ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2021
Revisions to USDA biotechnology regulations: The SECURE rule.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 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
28 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Environmental Risk Assessment and Confinement of Genetically Engineered Trees with an Emphasis on Vegetative Reproduction.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- CRISPR/Cas9 Mediated Genome Editing for Enhancing Abiotic Stress Tolerance in Rice: An Omics Guided Perspective.Molecular biotechnology · 2026Review
- Genome editing and food safety: bridging the validation gap.NPJ science of food · 2026Review
- Genome editing between wonder and rejection.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Molecular phylogenetics and evolutionary history ofFrontiers in plant science · 2026Review
- Cis-regulatory elements in CAMTA-mediated stress signalling: mechanisms and prospects for CRISPR-based crop improvement.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Review
- Beyond GMOs: transgene-free gene-edited crops for global food security.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Review
- Next-generation CRISPR systems and advanced delivery paradigms for precision crop improvement: a comparative case study in sugar beet (Frontiers in plant science · 2026Review
- Biosurfactants as next-generation antimicrobials: mechanistic insights and applications in antibiofilm strategies for combatting antimicrobial resistance.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Review
- A roadmap to understanding and anticipating microbial gene transfer in soil communities.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2025Review
- Genome editing in maize and sorghum: A comprehensive review of CRISPR/Cas9 and emerging technologies.The plant genome · 2025Review
- Design and regulation of engineered bacteria for environmental release.Nature microbiology · 2025Review
- Regulatory challenges and global trade implications of genome editing in agriculture.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Biotechnology executive order opens door for regulatory reform and social acceptance of genetically engineered microbes in agriculture.GM crops & food · 2024Article
- The Global Advance of Genome-Edited Plants to the Market: The Key Role of Chile in Its Development.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Creating saponin-free yellow pea seeds byPlant direct · 2024Article
- Altering Specificity and Autoactivity of Plant Immune Receptors Sr33 and Sr50 Via a Rational Engineering Approach.Molecular plant-microbe interactions : MPMI · 2023Article
- From Transgenesis to Genome Editing in Crop Improvement: Applications, Marketing, and Legal Issues.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Parameters, practices, and preferences for regulatory review of emerging biotechnology products in food and agriculture.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2023Article
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
In keeping with the directive in Executive Order 13874 (Modernizing the Regulatory Framework for Agricultural Biotechnology Products) to adopt regulatory approaches that are proportionate to risk and avoid arbitrary distinctions across like products, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) revised its biotechnology regulations by promulgating the Sustainable, Ecological, Consistent, Uniform, Responsible, and Efficient (SECURE) rule. Specifically, the SECURE rule 1) establishes exemptions for plants modified by genetic engineering where the modification could otherwise have been made through conventional breeding, 2) uses risk posed by the introduced trait to determine whether an organism is regulated, rather than relying on whether the organism was developed using a plant pest, and 3) provides a mechanism for a rapid initial review to efficiently distinguish plants developed using genetic engineering that do not pose plausible pathways to increased plant pest risk from those that do. As a result of the focused oversight on potentially riskier crops developed using genetic engineering, USDA is expected to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of its oversight program. The reduced regulatory burden is expected to promote innovation by expanding the number and diversity of developers to include smaller businesses and academics and to increase the number and variety of traits being developed through biotechnology.
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.