How Natural Is “More Natural”? The Role of Method, Type of Transfer, and Familiarity for Public Perceptions of Cisgenic and Transgenic Modification
about
Public Acceptance of Plant Biotechnology and GM CropsRevisiting GMOs: Are There Differences in European Consumers' Acceptance and Valuation for Cisgenically vs Transgenically Bred Rice?Reproductive modification in forest plantations: impacts on biodiversity and society.Is it only the regulatory status? Broadening the debate on cisgenic plants.Is biotechnology (more) acceptable when it enables a reduction in phytosanitary treatments? A European comparison of the acceptability of transgenesis and cisgenesis.Identification of Novel Alleles Conferring Superior Production of Rose Flavor Phenylethyl Acetate Using Polygenic Analysis in Yeast.
P2860
How Natural Is “More Natural”? The Role of Method, Type of Transfer, and Familiarity for Public Perceptions of Cisgenic and Transgenic Modification
description
im August 2013 veröffentlichter wissenschaftlicher Artikel
@de
wetenschappelijk artikel
@nl
наукова стаття, опублікована в серпні 2013
@uk
name
How Natural Is “More Natural”? ...... ic and Transgenic Modification
@en
How Natural Is “More Natural”? ...... ic and Transgenic Modification
@nl
type
label
How Natural Is “More Natural”? ...... ic and Transgenic Modification
@en
How Natural Is “More Natural”? ...... ic and Transgenic Modification
@nl
prefLabel
How Natural Is “More Natural”? ...... ic and Transgenic Modification
@en
How Natural Is “More Natural”? ...... ic and Transgenic Modification
@nl
P2093
P2860
P356
P1476
How Natural Is “More Natural”? ...... ic and Transgenic Modification
@en
P2093
Motohiko Nagata
Nicole Kronberger
Wolfgang Wagner
P2860
P304
P356
10.1177/1075547013500773
P577
2013-08-29T00:00:00Z