The DOI matches its Crossref record; 107 of the 119 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 137 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Prevalence and impacts of genetically engineered feedstuffs on livestock populations1
Abstract
Globally, food-producing animals consume 70 to 90% of genetically engineered (GE) crop biomass. This review briefly summarizes the scientific literature on performance and health of animals consuming feed containing GE ingredients and composition of products derived from them. It also discusses the field experience of feeding GE feed sources to commercial livestock populations and summarizes the suppliers of GE and non-GE animal feed in global trade. Numerous experimental studies have consistently revealed that the performance and health of GE-fed animals are comparable with those fed isogenic non-GE crop lines. United States animal agriculture produces over 9 billion food-producing animals annually, and more than 95% of these animals consume feed containing GE ingredients. Data on livestock productivity and health were collated from publicly available sources from 1983, before the introduction of GE crops in 1996, and subsequently through 2011, a period with high levels of predominately GE animal feed. These field data sets, representing over 100 billion animals following the introduction of GE crops, did not reveal unfavorable or perturbed trends in livestock health and productivity. No study has revealed any differences in the nutritional profile of animal products derived from GE-fed animals. Because DNA and protein are normal components of the diet that are digested, there are no detectable or reliably quantifiable traces of GE components in milk, meat, and eggs following consumption of GE feed. Globally, countries that are cultivating GE corn and soy are the major livestock feed exporters. Asynchronous regulatory approvals (i.e., cultivation approvals of GE varieties in exporting countries occurring before food and feed approvals in importing countries) have resulted in trade disruptions. This is likely to be increasingly problematic in the future as there are a large number of "second generation" GE crops with altered output traits for improved livestock feed in the developmental and regulatory pipelines. Additionally, advanced techniques to affect targeted genome modifications are emerging, and it is not clear whether these will be encompassed by the current GE process-based trigger for regulatory oversight. There is a pressing need for international harmonization of both regulatory frameworks for GE crops and governance of advanced breeding techniques to prevent widespread disruptions in international trade of livestock feedstuffs in the future.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This review concludes that GE feedstuffs are compositionally equivalent to conventional feed and that livestock performance, health, and animal-product composition are comparable between GE-fed and non-GE-fed animals, based on feeding studies and field data from over 100 billion U.S. animals (2000–2011). It also warns that asynchronous regulatory approvals and zero-tolerance policies are causing trade disruptions and will become more problematic with second-generation GE crops and gene editing.
Key findings
- Experimental feeding studies consistently show performance and health of GE-fed animals comparable to those fed near-isogenic non-GE lines; no study has revealed differences in the nutritional profile of milk, meat, or eggs, and neither recombinant DNA nor intact recombinant protein has been detected in animal products.
- U.S. field data from 1983–2011, including over 100 billion animals after GE crop introduction, showed no unfavorable or perturbed trends in livestock health and productivity; available health indicators improved over time (e.g., dairy somatic cell count fell from 304,000 cells/mL in 1995 to 217,000 in 2011; broiler feed-to-gain fell from 2 in 1985 to 1.91 in 2011; cattle and poultry condemnation/mortality rates decreased).
- GE feed dominates global trade: an estimated 92.75–95.9% of traded soybeans, 64–92.7% of traded corn, 69% of cotton, and 84.2–85% of canola may contain GE material; non-GE-fed animal products are a niche market (<5% of U.S. animals), with organic livestock shares such as 0.33% of broilers, 1.97% of layers, 0.20% of turkeys, 0.34% of beef cows, 2.78% of dairy cows, and 0.01% of hogs in 2011.
- Asynchronous approvals caused trade disruptions, including China’s rejection of U.S. corn: 3.3 million t were subject to rejection and diverted shipments (1.4 million t) or canceled/deferred sales, with estimated losses up to $2.9 billion; GE crops added an estimated 122 and 230 million t to global soybean and corn production, reduced pesticide spraying by 499 million kg (−8.7%), and lowered environmental impact by 18.1%.
Methods
- Design: narrative review of peer-reviewed livestock GE feeding studies and animal-product composition studies, plus analysis of publicly available U.S. livestock productivity and health data from 1983 through 2011, comparing pre-GE (1983–1994) and high-GE-feed (2000–2011) periods.
- Data: broiler, dairy, hog, and beef industries; sources included USDA Economics, Statistics, and Market Information System, USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, USDA FSIS, National Chicken Council, and published audits; global production/trade data came from USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, FAO, Brookes and Barfoot, and others.
- Analysis: regression analyses were performed for 1983–1994 and 2000–2011, and slopes between periods were compared using an unpaired t test where data were available; feeding-study and trade data were summarized descriptively.
Limitations
- Paper-stated: whole-food animal feeding trials have low power to detect adverse effects, are limited by how much GE feed can be included without nutritional imbalance, and contribute little to safety assessment once compositional equivalence is established; fewer than 100 long-term (>90 d) and multigenerational target-animal GE feeding studies exist in the peer-reviewed literature.
- Paper-stated: long-term and multigenerational studies should be reserved for cases where reasonable doubt remains after a 90-d feeding trial triggered by a potential hazard, and statistically significant differences in such studies are not necessarily adverse effects.
- Evident from the text: the field analysis is observational, relies on aggregated publicly available data and regression slope comparisons, and cannot establish causality or individual-level exposure; the review is described as brief/narrative rather than a systematic review or meta-analysis.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
0 of 137 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and more than 95% of these animals consume feed containing GE ingredients.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These field data sets, representing over 100 billion animals following the introduction of GE crops, did not reveal unfavorable or perturbed trends in livestock health and productivity.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“It is estimated that 79% (85 million ha) of global soybean hectarage is planted to GE varieties (Fig. 3).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fig. 3
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“During 2011, less than 5% of U.S. animals within each of the major livestock sectors were raised for certified National Organic Program ( NOP ) markets that specifically prohibit the feeding of GE feed (Table 2).”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“Although only 32% (57 million ha) of global corn hectarage is planted with GE varieties (Fig. 3), 71% of global trade came from those countries that grow GE corn varieties (Fig. 6).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fig. 3
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“In 2013, 36.5% of global soybean production (97.2 million t) was exported and 97% came from 3 countries that grow GE soybeans-the United States, Brazil, and Argentina (Fig. 4).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fig. 4
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“In 2013, 36.5% of global soybean production (97.2 million t) was exported and 97% came from 3 countries that grow GE soybeans-the United States, Brazil, and Argentina (Fig. 4).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fig. 4
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesThe paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Soybean meal is a very important protein source for animal feeds in the EU, supplying 46% of the lysine supply overall.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesA result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In all industries, there were no obvious perturbations in production parameters over time.”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIn the paper
“Of the more than 163 million cattle arriving at USDA-inspected slaughter facilities for the years 2003 through 2007, a total of 769,339 (0.47%) were condemned (White and Moore, 2009).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites White and Moore, 2009
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passes- Rests on an assumption: All animals arriving at USDA-inspected slaughter facilities undergo both antemortem and postmortem inspections to identify abnormalities.
- Rests on an assumption: Carcasses are condemned postmortem if there are visible lesions or tumors present on organs and carcasses.
- Probably not a substantial claim. 92
- It may state two separate claims as one. 76
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“United States animal agriculture produces over 9 billion foodproducing animals annually”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“An estimated 24 consecutive generations of broilers would have been consuming GE feed during the time period 2000 to 2011.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: In a typical U.S. broiler operation, chickens are fed for 42–49 d on diets composed of approximately 35% soybean meal and 65% corn grain.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There was no indication of worsening animal health after the introduction of GE feed, and productivity improvements continued in the same direction and at similar rates as those that were observed before the introduction of GE crop varieties in 1996.”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: All animals arriving at USDA-inspected slaughter facilities undergo both antemortem and postmortem inspections to identify abnormalities.
- Rests on an assumption: Carcasses are condemned postmortem if there are visible lesions or tumors present on organs and carcasses.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, mortality was essentially unchanged throughout the years presented and was also at its lowest in 2011.”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The EU imports 65% of its protein-rich feedstuffs, for which there are no alternative sources grown in the EU (Popp et al., 2013), and is the largest importer of soybean meal and the second largest importer of soybeans after China (Fig. 4 and 5).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Popp et al., 2013 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Poultry continue to be the single largest domestic user of soybean meal, consuming about half of all meal, followed by swine.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Cattle fed or finished in feedyards, typically for 120 d before slaughter on high concentrate diets containing corn and soy as major ingredients, made up the majority (82%) of the cattle at harvest but represented a minority (12%) of the cattle condemned.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites White and Moore, 2009
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: All animals arriving at USDA-inspected slaughter facilities undergo both antemortem and postmortem inspections to identify abnormalities.
