USDA/GIPSA Proficiency Program

Testing for the Presence of Biotechnology Events in Corn and Soybeans

January 2004 Sample Distribution

June 18, 2004

 

Purpose of USDA/GIPSA Proficiency Program

Through the USDA/GIPSA Proficiency Program, USDA seeks to improve the overall performance of testing for biotechnology-derived grains and oil seeds.  The USDA/GIPSA Proficiency Program helps organizations identify areas of concern and take corrective actions to improve testing accuracy, capability and reliability.

 

Program Description

In February 2003, USDA/GIPSA’s Technical Services Division expanded the program to offer samples for qualitative or quantitative analysis.  Participants could request samples for qualitative analysis or quantitative analysis.  In this round of the USDA/GIPSA Proficiency Program one set of samples was used for both qualitative and quantitative analyses.  The samples were fortified with various combinations and concentrations of transgenic events, and participants had the choice of providing qualitative or quantitative results.  Scoring of the participant’s results was done by computing the “percentage of correctly reported transgenic events” in the samples.  Two new biotechnology corn events commercialized in the U.S. in 2003 were included in this round of samples:  MON863 (Monsanto event) and TC1507 (Dow AgroScience/Pioneer Dupont event)

 

Sample Composition   

The corn samples contained various combinations and concentrations of the following transgenic events: T25, CBH351, MON810, GA21, E176, Bt11, NK603, TC1507, and MON863; or, no events (i.e., negative corn sample).  To produce the various concentration levels the appropriate amount of ground transgenic corn was mixed with non-transgenic corn.  Fortified corn samples were prepared with concentration of 0.1 %, 0.4 % and 0.8 % of the event.  The soybean samples were either non-transgenic soybeans, or fortified soybeans samples containing 0.1 % or 1.5 % of the transgenic glyphosate-tolerant soybeans.   
 
Each participant received six corn samples and three soybean samples.  Each sample contained approximately 20 grams of ground material.

 

Program Participants

GIPSA mailed samples to seventy-six participants and sixty-seven participants returned results.    Participants included organizations from Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, and South America.  Each participant received a study description and a data report form by electronic mail, and with the samples.  Participants submitted results by electronic mail, FAX, or regular mail.  No methodologies were specified, and organizations used both DNA- and protein-based testing technologies. 

 

Sixty-seven organizations returned results by the deadline date: 

 

·                    Twenty-nine participants submitted qualitative results only,

 

·                    Nine participants submitted quantitative results only, and

 

·                    Twenty-nine participants submitted a combination of qualitative and quantitative results. 

In this report, participating organizations are identified by either a confidential “Participant Identification Number”, or by name.  Appendix I identifies those organizations who gave GIPSA permission to list them as participants in the USDA/GIPSA Proficiency Program.

 

Data Summary Results

Data submitted by the participants are summarized in this report primarily in tables and charts.  Participants reported their results on a qualitative basis, quantitative basis, or a combination of both qualitative and quantitative bases.  Qualitative results were reported as the presence or absence of a particular event in each sample.  Quantitative results were reported as the concentration of a particular event in the sample.   Due to the complexity of the data, this report summarizes the data as follows:

 

Qualitative Data Summaries.  This section summarizes qualitative sample analysis data:

 

·             Table One:  Percentage correct scores for all participants by event (DNA-based assays).

 

·             Figure One:  Summary data of all participants for each event combined with the number of results submitted for that particular event (DNA-based assays).

 

·             Table Two:  Percentage correct scores for all individual participants by event (Lateral Flow Strip testing; Protein-based assays).

 

·             Table Three:  Percentage correct scores for all individual participants by event (Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay testing; Protein-based assays).

 

Quantitative Data Summaries.  This section summarizes quantitative sample analysis data:

 

·        Table Four: Percentage correct scores for all participants by event (DNA-based assays).

 

·        Figure Two:  Summary data of all participants for each event combined with the number of results submitted for that particular event (DNA-based assays).

 

·        Figure Three:  Summary (chart) of participant’s results relative to GIPSA’s fortification level.

 

·        Table Five:  Summary (table) of participant’s results relative to GIPSA’s foritification level.

 

·        Figure Five:  Percentage of false negative and false positive results in combined qualitative and quantitative data.

 

·        Table Six: Percentage correct scores for all individual participants by event (Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay testing; Protein-based assays).

 

·        Table Seven.  Comparison of qualitative and quantitative sample analysis results.

