crops: Predicting effects of escaped transgenes\non the fitness of wild plants and their herbivores
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
\n \nOne prominent concern about genetically modified crops is the possibility of environmental impacts from the \nmovement of fitness-enhancing traits to wild plant populations. Decisions to deregulate Bt crops in the USA \nhave relied strongly on arguments that these crops will not interbreed with wild relatives in the permitted \ngrowing regions. Limited attention therefore has been directed to analyses of the consequences of gene flow. \nTo provide a transparent evaluation process for risks associated with insecticidal transgene escape, we crafted \na series of questions designed to guide this aspect of the risk assessment. We then explored the current \nknowledge base available for answering such risk-related questions for three Bt crops (cotton, rapeseed, and \nrice). First, we generated a list of wild relatives of these crops. A definitive list of potential transgene recipients \nis not yet possible for some crops. Sufficient data are not available for some crops to eliminate certain related \nplant species from consideration of fertile hybrid formation, thus making lists for these crops subject to \nspeculation. Second, we queried the HOSTS database (UK) to obtain a worldwide listing of lepidopteran species \nthat feed on these crops and their wild relatives, and to determine the host range of the larvae. To our \nknowledge, this list of 502 lepidopteran species is the first such list published for these crops and wild crop \nrelatives. Third, we used a data set maintained by the Canadian Forest Service to assess Bt toxin susceptibility \nfor these lepidopterans. Only 3% of those species have been tested for susceptibility; and the literature \nsuggests that generalizations about susceptibility among taxa are difficult due to the variability within families. \nFourth, we consulted the literature to interpret what is known about the ability of lepidopterans to regulate plant \nfitness or invasiveness. We could not eliminate the possibility of ecological release due to plant resistance \nagainst lepidopterans. In fact, there is strong experimental evidence that lepidopteran herbivores do limit the \ndistribution and/or abundances of at least some wild plant species. Neither could we eliminate the possibility \nthat non-target lepidopterans might have important functions in the ecosystem as pollinators or alternate hosts \nto natural enemies of pest species. This study suggests that crucial data are lacking for the development of a \ncredible scientific basis to confirm or deny environmental risks associated with the escape of Bt transgene \nconstructs to wild relatives. Given the absence of information on the identity, level of susceptibility, and \necological roles of lepidopterans exploiting specific wild relatives of Bt crops, we suggest that new efforts be \ndirected to assessing possible consequences of lepidopteran mortality on resistant wild relatives.\n\n
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».