- Rests on an assumption: Carcasses are condemned postmortem if there are visible lesions or tumors present on organs and carcasses.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The rate of broiler carcass condemnation decreased significantly over time and was at its lowest in 2011.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: All animals arriving at USDA-inspected slaughter facilities undergo both antemortem and postmortem inspections to identify abnormalities.
- Rests on an assumption: Carcasses are condemned postmortem if there are visible lesions or tumors present on organs and carcasses.
In the paper
“The EU imports 65% of its protein-rich feedstuffs, for which there are no alternative sources grown in the EU (Popp et al., 2013), and is the largest importer of soybean meal and the second largest importer of soybeans after China (Fig. 4 and 5).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fig. 4 and 5
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It is estimated that approximately 85% of soybean and 57% of corn grain production (USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, 2014b) are used in global livestock diets annually.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, 2014b
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Condemnation rates for non-fed cattle, particularly cows, were higher than for fed cattle, but the rate in 2007 (2.49%), the last year for which data are available, was similar to that reported in cattle in 1994 (2.6%; Boleman et al., 1998), before the introduction of GE crops.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Boleman et al., 1998 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: All animals arriving at USDA-inspected slaughter facilities undergo both antemortem and postmortem inspections to identify abnormalities.
- Rests on an assumption: Carcasses are condemned postmortem if there are visible lesions or tumors present on organs and carcasses.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“United States agriculture feeds billions of food-producing animals each year, with annual broiler numbers alone exceeding the current size of the global human population (Table 2).”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“About 70% of soybean meal consumed in the EU is imported and 80% of this meal is produced from GE soybeans.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The available health parameters, somatic cell count (an indicator of mastitis and inflammation in the udder) in the dairy data set (Fig. 1), postmortem condemnation rates in cattle (Fig. 1), and postmortem condemnation rates and mortality in the poultry industry (Fig. 2) all decreased (i.e., improved) over time.”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: All animals arriving at USDA-inspected slaughter facilities undergo both antemortem and postmortem inspections to identify abnormalities.
- Rests on an assumption: Carcasses are condemned postmortem if there are visible lesions or tumors present on organs and carcasses.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the 2011 to 2012 marketing year, domestic animal agriculture used 27.6 million t of U.S. soybean meal.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In Asia alone, consumption of meat and dairy products has been increasing annually by approximately 3 and 5%, respectively (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2012).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2012
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In 2011, the United States had 1.26 million ha of certified organic cropland and 0.93 million ha of certified organic pasture and range (USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This translates into roughly 0.8 and 0.5% of total U.S. cropland and pasture/rangeland, respectively (Fig. 7).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fig. 7
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The amount of organic farmland increased well over 1,000% in these countries between 2002 and 2006, while organic farmland in Europe and North America showed slower (27-80%) expansion rates (Grow and Greene, 2009).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Grow and Greene, 2009
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In 2009, Canada was the main market for U.S. organic exports, while countries in Latin America, including Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, and Uruguay, along with China and other countries in Asia are major sources of organic imports (Grow and Greene, 2009).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Grow and Greene, 2009
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Three of the top 5 corn exporting countries-the United States, Brazil, and Argentina-currently grow GE corn.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“During 2011, approximately 254,700 dairy cows (2.78% of the total U.S. dairy herd; Table 2) on 1,848 dairy operations were certified organic.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Table 2
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“China has a zero-tolerance policy for unapproved events.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The countries with the fastest growth in organic production are those that produce organic products for export including China, Bolivia, Chile, Uruguay, and Ukraine.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Grow and Greene, 2009
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In 2013, the United States imported over $100 million of organic soybeans primarily from China and India (Fig. 8; Global Agricultural Trade System online [GATS] organic products www.fas.usda. gov/commodities/organic-products).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Fig. 8; Global Agricultural Trade System online [GATS] organic products www.fas.usda. gov/commodities/organic-products
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The main driver for non-GE feed is the poultry sector (17%) followed by the cattle (9%) and pig sectors (2%; European Feed Manufacturers' Federation, 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites European Feed Manufacturers' Federation, 2013
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The proportion of organic imports used for livestock feed versus human food purposes is unavailable as import product codes do not distinguish between these uses.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In 2007, USDA-accredited groups certified 27,000 producers and handlers worldwide to the U.S. organic standard, with approximately 16,000 in the United States and 11,000 in over 100 foreign countries (Grow and Greene, 2009).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Grow and Greene, 2009
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Of the top 5 corn importing countries-Japan, Mexico, the EU, South Korea, and Egypt-only 5 countries within the EU (Spain, Portugal, Romania, Czechoslovakia, and Slovakia) grew a small amount (148,013 ha) of BtMON810 corn (USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, 2014a).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, 2014a
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Corn is the second largest category of GE products imported into the EU after soy.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Consumers wishing to purchase products from animals fed non-GE diets in the United States currently have that choice available through certified NOP prod -ucts, the FSIS-approved Non-GMO Project verified label claim for meat and liquid eggs, and other non-genetically modified organism certification programs.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Similarly, in 2007 there was a problem with asynchronous approval of a GE corn variety approved for cultivation in Argentina but unapproved for food and feed use in the EU. This concentrated demand on corn grown in Brazil, which in -creased prices an estimated €50/million t for compound feed producers in the EU (Popp et al., 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Popp et al., 2013 source
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Farm animal feed in the 27 member states of the European Union (EU-27) is composed of 50% roughages and 10% grains produced on farm, 10% purchased feed materials, and 30% industrial compound feed.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“China only accepts GE-positive cargo if the shipment is marked accordingly and contains only those GE events that are approved for import in China as well as cultivation in the country of origin.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In 2013, 4 major United Kingdom food supermarket groups-Tesco, Cooperative, Marks and Spencer, and Sainsbury's-ceased requiring that poultry and egg suppliers use only non-GE feed (Popp et al., 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Popp et al., 2013 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“For example, in March 2013, the retail chain Whole Foods Market set a deadline that by 2018, animal products sold in its U.S. and Canadian stores must be labeled to indicate whether or not they came from animals that had consumed GE feed (Whole Foods Market, 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Whole Foods Market, 2013
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Since these trade disruptions began, a total of 3.3 million t of U.S. corn have been subject to re-”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The quote only partly states this claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Organically raised livestock accounted for $1.31 billion in sales in 2011, the last year with a complete set of data on production and sales.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Of the top 5 soybean meal exporting countries in 2013-Argentina, Brazil, the United States, India, and Paraguay-only India does not allow the cultivation of GE soybeans.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The remaining 2 countries-Ukraine and India-do not have officially registered and approved GE corn varieties.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In 2007, approximately half of the accredited foreign organic farmers and handlers certified to NOP standards were in Canada, Italy, Turkey, China, and Mexico.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Grow and Greene, 2009
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Annual EU imports of corn products include US$1.8 billion of corn, $151 million of corn seed for planting, and $87 million of dried distillers grains (USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, 2013a).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, 2013a
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“It has been estimated that in the EU, less than 15% of the animal feed market is identity-preserved certified non-GE, although there are great variations between countries.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The estimated size of the export market requiring certified non-GE corn is 7.3 million t or 7% (Table 6).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Table 6
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Unlike soybean, EU corn production is sufficient to meet most of its own corn consumption, with imports accounting for only 10% of total supply.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“It has been estimated that up to $2.9 billion in economic losses were sustained by the U.S. corn, distillers' grains, and soy sectors in the aftermath of the ze -ro-tolerance enforcement policy on U.S. export shipments to China (National Grain and Feed Association, 2014).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites National Grain and Feed Association, 2014
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Ukraine does not export or import GE products as none are officially registered and approved for commer -cial use or sale in the country.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Approximately 11.6% (100 million t) of global corn production was internationally traded in 2013.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Organic milk led livestock commodities, accounting for $765 million, or 58%, of organic animal product sales; however, less than 2% of U.S. dairy production is currently organic (Hafla et al., 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Hafla et al., 2013 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Interestingly, Ukraine signed a 3-yr agreement with China in 2013 for the delivery of 4 to 5 million t of corn per year.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“However, private sources estimate approximately 60% of the Ukraine soybean crop and 30% of the corn crop consist of GE varieties (USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, 2013b).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, 2013b
