↓ Skip to main content

A Critical Assessment of the Effects of Bt Transgenic Plants on Parasitoids

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, May 2008
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
84 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
98 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
A Critical Assessment of the Effects of Bt Transgenic Plants on Parasitoids
Published in
PLOS ONE, May 2008
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0002284
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mao Chen, Jian-Zhou Zhao, Hilda L. Collins, Elizabeth D. Earle, Jun Cao, Anthony M. Shelton

Abstract

The ecological safety of transgenic insecticidal plants expressing crystal proteins (Cry toxins) from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) continues to be debated. Much of the debate has focused on nontarget organisms, especially predators and parasitoids that help control populations of pest insects in many crops. Although many studies have been conducted on predators, few reports have examined parasitoids but some of them have reported negative impacts. None of the previous reports were able to clearly characterize the cause of the negative impact. In order to provide a critical assessment, we used a novel paradigm consisting of a strain of the insect pest, Plutella xylostella (herbivore), resistant to Cry1C and allowed it to feed on Bt plants and then become parasitized by Diadegma insulare, an important endoparasitoid of P. xylostella. Our results indicated that the parasitoid was exposed to a biologically active form of the Cy1C protein while in the host but was not harmed by such exposure. Parallel studies conducted with several commonly used insecticides indicated they significantly reduced parasitism rates on strains of P. xylostella resistant to these insecticides. These results provide the first clear evidence of the lack of hazard to a parasitoid by a Bt plant, compared to traditional insecticides, and describe a test to rigorously evaluate the risks Bt plants pose to predators and parasitoids.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 2%
Italy 1 1%
Ghana 1 1%
Australia 1 1%
France 1 1%
Mexico 1 1%
Egypt 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Poland 1 1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 88 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 24 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 12 12%
Professor 10 10%
Student > Master 9 9%
Other 20 20%
Unknown 9 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 64 65%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 7%
Environmental Science 4 4%
Immunology and Microbiology 2 2%
Chemistry 2 2%
Other 6 6%
Unknown 13 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 30 May 2012.
All research outputs
#18,306,425
of 22,665,794 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#153,779
of 193,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,585
of 83,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#338
of 366 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,665,794 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,511 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 83,093 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 366 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.