered two primary issues: 1) 

the potential for gene flow and introgression to soybean relatives; and 2) the potential 

impact of introgression. Vertical gene flow is discussed below in the analysis of the 

Preferred Alternative. 

Horizontal gene flow represents the stable movement of genes from one organism to 

another without reproduction or human intervention (Keese, 2008; Quist, 2010). There is 

no evidence of naturally occurring transgene movement from transgenic crops to sexually 

incompatible species (Stewart, 2008). Horizontal gene transfer and consequent 
82 

expression of DNA from one plant to another sexually incompatible plant or other phyla 

(e.g., species of bacteria) is unlikely to occur (Keese, 2008). This event would require 

physical relocation of the functional genetic sequences from the transgenic plant to the 

new location, including not only the genes which code for the production of specific 

proteins, but also those portions of the genome which regulate the activity of those genes 

(Keese, 2008; Stewart, 2008). There are no known naturally occurring vectors (such as 

plasmids, phages, or transposable elements) that could be responsible for inter-domain 

gene transfer, and there is little evidence that eukaryotic cells are naturally capable of 

stably incorporating genes from the environment into their genome (Brown, 2003). 

Although viruses do move genetic material, all viruses that infect higher plants have 

small RNA or DNA genomes, usually with fewer than 20 encoded proteins (Keese, 

2008). These viruses are, therefore, constrained as to the type and size of novel genetic 

material which can be acquired by horizontal gene transfer (Stewart, 2008). The 

development of herbicide resistance, particularly that found in crop fields treated with 

glyphosate, is thus not a result of gene transfer but is the result of selective pressures 

associated with herbicide use. This issue is discussed in the subsection on impacts to 

plant communities. 

Two bacteria species commonly associated with plants, Agrobacterium and Rhizobium,

have been evaluated to determine the probability of horizontal gene transfer between the 

bacterium and their host plants. Agrobacterium moves its genes from its bacterial 

plasmid to the plant causing the plant to produce the gall; Rhizobium aids in nitrogen 

fixation in legume nodules (Stewart, 2008). The genomes of both bacteria have been 

sequenced, and the sequenced genes evaluated in search of exogenous genes (Kaneko et 

al., 2000; Kaneko et al., 2002; Wood et al., 2001). Despite what would appear to be 

millennia of symbiotic relationships between these bacteria and their host plants, there is 

no evidence that these organisms contain genes derived from plants (USDA-APHIS, 

2010c). In cases where review of sequence data implied that horizontal gene transfer 

occurred, these events are inferred to occur on an evolutionary time scale of millions of 

years (Brown, 2003; Koonin et al., 2001). Transgene DNA promoters and coding 

sequences are optimized for plant expression, not bacterial expression (USDA-APHIS, 

2010d). Horizontal gene flow, resulting in the relocation of entire transgenes including 

the regulatory portions of the DNA (those parts of the DNA which code for the 

production of the specific proteins in that relocated transgene) has never been shown to 

occur in nature (Clarke, 2007; Stewart, 2008). Thus, even if horizontal gene transfer 

occurred, proteins associated with these transgenes are not likely to be produced in the 

new host organism (Stewart, 2008; USDA-APHIS, 2010c). Based on this information, 

APHIS considers the horizontal gene flow from MON 87769 soybean or other cultivated 

GE soybean varieties to unrelated species to be unlikely. 
83 

No Action Alternative: Gene Flow and Weediness 

Under the No Action Alternative, conventional and GE transgenic soybean production 

will continue to be grown commercially, while MON 87769 soybean will remain a 

regulated article. Soybean cultivation practices are expected to remain the same. Gene 

flow from current commercially available GE cultivars to non-GE soybean cultivars is 

expected to remain unchanged from the current conditions. 

Preferred Alternative: Gene Flow and Weediness 

APHIS evaluated the potential for gene introgression to occur from MON 87769 soybean 

to sexually compatible varieties and considered the possibility that such introgression 

would result in increased weediness. Monsanto’s data found no significant difference in 

pollen morphology and viability from field grown MON 87769 soybean plants and other 

soybean varieties. The soybean is not identified as a weed in the U.S. (USDA-APHIS, 

2010c). Soybeans are not frost tolerant, do not survive freezing temperatures, and do not 

reproduce vegetatively (OECD, 2000; USDA-APHIS, 2010c). 

Some research suggests that fatty acid composition may influence cold tolerance and 

survivability. Kodama (Kodama, 1994) and Kodama et al. (Kodama et al., 1995) found 

that increases in levels of certain fatty acids, particularly hexadecatrienoic and linolenic 

acids, results in an increase in cold tolerance. In MON 87769 soybean, the levels of 

linolenic acid are within the lower end of the commercial range of fatty acid composition 

when compared with other varieties (Monsanto, 2010b). Changes in oleic acid or linoleic 

acid composition and reductions in saturated fatty acids have not been linked to increased 

cold tolerance. The changes in fatty acid composition MON 87769 soybean are not 

expected to enhance cold tolerance (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). 

In its PPRA, APHIS assessed the weediness potential of MON 87769 soybean based on 

the introduced Primula juliae delta-6 desaturase (Pj.D6D) and the Neurospora crassa

delta-15 desaturase (Nc.Fad3) genes controlling fatty acid composition (USDA-APHIS, 

2010c). The changes introduced in the MON 87769 soybean were deemed to not present 

a weediness risk (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). 

The change in composition of fatty acid in MON 987769 Soybean is due to the activity of 

the endogenous Pj.D6D and the Nc.Fad3 genes in the soybean. These two genes pose no 

novel risks from a plant pest perspective (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). The action of these 

two genes in MON 87769 soybean is not anticipated to give rise to an enhanced 

weediness or gene flow. 

In its petition, Monsanto presented information on phenotypic and agronomic 

characteristics collected from field studies (Monsanto, 2010b). These data included 

information on seed dormancy, germination, emergence, seedling vigor, plant height, 

lodging, days to maturity, shattering, seed weight, yields, disease incidence, and insect 

damage, among others (Monsanto, 2010b). 
84 

APHIS has assessed those parameters including some of those noted above to evaluate 

the weediness potential of MON 87769 soybean. Monsanto found no biologically 

significant differences between MON 87769 soybean and the original commercial variety 

that was transformed for seed dormancy, germination, early stand count, seedling vigor, 

days to 50% flowering, lodging, pod shattering, and final stand count. All values were 

within the recommended standards for certified soybean seed (AOSCA, 2009). 

To determine whether the variety could be more likely to increase gene flow, Monsanto 

studied pollen viability and morphology. No statistically significant differences were 

detected between MON 87769 soybean, the original modified line, and other controls for 

percent viable pollen or pollen grain diameter (Monsanto, 2010b). No differences in 

pollen morphology were observed. Thus, differences in gene flow to other soybean are 

unlikely. 

Results from the phenotypic and agronomic assessments indicate that MON 87769 

soybean does not possess characteristics that would confer a plant pest risk compared 

with conventional soybean (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). These data indicate that the 

engineered plant is not different in any fitness characteristics from its parent that are 

likely to cause the MON 87769 soybean to become weedy or invasive (USDA-APHIS, 

2010c). 

Based on the above information, APHIS has concluded that a determination of 

nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean will not impact other soybean varieties 

through gene flow or introgression, nor would it present a greater risk of weediness or 

invasive characteristics (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). MON 87769 soybean is expected to 

have the same effect on gene movement as the No Action Alternative.

4.4.4 Microorganisms 

Microorganisms in soil are important components that sustain and provide the dynamic 

aspects of soil associated with critical ecological processes. Nutrient cycling, 

establishing soil structure contributing to plant growth, metabolism of deleterious 

components are all dependent on the microbial constituents. The health and growth of 

these microbes may be influenced by many processes and conditions. 

No Action Alternative: Microorganisms 

There would be no changes to current cultivation practices under the No Action 

Alternative. Microbes in the field would continue to be exposed to glyphosate and other 

herbicides. 

Preferred Alternative: Microorganisms 

Monsanto conducted field observations to assess potential agronomic differences 

between MON 87769 soybean and conventional soybean (variety A3525, used for the 

transformation) over two years and at a total of 21 locations (Monsanto, 2010b). The 
85 

disease analysis included observations of a wide range of bacterial and fungal pathogens, 

nematodes, and plant viruses (Table I-4, I-5 (Monsanto, 2010b)). No significant 

incidence of disease damage was noted between MON 87769 soybean and the 

comparison variety (Monsanto, 2010b). The lack of difference indicates that the 

expression of stearidonic and gamma linolenic acid and modified fatty acid content by 

MON 87769 soybean does not change soybean interactions with microorganisms in the 

field. 

Monsanto also evaluated the potential impacts of these changes on the symbiotic 

relationship of soybean with the nitrogen-fixing root nodule bacteria Bradyrhizobium 

japonicum (Monsanto, 2010b). In these studies, MON 87769 soybean was compared 

with the original transformed conventional line, and six conventional soybean varieties as 

well as the negative isoline for MON 87769 soybean (Monsanto, 2010b). No significant 

differences were detected between MON 87769 soybean and any of the comparison 

varieties for nodule number, biomass of nodules, shoot total nitrogen (percent and mass), 

or shoot and root material (Monsanto, 2010b). These results indicate that the expression 

of the modified fatty acid composition does not impact the biology of root nodules 

formation by the symbiotic bacteria. 

Consistent with these test results, the impacts of a determination of nonregulated status of 

MON 87769 soybean on microorganisms is the same as the No Action Alternative. 

4.4.5 Biodiversity 

Biodiversity in an agroecosystem depends on four primary characteristics: 1) diversity of 

vegetation within and around the agroecosystem; 2) permanence of various crops within 

the system; 3) intensity of management, including selection and use of insecticides and 

herbicides; and 4) extent of isolation of the agroecosystem from natural vegetation 

(Altieri, 1999; Palmer et al., 2010). The reintroduction of woodlots, fencerows, 

hedgerows, wetlands, etc., has been used to enhance biodiversity in the agroecosystem 

landscape. Some enhancement strategies include intercropping (the planting of two or 

more crops simultaneously to occupy the same field), agroforestry, crop rotations, cover 

crops, no-tillage, composting, green manuring (growing a crop specifically for the 

purpose of incorporating it into the soil in order to provide nutrients and organic matter), 

addition of organic matter (compost, green manure, animal manure, etc.), adoption of 

integrated pest management techniques, and the use of hedgerows and windbreaks 

(Altieri, 1999; Palmer et al., 2010). The adoption of GE crops, with the concomitant 

reduction in insecticide use and enhanced soil conservation practices, has also contributed 

to the increase in biodiversity of soil microorganisms, beneficial organisms, and plants 

(Dively and Rose, 2003; Naranjo, 2009; Palmer et al., 2010; Sanvido et al., 2006). 

No Action Alternative: Biodiversity 

Under the No Action Alternative, MON 87769 soybean would continue to be a regulated 

article. Growers and other parties who are involved in production, handling, processing, 

or consumption of soybean would continue to have access to GE soybean varieties that 
86 

are no longer subject to the regulatory requirements of 7 CFR part 340 or the plant pest 

provisions of the Plant Protection Act, herbicide-tolerant soybean varieties, and 

conventional soybean varieties. The implications of agronomic practices associated with 

soybean production whether traditional or GE varieties with the attendant effects on 

biodiversity would not change. 

Preferred Alternative: Biodiversity 

Although soybean fields are cultivated as monocultures to optimize soybean yield, the 

landscape adjacent a soybean field may harbor a wide variety of plants. Broad spectrum 

herbicide application has the potential to impact off-site plant communities. The 

herbicide choices used for cultivation of MON 87769 soybean will not be different from 

those used by growers for weed control on other non-herbicide tolerant varieties, and 

acreage is not expected to exceed 100,000 acres in five years (Monsanto, 2010b). 

Consequently, production MON 87769 soybean is not expected to result in an increase in 

the application of herbicides or frequency of application over other existing non GE 

soybean varieties. A determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean is 

not expected to change the cultivation or agronomic practices, or agricultural land 

acreage associated with growing soybean. 

The stearidonic and gamma linolenic acid expressed in MON 87769 soybean, which are 

also expressed in some other plants, fish, and algae, would have no effect on animals that 

might feed on soybean, because the novel oils have been shown to have no harmful 

consequences by feeding (see FDA acceptance of GRAS status of oils from this variety). 

Monsanto has shown that expression of the two new proteins in MON 87769 soybean are 

homologous to many other desaturases found in food or feed, have no similarity to 

known toxins, are present at very low quantities in foods, and are readily digestible in 

simulated gastric and digestive fluids (Monsanto, 2010b). Thus, no potential for allergic 

response has been demonstrated by consuming the meal deriving from the soybean. 

Therefore, a determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean is highly 

unlikely to have any direct toxic effects on non-target organisms and is likely to be 

neutral or beneficial to animal and plant biodiversity. 

The abundance of diverse beneficial insects was assessed over two years in four states 

(Tables I-8 and I-10 (Monsanto, 2010b)). No consistent differences were noted in the 

populations of these insects over three collections spanning reproductive development of 

the soybean. The insects surveyed included Carabid and ladybird beetles, parasitic 

wasps, predatory plant bugs and spiders. No differences in insect diversity would be 

expected under the Preferred Alternative compared to the No Action Alternative. 

The cultivation of MON 87769 soybean would not change the use of insecticides to 

manage the invertebrate pests of soybean since there is no difference in insect damage or 

populations of pest insects in MON 87769 soybean and conventional control soybean 

(Monsanto, 2010b). Populations of pest insects were assessed in four states comparing 

MON 87769 soybean and conventional line A3235, the parental line during two growing 

seasons (Monsanto, 2010). Aphids, beanleaf beetles, leaf hoppers and three moth pests 
87 

among others were assessed over three collection periods during the reproductive phase 

of plant growth. No consistent differences were found in populations of insects in these 

locations and years. Practices currently employed for the management of conventional 

and other GE soybean would likely continue for this crop. In this regard, a determination 

of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean would have the same impacts on 

biodiversity as the No Action Alternative. 

4.5 Human Health 

4.5.1 No Action Alternative 

Public Health

Under the No Action Alternative, MON 87769 soybean would continue as a regulated 

article. Human exposure to existing traditional and GE soybean would not change under 

this alternative. Growers and consumers exposure to this product would be limited to 

those individuals involved in the cultivation of MON 87769 soybean under regulated 

conditions. 

Worker Safety 

During agricultural production of soybean, agricultural workers and pesticide applicators 

may be exposed to a variety of EPA registered pesticides (see, e.g., 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/pesticides/). Such chemicals would be expected to 

include those products currently used for insect pest and plant pest management in both 

GE and non-GE soybean cultivation. Worker safety is taken into consideration when a 

U.S. EPA pesticide label is developed during the registration process. When use is 

consistent with the label, pesticides present minimal risk to the worker. Industrial 

production of soybean oil has standard hazards common to many manufacturing 

processes. No changes to current worker safety are anticipated under the No Action 

Alternative. 

4.5.2 Preferred Alternative: Human Health 

Public Health

APHIS considers the FDA regulatory assessment in making its determination of the 

potential impacts of a determination of nonregulated status of the new agricultural 

product. Monsanto has submitted the data needed for a full consultation with FDA 

and has demonstrated the safety of the new proteins. Previous to the submitted FDA 

new protein consultation, Monsanto submitted a GRAS Notice for SDA soybean oil 

(No. GRN 000283) to FDA on February 25, 2009 (US-FDA, 2009b). FDA issued a 

response letter on September 4, 2009, indicating the agency has no further questions 

about the characteristics of the oil, and safety of its use in foods (US-FDA, 2009a). 
88 

Monsanto’s intention in developing MON 87769 soybean is to provide a plant source of 

omega-3 fatty acid that can efficiently be converted to the long chain polyunsaturated 

fatty acids, DHA and EPA, which are important in prevention or improvement of human 

health conditions. Oil derived from MON 87769 soybean would be used to enrich a wide 

variety of foods, including processed foods, margarine, salad dressings, and other 

selected food categories. 

APHIS has considered the human health impacts associated with the new fatty acids 

expressed in MON 87769 soybean deriving from activity of the two desaturases, PjD6D 

and Nc.Fad3. The possible impacts of ingestion of the proteins were assessed, as were the 

new fatty acids. Neither desaturase protein formed by the introduced sequences have 

amino acid segments that are structural or immunologically relevant to human allergens, 

and both are easily degraded by simulated gastric and intestinal fluids (Monsanto, 

2010b). The two proteins were purified from immature soybean seed, and tested for 

adverse effects on mice (Monsanto, 2010b). A ‘No Observed Effect Level’ (NOEL) was 

found for mouse ingestion up to 37.3 mg/kg body weight, which is 29,000 and 47,000 

times the concentration expected in human diet when containing oils from MON 87769 

soybean. 

Monsanto presents data comparing the fatty acid and other nutritional element 

concentrations with the reported ranges for conventional soybean against commercial 

tolerance ranges (see summary Table 15, below). MON 87769 soybean fatty acids are 

compared with conventional soybean and commercial ranges of these fatty acids. In 

addition to evaluating the targeted fatty acid composition, Monsanto evaluated non-fatty 

acid nutrients, anti-nutrients, proximate and fiber levels, consistent with the 

compositional guidance provided by the OECD (OECD, 2001). 

Table 15: Comparison of percentage fatty acid in MON 87769 soybean with 

conventional soybean control (A3525) and commercial range.

Fatty Acid 

Total Percent (%) 

MON 87769 

Soybean 

Mean 

Conventional 

Soybean (A3525)

Mean 

Commercial 

Soybean Range 

16:0 palmitic 12.1 11.8 9.9-12.3 

18:0 stearic 4.2 4.2 3.7- 4.9 

18:1 oleic 15.2 19.2 16.7 - 23.2 

18:2 linoleic 22.8 54.9 53.4 - 57.4 

18:3 alpha-linolenic 11.2 9.2 7.0 – 10.6 

18:3 gamma-linolenic 7.1 N/A N/A 

18:4 stearidonic 26.1 N/A N/A 

Source: Table E-12 and Table VII-1 (for percentage of new fatty acids) (Monsanto, 2010b). 

From the summary Table 14, total saturated fat (as measured by palmitic and stearic acid 

percentages) in MON 87769 soybean was similar to that of conventional soybean and 
89 

olive oil. The mean level of oleic acid decreased 4% in MON 87769 soybean compared 

to the conventional soybean variety (Table 15). Linoleic acid decreased from 54.9% in 

conventional soybean to 22.8% in MON 87769 soybean, and this is reflected in the 

appearance of stearidonic in MON 87769 soybean at 26.1%. There was a 2% increase in 

alpha-linolenic acid in MON 87769 soybean when compared to the conventional variety 

and the appearance of gamma linolenic acid of 7%. Overall, the total polyunsaturated 

fatty acids of MON 87769 soybean and conventional soybean are similar. 

SDA commonly occurs within the environment, and is found in 17 plant families and 

over 200 species at more than 1% of fatty acid content (p. 8 (Monsanto, 2010b)) and 

gamma-linolenic acid is found in at least 13 species (Table X-1 (Monsanto, 2010b)). 

Many plant species are cultivated as a source of these omega-3 fatty acids, such as 

Echium spp., black currant, and Borago officinalis. No adverse effects on human 

subjects were reported in a study of healthful effects associated with consuming soybean 

oil from MON 87769 (containing SDA) ((Lemke et al., 2010)). Many fish species have 

measureable content of SDA (Table X-2 (Monsanto, 2010b)) and fish oil is extensively 

consumed for the benefit of providing the long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids 

(Addendum to petition (Monsanto, 2010b)). 

Monsanto measured compositional aspects of MON 87769 soybean and compared these 

data with conventional soybean. As earlier noted, SDA and also gamma linolenic acid 

are not found in commodity soybean. Although the animal feed consultation with FDA is 

pending, submitted data showed that these new components are both intermediates in 

mammalian systems during production of DHA and EPA, and also are found in the 

environment in numerous other plant and animal sources. Linoleic acid (18:2) is 

decreased to about 41% of control percentage, and this altered MON 87769 soybean 

constituent is similar to that found in canola oil. Statistically significant but small 

differences were observed in the comparisons of the A3525 conventional variety to MON 

87769 soybean in the concentrations of several fatty acids (16:0 palmitic, 18:0 stearic, 

18:1 oleic, 18:3 alpha linolenic acid, 20:0 arachidic, 22:0 behenic). APHIS evaluated 

these differences in composition and has determined that those reported for MON 87769 

soybean either fall within the typical commercial range for percentage composition or the 

99% tolerance interval for commercial soybean composition (Monsanto, 2010b). Several 

amino acid percentages, % dry weight of proximates (protein and carbohydrate), and two 

isoflavones were also different from controls, but these also were within either the range 

of commercial values or the 99% tolerance level for commercial soybean (Monsanto, 

2010b). 

 

MON 87769 soybean was produced to make available an additional source of SDA, 

which is a healthful omega-3 fatty acid that can be obtained from other plant sources, fish 

and algae on commercial scales (Monsanto, 2010b). The key contribution that SDA 

provides is that of a precursor for the fatty acids DHA and EPA, which have been shown 

by a variety of clinical and research reports to reduce adverse cardiovascular incidents, 

reduce inflammatory mediators, reduce cancer risk and inhibit tumor growth (see review 
90 

in Whelan, 2006). EPA alone may influence these outcomes, but administration of SDA 

can equal the impacts on these conditions (see review in Whelan, 2006). 

The Preferred Alternative impacts to human health differ from the No Action Alternative 

with regard to potential human health benefits associated with consumption of the oil 

from this crop. APHIS’ analysis and Monsanto’s data (Monsanto, 2010b) suggest that 

enhancing food oils with the soybean oil extracted from the MON 87769 soybean may 

have a positive impact on human health when used in many foods for which it is suitable. 

The addition of SDA using oil derived from MON 87769 soybean oil may benefit many 

health conditions, both as preventative and as remedial. The extent to which positive 

benefits may be observed is contingent upon the market share of the MON 87769 

soybean and the types of food products to which manufacturers add the modified oil. 

Based on APHIS’ analysis of field and laboratory data and scientific literature provided 

by Monsanto (Monsanto, 2010b), and safety data available on other GE soybean, APHIS 

has concluded that under this alternative, a determination of nonregulated status of MON 

87769 soybean would have no significant impacts on human health. 

Worker Safety 

If MON 87769 soybean is adopted, growers during the course of production will be 

exposed to the same pesticides as those typical of other non-herbicide tolerant soybean 

varieties. As MON 87769 soybean does not require different cultivation practices than 

currently available glyphosate-tolerant soybean, this level of herbicide exposure is 

expected to be the same as the No Action Alternative. 

Soybean processing and manufacturing will not be altered by use of MON 87769 

soybean, and workers will not be exposed to any new equipment or chemicals to which 

they had not already been exposed. The novel fatty acids stearidonic and gamma 

linolenic acid derive from two enzymes (desaturases) that are conserved across plant, 

animal and bacterial kingdoms, and which are ubiquitous in the human diet. Minor 

amounts of trans-SDA and trans alpha linolenic acid (trans-ALA) are also generated from 

processing of the novel fatty acids (Monsanto, 2010b). The oils found in MON 87769 

soybean, including the novel ones, are also commonly found in other plants. Oils with 

substantial amounts of the new fatty acids are already being processed by the food and 

nutrients industries, and are extracted from other plant sources (gamma linolenic acid 

from borage oil and blackcurrant; SDA from Echium spp.) and thus would not provide 

novel exposures to workers in the edible oil processing and packaging industry. 

Monsanto submitted a GRAS Notice (for Foods Generally Recognized as Safe) for MON 

87769 soybean to the FDA (US-FDA, 2009b). FDA has no further questions about the 

characteristics of the oil, and safety of its use in foods (see Appendix A; GRAS Notice 

No. GRN 000283) (US-FDA, 2009a). 
91 

4.6 Animal Feed 

The majority of the soybean cultivated in the U.S. is grown for animal feed, and is 

usually fed as soybean meal (Monsanto, 2010b). Soybeans intended for animal feed 

are generally cultivated as commodity products, although there are some consumers 

demanding specific physical or chemical characteristics to meet specific feed needs 

(Monsanto, 2010c). In these cases, the soybean meeting those specialized needs are 

cultivated as a specialty soybean crop. The cultivation practices necessary to 

maintain identity protection have been previously discussed in Section 2.2.5. 

Under FFDCA, it is the responsibility of feed manufacturers to ensure that the 

products they market are safe and properly labeled. Feed derived from MON 87769 

soybean must be in compliance with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements. 

GE organisms for feed may undergo a voluntary consultation process with the FDA 

prior to release onto the market. Monsanto initiated the consultation process with FDA 

for the commercial distribution of MON 87769 soybean and submitted a safety and 

nutritional assessment of food and feed derived from MON 87769 soybean to the FDA on 

March 23, 2009 (BNF No. 00117) (Monsanto, 2010b). FDA is currently evaluating the 

submission. 

4.6.1 No Action Alternative: Animal Feed 

Under the No Action Alternative, soybean-based animal feed will still be available from 

currently cultivated soybean varieties, both conventional varieties as well as GE soybean 

that are no longer subject to the regulatory requirements of 7 CFR part 340 or the plant 

pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act expressing herbicide tolerance. No change in 

the availability of these crops as animal feed is expected under the No Action Alternative. 

4.6.2 Preferred Alternative: Animal Feed 

Monsanto has submitted compositional and nutritional characteristics of MON 87769 

soybean to APHIS (Monsanto, 2010b). As part of field trials, samples of MON 87769 

soybean and conventional variety A3525 were collected from five different field trial 

locations during the 2007-2008 growing season (Monsanto, 2010b). These samples were 

analyzed for comparable nutritional components, including proximate (protein, fat, 

carbohydrates, fiber, ash, moisture), vitamins, amino acids, fatty acids, and the 

antinutrient factors of soybean (which included lectin, trypsin inhibitors, isoflavones, and 

phytic acid) (Monsanto, 2010b). APHIS has reviewed Monsanto’s results and has 

concluded that with the exception of the changes in fatty acid composition, the levels of 

nutrients, anti-nutrients, and secondary metabolites in MON 87769 soybean are not 

statistically different from those likely to be expressed by conventional varieties. 

The change in fatty acid composition is not expected to impact the value of MON 

87769 soybean as an animal feed, The total fat content of the oil is unchanged which 

is only about 0.5% (minimum) (Iowa Soybean Association, 2010). The total saturated 

fatty acids and polyunsaturated fatty acids in MON 87769 soybean oil are similar to 
92 

those found in conventional soybean. FDA has agreed that the soybean oil produced 

with MON 87769 soybean has GRAS status (US-FDA, 2009a), and thus, these oils are 

not a risk to animals that consume meal. The desaturase proteins introduced into MON 

87769 soybean are similar to those found in a wide variety of plants, fish and animals, 

and have been shown to have no toxic or allergenic potential (Monsanto, 2010b). 

Based on this information APHIS has concluded that a determination of nonregulated 

status of MON 87769 soybean would have no significant impacts on animal feed or animal 

health. Overall impacts are similar to the No Action Alternative. 

4.7 Socioeconomic Impacts 

4.7.1 Domestic Economic Environment 

GE soybeans are cultivated on 93% of the U.S. soybean acreage (USDA-ERS, 2010a, 

2010b). The U.S. acreage of soybeans planted has varied over time, but the USDA has 

noted that the acreage dedicated to soybean has declined in recent years as returns on 

investment favored corn production (USDA-ERS, 2008). Although acreage has declined, 

the yield per acre has continued to increase (USDA-ERS, 2008). Short-season varieties 

have provided northern growers with the option to replace wheat crops with soybeans 

(USDA-ERS, 2008). 

Soybean oil lost market share in the food industry early in the decade as consumers 

sought vegetable oils that were lower in trans-fatty acids; this trend has slowed with the 

availability of low-linolenic and high-oleic varieties of soybean (USDA-ERS, 2008). 

The decline in food uses was replaced by an increase in demand for commodity-grade 

soy oil for biodiesel production (USDA-ERS, 2008). 

No Action Alternative: Domestic Economic Environment 

Under the No Action Alternative, MON 87769 soybean and its progeny would continue 

to be regulated under 7 CFR part 340. Growers and other parties who are involved in 

production, handling, processing, or consumption of soybean would not have access to 

MON 87769 soybean and its progeny, but would continue to have access to GE that are 

no longer subject to the regulatory requirements of 7 CFR part 340 or the plant pest 

provisions of the Plant Protection Act as well as conventional varieties. Domestic 

growers will continue to utilize currently available traditional and GE soybean varieties 

based upon availability and market demand. 

Preferred Alternative: Domestic Economic Environment 

Monsanto anticipates that MON 87769 soybean will provide a niche product, which in 

five years, if all demand for SDA were provided by this variety, would equate to about 

100,000 acres of MON 87769 soybean being grown in the U.S. (Monsanto, 2010b). 

Monsanto does not anticipate that MON 87769 soybean would change soybean 

production practices or increase soybean acreage (Monsanto, 2010b). Properties of MON 
93 

87769 soybean are not likely to replace substantial amounts of commodity acreage, and 

will not require significant additional acreage for the new soybean varieties. New niche 

food and industrial uses may be found for this oil, but at present, no large requirements 

for this variety can be foreseen. Existing soybean users will remain users of commodity 

soy oil, and small scale use of MON 87769 soybean oil may slowly increase in the next 

five years to that predicted in Monsanto’s market analysis (see Appendix C of this EA). 

Stewardship of MON 87769 Soybean. Soybean oil users who may have concerns about 

undesirable changes in standard properties of this modified oil have been identified by 

Monsanto, and dialogues have begun to solicit both specific issues of importance and to 

provide these stakeholders with relevant information (Appendix C; Addendum 

(Monsanto, 2010b)). As noted in Addendum 2 to the MON 87769 soybean petition, 

these groups include trade organizations representing oil processors, elevators, grain and 

oilseed processors, agricultural businesses and exporters, bakers, and grocery producers. 

Issues of commingling have been addressed in Addendum 1 (see for example, impacts to 

commodity soybean and meal, changes in oxidative and heat stability, acceptability of 

sensory properties and allowable changes in nutrition facts labeling). The issue of 

impacts of misdirected MON 87769 soybean was analyzed. Making standard 

assumptions for the size of a single truck delivery of an IP soybean and for the smallest 

soybean processor holding tank, the total SDA content of commodity oil would be 0.8% 

from a single such delivery. Maximal percentage of SDA in an elevator after 

misdirection would be 0.03-0.16% given standard elevator dimensions. A single truck 

inadvertently delivering one SDA soybean load to a commodity soybean ship would lead 

to SDA content of 0.0008%. In all these cases, the relative amount of the admixture 

would be extremely small, and as we show next, would not affect key properties of 

commodity oil. 

A number of assessments were made that showed to what extent mixture of MON 87769 

soybean would affect expected properties of commodity oil. To decrease the oxidative 

stability (measured by the oxidative stability index falling below the range of that for 

commodity soybean), the mixture would require up to 12.5% of MON 87769 soybean 

(Figure 1, Appendix C). Monsanto also determined that commodity oil would tolerate up 

to 15% MON 88769 Soybean without impact on formation of unacceptable levels of 

polar materials in commercial fryer conditions (Figure 3, Appendix 2). Commingling of 

MON 87769 soybean up to 15% content in the commodity oil had no impact on flavor of 

French fries (Figure 4, Appendix 2). 

 A key to the acceptability of soybean oil as a feedstock is that the product has a 

consistent and specific fatty acid composition (Cahoon, 2003). The identity protection 

system detailed above in Subsection 2.2.5, Specialty Soybean Production, provides 

controls to ensure that the product traits attained in the field are preserved up through the 

ultimate user. Monsanto intends to segregate the crop from commodity soybean at all 

stages, from seed production through and including handling , processing and use in a 

closed loop process, and to oversee a complete product stewardship plan involving all 

producers and users (Monsanto, 2010b). 
94 

Mechanisms to Maintain Product Identity. Monsanto has developed a Closed Loop 

Stewardship System (CLSS) that will avoid potential impacts to commodity soybean oil 

(Appendix 2). Procedures and processes for MON 87769 soybean have been designed 

for production integrity at all steps of viable seed and grain production, and through 

storage, grain elevators, oil and meal processors, and downstream entities for product 

identity assessment (Appendix 2; Addendum 1 (Monsanto, 2010b)). The CLSS will 

require terms and conditions for quality management systems, quality assurance and 

quality control. After obtaining international regulatory approvals for MON 87769 

soybean, Monsanto will continue to refine and update the stewardship system for long 

term implementation. Key stakeholders will continue to be consulted as stewardship of 

MON 87769 soybean continues. 

Contract buyers of MON 87769 soybean will be required to identify MON 87769 

soybean beginning with delivery at grain elevators; sampling for MON 87769 soybean 

grain will be required by contract for each arriving truckload. Processors and 

downstream users will use standard oil analytic procedures to provide oil constituent 

analysis at critical control points in the CLSS, as well as segregation and adherence to 

standard protocols required by contracts and agreements. 

In addition to contracts and agreements with Monsanto, product identity at all steps will 

be maintained because soybean sellers and oil processors are motivated to capture 

premium prices; routine adherence to protocols will also serve to maintain product 

identity. With these financial incentives and established procedures, the soybean industry 

will observe best management practices, use appropriate identification procedures, 

employ proprietary inventory systems and ensure traceability requirements. Using the 

proposed measures, which would be established by contractual agreements with growers, 

elevators and processors, Monsanto aims to provide stewardship during all phases of 

production for stakeholders invested in all uses of soybean oil. 