 


Table One.  Percentage correct scores for all participants reporting Qualitative results using DNA-based testing.  Events labeled as 35S through MON863 were assayed in corn samples.  The transgenic soybean samples contained the glyphosate tolerant event. 

NR = Participants who did not report a result

QUANT = Participants who reported a quantitative value (refer to Table Four for those results).

*

 


 

Figure One. Group average of percentage correct for Qualitative reports on each event combined with the total number of results reported using DNA-based testing.  Events labeled as 35S through MON863 were assayed in corn samples.  The transgenic soybean samples contained the glyphosate tolerant event producing the CP4 EPSPS protein.  Data are shown on a composite basis (i.e., all participants combined).

 

Tables Two and Three show the percentage correct scores for all participants reporting qualitative results using Lateral Flow Strip (LFS) testing and Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) testing (protein-based testing).  Events labeled as 35S through MON863 were assayed in corn samples.  The transgenic soybean samples contained the glyphosate tolerant event producing the CP4 EPSPS protein. 

 

Table Two. Lateral Flow Strip (LFS) Testing (Protein-based testing)

 

 

Table Three.  Enzyme-Lined Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) Testing (Protein-based testing)

 

Table Four.  Percentage correct scores for all participants reporting Quantitative results using DNA-based testing.  Events labeled as 35S through MON863 were assayed in corn samples.  The transgenic soybean samples contained the glyphosate tolerant event. 

NR = Participants who did not report a result

QUAL = Participants who reported a qualitative value (refer to Table One for those results).

                       

Figure Two. Group average of percentage correct for Quantitative reports on each event combined with the total number of results reported using DNA-based testing.  Events labeled as 35S through MON863 were assayed in corn samples.  The transgenic soybean samples contained the glyphosate tolerant event.  Data are shown on a composite basis (i.e., all participants combined).

Figure Three.  Accuracy of reported transgenic event quantifications.  The composite mean of participants’ reported quantifications (observed value) of the event compared to the GIPSA target concentration determined gravimetrically.  Corn samples were prepared to contain events at the concentrations of 0%, 0.1%, 0.4%, and 0.8%.  Soy samples were prepared to contain events at the concentrations of 0%, 0.1%, and 1.5%.  The relative error calculation was used to evaluate how close participant’s reported value agreed with the .

 

Relative error =   reported conc.  target conc.  x 100 = percentage relative error

                                            target conc.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Table Five:  Summary Quantitative Data

 

 

Transgenic Event

Fortification level

Observed level

Standard dev'n

Number of

Relative Error

Coeff. Var'n

 

(%)

(%)

(%)

Results

(%)

(%)

T-25

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0

0

0

28

0

0

 

0.1

0.67

0.48

32

570

72.7

 

0.4

0.73

0.54

31

83.7

71.4

CBH 351

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0

0.004

0.02

24

0

500

 

0.1

0.14

0.13

22

40

92.1

 

0.4

0.35

0.16

22

(-)12.5

44.5

MON 810

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0

0.02

0.07

48

0

380

 

0.1

0.13

0.15

25

34

111

 

0.4

0.3

0.2

25

24.3

66.6

 

0.8

0.8

0.43

50

0

53.7

GA 21

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0

0

0

32

0

0

 

0.1

0.15

0.22

32

50

146

 

0.4

0.41

0.18

34

2.5

45.6

Ev 176

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0

0

0

34

0

0

 

0.1

0.34

0.88

42

240

258.2

 

0.4

0.71

0.95

44

77.3

134

Bt 11

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0

0

0

41

0

0

 

0.1

0.16

0.29

40

66

174

 

0.4

0.55

0.29

40

39

53.1

NK 603

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0

0

0

22

0

0

 

0.1

0.17

0.15

11

70

88.2

 

0.4

0.36

0.23

11

(-)10

62.5

 

0.8

0.96

0.04

22

20

4.58

TC 1507

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0

0

0

10

0

0

 

0.1

0.08

0.04

5

(-)20

55

 

0.4

0.6

0.79

5

50

132.6

 

0.8

0.43

0.32

10

(-)46

75.2

MON 863

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

0

0

0

18

0

0

 

0.1

0.37

0.69

9

272

185

 

0.4

0.57

0.34

9

42.5

60.5

 

0.8

0.89

0.46

18

12.3

51.6

Soy

 

 

 

 

 

 

Glyphosate

0

0

0

14

0

0

Tolerant

0.1

0.21

0.28

30

113

130

 

1.5

1.86

0.52

46

24

28

 

Figure Four.  Percentage of false negatives and false positives observed in combined qualitative and quantitative participant data reports.  Results were classified as false negatives when a participant reported the absence of a transgenic event in a sample that contained the event.  Results were classified as false positives when a participant reported the presence of a transgenic event in a sample that did not contain the event.

