MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Application of Biotechnology to Nutrition: An Overview

2002· review· en· W2079562505 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Maureen Mackey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American College of Nutrition · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicTransgenic Plants and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiotechnologyCropFood securityCanolaBusinessCommodityGenetically modified cropsDeveloping countryAgricultural biotechnologyHuman healthAgricultural scienceAgricultural economicsAgricultureBiologyAgronomyEconomic growthEconomicsTransgeneEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crop biotechnology is being used in two major ways to enhance human nutrition: to improve global food security by making more food available, especially locally grown and familiar foods in the developing world, and by enhancing the nutritional composition of foods that would interest both the developed and developing worlds. Since the first commercialized products of biotechnology are major commodity crops grown primarily in the US, Canada and Argentina (soybeans, corn, canola and cotton), there is concern about whether and when crop biotechnology will help the developing world. There are, however, several on-going projects in Africa, SE Asia and Latin America where crop biotechnology is being used to enhance locally grown crops. The expectation is that genetically improved crops, e.g., those able to resist local pests, will allow even small-scale farmers to grow more crops using fewer inputs and in an environmentally sustainable manner. Furthermore, there are numerous on-going projects to enhance the nutritional or health value of foods via transgene technology. A few of these projects are described in this article.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American College of NutritionSame topicTransgenic Plants and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207