The vegetable oil industry is experienced at handling multiple IP soybean types and the 

oils extracted from them (Appendix 2 and Addendum 1 (Monsanto, 2010b)). Oil 

processors and users are able to appropriately characterize, segregate and blend for 

special functions the identity preserved oils available to them for attaining the final 

quality needed in specialty products. The Monsanto Vistive low-linolenic variety has 

been available to oil users for six years, and is grown extensively in 12 states (Appendix 

2, www.vistive.com). Monsanto’s oversight mechanisms for production of Vistive low 

linolenic oil as well as IP mechanisms used for other identity preserved soybean 

production both have similarities to the plan described here for product stewardship of 

MON 87769 soybean oil. Monsanto has provided the leadership for production of the low 

linolenic IP specialty oil, and thus, has multiple years of relevant experience in 

establishing and maintaining processes of appropriate stewardship for MON 87769 

soybean and its oil products. Monsanto demonstrated that they would work with 

processors to assure adequate testing methods and quality processes were applied. 

Market Share/Uses of MON 87769 Soybean. The majority of soybean cultivated in the 

U.S. is grown as a commodity product intended for animal feed. Specific market uses for 
95 

specialty soybean products generally require adherence to specialty crop practices to 

preserve identity from seed production through harvesting, handling, and processing. A 

premium is paid to growers and processors for delivering product that meets these desired 

purity and quality standards (Elbehri, 2007; Lee and Herbek, 2004; Muth et al., 2003; 

Pritchett et al., 2002; Smyth and Phillips, 2002; Sundstrom et al., 2002). MON 87769 

soybean is considered a specialty soybean product and will be marketed in accordance 

with other high-value specialty food crop products (Monsanto, 2010b). To maintain the 

identity of the product soybeans, growers cultivating MON 87769 soybean may 

potentially incur increased costs for production and distribution throughout the supply 

chain (mostly IP costs). The extent to which MON 87769 soybean displaces other 

cultivated varieties cannot be predicted, as market segment is contingent on variety 

acceptance by both growers and consumers. 

Monsanto has developed MON 87769 soybean to provide an enriched oil source of SDA, 

which could be made available for food incorporation and for cooking. Commercial 

plant sources of SDA are limited and production quantities are difficult to ascertain, and 

fish oil sources of stearidonic and other long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids may not be 

acceptable to customers who do not wish to consume fish or to producers who do not 

favor the organoleptic or stability properties of fish oil. Of the fish oil used in the U.S., 

about 14% is used in functional foods (Addendum 1 (Monsanto, 2010b)), which is one 

category to which SDA soybean will contribute. Monsanto proposes that the availability 

of SDA soybean will allow incorporation of the omega-3 fatty acid into a wider range of 

food categories than existing SDA sources (Monsanto, 2010b). The increase projected 

through 2016 for omega-3 oils is 26.6%, about twice the present rate, and Monsanto 

proposes that the product will get all the increase. Thus, by 2016, Monsanto expects that 

MON 87769 soybean will be produced on 100,000 acres (Appendix C: Addendum 1 

(Monsanto, 2010b)). The MON 87769 soybean modified oil may also be a candidate oil 

for use in industrial products, since increased unsaturation may be useful in some 

applications, but the potential for this use cannot easily be estimated. 

The main variables that determine outcomes for market share will be consumer 

acceptance (including that of food and industrial producers) and price of the commodity 

(Giannakas and Yiannaka, 2010). The greatest impacts will occur if the price of the 

novel soybean oil is relatively low, and consumer evaluation is highly favorable, which 

could result in an increasing number of products using oil from MON 87769 soybean. In 

this event, increased economic benefit would ensue to producers of the novel oil. 

Because these variables associated with MON 87769 soybean cannot be determined at 

present, no definitive conclusions can be made about market share impacts on soybean oil 

producers. 

Potential Market Response to MON 87769 Soybean. Changes in total acreage of specific 

oilseed crop varieties in response to market demand can be readily observed. In 1995, 

the National Sunflower Association began developing sunflower varieties to take 

advantage of pending label requirements for trans fatty acids (NSA, 2006). By 2005, it 

was estimated that 80% of the U.S. sunflower acreage was planted in NuSunTM, a 
96 

conventionally produced high-oleic variety (NSA, 2006). This transition occurred after 

the food industry conducted extensive studies of food chemistry, supported by human 

health assessments (NSA, 2006). The usefulness of low linolenic soybean has allowed 

growth of the market, from 800,000 acres in 2006 (Fehr, 2007) to a total of 3 million 

acres since 2005 (Monsanto, 2010c). The low linolenic soybean however, has uses as a 

modified commodity product, and not as a specialty oil that MON 87769 soybean would 

supply. 

The value to the consumer from the changes presented in MON 87769 soybean is a direct 

function of the chemical changes associated with the changed concentrations of the fatty 

acids. The beneficial results of incorporating SDA into consumer products and into 

finished manufactured foods will be a point advanced by food marketers. Enough 

scientific evidence is available for use of EPA, DHA (SDA is a precursor for these in 

human metabolism) as a food supplement in a conventional food to make certain health 

claims (see summary of U.S. Agencies statements,(Council for Responsible Nutrition, 

2005)), and these should not exceed FDA statements for reducing the risk of coronary 

heart disease, “Supportive but not conclusive research shows that consumption of EPA 

and DHA omega-3 fatty acids may reduce the risk of coronary heart disease” (US-FDA, 

2004 ). Claims supported by the European Food Safety Authority supported additional 

claims about the health benefits for maintaining normal eye and brain function, and could 

be the basis for marketing claims if products were made for export to European markets 

(EFSA (European Food Safety Administration), 2011). The size of such domestic 

markets is difficult to analyze, but gives credence to the market forecast offered by 

Monsanto for potential use of omega-3 uses for MON 87769 (Addendum 1 (Monsanto, 

2010b)). 

This product will have decreased oxidative stability relative to commodity soybean oil 

(Addendum 1 (Monsanto, 2010b)) and thus may not be useful for certain industrial 

lubricant uses (Monsanto, 2010b; USB, 2010b). Saturated fats in MON 87769 soybean 

are not lower than commodity soybean oil (Table 14) so that this parameter does not 

improve use as a biodiesel fuel over commodity soybean oil because these fatty acids 

may be one factor that improves cold weather performance (AGRA, 2009; Graef et al., 

2009; Knothe, 2005; Monsanto, 2010c) performance. Cetane numbers, which are a 

measure of the ignition quality of an oil, will likely be reduced compared to commodity 

soybean oil, since increased unsaturation depresses this value (see Table 7, Moser, 2009), 

and SDA itself and modestly increased linolenic acid both increase unsaturated fatty 

acids. Lower cetane numbers would not offer improvements over commodity soybean 

oil. 

The costs of developing and managing IP specialty soybean crops have been identified as 

a barrier to the market, so price premiums such as noted above are essential for these 

specialty soybeans to be adopted (Pritchett et al., 2002). The cost for entry into the IP 

system has been estimated as high as 25% above the cost of conventional crop production 

(Smyth and Phillips, 2002). Consumers of specialty crops also have cost burdens 

associated with these crops. In addition to the costs incurred for specialty crop 
97 

production, specialty crop consumers accrue added IP costs from five general activities: 

certifying and obtaining ingredients; testing ingredients or final products; separating 

equipment and facilities; scheduling production and conducting changeover procedures; 

and conducting recordkeeping (Muth et al., 2003). 

These IP management costs may be offset by premium value received for the crop and 

the product, as well as increased yields for certain IP varieties. Pritchett reports that 

specialty soybean yields are generally higher than those reported for commodity 

soybeans, which he attributes to either the managerial talent of the specialty grower or 

higher land quality which is recognized and optimized by the grower (Pritchett et al., 

2002). There is no information whether these market entry costs for cultivation and use 

of specialty soybean would be offset by increased yields and premium prices for the 

products of MON 87769 soybean. Irrespective of the value added application of oils 

derived from MON 87769 soybean, adherence to soybean IP practices will be essential to 

ensure that the crop value is preserved. 

In the alternative, inadvertent use of MON 87769 soybean by a user desiring an 

alternative fatty acid composition may give rise to negative impacts to those consumers. 

For example, when polyunsaturated fatty acids are high, rapid oxidation can occur in 

fried foods and result in undesirable taste and odor (Addendum (Monsanto, 2010b)). 

Also, the taste commonly associated with fried food is due to the presence of linoleic acid 

(AGRA, 2009) and MON 87769 soybean will have decreased content. High-oleic acid 

soy oils are not considered ideal for fried food applications (AGRA, 2009) and high 

levels of linolenic acid contribute to oxidation during frying and over extended storage 

times (Rosseli, 1998). If MON 87769 soybean were inadvertently used in high 

proportions for fried food applications, the resulting food products would likely be 

unacceptable. As noted in the Addendum, however, at low levels of admixture of MON 

87769 soybean with commodity soybean oil (up to 15%), no adverse effects can be 

detected on either oxidative stability or on flavor perception (Appendix C: Addendum 1, 

(Monsanto, 2010b)) 

The need to maintain identity and control product characteristics are similar concerns for 

industrial applications. Oils with high concentrations of linolenic acid are comparable to 

linseed oil and are very desirable in the coatings industry where they are used to enhance 

drying of paints, inks, and varnishes (Cahoon, 2003). SDA and the less saturated 

linolenic acid, may have decreased oxidative stability (Appendix 2) and thus be valuable 

in this type of application. Vegetable oil polyols formed via epoxides are used in 

production of polyurethanes, When vegetable oils contain high levels of specific 

unsaturated fatty acids, epoxidized soybean-produced oils can be produced that lead to 

higher quality chemicals with more homogeneous character (Cahoon, 2003). While the 

inadvertent substitution of one specialty oil for another specialty oil is highly unlikely, 

the results of such an accidental substitution in the industrial sector may nonetheless be 

substantial. If the IP practices do not maintain the identity of MON 87769 soybean and 

either conventional soy oil or other specialty oils, desired oil composition would be 

compromised and the product would not meet its specifications. Those entities crushing 
98 

or using oil from MON 87769 soybean will be required under Monsanto’s stewardship 

plan to be continually monitoring fatty acid content of oil, both upon arrival and after 

processing. Those oil industry entities that do not purchase or expect MON 87769 

soybean derived oil will also need to monitor fatty acid content of oil products, which for 

standard quality assurance programs would be done under any circumstance, but also 

because various specialty soybean oils besides MON 87769 are also present in the 

marketplace, which could also have impacts on fatty acid content. 

Identity preserved product such as low-linolenic varieties provide the grower with a 

premium price as high as $1.25 per bushel (Conley et al., 2008) but more recently have 

declined to 50-60 cents per bushel (Wallaces Farmer, 2010). In 2005, when Monsanto 

introduced the low-linolenic soybean “Vistive” variety, food producers such as Kellogg 

noted that there was a high demand and significant shortage for soy oils with these traits 

(Woznicki, 2005). MON 87769 soybean market share will be contingent on a 

demonstrated price and high yield potential as well as consumer and producer preference 

to other modified fatty acid soybean varieties. 

Net income differentials cannot be projected, since the net income of soybean producers 

growing conventional soybean is not easily predicted (see regional differences in years 

2009-10) (USDA-ERS, 2010e). However, as Monsanto anticipates that MON 87769 

soybean would be cultivated as a specialty crop under an IP system, resulting domestic 

socioeconomic impacts are expected to be similar to the No Action Alternative. Similar 

to other specialty crops currently being grown under IP systems, resulting economic 

benefits are contingent on adherence to IP practices at all stages of MON 87769 soybean 

cultivation and production. 

4.7.2 Trade Economic Environment 

Although soybean oil constitutes only a small percent of soybean weight (approximately 

19%), soybean oil accounts for up to 65% of all vegetable oil and fat consumed in the 

U.S. (USDA-ERS, 2010e). The worldwide market share is not as high. Until 2005, 

soybean oil was the largest source of vegetable oil worldwide (USDA-ERS, 2010e). In 

2005, however, palm oil overtook soybean oil in volume of production; palm oil and 

rapeseed oil (canola) production are expected to continue to grow over the next few years 

(USDA-ERS, 2010e). In 2009, the U.S. exported 1.3 billion bushels (34.9 million metric 

tons) of soybean, which accounted for 46% of the world's soybean exports (SoyStats, 

2010g). In total, the U.S. exported $16.5 billion U.S. dollars (USD) worth of soybean 

and soybean products in 2009 (SoyStats, 2010b). China is the largest export market for 

U.S. soybean with purchases totaling $9.2 billion. Mexico is the second largest export 

market with sales of $1.3 billion in the same year (SoyStats, 2010b). Other significant 

markets include Japan and the EU. 

The global demand for soybeans is expected to increase by a full third over 2010 

consumption in the next ten years, with China accounting for 80% of the expected 

increase in total demand (FAPRI, 2009; Hartnell, 2010). China and India are predicted to 

import 46% of the total soybean market by 2018/2019 (FAPRI, 2009). The USDA has 
99 

predicted that U.S. exports will remain flat during much of this period, as a result of 

increase in domestic consumption and competition from South America (FAPRI, 2009; 

USDA-ERS, 2009). To a certain extent, competition with South American producers 

will be offset by increased demand from China (FAPRI, 2009). The USDA predicts that 

the U.S. share of this export market could potentially decline from the current 46% to 

30% at the end of the decade (FAPRI, 2009; USDA-ERS, 2009). It is also noted that as a 

result of higher prices for vegetable oils as a result of increased demand for food use as 

well as for biodiesel and other industrial uses, previously uncropped land in Brazil, 

Indonesia, and Malaysia are being brought into production for soybean and palm oil 

(USDA-ERS, 2009). This will increase global competition for export market share. 

Income benefits from cultivation of herbicide tolerant soybeans have been substantial. 

Global farm income has been estimated to have increased over 6% in 2007 as a 

consequence of adopting these varieties (Brookes and Barfoot, 2010; Hartnell, 2010). 

Global gains from adoption of herbicide-tolerant soybeans have been estimated as high as 

$7 billion per year (Hartnell, 2010). Continued expansion of these crops internationally 

will be an extension of consumer demand as well as government regulation of GE 

commodities. 

Costs of production also play a role in U.S. soybean export competitiveness. In 

Argentina, for example, the cost of herbicide-tolerant soybean production is substantially 

lower than U.S. costs because Monsanto was unable to patent the technology in 

Argentina (Brookes and Barfoot, 2010). As a consequence, Argentinian growers are able 

to save seed and not pay technology fees or royalty fees on farm-saved seed (Brookes and 

Barfoot, 2010). 

No Action Alternative: Trade Economic Environment 

Approximately 93% of the soybean varieties currently cultivated in the U.S. are GE 

varieties (USDA-ERS, 2010a, 2010b). All these GE soybean varieties are herbicide 

resistant. Specialty soybeans comprise approximately 12% of the soybean acreage 

(MSA, 2009). U.S. soybeans will continue to play a role in global soybean production, 

and will continue to be a supplier in the international market. 

Under the No Action Alternative, there would be no changes to the existing soybean 

market. 

Preferred Alternative: Trade Economic Environment 

To support commercial introduction of MON 87769 soybean in the U.S., regulatory 

submissions will be made by the petitioner to countries that import significant quantities 

of soybean or its processed fractions from the U.S. and have established regulatory 

approval processes in place (Monsanto, 2010b). These will include submissions to a 

number of foreign government regulatory authorities, including: Ministry of Agriculture, 

People’s Republic of China; Japan’s Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, and Fisheries 

(MAFF) and the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare (MHLW); the Canadian Food 
100 

Inspection Agency (CFIA) and Health Canada; the Intersectoral Commission for 

Biosafety of Genetically Modified Organisms (CIBIOGEM), Mexico; the European Food 

Safety Authority (EFSA); and the regulatory authorities in other soybean importing 

countries with functioning regulatory systems. As appropriate, notifications of 

importation will be made by the petitioner to importing countries that do not have a 

formal approval process. 

MON 87769 soybean is intended to be cultivated as a specialty GE soybean variety and 

the SDA soybean oil will be produced and processed using a closed loop stewardship 

system to capture the food quality value of the oil (Monsanto, 2010b). The cultivation of 

MON 87769 soybean is not expected to result in an increase in the total acreage devoted 

to soybean cultivation, although the allocation of acreage to specialty soybean cultivation 

could increase contingent upon market demand. As with the No Action Alternative, U.S. 

soybeans will continue to play a role in the global soybean market. 

To the extent that the modified fatty acid soybean oil derived from MON 87769 soybean 

achieves market acceptance, it is conceivable that this soybean-based oil could displace 

other fish oils and small scale production of exotic SDA vegetable oils in the 

international market. Products potentially displaced by MON 87769 soybean oil may 

include crops producing oils from such plants of the genera Echium and Ribes (black 

current). Although MON 87769 soybean oil may not be used in food products to the 

exclusion of existing products, at least some diminution of other oils from commodity 

soybean, canola, corn and so forth may be marginally displaced in the production of food 

products augmented with the new soybean oil. 

Consistent with the potential increase in international demand for this specialty oil 

product, as well as price competitiveness, a determination of nonregulated status of MON 

87769 soybean may have a positive benefit on U.S. exports as soy oil based on this 

product increases soybean oil sales. The international market share of MON 87769 

soybean as specialty variety is contingent on global vegetable oil market requirements, 

food processor acceptance, consumer preference, demonstrated availability of the 

product, and price competitiveness (Monsanto, 2010b). However, with an inability to 

predict the size of these variable inputs, APHIS cannot reliably foresee the outcome for 

an increase in world market share of soybean resulting from planting of this variety. 

Global sensitivities to GE products, including international restrictions on import of GE 

products and inability of the petitioner to gain local approval for cultivation or 

importation, will continue to impede trade with those countries. These challenges to 

international trade in GE products are already in place. Restrictions on international trade 

in GE products, including MON 87769 soybean, are unlikely to change with a 

determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean. 

A determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean will not adversely impact 

the trade economic environment and could potentially enhance it through the subsequent 

demand for the SDA MON 87769 soybean line and its oil products. The MON 87769 

soybean follows trends in the continuing development of specialty soybeans with 
101 

modified fatty acid profiles. The trade economic impacts associated with a determination 

of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean are anticipated to be very similar to the 

No Action Alternative. 

4.7.3 Social Environment 

The social environment evaluated in this subsection relates to the general soybean 

farm, as well as the individuals or workers employed by the businesses potentially 

impacted by this product, including food processers and industrial users. 

No Action: Social Environment 

Under the No Action Alternative, there would be no changes from the status quo impacts 

on the social environment surrounding soybean farming, food processing, or industrial 

uses. The cropping and marketing decisions currently made by soybean growers are 

unlikely to change with the selection of this alternative. 

Preferred Alternative: Social Environment 

MON 87769 soybean is not intended to confer any competitive advantage in terms of 

weed management or to extend the range of cultivation outside of existing cultivation 

areas. Monsanto expects that MON 87769 soybean will be cultivated as a specialty crop, 

with the SDA soybean oil produced and processed under existing identity protection 

systems to capture the food quality value of the oil (Monsanto, 2010b). Consistent with 

the expectations that this variety is to be cultivated as a specialty crop, a determination of 

nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean is not expected to result in an expansion of 

the number of soybean acres, since oil from the variety will likely replace existing oils 

from soybean on a highly limited scale. Soybean acreage is expected to remain stable, 

and overall impacts relative to the total soybean market system are similar to the No 

Action Alternative. 

To the extent that MON 87769 soybean is accepted by producers and consumers, MON 

87769 soybean has the potential to displace other specialty soybean varieties, but given 

the expected market growth of the variety, is expected to have no significant impact. 

Only 0.5% of the existing acres of soybean in the affected area are likely to be planted to 

the MON 87769 soybean. Those growers currently cultivating specialty soybean 

varieties have already invested in equipment and practices to maintain the identity of the 

product from seed through harvest and processing and would not be impacted by this 

change. To the extent that a grower currently cultivating commodity soybean elects to 

cultivate MON 87769 soybean, that grower will need to invest in handling equipment and 

management practices to capture and preserve the food quality value of the oil. Growers 

adopting specialty varieties already make such investment decisions based upon 

perceived value and return on investment (Iowa State University, 2008). 

The soybean market also includes seed production, equipment manufacturers, handlers, 

and producers. Monsanto’s analysis of agronomic characteristics did not identify any 
102 

differences between MON 87769 soybean and conventional varieties (Monsanto, 2010b). 

Monsanto expects that MON 87769 soybean would be cultivated, handled, and processed 

consistent with existing identity protection practices and systems (Monsanto, 2010b). 

Other than equipment required to maintain identity protection, no specialized equipment 

is required to cultivate, handle, or process MON 87769 soybean. 

Food processors potentially impacted by MON 87769 soybean include those parts of the 

industry using soybean oil for frying, and cooking oil, and shortening products where 

shelf life and oxidative stability are important features. Monsanto intends to oversee the 

product using a closed loop stewardship system (Addendum 1) (Monsanto, 2010b). 

Because other modified oil products are already present in the commodity oil market and 

routinely handled by processors using standard industry processing methods and 

equipment, no new processes or equipment are required to introduce MON 87769 

soybean. Thus, workers in these areas are not likely to be impacted by any major 

alterations of soybeans or of qualities of soybeans processed. 

Monsanto has evaluated the market and trade applications of MON 87769 soybean, and 

has determined that this product will be used in a variety of uses, including margarine, 

shortenings, salad dressings, ready to eat foods, baked goods and a variety of other 

products (Addendum) (Monsanto, 2010b). In the event that MON 87769 soybean is 

introduced into a commodity oil unintentionally at the level of a misdirected truckload of 

soybean, or other unit delivery at a higher level of processing, the consequent mixture 

would be less than 15%, at which level, no impacts on food ingredient labels or nutrition 

facts panels or changes to oxidative stability or food sensory properties would result 

(Addendum) (Monsanto, 2010b). 

Potential impacts to industrial users of soybean products are similar. Existing identity 

protection measures are already in place to allow industrial users to manage feedstocks 

and products for specific applications and needs (Smyth and Phillips, 2002; Sonka et al., 

2004). No new equipment or practices are required to incorporate MON 87769 soybean 

into this industrial market. However, for industrial users that require close tolerances in 

the ratios of fatty acid to ensure product quality, continuous monitoring of properties of 

input oils may be necessary. This scrutiny may already have been enhanced, given that 

the industry has increasingly begun to encounter and already needs to manage an 

increasing range of different soy-based feedstocks, ranging from ultra-low linolenic acid 

varieties, through and including feedstock oils for blending from other crops, such as 

high-oleic and high linolenic varieties that have various uses (Cargill, 2011; USB, 

2010b). Thus, APHIS does not expect that changes to the social environment including 

workforce will be altered by entry of this variety into the soybean market. 

Consistent with the above assessment of potential impacts to the growers, and workforce 

in the food processing and industrial use categories, the impacts of a determination of 

nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean are expected to be the same as the No Action 

Alternative. 
103 

5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS 

A cumulative impact may be an effect on the environment which results from the 

incremental impact of the proposed action when added to other past, present, and 

reasonably foreseeable future actions. For example, the potential effects associated with 

a determination of nonregulated status of a GE crop in combination with the future 

production of crop seeds with multiple traits that are no longer subject to the regulatory 

requirements of 7 CFR part 340 or the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act 

(i.e., “stacked” traits), including drought tolerance, herbicide tolerance, and pest 

resistance, would be considered a cumulative impact. 

5.1 Assumptions Used for Cumulative Impacts Analysis 

Specialty soybeans are cultivated to meet specific consumer needs. MON 87769 soybean 

is anticipated to be cultivated as another specialty soybean, offering growers and 

consumers an option for an omega-3 fatty acid easily converted by human metabolism to 

desirable fatty acids, EPA and DHA. Herbicide tolerant soybean is already extensively 

deployed in the seed market, as are a variety of specialty fatty acid ratios in other 

vegetable oil sources. No additional potential cumulative impacts to the commodity 

soybean market or the specialty soybean market can be reliably anticipated as a result of 

a determination of nonregulated status and cultivation of MON 87769 soybean. 

MON 87769 soybean will be a readily produced source of omega-3 fatty acids, but not 

the only one, since there are other specialty vegetable oils that also provide SDA, such as 

the minor crops, borage, Echium spp. and blackcurrant. MON 87769 soybean successes 

in replacing these other high-oleic vegetable oils will be contingent upon producer and 

customer acceptance, availability of the product, and price. Monsanto estimates that the 

market for marine oils in the U.S. is 26,477 metric tons, and that this market and an 

annual increase in demand of 13.4% will provide the opportunity for use of this product. 

Stacked varieties of soybean, those crop varieties that may contain more than one trait, 

are currently found in the marketplace and in agricultural production. In the event 

APHIS reaches a determination of nonregulated status, MON 87769 soybean may be 

combined with non-GE and GE soybean varieties by traditional breeding techniques. 

There is no assurance that MON 87769 soybean will be stacked with any particular GE 

soybean trait (one no longer subject to the requirement of Part 340 and the provisions of 

the Plant Protection Act), as company plans and market demands play a significant role 

in those business decisions. APHIS’ regulations at 7 CFR Part 340 do not provide for 

Agency oversight of GE soybean varieties no longer subject to the requirement of Part 

340 and the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act, nor over stacked varieties 

combining these GE varieties, unless it can be positively shown that such stacked 

varieties were to pose a likely plant pest risk. Predicting all potential combinations of 

stacked varieties is hypothetical and purely speculative. 
104 

5.2 Cumulative Impacts: Acreage and Area of Soybean Production 

Cumulative effects of a determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean are 

unlikely. While APHIS expects that this variety will be stacked with glyphosate tolerance 

or other herbicide tolerance, as is a large percentage (93%) of other soybean crops in the 

U.S., it will not lead to any significant changes in the specifics of soybean production. 

Neither the No Action Alternative nor a determination of nonregulated status of MON 

87769 soybean are expected to directly cause an increase in agricultural acreage devoted 

to soybean production or those soybean acres devoted to GE soybean cultivation. It is 

anticipated that seed for this variety will not be marketed beyond five northern U.S. states 

(Monsanto, 2010b) and, in consideration of the low expected acreage (100,000 acres by 

2016), will have no substantial impact on general soybean production. The availability of 

MON 87769 soybean is not expected to change the cultivation areas for soybean 

production in the U.S., and there are no anticipated changes to the availability of GE and 

non-GE soybean varieties on the market under either alternative. 

5.3 Cumulative Impacts: Agronomic Practices 

Monsanto has stated that MON 87769 soybean would be stacked with either glyphosate 

or other available nonregulated herbicide resistance traits (Monsanto, 2010d). 

Glyphosate will be the continuing cornerstone of any multiple herbicide stack, with 

additional resistance complementing the activity, or allowing additional flexibility in 

designing weed control (Monsanto, 2010a). The adoption of herbicide tolerance traits 

complements conservation tillage practices by allowing farmers to substitute herbicide 

application for some tillage operations as a weed management practice (NRC, 2010). 

Benbrook (Benbrook, 2009) notes that herbicide-tolerant soybean accounts for over twothirds of the total acreage devoted to genetically engineered crops. 

Benbrook has reported that the adoption of herbicide-tolerant crops has resulted in an 

increase in the volume of herbicides applied to crops (Benbrook, 2009). Benbrook notes 

that herbicide use declined between 1996 and 2001 apparently in direct response to the 

adoption of herbicide-tolerant crops; however, since that time, herbicide use has 

increased (Benbrook, 2009). Reported increases in herbicide use reflect an increase in 

use of conventional herbicides as well as an increase in glyphosate applications as more 

glyphosate-tolerant crops are planted (Benbrook, 2009). Currently, nine weeds have been 

identified as glyphosate-resistant, with seven of these weeds identified as difficult to 

control weeds in soybean: common ragweed (Ambrosia artemisiifolia), common 

waterhemp (Amaranthus rudis), giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida), horsetail (marestail) 

(Conyza canadensis), Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum), Johnsongrass (Sorghum 

halapense), and Palmer amaranth (Amaranthus palmeri) (Benbrook, 2009). 

Besides glyphosate, soybean growers have had other herbicide-tolerant variety options 

for soybean production; two mechanisms for glyphosate resistance are offered to 

growers: insensitive target enzyme and increased metabolism. In addition, LibertyLink®

Soybean with glufosinate ammonium tolerance is available from numerous seed dealers 

(e.g., Stine Seed), as are STS soybeans, a conventionally derived resistance to ALS 
105 

herbicides, which may be stacked with other resistance traits (e.g., Asgrow Seed). These 

options allow growers to reduce dependence on glyphosate, especially if glyphosateresistant weeds are an important issue. Additional strategies to avoid development of 

glyphosate-resistant weeds may be used by growers which include: 

 Developing a diversified weed management program using herbicides with 

different modes of action, either concurrently or sequentially (NRC, 2010). 

 Using the full recommended herbicide rate and proper application timing for the 

most difficult to control weeds in the field (NRC, 2010). 

 Scouting the fields after herbicide application to ensure that control has been 

achieved and to discourage weeds from reproducing or proliferating vegetatively 

(NRC, 2010). 

 Incorporating cultural practices such as cultivation, tillage and crop rotation, 

where appropriate (NRC, 2010). 

Volunteer soybean is normally not a concern. Soybean is not winter hardy, and existing 

mechanical and chemical methods are available to manage the occasional volunteer 

soybean. Herbicides are available to control volunteer soybeans in corn, and wheat 

(above). These herbicides are suitable for post-emergent control of volunteer soybean. 

The challenges which growers face in managing glyphosate-resistant weeds is also not 

expected to differ between MON 87769 soybean stacked with glyphosate resistant trait 

and other glyphosate-tolerant varieties, and similar herbicides would be used in either 

crop for such weeds. 

A determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean will not result in changes 

in the current practices of crop rotation and pesticide use. Studies demonstrate MON 

87769 soybean is essentially indistinguishable from other soybean varieties (either 

herbicide tolerant ones, when stacked with an herbicide tolerant trait, or non-GE soybean 

when not stacked with an herbicide tolerant trait) in terms of agronomic characteristics, 

and cultivation practices would closely follow the herbicide tolerant GE or non-GE 

variety (Monsanto, 2010b). It is anticipated that herbicide use will continue the trends 

noted by Benbrook associated with the wide adoption of glyphosate-tolerant soybean and 

the emergence of glyphosate-resistant weeds. APHIS has determined that there are no 

past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions that would aggregate with effects of the 

proposed action to effect changes in crop rotation, and pesticide use. 

5.4 Cumulative Impacts: Soybean Seed Production 

Based on current acreage trends, GE soybean varieties will likely continue to dominate 

the soybean market. Since 2007, the GE varieties of soybean have comprised 91 to 93% 

of the U.S. soybean acreage. Changes in the agronomic practices and locations for 

soybean seed production using MON 87769 soybean are not expected. The availability 

of MON 87769 soybean will not change cultivation areas for soybean seed production in 

the U.S.; no cumulative effects have been identified for this issue. 
106 

5.5 Cumulative Impacts: Organic Soybean Production 

A determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean is not expected to change 

the market demands for GE soybean or soybean produced using organic methods. A 

determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean will add another GE 

soybean variety to the conventional soybean market. Based upon recent trend 

information, adding GE varieties to the market is not related to the ability of organic 

production systems to maintain their market share. 

5.6 Cumulative Impacts: Specialty Soybean Production 

A determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean is not expected to change 

the market demands for GE soybean or non-GE soybean produced using specialty 

systems. MON 87769 soybean is expected to be cultivated as a specialty soybean 

consistent with identity preserved practices. From Monsanto’s market analysis for needs 

of the soybean product, in five years the acreage produced will likely be only 1% of total 

specialty soybean acreage, assuming that specialty soybean stays at current estimates of 

12% of commodity soybean production (Monsanto, 2010b). Based on demonstrated 

agronomic characteristics and cultivation practices, and because the market share of 

specialty soybean varieties is unlikely to substantially change following the introduction 

of MON 87769 soybean, APHIS has determined that there are no past, present, or 

reasonably foreseeable changes that would impact specialty soybean producers and 

consumers. No cumulative effects have been identified for this issue. 

5.7 Cumulative Impacts: Water Resources 

Monsanto proposes that MON 87769 soybean will be stacked with a glyphosate tolerant 

trait or potentially with other herbicide tolerant traits no longer subject to the regulatory 

requirements of Part 340 and the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act or with 

both (Monsanto, 2010d). Current application rates of glyphosate for weed control with 

MON 87769 soybean are not expected to change. 

Although glyphosate is very soluble in water, it is strongly adsorbed to soils; 

consequently, glyphosate is unlikely to leach into groundwater or surface water runoff 

following application (Giesy et al., 2000; US-EPA, 1993b). However, Coupe et al. 

(Coupe et al., 2011) has shown that in agricultural basins with high glyphosate use rates, 

high overland runoff rates, and low flow through soil, glyphosate can be readily detected 

in surface waters. Relying on toxicological data, bioaccumulation and biodegradation 

studies, and acute and chronic tests on fish and other aquatic organisms, EPA however, 

has determined that “the potential for environmental effects of glyphosate in surface 

water is minimal” (US-EPA, 1993b). 

No cumulative effects on water use have been identified associated with a determination 

of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean. A determination of nonregulated status 

of MON 87769 soybean will not change the water use and irrigation practices used in 

commercial soybean production. 
107 

5.8 Cumulative Impacts: Soil Quality 

APHIS has not identified any cumulative effects to soils. Comprehensive phenotypic, 

agronomic, and ecological assessments conducted by the petitioner for MON 87769 

soybean did not find significant differences between MON 87769 soybean and control 

soybeans for these characteristics (Monsanto, 2010b). The few differences that were 

identified were typically small, site specific, and unlikely to be biologically meaningful. 

Event MON 87769 soybean required the same soil, fertilizer, water and pest management 

practices as non-GE soybean (Monsanto, 2010b). Consequently, the phenotypic, 

agronomic, and ecological data presented by Monsanto (Monsanto, 2010b) support the 

conclusion by APHIS that MON 87769 soybean will not significantly modify soil 

characteristics associated with conventional soybean production practices. 

