Input: Task: corroborate the claim using the given text. Claim: Regulations for gene-edited crops vary by country. [SEP] Text: Overview of studies required for the safety assessment of GM crops in the products have received regulatory approvals, and in addition to company stewardship plans associated with commercialization, there may be post-registration regulatory requirements regarding stewardship of the products; for example, insect-resistant GM crops require insect-resistance management plans. Citation67 Some countries also have requirements for post-market environmental monitoring of products, either to test hypotheses arising from the environmental risk assessment (so-called “case-specific” monitoring in EU countries) or to detect unexpected harmful effects not identified in the risk assessment (“general surveillance” monitoring in EU countries). Finally, many regulatory approvals are for fixed periods, and re-registration is required to maintain products on the market. Re-registration may require additional data or risk assessment depending on circumstances. of Regulation of GM Crops in the EUDuring research there will be greater uncertainty about the potentially harmful effects of a GM event than there is during agronomic field trials on the one or two events that were selected after extensive evaluation. Nevertheless, risks posed by research are low, owing to containment in the laboratory or glasshouse or the small scale of field trials, which allow spatial isolation from other crops. Most regulators recognize that risk management through containment and confinement is effective, and therefore laboratory experiments on most GMOs (those that are not human or animal pathogens) are performed after risk assessments within the organization carrying out the work and without having to notify regulators about each experiment. Regulators carry out inspections to make sure institutions are carrying out suitable risk assessments and keeping proper records of use and disposal of the GMOs. Similarly, in countries such as the USA, small-scale field trials for many categories of GM crop may be performed after notifying regulators. Submission of significant amounts of data and risk assessment is only required if the event is intended to be grown above a certain area in a calendar year;Citation2 this area is usually exceeded only during multi-location field trials for agronomic performance of events selected for regulatory submissions. For research and development field trials in the EU, however, many countries require a regulatory package similar in scope to an application for commercial release. The resulting high costs of conducting field trials, along with recurring vandalism of field trials in the EU—since 2001 there have been over 70 serious incidents of vandalism of GM crop field trials in the EUCitation68—creates a hostile climate for field trials. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text corroborates the claim by detailing the differences in regulatory requirements for GM crops in various countries. It points out that some countries have unique post-market environmental monitoring requirements and that the re-registration processes may differ significantly, highlighting how regulations can vary, especially between regions like the EU and the USA.


Input: Task: contrast the claim using the given text. Claim: Everyone benefits equally from the same probiotic strains. [SEP] Text: Since both these genes are likely to contribute to the respiratory physiology, it will be worth analysing if the growth and metabolite profile of JGR2 under aerobic growth are different from the other L. plantarum strains47. 3. 4 Phenotypes, technological properties and their genetic determinants The isolates did not show nitrate reduction, H2S production, arginine dihydrolase activity, urease activity, and catalase activity. The DKL3 cell biomass was yellowish and sticky and the colonies did not disperse easily in the liquid medium whereas JGR2 pellet was white and dispersed relatively easily (Fig. 2S). The color variation displayed by both strains is likely due to variable carotenoid production. A previous study showed the involvement of crtNM operon in the carotenoid synthesis which rendered yellow color to the L. plantarum isolates48. Even though our isolates showed color variation, the crtNM operon was present in both the isolates (data not shown). 3. 4. 1 Sugar utilization Both the strains were able to utilize maltose, salicin, sucrose, mannose, and fructose to a similar extent as glucose but neither of them was able to utilize arabinose and rhamnose (Fig. 2a). Melezitose was only utilized by DKL3; whereas, lactose, raffinose, sorbitol, and trehalose were exclusively utilized by L. plantarum JGR2. In general, high variability in the utilization of some sugars is reported in L. plantarum strains. The common and differential pattern observed for DKL3 and JGR2 was in accordance with such differences reported, for example, in the case of L. plantarum 299v and ATCC 1491749,50. For melezitose, raffinose, sorbitol, and trehalose utilization, the gene cassettes were found in both the genomes despite variable utilization. It has been shown that L. plantarum carbohydrate utilization operons are highly variable and are altered depending on the niche51. The correlation of these variable sugar utilization with the genome was only possible in the case of lactose, where a lactose utilization gene cassette was found only in JGR2. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text contrasts the claim by highlighting that different probiotic strains, such as L. plantarum DKL3 and JGR2, show variability in their properties and utilization of sugars. This signifies that individuals may not benefit equally from the same probiotic strains, as their efficacy can depend on the specific strain's capabilities and genetic determinants. For instance, while both strains could utilize certain sugars similarly, they exhibited significant differences in their ability to utilize other sugars, indicating that the benefits derived from these strains could vary among individuals.


Input: Task: pass the claim using the given text. Claim: Bioengineered yeast can be designed to produce high yields of biofuels from sugars. [SEP] Text: tyrobutyricum, indicating that the co-culture is capable of utilizing more of the acetate within the media and producing a subsequently higher amount of butyric acid. One possible explanation that can account for the lower acetate levels found in the co-culture is the glucose concentration, which was undetectable (< 0. 1 g/L) during the exponential growth phase. Consequently, it would appear that it was consumed immediately by the culture as soon as it was produced from sucrose. Under similar glucose-limited conditions, other groups have found that C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T shifts more carbon to the butyrate pathway instead of acetate production [3, 21]. Another possible reason for this is the activity of B. sp. SGP1, which produces lactic acid (Figure 1). Given that lactic acid was not detected within the co-culture, it appears that it and acetic acid are co-metabolized by C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T as fermentative substrates to produce butyric acid [8, 9]. As evidence of this, batch cultures of C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T were grown using P2 medium supplemented with either glucose (40. 0 g/L), lactic acid (10. 0 g/L in the form of sodium lactate) or both (Figure 5). When lactic acid was added alone, both it and the acetate present in the media were consumed (Figure 5C and E), leading to butyric acid production (Figure 5D). The consumption of two acids and subsequent production of only one led to a significant increase in the pH as the molar concentration of acids was nearly halved, i. e. , 0. 025 M of acetate and 0. 070 M lactate produced 0. 053 M butyrate (Figure 5F). These results confirm that acetate and lactate can be co-utilized by C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T to produce butyric acid, with a yield under these conditions of 0. 6 g butyrate/g (acetate and lactate). In fact, this is in agreement with the equation reported previously for acetate-lactate fermentation by C. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text does not address bioengineered yeast or its ability to produce biofuels from sugars. Instead, it discusses the metabolic pathways of C. tyrobutyricum and its ability to produce butyric acid from acetate and lactate. This information is not directly relevant to the claim about bioengineered yeast and biofuel production.


Input: Task: corroborate the claim using the given text. Claim: Regulations for gene-edited crops vary by country. [SEP] Text: This hostility is a severe disincentive to carry out GM crop research in the EU,Citation69 which has serious economic and scientific consequences for the bloc. In general, the types of data and approaches to human and environmental risk assessment as part of regulatory decision-making for approvals to import or cultivate GM crops are similar worldwide. There are however, certain data requirements that make regulatory submissions and decision-making more difficult in the EU than elsewhere. In human health risk assessment, the EU often requires a 28-d repeated-dose rodent study to assess transgenic protein toxicity, despite data on bioinformatics, mode-of-action, in vitro digestibility and stability, predicted dietary exposure and a 14-d single dose mouse study indicating negligible potential for the protein to be hazardous. Citation65 The scientific value of this study is minimal if other data indicate negligible hazard,Citation65 and therefore is it doubtful that the use of additional animals is justified. There are also additional requirements for ecological risk assessment in the EU. Ecotoxicology studies using plant material are increasingly required even when negligible ecological risk has been established through compositional analysis,Citation69 the mode of action of the transgenic protein,Citation61 and, in the case of insecticidal proteins, laboratory ecotoxicology studies that expose several representative surrogate species to high concentrations of the protein. Citation70 Additional exposure modeling is also requiredCitation71 even when conservative exposure scenarios reveal negligible risk to species highly sensitive to the insecticidal protein in question. Citation72Additional studies that add little to our knowledge of risk impose costs on companies that must supply them and on regulators who must review them, without appreciable benefit to decision-making from those costs. Furthermore, each additional endpoint increases the likelihood that a statistically significant difference between the treatment and control samples will occur by chance. Delays to decision-making are likely to result while the differences are investigated. Over the past 20 y, EU legislation on GM crops has changed continually (Table 2). This law-making may give the impression that something has gone wrong with approvals under previous legislation. In reality, major changes were made even though few products had been approved for import and cultivation and no adverse effects detected. Citation74,Citation75 The changes seem to be driven more by political requirements to be seen to be tough on GM crops in response to public perception that GM crops are inherently harmful and pose greater risks than food-borne illnesses and inadequate diets. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text corroborates the claim by highlighting the differences in regulatory requirements for GM crops between the EU and other countries. It points out that while there are similarities in risk assessment approaches worldwide, specific data requirements in the EU make regulatory submissions more challenging than in other regions. This indicates that the regulatory framework for gene-edited crops does indeed vary by country.


