Cited by 51Genetically Modified Organisms ResearchInsect Resistance and GeneticsAnimal Genetics and Reproduction

Barriers and paths to market for genetically engineered crops

Rommens, Caius M.·2010·Plant Biotechnology Journal

Abstract

Each year, billions of dollars are invested in efforts to improve crops through genetic engineering (GE). These activities have resulted in a surge of publications and patents on technologies and genes: a momentum in basic research that, unfortunately, is not sustained throughout the subsequent phases of product development. After more than two decades of intensive research, the market for transgenic crops is still dominated by applications of just a handful of methods and genes. This discrepancy between research and development reflects difficulties in understanding and overcoming seven main barriers-to-entry: (1) trait efficacy in the field, (2) critical product concepts, (3) freedom-to-operate, (4) industry support, (5) identity preservation and stewardship, (6) regulatory approval and (7) retail and consumer acceptance. In this review, I describe the various roadblocks to market for transgenic crops and also discuss methods and approaches on how to overcome these, especially in the United States.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1467-7652.2009.00464.x

Cites

100 of 100 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?

  • Emphasis on the benefits of GMOs would effectively induce sympathy.

    “Although GMOs are at a disadvantage because they are commonly associated 211 with unnaturalness and trigger disgust, emphasis on the benefits would effectively induce 212 sympathy [37,47].”

    From Fatal attraction: the intuitive appeal of GMO opposition (2015) · cites this paper as [47]

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rommens, C. M.
Affiliations
Simplot (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Rommens, Caius M.
Venue
Plant Biotechnology Journal
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-01-11
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
101-111
ISSN
  • 1467-7644 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-7652
OpenAlex
W2080373228
Cited by
51
References
100
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 9
FWCI
0.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Plant Biotechnology Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Insect Resistance and Genetics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Animal Genetics and Reproduction
Keywords
genetically modified crops, market barriers, product development, freedom to operate, regulatory approval, consumer acceptance, identity preservation, industry funding, agricultural biotechnology
MeSH terms
Agriculture, Biotechnology, Commerce, Legislation, Food, Public Opinion, United States, Crops, Agricultural, Intellectual Property, Plants, Genetically Modified, Food, 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