If MON 87769 soybean is stacked with herbicide tolerance traits, persistence of 

pesticides in soil may be modulated by cultivation (see review of runoff potential in 

conservation tillage versus no-till and runoff potential (Warnemuende et al., 2007)). The 

glyphosate tolerant trait would likely be stacked with this variety, and so glyphosate 

would be the predominant post-emergent herbicide applied to MON 87769 soybean, as it 

is with other glyphosate tolerant soybean. Glyphosate has been shown to rapidly 

dissipate from most agricultural ecosystems across a wide range of soil and climatic 

conditions, with a median soil half-life (the time it takes for half of the glyphosate to 

dissipate in the soil) of 13 days (Giesy et al., 2000). A survey reported by Borggard and 

Gimseng (Borggaard and Gimsing, 2008) noted soil half-lives ranging from 1.2 to 197 

days, depending on a wide range of chemical and physical parameters of soil. 

If MON 87769 were to be stacked with the glyphosate tolerant trait, this would present 

certain environmental benefits over other herbicides that may be used for control of 

weeds in non-GE soybean production (Cerdeira and Duke, 2006; Hin et al., 2001). 

Pesticide products approved for application to emerged weeds normally are applied with 

surfactants. Surfactants increase the permeability of the weed foliage to increase the 

foliar uptake of glyphosate and thereby improve the efficacy of the herbicide (Stock and 

Holloway, 1993). Polyethoxylated alkyl amine (POEA) is the predominant surfactant 

used in formulated glyphosate products. Glyphosate and the POEA surfactant have 

similar soil dissipation rates and the same primary route of dissipation, i.e., microbial 

degradation (Giesy et al., 2000). The half-life of POEA in soil is estimated to range from 

7 to 14 days (Giesy et al., 2000). On that basis, the POEA surfactant is expected to 

behave similarly to glyphosate in field soil, and an increase in residual soil concentrations 

(accumulation) of the POEA surfactant is not anticipated. Because MON 87769 soybean 

when stacked with glyphosate or other herbicide tolerance does not differ in its 

agronomic requirements from conventional soybean or other GE varieties expressing 

glyphosate tolerance, agronomic practices associated with soil and land use are not 

expected to change with the availability of this new plant product. Based on these 

findings, and because the amount of soybean grown in the U.S. is unlikely to change by 

the introduction of MON 87769 soybean, APHIS has determined that there are no past, 
108 

present, or reasonably foreseeable actions that would aggregate with effects of the 

proposed action to impact soil. 

5.9 Cumulative Impacts: Air Quality 

APHIS has not identified any cumulative effects for this issue. The use of MON 87769 

soybean in commercial soybean production is not expected to cause any cumulative 

effect on air quality because APHIS does not anticipate any changes in soybean 

production practices or an expansion of soybean acreage as a result of a determination of 

nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean. The consequences of the Preferred Action 

Alternative on commercial soybean production and acreage are the same as for the No 

Action Alternative. 

5.10 Cumulative Impacts: Climate Change 

APHIS has not identified any cumulative effects for this issue. The use of MON 87769 

soybean in commercial soybean production is not expected to cause any cumulative 

effect on climate change because APHIS does not anticipate any changes in soybean 

production practices or an expansion of soybean acreage as a result of a determination of 

nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean. The consequences of the Preferred Action 

Alternative on commercial soybean production and acreage are the same as for the No 

Action Alternative. 

5.11 Cumulative Impacts: Animal Communities 

Soybean may be used by mammals and birds, and diverse numbers of insects may feed 

on the vegetative parts of the plant, or feed on other arthropods that feed on the soybean 

grain. Monsanto data for food and feed safety has established substantial evidence that 

the MON 87769 soybean is safe for long term consumption, since no acute impacts could 

be identified. Dietary exposure to the two new proteins expressed by MON 87769 is not a 

risk to human or animal health; the proteins are not toxic and fatty acids produced are 

common in the environment, produced by some other plants, fish and algae. There are no 

composition differences between this and conventional soybean, except for increased 

production of SDA, gamma linolenic acid and some expected decreases in other fatty 

acids. No differences in insect feeding damage to MON 87769 soybean and the 

comparator, conventional variety A3525 were observed over two years (Table I-5 and I6) (Monsanto, 2010b). No significant cumulative impacts to animals or insects that feed 

on soybean expressing MON 87769 soybean would follow a decision to choose the 

Preferred Alternative. 

5.12 Cumulative Impacts: Plant Communities 

If MON 87769 soybean is stacked with the glyphosate tolerance trait growers would 

continue to use glyphosate predominately for post-emergent weed control. The Roundup 

Ready® soybean system has become the standard weed control program in the U.S. 

cultivation of soybean. Approximately 92% of the U.S. soybean acreage is planted in 
109 

Roundup Ready® soybean varieties. Monsanto anticipates that MON 87769 soybean will 

not replace commodity type glyphosate-tolerant soybean varieties previously found to no 

longer be subject to the requirement of Part 340 and the plant pest provisions of the Plant 

Protection Act. Rather, MON 87769 soybean will remain a minor product with limited 

acreage. While any broad spectrum herbicide application has the potential to impact offsite plant communities, the impacts of planting MON 87769 soybean expressing 

glyphosate tolerance will not be novel or extensive. Accordingly, the cultivation of MON 

87769 soybean is not expected to result in an increase in the application of glyphosate or 

changes in herbicide treatments when compared with existing glyphosate-tolerant 

soybean varieties that are no longer subject to the regulatory requirements of 7 CFR part 

340 or the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act. 

Cumulative Impacts: Gene Flow and Weediness 

One introduced gene expected to be stacked in the MON 87769 soybean is the cp4 epsps

gene, which confers tolerance to the herbicide glyphosate. This gene is commonly found 

in other Roundup Ready® crops (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). No data have been presented to 

suggest that the incorporation of the cp4 epsps gene allows soybean to survive and 

reproduce without human intervention (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). 

The soybean industry has identity protection measures in place to restrict pollen 

movement and gene flow between soybean fields through the use of isolation distances, 

border and barrier rows, the staggering of planting dates and various seed handling, 

transportation, and ginning procedures (Bradford, 2006; NCAT, 2003; Sundstrom et al., 

2002). As a specialty soybean variety, MON 87769 soybean would be cultivated within 

these identity protection practices. In addition, there is no evidence that horizontal gene 

transfer and expression of DNA occurs between soybean and soil bacteria or unrelated 

plant species under natural field conditions, and even if this did occur, proteins 

corresponding to the transgenes are not likely to be produced. Gene movement between 

sexually compatible soybean varieties is no greater for MON 87769 soybean than it is for 

other non-GE or GE cultivars. In its PPRA, APHIS assessed the weediness potential of 

MON 87769 soybean based on the introduced Primula juliae delta-6 desaturase (Pj.D6D) 

and the Neurospora crassa delta-15 desaturase (Nc.Fad3) genes controlling fatty acid 

composition (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). In each case, the changes introduced in the MON 

87769 soybean were deemed to not present a weediness risk (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). 

Based on the scientific evidence, APHIS has not identified any cumulative effects on 

gene movement that would occur from a determination of nonregulated status of MON 

87769 soybean. 

5.13 Cumulative Impacts: Microorganisms 

Cultivation of MON 87769 soybean is highly unlikely to have direct toxic effects on 

microorganisms. The glyphosate tolerant trait would likely be stacked with this variety, 

and therefore glyphosate would likely be the predominant post-emergent herbicide 

applied to MON 87769 soybean, as it is with other glyphosate tolerant soybean. 

Microorganisms produce aromatic amino acids through the shikimate pathway, similar to 
110 

that in plants (USDA-FS, 2003). Because glyphosate inhibits this pathway, it could be 

expected that glyphosate would be toxic to microorganisms. Glyphosate use has been 

identified as potentially causing increases in certain disease-causing microbes (Fernandez 

et al., 2009; Kremer and Means, 2009). Reported increases in infections in cereal crops 

from pathogenic soil fungi have in some cases been determined to be more closely related 

to reduced tillage and continuous cropping using herbicide-tolerant crops, whereas in 

others, application of glyphosate correlated with increased bacterial species (Fernandez et 

al., 2009). The U.S. Forest Service, while acknowledging that in some cases, increases in 

soil pathogens following glyphosate treatment can be detected, “there is no indication 

that the transient enhancement in populations of soil fungi or bacteria will result in any 

substantial or lasting damage to soil ecology” (USDA-FS, 2003). 

Because any microorganism is already extensively exposed to glyphosate, it is unlikely 

that any new organisms would be impacted. Therefore, the likelihood of adverse 

cumulative effects on microorganisms following the introduction of MON 87769 soybean 

is minimal.

5.14 Cumulative Impacts: Biodiversity 

Cultivation of MON 87769 soybean is highly unlikely to have direct toxic effects on nontarget animals and microorganisms and is likely to be neutral to biodiversity compared 

with conventionally managed GE and non-GE soybean. Because any nontarget plants are 

already extensively exposed to glyphosate, it is unlikely that any new plants will be 

impacted. Therefore, the likelihood of adverse cumulative effects on non-target 

organisms and biodiversity following the introduction of MON 87769 soybean is 

minimal. 

The use of genetically modified soybean such as MON 87769 soybean when stacked with 

glyphosate tolerance may improve biological diversity by providing growers the 

opportunity to use conservation practices. Incorporation of herbicide tolerance in the crop 

facilitates the grower adoption of conservation and no-till strategies, improved soil 

porosity, enhancing soil fauna and flora (CTIC, 2010a), increasing the flexibility of crop 

rotation, and facilitating strip cropping (Fernandez-Cornejo et al., 2002), each of which 

contributes to the health of the faunal and floral communities in and around soybean 

fields thereby promoting biodiversity (Palmer et al., 2010; Sharpe, 2010). 

Based on available scientific data, the changes in fatty acid composition associated with 

MON 87769 soybean are not expected to directly or indirectly affect plants, animals or 

biodiversity. The genes responsible for the change in fatty acid composition are 

endogenous to the soybean and are thus already a part of the soybean cultivation 

environment. The U.S. EPA has reviewed the safety of the CP4 EPSPS protein and has 

established a tolerance exemption for the protein and the genetic material necessary for 

its production in or on all raw agricultural commodities ((US-EPA, 1996); 40 

CFR§174.523). The lack of any documented reports of adverse effects since the 

introduction of other Roundup Ready® crops in 1996 suggests the safety of its use. The 

CP4 EPSPS protein expressed in MON 87769 soybean is the same as that previously 
111 

reviewed by the U.S. EPA, accordingly, MON 87769 soybean is anticipated to be safe for 

animal consumption with regard to the cp4 epsps gene. 

APHIS has determined that there are no impacts from past, present, or reasonably 

foreseeable actions that would aggregate with effects of the proposed action to create 

cumulative impacts or reduce the long-term productivity or sustainability of any of the 

resources associated with the ecosystem in which MON 87769 soybean is planted 

(USDA-APHIS, 2010c). 

5.15 Cumulative Impacts: Human Health 

5.15.1 Cumulative Impacts: Worker Safety 

MON 87769 soybean is not expected to increase the total acreage of soybean production 

or the use of GE soybean. Monsanto anticipates that MON 87769 soybean will be a 

minor crop, produced to fill a small market need. To a limited extent, if stacked with an 

herbicide tolerant trait, MON 87769 soybean would simply replace a small percentage of 

acres of the herbicide-tolerant soybean cultivars already on the market today. As APHIS 

analyzed in the Proposed Alternative, no hazards of exposure to the new fatty acids exist 

and therefore cumulative impacts are unlikely. 

Monsanto is expected to stack MON 87769 soybean with the glyphosate tolerance trait 

(Monsanto, 2010d). The introduced protein for the tolerance is the CP4 EPSPS protein 

derived from Agrobacterium sp. The U.S. EPA has reviewed the safety of the CP4 

EPSPS protein and has established a tolerance exemption for the protein and the genetic 

material necessary for its production in or on all raw agricultural commodities ((US-EPA, 

1996); 40 CFR §174.523). This exemption was also based on a safety assessment for 

allergenicity that included rapid digestion in simulated gastric fluids, lack of homology to 

known toxins and allergens, and lack of toxicity in an acute oral mouse gavage study. 

The lack of any documented reports of adverse effects since the introduction of other 

Roundup Ready® crops in 1996 suggests the safety of its use. Worker safety issues 

related to the use of glyphosate and other U.S. EPA registered pesticides during 

conventional and GE soybean production should remain the same. If a grower replaces a 

non-herbicide-tolerant soybean variety with MON 87769 soybean it would be expected 

that there would be a corresponding increase in the post-emergent use of glyphosate. To 

the extent that such changes result in the replacement of more toxic herbicides with 

glyphosate, the change should positively benefit worker safety. 

The CP4 EPSPS protein likely to be expressed in MON 87769 soybean is the same 

protein previously reviewed by the U.S. EPA. Accordingly, worker safety risk associated 

with cultivation of and exposure to MON 87769 soybean is the same as the No Action 

Alternative. 
112 

5.15.2 Cumulative Effects: Public Health 

APHIS determined no significant adverse impacts on human health from consumption of 

the oil derived from MON 87769 soybean, although certain potential beneficial impacts 

may be possible. However, because Monsanto has decided to stack tolerance to the 

herbicide glyphosate with MON 87769 soybean, APHIS considers briefly the possible 

impacts of the gene on human health. Similar products are no longer subject to the 

regulatory requirements of 7 CFR part 340 or the plant pest provisions of the Plant 

Protection Act and have been used for general cultivation beginning in the mid-1990s 

with the introduction of Roundup Ready® products providing tolerance to glyphosate 

with the introduction of the cp4 epsps gene. In each case, FDA and U.S. EPA reviews 

and approvals determined that the products met the agency’s review criteria for approval. 

The cultivation of these existing crop products would not change under either alternative. 

Both characteristics have been successfully cultivated in multiple crops in the ensuing 

years with no evidence of human health impacts. 

The CP4 EPSPS protein confers tolerance to glyphosate. This protein is structurally 

homologous and similar functionally to endogenous plant EPSPS enzymes and is 

identical to the CP4 EPSPS in other Roundup Ready® crops, including Roundup Ready®

soybean (40-3-2 and MON 89788), Roundup Ready® canola, Roundup Ready® sugar 

beet, Roundup Ready® flax, and Roundup Ready® cotton (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). The 

first generation of Roundup Ready® soybean (40-3-2) no longer subject to the regulatory 

requirements of 7 CFR part 340 or the plant pest provisions of the Plant Protection Act in 

1995 (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). The cp4 epsps gene has been assessed extensively in the 

last 15 years. The safety of CP4 EPSPS protein present in biotechnology derived crops 

has been evaluated as part of comprehensive reviews of the safety of glyphosate exposure 

and ingestion (Harrison et al., 1996) (see also (Hammond et al., 1996; Padgette et al., 

1996)). The FDA has reviewed the safety of human consumption of the CP4 EPSPS 

protein in MON 87769 soybean, and concluded that this protein presents negligible risk 

to human health from consumption (US-FDA, 2009a). 

The EPA has also reviewed the safety of the CP4 EPSPS protein and has established a 

tolerance exemption for the protein and the genetic material necessary for its production 

in or on all raw agricultural commodities ((US-EPA, 1996); 40 CFR §174.523). This 

exemption is based on a safety assessment that included rapid digestion in simulated 

gastric fluids, lack of homology to known toxins and allergens, and lack of toxicity in an 

acute oral mouse gavage study. The CP4 EPSPS protein expressed in MON 87769 

soybean is the same as that previously reviewed by the EPA. Accordingly, MON 87769 

soybean is anticipated to be safe for human and animal consumption with regard to the 

cp4 epsps gene. 

There are no significant impacts on human health related to the No Action Alternative or 

a determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean. Moreover, no 

cumulative effects have been identified by APHIS. 
113 

5.16 Cumulative Impacts: Animal Feed 

No impacts were determined from APHIS’ analysis of possible impacts MON 87769 

soybean on animal feed. However, Monsanto plans to market the MON 87769 soybean 

with the Roundup tolerance trait. The gene for the trait expresses the CP4 EPSPS 

protein, derived from Agrobacterium sp., to achieve glyphosate herbicide tolerance. The 

U.S. EPA has reviewed the safety of the CP4 EPSPS protein and has established a 

tolerance exemption for the protein and the genetic material necessary for its production 

in or on all raw agricultural commodities ((US-EPA, 1996); 40 CFR §174.523). This 

exemption is based on a safety assessment that included rapid digestion in simulated 

gastric fluids, lack of homology to known toxins and allergens, and lack of toxicity in an 

acute oral mouse gavage study. The lack of any documented reports of adverse effects 

since the introduction of other Roundup Ready® crops in 1996 suggests the safety of its 

use. 

There are no significant impacts on animal health related to the No Action Alternative or 

a determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean and no cumulative effects 

have been identified. 

5.17 Cumulative Impacts: Domestic Economic Environment 

MON 87769 soybean is intended to be cultivated as a specialty soybean product and its 

oil fraction will be produced and used within a closed loop stewardship system 

(Monsanto, 2010b). The likelihood that MON 87769 soybean will be stacked with an 

herbicide tolerance trait could potentially lead some IP producers to replace existing 

specialty soybean varieties to plant MON 87769 soybean as a new specialty oilseed 

product. 

Agronomic and phenotypic analyses conducted by Monsanto did not demonstrate any 

substantial differences between MON 87769 soybean and conventional varieties. No 

new agronomic characteristics providing benefits for cultivation beyond traditional 

soybean cultivation regions were determined and none of the modifications expressed by 

MON 87769 soybean are considered likely to result in new acreage devoted to soybean 

cultivation outside of those regions where soybean is currently cultivated (Monsanto, 

2010). The percentage of the U.S. soybean acreage dedicated to specialty oil soybeans 

does have the potential to change, contingent upon market acceptance and consumer 

demand, and specific applications of the specialty products. 

In the food supplements market, MON 87769 soybean has the potential to displace fish 

oils (containing stearidonic and higher level omega-3 fatty acids) and also some other 

non-soy oil crops that may produce SDA (Addendum 1, (Monsanto, 2010b)). The latter 

market derives from the likely small scale production of oils from Echium plantagineum, 

black currant (Ribes) and a few other plant sources of the fatty acid (Cyberlipid Center, 

2011). In the foods production industry, the ability to provide SDA containing oils for 

large scale use in various manufactured foods, and baked products will likely expand 
114 

business opportunities. These specifically will include supplementing existing oils used 

in functional foods and healthful products. 

For the past decade, soybean oil has consistently been the least expensive domestic 

vegetable oil (Table 16) (USDA-ERS, 2011b) and the ability to produce a high value 

specialty fatty acid in soybean will keep production costs of the oil low. If MON 87769 

soybean oil achieves market acceptance, the product has the potential to marginally 

displace other vegetable food oils, including other soybean, canola, or sunflower oils in 

certain specialized products, and then most likely as a supplement, and consequently may 

not completely replace other oils in existing formulations for those products. Given that 

a determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean is not expected to lead to 

an expansion of U.S. soybean acreage or substantial changes in oil products industry, 

APHIS determines no significant impacts from production of MON 87769 soybean and 

no cumulative impacts. 

Table 16. U.S. vegetable oil prices (dollars/gallon). 

Marketing 

Year 

Soybean 

Oil 

Cottonseed 

Oil 

Sunflower 

oil 

Canola 

Oil 

Peanut 

Oil Corn Oil

2000/01 1.09 1.23 1.22 1.35 2.69 1.04 

2001/02 1.27 1.38 1.79 1.81 2.48 1.47 

2002/03 1.70 2.91 2.55 2.29 3.60 2.17 

2003/04 2.31 2.40 2.57 2.60 4.68 2.19 

2004/05 1.77 2.16 3.37 2.37 4.13 2.15 

2005/06 1.80 2.27 3.13 2.39 3.42 1.94 

2006/07 2.39 1.98 4.47 3.12 4.08 2.45 

2007/08 4.01 5.66 7.02 5.05 7.28 5.34 

2008/09 2.48 2.09 3.87 3.04 6.04 2.52 

2009/10 2.77 3.01 4.07 3.30 4.59 3.03 

2010/11 4.27 4.46 5.92 4.77 6.31 4.65 

Source: Table 9 (converted to dollars per gallon based on a vegetable oil conversion factor of 7.7 pounds 

per gallon) (USDA-ERS, 2011b). 

5.18 Cumulative Impacts: Trade Economic Environment 

Contingent upon producer and consumer acceptance, availability, and price, and 

considering that the market for MON 87769 soybean will be about 100,000 acres by 

2016, this variety will occupy 0.5% of acreage planted to soybean in the affected area. 

Thus, there is insignificant potential to displace some of these comparable, non-soybean 
115 

vegetable oils on the international market. Consistent with the analysis of international 

markets for GE soybean, a specialty oil for a small healthful products niche, and GE 

crops generally, APHIS has determined that there are no past, present, or reasonable 

foreseeable effects of the proposed action which would present a negative cumulative 

impact on the trade economic environment. 

5.19 Cumulative Impacts: Social Environment 

The planting and production of oils deriving from MON 87769 will not change the 

percentage of growers who plant specialty soybean products because the market for these 

products will likely remain small for the next five years (Monsanto, 201l). No changes 

can be foreseen in the crusher/refiner businesses, since again, only those businesses 

which already crush small scale specialty soybean will likely be signed up to accept the 

MON 87769 soybean. APHIS has determined that there are no past, present, or 

reasonably foreseeable actions that will aggregate with the effects of the proposed action 

to impact the social environment surrounding soybean farming. 
116 

6 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES 

The Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, as amended, is one of the most far-reaching 

wildlife conservation laws ever enacted by any nation. Congress, on behalf of the 

American people, passed the ESA to prevent extinctions facing many species of fish, 

wildlife and plants. The purpose of the ESA is to conserve endangered and threatened 

species and the ecosystems on which they depend as key components of America’s 

heritage. To implement the ESA, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) works in 

cooperation with the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), other Federal, State, 

and local agencies, Tribes, non-governmental organizations, and private citizens. Before 

a plant or animal species can receive the protection provided by the ESA, it must first be 

added to the Federal list of threatened and endangered wildlife and plants. 

A species is added to the list when it is determined by the USFWS/NMFS to be 

endangered or threatened because of any of the following factors: 

 The present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or 

range; 

 Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes; 

 Disease or predation; 

 The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; and 

 The natural or manmade factors affecting its survival. 

Once an animal or plant is added to the list, in accordance with the ESA, protective 

measures apply to the species and its habitat. These measures include protection from 

adverse effects of Federal activities. 

Section 7 (a)(2) of the ESA requires that Federal agencies, in consultation with USFWS 

and/or the NMFS, ensure that any action they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to 

jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or result in the destruction or 

adverse modification of designated critical habitat. It is the responsibility of the Federal 

agency taking the action to assess the effects of their action and to consult with the 

USFWS and NMFS if it is determined that the action “may affect” listed species or 

critical habitat. To facilitate APHIS’ ESA consultation process, APHIS met with the 

USFWS from 1999 to 2003 to discuss factors relevant to APHIS’ regulatory authority 

and effects analysis for petitions for nonregulated status, and developed a process for 

conducting an effects determination consistent with the Plant Protection Act of 2000 

(Title IV of Public Law 106-224). This process is described in a decision tree document, 

which is presented as appendix B. APHIS uses this process to help fulfill its obligations 

and responsibilities under Section 7 of the ESA for biotechnology regulatory actions. 

APHIS’ regulatory authority for GE organisms under the PPA is limited to those for 

which it has reason to believe might be a plant pest or those for which APHIS does not 
117 

have sufficient information to determine that the GE organism is unlikely to pose a plant 

pest risk (7 CFR § 340.1). After completing a plant pest risk analysis, APHIS concluded 

that MON 87769 soybean does not pose a plant pest risk (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). 

Because the agency has concluded that MON 87769 soybean is unlikely to pose a plant 

pest risk, a determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean is a response 

that is consistent with the plant pest provisions of the PPA, the regulations codified in 7 

CFR part 340, and the biotechnology regulatory policies in the Coordinated Framework. 

Nevertheless, APHIS has chosen to analyze the potential effects to threatened and 

endangered species and critical habitat under the ESA. As part the environmental review 

process, APHIS thoroughly reviews genetically engineered product information and data 

to inform the ESA effects analysis and, if necessary, the biological assessment related to 

the organism (generally a plant species, but may also be other genetically engineered 

organisms) for which regulatory jurisdiction applies under the plant pest provisions of the 

Plant Protection Act of 2000 and implementing regulations in 7 CFR part 340. For each 

transgene(s)/transgenic plant the following information, data, and questions are 

considered by APHIS: 

 A review of the biology and taxonomy of the crop plant and its sexually 

compatible relatives; 

 Characterization of each transgene with respect to its structure and function and 

the nature of the organism from which it was obtained; 

 A determination of where the new transgene and its products (if any) are 

produced in the plant and their quantity; 

 A review of the agronomic performance of the plant including disease and pest 

susceptibilities, weediness potential, and agronomic and environmental impact; 

 Determination of the concentrations of known plant toxicants (if any are known in 

the plant); and 

 Analysis to determine if the transgenic plant is sexually compatible with any 

threatened or endangered plant species (TES) or a host of any TES. 

In following this process, APHIS evaluated the potential effects that a determination of 

nonregulated status to MON 87769 soybean would have on Federally listed TES and 

species proposed for listing, as well as designated critical habitat and habitat proposed for 

designation (See Appendix B). Based upon the scope of the EA and production areas 

identified in the Affected Environment section of the EA, APHIS obtained a list of TES 

species (listed and proposed) from the USFWS Environmental Conservation Online 

System (ECOS) for each state where MON 87769 soybean is likely to be commercially 

produced (ECOS; as accessed 4/15/2011 at 

http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/stateListingAndOccurrence.jsp). 

As discussed above in the analysis of Gene Movement and Weediness and Plants, APHIS 

has determined that there is no risk to unrelated plant species from the cultivation of 

MON 87769 soybean. Monsanto submitted results of a comparison of agronomic and 
118 

phenotypic differences between MON 87769 soybean and conventional soybean; there is 

no reason to believe that MON 87769 soybean is different from the commercial variety 

from which it was developed (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). Consistent with these studies, 

APHIS has concluded the determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean 

does not present a plant pest risk, does not present a risk of weediness, and does not 

present an increased risk of gene flow when compared to other currently cultivated 

varieties. 

Accordingly, APHIS focuses our assessment of possible impacts on TES animal species, 

particularly those potentially at risk from the consumption of MON 87769 soybean. Few 

TES animal species are likely to frequent soybean fields because the habitat would not be 

suitable. Some animal species, particularly migratory birds, may visit soybean fields, but 

their presence would be a passing one as the habitat is either not suitable or does not 

contain constituent elements required by the species. It is reasonable to assume that 

populations of the species adjacent to soybean production fields could be impacted by 

aspects of cultivation of MON 87769 soybean or could feed on MON 87769 soybean. As 

described below, the EPA and the FDA have conducted independent evaluations of these 

potential risks directly relevant to APHIS’ analysis. 

Monsanto measured compositional aspects of MON 87769 soybean and compared these 

data with conventional soybean. The intended expression of SDA and also of gamma 

linolenic acid is new to commodity soybean. Although the animal feed consultation with 

FDA is pending, submitted data showed that these new components are both 

intermediates in mammalian systems during production of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) 

and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), and also are found in the environment in numerous 

other plant and animal sources. Linoleic acid (18:2) is decreased to about 41% of control 

percentage, and this altered soybean content is similar to that of canola oil. Statistically 

significant but small differences were observed in the comparisons of the A3525 

conventional variety to MON 87769 soybean in the concentrations of several fatty acids 

(16:0 palmitic, 18:0 stearic, 18:1 oleic, 18:3 alpha linolenic acid, 20:0 arachidic, 22:0 

behenic). APHIS evaluated these differences in composition, and has determined that 

those reported for MON 87769 either fall within the typical commercial range for 

percentage composition, or within the 99% tolerance interval for soybean composition 

(Monsanto, 2010b). For several amino acids % of total amino acid content, % dry 

weight of proximates (protein and carbohydrate) and two isoflavones were also different 

from controls (US-EPA, 1993b), but these also were within either the range of 

commercial values or the 99% tolerance level for commercial soybean (Monsanto, 

2010b). 

Because the composition of MON 87769 soybean is either similar to other commercial 

soybean plants in most constituents, or expresses fatty acids that are unlikely to impact 

human or animal health with consumption, it is unlikely that MON 87769 soybean poses 
119 

a hazard to TES animal species. Because no hazards are identified, the risk of MON 

87769 soybean affecting TES animal species is also unlikely, regardless of exposure. 

Based on the above information, APHIS has determined that the Preferred Alternative, a 

determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean, would have no effect on 

Federally listed TES proposed for listing, or on designated critical habitat or habitat 

proposed for designation. Following the BRS Decision Tree Document that indicates 

when a consultation with FWS is triggered (See Appendix B), APHIS BRS has 

determined that a written concurrence or formal consultation with the USFWS is not 

required for this action. 

6.1 Cumulative Impacts of Stacking MON 87768 Soybean with a Glyphosate 

Tolerant Trait on TES 

Monsanto has stated that MON 87769 soybean will likely be conventionally bred with 

the cp4 epsps gene (glyphosate tolerance trait), and as a result, APHIS has decided to 

conduct a cumulative NEPA impact analysis of this potential future action on TES. 

The U.S. EPA has published an exemption from tolerance for the cp4 epsps gene and the 

material necessary for its production in all plants (US-EPA, 1996). Roundup Ready® 

crops incorporating the cp4 epsps gene have been marketed since the mid-1990s with no 

reports of any non-target impacts associated with exposure to or consumption of the 

modified crop. Accordingly, no impacts to TES are anticipated as a result of exposure to 

the cp4 epsps gene. 

The U.S. EPA has conducted a review of the potential impacts of glyphosate to nontarget species, and has determined that when used in accordance with the FIFRA label, 

the potential impacts to non-target species is not significant (US-EPA, 1993a, 1993b). As 

the action agency for pesticide registrations, U.S. EPA has the responsibility to conduct 

an assessment of effects of a registration action on TES. The U.S. EPA Endangered 

Species Protection Program web site, http://www.epa.gov/espp/, describes the U.S. EPA 

assessment process for endangered species. Some of the elements of that process, 

generally taken from the web site, are summarized below. 

When registering a pesticide or reassessing the potential ecological risks from use of a 

currently registered pesticide, U.S. EPA evaluates extensive exposure and ecological 

effects data to determine how a pesticide will move through and break down in the 

environment. Risks to birds, fish, invertebrates, mammals and plants are routinely 

assessed and used in U.S. EPA’s determinations of whether a pesticide may be licensed 

for use in the U.S. 

U.S. EPA’s core pesticide risk assessment and regulatory processes ensure that 

protections are in place for all populations of nontarget species, including TES. These 

assessments provide U.S. EPA with information needed to develop label use restrictions 
120 

for the pesticide. These label restrictions carry the weight of law and are enforced by 

U.S. EPA and the states (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act 7 USC 

§136j (a)(2)(G) Unlawful acts). Because TES may need specific protection, U.S. EPA 

has developed risk assessment procedures, described in the Overview of the Ecological 

Risk Assessment Process (US-EPA, 2004), to determine whether individuals of a listed 

species have the potential to be harmed by a pesticide; and if so, what specific protections 

may be appropriate. U.S. EPA’s conclusion regarding the potential risks a pesticide may 

pose to a listed species and any designated critical habitat for the species, after 

conducting a thorough ecological risk assessment, results in an "effects determination" in 

accordance with Section 7 (a)(2) of the ESA. 

As a part of U.S. EPA’s TES effects assessment for the California red-legged frog (USEPA, 2008), U.S. EPA evaluated the effect of glyphosate use at rates up to 7.95 pounds 

active ingredient per acre (lb a.i./A) on fish, amphibians, aquatic invertebrates, aquatic 

plants, birds, mammals, and terrestrial invertebrates. The U.S. EPA assessment was 

uncertain of the effects on terrestrial invertebrates, citing the potential to affect small 

insects at all application rates and large insects at the higher application rates. 

U.S. EPA considered these potential effects as part of their review process and label use 

restrictions for glyphosate tolerant crops imposed under authority of FIFRA. U.S. EPA 

has imposed specific label use restrictions for glyphosate use when applied with aerial 

equipment including “The product should only be applied when the potential for drift to 

adjacent sensitive areas (e.g., residential areas, bodies of water, known habitat for 

threatened or endangered species, non-target crops) is minimal (e.g., when wind is 

blowing away from the sensitive areas).” This requirement should protect TES that may 

be at risk from exposure to glyphosate. 

To facilitate pesticide applicator adherence to U.S. EPA label use restrictions for 

glyphosate, Monsanto has designed a web-based program (www.Pre-Serve.org), designed 

to ensure no effect of glyphosate applications on threatened and endangered plant 

species. Pre-Serve instructs growers to observe specific precautions including buffer 

zones when spraying glyphosate herbicides on glyphosate-tolerant crops near threatened 

and endangered plant species that may be at risk. In addition, label requirements for 

Monsanto’s Roundup® formulations and glyphosate formulations marketed by other 

manufacturers prohibit application in conditions or locations where adverse impact on 

federally designated endangered/threatened plants or aquatic species is likely. 

In conclusion, there are legal precautions in place (U.S. EPA label use restrictions) and 

“best practice” guidance to reduce the possibility of exposure and adverse impacts to TES 

from glyphosate application. U.S. EPA has considered potential impacts to TES as part 

of their registration and labeling process for glyphosate; and adherence to U.S. EPA label 

use restrictions by the pesticide applicator will ensure that the use of glyphosate will not 
121 

adversely affect TES or critical habitat. Furthermore, pesticide applicators are legally 

required to follow U.S. EPA label use restrictions. 