Input: Task: contrast the claim using the given text. Claim: Everyone benefits equally from the same probiotic strains. [SEP] Text: Both the strains showed the presence of the genes encoding both cell wall-anchored adhesion-associated protein (CwaA) (96% similarity) and mucus-binding protein precursor (Mbp) (99% similarity). DKL2 and JRG2 were also found to encode fibronectin-binding protein A (FbpA) with low identity (< 58%). Furthermore, mannose-specific lectin (Msl) was found to be encoded by the DKL3 genome with 83. 8% identity. Based on the earlier studies, all these proteins appear to be associated with the probiotic properties of the lactobacilli. Specifically, recombinantly expressed CwaA in Lactococcus lactis has been shown to be involved in adhesion to the colonic epithelial cells as well as in the exclusion of pathogen45. Similarly, recombinant expression of two of the six mucous binding domains of L. plantarum Mbp in E. coli has been shown to exhibit very high adhesion to rat, pig, and human intestinal tissues and also inhibition of pathogen binding66. Also, purified FbpA from L. casei has been characterized to show adhesion to immobilized fibronectin67. In L. plantarum CMPG5300, Msl was shown to be required for adhesion to the vaginal epithelial cells and other cell adhesion properties such as auto-aggregation, biofilm formation, and binding to mannosylated glycans68. Thus, the in vitro adhesion properties and the presence of the required genes suggests the potential of both the DKL3 and JGR2 to colonize in the human gut. The presence of msl in DKL3 also suggests that it can have the potential of colonizing in the vagina and subsequently exhibiting probiotic effects. Additionally, we assessed 147 genomes of L. plantarum available in the NCBI database for the presence of these adhesion-related genes (Fig. 3b). L. plantarum strains have previously been shown to have either of the two types of CwaA45. In accordance with this observation, the majority of the strains that we analyzed had CwaA (107 strains), a few had Group II CwaA (30 strains); whereas, the remaining few strains did not contain this protein. Similarly, a protein with about 57. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text contrasts the claim by detailing that different probiotic strains, such as L. plantarum and L. casei, possess varying genes encoding adhesion-associated proteins, indicating that not all strains will provide the same benefits to all individuals. It highlights that different strains have different properties related to adhesion to human tissues and pathogenesis inhibition, suggesting that the effects of probiotics can vary depending on the specific strain and the individual's unique biological makeup.


Input: Task: pass the claim using the given text. Claim: Bioengineered yeast can be designed to produce high yields of biofuels from sugars. [SEP] Text: butyricum, where: Acetate + 3 Lactate + ADP + P i → 2 Butyrate + 2 H 2 + ATP [22]. Figure 5Characteristics of C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755Tcultures grown on P2 medium supplemented with either 40. 0 g/L glucose (Glu), 40. 0 g/L glucose and 10. 0 g/L lactate (Glu+Lac), 10. 0 g/L lactate (Lac) or nothing (Control). This results shown are (A) optical density, (B) glucose concentration, (C) lactic acid concentration, (D) butyric acid concentration, (E) acetic acid concentration and (F) pH of the cultures. Full size imageWhen lactic acid was added along with glucose, C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T showed an enhanced growth and butyric acid production, which can be in part attributed to the pH buffering effect described above. In confirmation of Figure 4A, the acetate concentration did not increase, as was seen when glucose was added alone, while the lactic acid concentration decreased, suggesting that these two acids were once more being converted into butyric acid. Lactic acid is converted only into butyric acid not acetic acidTo confirm that lactic acid is being converted by C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T into butyric acid only, P2 medium was prepared once more but with a mixture of 12C- glucose (40. 0 g/L) and [1, 2, 3 13C3] lactic acid (5. 0 g/L). After 40 h of culturing, samples were taken, and the resulting butyric and acetic acids were analyzed for the presence of 13C (Figure 6). Acetic acid showed only a single peak at 60 (m/z) corresponding to the expected molecular weight of 12C2-acetic acid. For butyric acid, however, we found multiple molecular peaks at 88 (m/z), which corresponds to the molecular weight of 12C4-butyric acid, as well as at 89, 90, 91 and 92 (m/z), indicating the existence of significant amounts of 13C in butyric acid. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text does not directly address or provide any information regarding the claim about bioengineered yeast and their ability to produce biofuels from sugars. Instead, it discusses the growth conditions and metabolic conversions of C. tyrobutyricum, focusing on butyric acid production from lactic acid and glucose, which is unrelated to the claim about yeast. Therefore, this text is deemed irrelevant to the claim.


Input: Task: corroborate the claim using the given text. Claim: Regulations for gene-edited crops vary by country. [SEP] Text: ChassyCitation76 summarizes the position pithily: “In spite of scientific analysis that indicates that transgenic crops are as safe as, or safer than, crops produced by other breeding modalities, transgenic plants are treated as if they were toxic chemicals or nuclear waste. ”Table 2. Major changes to EU since 1990’s complicated procedures create ideal opportunities for any political opposition to GMOs to delay decision-making through claims about scientific uncertainty. Under the Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, the application for import or cultivation of a GM crop for food and feed is produced by the applicant and submitted to a competent authority of one of the EU member states. The application contains large amounts of information, including human health and environmental risk assessments, monitoring plans, labeling proposals and a detection method for the product. The application is passed to EFSA, which prepares an opinion based on the assessment conducted by scientific experts; EFSA should issue its opinion within 6 mo, although the time limit is often extended because of requests for further information. The EFSA opinion is passed to the European Commission, and is also made available for public comment. then makes a recommendation to grant or refuse authorisation; if the Commission’s decision differs from EFSA’s opinion, its reasons for disagreeing with EFSA must be justified. The Commission’s recommendation is voted on by member states in the on the (). Acceptance or rejection of the Commission’s recommendation by must be by a qualified majority. Citation9 If there is no qualified majority, the Commission’s recommendation is passed to the Council of Ministers for Agriculture, which must accept or reject the recommendation by a qualified majority. If there is no qualified majority to accept or reject the Commission’s recommendation, the decision passes back to the Commission, which may accept its own recommendation. Such a complex system requires political will to ensure final decisions on product approvals are made. Without this political will, proposals can stall, often indefinitely, at any step of the “comitology” with no justification given. This results in huge backlogs of products awaiting decisions. 2011, there were 72 dossiers in the process and only three products were approved in the EU between January and November 2011. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text corroborates the claim by detailing the complex regulatory processes for gene-edited crops in the EU, illustrating that different countries have distinct systems (e.g., the application process and the role of EFSA) that affect how GM crops are approved, thereby indicating a variation in regulations by country.


Input: Task: contrast the claim using the given text. Claim: Everyone benefits equally from the same probiotic strains. [SEP] Text: 6% similarity to FbpA was present in all but two strains. A protein showing about 54% identity with MapA from Limosilactobacillus reuteri but annotated as transporter substrate-binding protein was present in all the L. plantarum strains analyzed. Proteins similar to mucin-binding protein (MucBP) (6 strains with 52–98% identity), Msl (6 strains with 72–98% identity), and collagen-binding protein (Cbp) (5 strains with 88–89% identity), were scarcely found across L. plantarum strains and were annotated differently. The presence of adhesion-related protein of one or the other type in a large majority of the L. plantarum strains suggests that they might be able to colonize in the animal hosts. The fact that DKL3 was one of the only six L. plantarum having msl further highlights its unique probiotic potential. 3. 4. 5 Safety of isolates Although L. plantarum has a GRAS status, the safety of each stain for usage in human consumption needs to be determined 69. To establish food safety, DKL3 and JGR2 were assessed for their antibiotic resistance at the phenotypic and genomic levels, hemolysis activity at phenotypic levels, and the biogenic amine biosynthesis at the genomic levels. Antibiotic MIC test revealed that both the strains were sensitive to tetracycline, chloramphenicol, clindamycin, and trimethoprim and resistant to gentamicin and vancomycin (Table 2). Campedelli et al. (2019) reported phenotypic resistance to tetracycline and chloramphenicol in a majority of L. plantarum strains in their panel. This fact suggests the superiority of JGR2 and DKL3 on this parameter. Resistance to gentamicin and vancomycin is considered to be intrinsic and is well-studied in lactobacilli70. When mined for AR genes, those conferring resistance to tetracycline, chloramphenicol, and erythromycin were found in both strains in spite of having the phenotypic resistance to the former two antibiotics. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text contrasts the claim by discussing the unique probiotic potential of different Lactobacillus plantarum strains, such as DKL3, which has specific adhesion-related proteins that suggest it can colonize animal hosts more effectively than others. This implies that not all strains confer the same benefits to individuals, highlighting variations in the probiotic efficacy based on strain differences.


Input: Task: pass the claim using the given text. Claim: Bioengineered yeast can be designed to produce high yields of biofuels from sugars. [SEP] Text: These results demonstrate that the lactic acid present in the media is being used as a substrate by C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T and that it is being converted only into butyric acid and not for acetic acid production even in presence of another carbon source in the medium such as glucose. Figure 6GC-MS spectra of acetic and butyric acids present in the culture broth of C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755Tafter culturing for 40 h in P2 medium with 12C 6 -glucose (40. 0 g/L) and [1,2,3-13C 3 ] lactic acid (5. 0 g/L). A) Mass spectra of butyric acid showing the presence of significant amounts of butyric acid with molecular weights higher than 88 (i. e. : 89, 90, 91 and 92) indicating the corporation of 13C. B) Mass spectra of acetic acid showing the absence of 13C in the acetic acid. Full size imageOptimizing pH conditions in the co-culture for butyric acid productionThe optimum pH for culturing B. sp. SGP1 was around 7. 0 while more acidic conditions led to a decreased growth (Additional file 3: Figure S3). However, for C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T, the optimum pH for growth and butyric acid production is known to be 5. 9 to 6. 0 [4–6, 23], a value that we used previously to produce more than 50 g/L butyric acid [7]. For this co-culture, we tried fed-batch fermentations at different pH values (5. 9, 5. 7, 5. 5, and 5. 3). All fermentations were performed at 37°C as this temperature was found to be the best for the co-culture based upon butyric acid final concentration (Additional file 4: Figure S4). Interestingly, the optimum pH for the co-culture both in terms of growth and butyric acid production was 5. 5 (Figure 7) which is lower than the optimum for growth of either strain. At this pH, the maximum productivity was 0. 3±0. 04 g/L/h and the final butyrate concentration was 34. 2±1. 8 g/L with a yield of 0. 35±0. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text is irrelevant to the claim as it discusses the fermentation process of C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T and butyric acid production under specific pH conditions. It does not mention bioengineered yeast or their ability to produce biofuels from sugars.


