MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002066023 · doi:10.1081/pfc-200061573

Evaluation of Detection Methods for Genetically Modified Traits in Genotypes Resistant to European Corn Borer and Herbicides

2005· article· en· W2002066023 on OpenAlexaff
B. L., K. D. Subedi, L. Evenson, G.A. Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part B · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetically Modified Organisms Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersCargill
KeywordsBacillus thuringiensisEuropean corn borerOstriniaGenetically modified maizeBiologyGenetically modified organismHybridPollenBt cottonGenetically modified cropsGenotypeHorticultureBiotechnologyPEST analysisAgronomyPyralidaeBotanyGeneGeneticsTransgene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detection of genetically modified (GM) traits in corn (Zea mays L.) is urgently needed for preservation of genetic identity and marketing GM products. A laboratory study was conducted to evaluate the efficiency, accuracy, and reliability of different analytical methods to detect GM traits in corn. Samples with known fractions of GM concentrations (Bacillus thuringiensis [Bt], Liberty Link [LL] and stacked [Bt/LL] genes) from commercial seed companies and those derived from yellow kernels in a white corn ear, outcrossed by pollen of neighboring Bt hybrid, were tested by lateral flow quick test kits and by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)-based test strips purchased from different companies. Liberty Link hybrids are resistant to glufosinate (Liberty or Basta) herbicides, whereas Bt corn is developed for the control of European corn borer (Ostrinia nubilalis). Selected samples of GM concentrations were also tested in a commercial laboratory using DNA-based polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test. The results demonstrated that qualitative lateral flow quick tests could detect samples containing 1% or higher Bt and 2% or higher LL concentrations within the recommended time limit of the test. Faint test lines for samples containing 0.5 to 1% Bt or 1 to 2% LL concentrations appeared if samples remained in the test cup overnight. ELISA test strips detected the Bt content semiquantitatively in the range of 0.5 to 2.0%. Grain samples derived from non-Bt corn outcrossed by neighboring Bt pollen had usually lower GM concentrations than commercial GM seed samples. Both ELISA- and DNA-based PCR tests distinguished samples with GM concentrations between 0.1 to 0.5%, but the precision of quantification at this range was very low and results were highly inconsistent.

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)0.010
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.350

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.107
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part BSame topicGenetically Modified Organisms ResearchFrench-language works237,207