Finally, cultivation of MON 87769 soybean is not expected to result in an increase in the 

application of glyphosate or changes of any other herbicide treatments when compared 

with existing herbicide-tolerant and non-GE soybean varieties. APHIS has determined 

that there are no past, present, or reasonably foreseeable actions that would aggregate 

with effects of the proposed action on TES. 
122 

7 CONSIDERATION OF EXECUTIVE ORDERS, STANDARDS, AND 

TREATIES RELATING TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 

7.1 Executive Orders with Domestic Implications 

The following executive orders require consideration of the potential impacts of the 

Federal action to various segments of the population. 

 Executive Order (EO) 12898 (US-NARA, 2010a), "Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,"

requires Federal agencies to conduct their programs, policies, and activities that 

substantially affect human health or the environment in a manner so as not to 

exclude persons and populations from participation in or benefiting from such 

programs. It also enforces existing statutes to prevent minority and low-income 

communities from being subjected to disproportionately high and adverse human 

health or environmental effects. 

 EO 13045, “Protection of Children from Environmental Health Risks and 

Safety Risks,” acknowledges that children may suffer disproportionately from 

environmental health and safety risks because of their developmental stage, 

greater metabolic activity levels, and behavior patterns, as compared to adults. 

The EO (to the extent permitted by law and consistent with the agency’s mission) 

requires each Federal agency to identify, assess, and address environmental health 

risks and safety risks that may disproportionately affect children. 

Each alternative was analyzed with respect to EO 12898 and EO 13045. Neither 

alternative is expected to have a disproportionate adverse effect on minorities, lowincome populations, or children. 

Based on the information submitted by the applicant and assessed by APHIS, MON 

87769 soybean is agronomically, phenotypically, and biochemically comparable to 

conventional soybean except for the intended unique fatty acid profile (i.e., the presence 

of SDA and GLA). The information provided in the petition indicates that the two 

desaturase proteins, PjD6D and NcFad3, expressed in MON 87769 soybean are not 

expected to be allergenic, toxic, or pathogenic in mammals (Monsanto, 2010b). Also, 

FDA indicated that they had no questions “regarding Monsanto’s conclusion that SDA 

soybean oil is GRAS under the intended conditions of use” (US-FDA, 2009a). The use of 

SDA soybean oil in selected food categories could provide a wide range of dietary 

alternatives for increasing human intake of omega-3 fatty acid. The oil derived from 

MON 87769 soybean, is intended for use only in certain markets and will be identity 

preserved to maintain its value and assure its use in appropriate food applications. 

Additionally, the defatted soybean meal from MON 87769 soybean is compositionally 

similar to other defatted commodity soybean meal and will be used in a manner similar to 
123 

the meal derived from these commodity soybean. This information establishes the safety 

of MON 87769 soybean and its products to humans, including minorities and low income 

populations who might be exposed to them through agricultural production and/or 

processing. No additional safety precautions would need to be taken. 

None of the impacts on agricultural practices expected to be associated with a 

determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean are expected to have a 

disproportionate adverse effect on minorities and low income populations. MON 87769 

soybean is not genetically engineered to produce a toxin or pesticide, and is not 

genetically engineered to be tolerant to an herbicide. Due to the lack of pesticidal and 

herbicidal traits in MON 87460 Soybean, soybean hybrid varieties may be produced with 

MON 87769 soybean and other nonregulated soybean hybrids containing herbicide 

tolerant traits. Thus, pesticide application practices and usage associated with a 

determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean are not expected to change 

from the current trends for existing nonregulated GE soybean. 

The following executive order addresses Federal responsibilities regarding the 

introduction and effects of invasive species: 

EO 1311 (US-NARA, 2010b), “Invasive Species,” states that Federal 

agencies take action to prevent the introduction of invasive species, to 

provide for their control, and to minimize the economic, ecological, and 

human health impacts that invasive species cause. 

Non-GE soybean, as well as other modified fatty acid soybean varieties, are widely 

grown in the U.S. Based on the historical experience with these varieties and the data 

submitted by the applicant and reviewed by APHIS, MON 87769 soybean are sufficiently 

similar in fitness characteristics to other soybean varieties currently grown and are not 

expected to become weedy or invasive (USDA-APHIS, 2010c). 

The following executive order requires the protection of migratory bird populations: 

EO 13186 (US-NARA, 2010b), “Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to 

Protect Migratory Birds,” states that federal agencies taking actions that 

have, or are likely to have, a measurable negative effect on migratory bird 

populations are directed to develop and implement, within two years, a 

Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Fish and Wildlife 

Service that shall promote the conservation of migratory bird populations. 

Monsanto has presented results of field trials conducted to evaluate field phenotypic, 

agronomic and environmental interactions. These data, presented in Appendix G of 

the petition (USDA-APHIS, 2010c), showed no differences in arthropod damage or 

arthropod pest and beneficial insect abundance between MON 87769 soybean and 

other varieties, supporting the conclusion that the modified oil trait is unlikely to 
124 

impact food sources for migratory bird species. Migratory bird use of soybean in 

harvested fields is reduced in terms of species numbers as well as population 

densities compared to their use of corn and sunflower fields (Galle et al., 2009), so 

usefulness of soybean for these birds may be as only a secondary source of grain. 

Migratory birds may forage on soybean seed before seed germination in a field that 

produced soybean the previous growing season, and following harvest, may also ingest 

additional seed. Data submitted by the applicant has shown no difference in 

compositional and nutritional quality of MON 87769 soybean compared to 

commercial soybean or non-GE-soybean, apart from the modification of the fatty 

acid composition. Fatty acid content is unlikely to impact bird species, since the oils 

derived from MON 87769 are both typical of other seeds and have been approved for 

GRAS status. Based on APHIS’ assessment of MON 87769 soybean, it is unlikely that 

a determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean will have a negative 

effect on migratory bird populations that occasionally forage in soybean fields. 

International Implications 

EO 12114 (US-NARA, 2010b), “Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal 

Actions” requires federal officials to take into consideration any potential environmental 

effects outside the U.S., its territories, and possessions that result from actions being 

taken. 

APHIS has given this EO careful consideration and does not expect a significant 

environmental impact outside the U.S. in the event of a determination of nonregulated 

status of MON 87769. All existing national and international regulatory authorities and 

phytosanitary regimes that currently apply to introductions of new soybean cultivars 

internationally apply equally to those covered by an APHIS determination of 

nonregulated status under 7 CFR part 340. 

Any international trade of MON 87769 subsequent to a determination of nonregulated 

status of the product would be fully subject to national phytosanitary requirements and be 

in accordance with phytosanitary standards developed under the International Plant 

Protection Convention (IPPC, 2010). The purpose of the IPPC “is to secure a common 

and effective action to prevent the spread and introduction of pests of plants and plant 

products and to promote appropriate measures for their control” (IPPC, 2010). The 

protection it affords extends to natural flora and plant products and includes both direct 

and indirect damage by pests, including weeds. 

The IPPC establishes a standard for the reciprocal acceptance of phytosanitary 

certification among the nations that have signed or acceded to the Convention (172 

countries as of March 2010). In April 2004, a standard for PRA of living modified 

organisms (LMOs) was adopted at a meeting of the governing body of the IPPC as a 

supplement to an existing standard, International Standard for Phytosanitary Measure No. 
125 

11 (ISPM-11, Pest Risk Analysis for Quarantine Pests). The standard acknowledges that 

all LMOs will not present a pest risk and that a determination needs to be made early in 

the PRA for importation as to whether the LMO poses a potential pest risk resulting from 

the genetic modification. APHIS pest risk assessment procedures for genetically 

engineered organisms are consistent with the guidance developed under the IPPC. In 

addition, issues that may relate to commercialization and transboundary movement of 

particular agricultural commodities produced through biotechnology are being addressed 

in other international forums and through national regulations. 

The Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety is a treaty under the United Nations Convention on 

Biological Diversity (CBD) that established a framework for the safe transboundary 

movement, with respect to the environment and biodiversity, of LMOs, which include 

those modified through biotechnology. The Protocol came into force on September 11, 

2003, and 160 countries are Parties to it as of December 2010 (CBD, 2010). Although 

the U.S. is not a party to the CBD, and thus not a party to the Cartagena Protocol on 

Biosafety, U.S. exporters will still need to comply with those regulations that importing 

countries which are Parties to the Protocol have promulgated to comply with their 

obligations. The first intentional transboundary movement of LMOs intended for 

environmental release (field trials or commercial planting) will require consent from the 

importing country under an advanced informed agreement (AIA) provision, which 

includes a requirement for a risk assessment consistent with Annex III of the Protocol and 

the required documentation. 

LMOs imported for food, feed, or processing (FFP) are exempt from the AIA procedure, 

and are covered under Article 11 and Annex II of the Protocol. Under Article 11, Parties 

must post decisions to the Biosafety Clearinghouse database on domestic use of LMOs 

for FFP that may be subject to transboundary movement. To facilitate compliance with 

obligations to this protocol, the U.S. Government has developed a website that provides 

the status of all regulatory reviews completed for different uses of bioengineered products 

(NBII, 2010). These data will be available to the Biosafety Clearinghouse. 

APHIS continues to work toward harmonization of biosafety and biotechnology 

consensus documents, guidelines, and regulations, including within the North American 

Plant Protection Organization (NAPPO), which includes Mexico, Canada, and the U.S., 

and within the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). 

NAPPO has completed three modules of the Regional Standards for Phytosanitary 

Measures (RSPM) No. 14, Importation and Release into the Environment of Transgenic 

Plants in NAPPO Member Countries (NAPPO, 2009). 

APHIS also participates in the North American Biotechnology Initiative (NABI), a forum 

for information exchange and cooperation on agricultural biotechnology issues for the 

U.S., Mexico, and Canada. In addition, bilateral discussions on biotechnology regulatory 
126 

issues are held regularly with other countries including Argentina, Brazil, Japan, China, 

and Korea. 

7.2 Compliance with Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act 

This EA evaluated the changes in soybean production due to a determination of 

nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean. Cultivation of MON 87769 soybean will 

not lead to the increased production of soybean in U.S. agriculture. 

There is no expected change in water use due to the cultivation of MON 87769 

soybean compared to current soybean seed and production regimes. There is no 

expected change in air quality associated with agronomic practices associated with 

the cultivation of MON 87769 soybean. 

Based on this review, APHIS concludes that the cultivation of MON 87769 soybean 

would inherently comply with the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act. 

7.3 Impacts on Unique Characteristics of Geographic Areas 

A determination of non-regulated status of MON 87769 soybean is not expected to 

impact unique characteristics of geographic areas such as park lands, prime farm lands, 

wetlands, wild and scenic areas, or ecologically critical areas. 

The common agricultural practices that would be carried out in the cultivation of MON 

87769 soybean are not expected to deviate from current practices. The product will be 

deployed on agricultural land currently suitable for production of soybean, will replace 

existing varieties, and is not expected to increase the acreage of soybean production. 

There are no proposed major ground disturbances; no new physical destruction or 

damage to property; no alterations of property, wildlife habitat, or landscapes; and no 

prescribed sale, lease, or transfer of ownership of any property. This action is limited to a 

determination of non-regulated status of MON 87769 soybean. This action would not 

convert land use to nonagricultural use and therefore would have no adverse impact on 

prime farm land. Standard agricultural practices for land preparation, planting, irrigation, 

and harvesting of plants would be used on agricultural lands planted to MON 87769 

soybean including the use of EPA registered pesticides. Applicant’s adherence to EPA 

label use restrictions for all pesticides will mitigate potential impacts to the human 

environment. 

7.4 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 as Amended 

The NHPA of 1966 and its implementing regulations (36 CFR 800) require Federal 

agencies to: 1) determine whether activities they propose constitute "undertakings" that 

have the potential to cause effects on historic properties and 2) if so, to evaluate the 
127 

effects of such undertakings on such historic resources and consult with the Advisory 

Council on Historic Preservation (i.e., State Historic Preservation Office, Tribal Historic 

Preservation Officers), as appropriate. 

A determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean is not expected to 

adversely impact cultural resources on tribal properties. Any farming activity that may 

be taken by farmers on tribal lands would only be conducted at the tribe’s request; thus, 

the tribes would have control over any potential conflict with cultural resources on tribal 

properties. 

A determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean would have no impact on 

districts, sites, highways, structures, or objects listed in or eligible for listing in the 

National Register of Historic Places, nor would it likely cause any loss or destruction of 

significant scientific, cultural, or historical resources. This action is limited to a 

determination of non-regulated status of MON 87769. 

A determination of nonregulated status of MON 87769 soybean is not an undertaking that 

may directly or indirectly cause alteration in the character or use of historic properties 

protected under the NHPA. In general, common agricultural activities conducted under 

this action do not have the potential to introduce visual, atmospheric, or noise elements to 

areas in which they are used that could result in effects on the character or use of historic 

properties. For example, there is potential for increased noise on the use and enjoyment 

of a historic property during the operation of tractors and other mechanical equipment 

close to such sites. A built-in mitigating factor for this issue is that virtually all of the 

methods involved would only have temporary effects on the audible nature of a site and 

can be ended at any time to restore the audible qualities of such sites to their original 

condition with no further adverse effects. Additionally, these cultivation practices are 

already being conducted throughout the soybean production regions. The cultivation of 

MON 87769 soybean does not inherently change any of these agronomic practices so as 

to give rise to an impact under the NHPA. 

 
128 

8 REFERENCES 

Adam, KL (2005). Seed Production and Variety Development for Organic Systems 

National Center for Appropriate Technology. Retrieved November 3, 2010 from 

https://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/summaries/summary.php?pub=70 

ADM (2006). ADM to Process Monsanto’s VistiveTM Low Linolenic Soybeans at Indiana 

Facility. Retrieved from http://www.adm.com/enUS/news/_layouts/PressReleaseDetail.aspx?ID=170

AGRA (2009). A Study Assessing the Opportunities and Potential of Soybean Based 

Products and Technologies. Retrieved March 15, 2011 from 

http://www.auri.org/research/Informa%20Soybean%20Report%20Final.pdf

Aitzetmüller, K and Werner, G. (1991) Stearidonic acid (18:4[omega]3) in Primula 

florindae. Phytochemistry, 30(12), 4011-4013. 

Al-Kaisi, M, Hanna, M, and Tidman, M (2003). Crop rotation considerations for 2004 

management season rotation Retrieved November 29, 2010 from 

http://www.ipm.iastate.edu/ipm/icm/2003/12-15-2003/croprotation.html

Alt, JL, Fehr, WR, Welke, GA, and Sandhu, D. (2005) Phenotypic and Molecular 

Analysis of Oleate Content in the Mutant Soybean Line M23 Crop Science, 45, 

1997-2000. 

Altieri, MA. (1999) The ecological role of biodiversity in agroecosystems. Agriculture, 

Ecosystems and Environment, 74, 19-31. 

American Heart Association (2011). Fry Oils and Shortenings - Heavy-Duty (For 

Restaurants). Retrieved from 

http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/GettingHealthy/FatsAndOils/FacetheFatsRest

aurantResources/Fry-Oils-and-Shortenings---Heavy-Duty-ForRestaurants_UCM_304476_Article.jsp

Anderson, RL. (2008) Weed Seedling Emergence and Survival as Affected by Crop 

Canopy. Weed Technology, 22(4), 736-740. 

Aneja, VP, Schlesinger, WH, and Erisman, JW. (2009) Effects of agriculture upon the air 

quality and climate: Research, policy, and regulations. Environmental Science & 

Technology, 43(12), 4234–4240. 

AOSCA. (2009) Seed Certification Handbook. Moline, IL: Association of Official Seed 

Certifying Agencies. 

AOSCA (2010). General IP Protocols Standards. The Association of Official Seed 

Certifying Agencies. Retrieved November 8, 2010 from 

http://www.identitypreserved.com/handbook/aosca-general.htm

APAG (2011). Fatty Acids & Glycerine: Major Production Routes Starting from 

Vegetable & Animal Oils and Fats The European Oleochemicals and Allied 

Products Group. Retrieved March 13, 2011 from 

http://www.apag.org/oleo/fats.htm

Aref, S and Pike, DR. (1998) Midwest farmers' perceptions of crop pest infestation. 

Agronomy Journal, 90(6), 819-825. 
129 

ASA. (2011). Soy Stats: A Reference Guide to Important Soybean Facts and Figures. 

Retrieved April 19, from American Soybean Association 

http://www.soystats.com/2011/

Asgrow. (2011). Asgrow Seed Resource Guide-North (Soybean). from Asgrow Brand. 

Monsanto Co. 

https://www.asgrowanddekalb.com/products/Documents/2011_seed_resource_gui

de_north.pdf

Baier, AH (2008). Organic Standards for Crop Production National Center for 

Appropriate Technology. Retrieved December 7, 2010 from 

http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/nopstandard_crops.pdf

Baker, J, Southard, R, and Mitchell, J. (2005) Agricultural dust production in standard 

and conservation tillage systems in the San Joaquin Valley. Journal of 

Environmental Quality, 34, 1260-1269. 

Barrentine, WL. (1989) Minimum effective rate of chlorimuron and imazaquin applied to 

common cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium). Weed Technology, 3(1), 126-130. 

Basore, NS, Best, LB, and Wooley, JB, Jr. (1986) Bird Nesting in Iowa No-Tillage and 

Tilled Cropland. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 50(1), 19-28. 

Benbrook, C. (2009) Impacts of Genetically Engineered Crops on Pesticide Use in the 

United States: The First Thirteen Years. Critical Issue Report Number 3 (Report: 

The Organic Center. 

Bengtsson, J, Ahnstrom, J, Weibull, A-C, and Ecology, JoA. (2005) The effects of 

organic agriculture on biodiversity and abundance: a meta-analysis. 42, 261-269. 

Bennett, JM, Hicks, DR, and Naeve, SL (Eds.). (2011). The Minnesota Soybean Field 

Book: University of Minnesota. 

Berg, JM, Tymoczko, JL, and Stryer, L. (2002) Biochemistry. New York: W H Freeman. 

Berglund, D and Helms, T. (2003) Soybean Production (Report: NDSU Extension 

Service Circular A-250). Fargo, ND: North Dakota State University Extension 

Service Retrieved June 2003, from 

http://library.ndsu.edu/tools/dspace/load/?file=/repository/bitstream/handle/10365

/5450/a250.pdf?sequence=1

Berk A (Producer). (2008, May 27, 2011). Do deer love soybeans? Sports and Fitness 

Articles. Retrieved from http://www.articlesbase.com/sports-and-fitnessarticles/do-deer-love-soybeans-700903.html

Besler, M, Helm, RM, and Ogawa, T (2000). Allergen Data Collection - Update: 

Soybean (Glycine max). Retrieved 2(Suppl.3), from http://www.foodallergens.de/symposium-2-2/soybean/soy-abstract.htm

Betzelberger, AM, Gillespie, KM, McGrath, JM, Koester, RP, Nelson, RL, and 

Ainsworth, EA. (2010) Effects of chronic elevated ozone concentration on 

antioxidant capacity, photosynthesis and seed yield of 10 soybean cultivars. Plant, 

Cell and Environment, 33(9), 1569-1581. 

Beuerlein, J (2005). 2005 Inoculation Study. Submitted by Registration Manager. Ohio 

State University (See Table http://agcrops.osu.edu/specialists/soybean/currentresearch-projects/2005SoyInoculationReport.pdf). 
130 

Bitzer, RJ, Rice, ME, Pilcher, CD, Pilcher, CL, and Lam, W-KF. (2005) Biodiversity and 

Community Structure of Epedaphic and Euedaphic Springtails (Collembola) in 

Transgenic Rootworm Bt Corn. Environmental Entomology 34(5), 1346-1376. 

Bohm, GMB, Alves, BJR, Urquiaga, S, Boddey, RM, Xavier, GR, Hax, F, and Rombaldi, 

CV. (2009) Glyphosate- and imazethapyr-induced effects on yield, nodule mass 

and biological nitrogen fixation in field-grown glyphosate-resistant soybean. Soil 

Biology and Biochemistry, 41(2), 420-422. 

Borggaard, OK and Gimsing, AL. (2008) Fate of glyphosate in soil and the possibility of 

leaching to ground and surface waters: A review. Pest Management Science, 

64(4), 441-456. 

Bottomley, P. (1992). Ecology of Bradyrhizobium and Rhizobium. In G Stacey, RH 

Burris and HJ Evans (Eds.), Biological Nitrogen Fixation (pp. 293 - 348). New 

York: Routledge, Chapman and Hall. 

Bradford, KJ (2006). Methods to Maintain Genetic Purity of Seed Stocks University of 

California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources. Retrieved November 

8, 2010 from http://ucanr.org/freepubs/docs/8189.pdf

Brookes, G and Barfoot, P. (2010) GM Crops: Global Socio-Economic and 

Environmental Impacts 1996-2008 (Report: United Kingdom: PG Economics Ltd. 

Retrieved from 

Brooks, DR, Clark, SJ, Perry, JN, Bohan, DA, Champion, GT, Firbank, LG, Haughton, 

AJ, Hawes, C, Heard, MS, and Woiwod, IP. (2005) Invertebrate biodiversity in 

maize following withdrawal of triazine herbicides. Proceedings of the Royal 

Society B: Biological Sciences, 272(1571), 1497-1502. 

Brown, JR. (2003) Ancient horizontal gene transfer. Nature Reviews: Genetics, 4, 121-

132. 

Brumm, TJ and Hurburgh Jr, CR. (2006) Changes in long-term soybean compositional 

patterns. JAOCS, Journal of the American Oil Chemists' Society, 83(11), 981-983. 

Buckelew, LD, Pedigo, LP, Mero, HM, Owen, MDK, and Tylka, GL. (2000) Effects of 

weed management systems on canopy insects in herbicide-resistant soybeans. 

Journal of Economic Entomology, 93(5), 1437-1443. 

Burdge, GC and Calder, PC. (2005) α-Linolenic acid metabolism in adult humans: the 

effects of gender and age on conversion to longer-chain polyunsaturated fatty 

acids. European Journal of Lipid Science and Technology, 107(6), 426-439. 

Byrd, JD, Blaine, A, and Poston, D. (2003) Soybean Postemergence Weed Control 

(Report: Mississippi State University Extension Service. Retrieved from 

Cahoon, EB. (2003) Genetic enhancement of soybean oil for industrial uses: Prospects 

and challenges. AgBioForum, 6(1&2), 11-13. 

Cardnoentrix (2011). Economic Analysis: Economic Impact of Removing the Biodiesel 

Tax Credit for 2010 And Implementation of RFS2 Targets Through 2015. 

Retrieved from 

http://www.biodiesel.org/news/pressreleases/supporting_docs/20110615_Econom

ic%20Impact.pdf
131 

Cargill (2011). Oils for Healthy Solutions. High oleic / low linolenic. Cargill, Inc. 

Retrieved from http://www.cargill.com/food/na/en/products/oils-shortenings/oilsfor-healthy-solutions/from-our-experts/high-oleic-low-linolenic/index.jsp

Cargill (2011 ). Oils for healthy solutions. Food ingredients. Blends. Retrieved from 

http://www.cargill.com/food/na/en/products/oils-shortenings/oils-for-healthysolutions/solutions/blends/index.jsp

Carlsen, SCK, Spliid, NH, and Svensmark, B. (2006 ) Drift of 10 herbicides after tractor 

spray application. 2. Primary drift (droplet drift). Chemosphere 64(5), 787-794. 

Carpenter, JE, Felsot, A, Goode, T, Hammig, M, Onstad, D, and Sankula, S (2002). 

Comparative Environmental Impacts of Biotechnology-Derived and Traditional 

Soybean, Corn, and Cotton Crops Retrieved November 30, 2010 from 

www.cast-science.org

Carpenter, SR, Caraco, NF, Correll, DL, Howarth, RW, Sharpley, AN, and Smith, VH. 

(1998) Nonpoint pollutin of surface waters with phosphorus and nitrogen. 

Ecological Applications, 8(3), 559-568. 

Causarano, HJ, Franzluebbers, AJ, Reeves, DW, and Shaw, JN. (2006) Soil organic 

carbon sequestration in cotton production systems of the Southeastern United 

States: A review. Journal of Environmental Quality, 35(4), 1374-1383. 

Caviness, CE. (1966) Estimates of natural cross-pollination in Jackson soybeans in 

Arkansas. Crop Science, 6, 211-212. 

CBD (2010). The Cartegena Protocol on Biosafety Convention on Biological Diversity. 

Retrieved January 31, 2011 from http://www.cbd.int/biosafety/

Cerdeira, AL and Duke, SO. (2006) The current status and environmental impacts of 

glyphosate-resistant crops: A review. Journal of Environmental Quality, 35(5), 

1633-1658. 

Chamberlain, DE, Freeman, SN, and Vickery, JA. (2007) The effects of GMHT crops on 

bird abundance in arable fields in the UK. Agriculture, Ecosystems & 

Environment, 118(1-4), 350-356. 

Chen, M, Zhao, JZ, Collins, HL, Earle, ED, Cao, J, and Shelton, AM. (2008) A Critical 

Assessment of the Effects of Bt Transgenic Plants on Parasitoids. PLoS ONE, 

3(5), e2284. 

Clarke, C (2007). Gene Flow between Genetically Modified and Non-GM Plants 

Retrieved January 9, 2011 from 

http://cosmos.ucdavis.edu/archives/2007/cluster1/clarke_cornelia.pdf

Cober, ER, Tanner, JW, and Voldeng, HD. (1996) Genetic Control of Photoperiod 

Response in Early-Maturing, Near-Isogenic Soybean Lines. Crop Sci., 36(3), 601-

605. 

CODEX (2010). CODEX Standard for Named Vegetable Oils Retrieved November 29, 

2010 from http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/more_info.jsp?id_sta=336

Cole, CV, Duxbury, J, J., F, Heinemeyer, O, Minami, K, Mosier, A, Paustian, K, 

Rosenberg, N, Sampson, N, Sauerbeck, D, and Zhao, Q. (1997) Global estimates 

of potential mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions by agriculture. Nutrient 

Cycling in Agroecosystems, 49, 221–228. 
132 

Conley, SP, Boerboom, C, and Gaska, J (2008). Double Crop Soybeans in WI: More Risk 

than Reward University of Wisconsin Agronomy, Soybean Research, University 

of Wisconsin-Extension. Retrieved 2011 from 

http://soybean.uwex.edu/documents/Doublecrop.pdf

Conley, SP and Gaska, J (2011). Considerations for switching soybean maturity groups 

for delayed plantings University of Wisconsin-Madison. Retrieved from 

http://soybean.uwex.edu/documents/MGSoybeanSwitch.pdf

Council for Responsible Nutrition (2005). Long Chain Omega-3 Fatty Acids in Human 

Health, Heart Health: The Role of Eicosapentaenoic, Docosahexaenoic, & AlphaLinolenic Acids (EPA, DHA, and ALA). White Paper. Council for Responsible 

Nutrition Retrieved from http://www.crnusa.org/pdfs/CRNo3wg_whitepaper.pdf

Coupe, RH, Kalkhoff, SJ, Capel, PD, and Gregoire, C. (2011) Fate and transport of 

glyphosate and aminomethylphosphonic acid in surface waters of agricultural 

basins. Pest Manag Sci. 

CRC (2011). Physical Constants of Organic Compounds. Submitted by WM Haynes, 

Registration Manager. CRC Press/Taylor and Francis (See Table 

http://www.hbcpnetbase.com/). 

CTIC (2010a). Facilitating Conservation Farming Practices and Enhancing 

Environmental Sustainability with Agricultural Biotechnology. Conservation 

Technology Information Center. Retrieved from 

http://www.improveagriculture.com/uploads/files/BiotechFinal2.pdf

CTIC (2010b). National Crop Residue Management Survey. 2008. Retrieved from 

http://www.ctic.purdue.edu/media/pdf/National%20Summary%202008%20(Ame

ndment).pdf

Cui, Z, James, AT, Miyazaki, S, Wilson, RF, and Carter, TE. (2004). Breeding Specialty 

Soybeans for Traditional and New Soyfoods (Chapter 14), In Soybeans as 

Functional Foods and Ingredients (pp. 266-322): AOCS Publishing. 

Cunnane, SC, Plourde, M, Pifferi, F, Bégin, M, Féart, C, and Barberger-Gateau, P. (2009) 

Fish, docosahexaenoic acid and Alzheimer's disease. Progress in Lipid Research, 

48(5), 239-256. 

Cyberlipid Center (2011). Polyenoic Fatty Acids Retrieved from 

http://www.cyberlipid.org/fa/acid0003.htm

Dalley, CD, Renner, KA, and Kells, JJ (2001). Weed Competition in Roundup Ready

Soybeans and Corn Dept. of Crop and Soil Sciences, Michigan State University. 

Retrieved November 30, 2010 from 

http://www.ipm.msu.edu/cat06field/pdf/weedfactsheet.pdf

Daniells, S (2011). All-conquering omega-3 market set for further growth. William Reed 

Business Media. Retrieved from http://www.nutraingredients.com/ConsumerTrends/All-conquering-omega-3-market-set-for-further-growth

Dively, GP and Rose, R. (2003). Effects of Bt Transgenic and Conventional Insecticide 

Control on the Non-Target Natural Enemy Communtiy in Sweet Corn. Presented 

at 1st International Symposium on Biological Control of Arthropods, Honolulu, 

HI. 
133 

Domagalski, JL, Ator, S, Coupe, R, McCarthy, K, Lampe, D, Sandstrom, M, and Baker, 

N. (2008) Comparative study of transport processes of nitrogen, phosphorus, and 

herbicides to streams in five agricultural basins, USA. Journal of Environmental 

Quality, 37(3), 1158-1169. 

Doran, J, Sarrantonio, M, and Liebig, M. (1996) Soil health and sustainability. Advances 

in Agronomy, 56, 1-54. 

Du Pont (2011). The science behind New Harvest. E.I. du Pont de Nemours and 

Company Retrieved 25 August, 2011 from 

http://newharvest.com/New_Harvest/ub_US/about/science_behind_new_harvest.h

tml

Dubois, V, Breton, S, Linder, M, Fanni, J, and Parmentier, M. (2007) Fatty acid profiles 

of 80 vegetable oils with regard to their nutritional potential. European Journal of 

Lipid Science and Technology, 109(7), 710-732. 

Duke, SO and Powles, SB. (2009) Glyphosate-resistant crops and weeds: Now and in the 

future. AgBioForum, 12(3&4), 346-357. 

EFSA (European Food Safety Administration). (2011) Scientific Opinion on the 

substantiation of health claims related to docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), 

eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and brain, eye and nerve development (ID 501, 513, 

540), maintenance of normal brain function... EFSA Journal, 9(4), 2078-2108. 

EIA (2007). Biofuels in the U.S. Transportation Sector. US Energy Information 

Administration, US Department of Energy. Retrieved from 

http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/analysispaper/biomass.html

Elbehri, A. (2007) The Changing Face of the U.S. Grain System: Differentiation and 

Identity Preservation Trends (Report: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic 

Research Service. Retrieved from 

Eldridge, AC, Black, LT, and Wolf, WJ. (1979) Carbohydrate Composition of Soybean 

Flours, Protein Concentrates, and Isolates. Journal of Agricultural & Food 

Chemistry, 27, 799-802. 

Ellstrand, NC. (2003) Current knowledge of gene flow in plants: Implications for 

transgene flow. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series 

B, Biological Sciences, 358(1434), 1163-1170. 

Ernst, M and McNulty, S (2011 download). Green Edible Soybeans. Fresh Market. 

University of Kentucky Agricultural Economics Extension. Retrieved from 

http://www.uky.edu/Ag/NewCrops/soybeanmarketing.pdf

FAO (2010). Crop Production. Soybean. Food and Agriculture Organization of the 

United Nations. Retrieved from 

http://faostat.fao.org/site/567/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=567#ancor

FAPRI. (2009) U.S. and World Agricultural Outlook (Report: Ames, Iowa: Food and 

Agricultural Policy Research Institute. Retrieved from 

http://www.fapri.iastate.edu/outlook/2009/

Farooq, FT and Vessey, JK. (2009) Genetic diversity of Bradyrhizobium japonicum 

within soybean growing regions of the north-eastern Great Plains of North 

America as determined by REP-PCR and ERIC-PCR profiling. 48(1/3), 131-142. 
134 

Faust, MA. (2002) New feeds from genetically modified plants: the US approach to 

safety for animals and the food chain. 74(3), 239-254. 

Fehr, WR. (2007) Breeding for Modified Fatty Acid Composition in Soybean. Crop Sci., 

47((S3)), S72-S87 

Ferguson, RB, Shapiro, CA, Dobermann, AR, and Wortmann, CS (2006). Fertilizer 

recommendations for soybean. University of Nebraska-Lincoln. Retrieved from 

http://elkhorn.unl.edu/epublic/live/g859/build/g859.pdf

Fernandez-Cornejo, J, Klotz-Ingram, C, and Jans, S. (2002) Farm level effects of 

adopting Journal of Agriculture and Applied Economics, 34(1), 149-163. 

Fernandez, MR, Zentner, RP, Basnyat, P, Gehl, D, Selles, F, and Huber, D. (2009) 

Glyphosate associations with cereal diseases caused by Fusarium spp. in the 

Canadian Prairies. European Journal of Agronomy, 31(3), 133-143. 

Flachowsky, G, Chesson, A, and Aulrich, K. (2005) Animal nutrition with feeds from 

genetically modified plants. Archives of Animal Nutrition, 59(1), 1 - 40. 

