2009
DOI: 10.1603/022.038.0603
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Appropriate Analytical Methods Are Necessary to Assess Nontarget Effects of Insecticidal Proteins in Gm Crops Through Meta-Analysis (Response to Andow et al. 2009)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
26
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

3
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
0
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Lovei et al [120] recently carried out a meta-analysis in an attempt to summarize the published literature on the impact of GM plants on arthropod natural enemies from laboratory-based experiments. However, their findings were considered by many to be misleading since important methodological limitations relative to risk assessment led the authors to reach conclusions that were in conflict with those of several recent comprehensive reviews and meta-analyses concerning the effects of Cry proteins on natural enemies [121].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Lovei et al [120] recently carried out a meta-analysis in an attempt to summarize the published literature on the impact of GM plants on arthropod natural enemies from laboratory-based experiments. However, their findings were considered by many to be misleading since important methodological limitations relative to risk assessment led the authors to reach conclusions that were in conflict with those of several recent comprehensive reviews and meta-analyses concerning the effects of Cry proteins on natural enemies [121].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Instead, one must measure whether the distribution of observed effect sizes are normally distributed, as predicted under the null hypothesis that none of the observed effects are signiÞcantly nonzero. We provide here a technical clariÞcation of our calculations, respond to two comments by Shelton et al (2009b), and clarify the theory underlying our statistical tests.…”
Section: To the Editormentioning
confidence: 87%
“…If g rse is not normally distributed around zero, then the null hypothesis is false, and we must conclude that some of the real responses (means) are nonzero. For Case II, the analyst cannot conclude that there are multiple populations (as suggested by Shelton et al 2009b), because this assumption is already part of the null hypothesis.…”
Section: To the Editormentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, such effects can usually be traced back to the poor quality of the host used and do not demonstrate any toxicity to the natural enemy by the Bt protein itself (Shelton et al 2009, Romeis et al 2013). In the current study, acquisition of Cry1Ac and Cry2Ab by T. tabaci, a nontarget pest on BG-II cotton, and the further transmission of the proteins to O. insidiosus, were conÞrmed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%