Input: Task: corroborate the claim using the given text. Claim: Regulations for gene-edited crops vary by country. [SEP] Text: Agricultural policy should be derived from economic, social and environment values, and the acceptability of the likely results of using of GMHT maize should be judged according to that policy. Economic, social and environment values cannot be discovered by scientific analysis of weed shifts, no matter how accurate and precise they may be. The impact of the changes in legislation was a long period up to 2004 when very few GM crop import or cultivation approvals were received (Table 2). In 2010, there was an increase in import approvals; however, on average these still take approximately 4 y. Only 4 products have received cultivation approvals (MON810 maize, Bt 176 maize, T25 maize and Amflora Potato), 2 of which are grown currently. Footnote† Changes in legislation have led to significant changes in data requirements, and therefore regulatory packages prepared in, say, 2001 or 2007, are different from those requested in 2011, and this results in delays in submissions, review and decision-making in the EU compared with other jurisdictions. Some of the consequences of these delays are considered below. Impact of EU Regulations and Lengthy and Unpredictable Decision-MakingThe cost to agricultural biotechnology companies and society generally of difficulties conducting GM crop field trials, and unpredictable decision-making on applications for product approvals, are difficult to identify fully and quantify precisely; however, there are clear effects on agricultural biotechnology companies, the economies of the EU and countries that cultivate, or may wish to cultivate, GM crops and export agricultural commodities to the EU. Delays in import approvals in the EU may have important consequences because although a company may have approvals to sell GM seed for cultivation in countries outside the EU, in practice it may not be possible to sell the seed until the product is approved for import in the EU. The EU has, for the most part, “zero tolerance” of unapproved events leading to rejection of commodities in which these events are detected. The costs of rejection are high and are estimated to be between €100 million and €1 billion per incident. Citation80 These risks could be managed using segregation and identity preservation methods to reduce the probability that cultivation of the unapproved event will lead to its presence in commodities for export to the EU;Citation81 however, the risk, in some cases may be managed more effectively by not cultivating the event even though it is approved for cultivation in the exporting country. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text corroborates the claim by discussing how changes in EU regulations have led to different data requirements and approval processes for GM crops compared to other jurisdictions. It indicates that the regulatory landscape is not uniform across countries, with specific examples of how delays in the EU regulations affect the approval process for GM crops intending to be exported to the EU. This illustrates the variability in regulations for gene-edited crops across different regions.


Input: Task: pass the claim using the given text. Claim: Everyone benefits equally from the same probiotic strains. [SEP] Text: Environ. Microbiol. 12, 758–773 (2010). 9. Martino, M. E. et al. Nomadic lifestyle of Lactobacillus plantarum revealed by comparative genomics of 54 strains isolated from different habitats. Environ. Microbiol. 18, 4974–4989 (2016). 10. Gupta, A. & Tiwari, S. K. of Lactobacillus plantarum LD1 Isolated from Batter of Dosa, a Fermented Food. Probiotics Antimicrob. Proteins 6, 73–81 (2014). 11. Khemariya, P. , Singh, S. , Jaiswal, N. & Chaurasia, S. N. S. Isolation and Identification of Lactobacillus plantarum from Vegetable Samples. Food Biotechnol. 30, 49–62 (2016). 12. Poornachandra Rao, K. et al. Probiotic potential of Lactobacillus strains isolated from sorghum-based traditional fermented food. Probiotics Antimicrob. Proteins 7, 146–156 (2015). 13. Bora, S. S. , Keot, J. , Das, S. , Sarma, K. & Barooah, M. Metagenomics analysis of microbial communities associated with a traditional rice wine starter culture (Xaj-pitha) of Assam, India. 3 Biotech 6, 1–13 (2016). 14. Tamang, J. P. et al. Identification of predominant lactic acid bacteria isolated from traditionally fermented vegetable products of the Eastern Himalayas. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 105, 347–356 (2005). 15. Goel, A. , Halami, P. M. & Tamang, J. P. Genome analysis of Lactobacillus plantarum isolated from some Indian fermented foods for bacteriocin production and probiotic marker genes. Front. Microbiol. 11, (2020). 16. Grover, S. , Sharma, V. K. , Mallapa, R. H. & Batish, V. K. Draft genome sequence of Lactobacillus plantarum strain Lp91, a promising Indian probiotic isolate of human gut origin. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text does not address the claim directly and instead discusses various studies on Lactobacillus plantarum and its identification, isolation, and genomic analysis. It does not provide evidence or arguments supporting or contrasting the claim that everyone benefits equally from the same probiotic strains.


Input: Task: pass the claim using the given text. Claim: Bioengineered yeast can be designed to produce high yields of biofuels from sugars. [SEP] Text: 03 g butyrate/g sucrose based upon the amount of sucrose consumed. By comparison, in a previous study done by our group employing immobilized C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T, a yield of 0. 45 g butyrate/g glucose was reported using the same media as in this study [7]. Another study looking at the fed-batch addition of carbonated beverages, which contain sucrose, glucose and fructose, to cultures of C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T grown in RCM media found yields of 0. 42 ± 0. 11 g/g [10], a value that is comparable with that seen in our study. The final acetate and lactate concentrations in the medium were 2. 5 g/L and 0. 2 g/L, respectively. Accordingly, this co-culture was selective for butyric acid, with 92. 8% of the final acids by weight being butyric acid. By comparison, our previous study found butyric acid constituted only 82% of the total acids when 35. 4 g/L butyric acid was produced during a fed batch culture with glucose [7]. Figure 7Typical B. sp. SGP1 and C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755Tco-culture fed-batch fermentation in RCM supplemented with sucrose at pH 5. 5 and 37°C. The plots show (A) the sugars consumption profile and (B)the optical density of the cultures and their production profiles for butyric, acetic and lactic acids. Full size imageOn the other hand, at the higher pH values tested (5. 7, and 5. 9), the final butyric acid concentrations were both lower; 26. 3 g/L and 16. 6 g/L for pHs 5. 7 and 5. 9 respectively while the acetic acid final concentrations were 1. 0 g/L and 1. 5 g/L respectively. It is thought that this may be attributed to the enhanced growth of B. sp. SGP1 at these higher pH values, leading to competition for the sugars produced. On the other hand, the final butyrate and acetic acid concentrations with the lowest pH tested, i. e. , 5. 3 were 20. 8 and 10. 0 g/L respectively. It was also observed that the glucose concentration was lower than 0. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text does not provide information that directly supports or contradicts the claim regarding bioengineered yeast and biofuel production. Instead, it discusses various studies related to butyric acid production from sucrose and glucose using specific microorganisms without mentioning yeast, which makes it irrelevant to the claim.


Input: Task: corroborate the claim using the given text. Claim: Regulations for gene-edited crops vary by country. [SEP] Text: Citation84 Movement of research and development outside the EU has immediate costs of fewer jobs, but also has likely long-term adverse consequences on the EU’s ability to influence the direction of agricultural biotechnology innovation and to reap benefits from a biotechnology-based economy. Citation84 In this regard, the EU’s policies on GM crops may be an extreme manifestation of a long-term trend of reduced political and financial support for agricultural research in the EU. Citation85 For reasons given above, agricultural problems are never permanently solved owing to, among other things, environment change, evolution in pests and changing political and social objectives; and the EU risks being unable to solve future problems unique to its agriculture if all innovation in agricultural technology is performed elsewhere. A final consideration is the many millions of euros needed yearly to maintain the EU regulatory bureaucracy for GM crops, including parts of EFSA, competent authorities in member states and public research into human and health and environmental risks. Citation86,Citation87 Some of this cost will be incurred dealing with applications for cultivation approvals. If this money has any chance of being well spent, there must be a policy that GM crops can be grown in the EU if they meet certain criteria, and that scientific analysis of the risks posed by cultivation will play some part in the decision for particular products. If cultivation of GM crops is politically unacceptable in the EU, then scientific analysis of the risks of GM crops will have no effect on decision-making, and is a waste of time and money, except as a means to conceal to preconceived political decisions. for Clear PolicyExperience of EU regulation of GM crops suggests that science is being used to conceal political objectives that cannot be made clear. Products such as Bt11 maize, which has been in the EU system for 15 years awaiting a decision on cultivation, and GA21 maize have undergone thorough risk assessments based on data that have been more than adequate to secure cultivation approvals in North and South America, and the Philippines. In many countries, regulatory decision-making proceeds according to well-defined procedures. In the EU, on the other hand, unexpected delays are met continually: new study requirements are devised, new methods of analyzing data are imposed, formats of dossiers are changed, legislation is revised, and decision-making schedules are extended. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text corroborates the claim by highlighting the differences in regulatory approaches to GM crops between the EU and other countries. It discusses how the EU's regulatory framework leads to continuous unexpected delays and new requirements, while countries like North and South America and the Philippines have well-defined procedures for regulatory decision-making. This indicates that the regulations for gene-edited crops indeed vary significantly by country, supporting the claim.


Input: Task: contrast the claim using the given text. Claim: Gut bacteria have no effect on mental health or mood. [SEP] Text: Abstract Histopathologically, amyloids are known as β-sheet rich extracellular protein deposits that are generally associated with neuro-degenerative diseases of mammals including α-synuclein observed in Parkinson’s disease (PD). Microorganisms have been reported for the production of similar proteins with functional physiological traits also termed as “functional amyloids” helping them in the invasion, biofilm formation, host-colonization, and even in immune activation. The gut-associated micro-flora is known to aggravate neuro-degeneration and disease progression. In the present work, the authors have analyzed the possibility of interaction between α-synuclein with functional amyloids using in silico tools (phylogeny, docking, and molecular dynamics (MD) simulation and visual MD visualization) and reviewed the reported (in vitro and in vivo) interactions. The interaction of functional amyloids and anti-Parkinsonian drugs with wild type α-synuclein (non-misfolded) was shown to be interacting with specific amino acids with the possibility of use of micro-biota even as psycho-biotics. Microbial exudates have been implicated with various disorders influencing human mental health with both negative and positive effects. The present review, analyzing the influence of gut-micro-flora crossing the gut-brain-axis, and enhancing the psycho-pathological health of the human brain can help future research in alleviating human mental health using the gut-brain axis. Keyword: Bacterial functional amyloids In silico Mental health Neuro-degeneration Psychobiotics α-synuclein Citation:. Effects of gut bacteria and their amyloids on mental health and neurodegeneration in Parkinson’s disease. J Biotech. 2023;11(3):38-46. Copyright: Author(s). This is an 1. than twenty different human amyloidosis diseases and other neurodegenerative disorders have been linked to misfolding of amyloid proteins and further aggregation and fibrillation. Parkinson’s disease (PD) (a neurodegenerative disease), has been associated with pathological amyloid- α-synuclein capable of aggregation and amyloidosis. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text contrasts the claim by presenting evidence that microorganisms, including gut bacteria, produce functional amyloids that can influence neuro-degeneration and disease progression. It specifically notes that microbial exudates are implicated in various disorders influencing mental health, suggesting that gut bacteria play a role in both negative and positive effects on mental health. Furthermore, the mention of the 'gut-brain axis' indicates a significant relationship between gut microbiota and mental health.