Franzen, D and Nowatzki, J (2009). NDSU Offers Tillage and Residue Management 

Options. North Dakota State Extension. Retrieved from 

http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/news/newsreleases/2009/april-16-2009/ndsu-offerstillage-and-residue-management-options/

Freibauer, A, Rounsevell, M, Smith, P, and Verhagen, J. (2004) Carbon sequestration in 

the agricultural soils of Europe. Geoderma, 122(1), 1-23. 

Gage, DJ. (2004) Infection and invasion of roots by symbiotic, nitrogen-fixing rhizobia 

during nodulation of temperate legumes. Microbiology and Molecular Biology 

Reviews, 68, 280-300. 

Galle, AM, Linz, GM, Homan, HJ, and Bleier, WJ. (2009) Avian use of harvested crop 

fields in North Dakota during Spring Migration. Western North American 

Naturalist, 69(4), 491-500. 

Gamble, LR, Johnson, KM, Linder, G, and Harrahy, EA. (2002, September 27, 2002). 

The migratory bird treaty act and concerns for nontarget birds relative to spring 

baiting with DRC-1339. Presented at Management of North American Blackbirds, 

Proceedings of a special symposium of The Wildlife Society, 9th Annual 

Conference, Bismarck, North Dakota. 

Garbeva, P, van Veen, JA, and van Elsas, JD. (2004) Microbial diversity in soil: 

Selection of microbial populations by plant and soil type and implications for 

disease suppressiveness. Annual Review of Phytopathology, 42(1), 243-270. 

Gardiner, MM, Landis, DA, Gratton, C, DiFonzo, CD, O'Neal, M, Chacon, JM, Wayo, 

MT, Schmidt, NP, Mueller, EE, and Heimpel, GE. (2009) Landscape diversity 

enhances biological control of an introduced crop pest in the north-central USA. 

Ecological Applications, 19(1), 143-154. 

Garrison, RL and Lewis, JC. (1987) Effects of Browsing by White-Tailed Deer on Yields 

of Soybeans. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 15(4), 555-559. 

GCIA (1988). Soybean Seed Certification Standards. Georgia Crop Improvement 

Association, Inc. Retrieved 1988, from http://www.certifiedseed.org/
135 

Gelderman, R. (2009) Estimating nutrient loss from crop residue fires (Report: 

Brookings, SD: South Dakota State University. Retrieved June 2009, from 

http://pubstorage.sdstate.edu/AgBio_Publications/articles/ExEx8164.pdf

Gianessi, LP and Reigner, NP. (2007) The Value of Herbicides in U.S. Crop Production. 

Weed Technology, 21(2), 559-566. 

Gianessi, LP, Silvers, CS, Sankula, S, and J.E., C. (2002) Plant biotechnology: Current 

and potential impact for improving pest management in U.S. agriculture, an 

analysis of 40 case studies (Report: Washington, DC: National Center for Food 

and Agricultural Policy. Retrieved June, 2002 from 

http://croplife.intraspin.com/Biotech/plant-biotechnology-current-and-potentialimpact-for-improving-pest-management-in-u-s-agriculture-an-analysis-of-40-

case-studies/

Giannakas, K and Yiannaka, A. (2010) The Market Potential of a New High-Oleic 

Soybean: An Ex Ante Analysis AgBioForum, 7(3). 

Giesy, JP, Dobson, S, and Solomon, KR. (2000) Ecotoxicological risk assessment for 

Roundup herbicide. Reviews of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 

167, 35-120. 

Giles, D, Downey, D, and Thompson, J (2006). In Field Assessments of Dust Generation 

of Harvesting Equipment. Workshop on Agricultural Air Quality. Retrieved 

from http://www.ncsu.edu/airworkshop/Emissions_Crop.pdf

Givens, WA, Shaw, DR, Kruger, GR, Johnson, WG, Weller, SC, Young, BG, Wilson, 

RG, Owen, MDK, and Jordan, D. (2009) Survey of Tillage Trends Following The 

Adoption of Glyphosate-Resistant Crops. Weed Technology, 23(1), 150-155. 

Goldblum, D. (2009) Sensitivity of corn and soybean yield in Illinois to air temperature 

and precipitation: the potential impact of future climate change. Physical 

Geography, 30(1), 27-42. 

Goldsmith, P, Masuda, T, and Farrell, R. (2008) Iowa 2006 Specialty Soybean and Corn 

Survey (Report: Urbana, IL: National Soybean Research Laboratory, 

University of Illinois. Retrieved from 

https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/pgoldsmi/www/research_presentations/2008-

Iowa_Corn_Srvy.pdf 

Graef, G, LaVallee, BJ, Tenopir, P, Tat, M, Schweiger, B, Kinney, AJ, Van Gerpen, JH, 

and Clemente, TE. (2009) A high-oleic-acid and low-palmitic-acid soybean: 

Agronomic performance and evaluation as a feedstock for biodiesel. Plant 

Biotechnology Journal, 7(5), 411-421. 

Gunsolus, JL. (1990) Mechanical and cultural weed control in corn and soybeans. 

American Journal of Alternative Agriculture, 5(03), 114-119. 

Hamer, M, Owen, G, and Kloek, J. (2005) The role of functional foods in the 

psychobiology of health and disease. Nutrition Research Reviews, 18(01), 77-88. 

Hammond, BG, Lemena, JK, Ahmeda, G, Miller, KD, Kirkpatrick, J, and Fleeman, T. 

(2008) Safety assessment of SDA soybean oil: Results of a 28-day gavage study 

and a 90-day/one generation reproduction feeding study in rats Regulatory 

Toxicology and Pharmacology, 52(3), 311-323. 
136 

Hammond, BG, Vicini, JL, Hartnell, GF, Naylor, MW, Knight, CD, Robinson, EH, 

Fuchs, RL, and Padgette, SR. (1996) The feeding value of soybeans fed to rats, 

chickens, catfish and dairy cattle is not altered by genetic incorporation of 

glyphosate tolerance. The Journal of Nutrition, 126(3), 717-727. 

Hanna, HM and Jarboe, DH. (2005). Clean-out of combines for identity preserved grain 

production. Presented at Integrated Crop Management Conference, 

Hansen Jesse, LC and Obrycki, JJ. (2000) Field deposition of Bt transgenic corn pollen: 

lethal effects on the monarch butterfly. Oecologia, 125, 241-248. 

Harlan, JR. (1975) Our vanishing genetic resources. Science, 188(4188), 618-621. 

Harrison, LA, Bailey, MR, Naylor, MW, Ream, JE, Hammond, BG, Nida, DL, Burnette, 

BL, Nickson, TE, Mitsky, TA, Taylor, ML, Fuchs, RL, and Padgette, SR. (1996) 

The expressed protein in glyphosate-tolerant soybean, 5-enolypyruvylshikimate3-phosphate synthase from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4, is rapidly digested in 

vitro and is not toxic to acutely gavaged mice. The Journal of Nutrition, 126(3), 

728-740. 

Hartman, HT and Kester, DE. (1975) Plant Propagation: Principles and Practices. 

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc. 

Hartnell, GF. (2010). Do Genetically Engineered Crops Make Economic Sense?

Presented at Southwest Nutrition and Management Conference, Tempe, AZ. 

Hatfield, JL, Boote, KJ, Kimball, BA, Ziska, LH, Izaurralde, RC, Ort, D, Thomson, AM, 

and Wolfe, D. (2011a) Climate Impacts on Agriculture: Implications for Crop 

Production. Agron. J., 103, 351-370. 

Hatfield, JL, Boote, KJ, Kimball, BA, Ziska, LH, Izaurralde, RC, Ort, D, Thomson, AM, 

and Wolfe, D. (2011b) Climate impacts on agriculture: Implications for crop 

production. Agronomy Journal, 103(2), 351-370. 

Haughton, AJ, Champion, GT, Hawes, C, Heard, MS, Brooks, DR, Bohan, DA, Clark, 

SJ, Dewar, AM, Firbank, LG, Osborne, JL, Perry, JN, Rothery, P, Roy, DB, Scott, 

RJ, Woiwod, IP, Birchall, C, Skellern, MP, Walker, JH, Baker, P, Browne, EL, 

Dewar, AJG, Garner, BH, Haylock, LA, Horne, SL, Mason, NS, Sands, RJN, and 

Walker, MJ. (2003) Invertebrate responses to the management of genetically 

modified herbicide-tolerant and conventional spring crops. II. Within-field epigeal 

and aerial arthropods. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: 

Biological Sciences, 358(1439), 1863-1877. 

Hawes, C, Haughton, AJ, Osborne, JL, Roy, DB, Clark, SJ, Perry, JN, Rothery, P, Bohan, 

DA, Brooks, DR, Champion, GT, Dewar, AM, Heard, MS, Woiwod, IP, Daniels, 

RE, Young, MW, Parish, AM, Scott, RJ, Firbank, LG, and Squire, GR. (2003) 

Responses of plants and invertebrate trophic groups to contrasting herbicide 

regimes in the Farm Scale Evaluations of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant 

crops. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, 

Biological sciences, 358(1439), 1899-1913. 

Heard, MS, Hawes, C, Champion, GT, Clark, SJ, Firbank, LG, Haughton, AJ, Parish, 

AM, Perry, JN, Rothery, P, Scott, RJ, Skellern, MP, Squire, GR, and Hill, MO. 

(2003) Weeds in fields with contrasting conventional and genetically modified 
137 

herbicide-tolerant crops. I. Effects on abundance and diversity. Philosophical 

Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 358(1439), 1819-1832. 

Heatherly, L, Dorrance, A, Hoeft, R, Onstad, D, Orf, J, Porter, P, Spurlock, S, and 

Young, B. (2009) Sustainability of U.S. Soybean Production: Conventional, 

Transgenic, and Organic Production Systems (Report: Ames, Iowa, USA: Council 

for Agricultural Science and Technology. Retrieved from 

Heatherly, LG and Hodges, H, F. (Eds.). (1999). Soybean production in the midsouth. 

Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. 

Hefle, SL and Taylor, SL. (1999) Allergenicity of Edible Oils. Food Technology, 53(2), 

62-70. 

Helsel, ZR and Minor, HC (1993). Soybean Production in Missouri University of 

Missouri Extension. Retrieved November 29, 2010 from 

http://extension.missouri.edu/publications/DisplayPrinterFriendlyPub.aspx?P=G4

410

Herro, A (2008). Adjustments to agriculture may help mitigate global warming. 

Retrieved May-June from 

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb6376/is_3_21/ai_n29427848/

Higdon, J and Drake, V (2009). Soy Isoflavones Linus Pauling Institute: Oregon State 

University. Retrieved December 7, 2010 from 

http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/infocenter/phytochemicals/soyiso/

Higley, L and Boethel, D. (1994) Handbook of Soybean Insect Pests. The Entomological 

Society of America. 

Hin, CJA, Schenkelaars, P, and Pak, GA (2001). Agronomic and environmental impacts 

of the commercial cultivation of glyphosate tolerant soybean in the USA. CLM: 

Centrum voor Landbouw en Milieu (Centre for Agriculture and Environment). 

Utrecht. Retrieved from http://foodsafety.kstate.edu/articles/145/enviro_impact_soy_hrbcd.pdf

Hodges, T and French, V. (1985) Soyphen: Soybean growth stages modeled from 

temperature, daylength, and water availability. Agronomy Journal, 77(3), 500-

505. 

Hoeft, RG, Nafziger, ED, Johnson, RR, and Aldrich, SR. (2000) Modern Corn and 

Soybean Production. Champaign, IL: MCSP Publications. 

Holm, LG, Plucknett, DL, Pancho, JV, and Herberger, JP. (1977) The world's worst 

weeds. Distribution and biology. Honolulu, Hawaii: University Press of Hawaii. 

Holmén, B, Miller, D, Hiscox, A, Yang, W, Wang, J, Sammis, T, and Bottoms, R. 

(2006). Aerosol Emissions from Field Planting Operations 

Hoover's (2011). South Dakota Soybean Processors LLC. Hoover's (A D&B Co.). 

Retrieved from 

http://www.hoovers.com/company/South_Dakota_Soybean_Processors_LLC/rrkf

hhi-1.html

Horowitz, J, Ebel, R, and Ueda, K (2010). “No-Till” Farming Is a Growing Practice 

United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service. Retrieved 

from http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/EIB70/EIB70.pdf
138 

Hou, G, Ablett, G, Pauls, K, and Rajcan, I. (2006) Environmental effects on fatty acid 

levels in soybean seed oil. Journal of the American Oil Chemists' Society, 83(9), 

759-763. 

Hymowitz, T and Singh, RJ. (1987). Taxonomy and speciation. In JR Wilcox (Ed.), 

Soybeans: Improvement, Production, and Uses; 2nd edition (pp. 23-48 ). 

Madison, Wisconsin: American Society of Agronomy. 

Imura, O, Shi, K, Iimura, K, and Takamizo, T. (2010) Assessing the effects of cultivating 

genetically modified glyphosate-tolerant varieties of soybeans (Glycine max (L.) 

Merr.) on populations of field arthropods. Environmental Biosafety Research, 

9(2), 101-112. 

Institute of Shortening and Edible Oils (2006). Food Fats and Oils. Institute of Shortening 

and Edible Oils. Retrieved from http://www.iseo.org/FoodFatsOils2006.pdf

Iowa Soybean Association (2010). Soybean Meal Composition Retrieved from 

http://www.soymeal.org/sbmcomposition.html

Iowa State University (2008). Six New Soybean Varieties Highlight Progress in 

Developing Healthier Oils at ISU. Retrieved March 14, 2011 from 

http://www.notrans.iastate.edu/

IPCC (2007). Subsection 14.4.4: Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. Submitted by 

Registration Manager. Cambridge University Press (See Table 

http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg2/en/ch14s14-4-4.html). 

IPMCenters (2011). Crop Profile for Soybean in Minnesota. General Production 

Information. Prepared 2003. National Information System of the Regional 

Integrated Pest Management Centers. Retrieved from 

http://www.ipmcenters.org/cropprofiles/docs/MNSoybeans.pdf

IPPC (2010). Official Web Site for the International Plant Protection Convention: 

International Phytosanitary Portal, International Plant Protection Convention. 

Retrieved November 30, 2010 from https://www.ippc.int/IPP/En/default.jsp

Jacobsen, C, Let, MB, Nielsen, NS, and Meyer, AS. (2008) Antioxidant strategies for 

preventing oxidative flavour deterioration of foods enriched with n-3 

polyunsaturated lipids: a comparative evaluation. Trends in Food Science and 

Technology, 19(2), 76-93. 

James, MJ, Ursin, VM, and Cleland, LG. (2003) Metabolism of stearidonic acid in 

human subjects: comparison with the metabolism of other n-3 fatty acids. The 

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 77(5), 1140-1145. 

Kandel, H (2008). North Dakota Soybean Performance Testing 2008 N.D. Agricultural 

Experiment Station, NDSU Extension Service. Retrieved from 

http://hdl.handle.net/10365/4680

Kaneko, T, Nakamura, Y, Sato, S, Asamizu, E, Kato, T, Sasamoto, S, Watanabe, A, 

Idesawa, K, Ishikawa, A, Kawashima, K, Kimura, T, Kishida, Y, Kiyokawa, C, 

Kohara, M, Matsumoto, M, Matsuno, A, Mochizuki, Y, Nakayama, S, Nakazaki, 

N, Shimpo, S, Sugimoto, M, Takeuchi, C, Yamada, M, and Tabata, S. (2000) 

Complete genome structure of the nitrogen-fixing symbiotic bacterium 

Mesorhizobium loti (supplement). DNA Research, 7, 381-406. 
139 

Kaneko, T, Nakamura, Y, Sato, S, Minamisawa, K, Uchiumi, T, Sasamoto, S, Watanabe, 

A, Idesawa, K, Iriguchi, M, Kawashima, K, Kohara, M, Matsumoto, M, Shimpo, 

S, Tsuruoka, H, Wada, T, Yamada, M, and Tabata, S. (2002) Complete genomic 

sequence of nitrogen-fixing symbiotic bacterium Bradyrhizobium japonicum

USDA110. DNA Research, 9, 189-197. 

Keese, P. (2008) Risks from GMOs due to horizontal gene transfer. Environmental 

Biosafety Research, 7(3), 123-149. 

Knothe, G. (2005) Dependence of biodiesel fuel properties on the structure of fatty acid 

alkyl esters. Fuel Processing Technology, 86(10), 1059-1070. 

Kodama, H. (1994) Genetic enhancement of cold tolerance by expression of a gene for 

chloroplast [omega]-3 fatty acid desaturase in transgenic tobacco. Plant 

Physiology, 105, 601-605. 

Kodama, H, Horiguchi, G, Nishiuchi, T, Nishimura, M, and Iba, K. (1995) Fatty acid 

desaturation during chilling acclimation is one of the factors involved in 

conferring low-temperature tolerance to young tobacco leaves. Plant Physiology, 

107, 1177-1185. 

Koonin, EV, Makarova, KS, and Aravind, L. (2001) Horizontal gene transfer in 

prokaryotes: Quantification and classification. Annual Review of Microbiology, 

55, 709-742. 

Kowalchuk, GA, Bruinsma, M, and van Veen, JA. (2003) Assessing responses of soil 

microorganisms to GM plants. Trends in ecology & evolution (Personal edition), 

18(8), 403-410. 

Kremer, RJ and Means, NE. (2009) Glyphosate and glyphosate-resistant crop interactions 

with rhizosphere microorganisms. European Journal of Agronomy, 31(3), 153-

161. 

Krupa, S, Booker, F, Bowersox, V, and Grantz, D. (2006). Uncertainties in the Current 

Knowledge of Atmospheric Trace Gases Associated with Cropping Systems in the 

US 

Kucharik, CJ, Serbin, S.P. . (2008) Impacts of recent climate change on Wisconsin corn 

and soybean yield trends. . Environ. Res. Lett. , 3 034003, 10pp. 

Kuepper, G (2003). Organic Soybean Production National Center for Appropriate 

Technology. Retrieved December 7, 2010 from http://attra.ncat.org/attrapub/PDF/organicsoy.pdf

Kuiken, KA and Lyman, CM. (1949) Essential amino acid composition of soy bean 

meals prepared from twenty strains of soy beans. Journal of Biological 

Chemistry, 177(1), 29-36. 

Lal, R. (2011) Sequestering carbon in soils of agro-ecosystems. Food Policy () 

36(Supplement 1), S33-S39. 

Lal, R and Bruce, JP. (1999) The potential of world cropland soils to sequester C and 

mitigate the greenhouse effect. Environmental Science & Policy, 2(2), 177-185. 

Lee, C and Herbek, J. (2004) Specialty soybean production and management in Kentucky 

(Report: University of Kentucky Cooperative Extension, University of Kentucky. 

Retrieved from http://www.ca.uky.edu/agc/pubs/agr/agr182/agr182.pdf
140 

Leep, R, Undersander, D, Min, D, Harrigan, T, and Grigar, J (2003). Steps to Successful 

No-till Establishment of Forages. Submitted by Registration Manager. Michigan 

State University Extension (See Table 

http://www.fieldcrop.msu.edu/documents/E2880.pdf). 

Lemke, SL, Vicini, JL, Su, H, Goldstein, DA, Nemeth, MA, Krul, ES, and Harris, WS. 

(2010) Dietary intake of stearidonic acid-enriched soybean oil increases the 

omega-3 index: Randomized, double-blind clinical study of efficacy and safety. 

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 92(4 ), 766-775 

Li, X, Wang, S, Duan, L, Hao, J, Li, C, Chen, Y, and Yang, L. (2007) Particulate and 

Trace Gas Emissions from Open Burning of Wheat Straw and Corn Stover in 

China. Environmental Science & Technology, 41(17), 6052-6058. 

Liu, K. (1997) Soybeans : chemistry, technology, and utilization. New York: Chapman & 

Hall. 

Loux, M, Johnson, B, and Nice, G (2009). Herbicide Program for non-GMO Soybeans. 

Purdue University 

Ohio State University Extension Weed Science. Retrieved from 

http://www.btny.purdue.edu/weedscience/2009/nonGMO09.pdf

Loux, MM, Dobbels, AF, Stachler, JM, Johnson, WG, Nice, G, and Bauman, TT. (2008) 

"Weed Control Principles" (Report: Ohio State University Extension. Retrieved 

from http://ohioline.osu.edu/b789/index.html

Lovett, S, Price, P, and Lovett, J (2003). Managing Riparian Lands in the Cotton 

Industry. Submitted by Registration Manager. Cotton Research and Development 

Corporation (See Table 

http://live.greeningaustralia.org.au/nativevegetation/pages/pdf/Authors%20L/18_

Lovett_Price.pdf). 

Lubowski, RN, Vesterby, M, Bucholtz, S, Baez, A, and Roberts, MJ (2006). Major Uses 

of Land in the United States, 2002. USDA-ERS. Retrieved from 

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/EIB14/eib14a.pdf

Lundgren, JG, Hesler, LS, Tilmon, K, Dashiell, K, and Scott, R. (2009) Direct effects of 

soybean varietal selection and Aphis glycines-resistant soybeans on natural 

enemies. Arthropod-Plant Interactions, 3(1), 9-16. 

MacGowan, BJ, Humberg, LA, Beasley, JC, DeVault, TL, Retamosa, MI, and Rhodes, J, 

O.E. . (2006) Corn and Soybean Crop Depredation by Wildlife (Report: FNR265-W). Purdue Extension, Department of Forestry and Natural Resources, 

Purdue University. Retrieved from 

http://www.ces.purdue.edu/extmedia/FNR/FNR-265-W.pdf

Mallory-Smith, C and Zapiola, M. (2008) Gene flow from glyphosate-resistant crops. 

[Review]. Pest Management Science, 64(4), 428-440. 

Manach, C, Scalbert, A, Morand, C, Rémésy, C, and Jiménez, L. (2004) Polyphenols: 

food sources and bioavailability. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 

79(5), 727-747. 
141 

Marshall, EJP, Brown, VK, Boatman, ND, Lutman, PJW, Squire, GR, and Ward, LK. 

(2003) The role of weeds in supporting biological diversity within crop fields*. 

Weed Research, 43(2), 77-89. 

Martek (2010). Why life's DHATM Martek Biosciences Corp. Retrieved 25 August, 2011 

from http://www.martek.com/Products-and-Services/Child-and-AdultNutrition/General-Information/Why-lifesDHA-.aspx

Marvier, M, McCreedy, M, Regetz, J, and Kareival, P. (2007) A meta-analysis of effects 

of Bt cotton and maize on nontarget invertebrates. Science 316, 1475-1477. 

McDaniel, P (2011). The Twelve Soil Orders. Soil Taxonomy. University of Idaho. 

College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. Retrieved from 

http://soils.cals.uidaho.edu/soilorders/orders.htm

MCIA. (2009) Seed Certification Handbook (Report: St. Paul, MN: Minnesota Crop 

Improvement Association. Retrieved from 

http://www.mncia.org/program_seedcert.html

MCIA. (2010) Seed Certification Handbook (Report: Columbia, MO: Missouri Crop 

Improvement Association. Retrieved from 

McKnight, TL. (2004) Regional Geography of the United States and Canada. Prentice 

Hall. 

MDA. (2009) 2007 Pesticide Usage on Four Major Crops in Minnesota (Report: St. Paul, 

MN: Minnesota Department of Agriculture, 

USDA NASS - MN and ND Field Offices. Retrieved from 

http://www.mda.state.mn.us/news/publications/chemfert/2007pesticideuse.pdf

Micha, R and Mozaffarian, D. (2008) Trans Fatty Acids: Effects on Cardiometabolic 

Health and Implications for Policy. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids, 

79(3-5), 147-152. 

Micha, R and Mozaffarian, D. (2010) Saturated Fat and Cardiometabolic Risk Factors, 

Coronary Heart Disease, Stroke, and Diabetes: a Fresh Look at the Evidence. 

Lipids, 45, 893-905. 

Monsanto (2008). Monsanto to offer more Vistive low-lin soybean varieties for 2008 

Retrieved 7-28-11, 2011 from https://www.vistive.com/News/Pages/Monsantoto-offer-more-Vistive-low-lin-soybean-varieties-for-2008.aspx

Monsanto. (2009). GRAS Notice for Stearidonic (SDA) Omega-3 Soybean Oil 

Monsanto 09-SY-195F. Retrieved from 

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fcn/gras_notices/grn000283.pdf

Monsanto (2010a). Monsanto Completes Key Regulatory Submission for Soybeans With 

Dicamba Herbicide Tolerance Trait. . Retrieved from 

http://monsanto.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=863

Monsanto (2010b). Petition for the Determination of Non-Regulated Status for MON 

87769. Submitted by C George and GJ Rogan, Registration Manager. Monsanto 

Company, St. Louis MO 

Monsanto. (2010c). Petition for the Determination of Nonregulated Status for Improved 

Fatty Acid Profile MON 87705. Petition. Monsanto Company. Retrieved from 

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs/09_20101p.pdf
142 

Monsanto (2010d). Phone Record. C.Roseland Conversation with Cherian George, 

Monsanto Co. Submitted by Registration Manager. (See Table 

Monsanto (2011). Roundup Ready® Soybeans. Monsanto Co. Retrieved from 

https://www.genuity.com/stewardship/Documents/TUG.pdf

Mori, S, M., K, and Ido, T. (2010) GISELA - GIS-based evaluation of land use and 

agriculture market analysis under global warming. Applied Energy, 87, 236-242. 

Mozzaffarian, D, Katan, MB, Ascherio, A, Stampfer, MJ, and Willett, WC. (2006) Trans 

fatty acids and cardiovascular disease. The New England Journal of Medicine, 

354(15), 1601-1613. 

MSA (2009). Market Trends for IP Crops Midwest Shippers' Association. Retrieved 

November 29, 2010 from http://www.mnshippers.com/html/news.cfm?ID=44

MSU-Extension (2010). 2010 Michigan Soybean Performance Report. Michigan State 

University Extension Retrieved from 

http://www.css.msu.edu/varietytrials/soybean/2010%20pdf/2010%20Performance

%20Report-final.pdf

MSU (2011). 2011 Weed Control Guide. Soybean, Table 2a Chemical Weed Control in 

Soybean Retrieved from 

http://www.msuweeds.com/assets/2011WeedGuide/2011WeedGuideSoy.pdf

Muth, MK, Mancini, D, and Viator, C. (2003) The role of identity-preservation systems 

in food-manufacturer responses to bioengineered foods. Journal of Food 

Distribution Research, 34(1), 43-49. 

NAPPO (2009). North American Plant Protection Organization approved standards 

North American Plant Protection Organization. Retrieved April 18, 2011 from 

http://www.nappo.org/Standards/Std-e.html

Naranjo, SE. (2009) Impacts of Bt crops on non-target invertebrates and insecticide use 

patterns. CAB Review: Perspectives in Agriculture, Veterinary Science, Nutrition 

and Natural Resources, 4(11), 1-23. 

NBII (2010). United States Regulatory Agencies Unified Biotechnology Website 

Retrieved 2011 from http://usbiotechreg.nbii.gov/

NCAT (2003). NCAT's Organic Crops Workbook: A Guide to Sustainable and Allowed 

Practices National Center for Appropriate Technology. Retrieved November 8, 

2010 from http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/PDF/cropsworkbook.pdf

NCCIA (2011). Soybeans: Specific Certification Standards North Carolina Crop 

Improvement Association. Retrieved April, 2011 from 

http://www.nccrop.com/files/Soybean%20Certification%20Standards.pdf

NDSU Weed Science (unknown). Soybean, Dry Bean, Edible Pulses. North Dakota State 

University, Weed Science Department. Retrieved from 

http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/weeds/weed-control-guides/nd-weed-control-guide1/wcg-files/5-Soy.pdf

Nice, G and Johnson, B (2005). Indiana’s Top Ten Most Problematic Weeds Retrieved 

November 30, 2010 from 

http://www.btny.purdue.edu/weedscience/2005/topten05.pdf
143 

NOAA. (2011 download). Climatology by State; 1971-2000. In NOaA Administration 

(Ed.). 

NOPA (2011). Oilseed Processing Plants. National Oilseed Processors Association. 

Retrieved from http://www.nopa.org/content/oilseed/NOPA%20Plants%20-

%20Location%20by%20State%20_%20August%202011.pdf

NRC. (2004) Safety of Genetically Engineered Foods: Approaches to Assessing 

Unintended Health Effects (Report: Washington DC: National Resource Council. 

NRC. (2010) The Impact of Genetically Engineered Crops on Farm Sustainability in the 

United States. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. 

NSA (2006). Ten Years of NuSun Retrieved March 17, 2011 from 

https://www.sunflowernsa.com/magazine/details.asp?ID=408&Cat=20

NYC-DOH (Producer). (2009, June 6, 2011). Fry Oils and Shortenings. Light/Medium 

Duty. Retrieved from 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/transfat/english/oillist.pdf

O'Brien, RD. (2004) Fats and Oils - Formulating and Processing for Applications. Boca 

Raton, FL: CRC Press. 

O'Brien, RD. (2009a). Baking Shortenings. In O'Brien (Ed.), Fats and Oils: Formulating 

and Processing for Applications. Boca Raton: CRC Press. 

O'Brien, RD. (2009b). Liquid Oils In RD O'Brien (Ed.), Fats and Oils: Formulating and 

Processing for Applications. Boca Raton: CRC Press. 

OECD. (2000) Series on Harmonization of Regulatory Oversight in Biotechnology No. 

15: (Report: Paris, France: Environment Directorate, Organization for Economic 

Co-operation and Development. 

OECD. (2001) Series on the Safety of Novel Foods and Feeds No. 12: (Report: Paris, 

France: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. 

Oliva, ML, Shannon, JG, Sleper, DA, Ellersieck, MR, Cardinal, AJ, Paris, RL, and Lee, 

JD. (2006) Stability of Fatty Acid Profile in Soybean Genotypes with Modified 

Seed Oil Composition. Crop Sci., 46(5), 2069-2075. 

Orthoefer, FT. (2005) Performance of trans-free vegetable oils in shortenings and deepfat frying. Lipid Technology, 17(5). 

Otten, JJ, Pitzi Hellwig, J, and Meyers, LD. (2006). Dietary Reference Intakes: The 

Essential Guide to Nutrient Requirements IoMotNAo Science (Ed.) Retrieved 

from http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11537#toc 

Padgette, SR, Re, DB, Barry, GF, Eichholtz, D, Delannay, X, Fuchs, RL, Kishore, G, and 

Fraley, RT. (1996). New weed control opportunities: Development of soybeans 

with a Roundup Ready gene. In SO Duke (Ed.), Herbicide Resistant Crops: 

Agricultural, Environmental, Economic, Regulatory, and Technical Aspects (pp. 

53–84 ). New York: Lweis Publishers. 

Palmer, WE, Bromley, PT, and Anderson, JR (2010). Pesticides and Wildlife - Soybeans 

Retrieved November 29, 2010 from 

http://ipm.ncsu.edu/wildlife/soybeans_wildlife.html
144 

Pedersen, P (2007). Seed Inoculation Iowa State University Extension. Retrieved 

February 4, 2011 from 

http://extension.agron.iastate.edu/soybean/production_seedinoc.html

Pedersen, P (2010). Soybean Growth and Development Department of Agronomy, Iowa 

State University. Retrieved November 29, 2010 from 

http://extension.agron.iastate.edu/soybean/documents/SoybeanGrowthandDevelo

pment_000.pdf

Pedersen, P and Lauer, JG. (2004) Soybean growth and development in various 

management systems and planting dates. Crop Science, 44, 508-515. 

Pilcher, CD, Rice, ME, and Obrycki, JJ. (2005) Impact of transgenic Bacillus 

thuringiensis corn and crop phenology on five nontarget arthropods. 

Environmental Entomology, 34, 1302-1316. 

Pioneer (2011). Field Facts: Soybean Variety Maturity Ratings. Pioneer Hi-Bred Co. 

Retrieved from 

https://www.pioneer.com/home/site/ca/template.CONTENT/guid.01FD7761-

12B6-F2DC-5E45-015867C14C14/

Pioneer Hi-Bred (2011). Plenish High Oleic Soybeans Retrieved May 20, 2011, 2011 

from http://www.pioneer.com/home/site/about/products/product-traitstechnology/plenish

Ponsard, S, Gutierrez, AP, and Mills, NJ. (2002) Effect of Bt-toxin (Cry1Ac) in 

transgenic cotton on the adult longevity of four heteropteran predators. 

Environmental Entomology, 31, 1197-1205. 

Potter, B and Ostlie, K (2003). Crop Profile for Soybean in Minnesota. Minnesota 

Project, NCPM Center, National Information System of the Regional Integrated 

Pest Management Centers. Retrieved from 

http://www.ipmcenters.org/cropprofiles/docs/MNSoybeans.pdf

Primomo, VS, Falk, DE, Ablett, GR, Tanner, JW, and Rajcan, I. (2002) Genotype × 

Environment Interactions, Stability, and Agronomic Performance of Soybean with 

Altered Fatty Acid Profiles. Crop Sci., 42(1), 37-44. 

Pritchett, JJ, Fulton, J, Beyers, R, Pederson, L, and Lawson, L. (2002) Specialty Corn and 

Soybeans: Production and Marketing in Indiana. (Report: Purdue University 

Cooperative Extension Service. Retrieved from 

Purves, W, Sadava, D, Orians, G, and Heller, H. (2004) Life: The science of biology. 

Gordonsville, VA: Sinauer Associates and W. H. Freeman & Company. 

Qualisoy (2011). The traits. Low Linolenic. Qualisoy. Retrieved from 

http://qualisoy.com/agriculture/section/the_traits

Quist, D. (2010). Vertical (Trans)gene Flow: Implications for Crop Diversity and Wild 

Relatives. Biotechnology & Biosafety Series 11. Penang, Malaysia: Third World 

Network. 

