The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Current Status and Environmental Impacts of Glyphosate‐Resistant Crops: A Review
Abstract
Glyphosate [N‐(phosphonomethyl) glycine]‐resistant crops (GRCs), canola (Brassica napus L.), cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.), maize (Zea mays L.), and soybean [Glycine max (L.) Merr.] have been commercialized and grown extensively in the Western Hemisphere and, to a lesser extent, elsewhere. Glyphosate‐resistant cotton and soybean have become dominant in those countries where their planting is permitted. Effects of glyphosate on contamination of soil, water, and air are minimal, compared to some of the herbicides that they replace. No risks have been found with food or feed safety or nutritional value in products from currently available GRCs. Glyphosate‐resistant crops have promoted the adoption of reduced‐ or no‐tillage agriculture in the USA and Argentina, providing a substantial environmental benefit. Weed species in GRC fields have shifted to those that can more successfully withstand glyphosate and to those that avoid the time of its application. Three weed species have evolved resistance to glyphosate in GRCs. Glyphosate‐resistant crops have greater potential to become problems as volunteer crops than do conventional crops. Glyphosate resistance transgenes have been found in fields of canola that are supposed to be non‐transgenic. Under some circumstances, the largest risk of GRCs may be transgene flow (introgression) from GRCs to related species that might become problems in natural ecosystems. Glyphosate resistance transgenes themselves are highly unlikely to be a risk in wild plant populations, but when linked to transgenes that may impart fitness benefits outside of agriculture (e.g., insect resistance), natural ecosystems could be affected. The development and use of failsafe introgression barriers in crops with such linked genes is needed.
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
1 retracted
Williams, G. M., Kroes, R., & Munro, I. C. (2000) · Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology · doi:10.1006/rtph.1999.1371 · Cited by 864
RetractedUnintended effects and their detection in genetically modified crops
Cellini, F., Chesson, A., Colquhoun, I., Constable, A., Davies, H. V., Engel, K. H., Gatehouse, A. M. R., Kärenlampi, S., Kok, E. J., Leguay, J.-J., et al. (2004) · Food and Chemical Toxicology · doi:10.1016/j.fct.2004.02.003 · Cited by 397
Urban contributions of glyphosate and its degradate AMPA to streams in the United States
Kolpin, D. W., Thurman, E. M., Lee, E. A., Meyer, M. T., Furlong, E. T., & Glassmeyer, S. T. (2006) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2005.01.028 · Cited by 252 · cited 1×
“Kolpin et al. (2006) detected AMPA almost four times as often as glyphosate downstream from waste water effluent from treatment plants treating water from urban environments where glyphosate was used.”
BackgroundDuke, S. O., Rimando, A. M., Pace, P. F., Reddy, K. N., & Smeda, R. J. (2003) · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jf025908i · Cited by 195
Self-citationResults of a 13 week safety assurance study with rats fed grain from glyphosate tolerant corn
Hammond, B., Dudek, R., Lemen, J., & Nemeth, M. (2004) · Food and Chemical Toxicology · doi:10.1016/j.fct.2004.02.013 · Cited by 124
Cited by
Glyphosate: a once‐in‐a‐century herbicide
Duke, S. O., & Powles, S. B. (2008) · Pest Management Science · doi:10.1002/ps.1518 · Cited by 1,749
Self-citationWhy have no new herbicide modes of action appeared in recent years?
Duke, S. O. (2012) · Pest Management Science · doi:10.1002/ps.2333 · Cited by 559
Self-citationThe challenge of herbicide resistance around the world: a current summary
Peterson, M. A., Collavo, A., Ovejero, R., Shivrain, V., & Walsh, M. J. (2018) · Pest Management Science · doi:10.1002/ps.4821 · Cited by 382
Is There a Need for a More Sustainable Agriculture?
Gomiero, T., Pimentel, D., & Paoletti, M. G. (2011) · Critical Reviews in Plant Sciences · doi:10.1080/07352689.2011.553515 · Cited by 320
Vencill, W. K., Nichols, R. L., Webster, T. M., Soteres, J. K., Mallory-Smith, C., Burgos, N. R., Johnson, W. G., & McClelland, M. R. (2012) · Weed Science · doi:10.1614/ws-d-11-00206.1 · Cited by 309
Metadata
- Authors
- Cerdeira, A. L., & Duke, S. O.
- Venue
- Journal of Environmental Quality
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-09
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1633-1658
- ISSN
- 0047-2425 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-2537
- OpenAlex
- W2116409010
- Cited by
- 393
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 25.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: The Current Status and Environmental Impacts of Glyphosate‐Resistant Crops: A Review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2134/jeq2005.0378
- The paper
- Cerdeira, A. L., & Duke, S. O. (2006). The Current Status and Environmental Impacts of Glyphosate‐Resistant Crops: A Review. Journal of Environmental Quality. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2005.0378
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.