ArticleGM crops & food2024
Does DNA extraction affect the specificity of a PCR method claiming the specific detectability of a genome-edited plant?
Article in GM crops & food, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Under current EU legislation, genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and derived food and feed products must be authorized as GM food, feed, or seed and appropriate detection methods must be made available for use in official controls. A Real-Time PCR method has recently been published by Chhalliyil et al. claiming to be specific for the detection and identification of genome-edited oilseed rape (OSR) lines commercialized in North America. In a previous study, we have independently assessed this method in three reference laboratories for sensitivity, specificity, and robustness. We found that the method does not meet all the minimum performance requirements (MPR) for GMO testing in the EU, which contradicts the claims of the method developer. Here we show, in addition to the previously published method assessment study that a modified DNA extraction is not the reason for the contradictory findings and does not affect the specificity of the method. We also discuss the procedures recently proposed by the method developers for interpreting PCR results with high Cq values.
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.