MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Genetically modified microbial symbionts as arthropod pest controllers: risk assessment through the European legislations

2011· article· en· W1933278269 on OpenAlexaff
Jaime Aguilera, Ana Gomes, Kaare Magne Nielsen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Entomology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influences
Canadian institutionsOffice of the Chief Medical Examiner
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGenetically modified organismRisk assessmentEuropean unionPEST analysisBiotechnologyPest controlBiosecurityPesticideEcologyEnvironmental planningRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessGeneticsBotanyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The genetic modification and applied use of microbial symbionts have been identified as novel tools to protect beneficial insects such as pollinators or parasitoids or to fight insects that constitute pests or are vectors of infectious diseases. The deliberate release of insect pest or disease vector control products containing genetically modified micro-organisms (GMMs) can raise questions about health and environmental safety. Different national and international authorities have established legal requirements to ensure the safe use of conventional pesticides and insecticides as well as GMMs. A key requirement is to conduct a scientific risk assessment to determine whether the product is safe to be placed in the market. In this study, we address the legal framework, the regulatory requirements, and the criteria for the environmental risk assessment of GM symbionts that currently apply within the European Union.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.836

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied EntomologySame topicInsect symbiosis and bacterial influencesFrench-language works237,207