 

Table Six.  Percentage correct scores for all participants reporting Quantitative results using ELISA (Protein-based testing).  Events labeled as T25 through MON863 were assayed in corn samples.  The transgenic soybean samples contained the glyphosate tolerant event producing the CP4 EPSPS protein. 

NR= no result reported.

 

 

 

Table Seven.  Comparison of performance between qualitative and quantitative methods of sample analysis.  The mean percentage correct for each event on both types of sample analyses were compared as differentials (Qualitative mean % correct minus Quantitative mean % correct).

 

 

T25

CBH351

Mon810

GA21

Ev176

Bt11

NK603

TC1507

MON863

RUR

QUAL

92.1

92.7

96

96

96

95

97.8

95.1

93.6

95.2

QUANT

99

93.9

93.9

95.1

97

95.2

95.8

93.3

90

100

Difference

+6.9

+1.2

-2.1

-0.9

+1.0

+0.2

-2.0

-1.8

-3.6

+4.8

 

 

Summary of Findings

 

Qualitative Sample Analysis

 

1.                  The group average “percentage correct scores” was above 95% correct for all events except T25 and CBH351.  The group average “percentage correct” for T25 and CBH351 were approximately 92% (See Table One).  The participants’ lower performance on T25 and CBH351, as compared to their performance on other events, was consistent with the trend observed in the previous round of samples (September 2003).  This differential in percentage correct was largely due to the higher number of “false negative” results reported for T25 and CBH351 (See Figure Four).

 

2.                  Interestingly, although the events TC1507 and MON863 were new transgenic events, the participants did well in identifying their presence or absence.  This is likely due to a smaller number of participants reporting results for these events. 

 

3.                  The results show that Lateral Flow Strip test methods can be used to correctly identify a number of events; however, it proved less reliable for identifying the marker protein associated with the T25 event.  This is likely due to the lowest fortification level (0.1 %) being below the Limit of Detection.

 

4.                  Generally, the ELISA test methods were able to correctly identify the presence or absence of the marker protein associated with an event (See Table Three).  However, the  performance of the ELISA test for the glyphosate tolerant soybean marker protein (CP4 EPSPS) was surprisingly low (67%).

 

 

Quantitative Sample Analysis

    

1.                  The group average “percentage correct scores” for all events was greater than or equal to

94%, with the exception of TC1507 and MON863.  The composite “percentage correct” scores for TC1507 and MON863 were 93% and 90% respectively (See Table Two).

 

2.                  The quantitative results were scored on a “qualitative” basis, and an analysis of the  

“Accuracy” of the reported concentration of an event versus the target concentration of an event in the samples was conducted.  The quantification accuracy was evaluated by computing the relative error for each of the means of the reported values (See Figure Three and Table Five).  The trend observed was that at the lower fortification levels, the results were less accurate and more variable.(i.e., higher relative error and greater coefficients of variation).  In contrast, at the higher fortification levels, the reported quantifications were more accurate and less variable.  This inverse relationship between fortification level and the accuracy of reported quantifications has been observed in the previous rounds and is consistent with observations of other quantitative analytical methods. The most dramatic dispersions in quantification accuracy were observed for events T25, E176, and MON863.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.                  Results from this study indicate that accurate and precise quantitation at the 0.1% fortification level is very difficult for many organizations, and therefore, actual results reported at this level should be very carefully considered.

 

4.                  When the performance between qualitative and quantitative methods of sample analysis was examined, there was no marked difference in performance (Table Seven).  This is in contrast to the September 2003 results that showed a significant difference between organizations that reported qualitative and quantitative results. 

 

Note:  It is important to understand that there are no internationally recognized standard reference materials for all transgenic events.   The transgenic seed or grain used to prepare these samples was made available to GIPSA by the Life Science Organizations.  Care was taken to ensure the transgenic material was either essentially 100 % positive for the event, or adjusted accordingly.  The fortified samples were prepared using a process that has been verified to produce homogenous mixes, and representative samples were analyzed to ensure proper fortification and homogeneity.

 

To obtain additional information on the USDA/GIPSA Proficiency Program, contact Dr. Ron Jenkins, USDA/GIPSA Proficiency Program Manager, at US 816-891-04442, or by e-mail at biotech-lab@usda.gov.

