The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Hierarchical metabolomics demonstrates substantial compositional similarity between genetically modified and conventional potato crops
Open accessAbstract
There is current debate whether genetically modified (GM) plants might contain unexpected, potentially undesirable changes in overall metabolite composition. However, appropriate analytical technology and acceptable metrics of compositional similarity require development. We describe a comprehensive comparison of total metabolites in field-grown GM and conventional potato tubers using a hierarchical approach initiating with rapid metabolome “fingerprinting” to guide more detailed profiling of metabolites where significant differences are suspected. Central to this strategy are data analysis procedures able to generate validated, reproducible metrics of comparison from complex metabolome data. We show that, apart from targeted changes, these GM potatoes in this study appear substantially equivalent to traditional cultivars.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Note on the Sampling Error of the Difference Between Correlated Proportions or Percentages
McNemar, Q. (1947) · Psychometrika · doi:10.1007/bf02295996 · Cited by 4,754
Cited by
Potato Glycoalkaloids and Metabolites: Roles in the Plant and in the Diet
Friedman, M. (2006) · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jf061471t · Cited by 656
Plant metabolomics: towards biological function and mechanism
SCHAUER, N., & FERNIE, A. (2006) · Trends in Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2006.08.007 · Cited by 434
Metabolite profiling of human colon carcinoma – deregulation of TCA cycle and amino acid turnover
Denkert, C., Budczies, J., Weichert, W., Wohlgemuth, G., Scholz, M., Kind, T., Niesporek, S., Noske, A., Buckendahl, A., Dietel, M., et al. (2008) · Molecular Cancer · doi:10.1186/1476-4598-7-72 · Cited by 317
Self-citationDunn, W. B. (2008) · Physical Biology · doi:10.1088/1478-3975/5/1/011001 · Cited by 278
Draper, J., Enot, D. P., Parker, D., Beckmann, M., Snowdon, S., Lin, W., & Zubair, H. (2009) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-10-227 · Cited by 169
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Catchpole, G. S., Beckmann, M., Enot, D. P., Mondhe, M., Zywicki, B., Taylor, J., Hardy, N., Smith, A., King, R. D., Kell, D. B., Fiehn, O., & Draper, J.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2005-09-26
- Volume
- 102
- Issue
- 40
- Pages
- 14458-14462
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- OpenAlex
- W2115592362
- Cited by
- 392
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 37.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hierarchical metabolomics demonstrates substantial compositional similarity between genetically modified and conventional potato crops. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0503955102
- The paper
- Catchpole, G. S., Beckmann, M., Enot, D. P., Mondhe, M., Zywicki, B., Taylor, J., Hardy, N., Smith, A., King, R. D., Kell, D. B., Fiehn, O., & Draper, J. (2005). Hierarchical metabolomics demonstrates substantial compositional similarity between genetically modified and conventional potato crops. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0503955102
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
