↓ Skip to main content

Regulatory Uncertainty Around New Breeding Techniques

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Plant Science, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
10 X users

Readers on

mendeley
93 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
Regulatory Uncertainty Around New Breeding Techniques
Published in
Frontiers in Plant Science, September 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpls.2018.01291
Pubmed ID
Authors

Rim Lassoued, Stuart J. Smyth, Peter W. B. Phillips, Hayley Hesseln

Abstract

Emerging precision breeding techniques have great potential to develop new crop varieties with specific traits that can contribute to ensuring future food security in a time of increasing climate change pressures, such as disease, insects and drought. These techniques offer options for crop trait development in both private and public sector breeding programs. Yet, the success of new breeding techniques is not guaranteed at the scientific level alone: political influences and social acceptance significantly contribute to how crops will perform in the market. Using survey data, we report results from an international panel of experts regarding the institutional and social barriers that might impede the development of new plant technologies. Survey results clearly indicate that regulatory issues, social, and environmental concerns are critical to the success of precision breeding. The cross-regional analysis shows heterogeneity between Europeans and North Americans, particularly regarding political attitudes and social perceptions of targeted breeding techniques.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 15 16%
Student > Master 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 4%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 33 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 25%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Environmental Science 4 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 40 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 13 December 2022.
All research outputs
#2,769,850
of 24,988,588 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#1,263
of 23,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,657
of 340,701 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#44
of 441 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,988,588 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 23,957 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% 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 340,701 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 441 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 90% of its contemporaries.