Table A.1.

Summary of subquestions (i.e. risk hypotheses (RHs)) for each assessment question (AQ) that will be answered in this scientific assessment, and relevant endpoints to consider for testing RHs

AQs	RHs		Relevant endpoints (information) to test (corroborate or falsify/reject) RHs
1	1a	Teosinte does not occur in EU areas where genetically modified (GM) maize is grown	Spatial overlap between GM maize cultivation and teosinte occurrence
	1b	Teosinte (occurring in the EU) does not hybridise successfully with GM maize under EU field conditions	– Hybridisation rate (e.g. number of (viable and fertile) hybrid seeds/plants relative to the number of non‐hybrid ones) – Gene introgression6
	1c	GM teosinte hybrid progeny is not more persistent and invasive than non‐GM teosinte hybrid progeny under EU field conditions	– Vegetative vigour – Reproductive fitness and seed production – Abundance and geographical distribution of GM teosinte hybrid progeny (that has acquired the transgene from GM maize through vertical gene flow)
	1d	Non‐target organism (NTO) does not use GM teosinte hybrid progeny as host plant/food source under EU field conditions	Host plant suitability
	1e	NTO is not adversely affected by exposure to GM teosinte hybrid progeny under EU field conditions	NTO mortality, development time, growth, weight, fecundity, fertility, number of progeny and progeny survival
	1f	Target organism (TO) of Bt‐maize does not use GM teosinte hybrid progeny as host plant/food source under EU field conditions	Host plant suitability
2	2a	Transgene product in GM teosinte hybrid progeny is high dose under EU field conditions	– Concentration of transgene product in relevant plant parts of GM teosinte hybrid progeny – TO mortality
	2b	GM teosinte hybrid progeny does not occur in non‐Bt‐maize refuge areas, nor in Bt‐maize fields in the EU	Plant/population density of GM teosinte hybrid progeny in non‐Bt‐maize refuge areas planted near or adjacent to, or within Bt‐maize fields