Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 393

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

Cerdeira, Antonio L., Duke, Stephen O.·2006·Journal of Environmental Quality

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2134/jeq2005.0378

Cites

5 of 5 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

1 retracted

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 393

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.