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The retail price for or -ganic milk between 2004 and 2007 averaged 3 times the cost of conventional milk (USDA Economic Research Service, 2012b), and in 2013, organic milk made up 4.38% of total U.S. fluid milk market sales.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites USDA Economic Research Service, 2012b
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In 2011, sales of U.S. organic broilers and eggs totaled $115 million and $276 million, representing 0.5 and 3.7% of total sales, respectively.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Several of these crops are far advanced in the regulatory pipeline (Table 8; Tillie et al., 2013)”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Table 8; Tillie et al., 2013
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In 2013, approximately 175.2 million ha of GE crops were cultivated worldwide (James, 2013) by 18 million farmers.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites James, 2013
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The price of natural/organic beef averaged $12.08/kg in the first quarter of 2011, which represent -ed a premium of $3.75/kg.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In China, 7.5 million farmers cultivating an average of approximately 0.5 ha collectively grew 4.2 million ha of Bt cotton, an adoption rate of 90%.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Organic beef cattle may be finished in feedlots for no more than 120 d and must have access to pasture during this time.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Natural, organic (grain-fed or otherwise), and grass/ forage-fed (including cattle finished on grasses/forages to a specific quality standard) account for about 3% of the U.S. beef market (Mathews and Johnson, 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Mathews and Johnson, 2013
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Currently, 33 countries have regulatory systems that handle approval for the cultivation or importation of new GE crops (International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, 2014).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites International Service for the Acquisition of Agri-Biotech Applications, 2014
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, silage is an accepted feed that can consist of relatively large portions of grain.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Under this verification standard, grass or forage must be the exclusive feed source throughout the lifetime of the ruminant animal except for milk consumed before weaning.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Likewise, the USDA NE3 Process Verified Program does not mandate or specify the use of non-GE feed.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“There are numerous GE crops enhanced for animal nutrition in the research and development pipeline, with almost 100 events under research in many countries of the world (Tillie et al., 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Tillie et al., 2013 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“By 2020, developing countries will consume 107 million t more meat and 177 million t more milk than the annual average of the years 1996 through 1998.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Delgado, 2003 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Protocols have been developed to address the safety testing of these crops (International Life Sciences Institute, 2007).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites International Life Sciences Institute, 2007
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The largest volume of organic meat sales is for poultry.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In 2011, 106,181 beef cows (0.34% of the total U.S. beef cows; Table 2) and 113,114 unclassified cows and young stock were raised in certified organic production systems.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Table 2
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“As a result of fuel savings associated with making fewer spray runs, the adoption of production systems with reduced tillage, and additional soil carbon sequestration, GE crops have also resulted in a significant reduction in the release of greenhouse gas emissions, which, in 2012 alone, was equivalent to removing 11.88 million cars from the roads (Brookes and Barfoot, 2014b).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Brookes and Barfoot, 2014b
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Over 90% (>16.5 million) were small-scale, resource-poor farmers in developing countries.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In 2011, the number of certified organic broilers totaled more than 28 million (0.33% of the total U.S. broilers; Table 2), layer hens totaled more than 6.6 million (1.97% of the total U.S. layers), and turkeys totaled 504,000 (0.20% of the total U.S. turkeys).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Table 2
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The animal cannot be fed grain or any grain byproduct before marketing and must have continuous access to pasture during the growing season.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“India cultivated 11.0 million ha of Bt cotton with an adoption rate of 95%.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The retail price for or -ganic milk between 2004 and 2007 averaged 3 times the cost of conventional milk (USDA Economic Research Service, 2012b), and in 2013, organic milk made up 4.38% of total U.S. fluid milk market sales.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The retail price for organic poultry and eggs between 2004 and 2006 was approximately twice that of conventional products (USDA Economic Research Service, 2012a).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites USDA Economic Research Service, 2012a
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“For example, corn silage, which averages 10 to 20% grain and can consist of up to a third or more grain, blurs the distinction between grain fed and forage fed (Mathews and Johnson, 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Mathews and Johnson, 2013
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“V oluntary labeling programs and market premiums exist for products derived from animals that have not consumed GE feed.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Sampling, testing, and certification depend on statistical processes, however, and hence all are subject to some error, which increases at very low tolerances (Lamb and Booker, 2011).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lamb and Booker, 2011
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Currently, the most accepted techniques for the detection of rDNA and protein products are PCR and ELISA, respectively.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although efforts have been taken to harmonize analytical methodology for the detection of GE products at national, regional, and international levels, no international standards have yet been established (Holst-Jensen et al., 2006).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Holst-Jensen et al., 2006 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Animal agriculture is currently highly dependent on GE feed sources, and global trade of livestock feed is largely supplied by countries that have approved the cultivation of GE crops.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Commercial livestock populations are the largest consumers of GE crops, and globally, billions of animals have been eating GE feed for almost 2 decades.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Various analytical methods have been developed and are routinely used for the monitoring of GE origin in raw materials and processed foods and have been reviewed elsewhere (Alexander et al., 2007; Marmiroli et al., 2008).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Alexander et al., 2007; Marmiroli et al., 2008
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There is currently a pipeline of so-called 'second generation' GE crops with improved output traits for livestock production.”
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The cost of these products is higher than conventionally produced products due to both the higher cost of non-GE feed and the costs associated with certifying the absence of GE crops in the production process and product segregation.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The market for animals that have not consumed GE feed is currently a niche market in the United States, although such products are available to interested consumers via voluntary processbased marketing programs.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“no significant differences in feed digestibility, performance, or health have been observed in livestock that consume GE feed (Flachowsky et al., 2012).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Flachowsky et al., 2012 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“the European Food Safety Authority (2008; Parma, Italy) states that such testing is only warranted when driven by a specific hypothesis indicated by mo -lecular, compositional, phenotypic, agronomic, or other analysis (e.g., metabolic pathway considerations) of the particular GE event.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites European Food Safety Authority, 2008 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Results from these comprehensive studies revealed the compositional and nutritional noninferiority of GE corn to its isogenic control and an absence of long-term adverse effects from GE corn consumption.”
What the sources say
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“α-solanine, a glycoalkaloid, was unintentionally increased to unacceptable levels in certain varieties of potato through plant breeding resulting in certain cultivars being withdrawn from the U.S. and Swedish markets due to frequently exceeding the upper safe limit for total glycoalkaloid content (Petersson et al., 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Petersson et al., 2013 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Many toxicologists concur that animal feeding trials of whole GE food have a low power to detect adverse effects and contribute little, if anything, to the safety assessment of whole foods (Kuiper et al., 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kuiper et al., 2013 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Antibodies specific to the GE corn protein (Cry1Ab) were not detected in the blood, indicating the absence of an allergic-type immune response to the protein.”
What the sources say
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Neither the cry1Ab gene nor the Cry1Ab protein was found in the blood, organs, or products of animals fed GE corn”
What the sources say
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“indicating that neither the intact rDNA nor the intact recombinant protein migrated from the digestive system of the animal into other body tissues or edible animal products.”
Load-bearingStrength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The European Food Safety Authority clarified the difference between statis -tical significance and biological relevance (European Food Safety Authority, 2011).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites European Food Safety Authority, 2011
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“there were no adverse effects of feeding GE corn on small intestinal morphology or the gut microbiota.”
What the sources say
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“but this ratio is something that would be expected to worsen (i.e., increase) if the health of these animals was deteriorating following exposure to GE feed.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim.
- The authors state this as an assumption: If animal feed derived from GE crops had deleterious effects on animals consuming GE feed, then animal performance and health attributes in these large commercial livestock populations would have been negatively impacted.