Rackis, JJ (1974). Biological and physiological factors in soybean. Retrieved 51:161A174A from http://ddr.nal.usda.gov/bitstream/10113/31316/1/CAIN749011713.pdf

Randall, GW and Mulla, DJ. (2001) Nitrate Nitrogen in Surface Waters as Influenced by 

Climatic Conditions and Agricultural Practices. J. Environ. Qual., 30(2), 337-344. 
145 

Raper Jr., CD and Kramer, PJ. (1987). Stress physiology. In JR Wilcox (Ed.), Soybean: 

Improvement, Production, and Uses (2nd ed., pp. 589–641). Madison, WI: Agron. 

Monogr. 16. 

Ravier, I, Haouisee, E, Clement, M, Seux, R, and Briand, O. (2005) Field experiments for 

the evaluation of pesticide spray-drift on arable crops. Pest Management Science, 

61, 728-736. 

Ray, JD, Kilen, TC, Abel, CA, and Paris, RL. (2003) Soybean natural cross-pollination 

rates under field conditions. Environmental Biosafety Research, 2(2), 133-138. 

Rehm, G. (2009). Burning would be a good option. Retrieved from 

http://minnesotafarmguide.com/app/blog/?p=311

Rehm, G, Schmitt, MA, Lamb, J, and Eliason, R (2001). Fertilizing Soybeans in 

Minnesota. Retrieved from 

http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/cropsystems/DC3813.html

Romeis, J, Meissle, M, and Bigler, F. (2006) Transgenic crops expressing Bacillus 

thuringiensis toxins and biological control. [10.1038/nbt1180]. Nat Biotech, 

24(1), 63-71. 

Ronald, P and Fouche, B (2006). Genetic Engineering and Organic Production Systems. 

University of California, Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources. 

Retrieved Publication 8188, from http://ucanr.org/freepubs/docs/8188.pdf

Rosenzweig, C, Tubiello, FN, Goldberg, R, Mills, E, and Bloomfield, J. (2002) Increased 

crop damage in the US from excess precipitation under climate change. Global 

Environmental Change, 12, 197-202. 

Rosseli, JB. (1998) Industrial Frying Process. Grasas y Aceites, 49(3-4), 282-295. 

Rostagno, M (2009). Soybeans Isoflavones SciTopics. Retrieved December 7, 2010 

from http://www.scitopics.com/Soybeans_Isoflavones.html

Roy, DB, Bohan, DA, Haughton, AJ, Hill, MO, Osborne, JL, Clark, SJ, Perry, JN, 

Rothery, P, Scott, RJ, Brooks, DR, Champion, GT, Hawes, C, Heard, MS, and 

Firbank, LG. (2003) Invertebrates and vegetation of field margins adjacent to 

crops subject to contrasting herbicide regimes in the Farm Scale Evaluations of 

genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol 

Sci, 358(1439), 1879-1898. 

SANA (2011download). Sales and Trends. Sales Data. Soyfoods Association of North 

America Retrieved from http://www.soyfoods.org/soy-information/sales-andtrends

Sandretto, C and Payne, J (2008). Soil Management and Conservation. Submitted by K 

Wiebe and N Gollehon, Registration Manager. U.S. Department of Agriculture - 

Economic Research Service (See Table 

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/arei/eib16/eib16_4-2.pdf). 

Sanvido, O, Stark, M, Romeis, J, and Bigler, F. (2006) Ecological Impacts of Genetically 

Modified Crops: Experiences from Ten Years of Experimental Field Research and 

Commercial Cultivation (Report: Zürich, Switzerland: Agroscope ReckenholzTänikon Research Station ART. 
146 

Sawyer, JE (2000). Dry fall leads to field fires. Iowa State University Extention. 

Retrieved IC-484(23), from http://www.ipm.iastate.edu/ipm/icm/2000/10-23-

2000/dryfallfires.html

Schlenker, W and Roberts, MJ. (2009) Nonlinear temperature effects indicate severe 

damages to U.S. crop yields under climate change. Proceedings of the National 

Academy of Sciences, 106(37), 15594-15598. 

Scott, WO and Aldrich, SR. (1970) Modern Soybean Production. Cincinnati, OH: The 

Farm Quarterly. 

Seed Certification Department (2001). South Carolina Seed Certification Standards. 

Department of Fertilizer & Seed Certification Services of Clemson University. 

Retrieved from 

http://www.clemson.edu/public/regulatory/plant_industry/fertilizer_seed/images/S

CertStandards.pdf

Setiyono, TD, Weiss, A, Specht, J, Bastidas, AM, Cassman, KG, and Dobermann, A. 

(2007) Understanding and modeling the effect of temperature and daylength on 

soybean phenology under high-yield conditions. Field Crops Research, 100(2-3), 

257-271. 

Sharpe, T. (2010). Cropland Management (Chapter 4). In MD Jones and JS Braden 

(Eds.), Tarheel Wildlife: A Guide for Managing Wildlife on Private Lands in 

North Carolina (pp. 26-29). Raleigh: North Carolina Wildlife Resources 

Commission. 

Singh, E, Tiwari, S, and Agrawal, M. (2010) Variability in antioxidant and metabolite 

levels, growth and yield of two soybean varieties: An assessment of anticipated 

yield losses under projected elevation of ozone. Agriculture, Ecosystems & 

Environment, 135(3), 168-177. 

Smith, RG, Gross, KL, and Robertson, GP. (2008) Effects of crop diversity on 

agroecosystem function: Crop yield response. Ecosystems, 11, 355-366. 

Smyth, S and Phillips, P. (2002) Product differentiation alternatives: Identity 

preservation, segregation, and traceability. AgBioForum, 5(2), 30-42. 

Soil Survey Staff. (1999). Soil Taxonomy: A Basic System of Soil Classification for 

Making and Interpreting Soil Surveys Agriculture Handbook Number 436 

Retrieved from ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NSSC/Soil_Taxonomy/tax.pdf 

Soil Survey Staff. (2010). Keys to Soil Taxonomy Retrieved from ftp://ftpfc.sc.egov.usda.gov/NSSC/Soil_Taxonomy/keys/2010_Keys_to_Soil_Taxonomy.

pdf 

Sonka, ST, Bender, KL, and Fisher, DK. (2004). Economics and Marketing (Chapter 19) 

Soybeans: Improvement, Production, and Uses (3rd ed., Vol. No. 16, Agronomy 

Monograph, pp. 919-947). Madison, WI: American Society of Agronomy, Crop 

Science Society of America, Soil Science Society of America. 

Soyatech (2008). Soya and Oilseed Bluebook. Retrieved August 15, 2008 from 

http://72.32.142.180/oilseed_statistics.htm
147 

Soyatech (2010). World Major Oilseeds: Area, Yield & Production by Main Producers 

2003 - 2009 Retrieved November 29, 2010 from 

http://www.soyatech.com/bluebook_ref/statistics/html/T101.htm

Soyconnection (2011). Food and Fuel: Meeting the Challenges of Feeding the World and 

Creating Renewable Fuels Retrieved March 14, 2011 from 

http://www.soyconnection.com/soybean_oil/pdf/foodvsfuel_soy_biofuels.pdf

SoyStats (2010a). Soybeans' Many Uses: Edible & Industrial American Soybean 

Association. Retrieved November 30, 2010 from 

http://www.soystats.com/2010/page_06.htm

SoyStats (2010b). Top Ten U.S. Export Customers $ Million 2009 American Soybean 

Association. Retrieved November 30, 2010 from 

http://soystats.com/2010/page_27.htm

SoyStats (2010c). U.S. Soybean Meal Production 1984-2009 Retrieved March 23, 2011 

from http://www.soystats.com/2010/page_19.htm

SoyStats (2010d). U.S. Soybean Oil Consumption 2009 Retrieved March 20, 2011 from 

http://www.soystats.com/2010/page_22.htm

SoyStats (2010e). U.S. Soybean Use by Livestock 2009 American Soybean Association. 

Retrieved March 23, 2011 from http://www.soystats.com/2010/page_19.htm

SoyStats (2010f). World Protein Meal Consumption 2009 American Soybean 

Association. Retrieved November 30, 2010 from 

http://www.soystats.com/2010/page_34.htm

SoyStats (2010g). World Soybean Exports 2009 American Soybean Association. 

Retrieved November 30, 2010 from http://soystats.com/2010/page_32.htm

SoyStats (2010h). World Soybean Production 2009. American Soybean Association. 

Retrieved November 30, 2010 from http://soystats.com/2010/page_30.htm

Soystats (2011a). Domestic Utilization. Meal Use by Livestock American Soybean 

Association Retrieved from http://www.soystats.com/2011/Default-frames.htm

SoyStats (2011b). A reference guide to important soybean facts and figures. Soy Stats. 

American Soybean Association. Retrieved from 

http://www.soystats.com/2011/Default-frames.htm

Sprague, C (2006). Growing non-GMO soybeans: What do you need to know? Michigan 

State Crop and Soils Department. Retrieved 2011 from 

http://ipmnews.msu.edu/fieldcrop/fieldcrop/tabid/56/articleType/ArticleView/arti

cleId/1884/categoryId/2/Growing-nonGMO-soybeans-What-do-you-need-toknow.aspx

Squire, GR, Brooks, DR, Bohan, DA, Champion, GT, Daniels, RE, Haughton, AJ, 

Hawes, C, Heard, MS, Hill, MO, May, MJ, Osborne, JL, Perry, JN, Roy, DB, 

Woiwod, IP, and Firbank, LG. (2003) On the rationale and interpretation of the 

Farm Scale Evaluations of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. 

Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological 

Sciences, 358(1439), 1779-1799. 

Stanton, JS, Steele, GV, and Vogel, JR (2007). Occurrence of Agricultural Chemicals in 

Shallow Ground Water and the Unsaturated Zone, Northeast Nebraska Glacial 
148 

Till, 2002-04. U.S. Department of the Interior. USGS Retrieved from 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2007/5228/pdf/sir2007-5228.pdf

Starling, S (2011). Krill set for continued omega-3 stardom. William Reed Business 

Media. Retrieved from 

http://www.nutraingredients.com/content/view/print/394677

Staton, M and Warncke, D (2009). Fertilizing soybeans in Michigan. Michigan State 

University Integrated Pest Management Program Retrieved April 30, 2009 from 

http://ipmnews.msu.edu/fieldcrop/fieldcrop/tabid/56/articleType/ArticleView/arti

cleId/179/categoryId/2/Fertilizing-soybeans-in-Michigan.aspx

Stewart, CN (2008). Gene Flow and the Risk of Transgene Spread University of 

Tennessee, Plant Molecular Genetics 

 Retrieved November 30, 2010 from http://agribiotech.info/details/StewartGeneFlow%20Mar%208%20-%2003.pdf 

Stock, D and Holloway, PJ. (1993) Possible Mechanisms for Surfactant-Induced Foliar 

Uptake of Agrochemicals. Pesticide Science, 38, 165-177. 

Sundstrom, FJ, Williams, J, Van Deynze, A, and Bradford, KJ (2002). Identity 

Preservation of Agricultural Commodities. University of California, Division of 

Agriculture and Natural Resources. Retrieved Publication 8077, from 

http://anrcatalog.ucdavis.edu/pdf/8077.pdf

TCM (2008). Nightshade: Threat to Harvest and Export Annex Publishing & Printing 

Inc. Retrieved November 29, 2010 from 

http://www.topcropmanager.com/content/view/2507/

Torres, JB and Ruberson, JR. (2005) Canopy- and Ground-Dwelling Predatory 

Arthropods in Commercial Bt and non-Bt Cotton Fields: Patterns and 

Mechanisms. Environmental Entomology, 34(5), 1242-1256. 

Twyman, RM. (2003). Weeds: Herbicide Resistance. In Encyclopedia of Applied Plant 

Sciences (pp. 1516-1521). London, UK: Elsevier Science. 

Tyson, KS, Bozell, J, Wallace, R, Peterson, E, and Moens, L. (2004).Biomass Oil 

Analysis: Research Needs and Reco mmendations. Golden, CO. Last accessed 

from http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy04osti/34796.pdf

UK. (2010) Specialty Soybeans (Report: University of Kentucky Cooperative Extension 

Service, College of Agriculture. Retrieved from 

UM. (2011). Some soybean insecticides labeled for control of soybean aphid. from 

University of Minnesota 

http://www.soybeans.umn.edu/crop/insects/aphid/aphid_insecticides.htm

University of Connecticut (2011). Dietary Recommendations for Omega-3 Fatty Acids. 

International Omega-3 Learning and Education Consortium for Health and 

Medicine. Retrieved from http://www.omega3learning.uconn.edu/info/what-areomega-3-fatty-acids/dietary-recommendations-for-omega-3-fatty-acids/

University of Illinois (2006). No-till is now the "Conventional" Tillage System for 

Illinois Farmers Retrieved November 30, 2010 from 

http://web.extension.illinois.edu/state/newsdetail.cfm?NewsID=4991
149 

US-EPA. (1993a) R.E.D. Facts: Glyphosate (Report: Washington, DC: U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances. 

Retrieved from 

US-EPA. (1993b) Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED): Glyphosate. (Report: 

Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Prevention, 

Pesticides and Toxic Substances. Retrieved from 

US-EPA. (1996) 40 CFR Part 180 Plant Pesticide Inert Ingredient CP4 

Enolpyruvylshikimate-3-D and the Genetic Material Necessary for Its Production 

in All Plants. Federal Register, 61(150), 40338-40340. 

US-EPA (2004). Overview of the Ecological Risk Assessment Process in the Office of 

Pesticide Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Submitted by 

Registration Manager. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of 

Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Office of Pesticide Programs 

US-EPA. (2005) Protecting Water Quality for Agricultural Runoff. (EPA 841-F-05-001). 

US-EPA. (2007). Agricultural Sector Impacts. Chapter 8 Regulatory Impact Analysis: 

Renewable Fuel Standard Program, Retrieved from 

http://www.epa.gov/oms/renewablefuels/420r07004chap8.pdf 

US-EPA. (2008) Risks of Glyphosate Use to Federally Threatened California Red-legged 

Frog (Rana aurora draytonii) (Report: Washington, DC: U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, Office of Pesticide Programs, Environmental Fate and Effects 

Division. Retrieved from 

US-EPA (2009). Soil Preparation Environmental Protection Agency. Retrieved March 

2011, from http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/ag101/cropsoil.html

US-EPA (2010a). Agriculture (Chapter 6). Submitted by Registration Manager. United 

States Environmental Protection Agency (See Table 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads10/508_Complete_GHG

_1990_2008.pdf). 

US-EPA (2010b). Basic Information - Air Emission Sources Retrieved March 2011, 

from http://www.epa.gov/air/emissions/basic.htm

US-EPA (2010c). National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) Retrieved March 

2011, from http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html

US-EPA (2011a). Agricultural Burning Retrieved October 12, 2011 from 

http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/tburn.html

US-EPA (2011b). Particulate Matter (PM-2.5) 2006 Standard Nonattainment 

Area/State/County Report Retrieved 2011 from 

http://www.epa.gov/airquality/greenbk/rnca.html#5081

US-FDA (1996). Biotechnology Consultation Note to the File BNF No. 000039 

Retrieved February 4, 2011 from 

http://www.fda.gov/food/biotechnology/submissions/ucm161157.htm

US-FDA (1998). Use of Antibiotic Resistance Marker Genes in Transgenic Plants (Draft 

Guidance). Retrieved November 30, 2010 from 

http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidance

Documents/Biotechnology/ucm096135.htm
150 

US-FDA. (2004 ).Letter Responding to Health Claim Petition dated November 3, 2003 

(Martek Petition): Omega-3 Fatty Acids and Reduced Risk of Coronary Heart 

Disease (Docket No. 2003Q-0401). U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Last 

accessed from 

http://www.fda.gov/Food/LabelingNutrition/LabelClaims/QualifiedHealthClaims/

ucm072932.htm

US-FDA. (2009a).Agency Response Letter GRAS Notice No. GRN 000283. U.S. Food 

and Drug Administration, Washington, D.C. Last accessed from 

http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodIngredientsPackaging/GenerallyRecognizedasSafe

GRAS/GRASListings/ucm185688.htm

US-FDA. (2009b).GRAS Notice for Stearidonic (SDA) Omega-3 Soybean Oil. Center 

for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN) 

U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Washington, D.C. Last accessed from 

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fcn/gras_notices/grn000283.pdf

US-FDA (2011). Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) Retrieved September 30, 2011 

from 

http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodIngredientsPackaging/GenerallyRecognizedasSafe

GRAS/default.htm

US-FWS (2011). Species Reports - Listings and Occurrences for Each State Retrieved 

May 25, 2011 from 

http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/stateListingAndOccurrence.jsp

US-NARA (2010a). Executive Orders Disposition Tables Index United States National 

Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved January 31, 2011 from 

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/disposition.html

US-NARA (2010b). Executive Orders disposition tables index United States National 

Archives and Records Administration. Retrieved March 11, 2010 from 

http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/disposition.html

US Census Bureau (2007). Soybean processing. Census Bureau. Retrieved from 

http://www.census.gov/econ/industry/hierarchy/i311222.htm

US Census Bureau (2008). Fats and Oils: Oilseed Crushings - Summary 2007 and 2006. 

Submitted by Registration Manager. (See Table 

http://academicarchive.snhu.edu/bitstream/handle/10474/958/m311j0713.pdf?seq

uence=1). 

US Census Bureau. (2009a) 2007 Economic Census, Sector 31: Manufacturing: Industry 

Series: Products Statistics for the United States: 2007 , Fats and Oils: Oilseed 

Crushings (Report: Retrieved 7/21/11, from 

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/IBQTable?_bm=y&-geo_id=&-

fds_name=EC0700A1&-_skip=100&-ds_name=EC0731I2&-_lang=en

US Census Bureau (2009b). 2007 Economic Census. American Factfinder. Sector 31: 

Manufacturing: Industry Series. Retrieved from 

USB (2010a). Animal Agriculture Economic Analysis: 1999-2009. United Soybean 

Board. Retrieved from 
151 

http://unitedsoybean.org/images/uploads/multimedia/National_Animal_Agricultur

e_Economic_Analysis_2010.pdf

USB. (2010b) A Survey of Recent Chemical Price Trends: The Potential Impact of 

Rising Petrochemical Prices on Soy Use for Industrial Applications (Report: 

OMNI TECH, Prepared for the United Soybean Board. Retrieved from 

USB (2011a). Food and Fuel: Meeting the challenge of feeding the world and creating 

renewable fuels. United Soybean Board Retrieved from 

http://www.soyconnection.com/soybean_oil/pdf/foodvsfuel_soy_biofuels.pdf

USB (2011b). Online Market View Database. Domestic Data 2008/2009. Submitted by 

US Board, Registration Manager. (See Table 

http://usb.adayana.com:8080/usb/reports/domestic_data.jsp). 

USB (2011c). Soyfoods Guide 2011. United Soybean Board. Retrieved from 

http://www.soyconnection.com/soyfoods/pdf/soyfoods_guide.pdf

USDA-AMS (2010). National Organic Program Agricultural Marketing Service, United 

States Department of Agriculture. Retrieved November 23, 2010 from 

http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/nop 

USDA-APHIS. (1997) DuPont Petition 97-008-01p for determination of nonregulated 

status for transgenic High Oleic Acid soybean sublines G94-1, G94-19, and G168 (Report: 97). Retrieved June, 2010 from 

http://www.aphis.usda.gov/brs/aphisdocs2/97_00801p_com.pdf

USDA-APHIS. (2010a) Monsanto Company and KWS SAAT AG Supplemental Request 

for Partial Deregulation of Sugar Beet Genetically Engineered to be Tolerant to 

the Herbicide Glyphosate (Draft EA) (Report: Riverdale, MD: US Department of 

Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Biotechnology 

Regulatory Services. Retrieved from 

USDA-APHIS. (2010b) Pioneer Hi-Bred International High Oleic Soybean DP-305432-

1, Final Environmental Assessment (Report: Riverdale, MD: US Department of 

Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, Biotechnology 

Regulatory Services. Retrieved from 

USDA-APHIS. (2010c) Plant Pest Risk Assessment for MON 87769 Soybean. (Report: 

Riverdale, MD: APHIS - Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. Retrieved 

from http://www.aphis.usda.gov/biotechnology/not_reg.html

USDA-APHIS. (2010d) Syngenta Biotechnology, Inc. Petition (07-108-01p) for 

Determination of Nonregulated Status for Lepidopteran-Resistant Event COT67B 

Cotton “Draft Environmental Assessment” (Report: Riverdale, MD: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. 

USDA-ARS (2008a). National Program 304: Crop Protection & Quarantine Action Plan 

Retrieved February 3, 2011 from 

http://www.ars.usda.gov/research/programs/programs.htm?np_code=304&docid=

355&page=14

USDA-ARS (2008b). USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 

21 Retrieved November 29, 2010 from 

http://www.ars.usda.gov/main/site_main.htm?modecode=12-35-45-00
152 

USDA-ERS. (2006a) Soybean Backgrounder (Report: U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Economic Research Service. 

USDA-ERS (2006b). Soybean Production Costs and Returns Per Planted Acre, by 

Region, Excluding Government Payments. Submitted by Registration Manager. 

Developed from the 2006 Agricultural Resource Management Survey of Soybean 

Producers 

USDA-ERS (2008). Soybeans and Oil Crops: Market Outlook Economic Research 

Service. Retrieved January 21, 2011 from 

http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/soybeansoilcrops/2008baseline.htm

USDA-ERS (2009). Cotton: Background Retrieved November 2, 2010 from 

http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Cotton/background.htm

USDA-ERS (2010a). Adoption of Genetically Engineered Crops in the U.S. Retrieved 

November 29, 2010 from http://www.ers.usda.gov/data/biotechcrops/

USDA-ERS (2010b). Adoption of Genetically Engineered Crops in the U.S. - Soybeans 

Varieties Retrieved November 29, 2010 from 

http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/BiotechCrops/ExtentofAdoptionTable3.htm

USDA-ERS (2010c). Agricultural Chemicals and Production Technology: Soil 

Management Retrieved November 29, 2010 from 

http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/agchemicals/soilmangement.htm

USDA-ERS (2010d). Data Sets. Organic Production. State Level Tables. Submitted by 

TCO Beans., Registration Manager. USDA Economic Research Service (See 

Table http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/Organic/). 

USDA-ERS (2010e). Soybean and Oil Crops: Background Retrieved December 7, 2010 

from http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/SoybeansOilcrops/background.htm

USDA-ERS (2010f). Table 3--Certified Organic and Total U.S. Acreage, Selected Crops 

and Livestock, 1995-2008 Economic Research Service. Retrieved November 5, 

2010 from http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/Organic/

USDA-ERS (2011a). Adoption of Genetically Engineered Crops in the U.S. Genetically 

Engineered Soybean Varieties. Retrieved from 

http://www.ers.usda.gov/Data/BiotechCrops/ExtentofAdoptionTable3.htm 

USDA-ERS (2011b). Oil Crops Outlook. Retrieved March 13, 2011 from 

http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/OCS/OCS-03-11-2011.pdf

USDA-FAS (2008). Table 31: Vegetable Oil Prices US Dollars per Metric Ton. USDAForeign Agricultural Service. Retrieved from 

http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/fas/oilseed-trade/2000s/2008/oilseed-trade03-01-2008.pdf

USDA-FAS (2011). Oilseeds: World Markets and Trade. USDA Foreign Agricultural 

Service. Approved by the World Agricultural Outlook Board/USDA. Retrieved 

from http://www.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/circulars/oilseeds.pdf

USDA-FS. (2003).Glyphosate – Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment Final 

Report. Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc., Fayetteville, NY. 

USDA-NASS. (1997) Usual Planting and Harvesting Dates for U.S. Field Crops - 

December 1997 (Report: USDA - National Agricultural Statistics Service. 
153 

Retrieved from 

http://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Usual_Planting_and_Harvesting_Dates/up

h97.pdf

USDA-NASS (2006). Agricultural Chemical Usage 2005 Field Crops Summary U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. Retrieved 

November 30, 2010 from 

http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/nass/AgriChemUsFC//2000s/2006/AgriChe

mUsFC-05-17-2006.pdf

USDA-NASS. (2007a) 2007 Census of Agriculture: Grain and Oilseed Farming (Report: 

National Agricultural Statistics Service. 

USDA-NASS (2007b). Agricultural Chemical Usage 2006 Field Crops Summary 

Retrieved from 

http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/nass/AgriChemUsFC//2000s/2007/AgriChe

mUsFC-05-16-2007_revision.pdf

USDA-NASS. (2007c).Table 33. Specified Crops by Acres Harvested: 2007 and 2002. 

Last accessed from 

http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Full_Report/Census_by_State/i

ndex.asp

USDA-NASS. (2009).2007 Census of Agriculture U.S. Department of Agriculture - 

National Agricultural Statistics Service, Washington, DC. Last accessed from 

http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Full_Report/index.asp

USDA-NASS (2010a). Crop Production. Soybean. National Agricultural Statistics 

Service. Retrieved 2011 from 

http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/nass/CropProd//2010s/2010/CropProd-10-

08-2010.pdf

USDA-NASS. (2010b).Table 29. Selected Crops Harvested by Chemigation and Water 

Source: 2008 and 2003. 2007 Census of Agriculture. Farm and Ranch Irrigation 

Survey. . Washington, DC. Last accessed from 

http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Online_Highlights/Farm_and_R

anch_Irrigation_Survey/fris08_1_29.pdf

USDA-NASS (2010 ). Table 27. Crops Harvested from Irrigated Farms: 2008 and 2003. 

Soybeans for Beans. Retrieved from 

http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/Publications/2007/Online_Highlights/Farm_and_R

anch_Irrigation_Survey/fris08_1_27.pdf

USDA-NASS (2010e). Crop Production National Agricultural Statistics Service. 

Retrieved November 5, 2010 from 

http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/nass/CropProd//2010s/2010/CropProd-10-

08-2010.pdf

USDA-NASS. (2011a).Acreage. Washington, DC. Last accessed 9-29-2011, from 

http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/current/Acre/Acre-06-30-2011.pdf

USDA-NASS. (2011b).USDA Long-Term Agricultural Projection Tables. Table 24: U.S. 

soybeans and soybean products long-term projections Washington, DC. Last 

accessed 9-30-2011, from 
154 

http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/MannUsda/viewStaticPage.do?url=http://usda.ma

nnlib.cornell.edu/usda/ers/94005/./2011/index.html

USDA-NASS_Wisconsin-Field-Office (2009 download). 2006 Soybean Production 

Practices. USDA NASS, Wisconsin. Retrieved from 

http://www.nass.usda.gov/Statistics_by_State/Wisconsin/Publications/Miscellane

ous/chemuse_soybeans_06.pdf

USDA-NRCS (2006a). Conservation Resource Brief: Air Quality, Number 0605 National 

Resources Conservation Service. Retrieved November 9, 2010 from 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/feature/outlook/Air%20Quality.pdf

USDA-NRCS (2006b). Conservation Resource Brief: Soil Erosion, Number 0602 

National Resources Conservation Service. Retrieved November 9, 2010 from 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/feature/outlook/Soil%20Erosion.pdf

USDA-NRCS (2006c). Conservation Resource Brief: Soil Quality, Number 0601 

National Resources Conservation Service. Retrieved November 9, 2010 from 

http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/feature/outlook/Soil%20Quality.pdf

USDA-OCE. (2011).USDA Agricultural Projections to 2020. USDA, Office of the Chief 

Economist, World Agricultural Outlook Board, Washington, D.C. Last accessed 

September 30, 2011, from 

http://usda.mannlib.cornell.edu/usda/ers/94005/2011/OCE111.pdf

USSEC (2006). Biotechnology, IP Soybeans, Soyfoods, and Industrial Uses (Chapter 6) 

U.S. Soybean Export Council. Retrieved March 9, 2011 from 

http://ussec.org/ussoy/buyersguide/Chap6.pdf

UW-Extension. (2004) Including a small grain in the corn-soybean rotation: Production 

economics of small grains. 

UW-Extension (2008 ). Wisconsin Soybean Variety Test Results. University of 

Wisconsin – Madison. Departments of Agronomy and Plant Pathology. Retrieved 

from 

http://soybean.uwex.edu/soytrials/printable/documents/2008WISoybeanReport.pd

f

Vogel, JR, Majewski, MS, and Capel, PD. (2008) Pesticides in rain in four agricultural 

watersheds in the United States. J Env Qual, 37(3), 1101-1115. 

Wallaces Farmer (2010). 2011 Vistive Low-Linolenic Soybean Program Announced 

Retrieved 7-16-2011, from http://wallacesfarmer.com/story.aspx/2011-vistivelowlinolenic-soybean-program-announced-44648

Warnemuende, EA, Pattersona, JP, Smitha, DR, and Huanga, C-H. (2007) Effects of 

tilling no-till soil on losses of atrazine and glyphosate to runoff water under 

variable intensity simulated rainfall Soil and Tillage Research 

 95(1-2), 19-26. 

Warner, RE, Havera, SP, and David, LM. (1985) Effects of Autumn Tillage Systems on 

Corn and Soybean Harvest Residues in Illinois. The Journal of Wildlife 

Management, 49(1), 185-190. 

Wijendran, V and Hayes, KC. (2004) Dietary n-6 and n-3 Fatty Acid Balance and 

Cardiovascular Health. Annual Review of Nutrition, 24(1), 597-615. 
155 

Wilcox, JR and Cavins, JF. (1992) Normal and Low Linolenic Acid Soybean Strains: 

Response to Planting Date. Crop Sci., 32(5), 1248-1251. 

Wilkes, RS. (2008) Low linolenic soybeans and beyond. Lipid Technology, 20(12), 277-

279. 

Wilson, EO. (1988) Biodiversity. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. 

Wolfenbarger, L, Naranjo, SE, Lundgren, JG, Bitzer, RJ, and Watrud, LS. (2008) Bt 

Crop Effects on Functional Guilds of Non-Target Arthropods: A Meta-Analysis. 

PLoS ONE 3(5), 1-11. 

Wood, D, Setubal, J, Kaul, R, Monks, D, Kitajima, J, Okura, V, Zhou, Y, Chen, L, 

Wood, G, Almeida, N, Woo, L, Chen, Y, Paulsen, I, Eisen, J, Karp, P, Bovee, S, 

Chapman, P, Clendenning, J, Deatherage, G, Gillet, W, Grant, C, Kutyavin, T, 

Levy, R, Li, M, McClelland, E, Palmieri, A, Raymond, C, Rouse, G, 

Saenphimmachak, C, Wu, Z, Romero, P, Gordon, D, Zhang, S, Yoo, H, Tao, Y, 

Biddle, P, Jung, M, Krespan, W, Perry, M, Gordon-Kamm, B, Liao, L, Kim, S, 

Hendrick, C, Zhao, Z, Dolan, M, Chumley, F, Tingey, S, Tomb, J, Gordon, M, 

Olson, M, and Nester, E. (2001) The genome of the natural genetic engineer 

Agrobacterium tumefaciens C58. Science, 294(5550), 2317-2323. 

Woodruff, J, Whitaker, J, Prostko, E, Roberts, P, Kemerait, R, Smith, N, Smith, A, 

Sumner, P, Harrison, K, and Harris, G. (2010) Soybean Weed Control (Report: 

University of Georgia College of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences. 

Retrieved from 

http://www.caes.uga.edu/commodities/fieldcrops/soybeans/documents/Compiled2

010SoybeanProductionGuide.pdf

Woznicki, K (2005). Kellogg Replaces Trans Fat with Genetically Modified Soybean Oil 

Retrieved January 22, 2011 from 

http://www.medpagetoday.com/tbprint.cfm?tbid=2317

Yoshimura, Y, Matsuo, K, and Yasuda, K. (2006) Gene flow from GM glyphosatetolerant to conventional soybeans under field conditions in Japan. Environmental 

Biosafety Research, 5(3), 169-173. 

Zapiola, ML, Campbell, CK, Butler, MD, and Mallory-Smith, CA. (2008) Escape and 

establishment of transgenic glyphosate-resistant creeping bentgrass Agrostis 

stolonifera in Oregon, USA: a 4-year study. Journal of Applied Ecology, 45(2), 

486-494. 

Zhang, LX, Kyei-Boahen, S, Zhang, J, Zhang, MH, Freeland, TB, Watson, CE, Jr. , and 

Liu, XM (2007). Modifications of optimum adaptation zones for soybean maturity 

groups in the USA. Plant Management Network. Retrieved Online, from 

http://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/pub/cm/research/2007/zone/

Zhou, YY, Luo, SH, Yi, TS, Li, CH, Luo, Q, Hua, J, Liu, Y, and Li, SH. (2011) 

Secondary Metabolites from Glycine soja and Their Growth Inhibitory Effect 

against Spodoptera litura. J Agric Food Chem, 59(11), 6004-6010. 

Zollinger, R (2010). ND Weed Control Guide North Dakota State University. Retrieved 

November 30, 2010 from http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/weeds/weed-control-guides/ndweed-control-guide-1
156 

 
157 

Appendix A 

FDA Substances Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) – Agency 

Response Letter GRAS Notice No. GRN 000283 
158 
159 

Agency Response Letter GRAS Notice No. GRN 000283

CFSAN/Office of Food Additive Safety

September 4, 2009

Raymond C. Dobert, Ph.D.

Monsanto Company

800 North Lindbergh Blvd

St. Louis, MO 63167

Re: GRAS Notice No. GRN 000283

Dear Dr. Dobert:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responding to the notice, dated February 25,

2009, that you submitted in accordance with the agency’s proposed regulation, proposed

21 CFR 170.36 (62 FR 18938; April 17, 1997; Substances Generally Recognized as Safe

(GRAS); the GRAS proposal). FDA received the notice on February 26, 2009, filed it on

March 3, 2009, and designated it as GRAS Notice No. GRN 000283.

