ArticlePlant biotechnology journal2016
Evolution of risk assessment strategies for food and feed uses of stacked GM events.
Article in Plant biotechnology journal, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative assessment of endogenous lipid transfer protein (LTP) level in genetically modified maize for its relevance in safety assessment.GM crops & food · 2026Article
- Assessment of the potential risks in SD rats gavaged with genetically modified yeast containing theFrontiers in veterinary science · 2024Article
- Regulatory policy on genetically modified breeding stack in key countries and the current status in Korea.Food science and biotechnology · 2021Review
- Update of Argentina's Regulatory Policies on the Environmental Risk Assessment.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2021Article
- Comparing agronomic and phenotypic plant characteristics between single and stacked events in soybean, maize, and cotton.PloS one · 2020Article
- How biological background assumptions influence scientific risk evaluation of stacked genetically modified plants: an analysis of research hypotheses and argumentations.Life sciences, society and policy · 2017Article
- Long-term T-DNA insert stability and transgene expression consistency in field propagated sugarcane.Plant molecular biology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Data requirements are not harmonized globally for the regulation of food and feed derived from stacked genetically modified (GM) events, produced by combining individual GM events through conventional breeding. The data required by some regulatory agencies have increased despite the absence of substantiated adverse effects to animals or humans from the consumption of GM crops. Data from studies conducted over a 15-year period for several stacked GM event maize (Zea mays L.) products (Bt11 × GA21, Bt11 × MIR604, MIR604 × GA21, Bt11 × MIR604 × GA21, Bt11 × MIR162 × GA21 and Bt11 × MIR604 × MIR162 × GA21), together with their component single events, are presented. These data provide evidence that no substantial changes in composition, protein expression or insert stability have occurred after combining the single events through conventional breeding. An alternative food and feed risk assessment strategy for stacked GM events is suggested based on a problem formulation approach that utilizes (i) the outcome of the single event risk assessments, and (ii) the potential for interactions in the stack, based on an understanding of the mode of action of the transgenes and their products.
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.