 

 


Appendix I.  Organizations who participanted in the January GIPSA 2004 Proficiency Program.

 

A. Bio. C – Molecular Biology Division

Route de Samadet

64410 ARZACQ        

France

Contact            Dr. F. Bois

Telephone        33 5 59 04 49 20

Fax                  33 5 59 04 49 30

E-mail              bio.moleculaire@labo-abioc.fr

 

AINIA (Instituto Tecnologico Agroalimentario)     

Benjamin Franklin 5-11

Parque Tecnologico

46980 Paterna

Valencia

Spain

Contact            David Tomas

Telephone        +34961366090

Fax                  +34961318008

E-mail              dtomas@ainia.es

 

Behoerde fur Umwelt und Gesundheit Institut fur Hygiene und Umwelt

Marckmannstr.129b, Haus 6

D20539 Hamburg

Germany

Contact            Norbert Hess, Ph.D.

Telephone        +49 40 42845 3629

Fax                  +49 40 42845 3840

E-mail              norbert.hess@bug.hamburg.de

 

Biogenetic Services, Inc.                  

801 32nd Avenue

Brookings, SD  57006

Contact            Alex Kahler

Telephone        800-423-4263/605-697-8500

Fax                  605-697-8507

E-mail              biogene@brookings.net

 

Biolytix AG

Benkenstrasse 254

CH-4108 Witterswil

Switzerland

Contact            Peter Brodmann

Telephone        41 (0)61 723 20 70

Fax                  41 (0)61 723 20 71

E-mail              peter.brodmann@biolytix.ch


Biotechnology Research and Development

Office of Biotechnology Research and Development

Tunyabury District

Pratumthani Province

Thailand

Contact            Mr. Kittisak Kiratiya-angul

Telephone        66 2 9046885-95

Fax                  66 2 9046885-95, ext. 555

E-mail              nudee@ksc.th.com

 

Bureau of Food and Drug Analysis (BFDA), DOH, Taiwan

161-2, Kuen Yang Street

Nankang         

Taipei, Taiwan 

Contact            Dr. Lih-Ching Chiueh

Telephone        02-26531273

Fax                  02-26531268

E-mail              clc1025@nlfd.gov.tw

 

California Seed and Plant Lab         

7877 Pleasant Grove Road      

Elverta, CA  95626

Contact            Parm Randhawa

Telephone        916-655-1581

Fax                  916-655-1582

E-mail              randhawa@calspl.com

 

Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Ottawa Lab Fallowfield - MATU

3851 Fallowfield Road

Ottawa, Ontario

K2H 8P9

Canada

Contact            Cheryl Dollard

Phone               613 228-6698, ext 5960

Fax                  613-228-6669

 

Canadian Food Inspection Agency

Center for Plant Health

Molecular Analysis Laboratory

8801 East Saanich Road

Sindey, BC

Canada, V8L 1H3

Contact            Ms. Margaret Green

Telephone        (250) 363-6650 ext. 222/248

Fax                  (250) 363-6661

E-mail              greenmg@inspection.gc.ca

 


Canadian Grain Commission

1404-303 Main Street

Winnipeg, Manitoba

R3C 3G8, Canada

Contact            Tigst Demeke

Telephone        204-984-4582

Fax                  204-983-0724

E-mail              tdemeke@grainscanada.gc.ca

 

CONGEN Biotechnology GmbH

Robert Roessle Str. 10

13125 Berlin, Germany

Telephone        Fon +49-(0)30-9489 3506

Fax                   +49-(0)30-9489 3510

E-Mail  l.grohmann@congen.de

 

Chemisches und Veterinäruntersuchungsamt Freiburg (CVUA)

Bissierstrasse 5

79114 Freiburg

Germany

Contact            Hans-Ulrich Waiblinger/Dr. Pietsch

Telephone        ++49 761 8855151

Fax                  ++49 761 8855100

E-mail              hans-ulrich.waiblinger@cvuafr.bwl.de

 

CNTA-Laboratorio del Ebro

Ctra N-134 km 50

31570 San Adrian

Navarra

Spain

Contact            Blanca Jauregui, Ph.D.

