The effect of glyphosate on digestion and horizontal gene transfer during <i>in vitro</i> ruminal fermentation of genetically modified canola
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND: The impact of glyphosate on ruminal fermentation, selective pressure on ruminal bacteria and horizontal transfer of the gene encoding 5‐enolpyruvylshikimate‐3‐phosphate synthase (epsps) to ruminal bacteria was studied using batch culture with glyphosate‐tolerant (Roundup Ready®) canola meal as substrate. RESULTS: A glyphosate concentration × time interaction (P < 0.05) occurred when glyphosate (0–100 mmol L−1) was included in in vitro ruminal incubations with a diet containing 150 g kg−1 Roundup Ready® canola meal (Experiment 1). Glyphosate at 50 and 100 mmol L−1 inhibited fermentation. In Experiment 2, epsps fragments were detected in plant debris for up to 16 h of incubation using primer sets that amplified three fragments (62, 108 and 300 bp) of DNA spanning the transgenic construct. Persistence was affected by fragment size but not by glyphosate concentration (0, 10 or 60 mmol L−1). Extensive polymerase chain reaction assays provided no evidence of acquisition of epsps by feed‐ or fluid‐associated bacteria during fermentation. A glyphosate concentration × time interaction (P < 0.05) was observed for all fermentation parameters measured, and glyphosate caused a general inhibition of fermentation. CONCLUSION: The presence of glyphosate did not increase selective pressure for gene transfer of DNA encoding glyphosate resistance from Roundup Ready® canola meal to ruminal bacteria. Copyright © 2007 Society of Chemical Industry
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".