Literature DB >> 21912209

Reducing uncertainty in regulatory decision-making for transgenic crops: more ecological research or clearer environmental risk assessment?

Alan Raybould1.   

Abstract

Ecological research and environmental risk assessment are similar in that they address interesting problems by formulating and testing hypotheses. They differ in the types of problems that are interesting, the characteristics of good hypotheses to solve those problems, and the methods for rigorous testing of hypotheses. It is important to recognize the differences between environmental risk assessment and basic ecological research because confusing them can lead to ineffective risk assessment and missed opportunities to advance ecological theory. Uncertainty in regulatory decision-making about transgenic crops may be reduced more effectively by clarifying the purpose and structure of environmental risk assessments than by further research on the ecology of the crops.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21912209     DOI: 10.4161/gmcr.1.1.9776

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  GM Crops        ISSN: 1938-1999


  12 in total

1.  Can science justify regulatory decisions about the cultivation of transgenic crops?

Authors:  Alan Raybould
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2012-04-05       Impact factor: 2.788

2.  Towards a more open debate about values in decision-making on agricultural biotechnology.

Authors:  Yann Devos; Olivier Sanvido; Joyce Tait; Alan Raybould
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2013-09-13       Impact factor: 2.788

3.  The policy chicken and the science egg. Has applied ecology failed the transgenic crops debate?

Authors:  A J Gray
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2013-10-23       Impact factor: 2.788

4.  Problem formulation and phenotypic characterisation for the development of novel crops.

Authors:  Alan Raybould
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2019-08       Impact factor: 2.788

5.  Risk assessment of gene flow from genetically engineered virus resistant cassava to wild relatives in Africa: an expert panel report.

Authors:  Karen E Hokanson; Norman C Ellstrand; Alfred G O Dixon; Heneriko P Kulembeka; Kenneth M Olsen; Alan Raybould
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2015-12-14       Impact factor: 2.788

6.  Genetically modified crops and aquatic ecosystems: considerations for environmental risk assessment and non-target organism testing.

Authors:  Keri Carstens; Jennifer Anderson; Pamela Bachman; Adinda De Schrijver; Galen Dively; Brian Federici; Mick Hamer; Marco Gielkens; Peter Jensen; William Lamp; Stefan Rauschen; Geoff Ridley; Jörg Romeis; Annabel Waggoner
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2011-11-26       Impact factor: 2.788

7.  Environmental risk assessment of GE plants under low-exposure conditions.

Authors:  Andrew Roberts; Yann Devos; Alan Raybould; Patrick Bigelow; Alan Gray
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2013-11-01       Impact factor: 2.788

8.  Transportable data from non-target arthropod field studies for the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified maize expressing an insecticidal double-stranded RNA.

Authors:  Aqeel Ahmad; Ignacio Negri; Wladecir Oliveira; Christopher Brown; Peter Asiimwe; Bernard Sammons; Michael Horak; Changjian Jiang; David Carson
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2015-10-03       Impact factor: 2.788

9.  Expert opinion vs. empirical evidence: the precautionary principle applied to GM crops.

Authors:  Rod A Herman; Alan Raybould
Journal:  GM Crops Food       Date:  2014-02-26       Impact factor: 3.074

Review 10.  The end of a myth-Bt (Cry1Ab) maize does not harm green lacewings.

Authors:  Jörg Romeis; Michael Meissle; Steven E Naranjo; Yunhe Li; Franz Bigler
Journal:  Front Plant Sci       Date:  2014-08-12       Impact factor: 5.753

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.