Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27246007›Full record

ReviewTransgenic research2016

Strategies to enable the adoption of animal biotechnology to sustainably improve global food safety and security.

Mark Tizard, Eric Hallerman, Scott Fahrenkrug, Martina Newell-McGloughlin, John Gibson, Frans de Loos, Stefan Wagner, Götz Laible, Jae Yong Han, Michael D'Occhio and 6 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Transgenic research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Fourth Report on Chicken Genes and Chromosomes 2022.Cytogenetic and genome research · 2022
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Primordial germ cell-mediated transgenesis and genome editing in birds.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2018
    Review
  9. Genome Modification Technologies and Their Applications in Avian Species.International journal of molecular sciences · 2017
    Review
  10. 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

16 authors.

Mark TizardCSIRO Health and Biosecurity, Geelong, Australia.
Eric HallermanVirginia Polytechic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA, USA.
Scott FahrenkrugUniversity of Minnesota, Recombinetics, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Martina Newell-McGloughlinUniversity of California Davis, Davis, CA, USA.
John GibsonUniversity of New England, Armidale, Australia.
Frans de LoosFlow Biotech, Soest, The Netherlands.
Stefan WagnerAgResearch, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Götz LaibleAgResearch, Hamilton, New Zealand.
Jae Yong HanSeoul National University, Seoul, Korea.
Michael D'OcchioUniversity of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Lisa KellyFood Standards Australia New Zealand, Canberra, Australia.
John LowenthalCSIRO Health and Biosecurity, Geelong, Australia.
Kari GobiusCSIRO Food and Nutrition, Werribee, Australia.
Primal SilvaForeign Animal Inspection Agency, Winnipeg, Canada.
Caitlin CooperCSIRO Health and Biosecurity, Geelong, Australia.
Tim DoranCSIRO Health and Biosecurity, Geelong, Australia. Timothy.Doran@csiro.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ability to generate transgenic animals has existed for over 30 years, and from those early days many predicted that the technology would have beneficial applications in agriculture. Numerous transgenic agricultural animals now exist, however to date only one product from a transgenic animal has been approved for the food chain, due in part to cumbersome regulations. Recently, new techniques such as precision breeding have emerged, which enables the introduction of desired traits without the use of transgenes. The rapidly growing human population, environmental degradation, and concerns related to zoonotic and pandemic diseases have increased pressure on the animal agriculture sector to provide a safe, secure and sustainable food supply. There is a clear need to adopt transgenic technologies as well as new methods such as gene editing and precision breeding to meet these challenges and the rising demand for animal products. To achieve this goal, cooperation, education, and communication between multiple stakeholders-including scientists, industry, farmers, governments, trade organizations, NGOs and the public-is necessary. This report is the culmination of concepts first discussed at an OECD sponsored conference and aims to identify the main barriers to the adoption of animal biotechnology, tactics for navigating those barriers, strategies to improve public perception and trust, as well as industry engagement, and actions for governments and trade organizations including the OECD to harmonize regulations and trade agreements. Specifically, the report focuses on animal biotechnologies that are intended to improve breeding and genetics and currently are not routinely used in commercial animal agriculture. We put forward recommendations on how scientists, regulators, and trade organizations can work together to ensure that the potential benefits of animal biotechnology can be realized to meet the future needs of agriculture to feed the world.

Indexed as

Food SafetyAnimalsAnimals, Genetically ModifiedBiotechnologyBreedingCrops, AgriculturalFood SupplyHumansAnimal biotechnologyFood safetyGene editingPrecision breedingRegulationTransgenic

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.