ArticleJournal of experimental botany2019
Communicating the risks of genetically modified organisms: lessons learnt from an Irish field of cisgenic potatoes.
Article in Journal of experimental botany, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Sublethal effects of potato plant defenses induced via synthetic elicitors against the Colorado potato beetle (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae).Journal of insect science (Online) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As plant scientists we are all too familiar with the generic commentary that is often associated with the development or use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in agricultural systems, but through fact-driven communication, constructive engagement can be achieved. The EU-funded 'AMIGA' project, one element of which involved assessing the impact of a GM potato (previously engineered for late blight resistance using cisgenics) with field trials in Ireland, provides a valuable case study in how this can come about. The experiences detailed highlight important lessons learnt relating to the presentation of scientific evidence in a non-scientific format and the necessity for greater integration of biological and social sciences to support the participation of biological researchers in public engagement exercises.
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.