Reasoned opinion on the import tolerance for glyphosate in genetically modified oilseed rape
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In accordance with Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, Germany, hereafter referred to as the evaluating Member State (EMS), received an import tolerance application from the company DuPont de Nemours for the authorized use of glyphosate in Canada and United States on genetically modified oilseed rape containing the glyphosate N-acetyltransferase (gat) gene. The EMS assessed a new metabolism study and residue trials of glyphosate on oilseed rape containing the gat gene and concluded that there is no need to modify the existing residue definitions and MRLs for glyphosate. EFSA confirms the conclusions of the EMS that the metabolic pathway of glyphosate in genetically modified oilseed rape, maize and soybean containing the gat gene proceeds similarly and the current risk assessment residue definition is applicable. For enforcement, three options for residue definition as previously proposed by EFSA for glyphosate tolerant crops with gat gene are still valid. For the critical Canadian use, the existing EU MRL of 10 mg/kg in rape seed is found to be sufficient if the current enforcement residue definition “glyphosate” is maintained. For alternative enforcement residue definitions “sum of glyphosate and N-acetyl-glyphosate, expressed as glyphosate” and “N-acetyl-glyphosate, expressed as glyphosate”, a MRL proposal of 20 mg/kg is derived. Based on the risk assessment results, EFSA concludes that residues of glyphosate in genetically modified rape seed containing the gat gene will not result in a consumer exposure exceeding the toxicological reference values and therefore is unlikely to pose a public health concern.
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 | 0.019 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.043 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".