↓ Skip to main content

Genetically Modified α-Amylase Inhibitor Peas Are Not Specifically Allergenic in Mice

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
17 X users
facebook
6 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Genetically Modified α-Amylase Inhibitor Peas Are Not Specifically Allergenic in Mice
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0052972
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rui-Yun Lee, Daniela Reiner, Gerhard Dekan, Andrew E. Moore, T. J. V. Higgins, Michelle M. Epstein

Abstract

Weevils can devastate food legumes in developing countries, but genetically modified peas (Pisum sativum), chickpeas and cowpeas expressing the gene for alpha-amylase inhibitor-1 (αAI) from the common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) are completely protected from weevil destruction. αAI is seed-specific, accumulated at high levels and undergoes post-translational modification as it traverses the seed endomembrane system. This modification was thought to be responsible for the reported allergenicity in mice of the transgenic pea but not the bean. Here, we observed that transgenic αAI peas, chickpeas and cowpeas as well as non-transgenic beans were all allergenic in BALB/c mice. Even consuming non-transgenic peas lacking αAI led to an anti-αAI response due to a cross-reactive response to pea lectin. Our data demonstrate that αAI transgenic peas are not more allergenic than beans or non-transgenic peas in mice. This study illustrates the importance of repeat experiments in independent laboratories and the potential for unexpected cross-reactive allergic responses upon consumption of plant products in mice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 2 4%
Spain 1 2%
Peru 1 2%
Unknown 41 91%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 31%
Student > Bachelor 8 18%
Other 4 9%
Student > Master 3 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 4%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 27 60%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 4%
Environmental Science 1 2%
Computer Science 1 2%
Other 3 7%
Unknown 8 18%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 30. 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 10 May 2019.
All research outputs
#1,169,509
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#15,396
of 202,026 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,584
of 286,453 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#325
of 4,904 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 202,026 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% 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 286,453 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,904 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 93% of its contemporaries.