MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4246420238 · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3743

Reasoned opinion on the setting of MRLs for imazapyr in genetically modified soya bean and other oilseeds and in lentils

2014· article· en· W4246420238 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueEFSA Journal · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgricultural safety and regulations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSunflowerImazapyrSoya beanToxicologyBiotechnologyBiologyAgronomyFood scienceGlyphosate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In accordance with Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005, the United Kingdom, hereafter referred to as the evaluating Member State (EMS), received an import tolerance application from Exponent International Ltd., on behalf of BASF Corporation, to set MRLs for the use of the active substance imazapyr in genetically modified soya bean grown in Brazil, imidazolinone-tolerant lentils, rape and mustard plants grown in Canada and sunflowers in Argentina. The United Kingdom proposed to set MRLs of 5 mg/kg in soya bean, 0.08 mg/kg in sunflower seed, 0.05 mg/kg in rape seed and mustard seed and 0.2 mg/kg in lentils. The United Kingdom drafted an evaluation report in accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 which was submitted to the European Commission and forwarded to EFSA. According to EFSA the data are sufficient to derive MRL proposals of 5 mg/kg on soya bean, 0.08 mg/kg on sunflower seed, the limit of quantification (LOQ) of 0.05 mg/kg on rape and mustard seed and 0.3 mg/kg on lentils. In the countries of origin the MRLs are set at 3 mg/kg on soya bean, 0.05 mg/kg on sunflower, rape and mustard seed and 0.2 mg/kg on lentils. Adequate analytical enforcement methods are available to control the residues of imazapyr in the crops under consideration. Based on the risk assessment results, EFSA concludes that the proposed uses of imazapyr in soya bean, sunflower seed, rape seed, mustard seed and lentils will not result in a consumer exposure exceeding the toxicological reference value and therefore are unlikely to pose a consumer health risk.

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.006
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0080.003
Research integrity0.0780.029
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.005

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEFSA JournalSame topicAgricultural safety and regulationsFrench-language works237,207