Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 174

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Antibiotic-resistant soil bacteria in transgenic plant fields

Open access
Demanèche, Sandrine, Sanguin, Hervé, Poté, John, Navarro, Elisabeth, Bernillon, Dominique, Mavingui, Patrick, Wildi, Walter, Vogel, Timothy M., Simonet, Pascal·2008·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Understanding the prevalence and polymorphism of antibiotic resistance genes in soil bacteria and their potential to be transferred horizontally is required to evaluate the likelihood and ecological (and possibly clinical) consequences of the transfer of these genes from transgenic plants to soil bacteria. In this study, we combined culture-dependent and -independent approaches to study the prevalence and diversity of bla genes in soil bacteria and the potential impact that a 10-successive-year culture of the transgenic Bt176 corn, which has a bla TEM marker gene, could have had on the soil bacterial community. The bla gene encoding resistance to ampicillin belongs to the beta-lactam antibiotic family, which is widely used in medicine but is readily compromised by bacterial antibiotic resistance. Our results indicate that soil bacteria are naturally resistant to a broad spectrum of beta-lactam antibiotics, including the third cephalosporin generation, which has a slightly stronger discriminating effect on soil isolates than other cephalosporins. These high resistance levels for a wide range of antibiotics are partly due to the polymorphism of bla genes, which occur frequently among soil bacteria. The bla TEM116 gene of the transgenic corn Bt176 investigated here is among those frequently found, thus reducing any risk of introducing a new bacterial resistance trait from the transgenic material. In addition, no significant differences were observed in bacterial antibiotic-resistance levels between transgenic and nontransgenic corn fields, although the bacterial populations were different.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.0800072105

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 174

Metadata

Authors
Demanèche, S., Sanguin, H., Poté, J., Navarro, E., Bernillon, D., Mavingui, P., Wildi, W., Vogel, T. M., & Simonet, P.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2008-03-11
Volume
105
Issue
10
Pages
3957-3962
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W1981921424
Cited by
174
References
1
FWCI
15.63
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: Antibiotic-resistant soil bacteria in transgenic plant fields. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.0800072105
The paper
Demanèche, S., Sanguin, H., Poté, J., Navarro, E., Bernillon, D., Mavingui, P., Wildi, W., Vogel, T. M., & Simonet, P. (2008). Antibiotic-resistant soil bacteria in transgenic plant fields. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0800072105

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.