In the paper
“Studies have concluded that animals do not digest transgenic and native plant DNA differently and that rDNA from GE crops has not been detected in animal products (Einspanier, 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Einspanier, 2013 source
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although broilers are exposed to large amounts of corn and soybean meal during their 42- to 49-d lifespan, they increase their body size 60fold during this period, making them very sensitive to dietary perturbations (European Food Safety Authority, 2008; International Life Sciences Institute, 2003).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites European Food Safety Authority, 2008 source
- Not checked yetcites International Life Sciences Institute, 2003
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: In a typical U.S. broiler operation, chickens are fed for 42–49 d on diets composed of approximately 35% soybean meal and 65% corn grain.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Adverse effects, including high rates of tumorogenesis, sterility, premature mortality, and histopathological abnormalities have been reported.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“however, neither recombinant DNA nor protein has ever been found in milk, meat, or eggs from animals that have eaten GE feed with the exception of a single study that reported the presence of fragments of transgenic DNA in both 'organic' and 'conventional' milk in Italy (Agodi et al., 2006).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Agodi et al., 2006 source
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Some of these reports were published and then retracted (Séralini et al., 2012), although recently and controversially republished without further peer review (Séralini et al., 2014), and others were never subjected to peer review (Ermakova, 2005; Velmirov et al., 2008).”
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The DNA from GE crops is chemically equivalent to DNA from other sources and both are thoroughly broken down in the gastrointestinal tract during digestion (Beever and Kemp, 2000; Jonas et al., 2001; CAST, 2006).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Beever and Kemp, 2000
- Not checked yetcites Jonas et al., 2001 source
- Not checked yetcites CAST, 2006
Load-bearingStrength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Increase in demand for animal products, especially meat, will drive demand for grain and protein feeds (USDA Economic Research Service, 2008).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites USDA Economic Research Service, 2008
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Despite a wealth of studies and literature to the contrary, these isolated and poorly designed studies have resulted in the promulgation of new regulations, including a mandatory 90-d rodent subchronic toxicity feeding study for all new GE approvals in the EU (Kuiper et al., 2013), and have generated a great deal of media attention (Arjó et al., 2013).”
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (Rome, Italy) predicts that by 2050 global grain trade will double to 600 million t (Bruinsma 2009).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Bruinsma 2009
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The United States used to be a major supplier of corn to the EU in the 1990s but GE corn plantings in the United States caused a drastic decline in corn exports to the EU because of trade disruptions due to asynchronous approvals (i.e., cultivation approvals of specific GE varieties in the United States occurring before food and feed import approvals in the EU).”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Given asynchronous regulatory approvals and the realities of agricultural production systems where harvesting machinery and storage facilities are shared among different production systems, trade disruption appears almost unavoidable if importing countries enforce a 'zerotolerance' policy for unapproved events that have been approved for cultivation in exporting countries.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Rests on an assumption: Harvesting machinery and storage facilities are shared among different agricultural production systems.
In the paper
“As the global production of GE feed crops continues to rise, the EU's stringent GE tolerance levels (0.9% GE material limit plus 0.05% measuring uncertainty tolerance) and zero tolerance for unapproved events are complicating the maintenance of non-GE supply chains (Popp et al., 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Popp et al., 2013 source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The availability and cost of certified organic feeds is a major challenge for U.S. or -ganic livestock producers.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Production costs for organic dairies are greater than for conventional dairies due to the increased cost of organic feed and the increased use of labor and capital, which is not scale neutral as the total costs per unit of production drops sharply as herd size increases.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These voluntary process-based labels, in effect, verify that GE crops were not used in the production process, rather than testing for the presence of GE content in the animal products themselves as such products contain no detectable and quantifiable traces of GE materials.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Given the high rates of GE adoption in major feed crops, U.S. producers wishing to purchase non-GE feed for their livestock likely contract with growers or source identity-preserved (certified non-GE) or organic feed.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Genetic engineering offers new possibilities for approaching both of these objectives, including improving the nutritional value of feed (e.g., AA content; Huang et al., 2006), lowering N and P pollution through altered crop composition (e.g., low phytate; Chen et al., 2008), and reducing manure excretion through a higher NE value (e.g., reduced lignin; Jung et al., 2012).”
What the sources say
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, given the different regulatory approaches that are in place for crops that are compositionally equivalent, it is unclear how regulatory requirements may vary between countries in terms of the number and length of target animal feeding studies for these crops with altered output traits.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These so-called 'second generation' crops modified for output traits will pose some regulatory and com -mercialization challenges.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Feedstuffs are a major contributor to life cycle assessments in the production of meat, milk, and eggs on a national and global scale.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Reversion from GE to conventional crop varieties would require the adoption of altered agronomic practices to manage those crops and relinquishment of the documented environmental and economic benefits as -sociated with the adoption of GE crops (Areal et al., 2013; Fernandez-Cornejo et al., 2014; Green, 2012; NRC, 2010).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Areal et al., 2013; Fernandez-Cornejo et al., 2014; Green, 2012; NRC, 2010
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This planting was greater than a 100-fold increase from the 1.7 million ha that were planted in 1996, making GE the fastest-adopted crop technology in recent history.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Additionally, if the benefits derived from growing these crops accrue to the livestock producer or feeder and not directly to the farmer growing the crop, there will need to be some form of supply chain segregation in place to ensure a price premium is obtained for the value-added output trait.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There are 2 ways in which plant breeding might increase the efficiency of livestock production; the first is by raising the crop yield per hect -are (e.g., improved drought tolerance or N use efficiency) and the second is by improving the rate of conversion of vegetable calories into animal calories (e.g., altered output traits or crop composition).”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The first is that they will not, by definition, be substantially equivalent to isogenic non-GE varieties.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Farmers have planted these GE varieties to enable the adoption of improved agronomic practices (e.g., reduced insecticide applications) providing environmental, economic, and food security benefits in various countries (Ali and Abdulai, 2010; Burachik, 2010; Fernandez-Cornejo et al., 2014; Huang et al., 2010; Kathage and Qaim, 2012; Qaim and Kouser, 2013).”
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Ali and Abdulai, 2010; Burachik, 2010; Fernandez-Cornejo et al., 2014; Huang et al., 2010; Kathage and Qaim, 2012; Qaim and Kouser, 2013
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Using pasture as a source of dairy forage is more common on organic dairies, which can help to reduce feed costs per cow but also contributes to lower production per cow.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The term 'natural' is not associated with an official production process standard so natural beef may come from animals that have consumed GE feed.”
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:correlational· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“2) the expanding range of GE crop species being grown and traded;”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kalaitzandonakes et al. (2014) source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“These include 1) the expanding pipeline of novel GE crop events, including second generation crops modified for output traits;”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kalaitzandonakes et al. (2014) source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As discussed previously, this has resulted in trade disruptions, especially when countries use a 'zero-tolerance' policy for unapproved events, meaning that even minute traces of unapproved GE crops are illegal and must be withdrawn from the market.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These developments may lead to a revaluation of the current rDNA process-based regulatory trigger for GE organisms to a more scientifically defensible product-based approach centered on the novelty and any unique risks associated with the phenotype of the product rather than the process used to accomplish the genetic modification (Bradford et al., 2005; McHughen, 2007).”
What the sources say
Strength:hedged· not yet calibratedCausal:conditional· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✗ Checkable: fails✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Countries with zero-tolerance policies will be perceived as risky export markets, and importers will pay higher prices and insurance premiums to offset risks taken by the supplier.”
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes? Load-bearing: unclear✓ Based: passesIt may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Their approval will further complicate the sourcing of non-GE feedstuffs.”
Tests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✓ Load-bearing: passes✗ Based: failsProbably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“will further complicate this situation.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kim and Kim, 2014
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedCausal:direct· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“3) the expanding global hectarage of GE crops and the growing number of countries that raise them;”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kalaitzandonakes et al. (2014) source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“4) the nascent and inexperienced regulatory expertise in many countries that will be called on to manage a large number of regulatory submissions for new GE crops in the future.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Kalaitzandonakes et al. (2014) source
Strength:plain· not yet calibratedTests✓ Asserted: passes✓ Checkable: passes✗ Load-bearing: fails✓ Based: passesProbably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
DNA and protein are normal components of the diet and are digested.
“Because DNA and protein are normal components of the diet that are digested”
The paper relies on this without support.
Globally, countries that are cultivating GE corn and soy are the major livestock feed exporters.
“Globally, countries that are cultivating GE corn and soy are the major livestock feed exporters.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Asynchronous regulatory approvals have resulted in trade disruptions.