Telephone        34 948 670159

Fax                  34 948 696127

E-mail              bjauregui@ctncv.es

 

DNA Technology Laboratory

Kamphaengsaean, Nakorn Pathon 73140

Thailand

Contact            Apiwan Yoojinda

Telephone        66-34-355192-4

Fax                  66-34-355196-7

E-mail              apiwan@dnatec.kps.ku.ac.th

 


Eurofins Scientific, Woodson-Tenent Laboratories Division         

3507 Delaware

Des Moines, IA  50313

Contact            David Pinero

Telephone        515-265-1461

Fax                  515-266-5453

E-mail              davidpinero@eurofinsus.com

 

European Commission - JRC

Via Fermi 1

I-21020 Ispra (VA)

Italy

Contact            Marco Mazzara

Telephone        0039 0332 785773

Fax                  0039 0332 789333

E-mail              marco.mazzaro@jrc.it

 

FASMAC CO., LTD

5-1-3 Midorigaoka, Atsugi-shi

Kanagawa 243-0041 

Japan

Contact            Dr. Satoshi Futo

Telephone        +81 46-295-8787

Fax                  +81 46-294-3738

E-mail              sfuto@fasmac.co.jp

 

Federal Institute for Risk Assessment BfR

Thielallee 88-92           

D-14195 Berlin

Germany

Contact            Jutta Zagon, Ph.D.

Telephone        49-30-8412-3876

Fax                  49-30-88412-3685

E-mail              j.zagon@bfr.bund.de

 

GeneScan Analytics GmbH, Freiburg

Engesserstr. 4

79108 Freiburg i. Br.

Germany

Contact            Dr. Castor Menendez

Telephone        +49-(0)761-5038

Fax                  +49-(0)761-5038-111

E-mail              gmoanalytics@genescan.com

 

Genetic ID NA

501 Dimick Drive        

Fairfield, Iowa  52557

Contact            Jane Pappin/Bernd Schoel

Telephone        641-472-9979, ext 124

Fax                  641-472-9198

E-mail              jpappin@genetic-id.com/bshoel@genetic-id.com

 

GeneScan do Brasil Ltda

Gerente de Qualidade

Avenida Antonia Gazzola, 1001

3 andar

13.301-245  ITU - SP - Brazil

Contact            Flavia Machado

Telephone        +55 11 4023 0522

Fax                  +55 11 4023 0625

 

GeneScan USA, Inc.

101 Woodland Highway

Belle Chasse, LA  70037

Contact            Dr. Frank Spiegelhalter

Telephone        504-398-0940

Fax                  504-398-0945

E-mail              fspiegel@gmotesting.com

 

JenaGen GmbH

JenaGen Diagnostik-Gentechnik-Biotechnologie

Loebstedter Str. 78

D-07749 Jena

Germany

Contact            Dr. Reinhard Baier

Telephone:        +49(0)3641-464913

Fax:                  +49(0)3641-464991

E-mail:              r.baier@jenagen.de

 

Indiana Crop Improvement

7700 Stockwell Road

Lafayette, IN  47909

Contact            Huabang Chen

Telephone        765-523-2535

Fax                  765-523-2536

E-mail              Chen@indianacrop.org

 

Instituto de Biologia Molecular de Barcelona (IBMB)

Departmento de Genetica Molecular

Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Cientificas (CSIC)

Jordi Girona Salgado 18-26

08034 Barcelona

Spain

Contact            Marta Hernandez Perez

Telephone        +34 93 400 61 00

Fax                  +34 93 204 59 04

 


Kantonales Labor Basel-Stadt                     

Kannenfeldstrasse 2

Postfach

CH-4012 Basel

Switzerland

Contact            Philipp Huebner, Ph.D.

Telephone        +41 61 385 25 27

Fax                  +41 61 385 25 09

 

Laboratorie IFRA

38 rue de l’industrie

BP 70192

67405 Illkirch Cedex

France

Contact            Philippe Rousselin, Ph.D.

Telephone        00 33 3 88 66 77 70

Fax                  00 33 3 88 66 37 90

 

Laboratorie IFRA

38 rue de l’industrie

BP 70192

67405 Illkirch Cedex

France

Contact            Philippe Rousselin, Ph.D.

