Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29240920›Full record

ArticleFEMS microbiology ecology2018

An appeal for a more evidence based approach to biopesticide safety in the EU.

Ben Raymond, Brian A Federici

Abstract readLetterComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in FEMS microbiology ecology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 47% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Elucidating the genomic history of commercially usedFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2023
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Ben RaymondUniversity of Exeter, Penryn campus, Penryn, TR10 9FE, UK.
Brian A FedericiDepartment of Entomology and Institute for Integrative Genome Biology, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA 92521, USA.
University of California, Riverside · USUniversity of Exeter · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

EFSA responded to our perspective article on the safe use of the insect pathogen Bacillus thrurigiensis (Bt). In doing so they admitted that there is no direct evidence to suggest that B. thuringiensis can cause diarrhoea. They nevertheless continue to repeat the assertion that Bt cannot be distinguished from Bacillus cereus, even though nearly all Bt strains, and certainly all biopesticide strains, can be distinguished from B. cereus using multi-locus sequencing typing. EFSA also continue to repeat the unsupported and speculative hypothesis that Bt strains could be capable of causing cryptic infections in humans. This hypothesis is very much against the weight of all available safety and epidemiological data. Moreover, genotyping schemes of B. cereus group clinical infections also show that biopesticide strains have never been associated with human infections. Our position that Bt biopesticides and Bt isolates from the clade dominated by invertebrate pathogens are incapable of causing infections in humans is well supported by the international community of scientists familiar with the data on the safety of Bt after more than four decades of extensive use in agriculture and forestry.

Indexed as

Bacillus thuringiensisInsecticidesAnimalsBacillus cereusBiological Control AgentsHumansInsectaBiological Control AgentsInsecticidesBacillus thuringiensisbiological safetymicrobial pesticiderisk assessment

Identifiers

PMID29240920
OpenAlexW2773690814

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.