» Articles » PMID: 25937981

Genetically Modified Plants: Public and Scientific Perceptions

Overview
Journal ISRN Biotechnol
Specialty Biotechnology
Date 2015 May 5
PMID 25937981
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The potential of genetically modified plants to meet the requirements of growing population is not being recognized at present. This is a consequence of concerns raised by the public and the critics about their applications and release into the environment. These include effect on human health and environment, biosafety, world trade monopolies, trustworthiness of public institutions, integrity of regulatory agencies, loss of individual choice, and ethics as well as skepticism about the real potential of the genetically modified plants, and so on. Such concerns are enormous and prevalent even today. However, it should be acknowledged that most of them are not specific for genetically modified plants, and the public should not forget that the conventionally bred plants consumed by them are also associated with similar risks where no information about the gene(s) transfer is available. Moreover, most of the concerns are hypothetical and lack scientific background. Though a few concerns are still to be disproved, it is viewed that, with proper management, these genetically modified plants have immense potential for the betterment of mankind. In the present paper, an overview of the raised concerns and wherever possible reasons assigned to explain their intensity or unsuitability are reviewed.

Citing Articles

Unclasping potentials of genomics and gene editing in chickpea to fight climate change and global hunger threat.

Singh C, Kumar R, Sehgal H, Bhati S, Singhal T, Gayacharan Front Genet. 2023; 14:1085024.

PMID: 37144131 PMC: 10153629. DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2023.1085024.


Effect of marker-free transgenic Chlamydomonas on the control of Aedes mosquito population and on plankton.

Fei X, Huang X, Li Z, Li X, He C, Xiao S Parasit Vectors. 2023; 16(1):18.

PMID: 36653886 PMC: 9847121. DOI: 10.1186/s13071-022-05647-3.


Correlation of Cry1Ac mRNA and protein abundance in transgenic plant.

Smitha P, Bathula C, Kumar A, Chandrashekara K, Dhar S, Das M 3 Biotech. 2021; 11(6):289.

PMID: 34109092 PMC: 8141090. DOI: 10.1007/s13205-021-02828-2.


Profile of genetically modified plants authorized in Mexico.

Garcia Ruiz M, Knapp A, Garcia-Ruiz H GM Crops Food. 2018; 9(3):152-168.

PMID: 30388927 PMC: 6277063. DOI: 10.1080/21645698.2018.1507601.


Genome editing for crop improvement: Challenges and opportunities.

Abdallah N, Prakash C, McHughen A GM Crops Food. 2016; 6(4):183-205.

PMID: 26930114 PMC: 5033222. DOI: 10.1080/21645698.2015.1129937.

References
1.
Spencer L, Snow A . Fecundity of transgenic wild-crop hybrids of Cucurbita pepo (Cucurbitaceae): implications for crop-to-wild gene flow. Heredity (Edinb). 2001; 86(Pt 6):694-702. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2540.2001.00890.x. View

2.
Onouchi H, Nishihama R, Kudo M, Machida Y, Machida C . Visualization of site-specific recombination catalyzed by a recombinase from Zygosaccharomyces rouxii in Arabidopsis thaliana. Mol Gen Genet. 1995; 247(6):653-60. DOI: 10.1007/BF00290396. View

3.
Ewen S, Pusztai A . Effect of diets containing genetically modified potatoes expressing Galanthus nivalis lectin on rat small intestine. Lancet. 1999; 354(9187):1353-4. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(98)05860-7. View

4.
Wolfenbarger L, Phifer P . The ecological risks and benefits of genetically engineered plants. Science. 2000; 290(5499):2088-93. DOI: 10.1126/science.290.5499.2088. View

5.
Losey J, Rayor L, Carter M . Transgenic pollen harms monarch larvae. Nature. 1999; 399(6733):214. DOI: 10.1038/20338. View