Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29377554›Full record

ReviewPest management science2018

Improved insect-proofing: expressing double-stranded RNA in chloroplasts.

Julia Bally, Elane Fishilevich, Andrew J Bowling, Heather E Pence, Kenneth E Narva, Peter M Waterhouse

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pest management science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Stabilized Double-Stranded RNA Strategy Improves Cotton Resistance to CBW (International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
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

6 authors.

Julia BallyCentre for Tropical Crops and Biocommodities, QUT, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Elane FishilevichDow AgroSciences, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Andrew J BowlingDow AgroSciences, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Heather E PenceDow AgroSciences, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Kenneth E NarvaDow AgroSciences, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Peter M WaterhouseCentre for Tropical Crops and Biocommodities, QUT, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2812-3753

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RNA interference (RNAi) was discovered almost 20 years ago and has been exploited worldwide to silence genes in plants and animals. A decade later, it was found that transforming plants with an RNAi construct targeting an insect gene could protect the plant against feeding by that insect. Production of double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) in a plant to affect the viability of a herbivorous animal is termed trans-kingdom RNAi (TK-RNAi). Since this pioneering work, there have been many further examples of successful TK-RNAi, but also reports of failed attempts and unrepeatable experiments. Recently, three laboratories have shown that producing dsRNA in a plant's chloroplast, rather than in its cellular cytoplasm, is a very effective way of delivering TK-RNAi. Our review examines this potentially game-changing approach and compares it with other transgenic insect-proofing schemes. © 2018 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

Indexed as

RNA InterferenceAnimalsChloroplastsGenes, InsectInsect ControlPlants, Genetically ModifiedRNA, Double-StrandedRNA, Double-StrandedChloroplastKingdomRNAiTrans

Identifiers

PMID29377554
PMCPMC6055657

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.