ReviewPest management science2021
Biosafety of bee pollinators in genetically modified agro-ecosystems: Current approach and further development in the EU.
Review in Pest management science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- The buzz about honey-based biosurveys.npj biodiversity · 2024Review
- Survivorship and food consumption of immatures and adults of Apis mellifera and Scaptotrigona bipunctata exposed to genetically modified eucalyptus pollen.Transgenic research · 2023Article
- Double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) technology to control forest insect pests and fungal pathogens: challenges and opportunities.Functional & integrative genomics · 2023Review
- Pleiotropic effects of recombinant protease inhibitors in plants.Frontiers in plant science · 2022Review
- RNAs - a new frontier in crop protection.Current opinion in biotechnology · 2021Review
- dsRNA-Mediated Pest Management ofInsects · 2021Article
- RNA Interference-Based Forest Protection Products (FPPs) Against Wood-Boring Coleopterans: Hope or Hype?Frontiers in plant science · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Bee pollinators are an important guild delivering a fundamental input to European agriculture due to the ecological service they provide to crops in addition to the direct economic revenues from apiculture. Bee populations are declining in Europe as a result of the effects of several environmental stressors, both natural and of anthropic origin. Efforts are ongoing in the European Union (EU) to improve monitoring and management of pollinator populations to arrest further declines. Genetically modified (GM) crops are currently cultivated in a limited area in Europe, and an environmental risk assessment (ERA) is required prior to their authorization for cultivation. The possible impacts of GM crops on pollinators are deemed relevant for the ERA. Existing ecotoxicological studies indicate that traits currently expressed in insect-resistant GM plants are unlikely to represent a risk for pollinators. However, new mechanisms of insect resistance are being introduced into GM plants, including novel combinations of Cry toxins and double strand RNA (dsRNA), and an ERA is required to consider lethal and sublethal effects of these new products on nontarget species, including insect pollinators. The evaluation of indirect effects linked to the changes in management practices (e.g. for herbicide-tolerant GM crops) is an important component of EU regulations and a requirement for ERA. This paper reviews current approaches used to test the sensitivity of pollinators to GM plants and their products to determine whether sufficient data are being provided on novel GM plants to satisfy EU risk assessment requirements. © 2021 The Authors. Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
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.