Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40243930›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2025

Environmental Applications of GM Microorganisms: Tiny Critters Posing Huge Challenges for Risk Assessment and Governance.

Michael F Eckerstorfer, Marion Dolezel, Marianne Miklau, Anita Greiter, Andreas Heissenberger, Karen Kastenhofer, Freya Schulz, Kristin Hagen, Mathias Otto, Margret Engelhard

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

10 authors.

Michael F EckerstorferTeam Landuse & Biosafety Unit, Umweltbundesamt-Environment Agency Austria, Spittelauer Lände 5, 1090 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-6827-904X
Marion DolezelTeam Landuse & Biosafety Unit, Umweltbundesamt-Environment Agency Austria, Spittelauer Lände 5, 1090 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-0037-6203
Marianne MiklauTeam Landuse & Biosafety Unit, Umweltbundesamt-Environment Agency Austria, Spittelauer Lände 5, 1090 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-6668-2890
Anita GreiterTeam Landuse & Biosafety Unit, Umweltbundesamt-Environment Agency Austria, Spittelauer Lände 5, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Andreas HeissenbergerTeam Landuse & Biosafety Unit, Umweltbundesamt-Environment Agency Austria, Spittelauer Lände 5, 1090 Vienna, Austria.
Karen KastenhoferInstitute of Technology Assessment, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Bäckerstraße 13, 1010 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-5843-6489
Freya SchulzInstitute of Technology Assessment, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Bäckerstraße 13, 1010 Vienna, Austria.
Kristin HagenDivision Assessment Synthetic Biology, Enforcement Genetic Engineering Act, Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Konstantinstrasse 110, 53179 Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4678-478X
Mathias OttoDivision Assessment Synthetic Biology, Enforcement Genetic Engineering Act, Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Konstantinstrasse 110, 53179 Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-3161-5625
Margret EngelhardDivision Assessment Synthetic Biology, Enforcement Genetic Engineering Act, Federal Agency for Nature Conservation, Konstantinstrasse 110, 53179 Bonn, Germany.

Funding

German Federal Agency for Nature Conservation FKZ 3522841700
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, the interest in developing genetically modified microorganisms (GMMs), including GMMs developed by genome editing, for use in the environment has significantly increased. However, the scientific knowledge on the ecology of such GMMs is severely limited. There is also little experience at the hands of regulators on how to evaluate the environmental safety of GMMs and on how to assess whether they provide sustainable alternatives to current (agricultural) production systems. This review analyzes two different GMM applications, GM microalgae for biofuel production and nitrogen-fixing GM soil bacteria for use as biofertilizers. We assess the challenges posed by such GMMs for regulatory environmental risk assessment (ERA) against the background of the GMO legislation existing in the European Union (EU). Based on our analysis, we present recommendations for ERA and the monitoring of GMM applications, and in particular for the improvement of the existing EU guidance. We also explore whether existing approaches for technology assessment can provide a framework for the broader assessment of GMM applications. To this end, we recommend developing and implementing an evidence-based sustainability analysis and other methods of technology assessment to support decision making and to address broader societal concerns linked to the use of GMM applications in the environment.

Indexed as

Organisms, Genetically ModifiedAgricultureBacteriaBiofuelsEuropean UnionMicroalgaeRisk AssessmentSoil MicrobiologyBiofuelsbiosafetyenvironmental risk assessmentERAgenetically modified microorganismsGM biofertilizerGMMGM microalgaegovernancemonitoringsustainability assessmentTAtechnology assessment

Identifiers

PMID40243930
PMCPMC11989004

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.