Cited by 243Genetically Modified Organisms ResearchAgricultural safety and regulationsCRISPR and Genetic Engineering

Regulating transgenic crops sensibly: Lessons from plant breeding, biotechnology and genomics

Bradford, Kent J, Van Deynze, Allen, Gutterson, Neal, Parrott, Wayne, Strauss, Steven H·2005·Nature Biotechnology

Abstract

The costs of meeting regulatory requirements and market restrictions guided by regulatory criteria are substantial impediments to the commercialization of transgenic crops. Although a cautious approach may have been prudent initially, we argue that some regulatory requirements can now be modified to reduce costs and uncertainty without compromising safety. Long-accepted plant breeding methods for incorporating new diversity into crop varieties, experience from two decades of research on and commercialization of transgenic crops, and expanding knowledge of plant genome structure and dynamics all indicate that if a gene or trait is safe, the genetic engineering process itself presents little potential for unexpected consequences that would not be identified or eliminated in the variety development process before commercialization. We propose that as in conventional breeding, regulatory emphasis should be on phenotypic rather than genomic characteristics once a gene or trait has been shown to be safe.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nbt1084

Cites

65 of 65 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?

  • Recent developments may lead to a revaluation of the current rDNA process-based regulatory trigger for GE organisms to a more scientifically defensible product-based approach centered on the novelty and any unique risks associated with the phenotype of the product rather than the process used to accomplish the genetic modification.

    “These developments may lead to a revaluation of the current rDNA process-based regulatory trigger for GE organisms to a more scientifically defensible product-based approach centered on the novelty and any unique risks associated with the phenotype of the product rather than the process used to accomplish the genetic modification (Bradford et al., 2005; McHughen, 2007).”

    From Prevalence and impacts of genetically engineered feedstuffs on livestock populations1 (2014) · cites this paper as Bradford et al., 2005

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 67 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bradford, K. J., Van Deynze, A., Gutterson, N., Parrott, W., & Strauss, S. H.
Affiliations
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • Mendel Biotechnology (United States) (US)
  • University of Georgia (US)
  • Oregon State University (US)
Corresponding author
Strauss, Steven H
Venue
Nature Biotechnology
Published
2005-04
Volume
23
Issue
4
Pages
439-444
ISSN
  • 0733-222X (ISSN-L)
  • 1087-0156
  • 1546-1696
OpenAlex
W2150788885
Cited by
243
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 14
FWCI
25.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Biotechnology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural safety and regulations
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Keywords
genetically modified crops, regulatory costs, plant breeding, genetic engineering safety
MeSH terms
Agriculture, Biotechnology, Breeding, Genetic Engineering, Crops, Agricultural, Genome, Plant, Genomics, Plants, Genetically Modified, Government Regulation

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