MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075488791 · doi:10.1139/x04-024

Current status and environmental impact of transgenic forest trees

2004· article· en· W2075488791 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kees van Frankenhuyzen, Tannis Beardmore

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetically Modified Organisms Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTree breedingBiologyIntrogressionAbiotic componentResistance (ecology)BiotechnologyTransgeneGenetically modified cropsAgroforestryEcologyWoody plantGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in technology for in vitro propagation and genetic transformation have accelerated the development of genetically engineered trees during the past 15 years. At least 33 species of transformed forest trees have been successfully regenerated to date. Targeted traits include herbicide tolerance, pest resistance, abiotic stress tolerance, modified fiber quality and quantity, and altered growth and reproductive development. Commercial potential has been demonstrated in the field for a few traits, in particular herbicide tolerance, insect resistance, and altered lignin content. Now that commercial implementation is feasible, at least for the few genotypes that can be efficiently transformed and propagated, environmental concerns have become the main obstacle to public acceptance and regulatory approval. Ecological risks associated with commercial release range from transgene escape and introgression into wild gene pools to the impact of transgene products on other organisms and ecosystem processes. Evaluation of those risks is confounded by the long life span of trees, and by limitations of extrapolating results from small-scale studies to larger-scale plantations. Issues that are central to safe deployment can only be addressed by permitting medium- to large-scale release of transgenic trees over a full rotation. Current regulations restricting field releases of all transgenes in both time and space need to be replaced with regulations that recognize different levels of risk (as determined by the origin of the transgene, its impact on reproductive fitness, and nontarget impacts) and assign a commensurate level of confinement. The next step in determining acceptability of transgene technology for forest tree improvement is the unconfined release of constructs that pose little risk in terms of gene escape and nontarget impacts, such as lignin-altered poplar or pine, to permit evaluation of ecological risks and environmental or agronomic benefits at relevant scales.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations95
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicGenetically Modified Organisms ResearchFrench-language works237,207