Cited by 22Genetically Modified Organisms ResearchInsect Resistance and GeneticsInsect-Plant Interactions and Control

Dynamic role and importance of surrogate species for assessing potential adverse environmental impacts of genetically engineered insect-resistant plants on non-target organisms

Open access
Wach, Michael, Hellmich, Richard L., Layton, Raymond, Romeis, Jörg, Gadaleta, Patricia G.·2016·Transgenic Research

Abstract

Surrogate species have a long history of use in research and regulatory settings to understand the potentially harmful effects of toxic substances including pesticides. More recently, surrogate species have been used to evaluate the potential effects of proteins contained in genetically engineered insect resistant (GEIR) crops. Species commonly used in GEIR crop testing include beneficial organisms such as honeybees, arthropod predators, and parasitoids. The choice of appropriate surrogates is influenced by scientific factors such as the knowledge of the mode of action and the spectrum of activity as well as societal factors such as protection goals that assign value to certain ecosystem services such as pollination or pest control. The primary reasons for using surrogates include the inability to test all possible organisms, the restrictions on using certain organisms in testing (e.g., rare, threatened, or endangered species), and the ability to achieve greater sensitivity and statistical power by using laboratory testing of certain species. The acceptance of surrogate species data can allow results from one region to be applied or "transported" for use in another region. On the basis of over a decade of using surrogate species to evaluate potential effects of GEIR crops, it appears that the current surrogates have worked well to predict effects of GEIR crops that have been developed (Carstens et al. GM Crops Food 5:1-5, 2014), and it is expected that they should work well to predict effects of future GEIR crops based on similar technologies.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11248-016-9945-5

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Because not all natural enemies potentially at risk can be tested, a representative subset of species (surrogates) is selected for assessment.

    “From a practical standpoint, because not all natural enemies potentially at risk can be tested, a representative subset of species (surrogates) is selected for assessment (Carstens et al., 2014;Romeis et al., 2013b;Wach et al., 2016).”

    From Genetically engineered crops help support conservation biological control (2019) · cites this paper as Wach et al., 2016

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 48 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Barrett KL, Grandy N, Harrison EG et al (1994) Guidance document of regulatory testing procedures for pesticides with non-target arthropods. In: ESCORT Workshop (European standard characteristics of non-target arthropod regulatory testing). Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Brussels, Belgium
  2. Candolfi MP, Barrett KL, Campbell P et al (2001) Guidance document on regulatory testing and risk assessment procedures for plant protection products with non-target arthropods. In: ESCORT2 Workshop (European standard characteristics of non-target arthropods)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wach, M., Hellmich, R. L., Layton, R., Romeis, J., & Gadaleta, P. G.
Affiliations
  • International Life Sciences Institute (US)
  • Iowa State University (US)
  • Pioneer Hi-Bred (US)
  • Agroscope (CH)
Corresponding author
Wach, Michael
Venue
Transgenic Research
Published
2016-02-27
Volume
25
Issue
4
Pages
499-505
ISSN
  • 0962-8819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-9368
OpenAlex
W2289588342
Cited by
22
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2
FWCI
0.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Transgenic Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Iowa State University Digital Repository (Iowa State University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Insect Resistance and Genetics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Insect Science › Insect-Plant Interactions and Control
Keywords
surrogate species, non-target organisms, Bt proteins, Apis mellifera, predatory arthropods, parasitoids, ecosystem services, pollination, pest control, mechanism of action, regulatory risk assessment
MeSH terms
Animals, Environment, Insecta, Pesticides, Risk Assessment, Plants, Genetically Modified, Ecotoxicology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review