Telephone        00 33 3 88 66 77 70

Fax                  00 33 3 88 66 37 90

 

Landesuntersuchungsanstalt fur das Gesundheits-und Veterinarwesen Sachsen

Sitz Dresden    

Amtliche Lebensmitteluberwachung      

Fachgebiet 6.6

Postfach 2002744

D – 01192 Dresden

Germany

Contact            Dr. Gerda Hempel

Telephone        +49-0351-8144-474

Fax                  +49-0351-8144-497

 

Mid-West Seed Services

236 32nd Avenue         

Brookings, SD  57006

Contact            Kalyn Brix-Davis

Telephone        605-692-7611

Fax                  605-692-7617

E-mail              kalynb@mwseed.com

 


National Food Institute Thailand

2008 Soi Charansanitwong 40

Charansanitwong Road, Bangyeekhan, Bangphlad

Bangkok, Thailand 10700

Contact            Phattraphorn Choo-in

Telephone        66(0)2886-8088

Fax                  66(0)28868106-7

E-mail              phattrapornc12@hotmail.com

 

National Institute of Biology

Vecna pot 111

1000 Ljubljana

Slovenia

Contact            Dr. Jana Zel

Telephone        +386 1 4233388

Fax                  +386 1 2573 847

E-Mail              jana.zel@nib.si

 

Niedersachsisches Landesamt fur Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit

Lebensmittelinstitut Braunschweig

Dresdenstrasse 2 + 6

38124 Braunschweig

Germany

Contact            Manuela Schulze, Ph.D.

Telephone        0531/6804 205

Fax                  0531/6804 201

E-mail              manuela.schulze@lua-bs.niedersachsen.de

 

Nippon Yuryo Kentei Kyokai Yokohama Laboratory

(Japan Oil Stuff Inspectors Corporation)          

Bankokubashi Bldg 5-26-1      

Kaigan-dori Naka-ku

231-0002,Yokohama

Japan

Contact            Ms Kumi Goto

Telephone        045-641-1037

Fax                  045-641-1038

E-mail              goto@nykk.or.jp

 

Ocimum Biosolutions, LLC

 8765 Guion Road, Suite #G

 Indianapolis, IN 46268

Contact            Sujata Pammi, Ph.D.

Telephone:        317-228-0600

Fax:                  317-228-0700

e-mail: sujata@ocimumbio.com

 


OMIC USA Inc.                                

3344 NW Industrial Street

Portland, OR 97210

Contact            Dr. Farin Hajar

Telephone        503-223-1497

Fax                  503-223-9436

E-mail              dna.us@omicnet.com

 

Reading Scientific Services Ltd.                                          

The Lord Zuckerman Research Centre

Whiteknights

Reading RG66LA

United Kingdom

Contact            Andrew P Tingey, PhD.

Telephone        +44 (0)118 986 8541

Fax                  +44 (0)118 986 8932

E-mail              andrew.p.tingey@rssl.com

 

ScanGene AB

P.O.Box 166

SE-230 53 Alnarp

Sweden

Contact            PeO Gummeson/Anders Dahlqvist

Tel:                   +46 40415321

Fax:                  +46 40415321

Mobile:             +46 702966603

e-mail: per.olov.gummeson@scangene.se

 

Silliker, Inc.

405 8th Ave SE                       

Cedar Rapids, IA  52401                    

Contact            Dr. Daniel Wetsch

Telephone        319-366-3570

Fax                  319-366-4018

E-mail              daniel.wetsch@silliker.com

 

Staatliches Veterinaeruntersuchungsamt

Zur Taubeneiche 10-12

D-59821 Arnsberg

Germany

Contact            Jochen Kilwinski, Ph.D.

Telephone        49-2931-809-220

Fax                  49-2031-809-290

E-mail              kilwinski@svia-arnsberg.nrw.de

 


Staatliches Veterinaeruntersuchungsamt Detmold                                    

Westerfeldstrasse l

D-32758 Detmold

Germany

Contact            Dr. Margit Hagen

Telephone        +49 (0)5231/911-740

Fax                  +49 (0)5231/911-503

E-mail              margit.hagen@svua-detmold.nrw.de

 

TECAM                                 

Rua Fabia, 59                                                              

Sao Paulo – SP – CEP:  05051-030

Brazil

Contact            Dr. Daniela Contri

Telephone        55 11 3873 2553

Fax                  55 11 3862 8954

E-mail              biomol@tecam.com.br

 

 

           

Thuringer Landesamt fur Lebensmittelsicherheit und Verbraucherschutz

Sitz Jena/Winterstein

Amtliche Lebensmitteluberwachung

Nauburger Str. 96 b

D-07743 Jena

Germany

 

 

Tobacco Research Board

Kutsaga Station

Airport Ring Road

Box 1909

Harare

Zimbabwe

Contact            Dr. Dahlia Garwe

Telephone        263 4 575290/4

Fax                  263 4 575288

E-mail              Dahlia_Garwe@kutsaga.co.zw