Input: Task: pass the claim using the given text. Claim: Bioengineered yeast can be designed to produce high yields of biofuels from sugars. [SEP] Text: 1 g/L throughout the course of fermentation when the pH was 5. 5, 5. 7, and 5. 9 while, at pH 5. 3, it was increasing constantly during the course of fermentation to reach 10. 0 g/L near the end of the fermentation (Data not shown). It is also worthy to note that, with an optimum pH of 5. 5, the sucrose hydrolysis was higher during the early stages of the fermentation than during the latter (>100 h), suggesting that the Bacillus strain was limited in its growth or activity. The ability of the co-culture to grow in RCM medium without previous purging with an inert gasC. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T is a strict anaerobe and sensitive to oxygen so the culturing medium needs to be purged with an inert gas like nitrogen or argon prior to inoculation to provide anoxic conditions. However, this purging contributes to the total cost for butyric acid production. Since B. sp. SGP1 strain is a facultative anaerobe, we wanted to test the ability of this co-culture to grow in RCM medium without prior purging. We found that the co-culture could grow successfully and produce butyric acid, albeit after a longer lag time (Figure 8). It appears that B. sp. SGP1 grew and consumed the oxygen present in the medium, thus providing the anoxic conditions needed for the growth of C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T. This finding is important since it suggests that fermentations using these two bacteria can be performed using media without purging, allowing industries to reduce their production costs. Figure 8Growth of and butyric acid production by B. sp. SGP1 and C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755Tco-cultures with and without purging of the medium with argon gas. The cultures were grown in serum bottles at 37°C using RCM supplemented with sucrose. Full size imageConclusionsAlthough C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T alone is unable to utilize sucrose, using a co-culture of C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T and B. sp. SGP1, this study demonstrates that sucrose can be utilized as a carbon source for butyric acid production. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text is irrelevant to the claim as it discusses the growth and butyric acid production of specific bacterial strains (B. sp. SGP1 and C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T) in the presence of sucrose, but does not mention bioengineered yeast or the production of biofuels. It focuses on fermentation processes and growth conditions, such as pH levels and anaerobic conditions, rather than on yeast or biofuel yield.


Input: Task: corroborate the claim using the given text. Claim: Regulations for gene-edited crops vary by country. [SEP] Text: Introduction: the Governance of Agrifoods? Download book PDF Download book. Clark3 & Jill E. Hobbs3 Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in (()) 704 Accesses AbstractThe introduction to this book asks the question: why study the governance of genome editing in agrifood? We discuss current system-wide, and country specific policy changes that have increased interest in using genomic techniques to make improvements to agronomic, nutritional/functional traits and organoleptic qualities of plants used for human food and animal feed. We discuss why applying supply chain and systems approaches are useful ways to view how the pace and applications of technological innovations in this sector are tempered by the political and economic dynamics of risk governance. This introductory 2018. A conference held in brought scientists together from around the world to discuss the implications of using -Cas9 to edit genes for human health research as well as agricultural applications. During the conference, a researcher from China made a presentation that would leave a lasting impression. In this presentation, scientist announced that gene editing had been used successfully on twin girls to make them resistant to HIV/AIDS infections. At the time, there were no regulations or policies in place to prevent ethically questionable uses of -Cas9 to alter the genome of any organism, including humans. The global controversy and condemnation by the scientific community surrounding this announcement triggered a strong regulatory response in countries around the world (Asquer & Krachkovskaya, 2021: 1117). The 2018 event would have lasting effects on the trajectory of gene editing in agricultural research up until today. The introduction of innovative technologies into the world often requires what Klerkx et al. (2010: 391) call ‘selling a good story’. The story must be told by the right people who have credibility, at the right time, in the right place and to the right people who can ‘capitalize on momentum and windows of opportunity’. If not, fear, uncertainty and outrage may dominate the narrative. It can easily be argued that gene editing, and particularly -Cas9, was not the subject of a good story. It was instead, introduced to the world as an ethically dubious technology wielded by unscrupulous scientists to re-write the human genome without any social license to do so. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text corroborates the claim by discussing the global regulatory responses triggered by the controversial use of gene editing technologies, highlighting that these responses vary by country. The text mentions that the announcement about gene editing's use on human beings led to a strong regulatory response in countries around the world, implying that different countries have different regulations governing gene editing, especially in agricultural applications.


Input: Task: contrast the claim using the given text. Claim: Gut bacteria have no effect on mental health or mood. [SEP] Text: Various different types of amyloid proteins have been reported which vary in amino acid sequence but similar in their structure enriched with b-sheets giving them unique features such as robustness, stability, and insolubility in environment. These important characteristics of amyloid proteins have resulted in their selected evolution and utilization by insects, fungi, and bacteria. Thus the amyloid fiber aggregation is not just restricted to mammalian pathological and pathogenic processes but is a widely distributed attribute among the proteins and polypeptides exhibiting their existence in nature. These amyloids have been reported with biological functions such as fimbria formation in bacteria, epigenetic traits transmission in fungi and deposition and hormonal release in humans. The term “functional amyloid” has been coined to differentiate these biologically useful proteins from their toxic siblings [1,2]. Although amyloid proteins were first discovered for their link to human diseases, they now represent among a list of proteins with unique functional states which are disease-unrelated in the tree of life [3]. Recently, the microbial functional amyloids have been reported for enhancement and initiation of amyloido-genesis due to their cross-interaction. However, amyloid proteins have been reported from diverse microorganisms, their structural attributes have been studied very less. In silico studies on the proteins reduce the need for expensive laboratory work and enhance the rate of research and discovery [4,5]. Interests in the works on the gut-brain axis during the initial part of the new millennium have been reduced due to the lack of long-term longitudinal research [3]. In the present review, we have analyzed different types of bacterial “functional amyloids” with respect to α-synuclein of PD and their interaction with each other and in comparison to the known medication molecules. Understanding these interactions of “functional amyloids” of gut micro-biota with pathological (wild type and virulent) amyloid of brain influencing the mental health can help in future treatment and actions. 2. α-– more than 50 human diseases, formation of various forms of aggregated intermediates and amyloid fibrils were observed due to misfolding and accumulation of amyloido-genic proteins [6]. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text contrasts the claim by discussing the interactions between bacterial 'functional amyloids' and human amyloids, suggesting that understanding these interactions can influence mental health. The mention of the gut-brain axis and the potential for gut microbiota to affect brain-related amyloid interactions supports the argument that gut bacteria do have implications for mental health.


Input: Task: pass the claim using the given text. Claim: Bioengineered yeast can be designed to produce high yields of biofuels from sugars. [SEP] Text: In addition, this co-culture offers also the benefit of a greater selectivity for butyric acid. Another advantage of this co-culture is its ability to produce butyric acid at a relatively high yield, which is similar to the yield obtained by pure cultures of C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T grown on glucose. One drawback for this proposed co-culture is the low productivity during fed-batch fermentations. This can be improved in future studies by changing the medium composition or the fermentation mode to optimize the growth kinetics of the two strains. Likewise, future work may also include using this novel B. sp. SGP1 strain or other Bacillus strains in similar co-cultures with C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T for production of butyric acid but from other carbon sources, such as starch or cellulose. Materials and methodsReagentsAll of the chemicals and reagents used were purchased from the Sigma-Aldrich Co. USA, unless mentioned otherwise. The reagents, when available, were molecular biology grade. All solutions were prepared using these reagents and sterile distilled water. Bacterial strains and culturing methodsB. sp. SGP1 was isolated from a waste water sludge sample obtained from the Jo anaerobic digestion tank, Seoul, South Korea. This strain was co-cultured with C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T in reinforced clostridial media (RCM). The media was made fresh using the individual components and supplemented with 40. 0 g/L of either sucrose for the co-culture tests or B. sp. SGP1 monocultures or glucose for C. tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T monocultures. The composition of the RCM medium was as follows: beef extract (Difco, USA) 10. 0 g/L, peptone (Difco, USA) 5. 0 g/L, yeast extract (Difco, USA) 3. 0 g/L, tryptone (Difco, USA) 5. 0 g/L, starch 1. 0 g/L, sodium acetate 3. 0 g/L, and NaCl 5. 0 g/L. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text provides information about a co-culture of bacteria and their ability to produce butyric acid, as well as details about media composition and culturing methods. However, it does not address or provide any information related to bioengineered yeast or the production of biofuels, making it irrelevant to the claim.


