SynthesisTransgenic research2020
The effect of Bt crops on soil invertebrates: a systematic review and quantitative meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Transgenic research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does the growing of Bt maize change abundance or ecological function of non-target animals compared to the growing of non-GM maize? A systematic review.Environmental evidence · 2022Pooled it
- An environmental risk assessment of maize containing event, DP-Ø51291-2, with activity against corn rootworms (GM crops & food · 2025Article
- Review
- Nano-pesticides: the lunch-box principle-deadly goodies (semio-chemical functionalised nanoparticles that deliver pesticide only to target species).Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2022Article
- Development of TransgenicPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The ongoing debate about the ecological effects of Bt-crops calls for thorough reviews about the impact on soil biodiversity and their ecosystem services. Transgenic Bt-crops have been genetically modified by inserting a Bacillus thuriengensis gene so the plant expresses a Cry toxin aimed for insect crop pests. Non-target soil invertebrates are particularly recognized for their contribution to plant nutrient availability and turnover of organic matter and it is therefore relevant to protect these invertebrate taxa. A number of studies have compared the population abundance and biomass of soil invertebrates in agricultural fields planted with genetically modified Bt crops and their conventional counterparts. Here, were review and analyze a selection of studies on Protista, nematodes, Collembola, mites, enchytraeids, and earthworms systematically to empower the evidence for asking the question whether population abundances and biomasses of soil invertebrates are changed by Bt crops compared to conventional crops. 6110 titles were captured, of which 38 studies passed our inclusion criteria, and a final number of 22 publications were subject to data extraction. A database with 2046 records was compiled covering 36 locations and the Bt types Cry1Ab, Cry1Ac, Cry3Bb1 and Cry3Aa. Comparative effect sizes in terms of Hedges' g were calculated irrespectively of statistical significance of effects of the source studies. Cry effects on populations were compared across the studies in a meta-analysis employing a hierarchical Bayesian approach of weighted data according to the level of replication. The temporal development of effect sizes was modelled, thereby taking into account the variable duration of the field experiments. There was considerable variation among soil invertebrate orders, but the sample size was insufficient and the sample heterogeneity too large to draw any credible conclusions on the effect of Cry at the order level. However, across orders there was no significant effect of Cry on soil invertebrates.
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.