Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33719302›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in plant science2021

Global Regulation of Genetically Modified Crops Amid the Gene Edited Crop Boom - A Review.

Crystal Turnbull, Morten Lillemo, Trine A K Hvoslef-Eide

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in plant science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 157 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
157citing papers in PubMed
24.1field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

157 citing papers in PubMed, 424 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Genome Editing Approaches in Flax (International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  8. Harnessing artificial intelligence in plant breeding: innovations in digital phenotyping and breeding methodologies.TAG. Theoretical and applied genetics. Theoretische und angewandte Genetik · 2026
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

97 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Crystal TurnbullFaculty of Biosciences, Institute of Plant Science, Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU), Ås, Norway.
Morten LillemoFaculty of Biosciences, Institute of Plant Science, Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU), Ås, Norway.
Trine A K Hvoslef-EideFaculty of Biosciences, Institute of Plant Science, Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU), Ås, Norway.
Norwegian University of Life Sciences · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Products derived from agricultural biotechnology is fast becoming one of the biggest agricultural trade commodities globally, clothing us, feeding our livestock, and fueling our eco-friendly cars. This exponential growth occurs despite asynchronous regulatory schemes around the world, ranging from moratoriums and prohibitions on genetically modified (GM) organisms, to regulations that treat both conventional and biotech novel plant products under the same regulatory framework. Given the enormous surface area being cultivated, there is no longer a question of acceptance or outright need for biotech crop varieties. Recent recognition of the researchers for the development of a genome editing technique using CRISPR/Cas9 by the Nobel Prize committee is another step closer to developing and cultivating new varieties of agricultural crops. By employing precise, efficient, yet affordable genome editing techniques, new genome edited crops are entering country regulatory schemes for commercialization. Countries which currently dominate in cultivating and exporting GM crops are quickly recognizing different types of gene-edited products by comparing the products to conventionally bred varieties. This nuanced legislative development, first implemented in Argentina, and soon followed by many, shows considerable shifts in the landscape of agricultural biotechnology products. The evolution of the law on gene edited crops demonstrates that the law is not static and must adjust to the

Indexed as

biosafetycultivating GMO cropsgene edited cropsGMO cropsharmonizationlegislationnew breeding techniquesregulations (laws)

Identifiers

PMID33719302
PMCPMC7943453
OpenAlexW3132248271

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.