Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20349115›Full record

ArticlePlant molecular biology2010

Natural variation explains most transcriptomic changes among maize plants of MON810 and comparable non-GM varieties subjected to two N-fertilization farming practices.

Anna Coll, Anna Nadal, Rosa Collado, Gemma Capellades, Mikael Kubista, Joaquima Messeguer, Maria Pla

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Plant molecular biology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Tempest in a tea pot: How did the public conversation on genetically modified crops drift so far from the facts?Journal of medical toxicology : official journal of the American College of Medical Toxicology · 2014
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Anna CollInstitut de Tecnologia Agroalimentària (INTEA), Universitat de Girona, Campus Montilivi, EPS-I, Girona, Spain.
Anna Nadal
Rosa Collado
Gemma Capellades
Mikael Kubista
Joaquima Messeguer
Maria Pla

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The introduction of genetically modified organisms (GMO) in many countries follows strict regulations to ensure that only safety-tested products are marketed. Over the last few years, targeted approaches have been complemented by profiling methods to assess possible unintended effects of transformation. Here we used a commercial (Affymertix) microarray platform (i.e. allowing assessing the expression of approximately 1/3 of the genes of maize) to evaluate transcriptional differences between commercial MON810 GM maize and non-transgenic crops in real agricultural conditions, in a region where about 70% of the maize grown was MON810. To consider natural variation in gene expression in relation to biotech plants we took two common MON810/non-GM variety pairs as examples, and two farming practices (conventional and low-nitrogen fertilization). MON810 and comparable non-GM varieties grown in the field have very low numbers of sequences with differential expression, and their identity differs among varieties. Furthermore, we show that the differences between a given MON810 variety and the non-GM counterpart do not appear to depend to any major extent on the assayed cultural conditions, even though these differences may slightly vary between the conditions. In our study, natural variation explained most of the variability in gene expression among the samples. Up to 37.4% was dependent upon the variety (obtained by conventional breeding) and 31.9% a result of the fertilization treatment. In contrast, the MON810 GM character had a very minor effect (9.7%) on gene expression in the analyzed varieties and conditions, even though similar cryIA(b) expression levels were detected in the two MON810 varieties and nitrogen treatments. This indicates that transcriptional differences of conventionally-bred varieties and under different environmental conditions should be taken into account in safety assessment studies of GM plants.

Indexed as

Gene Expression ProfilingAgricultureBacillus thuringiensis ToxinsBacterial ProteinsEndotoxinsFertilizersGene Expression Regulation, PlantHemolysin ProteinsNitrogenOligonucleotide Array Sequence AnalysisPlants, Genetically ModifiedPrincipal Component AnalysisReverse Transcriptase Polymerase Chain ReactionSpecies SpecificityZea maysBacillus thuringiensis ToxinsBacterial ProteinsEndotoxinsFertilizersHemolysin Proteinsinsecticidal crystal protein, Bacillus ThuringiensisNitrogen

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.