ReviewGenes2025
Updates on the Regulatory Framework of Edited Organisms in Brazil: A Molecular Revolution in Brazilian Agribusiness.
Review in Genes, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Beyond GMOs: transgene-free gene-edited crops for global food security.Frontiers in plant science · 2026Review
- CRISPR/Cas9 in soybean research: a measured leap toward genetic refinement.Frontiers in genome editing · 2026Review
- Analysis of the public perception and acceptance of gene-editing technology and gene-edited agricultural products in South Korea.GM crops & food · 2025Article
- The Enhancement of Fungal Disease Resistance in Major Staple Crops Using CRISPR-Cas Technology.Genes · 2025Review
- CRISPR-Cas Gene Editing Technology in Potato.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Genome editing technologies have revolutionized the production of microorganisms, plants, and animals with phenotypes of interest to agriculture. Editing previously sequenced genomes allows for the punctual, discreet, precise, and accurate alteration of DNA for genetic analysis, genotyping, and phenotyping, as well as the production of edited organisms for academic and industrial purposes, among many other objectives. In this context, genome editing technologies have been causing a revolution in Brazilian agriculture. Thanks to the publication of Normative Resolution No. 16 (in Portuguese Resolução Normativa No. 16-RN16) in 2018, Brazilian regulatory authorities have adapted to the new genetic manipulation technologies available to the scientific community. This review aims to describe the effects of updates to the regulatory framework for edited organisms in Brazil and to point out their impacts on research and development of emerging technologies in the Brazilian agricultural sector. The implementation of RN16 rationalized the regulatory aspects regarding the production, manipulation, exploration and commercial release of edited organisms and led to the faster, cheaper and safer obtaining of edited technologies, which are more productive and better adapted to different environmental conditions in Brazil.
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.