Input: Task: corroborate the claim using the given text. Claim: Regulations for gene-edited crops vary by country. [SEP] Text: The legacy of the focusing event in 2018 has had long standing implications for gene editing for research into its applications for human health, but also for how this innovation has been welcomed or resisted in the agricultural innovation space. The governance of gene editing in agricultural research may seem unrelated to this event, but the resultant regulatory wheels that were set in motion have had significant implications for the regulation and use of gene editing in the global agrifood system. On one hand, proponents of gene editing techniques in agriculture argue that it should not be considered identical to genetically modified foods because it does not use transgenes (the SDN1 technique) and thus, should be regulated similarly to any other agrifood introduced to a country with no prior safety record—genetically edited or produced using conventional techniques. On the other, gene editing is viewed by some as ‘just another biotechnology’ that carries the same perceived risks as Organisms (GMOs)Footnote 1 and should be subject to the same biosafety protocols and regulations as its genetically modified counterpart. Currently, there is no global consensus on how gene editing should be regulated in agrifood research or assessed for commercialization. Gene editing has been used in agricultural research and product development for decades before -Cas9. -Cas9 has revolutionized gene editing in a way that prior techniques have not. It has encouraged governments to critically assess, and in some cases re-think, how these techniques are regulated in research and commercialization. Today, there is a patchwork of diverse regulatory frameworks, with varying levels of acceptance of gene editing as equivalent to traditional breeding techniques. For example, Japan has commercialized two gene edited agrifoods; the GABAFootnote 2 enhanced tomato, and two types of fish for human consumption, while the has commercialized a soybean with improved fatty acid composition (Waltz, 2021) and American company Pairwise is set to commercially release a gene edited leafy green. On the research side, Chinese institutions hold a significant proportion of patents for gene edited crop varieties (Bagley & Candler, 2023), but the Chinese national government has not yet publicized any regulatory protocols for commercialization of these products in the domestic market. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text corroborates the claim by illustrating that there is currently a 'patchwork of diverse regulatory frameworks' concerning gene editing, with different countries adopting varying levels of acceptance and regulation. It gives examples such as Japan's commercialization of gene-edited foods and the absence of publicized regulatory protocols in China, which emphasizes that the regulations do indeed vary by country.


Input: Task: contrast the claim using the given text. Claim: Gut bacteria have no effect on mental health or mood. [SEP] Text: In diseases such as PD (α-synuclein), Alzheimer’s disease (amyloid-β), and transmissible spongiform encephalopathy’s (prions or Platelet-rich plasma [PrP]), the cause is typically related to the structural conversions due to misfolding of a single disease associated protein [7]. Pathological aggregation of α-syn, a neuronal protein has been characterized in many progressive and pathologically similar neurodegenerative disorders such as PD, dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), and multiple system atrophy (MSA). Both in PD and DLB, α-syn aggregation is seen as Lewy neuritis (LNs) and LBs, while in MSA it is detected as Glial cytoplasmic inclusions (GCI) within oligo-dendrocytes. Presence of these aggregates of α-syn (LBs and GCIs) with p62 and ubiquitin (of components of machinery for protein degradation) triggers the pathological cascade leading to neuro-inflammation and severe neuro-degeneration characteristic of the said diseases [8]. The wild type and misfolded α-syn are shown in Figure 1a and b. Figure 1: Pathological and functional amyloide interactions. Structure of α-synuclein (a) Wild type (1XQ8) and (b) Misfolded (2N0A); Structure of amyloids analyzed here, (c) Bacillus subtilis (50F1) TasA amyloid, (d) Bacillus atropheus (BATR1942) TasA amyloid (e) Dinoroseobacter shibae DFL 12 (Dshi_4130), (f) Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki YBT-1520 TasA and (g) Streptococcus pyogenes MGAS15252; Common drugs of Parkinson’s disease analyzed in the present work - (h) Benztropine, (i) Bromocriptine, (j) Trihexyphenidyl, (k) Selegiline, and (l) Levodopa. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text contrasts the claim by detailing the pathological mechanisms involved in neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer’s, that are linked to protein misfolding and neuro-inflammation. These conditions impact mental health and mood, suggesting an intricate relationship between gut health, specifically gut bacteria, and mental well-being.


Input: Task: pass the claim using the given text. Claim: Bioengineered yeast can be designed to produce high yields of biofuels from sugars. [SEP] Text: The medium was purged with argon gas and aliquoted into 60 ml serum bottles (20 ml in each), after which it was sterilized by autoclaving at 121°C for 20 minutes. For some experiments, P2 medium was used instead of RCM. The composition of the P2 medium was as follows: yeast extract (Difco, USA) 1. 0 g/L, K2HPO4 0. 5 g/L, KH2PO4 0. 5 g/L, ammonium acetate 2. 2 g/L, p-aminobenzoate 0. 001 g/L, thiamin 0. 001 g/L, biotin 0. 00001 g/L, MgSO4. 7H2O 0. 2 g/L, MnSO4. H2O 0. 01 g/L, FeSO4. 7H2O 0. 01 g/L, and NaCl 0. 01 g/L. Unless else is mentioned, incubation and growth of the cultures was done in a shaking incubator at 37°C and 200 rpm. Analytical methodsQuantitative analysis of the volatile fatty acids (acetic and butyric acids) was done using GC (gas chromatography) (6890). Helium was used as the carrier gas. The oven temperature was programmed to increase from 50 to 240°C at a rate of 10°C/min. The temperature of the injection port and FID (Detector) were 250°C. The concentration of the acids was determined according to a standard calibration curve. For analysis of the sugars and lactic acid, an HPLC (1200 ) with an RID (Detector) was used under the following conditions: mobile phase, 0. 01M sulfuric acid; column, Aminex HPX-87H (dimensions - 300*7. 8, Biorad, USA); flow rate, 0. 5 ml/min; temperature, 40°C. The optical densities of the samples were measured using spectrophotometer (UV-mini 1240, Shimadzu, Japan) at 600 nm. To prove that [1, 2, 3 13C3] lactic acid is converted to butyric acid and not acetic acid by C. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text does not address the claim about bioengineered yeast producing biofuels from sugars. Instead, it discusses various experimental methods related to yeast growth and acid analysis without providing any direct evidence or information relevant to the specific claim. Thus, it is irrelevant.


Input: Task: corroborate the claim using the given text. Claim: Regulations for gene-edited crops vary by country. [SEP] Text: Canadian regulatory bodies have determined that gene edited agrifoods do not present any novel risks to human, animal or environmental health compared to conventional breeding techniques, and applications for commercialization will be assessed on a case-by-case basis for health and biosafety concerns. The EU has had legislation in place since 2001 prohibiting the deliberate release of all products of Techniques (NBTs). Gene edited crops are GMOs under Directive 2001/18/EC. But in July of 2023, the EU Commission announced that it was re-examining how ‘new genomic techniques’ (including gene editing like -Cas9) are regulated, considering a loosening of regulatory protocols for organisms that are not transgenic (no foreign genes from other species) and have less than 20 genetic modifications. Gene editing in agrifood research, product development and regulatory frameworks is not where it was in 2018. The global economy is also not where it was in 2018. System wide shocks such as the COVID-19 global pandemic, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and its impact on global food security, and the widespread damaging effects of climate change have put enormous stresses on the agrifood system and its global supply chains. Some experts argue that we are at the tipping point and must harness useful agricultural technologies in whatever way we can to mitigate damages to human, animal and environmental health and welfare if we are to avoid catastrophic environmental collapse and widespread hunger. Prior to the discovery of -Cas9, gene editing techniques had been around for decades, and proponents argued for their wider adoption to help manage future challenges. But the progress of gene editing as a useful and effective tool in agrifood research and development is not where some had hoped when -Cas9 was discovered in 2012. The status of gene editing in the agrifood system is in a state of flux. In some ways, the technology has not lived up to its potential to provide solutions to global food insecurity and the damaging effects of climate change on the world’s food supply. But why? What is the relationship between the current status of gene editing applications and the governance of agrifood technologies? Where might the future take gene editing? In this book, we investigate the factors that have guided science and governance discourse surrounding gene editing technologies, what has changed, and how might governance and regulatory frameworks respond to changes in the application of agrifood technologies in the future. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text corroborates the claim by providing examples of differing regulatory approaches toward gene-edited crops in Canada and the European Union. It mentions that Canadian regulatory bodies assess gene edited agrifoods on a case-by-case basis, while the EU has specific legislation that categorizes gene edited crops as GMOs under Directive 2001/18/EC. Furthermore, it indicates that the EU is currently re-examining its regulatory stance on gene editing, showcasing the variability in regulations internationally.


Input: Task: contrast the claim using the given text. Claim: Gut bacteria have no effect on mental health or mood. [SEP] Text: [Click here to view] PD, as a neurodegenerative disease shows motor and non-motor symptoms associated with decreased dopamine release and loss of dopaminergic neurons with characteristic presence of LBs or LNs. As major pathological characteristics of PD, misfolding and further deposition of α-syn was observed with related synnucleopathy and MSA. This spread of α-syn pathology across the brain region results in the onset and further progression of the clinical phenotypes. α-syn misfolding into pathologic-folds showing self-templating conformations exhibiting ability to spread between cells like “Prion” proteins and further oligomerization to form higher structures has been proposed for the pathological cascade in these neurodegenerative diseases [8-10]. 3. fibers are ordered protein aggregates generally associated with many neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, and various Prion diseases. As their production is reported from different microorganisms like, Proteobacteria, Actinobacteria, Firmicutes, and Bacteroides and also in fungi with relatively no relation to each other at the amino acid level, as seen in the present work there seems to be a preferential selection of amyloid curve during the evolution for various functions [Figure 1c-g]. The constructive use of stable amyloid fold in cellular, physiological, and functional purposes by bacteria is an evolutionary master-piece exhibiting pathological trait when similar proteins are not controlled by the cell leading to different neurodegenerative diseases. The unusual robustness of this extracellular “functional” bacterial amyloids (FuBA) (capable of withstanding chemical denaturants and SDS) has been employed by bacteria (under tight spatio-temporal-control) for biofilm-strengthening, cell-cell communications, cell-wall construction, and for bacterial antagonism. Although the misfolded human pathological amyloid proteins are intracellular-leading to cell lysis on fibrillation, most of the bacterial functional amyloids are extracellular and rarely reported for intracellular functions [3,11]. The synthesis, transport, and nucleation of bacterial FuBA involve a complex mixture of proteins makes their bioinformatic prediction and analysis with respect to pathological amyloids difficult. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text contrasts the claim by discussing the involvement of gut bacteria in the production of amyloid proteins, which are linked to neurodegenerative diseases. It suggests that misfolded proteins from gut bacteria can exhibit pathogenic traits that relate to neurological issues, indicating a potential effect of gut bacteria on mental health. This implies a connection between gut bacteria and brain health, directly opposing the claim.