The subject of the notice is stearidonic acid (SDA) soybean oil. The notice informs FDA of

the view of Monsanto Company (Monsanto) that SDA soybean oil is GRAS, through

scientific procedures, for use as an ingredient in baked goods and baking mixes, breakfast

cereals and grains, cheeses, dairy product analogs, fats and oils, fish products, frozen dairy

desserts and mixes, grain products and pastas, gravies and sauces, meat products, milk

products, nuts and nut products, poultry products, processed fruit juices, processed

vegetable products, puddings and fillings, snack foods, soft candy, and soups and soup

mixes, at levels that will provide 375 milligrams (mg) of SDA per serving.1

21 CFR 101.4 states that all ingredients must be declared by their common or usual name.

In addition, 21 CFR 102.5 outlines general principles to use when establishing common or

usual names for nonstandardized foods. Our use of “SDA soybean oil” in this letter should

not be considered an endorsement or recommendation of that term as an appropriate

common or usual name for the purpose of declaring the substance in the ingredient

statement of foods that contain that ingredient. Issues associated with labeling and the

appropriate common or usual name of a food are the responsibility of the Office of

Nutrition, Labeling, and Dietary Supplements (ONLDS) in the Center for Food Safety and

Applied Nutrition.

As part of its notice, Monsanto includes the report of a panel of individuals (Monsanto’s

GRAS panel) who evaluated the data and information that are the basis for Monsanto’s
160 

GRAS determination. Monsanto considers the members of its GRAS panel to be qualified

by scientific training and experience to evaluate the safety of substances added to food.

Monsanto’s GRAS panel evaluated estimates of dietary exposure, method of production,

and product specifications. as well as published studies. Based on this review, Monsanto’s

GRAS panel concluded that SDA soybean oil that meets its established food grade

specifications is GRAS under the conditions of its intended use.

Monsanto describes the identity of SDA soybean oil. The oil is obtained from a

bioengineered soybean. Monsanto states that SDA soybean oil is compositionally different

from conventional soybean oil. SDA soybean oil contains 15 to 30 percent SDA and 5 to 8

percent gamma‐linolenic acid (GLA), neither of which is present in conventional soybean

oil. SDA soybean oil also contains slightly higher levels of alpha‐linolenic acid (ALA) and

palmitic acid than conventional soybean oil. SDA soybean oil contains lower levels of oleic

acid and linoleic acid (LA) than those present in conventional soybean oil. Monsanto notes

that the variability in the oil’s fatty acid composition, notably the SDA concentration, is due

to natural variation in growing conditions for the soybean.

Monsanto discusses the biosynthetic pathway of SDA in the bioengineered soybean. SDA

biosynthesis involves the introduction of two desaturase genes that encode for the

proteins Primula juliae delta 6‐desaturase and Neurospora crassa delta 15‐desaturase.

Conventional soybeans lack delta 6‐desaturase; delta 6‐desaturase is required for the

production of SDA in soybeans. Addition of the delta 15‐desaturase with temporal

expression similar to the delta 6‐desaturase increases the flux of ALA to SDA. The delta 15‐

desaturase also lowers LA levels, thus lowering the substrate pool for GLA production.

Monsanto notes that the introduced desaturases are the only non‐soybean genes

expressed in the bioengineered soybean.2

SDA soybean oil is processed using conventional industry standard processing methods.

The soybean meat is first mechanically separated from the hulls. The resulting soybean

meat is then flaked and solvent extracted with iso‐hexane/hexane to yield crude soybean

oil and soybean meal. The crude oil is degummed and bleached, and further purified

through filtration and steam distillation. Anti‐oxidants, primarily TBHQ, are added at the

end of processing to inhibit oxidation of the oil. All processing aids used in the manufacture

of SDA soybean oil are used in compliance with appropriate federal regulations.

Monsanto states that stability of SDA soybean oil was determined with respect to peroxide

value and fatty acid content. SDA soybean oil maintains a peroxide value similar to that of

conventional soybean oil under similar storage conditions. Monsanto notes that SDA oil is

stable when stored under nitrogen, as is typical for soybean oil, for as long as nine months.

Monsanto provides specifications for SDA soybean oil with comparison to the

specifications set forth in the Food Chemicals Codex (FCC), 6th Edition, for conventional

soybean oil. Specifications include fatty acid composition, stability, limits for free fatty
161 

acids (< 0.1 percent), lead (< 0.1 milligrams/kilogram), peroxide value (< 10

milliequivalents/kilogram), unsaponifiable matter (< 1.5 percent), and water (< 0.1

percent).

Monsanto estimates the per capita consumption of SDA soybean oil from all intended food

uses using the intended use levels in conjunction with food consumption data included in

the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (1999‐2002). The current intake of

fat, trans‐fat, and fatty acids in the diet as well as intake following the addition of 20 or 30

percent SDA soybean oil to the intended food uses was calculated. SDA soybean oil was

either added to foods or used as a replacement for unhydrogenated oil (including soybean

oil, ‘not further specified’ oil, corn oil, cottonseed oil, peanut oil, sunflower oil, coconut oil,

olive oil, canola oil, or palm oil). Monsanto notes that in order to achieve 375 milligrams

SDA per serving of food, target foods need to have 1.8 g of 20 percent SDA soybean oil or

1.3 grams of 30 percent SDA soybean oil per serving of food.

Monsanto estimates, on a per capita basis, mean and 90th percentile intakes of 20 percent

SDA soybean oil to be 10.1 and 19.6 grams per day (g/day), respectively (0.18 and 0.38

grams per kilogram body weight per day (g/kg bw/day), respectively). Monsanto also

estimates per capita mean and 90th percentile intakes of 30 percent SDA soybean oil to be

7.6 and 14.8 g/day, respectively (0.10 and 0.30 g/kg bw/day, respectively). Monsanto

estimates the per capita mean and 90th percentile intakes of SDA to be 2.1 g/day and 4.1

g/day, respectively. Estimated intakes of SDA were similar for 20 or 30 percent SDA

soybean oil due to the constant use level of SDA per serving.

Monsanto discusses the known biochemical pathways through which SDA soybean oil is

metabolized after absorption into the body. The fatty acids (FA) of SDA soybean oil may

undergo beta‐oxidation to produce acetyl‐CoA, or they may be elongated to form long

chain fatty acids such as eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA). Monsanto describes published

studies that discuss the FA elongation conversion rate in humans as being as high as 3:1

SDA to EPA; this equates to 0.73 g/day at the mean, and 1.4 g/day at the 90th percentile for

the intended food uses.

Monsanto discusses published animal studies for SDA soybean oil, in which rats received

up to 4 g/kg bw/day; no toxicologically significant effects were observed. Monsanto also

cites other published animal studies where rats, guinea pigs, and dogs consumed SDA oil

derived from sources other than soybean at up to 2.1 g/kg bw/day with no toxicologically

significant effects observed. In addition, no reproductive or developmental effects were

seen in a published study in which rats received up to 4 g/kg bw/day. Furthermore,

Monsanto describes a published study in humans where SDA soybean oil, consumed at

3.66 g/d for 16 weeks, did not affect physiological or blood chemistry endpoints. Other

published studies in which humans consumed SDA oil derived from non‐soybean sources,

showed no adverse effects at levels up to 1.875 g/day.
162 

Standards of Identity

In the notice, Monsanto states its intention to use SDA soybean oil in several food

categories, including foods for which standards of identity exist, located in Title 21 of the

Code of Federal Regulations. We note that an ingredient that is lawfully added to food

products may be used in a standardized food only if it is permitted by the applicable

standard of identity.

Potential Labeling Issues

Under section 403(a) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), a food is

misbranded if its labeling is false or misleading in any particular. Section 403(r) of the

FFDCA lays out the statutory framework for the use of labeling claims that characterize the

level of a nutrient in a food or that characterize the relationship of a nutrient to a disease

or health‐related condition. In describing the intended use of SDA soybean oil and in

describing the information that Monsanto relies on to conclude that SDA soybean oil is

GRAS under the conditions of its intended use, Monsanto raises a potential issue under

these labeling provisions of the FFDCA. If products that contain SDA soybean oil bear any

claims on the label or in labeling, such claims are the purview of ONLDS. The Office of Food

Additive Safety neither consulted with ONLDS on this labeling issue nor evaluated the

information in your notice to determine whether it would support any claims made about

SDA soybean oil on the label or in labeling.

Allergen Labeling

The Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act of 2004 (FALCPA) amends the

FFDCA to require that the label of a food that is or contains an ingredient that bears or

contains a “major food allergen” declare the presence of the allergen (section 403(w)).

FALCPA defines a “major food allergen” as one of eight foods or food groups (i.e., milk,

eggs, fish, Crustacean shellfish, tree nuts, peanuts, wheat, and soybeans) or a food

ingredient that contains protein derived from one of those foods. Issues associated with

labeling food are the responsibility of ONLDS.

Use in Meat, Poultry, and Egg Products

During its evaluation of GRN 000283, FDA consulted with the Risk and Innovations

Management Division of the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) of the United States

Department of Agriculture. Under the Federal Meat Inspection Act, the Poultry Products

Inspection Act, and the Egg Products Inspection Act, FSIS is responsible for determining the

efficacy and suitability of food ingredients in meat, poultry, and egg products as well as

prescribing safe conditions of use. Suitability relates to the effectiveness of the ingredient

in performing the intended purpose of use and the assurance that the conditions of use

will not result in an adulterated product, or one that misleads consumers.
163 

FSIS requested that FDA advise Monsanto to seek regulatory guidance from FSIS about the

use of SDA soybean oil in meat and poultry products. Monsanto should direct such an

inquiry to Dr. John M. Hicks, Jr., Risk and Innovations Management Division, Office of Policy

and Program Development, Food Safety and Inspection Service, United States Department

of Agriculture, George Washington Carver Center (GWCC), 5601 Sunnyside Ave., Mailstop

5271, Beltsville, MD 20705‐5271. The telephone number for that office is (391) 504‐0884

and the telefax number is (301) 504‐0876.

Section 301(ll) of the FFDCA

The Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007, which was signed into law on

September 27, 2007, amends the FFDCA to, among other things, add section 301(ll).

Section 301(ll) of the FFDCA prohibits the introduction or delivery for introduction into

interstate commerce of any food that contains a drug approved under section 505 of the

FFDCA, a biological product licensed under section 351 of the Public Health Service Act, or

a drug or a biological product for which substantial clinical investigations have been

instituted and their existence made public, unless one of the exemptions in section

301(ll)(1)‐(4) applies. In its review of Monsanto’s notice that SDA soybean oil is GRAS for

use in certain foods, FDA did not consider whether section 301(ll) or any of its exemptions

apply to foods containing SDA soybean oil. Accordingly, this response should not be

construed to be a statement that foods that contain SDA soybean oil, if introduced or

delivered for introduction into interstate commerce, would not violate section 301(ll).

Conclusions

Based on the information provided by Monsanto, the agency has no questions at this time

regarding Monsanto’s conclusion that SDA soybean oil is GRAS under the intended

conditions of use. The agency has not, however, made its own determination regarding the

GRAS status of the subject use of SDA soybean oil. As always, it is the continuing

responsibility of Monsanto to ensure that food ingredients that the firm markets are safe,

and are otherwise in compliance with all applicable legal and regulatory requirements.

In accordance with proposed 21 CFR 170.36(f), a copy of the text of this letter responding

to GRN 000283, as well as a copy of the information in this notice that conforms to the

information in the GRAS exemption claim (proposed 21 CFR 170.36(c)(1)), is available for

public review and copying via the FDA home page at http://www.fda.gov. To view or

obtain an electronic copy of the text of the letter, follow the hyperlinks from the “Food”

topic to the “Food Ingredients and Packaging” section to the “Generally Recognized as Safe

(GRAS)” page where the GRAS Inventory is listed.

Sincerely,
164 

Mitchell A. Cheeseman, Ph.D.

Acting Director

Office of Food Additive Safety

Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition

cc: John M. Hicks, Jr. DVM, MPH

Risk and Innovations Management Division

Office of Policy and Program Development

Food Safety and Inspection Service

United States Department of Agriculture

George Washington Carver Center (GWCC)

5601 Sunnyside Ave., Mailstop 5271

Beltsville, MD 20705‐5271

1

Reference amounts customarily consumed (21 CFR 101.12) 2

Monsanto states that Neurospora crassa is considered a non‐pathogenic organism and is

found in foods worldwide. Monsanto also notes that Primula juliae is a member of the

Primula (Primrose) genus that includes plants that are commonly used as sources of GLA

for human uses.
165 

Appendix B 

APHIS Threatened and Endangered Species 

 Decision Tree for FWS Consultations 
166 

Template Last Revised on July 11, 2006 

DECISION TREE ON WHETHER SECTION 7 CONSULTATION WITH 

FWS IS TRIGGERED FOR PETITIONS OF TRANSGENIC PLANTS

This decision tree document is based on the phenotypes (traits) that have been field tested under 

APHIS oversight (for a list of approved field tests, visit Information Systems for Biotechnology.) 

APHIS will re-evaluate and update this decision document as it receives new applications for 

field testing of new traits that are genetically engineered into plants. 

BACKGROUND

For each transgene(s)/transgenic plant the following information, data, and questions will be 

addressed by APHIS, and the EAs on each petition will be publicly available. APHIS review 

will encompass: 

 A review of the biology, taxonomy, and weediness potential of the crop plant and its 

sexually compatible relatives; 

 Characterization of each transgene with respect to its structure and function and the 

nature of the organism from which it was obtained; 

 A determination of where the new transgene and its products (if any) are produced in the 

plant and their quantity; 

 A review of the agronomic performance of the plant including disease and pest 

susceptibilities, weediness potential, and agronomic and environmental impact; 

 Determination of the concentrations of known plant toxicants (if any are known in the 

plant), 

 Analysis to determine if the transgenic plant is sexually compatible with any threatened 

or endangered plant species (TES) or a host of any TES. 

FDA published a policy in 1992 on foods derived from new plant varieties, including those 

derived from transgenic plants (http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/fr92529b.html and 

http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/consulpr.html). The FDA’s policy requires that genetically 

engineered foods meet the same rigorous safety standards as is required of all other foods. Many 

of the food crops currently being developed using biotechnology do not contain substances that 

are significantly different from those already consumed by human and thus do not require 

pre-market approval. Consistent with its 1992 policy, FDA expects developers to consult with 

the agency on safety and regulatory questions. A list of consultations is available at 

http://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/biocon.htmlhttp://vm.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/biocon.html. APHIS 

considers the status and conclusion of the FDA consultations in its EAs. 

Below is a description of our review process to whether a consultation with U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service is necessary. 
167 

If the answer to any of the questions 1-4 below is yes, APHIS will contact FWS to determine if a 

consultation is required: 

1) Is the transgenic plant sexually compatible with a TE plant2 without human intervention? 

2) Are naturally occurring plant toxins (toxicants) or allelochemicals increased over the normal 

concentration range in parental plant species? 

3) Does the transgene product or its metabolites have any significant similarities to known 

toxins3)? 

4) Will the new phenotype(s) imparted to the transgenic plant allow the plant to be grown or 

employed in new habitats (e.g., outside agro-ecosystem)4

? 

5) Does the pest resistance5

 gene act by one of the mechanisms listed below? If the answer is 

YES then a consultation with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is NOT necessary. 

A. The transgene acts only in one or more of the following ways: 

As a structural barrier to either the attachment of the pest to the host, to penetration of the 

host by the pest, to the spread of the pest in the host plant (e.g., the production of 

lignin, callose, thickened cuticles); 

In the plant by inactivating or resisting toxins or other disease causing substances 

produced by the pest; 

By creating a deficiency in the host of a component required for growth of the pest (such 

as with fungi and bacteria); 

By initiating, enhancing, or potentiating the endogenous host hypersensitive disease 

resistance response found in the plant; 

In an indirect manner that does not result in killing or interfering with normal growth, 

development, or behavior of the pest; 

B. A pest derived transgene is expressed in the plant to confer resistance to that pest (such as 

with coat protein, replicase, and pathogen virulence genes).

 

For the biotechnologist: 

Depending on the outcome of the decision tree, initial the appropriate decision below and 

 

2

APHIS will provide FWS a draft EA that will address the impacts, if any, of gene movement to the TES plant. 

3

 Via a comparison of the amino acid sequence of the transgene’s protein with those found in the protein databases 

like PIR, Swiss-Prot and HIV amino acid data bases. 

4

Such phenotypes might include tolerance to environmental stresses such as drought, salt, frost, aluminum or heavy 

metals. 

5

 Pest resistance would include any toxin or allelochemical that prevents, destroys, repels or mitigates a pest or 

effects any vertebrate or invertebrate animal, plant, or microorganism. 
168 

incorporate its language into the EA. Retain a hard copy of this decision document in the 

petition’s file.

________ BRS has reviewed the data in accordance with a process mutually agreed upon 

with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine when a consultation, as 

required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, is needed. APHIS has 

reached a determination that the release following a determination of nonregulated status would have no effects on listed threatened or endangered species 

and consequently, a written concurrence or formal consultation with the Fish and 

Wildlife Service is not required for this EA. 

________ BRS has reviewed the data in accordance with a process mutually agreed upon 

with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine when a consultation, as 

required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, is needed. APHIS 

reached a determination that the release following a determination of nonregulated status is not likely to adversely affect any listed threatened or 

endangered species and consequently obtained written concurrence from the Fish 

and Wildlife Service. 

________ BRS has reviewed the data in accordance with a process mutually agreed upon 

with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to determine when a consultation, as 

required under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, is needed. APHIS 

reached a determination that the release following a determination of nonregulated status is likely to affect adversely one or more listed threatened or 

endangered species and has initiated a formal consultation with the Fish and 

Wildlife Service. 

 
169 

Appendix C 

Petition for the Determination of Nonregulated Status for 

MON 87769 – Addendum 

Potential Market Impact of MON 87769 

 
Page 1 of 25

Petition for the Determination of Nonregulated Status for 

MON 87769

ADDENDUM 

Potential Market Impact of MON 87769

Submitted July 1

st, 2011

OECD Unique Identifier: MON-87769-7

Monsanto Petition Number: 09-183-01p
Page 2 of 25

1. Introduction

Monsanto has developed biotechnology-derived soybean MON 87769 (SDA soybean) that 

contains stearidonic acid (SDA), a sustainable alternate source of an omega-3 fatty acid to help 

meet the need for increased dietary intake of long chain omega-3 fatty acids. In mammals, SDA 

is a metabolic intermediate in the production of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and 

docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) from alpha linolenic acid (ALA), a common dietary constituent. 

Refined oil produced from MON 87769 contains approximately 20 to 30% SDA (wt% of total 

fatty acids) and can be included in a range of food products for health benefits. The oil from 

MON 87769 (SDA soybean oil) is Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS) in the United States

and can be used for the production of products such as margarine, shortenings, salad dressings, 

ready-to-eat foods, and other food categories specified in the GRAS notification1. 

MON 87769 is a specialty trait soybean, not developed for the commodity soybean market, and 

it is anticipated that MON 87769 will be a low acreage product planned initially for production 

in North America. In bringing this product to market, Monsanto will adhere to the 

Biotechnology Industry Organization‟s (BIO‟s) Product Launch Stewardship policy2, including 

its Annex 2: “Specialty Use Traits in Commodity Crops.” 

Market and Trade Assessment:

Monsanto has evaluated the potential impacts from the introduction of MON 87769 into the 

marketplace. This assessment which is hereafter referred to as „market and trade assessment‟ has 

taken into consideration the potential impacts which could be anticipated within the value chain 

due to the introduction of SDA soybean. The defatted soybean meal from MON 87769 is 

compositionally similar to other commodity defatted soybean meal and will be used in a manner 

similar to commodity soybean meal. The oil derived from MON 87769, however, has a unique 

fatty acid profile and will be identity preserved to maintain its value and assure its use in 

appropriate food applications. Compared to commodity soybean oil, SDA soybean oil contains 

two additional fatty acids, SDA and GLA. SDA soybean oil is intended for use only in certain 

markets. The presence of this oil in markets where it is not intended could result in potential 

market and trade impacts.

At the time SDA soybean oil is first introduced to the market, we do not expect that MON 87769

will have approvals in all key soybean export markets with functioning regulatory systems. 

Until such approvals are received, MON 87769 will be grown and handled in a closed loop 

stewardship system (CLSS).

Monsanto will utilize and implement the CLSS throughout the initial product introduction phase,

at least until approvals are received from key soybean export countries with functioning 

regulatory systems. After such approvals are received, Monsanto will, based on the experiences 

 

1

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fcn/gras_notices/grn000283.pdf

2

http://www.bio.org/letters/Product_Launch_Stewarship_12_10_09.pdf
Page 3 of 25

and learning gained during the initial product introduction phase under the CLSS, refine and 

update the stewardship system for long-term implementation. This long-term system will 

include measures to preserve the identity of this high value product and mitigation measures to 

minimize any impact resulting from the inadvertent comingling of SDA soybeans or oil with 

commodity or other specialty soybean products. 

This document describes the intended uses for SDA soybean oil, current processes for handling 

vegetable oils, and potential impacts to commodity soybean oil as well as other vegetable oils

from the commercial introduction of SDA soybean oil. This document also describes the CLSS

which Monsanto will implement during the initial phase of the product introduction.

2. Intended Uses SDA Soybean

MON 87769 is a sustainable source of omega-3 fatty acid for food use. SDA has fewer double 

bonds than other omega-3 fatty acids such as EPA (20:5) and DHA (22:6). Therefore, SDA 

soybean oil is more stable to oxidation (i.e., less prone to fishy or rancid odors and taste) 

compared to other oils containing EPA or DHA, thereby expanding the potential formulation 

options for food companies and consumers. SDA soybean oil is generally recognized as safe in 

the United States3. 

SDA is a metabolic precursor to the long chain omega-3 fatty acids, EPA and DHA, in humans 

and animals and is found in products such as fish and fish/algal oils. Although the benefits of 

omega-3 fatty acid consumption are widely recognized, typical Western diets contain very little 

fatty fish, while at the same time current foods and supplements provide limited alternatives to 

satisfy consumer demand for long chain omega-3 fatty acids. An alternative approach to 

increase omega-3 fatty acid intake is to provide a wider range of foods that are enriched in 

omega-3 fatty acids so that people can choose foods that suit their usual dietary habits. Human 

and animal studies have shown that 1 g dietary SDA is approximately equivalent to 200 - 300 mg 

dietary EPA in terms of increasing tissue concentrations of EPA. Thus, MON 87769 can serve 

as an alternate source of an omega-3 fatty acid to help meet the need for increased dietary intake 

of long chain omega-3 fatty acids in food. SDA soybean oil can be used for the production of 

margarine, shortenings, salad dressings, ready-to-eat foods, and other food categories described 

in the GRAS notification4. The use of SDA soybean oil in selected food categories could 

provide a wide range of dietary alternatives for increasing omega-3 fatty acid intake. 

Given the targeted commercial application of SDA soybean as an alternate source of omega-3

fatty acids in food it is anticipated that MON 87769 will be a low acreage product planned 

initially for production in North America. The oil derived from MON 87769, however, has a

unique fatty acid profile and will be identity preserved to maintain its value and assure its use in 

appropriate food applications. The co-product, soybean meal, derived from MON 87769 has 

 

3

http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodIngredientsPackaging/GenerallyRecognizedasSafeGRAS/GRASListings/ucm185688.htm

4

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fcn/gras_notices/grn000283.pdf
Page 4 of 25

been shown to be compositionally comparable to other commodity soybean meal and will be

used in a manner similar to commodity soybean meal. 

As a food ingredient, SDA soybean oil uses would be limited to those applications that 

demonstrate (1) functional suitability for incorporation into food products, (2) acceptable sensory 

properties (no off-flavors or bad taste) to the food, and (3) appropriate stability profile and shelf 

life of food products containing SDA soybean oil during food production and storage. As 

expected, SDA soybean oil from MON 87769 contains high levels of SDA (approximately 20-30 

wt% of total fatty acids). Vegetable oils containing high levels of polyunsaturated fatty acids

(PUFUs) like SDA are known to undergo rapid oxidation during frying applications and will 

impart undesirable taste and odor to the fried foods. Therefore, SDA soybean oil will not be 

suitable for all food applications and may not be suitable as a substitute for saturated fats in food 

recipes. However, SDA soybean oil can partially replace commodity soybean oil or other oils in 

many food categories. As is the case with fish oils, containing omega-3 fatty acids, 

hydrogenation of SDA-containing oil would be without purpose, as hydrogenation would 

eliminate the benefits of long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (LCPUFAs). Thus,

hydrogenation is not applicable to SDA soybean oil from MON 87769. The current anticipated 

food applications for SDA soybean oil are in baked goods and baking mixes, breakfast cereals 

and grains, cheeses, dairy product analogs, fats and oils, fish products, frozen dairy desserts and 

mixes, grain products and pastas, gravies and sauces, milk products, nuts and nut products, 

poultry products, processed fruit juices, processed vegetable products, puddings and fillings, 

snack foods, soft candy, and soups and soup mixes5.

3. Market Potential of SDA Soybean

Consumer demand for long chain omega-3 fatty acids through food and supplements is expected 

to continue to grow. As of 2008, the United States omega-3 ingredient market for marine oils 

was estimated at 26,447 metric tons (MT) per year, with 13.8% of that volume being consumed 

in functional foods. Furthermore, the projected average annual growth rate for this industry 

between 2008 and 2013 is 13.4% (Strategic Analysis of the North American Marine and Algae 

Oil Omega-3 Ingredients Market, Frost & Sullivan, March 20106). The value added product 

derived from MON 87769 is SDA soybean oil. SDA soybean oil provides increased alternatives 

for food companies to formulate omega-3 fatty acids into a wider range of foods. Because SDA 

soybean oil can be used in wider food categories, Monsanto estimates, for the purposes of this 

analysis that the industry growth of omega-3 oils in functional foods could increase by 26.6%. 

For the purposes of this analysis, Monsanto assumed that SDA soybean oil could capture 100% 

of that incremental growth, which, given market dynamics, may over estimate the demand for 

this oil. SDA soybean oil will typically contain 20% SDA, the expected relative conversion of 

SDA to EPA in humans is estimated at about 5:1 and marine oils in average may contain about 

30% long chain omega-3 fatty acids (James et al., 2003 and Lemke et al., 2010). As a result, it is 

 

5 FDA Food classifications 21 CFR §170.3(n).

6

http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/report-brochure.pag?id=N73E-01-00-00-00
Page 5 of 25

expected that about 7.5 times the volume of SDA soybean oil might be needed to satisfy the EPA 

equivalent amount currently provided by other marine oils. Under such a scenario, and assuming

this growth is sustained at that constant level through 2016 the incremental amount of SDA 

soybean oil needed to satisfy that 26.6% industry growth would be approximately 20,000 MT. 

Furthermore, assuming an average oil yield of 0.2 MT/acre for soybean, this would equate to 

around 100,000 acres per year of SDA soybean needed to be grown to satisfy the U.S. demand 

for SDA soybean oil derived from MON 87769. It is foreseeable that global market demands for 

omega-3 containing foods may augment the U.S. soybean acres grown with MON 87769 for the 

purposes of SDA soybean and/or SDA soybean oil exports. The United States is the largest 

producer of soybeans and regularly exports soybean and soybean products to global markets. In 

2010 approximately 75 million acres of soybean crop was grown in the U.S. producing 

approximately 87 million MT of soybeans. 

4. Stewardship of SDA Soybean

Monsanto is committed to product stewardship7and adhere to the BIO Product Launch 

Stewardship Policy8. In compliance with BIO's Product Launch Stewardship Policy, Monsanto 

considered Annex 2 “Special Use Traits in Commodity Crops” to develop launch plans for SDA 

soybean including: (1) identifying relevant stakeholders for the trait and crop and engaging them 

in dialogue and outreach regarding use of SDA soybean, (2) conducting a market and trade 

assessment to evaluate the potential impact from the introduction of MON 87769 to the market 

place, and (3) implementing a closed loop stewardship system to direct MON 87769 and derived 

products to their proper channels and developing a risk mitigation plan. 

4.1. Stakeholder Dialogue and Outreach

Monsanto is committed to dialogue with key industry stakeholder groups and has held several 

meetings with the National Oil Processors Association (NOPA) as well as other key industry 

associations such as the North American Export Grain Association (NAEGA), National Grain 

and Feed Association (NGFA), National Agri-Marketing Association (NAMA), American 

Bakers Association (ABA), and Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA). Soybean grower 

organizations consulted include: American Soybean Association (ASA), United States Soybean 

Board (USB), and many state soybean associations. Additionally, Monsanto has kept 

QUALISOY, a collaborative program sponsored by USB that serves as an independent third 

party resource for information on trait-enhanced soybean oils, informed of the plans for this 

product, along with dietary and nutrition thought leaders. Monsanto continues to have

conversations with, and considers the input of several soybean and food industry key 

stakeholders regarding the oil composition, stewardship plan and performance of MON 87769

oil.

 

7

http://www.monsanto.com/ourcommitments/pages/product-stewardship.aspx

8

http://www.bio.org/letters/Product_Launch_Stewarship_12_10_09.pdf; 
Page 6 of 25

Monsanto has been marketing specialty Vistive low linolenic soybeans to growers since 2005. 

As grower and market demand for this specialty soybean product has grown, we have continued

to work with processors to assure adequate testing methods and quality processes are applied to 

assure that the commodity soybean supply stream is not impacted. At a minimum, the same 

outreach, education, and quality principles will be applied as we further develop SDA soybean

stewardship and commercialization plan. These quality systems are described in the following 

sections. 

4.2 Market and Trade Assessment

Approximately 85 million MT of soybeans are produced in the U.S. annually and the U.S. is a 

leading exporter of soybean, soybean meal and soybean oil to global markets. Approximately 

12% of soybean grown is specialty soybean produced for a specific market or use 9. These 

soybean varieties are specified by buyers and end-users of soybean for production, and premiums 

are paid for delivering a product that meets purity and quality standards of that soybean variety. 

The specialty, value-added, product may be the whole soybean or, in the case of MON 87769, a 

processed fraction such as the oil. Product differentiation and market segmentation in the 

specialty soybean industry includes mechanisms to keep track of the soybean (traceability), 

methods for identity preservation (IDP), including closed-loop stewardship systems, and quality 

assurance processes (e.g., ISO9001-2000 certification), as well as contracts between growers and 

buyers that specify delivery agreements within product specifications.

Monsanto has conducted a market and trade assessment to anticipate and consider the potential 

impacts within the value chain from the introduction of SDA soybean, and to commodity 

soybean oil as well as other vegetable oil in the market place. Soybean is a globally traded 

commodity with the U.S. being the top global producer10. Biotechnology-derived crops are 

subject to regulation in many countries. In order to support free trade in soybean, Monsanto is 

pursuing regulatory approval for MON 87769 and any stacked products intended for 

commercialization in all key soybean export countries with a functioning regulatory system. 

International regulatory authorities are evaluating the food and feed safety of MON 87769 as 

well as the processed fractions derived from MON 87769. It is expected that uses of SDA

soybean oil would be similar on a global basis. Defatted soybean meal from MON 87769 is 

similar to commodity soybean meal and therefore it can be comingled with commodity soybean 

meal upon gaining regulatory approval from all key soybean export countries that have 

functioning regulatory systems. 

The stewardship system will be designed to prevent the comingling of SDA soybean or oil with 

commodity products. The market and trade assessment supports the conclusion that in the 

unlikely event that comingling of SDA soybean or oil in the commodity stream did occur, the

impact would be minimal. Sections 4.2.1, 4.2.2 and 4.2.3 below discuss in detail the potential 

 

9

http://usb.adayana.com:8080/usb/jsp/login.jsp. Percent U.S. Soybean acreage estimate based on U.S. Domestic 

Consumption by Segment – 2008/09. D. Ludwig, personal communication, 2009.

10 http://www.soyatech.com/oilseed_statistics.htm
Page 7 of 25

impacts of inadvertent comingling of SDA soybean, oil, and meal with commodity soybean, oil,

and meal in the market place and show that any such comingling would have only minimal 

impact to current soybean and vegetable oil markets. As discussed earlier, the SDA soybean and 

oil are for a specialty market and are not meant to be part of the commodity chain. The 

comingling scenarios and impacts are presented as worst case situations. Oilseed processors and 

users of vegetable oils are accustomed to the presence of numerous vegetable oils that are 

currently available for various food applications. The comingling levels where an impact would 

occur could only happen if there were a major deviation in the system which is highly unlikely as 

routine analytical methods are in place. Additionally, there is economic motivation, legal 

contracts, standard operating procedures (seed quality to end user), and demonstrated 

competency handling other vegetable oils of similar fatty acid profiles.

4.2.1 Potential Impact to Commodity Soybean in the Market Place

The impact from comingling was assessed based on the following , scenario: An inadvertent 

unloading of a truck containing 100% SDA soybean into the commodity stream at an elevator or 

processor where the event goes unnoticed. This scenario was chosen because it represents a 

“worst case” situation. This is unlikely to occur because a farmer producing SDA soybeans is 

financially motivated to identity preserve the SDA soybean from commodity soybean during 

harvest to realize the premium paid upon delivery. Further, comingling can be identified via 

routine fatty acid analysis or QC checks before the oil is shipped from the processing facility. 

All soybean oil is analyzed by gas chromatography (GC) to determine the fatty acid profile prior 

to shipping. This information is placed on the “Certificate of Analysis” (CofA) accompanying 

the shipment. Any commingling of commodity oil with SDA soybean oil should be identified 

prior to loading for export shipment, which minimizes commingled oil arriving at an exporting 

country. 

For the purposes of this analysis, the following assumptions were made: the load limit on roads 

in most soybean producing states is 80,000 lbs gross weight. The empty weight of most semi 

trucks is at or below 35,000 lbs, leaving a load capacity of 45,000 lbs (the difference). At 60 lbs 

per bushel, a standard semi truck will haul less than 800 bushels of soybeans. Thus, this 

commingling scenario assumes 800 bushels of SDA soybean commingled with commodity 

soybean.

