Abstract
Despite genetically modified (GM) canola receiving Australian regulatory approval in 2003, commercial production did not occur until 2008 due to concerns relating to coexistence. Following commercial release, a three-year study was initiated to assess adoption patterns; agronomic, economic, environmental, and coexistence impacts; and attitudinal changes of farmers growing GM and/or non-GM canola. The study's findings demonstrate substantial benefits from GM canola including more effective weed control, reduced pesticide use, reduced use of cultivation, improvement in yields, reduced risk of herbicide resistance, and a reduction in the environmental 'footprint.' The economic impacts have been variable due to the initial lack of access to GM canola varieties, the cost of access to the GM technology, and grain marketing/logistic issues. Concerns relating to coexistence failed to materialize with GM canola respondents and the issue of coexistence has not influenced farmers' choice in opting to grow GM canola or to increase the area of GM canola grown. The study demonstrates that the major barrier to adoption is the perceived lack of economic value derived from GM canola compared to the alternate non-GM weed-control management system options.
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record; open copy licensed other-oa. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 11
Claim · model-written summary
GM canola enabled more effective weed control.
- Taxon
- Canola
.jpg?width=60)
Brassica napus var. napust0 - Treatment
- GM canolae0
- Interactor
- weede0weed
- Outcome
- weed controle0
- Direction
- more effectivee0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
.jpg?width=500)
Verbatim
e0“substantial benefits from GM canola including more effective weed control, reduced pesticide use, reduced use of cultivation, improvement in yields, reduced risk of herbicide resistance, and a reduction in the environmental 'footprint.'”
t0“GM Canola”
Claim · model-written summary
GM canola reduced pesticide use.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Treatment
- GM canolae0
- Outcome
- pesticide usee0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“GM canola including more effective weed control, reduced pesticide use, reduced use of cultivation”
Claim · model-written summary
GM canola reduced cultivation use.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Treatment
- GM canolae0
- Outcome
- use of cultivatione0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“GM canola including more effective weed control, reduced pesticide use, reduced use of cultivation”
Claim · model-written summary
GM canola improved yields.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Treatment
- GM canolae0
- Outcome
- yieldse0
- Direction
- improvemente0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“GM canola including more effective weed control, reduced pesticide use, reduced use of cultivation, improvement in yields”
Claim · model-written summary
GM canola reduced the risk of herbicide resistance.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Treatment
- GM canolae0
- Outcome
- risk of herbicide resistancee0
- Direction
- reducede0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“GM canola including more effective weed control, reduced pesticide use, reduced use of cultivation, improvement in yields, reduced risk of herbicide resistance”
Claim · model-written summary
GM canola reduced the environmental footprint.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Treatment
- GM canolae0
- Outcome
- environmental 'footprint.'e0
- Direction
- reductione0
Not reportedComparator
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“GM canola including more effective weed control, reduced pesticide use, reduced use of cultivation, improvement in yields, reduced risk of herbicide resistance, and a reduction in the environmental 'footprint.'”
Claim · model-written summary
Economic impacts of GM canola were variable.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Outcome
- economic impactse0
- Qualifier
- variablee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“The economic impacts have been variable due to the initial lack of access to GM canola varieties, the cost of access to the GM technology, and grain marketing/logistic issues.”
Claim · model-written summary
Coexistence concerns did not materialize among GM canola respondents.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Outcome
- Concerns relating to coexistence failed to materializee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“Concerns relating to coexistence failed to materialize with GM canola respondents”
Claim · model-written summary
Coexistence did not influence farmers’ decision to grow GM canola.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Material
- GM canolae0
- Outcome
- farmers' choice in opting to grow GM canolae0
- Direction
- has not influencede0
- Qualifier
- issue of coexistencee0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the issue of coexistence has not influenced farmers' choice in opting to grow GM canola”
Claim · model-written summary
Coexistence did not influence farmers’ decision to increase GM canola area.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Material
- GM canolae0
- Outcome
- area of GM canola growne0
- Direction
- has not influencede0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the issue of coexistence has not influenced farmers' choice in opting to grow GM canola or to increase the area of GM canola grown”
Claim · model-written summary
The main adoption barrier was perceived lack of GM canola economic value compared with non-GM weed control options.
- Taxon
- canolaBrassica napus var. napuse0
- Outcome
- perceived lack of economic valuee0
- Comparator
- alternate non-GM weed-control management system optionse0
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“the major barrier to adoption is the perceived lack of economic value derived from GM canola compared to the alternate non-GM weed-control management system options.”
The same questions in other papers
Brassica napus var. napus · molecular: metabolites · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results
1 paper in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
Brassica napus var. napus · disease · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results
3 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- negative
- positive
- positive
1 paper more in this group
See all 5 papers →Brassica napus var. napus · weed · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 reporting no difference from an alternative
- no effect
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →Brassica napus var. napus · yield · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results
11 papers in the same direction as this paper · 4 in the opposite direction
- negative
- negative
- negative
12 papers more in this group
See all 16 papers →transgenic · yield · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Positive and negative results
5 papers in the same direction as this paper · 1 in the opposite direction
- no effect
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →transgenic · weed · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Results agree
2 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
transgenic · molecular: metabolites · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Results agree
3 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
transgenic · disease · Brassica napus (oilseed rape)Results agree
6 papers in the same direction as this paper
- positive
- positive
- positive
3 papers more in this group
See all 7 papers →Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.