Cited by 76Genetically Modified Organisms ResearchSoybean genetics and cultivationPlant Molecular Biology Research

Effect of transgenes on global gene expression in soybean is within the natural range of variation of conventional cultivars

Cheng, K. C., Beaulieu, J., Iquira, E., Belzile, F. J., Fortin, M. G., Strömvik, M. V.·2008·Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry

Abstract

Current safety assessment for novel crops, including transgenic crops, uses a targeted approach, which relies on compositional analysis. The possibility that transgene expression could lead to unintended effects remains a debated issue. This study used transcriptome profiling as a nontargeted approach to evaluate overall molecular changes in transgenic soybean cultivars. Global gene expression was measured in the first trifoliate leaves of two transgenic and three conventional soybean cultivars using the soybean Affymetrix GeneChip. It was found that gene expression differs more between the two conventional cultivars than between the transgenics and their closest conventional cultivar investigated and that the magnitudes of differences measured in gene expression and genotype (determined by SSR analysis) do not necessarily correlate. A MySQL database coupled with a CGI Web interface was developed to store and present the results ( http://soyxpress.agrenv.mcgill.ca/). By integrating the microarray data with gene annotations and other soybean data, a comprehensive view of differences in gene expression is explored between cultivars.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/jf073505i

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Independent studies have shown the compositional equivalence of the current generation of GE crops.

    “Independent studies have shown the compositional equivalence of the current generation of GE crops (Cheng et al., 2008; Garcia-Villalba et al., 2008; Herman and Price, 2013; Hollingworth et al., 2003)”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cheng, K. C., Beaulieu, J., Iquira, E., Belzile, F. J., Fortin, M. G., & Strömvik, M. V.
Affiliations
Université Laval (CA)
Corresponding author
Strömvik, M. V.
Venue
Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Published
2008-04-23
Volume
56
Issue
9
Pages
3057-3067
ISSN
  • 0021-8561 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-5118
OpenAlex
W2019524306
Cited by
76
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 5
FWCI
9.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Soybean genetics and cultivation
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Plant Molecular Biology Research
Keywords
transgenic soybean, gene expression, gene expression profiling, unintended consequences, safety assessment, cultivar differences, genotype-phenotype correlation, microarray data integration, genome annotation, microsatellite markers
MeSH terms
Genotype, Glycine max, Species Specificity, Gene Expression, Plant Leaves, Transgenes, Gene Expression Profiling, Plants, Genetically Modified

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