“Asynchronous regulatory approvals (i.e., cultivation approvals of GE varieties in exporting countries occurring before food and feed approvals in importing countries) have resulted in trade disruptions.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Plant varieties developed through other processes of achieving genetic changes, such as radiation mutagenesis, go through no formal risk assessment before being placed on the market.
“By contrast, plant varieties developed through other processes of achieving genetic changes (e.g., radiation mutagenesis) go through no formal risk assessment before being placed on the market.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The United States and Australia/New Zealand explicitly do not require a 90-day subchronic rodent feeding study or actively discourage their conduct due to their negligible scientific value.
“The United States and Australia/New Zealand explicitly do not require a 90-d subchronic rodent feeding study or actively discourage their conduct due to their negligible scientific value.”
The paper relies on this without support.
GE proteins are digested in the gut and no intact GE protein has been found in the bloodstream.
“especially given that GE proteins are digested in the gut and no intact GE protein has been found in the bloodstream.”
The paper relies on this without support.
There are a large number of second-generation GE crops with altered output traits for improved livestock feed in the developmental and regulatory pipelines.
“there are a large number of 'second generation' GE crops with altered output traits for improved livestock feed in the developmental and regulatory pipelines.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In a typical U.S. broiler operation, chickens are fed for 42–49 d on diets composed of approximately 35% soybean meal and 65% corn grain.
“in a typical U.S. broiler operation, chickens are fed for 42-49 d on diets that are composed of approximately 35% soybean meal and 65% corn grain”
The paper relies on this without support.
The average U.S. dairy cow has a productive life of 5 yr with 3 conceptions, 3 gestations, and 3 lactations.
“The average U.S. dairy cow has a productive life of 5 yr with 3 conceptions, 3 gestations, and 3 lactations.”
The paper relies on this without support.
A typical U.S. dairy diet contains 50% corn silage, 20% corn grain, and 10% dehulled soybean meal.
“A typical U.S. dairy diet contains 50% corn silage, 20% corn grain, and 10% dehulled soybean meal.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Many cows receive large portions of their rations as ground corn grain, fuzzy cottonseed, or roasted full-fat soybeans.
“Also, many cows receive large portions of their rations as ground corn grain, fuzzy cottonseed (no processing except for removal of the lint), or roasted full-fat soybeans.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Other GE sources of animal feed include alfalfa hay, sugar beet pulp, corn distillers grains or other coproducts from corn processing, cottonseed meal, canola meal, and soy hulls.
“Other GE sources of animal feed include alfalfa hay, sugar beet pulp, corn distillers grains or other coproducts from corn processing, cottonseed meal, canola meal, and soy hulls.”
The paper relies on this without support.
A beef cow on the range might consume only some GE alfalfa hay, but her progeny entering the feedlot might be expected to consume a ration containing high quantities of GE feed during their 120 d in the feedlot before harvest.
“A beef cow on the range might consume only some GE alfalfa hay, but her progeny entering the feedlot might be expected to consume a ration containing high quantities of GE feed during their 120 d in the feedlot before harvest.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
If animal feed derived from GE crops had deleterious effects on animals consuming GE feed, then animal performance and health attributes in these large commercial livestock populations would have been negatively impacted.
“It would be reasonable to hypothesize that if animal feed derived from GE crops had deleterious effects on animals consuming GE feed, then animal performance and health attributes in these large commercial livestock populations would have been negatively impacted.”
The paper relies on this without support.
All animals arriving at USDA-inspected slaughter facilities undergo both antemortem and postmortem inspections to identify abnormalities.
“All animals arriving at USDA-inspected slaughter facilities undergo both antemortem and postmortem inspections to identify abnormalities.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Carcasses are condemned postmortem if there are visible lesions or tumors present on organs and carcasses.
“Carcasses are condemned postmortem if there are visible lesions or tumors present on organs and carcasses.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Animals and humans regularly ingest DNA and RNA as part of traditional diets without consequence.
“It is important to note that animals and humans regularly ingest DNA and RNA as part of traditional diets without consequence.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Approximately 9 billion broilers are processed annually in the United States.
“approximately 9 billion broilers are processed annually in the United States”
The paper relies on this without support.
Only Brazil currently requires mandatory labeling of products from animals that consume GE feed.
“only Brazil currently re -quires mandatory labeling of products from animals that consume GE feed.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In some countries, mandatory food labeling regulations target the presence of GE components in the finished product (e.g., Australia, New Zealand, and Japan), whereas in other countries, regulations target foods that use GE technology as a part of the production process (e.g., the EU, Brazil, and China).
“In some countries, mandatory food labeling regulations target the presence of GE components in the finished product (e.g., Australia, New Zealand, and Japan), whereas in other countries, regulations target foods that use GE technology as a part of the production process (e.g., the EU, Brazil, and China).”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The volume of traded soybeans required to be identity-preserved certified non-GE is segregated from supplies that may contain GE soybeans.
“if it is as -sumed that this volume of traded soybeans is segregated from supplies that may contain GE soybeans”
The paper relies on this without support.
Harvesting machinery and storage facilities are shared among different agricultural production systems.
“realities of agricultural production systems where harvesting machinery and storage facilities are shared among different production systems”
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?
In the citing paper
“Several groups reviewing the evidence for health hazards of genetic modification have found no evidence for harms;130-134 however, methods for such evaluation remain heterogeneous.135-139”
From Dietary and Policy Priorities for Cardiovascular Disease, Diabetes, and Obesity: A Comprehensive Review (2016) · cites this paper as [134]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
GE feed crops are said to have been introduced in two different years
MinorThe paper repeatedly gives 1996 as the introduction year, but the description of Table 4 says 1986.
“Livestock production statistics for the United States before and after the introduction of GE feed crops in 1986 are summarized in Table 4.”
“The first genetically engineered ( GE ) feed crops were introduced in 1996.”
Table 7 cottonseed-meal percentage does not match its trade figures
MinorTable 7 lists 0.63 million t as the share of cottonseed-meal trade that may contain GE material and 0.6 million t as total trade. The listed share is 105% of total trade, not the reported 45%.
Reported 45 · recomputed 105
“| Percentage of global trade that may be GE | 84.4% | 45% | 64% |”
Citations
Cites
1 retracted
Séralini, G.-E., Clair, E., Mesnage, R., Gress, S., Defarge, N., Malatesta, M., Hennequin, D., & de Vendômois, J. S. (2012) · Food and Chemical Toxicology · doi:10.1016/j.fct.2012.08.005 · Cited by 397
RetractedA guide to genome engineering with programmable nucleases
Kim, S., & Kim, J. (2014) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg3686 · Cited by 1,211
Havenstein, G., Ferket, P., & Qureshi, M. (2003) · Poultry Science · doi:10.1093/ps/82.10.1500 · Cited by 861
Rising consumption of meat and milk in developing countries has created a new food revolution
Delgado, C. L. (2003) · The Journal of Nutrition · doi:10.1093/jn/133.11.3907s · Cited by 717
Trostle, R. (2026) · AgEcon Search (University of Minnesota, USA) · doi:10.22004/ag.econ.413173 · Cited by 543
A Method to Measure the Environmental Impact of Pesticides
Kovach, J. K., Petzoldt, C., Degni, J., & Tette, J. P. (1992) · eCommons (Cornell University) · Cited by 500
Ewen, S. W. B., & Pusztai, A. J. (1999) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(98)05860-7 · Cited by 426
USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service
(2014) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.51-3802 · Cited by 421
The resource outlook to 2050: by how much do land, water and crop yields need to increase by 2050?
