ArticleTransgenic research2011
Recommendations for the design of laboratory studies on non-target arthropods for risk assessment of genetically engineered plants.
Article in Transgenic research, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 89 papers.
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
89 citing papers in PubMed.
- Environmental risk assessment of the Cry1B.34.1, Cry1B.61.1, and IPD083Cb proteins to non-target organisms.GM crops & food · 2025Article
- Effect of Bt-Cry1Ab Maize Commercialization on Arthropod Community Biodiversity in Southwest China.Insects · 2025Article
- Ecological risk assessment for Cry1Da_7, Cry1B.3 and Vip3Cb1 proteins expressed in MON 89151 cotton: an insect-protected cotton with targeted activity against Lepidoptera.Transgenic research · 2025Article
- Toxicological and Functional Assessment of Minicell-Encapsulated dsRNA on Biocontrol Agents in Agriculture.ACS environmental Au · 2025Article
- An environmental risk assessment of IPD079Ea: a protein derived fromGM crops & food · 2024Article
- Modernizing and harmonizing regulatory data requirements for genetically modified crops-perspectives from a workshop.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Review
- Expression of Cry1Ab/2Aj Protein in Genetically Engineered Maize Plants and Its Transfer in the Arthropod Food Web.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Response of theGenes · 2023Article
- Survivorship and food consumption of immatures and adults of Apis mellifera and Scaptotrigona bipunctata exposed to genetically modified eucalyptus pollen.Transgenic research · 2023Article
- Neutral Dietary Effects of Two MicroRNAs, Csu-Novel-260 and Csu-Mir-14, on the Non-Target ArthropodPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Characterization of the Spectrum of Activity of IPD079Ea: A Protein Derived From Ophioglossum pendulum (Ophioglossales: Ophioglossaceae) With Activity Against Western Corn Rootworm [Diabrotica virgifera virgifera (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae)].Journal of economic entomology · 2022Article
- Negligible Impact of Drought-Resistant Genetically Modified Maize on Arthropod Community Structure Observed in a 2-Year Field Investigation.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- No Adverse Effects of Stacked Bacillus thuringiensis Maize on the Midge Chironomus riparius.Environmental toxicology and chemistry · 2022Article
- RNAi for Western Corn Rootworm Management: Lessons Learned, Challenges, and Future Directions.Insects · 2022Review
- Article
- A new method for evaluating the effects of insecticidal proteins expressed by transgenic plants on ectoparasitoid of target pest.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2020Article
- Advancing ecological risk assessment on genetically engineered breeding stacks with combined insect-resistance traits.Transgenic research · 2020Article
- Sublethal Endpoints in Non-target Organism Testing for Insect-Active GE Crops.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
- Assessing the Risks of Topically Applied dsRNA-Based Products to Non-target Arthropods.Frontiers in plant science · 2020Article
- Using problem formulation for fit-for-purpose pre-market environmental risk assessments of regulated stressors.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2019Article
29 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper provides recommendations on experimental design for early-tier laboratory studies used in risk assessments to evaluate potential adverse impacts of arthropod-resistant genetically engineered (GE) plants on non-target arthropods (NTAs). While we rely heavily on the currently used proteins from Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) in this discussion, the concepts apply to other arthropod-active proteins. A risk may exist if the newly acquired trait of the GE plant has adverse effects on NTAs when they are exposed to the arthropod-active protein. Typically, the risk assessment follows a tiered approach that starts with laboratory studies under worst-case exposure conditions; such studies have a high ability to detect adverse effects on non-target species. Clear guidance on how such data are produced in laboratory studies assists the product developers and risk assessors. The studies should be reproducible and test clearly defined risk hypotheses. These properties contribute to the robustness of, and confidence in, environmental risk assessments for GE plants. Data from NTA studies, collected during the analysis phase of an environmental risk assessment, are critical to the outcome of the assessment and ultimately the decision taken by regulatory authorities on the release of a GE plant. Confidence in the results of early-tier laboratory studies is a precondition for the acceptance of data across regulatory jurisdictions and should encourage agencies to share useful information and thus avoid redundant testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.