Upon processing of the comingled soybeans, 800 bushels of SDA soybeans would yield 

approximately 8000 lbs of refined SDA soybean oil. The capacity of the smallest soybean oil 

holding tank at U.S. processing plants is approximately 200,000 lbs. Thus the accidental 

comingling of the truck load of SDA soybean will result in a 25X dilution of SDA soybean oil in 

a 200,000 lb tank of commodity soybean oil. In this situation, 8000 lbs of 20% SDA soybean oil 

will be diluted to 200,000 lb resulting in a final SDA concentration of 0.8% SDA in commodity 

soybean oil. The presence of 0.8% SDA in commodity soybean oil will have no impact to 
Page 8 of 25

human health because the oil has been through the food safety assessment11. Impacts to food 

labeling and oil performance are discussed in Section 4.2 of this document. 

Another scenario would involve delivery of 800 bushels of SDA soybean to a grain elevator. In 

this case, the SDA soybean would be diluted with commodity soybean in a grain storage bin that 

typically holds 100,000 to 500,000 bushels of soybean, resulting in 125X to 625X dilution of 

SDA soybean in commodity soybean. The commodity soybean oil produced from this 

comingling scenario will only have SDA ranging from 0.03% to 0.16% of total fatty acids.

Soybeans are exported as whole beans or as processed fractions. Soybean oil is commonly 

exported via cargo ships in containers with a capacity of approximately 40,000 lbs. These oil 

filled containers are transferred from the cargo ships to trucks at the importing ports. If a 

container of SDA soybean oil unintentionally ends up in a port where it is not suppose to be, it 

can be identified and diverted back to the country of origin or to another importing country. Due 

to the CofA and the high value of the product, the chance of SDA in soybean oil entering into the 

export market unintentionally is very small. 

Commodity soybean shipped for export are typically loaded into unit trains (360,000 bushels) or 

barges (50,000 bushels/barge) that eventually are loaded into 2 million bushel ocean going 

vessels. Before a ship loaded with commodity soybean reaches a destination country, the 

inadvertent delivery of a truck containing 800 bushels would be mixed and diluted within 2 

million bushels. The amount of SDA soybean in the vessel would be less than 0.04% of the total 

amount, or 2500X dilution. The soybean oil produced from this commingled soybean will have 

SDA at level below 0.008% of total fatty acids, which is the more than six time below the 

CODEX limit of quantitation for fatty acids in vegetable oil (0.05%).

4.2.2 Potential Impact to Commodity Soybean Meal in the Market Place

Monsanto provided information to USDA in the petition demonstrating that the composition of 

the meal from MON 87769 is equivalent to meal derived from conventional soybean and safe 

and wholesome for food or feed applications as commodity soybean meal. Defatted SDA 

soybean meal contains approximately 1% residual oil. According to the National Oil Processors 

Association defatted soybean meal should contain a minimum of 0.5% oil to meet quality 

standards and guidelines for soybean meal from domestic and international shipping (NOPA,

2006). With the exception of the presence of minor amounts of the Pj 6D and Nc 15D proteins 

and de minimis amounts of residual oil, the soybean meal and other non-oil processed fractions 

used for animal feed and human food applications are unchanged from commodity processed 

soybean fractions. Upon receiving regulatory approval for MON 87769 in all major soybean 

export countries, SDA soybean meal can be comingled with commodity soybean meal in the 

 

11 http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodIngredientsPackaging/GenerallyRecognizedasSafeGRAS/GRASListings/ucm185688.htm
Page 9 of 25

market place. Therefore no trade impact is anticipated from the commingling of SDA soybean 

meal with commodity soybean meal. 

4.2.3 Potential Impact to Commodity Soybean Oil in the Market Place

Monsanto has assessed the impact due to the presence of SDA soybean oil on commodity and 

other vegetable oils. 

Areas of potential impact identified include the following: (1) food ingredient labeling, (2) 

nutritional facts panel labeling (3) functionality of the oil, and (4) sensory evaluation. This 

assessment has been shared with key stakeholders such as NOPA, NAEGA, ASA, QUALISOY, 

USB and GMA. 

Food Ingredient Labeling:

The impact due to the presence of SDA soybean oil in commodity soybean oil from the 

perspective of soybean oil ingredient labeling was considered. SDA soybean oil contains two 

additional fatty acids (SDA and GLA) that are not present in commodity soybean oil. Therefore,

we evaluated the potential impact to food ingredient labeling if SDA soybean oil was 

inadvertently present in the soybean oil that is added to food. 

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration requires that all ingredients present in a food to be 

declared with a few exceptions. Although the regulations do not explicitly define “ingredient” 

they do discuss a class of “incidental additives” that are not considered ingredients and yet can 

be present in a food. An “incidental additive” is exempt if, according to the regulations, it is 

present at “insignificant levels” and has no “technical or functional effect” in a food12. Residual 

product from a previous soybean oil processing run may occasionally be mixed into a different 

product in a new run. Such residual product would fit the concept of “incidental additive”13 and 

need not be included on the label. Thus, the unintended presence of insignificant amounts of 

SDA soybean oil in soybean oil is tolerated under the food label laws and should not impact the 

ingredient labeling of soybean oil or foods containing such oil.

Nutrition Facts Panel Labeling:

The FDA requires that information on fats to be declared on the nutrition facts panel of foods.

They are (1) total fat, (2) trans fat, and (3) saturated fat. It is voluntary for a food company to list 

the amounts of monounsaturated fat and polyunsaturated fat on the nutrition facts panel. The 

nutrition facts panel of SDA soybean oil will be similar to commodity soybean oil because the 

total fat, saturated fat and trans fat content of SDA soybean oil is similar to commodity soybean 

oil. Many vegetable oil providers voluntarily list also monounsaturated and polyunsaturated 

fatty acids present in the oil. Since in SDA soybean oil one polyunsaturated fatty acid (LA) is 

replaced with two other (SDA and GLA) polyunsaturated fatty acids; the impact of comingling 

on nutrition facts panel labeling from listing mono and polyunsaturated fatty acid is negligible. 

 

12 21 CFR § 101.100

1321 CFR § 101.100(3)i
Page 10 of 25

Even though bottled SDA soybean oil is not an intended use at this time, a worst case assessment

using 100% commodity soybean oil was considered to assess the potential impact of SDA 

soybean oil comingling with commodity soybean oil on nutritional facts panel labeling of bottled 

soybean oil. Table 1 shows the amount of SDA soybean oil that would be needed to be 

comingled with commodity bottled soybean oil in order to significantly impact the nutrition facts 

panel for major fatty acids on bottled soybean oil. Based on this analysis even 25% of SDA 

soybean oil comingled with commodity soybean oil will not significantly impact the nutritional 

facts panel label for soybean oil. This example illustrates that any incidental presence of SDA 

soybean oil in commodity soybean oil will not have any impact on the nutritional labeling of 

soybean oil or SDA soybean oil containing food products. Figure 1 shows the typical nutrition 

facts panel for commodity soybean oil (100 % soybean oil) and a theoretical nutrition facts panel 

for SDA soybean oil. 

Table 1. Impact of Comingling SDA Soybean Oil with Commodity Soybean Oil on 

Nutritional Facts Panel Labeling for Bottled Soybean Oil 

Major Fatty Acids SBO1SDA 

SBO

1% SDA 

SBO in 

SBO

5% SDA 

SBO in 

SBO

10% SDA 

SBO in 

SBO

25% SDA 

SBO in 

SBO

Saturated Fat (g) 2.11 2.27 2.11 2.12 2.13 2.15

Polyunsaturated Fat (g) 8.35 9.05 8.36 8.38 8.42 8.52

Monounsaturated Fat (g) 3.19 2.15 3.18 3.14 2.98 2.93

1

SBO=Soybean Oil

Note: The impact of mixing SDA soybean oil (SDA SBO) on nutritional facts labeling for 

bottled soybean oil (SBO) is depicted in the table above. The impact to nutritional facts 

panel labeling was assessed at various percentages of SDA soybean oil mixed with 

commodity soybean oil.

 14 g serving size and FCC rounding rules applied. GLA and SDA included in 

polyunsaturated fatty acid calculation. Mono and polyunsaturated fatty acid labeling is 

voluntary. No change in trans fat.
Page 11 of 25

Figure 1. Nutrition Facts Panel for Commodity Soybean Oil and Theoretical Nutrition 

Facts Panel for SDA Soybean Oil

Note: Nutrition facts panel generated using Genesis SQL R&D software (© 2011 ESHA 

Research), the same as used typically by food companies. Commodity soybean oil exists 

in the database. SDA soybean oil‟s typical fatty acid composition was utilized to develop 

a theoretical nutrition facts panel.

Oil Functionality:

Oxidative Stability Monsanto conducted an assessment of the impact of the oxidative stability of 

commodity soybean oil comingled with SDA soybean oil. Figure 2 demonstrates that 

comingling of SDA soybean oil with commodity soybean oil decreases the Oxidative Stability 

Index (OSI) of commodity soybean oil. The OSI stability index is an indicator of soybean oil 

stability. All oils and fats have a resistance to oxidation, which depends on the degree of 

saturation, antioxidant and pro-oxidant concentration, and prior abuse. Oxidation is slow until 

this resistance is overcome, at which point oxidation accelerates and becomes more rapid. The 
Page 12 of 25

length of time prior to the acceleration of oxidation is referred to as the „induction period,‟ and 

the point of maximum rate change is referred to as the OSI, and is reported in hours. The 

oxidative stability of soybean oil is significantly influenced by the proportion of 

monounsaturates to polyunsaturates. 

To assess the impact of comingling on the OSI, the OSI of 21 commercially available soybean 

oil as well as blends of commodity soybean oil with SDA soybean oil were evaluated.

Commodity/SDA soybean oil blends were prepared in duplicate (wt./wt.) using SDA soybean oil 

in retail salad oil (soybean oil) obtained from a local St. Louis market. Neither oils contained

added antioxidants. SDA soybean oil used for preparing the blends contained 22.9% of SDA 

(%wt of total fatty acid). Oil Stability Index measurements were obtained on an Omnion OSI 

instrument at 110oC using AOCS Official Method Cd 12b-92. OSI was run in duplicate for each 

blend sample, and means were averaged to obtain the data points shown. Target blend accuracy 

in the commodity/SDA soybean oil blends was confirmed by fatty acid composition determined 

using capillary gas chromatographic (GC) analysis (data not shown). The “Commercial soy” 

range shown in Figure 2 represents 21 unstabilized salad oils that were obtained at retail markets 

in St. Louis over a 3 year period and analyzed for OSI within 2 weeks of purchase. Oils were 

selected with „best by...‟ dates of 6 to 24 months from date of purchase. The OSI values of these 

oils ranged from 5.63 to 9.68 with a median value of 6.66. SDA soybean oil is estimated to have 

decreased oxidative stability compared to conventional soybean oil (Figure 2). Based on this 

study it is reasonable to conclude that minor levels of SDA will not impact the OSI index of 

commodity soybean oil. At comingling levels of 12.5% of SDA soybean oil in commodity 

soybean oil, the OSI index falls below the range observed for commercial soybean oils. 
Page 13 of 25

Figure 2. Oxidative Stability Index (OSI) of SDA Soybean Oil Blended with Commodity 

Soybean Oil

Heat Treatment Vegetable oils containing high levels of PUFA are known to undergo rapid 

oxidation during frying applications and are known to impart undesirable taste and odor to the 

fried foods. SDA soybean oil contains relatively high levels of PUFAs compared to other 

vegetable oils, and therefore, is not intended for frying applications. However, as part of the 

evaluation of the potential impact of SDA soybean oil on the functional properties of commodity 

soybean oil, the influence of SDA soybean oil on the ability of fry oil to withstand heat treatment

was determined. From a practical standpoint, commercial fryers use the level of polar materials 

formed during frying as a measure of oxidation and to determine the fry life of oil. Total polar 

material values are often used to determine when the oil has deteriorated to a point where the oil 

can no longer be used (Ortheofer and List, 2007). When the polar material reaches the threshold 

level of 24%, the oil is typically discarded and fresh oil is used. Polar compounds are 

byproducts that are generated as the oil degrades in quality. A common means of measuring 

total polar material in oils is by the use of the Ebro Food Oil Meter (Ebro International, Lino 

Lakes, MN). As oil degrades during frying, there is an increase in the polar materials that affect 

the dielectric constant of the oil. Measurements are taken of the fry oil throughout the length of 

the fry study to determine when the oil has reached 24% total polar material (TPM), which 

typically indicates the need to discard the oil. Figure 3 shows the time in hours that it took for 

each SDA soybean oil/commodity soybean oil blend to reach 24% TPM during frying. The 
Page 14 of 25

results indicate within the range of blends tested the level of SDA soybean oil had minimal 

impact on the formation of total polar materials in the oil. 

Figure 3. Hours to Reach 24% Total Polar Material During Frying Application of Soybean 

Oil Containing Varying Amounts of SDA Soybean Oil

Food Sensory Assessment:

A sensory assessment of SDA soybean oil was performed to evaluate consumer acceptability of 

SDA soybean oil. Sensory assessment has concluded that the sensory attributes of SDA soybean 

oil is comparable to commodity soybean oil. Even though SDA soybean oil is not intended for 

frying application, sensory results for SDA soybean oil in the most challenging environment of 

high temperature food frying applications was evaluated as a worst case scenario. To determine 

the impact SDA soybean oil on the quality of foods prepared from blends of SDA soybean oil 

and commodity soybean oil, french fries were prepared. The five oil blends (ranging from 2.5 to 

15% SDA soybean oil) and commodity soybean oil were heated continuously for over 40 hours. 

During this time, batches of french fries were cooked in each of the oil samples and one batch 

each day of frying was evaluated for the difference in sensory properties from a control (100% 

commodity oil) using the Sensory Quality System method (King et al., 2002). Each panelist was 

provided a control fry and test fry and asked to rate the overall quality score (overall difference) 

along with the differences in individual French fry attributes. A rating of 5 indicates no 

difference, 4 slight difference, 3 difference, 2 significant difference and 1 extremely different. 

Figure 4 shows the results from this study. The outcome from the sensory evaluation showed 
Page 15 of 25

that up to 15% of SDA soybean oil can be comingled with commodity soybean oil without 

impacting the flavor perception of fried food (Figure 4). 
Page 16 of 25

Figure 4. Sensory Results from Frying Application of Soybean oil Containing Varying Amounts of SDA Soybean Oil.
Page 17 of 25

The market and trade assessment has concluded that in the unlikely event comingling did occur, 

the impact to labeling and functionality of commodity soybean oil would be minimal. Monsanto

will have an appropriate stewardship plan in place to direct MON 87769 and oil to its intended 

markets, both in its initial commercial phase when produced and used under CLSS as well as 

longer-term.

4.3 Risk Mitigation Plan

4.3.1 Stewardship Plan for MON 87769 - Closed Loop Stewardship System

To mitigate potential impacts to commodity soybean, a Closed Loop Stewardship System 

(CLSS) has been developed to support the commercialization of SDA soybean prior to obtaining 

approvals in key soybean export markets with functioning regulatory systems. The CLSS

defines procedures and processes relevant to the production, handling, and processing of all 

stewarded materials generated within the closed loop. Stewarded materials include viable 

soybean seed and grain, meal, hulls, oil, and downstream co-products derived from the crude oil 

that are in direct control of Monsanto, its licensees or partners, and their customers. Monsanto 

will continue to utilize the CLSS through the initial product introduction phase until necessary 

global approvals are received from key soybean export countries with functioning regulatory 

systems. After the approvals are received, Monsanto will refine and update the stewardship 

system for long-term implementation based on the experience developed during the introduction 

phase and in consultation with key stakeholders. 

Under the CLSS, Monsanto will develop and implement best practices and systems consistent 

with the Excellence Through Stewardship14 initiative. Monsanto will carefully evaluate 

capabilities of partners and downstream entities to contain downstream products to their intended 

market(s) and include terms and conditions in agreements with those partners or entities. These 

agreements will require that appropriate quality management systems (QMS), including both 

quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC), are in place to manage and verify containment 

of all stewarded materials in countries of production and use.

Monsanto will only work with downstream partners that have proven traceability, identity 

preservation, and CLSS production capabilities. Monsanto, its licensees, partners and processors 

will implement an annual auditing process for material under their control. Commercial 

production of soybean seed for planting and harvested soybean and the subsequent processing or 

manufacturing of stewarded end use products requires strict adherence to established processes 

under the CLSS to ensure each material is handled and used appropriately. If any part of the 

process is contracted out to a third party, Monsanto will require a Stewardship Management Plan 

that meets CLSS standards. Monsanto reserves the right to audit these plans directly or through 

a third party.

 

14 Excellence Through Stewardship (ETS) is an initiative to promote the global adoption of stewardship programs 

and quality management systems for the full life cycle of biotechnology-derived plant products.
Page 18 of 25

Activities under the CLSS are organized into five relevant sections identifying critical control 

points: (1) Production of SDA Soybean Seed for Planting, (2) Production of SDA Soybean for 

Processing, (3) SDA Soybean Processing and Oil Refining, (4) SDA Soybean Oil Packaging and 

Storage, and (5) SDA Soybean Oil Distribution to Food Company Supply Chain. The 

information presented in each section describes the purpose, scope, and procedures necessary to 

conduct and verify the proper handling and use of all relevant materials under the CLSS.

Figure 5. Parts of the Closed Loop Stewardship System and Critical Control Points

The requirements and processes for activities at each of these control points under a CLSS are 

consistent with Monsanto stewardship guidelines. These guidelines include processes to prevent 

commingling with commodity soybean seed, soybean, and oil (e.g. isolation, equipment cleaning 

and segregated storage). All Monsanto and non-Monsanto personnel involved with producing 

material under the CLSS are required to follow these guidelines and requirements.

Detection Methods Monsanto has developed event-specific detection methods to detect the 

MON 87769 event in articles of commerce including soybean seed, harvested soybean, soybean 

meal and oil. More importantly, Monsanto has developed analytical methods to assess the fatty 

acid profile for SDA soybean oil as well as detect the presence of SDA in vegetable oil. 

Monsanto will provide these methods to the industry upon request. Oil processors and 

downstream distributors are accustomed to using oil analysis methods during their normal course 

of business. Fatty acid profile analyses of soybean oil are considered routine within the industry.
Page 19 of 25

Production of SDA Soybean Seed for Planting:

Monsanto is a leader in crop biotechnology having successfully introduced numerous 

biotechnology-derived crops to the marketplace globally. Monsanto has developed and 

implemented seed quality standards and practices to validate soybean seed meets the standards 

established for purity of a trait. These standards apply to all soybean seed sold by Monsanto and 

are based upon measures that seed producers put in place to assure the genetic purity of 

improved planting seed. This system is used to assure that farmers receive seed of known 

quality with a minimum level of off type seeds.

The first step in production of SDA soybean is the production, processing and delivery of high 

quality parent seed to the grower. Monsanto‟s seed manufacturing organization uses specific 

SOPs and documentation forms to ensure compliance with Monsanto stewardship and 

compliance standards. The entire seed production process at the majority of the seed companies 

and tollers operates using International Organization for Standardization15 (ISO) certification 

standards and include internal and external audits (ISO, 2009). By following ISO quality 

standards it is possible to validate that the processes are followed which have been designed to 

generate the desirable characteristics of seeds and services such as quality, safety, reliability, and 

efficiency. The ISO standards represent an international consensus on good management 

practices with the aim of ensuring that the organization can consistently deliver excellent product 

or services. The standards not only must meet the customer‟s requirements and applicable seed 

regulatory requirements, but also must aim to enhance customer satisfaction and achieve 

continual improvement of its performance in pursuit of these objectives (ISO, 2009).

Commercially certified soybean seed must meet state and federal seed standards and labeling 

requirements. The Association of Official Seed Certifying Agencies (AOSCA) standards for 

certified soybean seed are as follows: 98% pure seed (minimum), 2% inert matter (maximum). 

The inert matter can contain up to 0.05% weed seed (maximum, not to exceed 10 per lb.), 0.60% 

total of other crop seeds (maximum), 0.5% other varieties (maximum, includes off-colored beans 

and off-type seeds), 0.10% other crop seeds (maximum, not to exceed three per lb.), and have 

80% germination and hard seed (minimum) (AOSCA, 2009). Seed that meets or exceeds these 

standards are provided in appropriately labeled seed bags to growers. Monsanto‟s seed 

manufacturing practices for MON 87769 will be designed to contain MON 87769 within the 

boundaries of the production system thereby assuring that levels of the trait and the subsequent 

SDA and GLA fatty acids do not cause impacts to conventional soybeans or other commodity 

soybean varieties produced at seed manufacturing sites.

Production of SDA Soybean for Processing:

SDA soybean will be produced under contracts similar to those currently issued by processors or 

elevators for commercial specialty soybean such as food grade, organic, Vistive low linolenic or 

other specialty soybeans. 

 

15http://www.iso.org/iso/ims_2009.htm
Page 20 of 25

The income opportunity is achieved by the farmer only when the soybean is delivered to the 

processor within specifications. Therefore, the motivation is a financial incentive for the farmer 

to avoid comingling with commodity soybean, keeping SDA soybean identity preserved within 

system of seed – farmer – processor. Many farmers may willingly choose to plant all their 

acreage to specialty soybeans because it eliminates any risk of comingling that may occur during 

the harvest. If a farmer chooses to produce the specialty soybean for the processor, the farmer

will arrange to store the soybean on farm or at their local elevator, if the elevator is participating 

in the specialty program with the processor.

The steps involved in securing soybean production are:

1. Monsanto, its licensees, partners or processors will be responsible to issue production 

contracts. These contracts will be either to an elevator or directly to the farmer. If issued 

to an elevator, the elevator will in turn issue contracts with farmer customers in the 

amount of acreage established in its processor contract. The contract will include number 

of acres and the timeline for the delivery of harvested soybeans.

2. Monsanto, its licensees or partners will distribute SDA soybean seed to the farmer after 

verifying that the farmer has a valid contract that has been issued for SDA soybean

production and stewardship in their operation. This will include an amount of seed 

needed to plant the number of acres established on the production contract by the 

processor or elevator.

3. Monsanto, its licensees or partners will work with all parties involved to confirm and 

reconcile acres contracted with seed sales. Processors can plan processing schedules 

according to demand of the oil and supply of SDA soybean anticipated from contracted 

farmers.

4. After harvest, the farmer will deliver the harvested SDA soybean to the location specified 

in his contract, either a participating elevator or processor. If delivered to the elevator,

the elevator will keep the SDA soybean segregated from commodity soybean and pay the 

farmer any premiums as applicable, provided it passes the analytical testing. The

elevator will deliver the SDA soybean to the processor as delivery windows and crush 

schedules have been established. Upon delivery of SDA soybean by the farmer, samples 

will be analyzed from every truckload. This is to confirm the soybean contains the SDA 

trait as required by the production contract. Upon confirmation that the SDA soybean

meets specification, the processor or elevator will approve the premium payment to the 

farmer. SDA soybean that does not meet specifications at the elevator or processor will 

be segregated, processed and the oil will be directed to appropriate uses such as for the 

production of biofuel.

Soybean Grain Elevator Grain elevators play an important role in specialty programs with their 

long term storage of the soybeans. Because processing facilities crush soybeans throughout the 

year, soybeans used to supply these crush plants need to be stored year round. Farmers typically 
Page 21 of 25

prefer to empty their storage prior to planting of the new crop and prior to temperature warm up 

in the spring. The warm spring and summer weather presents challenges as condensation can 

build up in the bins creating moisture-related issues that make soybean-eating insects more 

active. To avoid this, commercial elevators have expert grain managers on staff to monitor 

soybean quality and keep soybean in good condition in all weather situations throughout the 

year. Commercial grain elevators are also better equipped to ship soybeans to processors during 

times of severe weather even when farmers cannot get to their bins. 

Processors will therefore enter into supply contracts with commercial grain elevators and work 

with farmers to establish inventories and to assure proper routing of SDA soybean through the 

supply chain. The elevator pays the farmer the specialty soybean premium upon successful 

analytical testing performed at the elevator location. Testing equipment will be provided as 

needed by Monsanto to participating elevators. 

In order for the elevator to be reimbursed for the premiums paid out to farmers that have 

delivered SDA soybeans to them, the elevator must in turn preserve the identity of the soybean

as it is delivered to the processor. Every load delivered to the processor by the elevator will be 

analyzed to make this determination. Processors will approve the premium payment to the 

elevator after analysis of the soybean to confirm the SDA trait. SDA soybean that does not meet 

specifications at the elevator or processor will be segregated, processed and the oil will be 

directed to appropriate uses such as for the production of biofuel.

SDA Soybean Processing and Oil Refining:

All SDA soybean processors must be approved in advance by Monsanto. In order for the 

processor to be approved by Monsanto to process SDA soybean, certain requirements must be 

met. They must posses the ability to store, segregate and identity preserve SDA soybeans. They 

must demonstrate the ability to clean the equipment associated with the receiving and subsequent 

handling of SDA soybeans. The processor‟s facility must have procedures in place and the 

ability to assure that SDA soybean processing, extracting, and oil refining equipments can be 

flushed to commercially acceptable standards after processing SDA soybeans. Monsanto and the 

processor will enter into an agreement to establish the terms and conditions of SDA soybean

processing services. These agreements will also include terms for distribution of SDA soybean 

co-products resulting from processing as stewarded products within the United States prior to 

receiving necessary regulatory approvals in soybean export markets. The resulting oil from 

processing SDA soybean is generally recognized as safe in the United States. 

Upon the transition from commodity soybeans to the SDA soybeans, a sample of crude oil is 

required to confirm the presence of the appropriate fatty acid composition (FAC) unique to SDA 

soybean oil. Crude oil will be collected and handled in a way that ensures that any SDA soybean 

oil as well as SDA soybean oil comingled with commodity soybean oil are handled in an 

appropriate manner and segregated from other oils. This will include all comingled oil before 

and after the collection of SDA soybean oil. Testing methods will be used to aid in identifying 
Page 22 of 25

the appropriate time to start and stop collecting crude SDA soybean oil. Storage tanks approved 

for SDA soybean oil will be assigned for the storage of crude and refined SDA soybean oil. 

Upon the completion of SDA soybean processing, a commodity soybean flush will be initiated. 

After all SDA soybean and commodity soybean used to flush the channels have been processed, 

crude oil exiting the extractor will be sampled and analyzed to confirm the equipment has been 

flushed to an acceptable level, yielding commercially acceptable commodity soybean oil. Offspec, commingled or flush SDA soybean oil will be segregated from commodity soybean oil and 

directed to appropriate use such as for the production of biofuel. 

SDA Soybean Oil Packaging and Storage:

Soybean oil produced under the CLSS will be distributed as a stewarded product within the 

United States until receiving approvals in all key soybean export markets. An agreement will be 

executed between Monsanto, its licensees, partners, the processor and/or the packager to 

establish the terms and conditions for packaging stewarded SDA soybean oil at a contract 

packaging facility. A separate agreement will be executed with a long-term storage facility, if 

used, to establish the terms and conditions for SDA soybean oil receipt, storage, and distribution. 

Bulk liquid semi-trailers (tankers) will be used to transport packaged and/or bulk SDA soybean 

oil. Refined, bleached, and deodorized (RBD) SDA soybean oil packaging will be conducted in 

an area that is clean, secure, and segregated to eliminate potential comingling with commodity 

soybean and/or other vegetable oils. The containers will be properly labeled using 

predetermined methods that will include chain of custody documentation. Periodic visual 

inspections will occur in and around the packaging area for the collection and disposal of any 

spilled oil or damaged containers. All semi-trailers used in the transportation of bulk SDA 

soybean oil will be verified to be clean at the processing plant or other Monsanto approved 

facility prior to being released. After packaging is complete, the facility will be flushed with 

adequate amounts of commodity soybean oil to remove SDA soybean oil and return the oil 

stream to commodity soybean oil specifications. Flush oil containing SDA soybean oil will be 

segregated and directed to appropriate use such as for the production of biofuel.

SDA Soybean Oil Distribution to Food Company Supply Chain:

Monsanto, its licensees and/or partners will execute agreements with food companies to establish 

the terms and conditions for the use of stewarded SDA soybean oil. During the development of 

these contracts, it will be necessary to verify that the food companies have the capabilities in 

place to control and limit distribution of stewarded products and track all products that use 

specific batches of the SDA soybean oil as ingredient. These contracts will include stewardship 

obligations and will require compliance including auditing. Third party consultants will be used 

if necessary under the CLSS. These third party consultants will have expertise in supply and 

demand chain procedures, to enable verification of a food company‟s capabilities. 

SDA soybean oil will be used by the food industry and will be supplied to specific customers by 

Monsanto, its licensees or partners and suppliers after verifying that it meets specific customer 
Page 23 of 25

requirements including quality factors. From the time the oil is packaged until it is utilized at the 

specific customer‟s facility there will be proper identification of the oil through labeling and 

manufacturing codes allowing for sufficient product traceability. Individual facilities will utilize 

proprietary inventory and ordering systems that are in place to insure that the appropriate oil is 

ordered, delivered and utilized.

Food companies will use SDA soybean oil as a food ingredient consistent with the GRAS 

notification16. Each individual food company has in place systems for ingredient (oil) ordering, 

receipt, storage, access and lot identification at specific manufacturing locations, as well as 

finished product (the food which incorporates SDA soybean oil) batch identification, 

manufacturing facility, storage, shipment to distribution centers, customer order picking, 

customer order shipment and receipt. Appropriate procedures are currently in place to ensure 

traceability from receipt of the ingredient through distribution to a specific retailer‟s facility.

Food manufacturing facilities also comply with federal and state requirements for good 

manufacturing practices and product traceability. Supply chain consultants can be employed to 

confirm appropriate systems have been established that meet ingredient and product traceability 

requirements.

4.3.2 Incident Response

All activities conducted by Monsanto and non-Monsanto personnel under the scope of the CLSS

must be consistent with Monsanto‟s corporate expectations for regulatory and stewardship 

compliance prior to obtaining all relevant global regulatory approvals. Monsanto has an incident 

response policy in place. If an unforeseen process failure or a breach of containment of 

stewarded material occurs, the CLSS incident response would be managed according to 

Monsanto‟s Global Product Stewardship and Quality process and procedures document. The 

Incident Response Process engages a multi-disciplinary team for immediate response 

investigation, assessment and mitigation of any potential adverse impacts that could result from 

the process failure. The incident investigation and analysis process will determine the reason for 

the occurrence and develop recommendations for corrective action including process 

improvement to prevent similar occurrences in the future. 

4.3.3 Development of Long Term Stewardship Processes 

The CLSS described above to support the commercialization of SDA soybean oil prior to 

obtaining all relevant regulatory approvals will be utilized through the initial product 

introduction phase until all relevant global approvals in key soybean export countries with 

functioning regulatory systems are received. Monsanto will refine and update the stewardship 

system for long-term implementation based upon the experience and learning developed during 

the CLSS production phase and through continued dialogue with stakeholders. This dialog will 

 

16 http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/fcn/gras_notices/grn000283.pdf
Page 24 of 25

aid in the assessment and development processes while enabling transparent communication 

regarding policy implementation. The long-term stewardship plan for MON 87769 derived 

through these actions will be designed to ensure that the SDA soybean oil is directed to its 

intended specialty market.

5. Summary

SDA soybean offers U.S. soybean growers the opportunity to supply a value added and 

sustainable omega-3 alternative that will provide food industry with choices to satisfy a growing 

omega-3 market. The closed loop stewardship system for the production and handling of 

MON 87769 and derived products is designed to ensure that SDA soybean and oil will be 

isolated from commodity soybean and oil as well as other vegetable oils in the market place and 

are directed to their intended specialty uses. The market and trade assessment has concluded that 

in the unlikely event comingling did occur, the impact to labeling and functionality would be 

minimal. Because SDA soybean is generally recognized as safe in the United States17 and the 

defatted meal from SDA soybean is similar to commodity soybean meal, there would be no 

negative impact to human heath from the use of any of the other processed fractions produced 

from soybean due to comingling of SDA soybean with commodity soybean. Given the 

abundance of vegetable oils on the market and demonstrated ability of the system to adapt to 

consumer preferences incorporating new oils into existing food manufacturing processes, the 

introduction of SDA soybean is expected to be easily managed by existing industry mechanisms 

and identity preservation systems. Monsanto continues to engage stakeholders and educate them 

on the benefits of SDA soybeans and proper stewardship practices.

 

17 http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodIngredientsPackaging/GenerallyRecognizedasSafeGRAS/GRASListings/ucm185688.htm
Page 25 of 25

References

James, M.J., V.M. Ursin, and L.G. Cleland. 2003. Metabolism of stearidonic acid in human 

subjects: comparison with the metabolism of other n-3 fatty acids. American Journal of Clinical 

Nutrition 77:1140-1145.

Lemke, S.L., Vicini, J.L., Su, H., Goldstein, D.A., Nemeth, M.A., Krul, E.A., and Harris, W.S. 

2010. Dietary intake of stearidonic acid–enriched soybean oil increases the omega-3 index: 

randomized, double-blind clinical study of efficacy and safety. Am J Clin Nutr 92:766–75.

NOPA. 2006. Trading Rules for the Purchase and Sale of Soybean Meal. National Oilseed 

Processors Association, Washington, D.C.

Orthoefer, F. T. and List, G. R. 2007. Evaluation of Used Frying Oil in Deep Frying: Chemistry, 

Nutrition and Practical Applications, 2nd Edition. Erickson, M.D. Editor. p 329-342.

King, S. et al. 2002. The sensory quality system: a global quality control solution. Food 

Quality and Preference (13) 385-395.