ArticleEFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority2024
Technical Note on the quality of DNA sequencing for the molecular characterisation of genetically modified plants.
Article in EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Considerations on the risk assessment of genetically modified plants containing transformation events stacked by conventional crossing.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2026Article
- Read-mapping signatures for molecular characterization of transgenic DNA insertions in paired-end Illumina data.BMC biotechnology · 2026Article
- Assessment of genetically modified T25 maize for renewal authorisation under Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003 (dossier GMFF-2024-22651).EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2025Article
- Questions and Consequences of Omics in Genetically Engineered Crop Regulation.Plant-environment interactions (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025Review
- Review of the technology used for structural characterization of the GMO genome using NGS data.Genomics & informatics · 2024Article
- EFSA statement on the requirements for whole genome sequence analysis of microorganisms intentionally used in the food chain.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
- Technical Note on the quality of DNA sequencing for the molecular characterisation of genetically modified plants.EFSA journal. European Food Safety Authority · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As part of the risk assessment (RA) requirements for genetically modified (GM) plants, according to Regulation (EU) No 503/2013 and the EFSA guidance on the RA of food and feed from GM plants (EFSA GMO Panel 2011), applicants need to perform a molecular characterisation of the DNA sequences inserted in the GM plant genome. This Technical Note to the applicants puts together requirements and recommendations for the quality assessment of the methodology, analysis and reporting when DNA sequencing is used for the molecular characterisation of GM plants. In particular, it applies to the use of Sanger sequencing and next-generation sequencing for the characterisation of the inserted genetic material and its flanking regions at each insertion site, the determination of the copy number of all detectable inserts and the analysis of the genetic stability of the inserts. This updated document replaces the EFSA 2018 Technical Note and reflects the current knowledge in scientific-technical methods for generating and verifying, in a standardised manner, DNA sequencing data in the context of RA of GM plants. It does not take into consideration the verification and validation of the detection method which remains under the remit of the Joint Research Centre (JRC).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.