ArticleEvolutionary applications2016
Applying gene flow science to environmental policy needs: a boundary work perspective.
Article in Evolutionary applications, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Meeting Report on the Assisted Gene Flow and Climate Change Responses Workshop, Golden Gate National Recreation Area, CA, USA, 5-7 March 2025.Evolutionary applications · 2026Article
- Supporting the adaptive capacity of species through more effective knowledge exchange with conservation practitioners.Evolutionary applications · 2021Article
- Understanding managers' and scientists' perspectives on opportunities to achieve more evolutionarily enlightened management in conservation.Evolutionary applications · 2018Article
- Dissecting functional components of reproductive isolation among closely related sympatric species of theEvolutionary applications · 2017Article
- When gene flow really matters: gene flow in applied evolutionary biology.Evolutionary applications · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One application of gene flow science is the policy arena. In this article, we describe two examples in which the topic of gene flow has entered into the U.S. national environmental policymaking process: regulation of genetically engineered crops and clarification of the jurisdictional scope of the Clean Water Act. We summarize both current scientific understanding and the legal context within which gene flow science has relevance. We also discuss the process by which scientific knowledge has been synthesized and communicated to decision-makers in these two contexts utilizing the concept of 'boundary work'. Boundary organizations, the work they engage in to bridge the worlds of science, policy, and practice, and the boundary objects they produce to translate scientific knowledge existed in both examples. However, the specific activities and attributes of the objects produced varied based on the needs of the decision-makers. We close with suggestions for how scientists can contribute to or engage in boundary work with policymakers.
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.