The DOI matches its Crossref record; 65 of the 67 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Regulating transgenic crops sensibly: lessons from plant breeding, biotechnology and genomics
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.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“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
Citations
Cites
Genome-Wide Insertional Mutagenesis of Arabidopsis thaliana
Alonso, J. M., Stepanova, A. N., Leisse, T. J., Kim, C. J., Chen, H., Shinn, P., Stevenson, D. K., Zimmerman, J., Barajas, P., Cheuk, R., et al. (2003) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1086391 · Cited by 5,105
Nuclear DNA content of some important plant species
Arumuganathan, K., & Earle, E. D. (1991) · Plant Molecular Biology Reporter · doi:10.1007/bf02672069 · Cited by 3,237
Role of MicroRNAs in Plant and Animal Development
Carrington, J. C., & Ambros, V. (2003) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1085242 · Cited by 1,772
Nested Retrotransposons in the Intergenic Regions of the Maize Genome
SanMiguel, P. J., Tikhonov, A. P., Jin, Y., Motchoulskaia, N., Zakharov, D., Melake‐Berhan, A., Springer, P. S., Edwards, K. J., Lee, M., AVRAMOVA, Z. V., et al. (1996) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.274.5288.765 · Cited by 1,402
Allopolyploidy-Induced Rapid Genome Evolution in the Wheat (Aegilops-Triticum) Group
Özkan, H., Levy, A. A., & Feldman, M. (2001) · The Plant Cell · doi:10.1105/tpc.010082 · Cited by 656
CONTROL OF PAPAYA RINGSPOT VIRUS IN PAPAYA: A Case Study
Gonsalves, D. (1998) · Annual Review of Phytopathology · doi:10.1146/annurev.phyto.36.1.415 · Cited by 593
The Genetic, Developmental, and Molecular Bases of Fruit Size and Shape Variation in Tomato
Tanksley, S. D. (2004) · The Plant Cell · doi:10.1105/tpc.018119 · Cited by 586
Assessment of the food safety issues related to genetically modified foods
Kuiper, H. A., Kleter, G. A., Noteborn, H. P. J. M., & Kok, E. J. (2001) · The Plant Journal · doi:10.1046/j.1365-313x.2001.01119.x · Cited by 557
SNP frequency, haplotype structure and linkage disequilibrium in elite maize inbred lines
Ching, A., Caldwell, K. S., Jung, M., Dolan, M., Smith, O. S., Tingey, S. V., Morgante, M., & Rafalski, A. J. (2002) · BMC Genetics · doi:10.1186/1471-2156-3-19 · Cited by 483
Intraspecific violation of genetic colinearity and its implications in maize
Fu, H., & Dooner, H. K. (2002) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.132259199 · Cited by 474
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. Impacts of Biotech Regulation on Small Business and University Research: Possible Barriers and Potential Solutions (Washington, DC, 2004). http://pewagbiotech.org/events/0602/proceedings.pdf .
- Kalaitzandonakes, N. Strategies and structure in the emerging global seed industry. Biofutur 215, 38–42 (2001).
- Jaffe, G. Withering on the Vine: Will Agricultural Biotech's Promises Bear Fruit? (Center for Science in the Public Interest, Washington, DC, 2005). http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/withering_on_the_vine.pdf .
- National Research Council. Field-Testing Genetically Modified Organisms: Framework for Decision (National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 1989).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Transgenic crops expressing Bacillus thuringiensis toxins and biological control
Romeis, J., Meissle, M., & Bigler, F. (2006) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1180 · Cited by 719
Assessment of risk of insect-resistant transgenic crops to nontarget arthropods
Romeis, J., Bartsch, D. K., Bigler, F., Candolfi, M. P., Gielkens, M. M. C., Hartley, S. E., Hellmich, R. L., Huesing, J. E., JEPSON, P. C., Layton, R. J., et al. (2008) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1381 · Cited by 505
The economics of genetically modified crops
Qaim, M. (2009) · Annual Review of Resource Economics · doi:10.1146/annurev.resource.050708.144203 · Cited by 465
Cisgenic plants are similar to traditionally bred plants
Schouten, H. J., Krens, F. A., & Jacobsen, E. (2006) · EMBO Reports · doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400769 · Cited by 397
Deployment of new biotechnologies in plant breeding
Lusser, M., Parisi, C., Plan, D., & Rodríguez-Cerezo, E. (2012) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.2142 · Cited by 342
Metadata
- 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
