| Title |
Impact of insect-resistant GM rice on pesticide use and farmers’ health in China
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science China Life Sciences, January 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11427-014-4768-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
JiKun Huang, RuiFa Hu, FangBin Qiao, YanHong Yin, HuaiJu Liu, ZhuRong Huang |
| Abstract |
The economic benefits of insect-resistant genetically modified (GM) crops have been well documented, but the impact of such crops and the consequent reduction in pesticide use on farmers' health remains largely unknown. Through the analysis of the data collected from the physical examination from farmers in China, we show that GM rice significantly reduces pesticide use and the resultant not only visible but also invisible adverse effects on farmers' neurological, hematological, and electrolyte system. Hence, the commercialization of GM rice is expected to improve the health of farmers in developing countries, where pesticide application is necessary to mitigate crop loss. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 78 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 15 | 19% |
| Chile | 3 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 4% |
| Canada | 3 | 4% |
| France | 2 | 3% |
| Spain | 2 | 3% |
| Italy | 1 | 1% |
| Kenya | 1 | 1% |
| Australia | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 13 | 17% |
| Unknown | 34 | 44% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 63 | 81% |
| Scientists | 13 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 1% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nepal | 1 | 2% |
| Italy | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 59 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 18% |
| Researcher | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 16% |
| Unknown | 16 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 15 | 25% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 6 | 10% |
| Social Sciences | 5 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 8% |
| Environmental Science | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 15% |
| Unknown | 17 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 71. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 September 2021.
All research outputs
#601,136
of 25,358,192 outputs
Outputs from Science China Life Sciences
#15
of 1,124 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#7,498
of 364,767 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science China Life Sciences
#2
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,358,192 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,124 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 364,767 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.