Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38607999›Full record

ReviewJournal of agricultural and food chemistry2024

Immunoassays and Mass Spectrometry for Determination of Protein Concentrations in Genetically Modified Crops.

Yanfei Wang, Mark Bednarcik, Christopher Ament, Matthew L Cheever, Simone Cummings, Tao Geng, Dulan B Gunasekara, Norma Houston, Kristen Kouba, Zi Liu and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of agricultural and food chemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Yanfei WangBayer CropScience, 700 Chesterfield Pkwy West, Chesterfield, Missouri 63017, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2030-2044
Mark BednarcikSyngenta Crop Protection, Limited Liability Company, 9 Davis Drive, Post Office Box 12257, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709-2257, United States.
Christopher AmentEurofins Food Chemistry Testing Madison, Incorporated, 6304 Ronald Reagan Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin 53704, United States.
Matthew L CheeverBASF Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5353-4880
Simone CummingsSyngenta Crop Protection, Limited Liability Company, 9 Davis Drive, Post Office Box 12257, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709-2257, United States.
Tao GengBayer CropScience, 700 Chesterfield Pkwy West, Chesterfield, Missouri 63017, United States.
Dulan B GunasekaraBASF Corporation, 26 Davis Drive, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27709, United States.
Norma HoustonCorteva Agriscience, Johnston, Iowa 50131, United States.
Kristen KoubaCorteva Agriscience, Johnston, Iowa 50131, United States.
Zi LiuBayer CropScience, 700 Chesterfield Pkwy West, Chesterfield, Missouri 63017, United States.
Jeffrey ShipparEurofins Food Chemistry Testing Madison, Incorporated, 6304 Ronald Reagan Avenue, Madison, Wisconsin 53704, United States.
Triangle · USCovestro (United States) · USCorteva (United States) · USMadison Group (United States) · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Quantifying protein levels in genetically modified (GM) crops is crucial in every phase of development, deregulation, and seed production. Immunoassays, particularly enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, have been the primary protein quantitation techniques for decades within the industry due to their efficiency, adaptability, and credibility. Newer immunoassay technologies like Meso Scale Discovery and Luminex offer enhanced sensitivity and multiplexing capabilities. While mass spectrometry (MS) has been widely used for small molecules and protein detection in the pharmaceutical and agricultural industries (e.g., biomarkers, endogenous allergens), its use in quantifying protein levels in GM crops has been limited. However, as trait portfolios for GM crop have expanded, MS has been increasingly adopted due to its comparable sensitivity, increased specificity, and multiplexing capabilities. This review contrasts the benefits and limitations of immunoassays and MS technologies for protein measurement in GM crops, considering factors such as cost, convenience, and specific analytical needs. Ultimately, both techniques are suitable for assessing protein concentrations in GM crops, with MS offering complementary capabilities to immunoassays. This comparison aims to provide insights into selecting between these techniques based on the user's end point needs.

Indexed as

GM cropsimmunoassayLC−MS/MSmass spectrometryprotein concentrationquantificationquantitation

Identifiers

PMID38607999
PMCPMC11046482
OpenAlexW4394743810

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.