Bruinsma, J. (2009) · Cited by 343
Deployment of new biotechnologies in plant breeding
Lusser, M., Parisi, C., Plan, D., & Rodríguez-Cerezo, E. (2012) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.2142 · Cited by 342
The adoption of genetically modified cotton and poverty reduction in Pakistan
Ali, A., & Abdulai, A. (2010) · Journal of Agricultural Economics · doi:10.1111/j.1477-9552.2009.00227.x · Cited by 320
Economic impacts and impact dynamics of Bt ( Bacillus thuringiensis ) cotton in India
Kathage, J., & Qaim, M. (2012) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1203647109 · Cited by 301
Séralini, G.-E., Clair, E., Mesnage, R., Gress, S., Defarge, N., Malatesta, M., Hennequin, D., & de Vendômois, J. S. (2014) · Environmental Sciences Europe · doi:10.1186/s12302-014-0014-5 · Cited by 299
Hartung, F., & Schiemann, J. (2014) · The Plant Journal · doi:10.1111/tpj.12413 · Cited by 277
Regulating transgenic crops sensibly: Lessons from plant breeding, biotechnology and genomics
Bradford, K. J., Van Deynze, A., Gutterson, N., Parrott, W., & Strauss, S. H. (2005) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt1084 · Cited by 243
Snell, C., Bernheim, A., Bergé, J.-B., Kuntz, M., Pascal, G., Paris, A., & Ricroch, A. E. (2012) · Food and Chemical Toxicology · doi:10.1016/j.fct.2011.11.048 · Cited by 234 · cited 3×
“A number of long-term (of more than 90 d and up to 2 yr in duration) feeding trials and multigenerational studies conducted by public research laboratories using various animal models including pigs, cows, quail, and fish have also been reviewed (Ricroch, 2013; Ricroch et al., 2013; Snell et al., 2012).”
Background(2008) · Food and Chemical Toxicology · doi:10.1016/j.fct.2008.02.008 · Cited by 230
Séralini, G.-E., Cellier, D., & de Vendomois, J. S. (2007) · Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology · doi:10.1007/s00244-006-0149-5 · Cited by 222
Genetically modified crops and food security
Qaim, M., & Kouser, S. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0064879 · Cited by 222
The benefits of herbicide‐resistant crops
Green, J. M. (2012) · Pest Management Science · doi:10.1002/ps.3374 · Cited by 203
Health Risks of Genetically Modified Foods
Dona, A., & Arvanitoyannis, I. S. (2008) · Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition · doi:10.1080/10408390701855993 · Cited by 202
(EFSA), E. F. S. A. (2008) · EFSA Journal · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2008.1057 · Cited by 198
Transgenic maize plants expressing a fungal phytase gene
Chen, R., Xue, G., Chen, P., Yao, B., Yang, W., Ma, Q., Fan, Y., Zhao, Z., Tarczynski, M. C., & Shi, J. (2008) · Transgenic Research · doi:10.1007/s11248-007-9138-3 · Cited by 196
Genetically Engineered Crops: From Idea to Product
Prado, J. R., Segers, G. C., Voelker, T. A., Carson, D., Dobert, R. C., Phillips, J., Cook, K. A., Cornejo, C., Monken, J., Grapes, L., et al. (2014) · Annual Review of Plant Biology · doi:10.1146/annurev-arplant-050213-040039 · Cited by 194
Boleman, S. L., Boleman, S. J., Morgan, W. W., Hale, D. S., Griffin, D. B., Savell, J. W., Ames, R. P., Smith, M. T., Tatum, J. D., Field, T. G., et al. (1998) · Journal of Animal Science · doi:10.2527/1998.76196x · Cited by 193
Safety considerations of DNA in food
Jonas, D. A., Elmadfa, I., Engel, K.-H., Heller, K. J., Kozianowski, G., König, A., Müller, D., Narbonne, J. F., Wackernagel, W., & Kleiner, J. (2001) · Annals of Nutrition and Metabolism · doi:10.1159/000046734 · Cited by 187
Bacterial Plasminogen Receptors: Mediators of a Multifaceted Relationship
Sanderson‐Smith, M. L., Oliveira, D. M. P. D., Ranson, M., et al. (2012) · BioMed Research International · doi:10.1155/2012/272148 · Cited by 181
Einspanier, R., Klotz, A., Kraft, J., Aulrich, K., Poser, R., Schwägele, F., Jahreis, G., & Flachowsky, G. (2001) · European Food Research and Technology · doi:10.1007/s002170000248 · Cited by 177
Impact of Genetically Engineered Crops on Farm Sustainability in the United States
National Research Council (2010) · National Academies Press eBooks · doi:10.17226/12804 · Cited by 171
Modifying crops to increase cell wall digestibility
Jung, H.-J. G., Samac, D. A., & Sarath, G. (2012) · Plant Science · doi:10.1016/j.plantsci.2011.10.014 · Cited by 167
A comparison of the effects of three GM corn varieties on mammalian health
de Vendômois, J. S., Roullier, F., Cellier, D., & Séralini, G.-E. (2009) · International Journal of Biological Sciences · doi:10.7150/ijbs.5.706 · Cited by 160
Methods for detection of GMOs in food and feed
Marmiroli, N., Maestri, E., Gullì, M., Malcevschi, A., Peano, C., Bordoni, R., & Bellis, G. D. (2008) · Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry · doi:10.1007/s00216-008-2303-6 · Cited by 158
Unintended compositional changes in genetically modified (GM) crops: 20 years of research
Herman, R. A., & Price, W. D. (2013) · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jf400135r · Cited by 156
Giesy, J. P., Solomon, K. R., Mackay, D., & Anderson, J. C. (2014) · Environmental Sciences Europe · doi:10.1186/s12302-014-0029-y · Cited by 152
Gruère, G. (2007) · IFPRI E-brary (International Food Policy Research Institute) · Cited by 151
Huang, S., Frizzi, A., Florida, C. A., Kruger, D. E., & Luethy, M. H. (2006) · Plant Molecular Biology · doi:10.1007/s11103-006-0027-6 · Cited by 148
The Impact of Genetically Engineered Crops on Farm Sustainability in the United States
Chen, H. (2010) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.48-2667 · Cited by 144
García-Villalba, R., León, C., Dinelli, G., Segura-Carretero, A., Fernández-Gutiérrez, A., Garcia-Cañas, V., & Cifuentes, A. (2008) · Journal of Chromatography A · doi:10.1016/j.chroma.2008.05.018 · Cited by 129
The Safety of Genetically Modified Foods Produced through Biotechnology
Hollingworth, R. M., Bjeldanes, L. F., Bolger, M., Kimber, I., Meade, B. J., Taylor, S. L., & Wallace, K. B. (2003) · Toxicological Sciences · doi:10.1093/toxsci/71.1.2 · Cited by 127
Brookes, G. R., & Barfoot, P. (2014) · GM crops & food · doi:10.4161/gmcr.28098 · Cited by 124
Aumaitre, A., Aulrich, K., Chesson, A., Flachowsky, G., & Piva, G. (2002) · Livestock Production Science · doi:10.1016/s0301-6226(02)00016-7 · Cited by 112
Malatesta, M., Caporaloni, C., Gavaudan, S., Rocchi, M. B. L., Serafini, S., Tiberi, C., & Gazzanelli, G. (2002) · Cell Structure and Function · doi:10.1247/csf.27.173 · Cited by 112
Economic and agronomic impact of commercialized GM crops: a meta-analysis
AREAL, F. J., RIESGO, L., & RODRÍGUEZ-CEREZO, E. (2013) · The Journal of Agricultural Science · doi:10.1017/s0021859612000111 · Cited by 112
Comparative regulatory approaches for groups of new plant breeding techniques
Lusser, M., & Davies, H. V. (2013) · New Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.nbt.2013.02.004 · Cited by 109
Council for Agricultural Science and Technology (CAST)
Pass, B. C. (1979) · Bulletin of the Entomological Society of America · doi:10.1093/besa/25.3.206 · Cited by 103
Beever, D. E., & Kemp, C. (2000) · Cited by 102
Kılıç, A., & Akay, M. T. (2008) · Food and Chemical Toxicology · doi:10.1016/j.fct.2007.11.016 · Cited by 98
Holst-Jensen, A., De Loose, M., & Van den Eede, G. (2006) · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jf052849a · Cited by 93
Huang, J., Mi, J., Lin, H., Wang, Z., Chen, R., Hu, R., Rozelle, S., & Pray, C. (2010) · Science China Life Sciences · doi:10.1007/s11427-010-4036-y · Cited by 89
A long-term study on female mice fed on a genetically modified soybean: effects on liver ageing
Malatesta, M., Boraldi, F., Annovi, G., Baldelli, B., Battistelli, S., Biggiogera, M., & Quaglino, D. (2008) · Histochemistry and Cell Biology · doi:10.1007/s00418-008-0476-x · Cited by 88
How safe does transgenic food need to be?