Input: Task: pass the claim using the given text. Claim: Bioengineered yeast can be designed to produce high yields of biofuels from sugars. [SEP] Text: tyrobutyricum ATCC 25755T, spent culture broth was analyzed using GC equipped with a Pegasus 2D TOF-MS (LECO, St. ) for detecting the presence of 13C in acetic and butyric acids. The column was HP-glycol (PEG) capillary column (17 m × 0. 32 mm internal diameter, 0. 25 μm film thickness, Agilent Technology, USA). The oven temperature was programmed to increase from 50°C to 150°C at a rate of 10°C/min. Helium was used as the carrier gas with a flow rate of 3 ml/min. The ionization mode employed was EI (electron impact ionization) with a scan rate of 100 spectra/sec and mass range of 40~500 m/z. The ion source temperature was 230°C [24]. Identification of the isolated Bacillus strainThe 16S rRNA gene sequence of the strain SGP1 was used as a query against the EzTaxon-e database [25, 26] and the 16S rRNA gene sequence of relatives were retrieved. The construction and evaluation of the phylogenetic trees were performed as described previously [27]. The alignment and phylogenetic analysis were performed using MEGA5 [28]. The 16s rRNA gene sequence of the strain SGP1 was submitted to GenBank ( and is registered under accession number HQ188291. 1. Fermentation conditionsFed-batch fermentations were done using a 3 L capacity bioreactor (Fermentec Co. Ltd. , Korea) with an initial working volume of 1 L. The medium was RCM supplemented with 60. 0 g/L sucrose (Sigma-Aldrich Co. USA). After autoclaving, the medium was purged with filtered oxygen-free argon gas. Overnight pre-cultures of the two strains were inoculated into the reactor at a concentration of 5% (v/v) for each strain. All fermentations were performed using agitation (200 rpm) and the pH was adjusted to the required values (5. 3 – 5. 9) by addition of a 10% ammonia solution, prepared by diluting an ammonium hydroxide solution (Cat # 320145, Sigma-Aldrich Co. USA) using sterile distilled water. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text is irrelevant to the claim as it primarily describes various experimental methods and conditions related to fermentation, including analysis techniques and strain identification, without addressing the concept of bioengineered yeast or its potential for biofuel production.


Input: Task: corroborate the claim using the given text. Claim: Regulations for gene-edited crops vary by country. [SEP] Text: The parameters of this study are as follows. We specifically focus on plants, with a brief discussion on gene edited microorganisms. Discussions of gene edited animals are not included in this study, however more general discussions of ‘gene editing’ techniques are analyzed in the context of crops and plant-based food & feed. Though the socio-political controversies and social movement oppositions surrounding biotechnology in agriculture are acknowledged as significant in terms of how gene editing is perceived in the public space, this book focuses on the governance of agricultural innovation of gene editing in the context of regulatory policy frameworks. Footnote 3 We discuss the influences of public perceptions of gene editing on regulatory frameworks, but our primary focus is on formalized regulations and guidelines governing the use and release of gene edited agrifoods. Our analysis builds on previous studies of regulatory frameworks for gene editing in agrifood (see Entine et al. , 2021; Ericksson et al. , 2019; Menz et al. , 2020; Wolt & Clark, 2018; OECD, 2018; NASEM, 2017; Friedrichs et al. , 2019a; FAO, 2022; Zarate et al. , 2023). Many academic and organizational studies focus on current applications of gene editing and how they are evaluated by regulatory agencies responsible for approving gene edited agrifood products for commercialization. The governance of gene edited crops has also received attention, as new applications for gene editing techniques are discovered (Phillips & Macall, 2021; Selfa et al. , 2021; Asquer & Krachkovskaya, 2021; Friedrichs et al. , 2019b). Methods used to investigate the dynamics of governance include interviews or surveys designed to evaluate either consumer, government, bench scientists and/or agribusiness’ perceptions of regulations, risk, safety, benefits, and uncertainties regarding gene edited agrifoods (Lassoued et al. , 2021). The volume of research in this area has exploded over the last few years for three main reasons: the advancement of gene editing applications such as to improve agronomic and nutritional traits in agrifoods; second, the evolution of regulatory guidelines in countries that have previously restricted the use of gene editing; and third, the global economic, political, and environmental turbulence of the last 5 years. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text corroborates the claim by discussing the governance of gene editing in the context of regulatory policy frameworks, specifically pointing out that the evolution of regulatory guidelines has occurred in countries that have previously restricted the use of gene editing. This indicates that there are differences in how regulations are applied in different countries.


Input: Task: contrast the claim using the given text. Claim: Gut bacteria have no effect on mental health or mood. [SEP] Text: The increasing data piling up with genomic and protein mining can help in further research in this regard [11]. Although there have been many studies on the amyloid proto-fibril stability and oligomerization, the fibril-prone conformation and self-assembly kinetics are lacking in research data. Thus, it becomes imperative to study these transient structural oligomers in silico which can be further confirmed by lab results [12]. Many genomic and proteomic databases host a plethora of sequences for amyloids of microbial and animal origin. These functional amyloids were checked here for phylogenetic affiliation (using MEGA version 7. 0 in Figure 2) and their evolutionary relationships using p-distance method, searching tree using the close-neighbor-interchange algorithm with appropriate bootstrap (5000 in Figure 2), and out-group (membrane bound Nitrosospira multiformis AmoA (AY177933) protein in Figure 2). The analysis involved 23 amino acid sequences. All positions containing gaps and missing data were eliminated. There were a total of 86 positions in the final dataset. Evolutionary analyses were conducted in MEGA7. 0 [13-18]. Figure 2: Evolutionary relationships of taxa. The evolutionary history was inferred using the method [19]. The Neighbor-joining algorithm [15] was used to generate the initial tree. The optimal tree with the sum of branch length = 6. 32315134 is shown. The percentage of replicate trees in which the associated taxa clustered together in the bootstrap test (5000 replicates) are shown next to the branches [16]. [Click here to view] It can be seen through the phylogenetic tree [Figure 2], the protein homologues were non-identical even within the same genus. This fact is evident from the clustering of different proteins from Tas and Curli families belonging to Bacillus sp. and Escherichia coli sp. Respectively as the similar protein sequences did not cluster together (which can be attributed to the possible non-homologous evolution). Dino-flagellate associated Dinoroseobacter sp. and insect associated Rahnela sp. clustered with different types of curli proteins produced by strains of E. coli. Other organisms showed a relative similarity to different synthesis intermediates or subunits of E. coli curli proteins [1]. These organisms include Saccharomyces sp. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text contrasts the claim by discussing the significance of microbial and protein research, which indirectly implies a connection between gut bacteria and biological processes that could potentially influence mental health. By emphasizing the need for further study on amyloid proteins of microbial origin, it suggests that there may be underlying mechanisms through which gut bacteria could affect mental health or mood, opposing the claim that they have no effect.


Input: Task: pass the claim using the given text. Claim: Bioengineered yeast can be designed to produce high yields of biofuels from sugars. [SEP] Text: Observing levansucrase enzyme on an SDS-PAGE gelA one-day (24 h) aerobic culture of B. sp. SGP1 was centrifuged and the supernatant was taken as a source for levansucrase enzyme. Concentration of the supernatant proteins was done through addition of acetone, centrifugation and then re-dissolving the precipitated proteins in phosphate buffer (pH 7. 0). SDS-PAGE gel was then carried out as described by Laemmli with a 7% (w/v) acrylamide gel. After migration, the gel was cut into two halves. One half (containing the protein markers) was stained with Coomassie blue. The other half (containing the samples) was stained using periodic acid-Schiff reagent method [29–32] as follows: first, the gel was washed in a washing buffer containing 10 mM phosphate buffer (pH 7), CaCl2 (2 mM), and Tween 80 (10. 0 g/L). Then the gel was incubated in the same solution but with 50 g/L sucrose, for 24 h at 37°C. After that, the formed levan was fixed on the gel through immersing in 70% ethanol, then the oxidizing solution (periodic acid o. 7% (w/v), acetic acid 5% (w/v)) was added, followed by sodium bisulfate washing, and finally immersing in Schiff’s reagent (#; 3952016). Sucrase and levan forming activity assayThe sucrase and levan forming activities at different temperatures and different pH values were determined by adding 50 μl of spent media, i. e. without cells, from a 20 h old B. sp. SGP1 culture to 950 μl of the reaction mixture (0. 5 M sucrose solution in phosphate buffer) [18]. To study the effect of the temperature, the pH was first adjusted to 6. 6 before incubation at the test temperatures. Likewise, a temperature of 37°C was used when studying the effect of the pH. The incubation was performed for 10 h, after which, the sucrase and the levan forming activities were measured. Sucrase activity was determined by measuring the glucose liberated using glucose kits (Merck, Germany, Cat # 1. 16720. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text is irrelevant to the claim as it focuses on the methodologies for observing and measuring the activities of the levansucrase enzyme, and does not mention bioengineered yeast or the production of biofuels from sugars.


