USDA reviews genetically engineered tomato, potato plants

The USDA recently reviewed soybean, tomato, and potato plants modified using genetic engineering to determine whether they presented an increased plant pest risk compared to similar cultivated plants.

USDA logo
USDA logo
(Graphic courtesy of USDA)

The USDA recently reviewed soybean, tomato, and potato plants modified using genetic engineering to determine whether they presented an increased plant pest risk compared to similar cultivated plants, according to a news release.

Inner Plant modified two soybean plants and one tomato plant to produce an optical signal, the release said. One soybean plant was modified to emit the signal when there is pest damage, while the other soybean and the tomato plant continuously emit the signal, according to the release.

Inner Plant has a system to detect these signals using remote sensing devices from tractors, drones, airplanes and satellites to aid crop management, the release said.

In addition, Ohalo Genetics modified a potato plant to produce an increased concentration of beta-carotene for altered nutritional value, the release said. Beta-carotene is an antioxidant that can give an orange, yellow or red color to carrots and other foods.

The USDA said the plants presented no special plant pest risk compared with other cultivated varieties of the same commodities.

Interested parties can view the regulatory status review requests from Inner Plant and Ohalo Genetics and APHIS’ response letters on the USDA website.

The agency said its responses are based on information from the developers and its:

  • Familiarity with plant varieties.
  • Knowledge of the traits.
  • Understanding of the modifications.

Under the Code of Federal Regulations Title 7, part 340, developers may request a regulatory status review when they believe a modified plant is not subject to regulation. The USDA Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service reviews the modified plant and considers whether it might pose an increased plant pest risk compared to a nonregulated plant. If the agency’s review finds a plant is unlikely to pose an increased plant pest risk relative to the comparator plant, APHIS issues a response indicating the plant is not subject to the regulations.

The Packer logo (567x120)
Related Stories
Tight margins leave growers hesitant to fund automation, even as delaying farm technology adoption exposes them to compounding labor and production losses.
In the wake of recent cyclospora concerns and eroding consumer confidence in the effectiveness of recalls, GS1 US says
deploying advanced product tracking and precision data sharing is critical to moving the industry forward.
The co-founder and CEO of Helios AI shares how hyperlocal, commodity-specific AI modeling predicts regional crop disruptions months before they hit, giving buyers and growers critical lead time.
Read Next
Findings from The Packer’s 2026 Sustainability Insights report highlight the severe financial strain on specialty crop growers as retail prices fail to keep pace with production expenses.
Get Daily News
GET MARKET ALERTS
Get News & Markets App