DeFrancesco, L. (2013) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.2686 · Cited by 86
Assessment of GE food safety using ‘-omics’ techniques and long-term animal feeding studies
Ricroch, A. (2012) · New Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.nbt.2012.12.001 · Cited by 86
How to deal with the upcoming challenges in GMO detection in food and feed
Broeders, S. R. M., De Keersmaecker, S. C. J., & Roosens, N. H. C. (2012) · Journal of Biomedicine and Biotechnology · doi:10.1155/2012/402418 · Cited by 85
Walsh, M. C., Buzoianu, S. G., Gardiner, G. E., Rea, M. C., Gelencsér, E., Jánosi, A., Epstein, M. M., Ross, R. P., & Lawlor, P. G. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0027177 · Cited by 82
Malatesta, M., Biggiogera, M., Manuali, E., & Rocchi, M. (2009) · European Journal of Histochemistry · doi:10.4081/851 · Cited by 77
Cheng, K. C., Beaulieu, J., Iquira, E., Belzile, F. J., Fortin, M. G., & Strömvik, M. V. (2008) · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jf073505i · Cited by 76
Petersson, E. V., Arif, U., Schulzova, V., Krtková, V., Hajšlová, J., Meijer, J., Andersson, H. C., Jonsson, L., & Sitbon, F. (2013) · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jf400318p · Cited by 74
A long-term toxicology study on pigs fed a combined genetically modified (GM) soy and GM maize diet
Carman, J. A., Vlieger, H. R., Steeg, L., Sneller, V.-P., Robinson, G. W., Clinch‐Jones, C. A., Haynes, J. I., & Edwards, J. W. (2013) · Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) · Cited by 71
Alexander, T. W., Reuter, T., Aulrich, K., Sharma, R., Okine, E. K., Dixon, W. T., & McAllister, T. A. (2006) · Animal Feed Science and Technology · doi:10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2006.08.003 · Cited by 71
Brake, D. G., & Evenson, D. P. (2003) · Food and Chemical Toxicology · doi:10.1016/j.fct.2003.08.003 · Cited by 71
Ultrastructural analysis of pancreatic acinar cells from mice fed on genetically modified soybean
Malatesta, M., Caporaloni, C., Rossi, L., Battistelli, S., Rocchi, M. B. L., Tonucci, F., & Gazzanelli, G. (2002) · Journal of Anatomy · doi:10.1046/j.0021-8782.2002.00103.x · Cited by 68
Arjó, G., Portero, M., Piñol, C., Viñas, J., Matias-Guiu, X., Capell, T., Bartholomaeus, A., Parrott, W., & Christou, P. (2013) · Transgenic Research · doi:10.1007/s11248-013-9692-9 · Cited by 67
Bartholomaeus, A., Parrott, W., Bondy, G., Walker, K., & on behalf of the ILSI International Food Biotechnology Committee Task Force on the Use of Mammalian Toxicology Studies in the Safety Assessment of GM Foods (2013) · Critical Reviews in Toxicology · doi:10.3109/10408444.2013.842955 · Cited by 59 · cited 5×
“The difficulties associated with the safety and nutritional testing of whole foods/feed derived from GE crops, which contain thousands of bioactive substances, are well known (reviewed in Bartholomaeus et al., 2013).”
BackgroundInfluentialWalsh, M. C., Buzoianu, S. G., Gardiner, G. E., Rea, M. C., Ross, R. P., Cassidy, J. P., & Lawlor, P. G. (2011) · British Journal Of Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s0007114511003011 · Cited by 52
Buzoianu, S. G., Walsh, M. C., Rea, M. C., O’Donovan, Ó., Gelencsér, É., Ujhelyi, G., Szabó, E., Nagy, A., Ross, R. P., Gardiner, G. E., et al. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0047851 · Cited by 50
Key global environmental impacts of genetically modified (GM) crop use 1996–2012
Barfoot, P., & Brookes, G. (2014) · GM crops & food · doi:10.4161/gmcr.28449 · Cited by 50
White, T. L., & Moore, D. A. (2009) · Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association · doi:10.2460/javma.235.8.937 · Cited by 48
Authority, E. F. S. (2012) · EFSA Journal · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2012.2986 · Cited by 47
Buzoianu, S. G., Walsh, M. C., Rea, M. C., O’Sullivan, Ó., Cotter, P. D., Ross, R. P., Gardiner, G. E., & Lawlor, P. G. (2012) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.00307-12 · Cited by 46
Flachowsky, G., Schafft, H., & Meyer, U. (2012) · Journal für Verbraucherschutz und Lebensmittelsicherheit · doi:10.1007/s00003-012-0777-9 · Cited by 45
Reversibility of hepatocyte nuclear modifications in mice fed on genetically modified soybean.
Malatesta, M., Tiberi, C., Baldelli, B., Battistelli, S., Manuali, E., & Biggiogera, M. (2005) · PubMed · doi:10.4081/950 · Cited by 45
Potential economic impacts of zero thresholds for unapproved GMOs: The EU case
Kalaitzandonakes, N., Kaufman, J., & Miller, D. (2014) · Food Policy · doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2013.06.013 · Cited by 44
GM soybeans and health safety—a controversy reexamined
Marshall, A. (2007) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt0907-981 · Cited by 44
Walsh, M. C., Buzoianu, S. G., Rea, M. C., O’Donovan, Ó., Gelencsér, É., Ujhelyi, G., Ross, R. P., Gardiner, G. E., & Lawlor, P. G. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0036141 · Cited by 43
Experience from use of GMOs in Argentinian agriculture, economy and environment
Burachik, M. (2010) · New Biotechnology · doi:10.1016/j.nbt.2010.05.011 · Cited by 43
Guertler, P., Paul, V., Steinke, K., Wiedemann, S., Preißinger, W., Albrecht, C., Spiekers, H., Schwarz, F. J., & Meyer, H. H. D. (2010) · Livestock Science · doi:10.1016/j.livsci.2010.04.010 · Cited by 43
Rhee, G. S., Cho, D. H., Won, Y.-H., Seok, J. H., Kim, S. S., Kwack, S. J., Lee, R. D., Chae, S. Y., Kim, J. W., Lee, B. M., et al. (2005) · Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health · doi:10.1080/15287390500182446 · Cited by 41
The Effect of Feeding Bt MON810 Maize to Pigs for 110 Days on Intestinal Microbiota
Buzoianu, S. G., Walsh, M. C., Rea, M. C., O’Sullivan, Ó., Crispie, F., Cotter, P. D., Ross, R. P., Gardiner, G. E., & Lawlor, P. G. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033668 · Cited by 40
Steinke, K., Guertler, P., Paul, V., Wiedemann, S., Ettle, T., Albrecht, C., Meyer, H. H. D., Spiekers, H., & Schwarz, F. J. (2010) · Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition · doi:10.1111/j.1439-0396.2010.01003.x · Cited by 38
Kuiper, H. A., Kok, E. J., & Davies, H. V. (2013) · Plant Biotechnology Journal · doi:10.1111/pbi.12091 · Cited by 38
Sustainability of US organic beef and dairy production systems: Soil, plant and cattle interactions
Hafla, A., MacAdam, J., & Soder, K. (2013) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su5073009 · Cited by 38
Fatal flaws in agbiotech regulatory policies
McHughen, A. (2007) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt0707-725 · Cited by 38
Detection of genetically modified DNA sequences in milk from The Italian market
Agodi, A., Barchitta, M., Grillo, A., & Sciacca, S. (2006) · International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health · doi:10.1016/j.ijheh.2005.08.005 · Cited by 37
New feeds from genetically modified plants: the US approach to safety for animals and the food chain
Faust, M. A. (2002) · Livestock Production Science · doi:10.1016/s0301-6226(02)00017-9 · Cited by 35
The Impact of Genetically Engineered Crops on Farm Sustainability in the United States
Plencovich, M. C. (2012) · The Journal of Agricultural Education and Extension · doi:10.1080/1389224x.2012.707068 · Cited by 34
Buzoianu, S. G., Walsh, M. C., Rea, M. C., Cassidy, J. P., Ross, R. P., Gardiner, G. E., & Lawlor, P. G. (2012) · animal · doi:10.1017/s1751731112000249 · Cited by 34
Safety of Meat, Milk, and Eggs from Animals Fed Crops Derived from Modern Biotechnology
CAST (2006) · doi:10.62300/mbq1l3sf · Cited by 31
Buzoianu, S. G., Walsh, M. C., Rea, M. C., Cassidy, J. P., Ryan, T., Ross, R. P., Gardiner, G. E., & Lawlor, P. G. (2012) · Journal of Animal Science · doi:10.2527/jas.2012-5360 · Cited by 30
GMOs in animal agriculture: time to consider both costs and benefits in regulatory evaluations