Input: Task: corroborate the claim using the given text. Claim: Regulations for gene-edited crops vary by country. [SEP] Text: The rapidly evolving global economic, environmental and security issues impacting everything from food and fuel costs, to climate, biodiversity and human migration have brought more attention. Climate change, rising global food and nutritional insecurity, global economic uncertainties, volatile commodity markets (which have contributed to spiraling food costs), and international armed conflicts are system-wide factors influencing the development of nascent regulatory frameworks. Of particular interest to contemporary academic study are those crops with gene edits that contribute to sustainability via improved yields (e. g. , drought resistance), research investments in orphan cropsFootnote 4 and developments in improving storability traits of staple crops (FAO, 2022: 14). New applications may have major implications for how gene editing systems are governed in the near future, which requires ongoing evaluations by scholars, but also makes it difficult to provide an up-to-date portrait of regulatory frameworks, as they are responding to change in real-time (see Entine et al. , 2021; Friedrichs et al. , 2019a; Project, 2023). Most discussions of gene editing as it pertains to agrifood plants includes some discussion of regulatory frameworks. The typologies are not identically worded, but they are essentially divided into three primary categories: prohibited, regulated like GMOs, and evaluated on a case-by-case basis under existing biosafety protocols (no transgenes). Bain et al. (2020) views the typology of regulatory regimes as based on ‘three sociotechnical imaginaries’, which refers to what Macnaghten et al. (2005: 279) describe as “how gene editing is being imagined by proponents and the implicit assumptions, values and visions that they assert”. The three sociotechnical imaginaries pertaining to gene edited agrifoods are as follows: (1) equivalent to traditional plant breeding; (2) have the potential to usher in a new Green Revolution; and (3) could facilitate the democratization of agricultural biotechnologies. This typology focuses on the ideological underpinnings of the content of regulations governing gene edited agrifoods. Studies interviewing stakeholders have revealed important information about the perceptions of the safety of gene edited agrifoods and concerns about regulations, resource sharing and communication (see Selfa et al. , 2021; Zarate et al. , 2023). All three of these aspects are addressed throughout this book using several approaches and methods. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text corroborates the claim by detailing that regulatory frameworks for gene-edited crops are influenced by various factors, which leads to their variability across different contexts. It mentions that gene editing regulations are divided into categories such as prohibited, regulated like GMOs, and evaluated case-by-case, indicating a lack of uniformity. Furthermore, it states that the development of these frameworks is responsive to ongoing changes and global issues, reinforcing the idea that regulations vary by country.


Input: Task: contrast the claim using the given text. Claim: Gut bacteria have no effect on mental health or mood. [SEP] Text: , Streptococcus sp. , Bacillus sp. , and Shigella sp. Protein homologues of Caulobacter phage clustered separately from the rest of the proteins while Bacillus thuringiensis and Treponema sp. proteins clustered together separately. Being the only phage protein homolog in the series, it was expected that the Caulobacter phage separated from the rest of the amyloid proteins. When time tree was analyzed in present work [Figure S1], the estimated log likelihood value was −3491. 9652. The analysis involved 25 amino acid sequences. All positions containing gaps and missing data were eliminated with a total of 82 positions in the final dataset. In the time tree, E. coli based curli structural proteins available in the GenBank were distinct and clustered separately into two specific clads - CsgE in a single branch while CsgA and CsgF (also Shigella flexneri CsgF) clustered together. While curli protein (Tag b1043) clad were different from the rest of related protein branches. All the Bacillus species proteins clustered together, Bacillus subtilis kurstaki YBT 1520 protein clustered with E. coli CsgE protein and Treponema pedis structural protein branch and Bacillus halodurans C-125 flagellin protein clustered as a distinct branch. The amyloid proteins from Saccharomyces cervisiae S288c, Streptococcus pyogenes MGAS15252, and Dinoroseobacter shibae DFL12 clustered as different branches from the root and outgroup. The curli proteins and Tas proteins showed distinct relative time line of evolution. While E. coli CsgE protein (surface protein) differentiated from root at 1. 78, E. coli CsgA and proteins (being amyloid proteins) showed a branching at 2. 26 from the root. Thus, there lies the possibility that functional amyloid proteins evolved later in the bacterial system than other surface structural proteins involved in their production. The phylogenetic analysis by the minimum evolution tree here shows differences among the protein structures of different microbial amyloids. Nielsen et al. [20] describe this fact of amyloid variation with respect to their distribution across the living kingdom as “each species, its own amyloid. ”et al. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text contrasts the claim by discussing the relationship between specific gut bacteria (like Bacillus and Streptococcus sp.) and various proteins, indicating that these microorganisms may contribute to biological functions that could potentially influence health. The phylogenetic analysis mentioned implies that gut bacteria have complex interactions, which challenges the idea that they do not affect mental health or mood.


Input: Task: pass the claim using the given text. Claim: Bioengineered yeast can be designed to produce high yields of biofuels from sugars. [SEP] Text: 0001), while levan formed was measured using the following procedure: 500 μl of the sample was added to 750 μl ethanol (to precipitate levan), and then the mixture was centrifuged. The precipitate was then washed with ethanol again, dried and then boiled with 0. 1 N HCl for 30 min. Finally, the liberated fructose was analyzed using HPLC [14, 18]. AbbreviationsRCM: Reinforced clostridial medium GC: Gas chromatography HPLC: High-performance liquid chromatography FID: Flame ionization detector RID: Refractive index detector GC-MS: Gas chromatography–mass spectrometry EI: Electron impact ionization 160. 10. 1038/sj. jim. 29007951417. 663. 10. 1007/s00284-009-9491-y528. 10. 1016/j. enzmictec. 2005. 07. 008157. 10. 1016/j. jbiotec. 2004. 02. 006102. 10. 1002/bit. 105425355. 10. 1016/j. biortech. 2009. 05. 04646. CAS 56. 51. 5. 843. 10. 1016/S0032-9592(99)00007-2309. CAS 5. 5146. 10. 1016/j. ijhydene. 2008. 05. 021267. 10. 1016/j. bej. 2009. 11. 0018. 2. Biotechnol 2005, 4: 6. 2839. CAS 119. 10. 1016/S0168-1656(02)00160-8183. 10. 1007/BF01577693267. 808. 10. 1016/j. procbio. 2005. 10. 0091185. 10. 1007/s00253-010-2673-52261. 10. 1099/ijs. 0. 64915-0721. 10. 1099/ijs. 0. 038075-01317. 10. 1099/ijs. 0. 64428-02739. 10. 1093/molbev/msr121369. 10. 1016/0003-2697(73)90202-9363. 10. 1016/0003-2697(86)90266-61299. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text is irrelevant to the claim as it does not discuss bioengineered yeast or its ability to produce biofuels from sugars. Instead, it describes procedures related to the measurement of levan and various analytical methods like HPLC, which are unrelated to the claim being analyzed.


Input: Task: corroborate the claim using the given text. Claim: Regulations for gene-edited crops vary by country. [SEP] Text: Hendriks (2009: 175) provides a succinct understanding of deliberative governance. Deliberative governance is based on the idea that, “policy making requires spaces where different institutions, agencies, groups, activists and individual citizens can come together to deliberate on pressing social issues. ”We employ qualitative analysis using primary (policy) and secondary (academic 2023. Footnote 6 We interviewed public sector scientists and scientists in the non-profit sector, agricultural economists, regulators involved in policy discussions surrounding gene edited agrifoods, Non-(NGO) representatives engaged in international agricultural development projects, and private sector representatives. Each interviewee had expertise and knowledge regarding the governance of gene edited agrifoods and/or gene editing technologies. The qualitative interview material expresses timely views on the state of gene editing in the agrifood system. Considering how quickly some aspects of the governance of gene edited agrifoods is moving, collecting expert opinions on current regulatory change and/or recent advancements in gene editing techniques was essential to gain a better understanding of the current governance dynamics, and also the future outlook for applications and regulations. Interviews with regulatory experts and research scientists who have practical experience in using gene editing technologies provide a rich set of insights which informs the policy recommendations we present in Chap. 6. Our analysis looks forward to future potential applications of gene editing technologies in the agrifood system and provides insights into how novel technologies on the horizon may be regulated in the future. 3 Structure of the BookThe manuscript is organized around probing two questions. (Chaps. 2 and 3) seeks to answer the question: why are there so few gene edited agrifoods on the market despite the initial optimism that accompanied the Nobel Prize-winning discovery of -Cas9 over a decade ago? It looks at the current suite of genomic techniques used in crop breeding to improve agronomic traits and nutritional profiles. Then it examines how current regulations governing the use and commercial release of gene edited agrifoods influence their adoption and commercialization. Part II (Chaps. 4 and 5) seeks to answer: what governance challenges and opportunities will shape the future applications of gene editing in the agrifood system? This part of the book explores ‘new genomic techniques’ and applications on the horizon. It also discusses how international regulatory frameworks can better respond to future genomic advancements in plant breeding by employing elements of deliberative governance. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text corroborates the claim by discussing how current regulations governing the use and commercial release of gene-edited agrifoods influence their adoption and commercialization, indicating that these regulations can vary and evolve. The text also refers to 'international regulatory frameworks' suggesting differences in governance across countries regarding gene editing technologies.


Input: Task: contrast the claim using the given text. Claim: Gut bacteria have no effect on mental health or mood. [SEP] Text: [21] analyzed the protein sequences of apo-lipoprotein superfamily, a high level of conservation was revealed. This was assumed to be due to duplications of ancestral amino acid tandem repeats forming a number of structural features in the common background of the proteins. Thus indicating that during the evolution for various functions, the amyloid fold has been selected multiple times. As seen in a newly described class of FuBA, the amyloid formation can be an integral part of normal cellular physiology. Giraldo [3] studied the subtle differences among these functional amyloids with respect to pathogenic and transmissible amyloids especially RepA-WH1, a bacterial amyloidogenic functional protein controlling the plasmid replication [2]. 4. the evolutionary process, humans have developed a sturdy symbiotic relationship with their gut micro-biome consisting of a complex community of archaea, bacteria, protists and viruses (including bacteriophages). Each individual harbors unique set of gut bacteria that influence interpersonal heterogeneity. This micro-biota enhances the selective neurological disorders due to the metabolism of polyphenols that interfere with the key pathologic mechanisms. The accumulation of these flavonoid metabolites have the ability to interact with α-syn and play a major role in their misfolding, inflammations, α-synucleiopathies, and PD progression [21]. The conformational variation in Pseudomonad amyloid FapC can be used as a potential therapeutic target to understand the bacterial colonization and infection during Alzheimer’s disease [22]. Many bacteria among the mouth micro-flora have been reported for release of FuBA and extensive cases have been reported from Streptococcus mutans and other bacteria involved in periodontal infections [23-25]. Goya et al. [27] reported effect of B. subtilis strain PXN21 vegetative cells and spores as psychobiotics in inhibiting α-syn and synucleiopathy and recommend their use as dietary supplements. 5. --genesis has been known to be influenced by genetic and environmental factors. Recent evidences have suggested the acceleration of amyloid aggregation due to non-identical amyloid proteins as seen in prion proteins due to possible cross-interactions between heterologous amyloidogenic proteins leading to amyloidogenesis and related disease pathology [7,27,28]. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text contrasts the claim by discussing the influence gut bacteria can have on neurological disorders and mental health. It mentions how the gut microbiome interacts with metabolism and the development of flavonoid metabolites that affect neurodegenerative conditions like Parkinson's disease. Specifically, it notes that gut bacteria such as B. subtilis have been found to have psychobiotic effects, which supports the idea that gut bacteria do play a role in mental health and mood.


