Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42125398›Full record

ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2014

Scientific Opinion on application (EFSA-GMO-NL-2010-77) for the placing on the market of herbicide-tolerant genetically modified cotton GHB614 × LLCotton25 for food and feed uses, import and processing under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 from Bayer CropScience.

EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

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

1 author.

EFSA Panel on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO)

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cotton GHB614 × LLCotton25 was produced by conventional crossing. The EFSA GMO Panel previously assessed the two single cotton events GHB614 and LLCotton25 and did not identify safety concerns. Integrity of the inserts was retained in the two-event stack cotton. No differences requiring further food and feed safety assessment were identified in the compositional analysis of cotton GHB614 × LLCotton25 except for a higher level of gossypol. The EFSA GMO Panel further assessed this difference and considers that it is of no safety relevance for animals and humans. Expression analysis and safety assessment of the newly expressed proteins identified no concerns regarding their potential toxicity and allergenicity. No indications of safety issues regarding the overall allergenicity of cotton GHB614 × LLCotton25 were identified. There are no indications of an increased likelihood of establishment and spread of feral cotton plants. Considering the scope of the application, potential interactions of cotton GHB614 × LLCotton25 with the biotic and abiotic environment were not considered a relevant issue. Environmental risks associated with an unlikely but theoretically possible horizontal gene transfer from cotton GHB614 × LLCotton25 to bacteria have not been identified. The post-market environmental monitoring plan and reporting intervals are in line with the intended uses of cotton GHB614 × LLCotton25.

Indexed as

cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L. and Gossypium barbadense L.)GHB614 × LLCotton25GMOherbicide tolerantRegulation (EC) No 1829/2003stack

Identifiers

PMID42125398
PMCPMC13159813

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.