Eenennaam, A. L. V. (2013) · Journal of Animal Science and Biotechnology/Journal of animal science and biotechnology · doi:10.1186/2049-1891-4-37 · Cited by 30
Self-citationGenetically Modified Feeds in Poultry Diet: Safety, Performance, and Product Quality
Tufarelli, V., Selvaggi, M., Dario, C., & Laudadio, V. (2013) · Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition · doi:10.1080/10408398.2012.667017 · Cited by 29
Novel GM animal technologies and their governance
Bruce, A., Castle, D. G. A., Gibbs, C., Tait, J., & Whitelaw, B. (2013) · Transgenic Research · doi:10.1007/s11248-013-9724-5 · Cited by 22
Bertheau, Y., Helbling, J. C., Fortabat, M. N., Makhzami, S., Sotinel, I., Audéon, C., Nignol, A. C., Kobilinsky, A., Petit, L., Fach, P., et al. (2009) · Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry · doi:10.1021/jf802262c · Cited by 20
Walsh, M. C., Buzoianu, S. G., Gardiner, G. E., Rea, M. C., O’Donovan, Ó., Ross, R. P., & Lawlor, P. G. (2012) · British Journal Of Nutrition · doi:10.1017/s0007114512002607 · Cited by 19
Buzoianu, S. G., Walsh, M. C., Rea, M. C., Quigley, L., O’Sullivan, Ó., Cotter, P. D., Ross, R. P., Gardiner, G. E., & Lawlor, P. G. (2013) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.02937-13 · Cited by 19
Guertler, P., Brandl, C., MEYER, H. H. D., & Tichopád, A. (2012) · Journal of Consumer Protection and Food Safety · doi:10.1007/s00003-012-0778-8 · Cited by 16
Serious inadequacies regarding the pathology data presented in the paper by Séralini et al. (2012)
Schorsch, F. (2013) · Food and Chemical Toxicology · doi:10.1016/j.fct.2012.10.043 · Cited by 12
Lamb, E. G., & Booker, H. (2011) · Seed Science Research · doi:10.1017/s0960258511000213 · Cited by 12
The fate of transgenic DNA and newly expressed proteins
Einspanier, R. (2013) · Animal nutrition with transgenic plants · doi:10.1079/9781780641768.0130 · Cited by 10 · cited 2×
“Summary of Data on Recombinant DNA/protein in Milk, Meat, and Eggs from Animals Fed Genetically Engineered Feed Studies have concluded that animals do not digest transgenic and native plant DNA differently and that rDNA from GE crops has not been detected in animal products (Einspanier, 2013).”
BackgroundFeeding animals with GM crops: Boon or bane?
Deb, R., Sajjanar, B., Devi, K. V., et al. (2013) · Cited by 10
The pipeline of GM crops for improved animal feed: Challenges for commercial use
Tillie, P., Dillen, K., & Rodríguez-Cerezo, E. (2013) · Animal nutrition with transgenic plants · doi:10.1079/9781780641768.0166 · Cited by 9
Natural genotypes via genetic engineering
Wells, K. D. (2013) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1315623110 · Cited by 8
Rickard, C. (2009) · Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition · doi:10.1080/10408390903467787 · Cited by 7
Economic impact of GM hysteria on EU feed market
Popp, J., Pető, K., Magda, R., & Lakner, Z. (2013) · American Journal of Plant Sciences · doi:10.4236/ajps.2013.48186 · Cited by 7 · cited 4×
“In 2013, 4 major United Kingdom food supermarket groups—Tesco, Cooperative, Marks and Spencer, and Sainsbury’s—ceased requiring that poultry and egg suppliers use only non-GE feed (Popp et al., 2013).”
BackgroundInfluentialFeeding studies with firstgeneration GM plants (input traits) with food-producing animals.
Flachowsky, G. (2013) · CABI eBooks · doi:10.1079/9781780641768.0072 · Cited by 6
Long-term and multi-generational animal feeding studies.
Ricroch, A., Berheim, A., Snell, C., et al. (2013) · CABI eBooks · doi:10.1079/9781780641768.0112 · Cited by 5
GMOs in animal agriculture: time to consider both costs and benefits in regulatory evaluations
Alison, van, & Eenennaam (2014) · Acta Scientiarum Naturalium Universitatis Sunyatseni · Cited by 2
The structural evolution of organic farms in the USA: the international market effect
Grow, S., & Greene, C. (2009) · Wageningen Academic Publishers eBooks · doi:10.3920/9789086866618_016 · Cited by 1
Flagged first, then by citations
12 of the 119 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- European Feed Manufacturers' Federation, 2013, XXVI FEFAC congress 2013, The feed chain in action.
- European Food Safety Authority, 2011, Opinion of the scientific committee/scientific panel. Statistical significance and biological relevance, EFSA J., 9, 2372
- International Life Sciences Institute, 2007, Best practices for the conduct of animal studies to evaluate crops genetically modified for output traits
- James, 2013, Global status of commercialized biotech/GM crops: 2013
- Velmirov, 2008, Biological effects of transgenic maize NK603xMON810 fed in long term reproduction studies in mice, Bundesministerium fur Gesundheit, Familie und Jugend.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mozaffarian, D. (2016) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.115.018585 · Cited by 2,216
Public Acceptance of Plant Biotechnology and GM Crops
Lucht, J. M. (2015) · Viruses · doi:10.3390/v7082819 · Cited by 410
“The large majority of soy-based animal feed in the EU, thus, contains genetically modified components [10].”
BackgroundMicrobial and genetically engineered oils as replacements for fish oil in aquaculture feeds
Sprague, M., Betancor, M. B., & Tocher, D. R. (2017) · Biotechnology Letters · doi:10.1007/s10529-017-2402-6 · Cited by 245
“It is thought that around 90% of soybeans traded globally contain GM material and, as such, a large proportion of animal feed available in the EU already contains GM components (Lucht 2015; Van Eenennaam and Young 2014).”
BackgroundFish nutrition research: past, present and future
Jobling, M. (2015) · Aquaculture International · doi:10.1007/s10499-014-9875-2 · Cited by 179
“…and books that aimed to inform about the advances in fish nutrition followed suit (e.g. Halver 1989; Wilson 1991; NRC 1993, 2011; Hertrampf and Piedad-Pascual 2000; Houlihan et al. 2001; Halver and Hardy 2002; Webster and Lim 2002; Holt 2011; Turchini et al. 2011; Merrifield and Ringø 2014).”
BackgroundInfluentialNew GMO regulations for old: Determining a new future for EU crop biotechnology
Davison, J., & Ammann, K. (2017) · GM crops & food · doi:10.1080/21645698.2017.1289305 · Cited by 124
“At this moment there are no international discussions on this subject of global regulation despite years-long pressing Masip G. et al. (Van Eenennaam and Young, 2014), PRRI (Gupta, 2000).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Van Eenennaam, A. L., & Young, A. E.
- Affiliations
- Department of Animal Science, University of California, Davis 95616
- University of California, Davis (US)
- ORCID
- Young, A. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Animal Science
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2014-10-01
- Volume
- 92
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 4255-4278
- ISSN
- 0021-8812 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-3163
- OpenAlex
- W2087980057
- Semantic Scholar
- 4ae01b48020041b54eddccee0ec80aa0b56c70eb
- Cited by
- 154
- References
- 119
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 18
- FWCI
- 2.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Animal Science (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Genetically Modified Organisms Research
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Food Science › Agricultural safety and regulations
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Animal Genetics and Reproduction
- Keywords
- livestock performance, livestock health, genome editing, international regulatory harmonization, animal feed
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Animal Feed, Breeding, Edible Grain, Eggs, Female, Genetic Engineering, Meat, Milk, Pregnancy, Prevalence, DNA, Plant, Pregnancy Rate, Livestock
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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