ReviewFrontiers in plant science2019
Safety Assessment of Genetically Modified Feed: Is There Any Difference From Food?
Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- The global scientific consensus on genetically modified crop risk assessments.GM crops & food · 2026Article
- Genetically Modified Plants in Agriculture.Biology · 2026Review
- Relative safety of glyphosate-resistant maize (CC-2) in rats.GM crops & food · 2025Article
- Investigation of the toxicity and safety concerns of transgenic maize seeds expressing immunogenic F and HN protein genes against Newcastle disease virus.Toxicology research · 2024Article
- Development and collaborative validation of an event-specific quantitative real-time PCR method for detection of genetically modified CC-2 maize.Frontiers in plant science · 2024Article
- Processes for regulating genetically modified and gene edited plants.GM crops & food · 2023Review
- Green Biologics: Harnessing the Power of Plants to Produce Pharmaceuticals.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Epichloë fungal endophyte interactions in perennial ryegrass (Lolium perenne L.) modified to accumulate foliar lipids for increased energy density.BMC plant biology · 2023Article
- Hotspots and bottlenecks for the enhancement of the environmental sustainability of pig systems, with emphasis on European pig systems.Porcine health management · 2023Review
- A Prospective Review on Selectable Marker-Free Genome Engineered Rice: Past, Present and Future Scientific Realm.Frontiers in genetics · 2022Review
- Genetically engineered crops for sustainably enhanced food production systems.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Review
- Three strategies of transgenic manipulation for crop improvement.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Review
- Genetically Modified Plants: Nutritious, Sustainable, yet Underrated.The Journal of nutrition · 2020Article
- Compositional analysis of transgenic Bt-chickpea resistant toGM crops & food · 2020Article
- Molecular and Toxicity Analyses of White Granulated Sugar and Other Processing Products Derived From Transgenic Sugarcane.Frontiers in plant science · 2020Article
- Structural Aspects of DNA Repair and Recombination in Crop Improvement.Frontiers in genetics · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Food security is one of major concerns for the growing global population. Modern agricultural biotechnologies, such as genetic modification, are a possible solution through enabling an increase of production, more efficient use of natural resources, and reduced environmental impacts. However, new crop varieties with altered genetic materials may be subjected to safety assessments to fulfil the regulatory requirements, prior to marketing. The aim of the assessment is to evaluate the impact of products from the new crop variety on human, animal, and the environmental health. Although, many studies on the risk assessment of genetically modified (GM) food have been published, little consideration to GM feedstuff has been given, despite that between 70 to 90% of all GM crops and their biomass are used as animal feed. In addition, in some GM plants such as forages that are only used for animal feeds, the assessment of the genetic modification may be of relevance only to livestock feeding. In this article, the regulatory framework of GM crops intended for animal feed is reviewed using the available information on GM food as the baseline. Although, the majority of techniques used for the safety assessment of GM food can be used in GM feed, many plant parts used for livestock feeding are inedible to humans. Therefore, the concentration of novel proteins in different plant tissues and level of exposure to GM feedstuff in the diet of target animals should be considered. A further development of specific methodologies for the assessment of GM crops intended for animal consumption is required, in order to provide a more accurate and standardized assessment to the GM feed safety.
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.