Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35663796›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in genome editing2022

Enabling Genome Editing for Enhanced Agricultural Sustainability.

Felicity Keiper, Ana Atanassova

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in genome editing, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Felicity KeiperBASF Australia Ltd., Southbank, VIC, Australia.
Ana AtanassovaBASF Belgium Coordination Center, Technologiepark-Zwijnaarde, Ghent, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Agricultural sustainability encompasses environmental, social, and economic aspects, all of which are continually shifting due changing environmental pressures and societal expectations. A range of strategies are required to address these challenges, and these include the use of innovation and adoption of the best available practices and technologies. Advances in biotechnologies, including genome editing, and their application in plant breeding and research are expected to provide a range of benefits that contribute to all aspects of agricultural sustainability. However, adoption of these technologies needs to be supported by proportionate, coherent, forward-looking, and adaptable policies and regulatory approaches. In this Perspective, we reflect on the regulatory challenges associated with commercialising a transgenic crop, and developments thus far in providing regulatory clarity for genome edited crops. We aim to demonstrate that much remains to be done to shift towards a more proportionate and enabling approach before the potential benefits of genome edited crops can be realised. The implications of precautionary and disproportionate regulation are also discussed.

Indexed as

agricultural sustainabilitybiotech cropsbiotech regulationcrop improvementgenome editingplant breeding

Identifiers

PMID35663796
PMCPMC9157430

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.