ReviewJournal of industrial microbiology & biotechnology2005
Risk mitigation of genetically modified bacteria and plants designed for bioremediation.
Review in Journal of industrial microbiology & biotechnology, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Bacteria in bioremediation of metal waste-contaminated soils across sub-saharan Africa: mechanisms, driving factors, and efficiency.Biodegradation · 2026Pooled it
- Environmental Release of Genetically Intervened Microorganisms: Towards a New Narrative.Microbial biotechnology · 2026Review
- The microbial strategies for the management of chemical pesticides: A comprehensive review.Current research in microbial sciences · 2026Review
- Advanced microbial engineering approaches for biodegradation of pharmaceutical pollutants.Biodegradation · 2025Review
- eCell Technology for Cell-Free Protein Synthesis, Biosensing, and Remediation.Advances in biochemical engineering/biotechnology · 2023Article
- Recent strategies of increasing metal tolerance and phytoremediation potential using genetic transformation of plants.Plant biotechnology reports · 2018Review
- Genetically modified microorganism Spingomonas paucimobilis UT26 for simultaneously degradation of methyl-parathion and γ-hexachlorocyclohexane.Ecotoxicology (London, England) · 2014Article
- Phytoremediation of polychlorinated biphenyls: new trends and promises.Environmental science & technology · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
While the possible advantages of bioremediation and phytoremediation, by both recombinant microbes and plants, have been extensively reviewed, the biosafety concerns have been less extensively treated. This article reviews the possible risks associated with the use of recombinant bacteria and plants for bioremediation, with particular emphasis on ways in which molecular genetics could contribute to risk mitigation. For example, genetic techniques exist that permit the site-specific excision of unnecessary DNA, so that only the transgenes of interest remain. Other mechanisms exist whereby the recombinant plants or bacteria contain conditional suicide genes that may be activated under certain conditions. These methods act to prevent the spread and survival of the transgenic bacteria or plants in the environment, and to prevent horizontal gene flow to wild or cultivated relatives. Ways in which these genetic technologies may be applied to risk mitigation in bioremediation and phytoremediation are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
15973534What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.