Input: Task: pass the claim using the given text. Claim: Bioengineered yeast can be designed to produce high yields of biofuels from sugars. [SEP] Text: Functional relationship of furfural yields and the hemicellulose-derived sugars in the hydrolysates from corncob by microwave-assisted hydrothermal pretreatment 99. 94 mg g−1, 160 °C, 90 min), the maximum xylobiose content (20. 89 mg g−1, 180 °C, 15 min), and the maximum total xylose content in monosaccharide and oligosaccharides (DP ≤ 6) (272. 06 mg g−1, 160 °C, 60 min) were further converted to furfural using tin-loaded montmorillonite as the catalyst in a biphasic system. The highest furfural yield (57. 80 %) was obtained at 190 °C for 10 min from hydrolysates with the maximum xylose content. Moreover, controlled experiments showed that furfural yields from corncob hydrolysates were higher than those from the pure xylose solutions, and lower initial xylose concentration may be in favor of the furfural production. ConclusionsThis work provides an efficient approach to produce furfural by a two-step process for the biomass-to-biofuel industry. Results indicated that the production of furfural from biomass raw materials can be controlled by the depolymerization degree of hemicelluloses. BackgroundThe depletion of fossil fuel reserves, the increasing environmental and political pressures, and the unstable situation of fuel prices have drawn attention to the lignocellulosic biomass as an alternative resource of petroleum [1]. Agricultural residues, such as corncob, represent a highly sustainable resource of bio-platform molecules and chemicals for significant industrial use [2]. Furthermore, characteristics of high carbohydrate (cellulose and hemicelluloses) contents and high energy densities make corncob as one of the most suitable feedstock for the production of a variety of high-value-added chemicals such as furfural [3, 4]. Furfural is a secondary fuel precursor directly from biomass with an annual production volume of more than 200,000 tons [5]. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text discusses the production of furfural from hemicellulose-derived sugars and its relevance to the biomass-to-biofuel industry. However, it does not mention bioengineered yeast or its role in producing high yields of biofuels from sugars, making the connection to the claim irrelevant.


Input: Task: corroborate the claim using the given text. Claim: Regulations for gene-edited crops vary by country. [SEP] Text: Deliberative approaches put effective, inclusive, and transformative communication at the heart of global governance. I—‘Balancing Innovation: Application and Regulation’—we discuss current dynamics of gene editing techniques and regulation frameworks. 9. We then turn our attention to the current regulatory frameworks that govern the use and commercialization of gene edited agrifoods in Chap. 3 (How are gene editing technologies regulated in the agrifood system? ). This 9. In this 1. GMOs are any organism that has genetic material changed through genetic engineering that does not occur naturally by mating or natural recombination. There is diversity across jurisdictions, in terms of how a GMO is defined, but many countries base their definition on the on Biosafety definition. A ‘Organism’ (LMO) is “any living organism that possesses a novel combination of genetic material obtained through the use of modern biotechnology. ” Regulations for any ‘novel’ agrifood product are designed to protect human, animal and environmental health, though there is wide diversity in the details of how that is achieved in the regulatory space (Entine et al. , 2021: 552). 2. Gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) is a naturally occurring amino acid that works as a neurotransmitter. Studies have shown that GABA may help reduce anxiety, depression in humans. 3. For an in-depth study of the societal responses to gene editing in the agrifood system, see Selfa et al. (2021). 4. Orphan crops are those which have significant potential to contribute to nutritional security, biodiversity and livelihoods but are grown by smallholders, often in subsistence farming systems, and thus deemed less lucrative investments for agbiotech firms. 5. The democratization of knowledge refers to the proliferation of knowledge across the wider population beyond experts and elites. Public access to information via the Internet and libraries facilitates this effort. 6. Further details of the interview methodology and a master list of interview questions are provided in 162. 1127. 10. 18235/0004904279. 422. 586. 584. 220. 1032. 201. 417. 1057. 400. 337. 1414. 13, 2023, from: 7572. 448. 405. 10. 3389/978-2-88963-670-9Book 11. J. D. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text corroborates the claim by discussing the diversity across jurisdictions in the regulation of gene-edited agrifoods, noting that 'there is diversity across jurisdictions, in terms of how a GMO is defined.' It emphasizes that while regulations for 'novel' agrifood products are designed for safety, the methods and specifics can vary widely, thereby supporting the idea that regulations for gene-edited crops differ from one country to another.


Input: Task: contrast the claim using the given text. Claim: Gut bacteria have no effect on mental health or mood. [SEP] Text: In recent years, lot of attention has been paid to the gut-brain axis with increasing data as symptomatic, physiological, and pathological findings accumulated [22]. The gut-brain bidirectional communication is controlled by the vagus nerve (VN) with the help of enteric nervous system (ENS). The neuro-pathological characteristic of PD is the widespread α-synucleiopathy in central and peripheral nervous systems including in ENS. The initiation of α-syn aggregation have also been linked to bacterial exudates of gut micro-biota in the ENS, which can then be transmitted to the CNS through VN in a prion-like manner [29]. Resident microbial community of the individual as micro-biota especially those capable of producing bacterial amyloids and other amphipathic metabolites have been known to influence the α-syn aggregation and influence the development of PD [30]. Microbial interaction with the VN and a similar cascade of event as given for neuro-pathological diseases has been reported for the action of psychobiotics in enhancing the mental health [31]. As seen in Figure 3, the interaction between bacterial amyloids with wild type α-synuclein resulted in specific regions being marked for repeated interactions [Figure 3a-e], which was correlating with the interaction potential of misfolded α-synuclein [Figure 3f]. Thus, the bacterial amyloids have the capability to interact with wild type α-synuclein and increase or decrease the progression of the PD in patients. Figure 3: Interaction of α-synuclein with bacterial functional amyloids. Docking studies for α-synuclein (1XQ8) with (a) Streptococcus pyogenes MGAS15252, (b) Dinoroseobacter shibae DFL 12 (Dshi_4130), (d) Bacillus thuringiensis kurstaki YBT-1520 TasA, (e) Bacillus atropheus (BATR1942) TasA and B. subtilis (50F1) TasA amyloid (c and f). [Click here to view] Various bacterial functional amyloids are allowed in present work to interact with α-synuclein by docking studies using and using software and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations up to 100 ns for analyzing the interaction stability. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text contrasts the claim by discussing the significant role of gut bacteria in influencing mental health and mood through mechanisms such as the gut-brain axis and the interaction of microbial communities with neurological processes. It points out that psychobiotics can enhance mental health, indicating that gut bacteria do, in fact, have an effect on mental health.


Input: Task: pass the claim using the given text. Claim: Bioengineered yeast can be designed to produce high yields of biofuels from sugars. [SEP] Text: This versatile intermediate is considered as an important chemical solvent for many organic materials and holds great promise as primary building blocks for the synthesis of a multitude of important non-petroleum-derived chemicals such as furfuryl alcohol, tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol, methyltetrahydrofuran and polyols through oxidation, hydrogenation, hydrogenolysis and condensation reactions [6, 7]. Furfural is industrially synthesized from pentose-rich lignocellulosic materials using mineral acids as catalysts. However, old and inefficient strategies, equipment corrosion and waste disposal, and low production yields have strongly diminished its competitiveness with petroleum-based alternatives in the global market [8]. Achieving high furfural yields from corncob integrating green approaches and efficient equipment has the promising potential for biomass-to-biofuel technologies. There is an urgent demand to develop novel effective strategies for overcoming the major drawbacks of industrial furfural production. Solid acid catalysts, which possess properties such as thermal stability and recyclability, are deemed to benefit for the furfural production process [9]. Biphasic systems, which can hinder the second reactions by simultaneously extracting furfural from the aqueous medium to the organic phase, have received much attention [10, 11]. Extensive studies on xylose dehydration have been performed using solid acids as catalysts in biphasic systems [12–14]. However, detailed information on the direct conversion of lignocellulosic biomass to furfural is inadequate. Many natural factors impede the effective conversion of biomass, such as the crystalline domains of cellulose, the structural heterogeneity and the complexity of cell-wall constituents as well as its complex cross-linking [15]. To achieve the good contact between corncob sugars and the solid catalyst, it is necessary to destroy the complicated structure of the solid raw materials first and then obtain as many hydrophilic products, such as soluble polysaccharides, oligosaccharides and monosaccharide, as possible [16]. Further converting these sugars by solid catalysts in biphasic systems would then be desirable. This approach can effectively enhance the carbohydrate conversion rate and overcome the regeneration problem of the solid catalyst arising from the one-step conversion method. [SEP] Justify:

Output: The text does not address the claim about bioengineered yeast or its ability to produce biofuels from sugars. Instead, the text focuses on the production of furfural from lignocellulosic materials and discusses various catalytic processes involved in the conversion of biomass. There is no mention of yeast or biofuels, thus making it irrelevant to the claim.