Scientia Agricultura Sinica ›› 2015, Vol. 48 ›› Issue (11): 2096-2107.doi: 10.3864/j.issn.0578-1752.2015.11.002

• CROP GENETICS & BREEDING·GERMPLASM RESOURCES·MOLECULAR GENETICS • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Safety Assessment of Weediness of Transgenic Drought-Tolerant Wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)

JIANG Qi-yan, LI Xin-hai, HU Zheng, MA You-zhi, ZHANG Hui, XU Zhao-shi   

  1. Institute of Crop Science, Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Beijing 100081
  • Received:2014-11-12 Online:2015-06-01 Published:2015-06-01

Abstract: 【Objective】 Genetically modified (GM) plants have been widely used in both agriculture and food industry. A scientifically sound environmental risk assessment, including weediness risk, is required for crops derived from genetically modified prior to unrestricted release into the environment. The objective of this study was to assess the potential ecological risk for weediness of transgenic drought-tolerant wheat MGX-L, and to provide scientific data for the formulation of evaluation standard of environmental safety assessment of transgenic wheat in China. 【Method】 In the cultivated lands and abandoned lands, the surviving competition ability of transgenic drought-tolerant wheat MGX-L, recipient variety and conventional wheat varieties were comparatively evaluated by investigating their agricultural traits. The propagation coefficient of wheat planted in abandoned lands was compared and the survival ability in abandoned lands was evaluated. Volunteer possibility, seed shattering and persisting possibility of transgenic drought-tolerant wheat MGX-L were analyzed and compared with the wild type for evaluating the ability of life continuous. The reproducing ability was evaluated by comparing the pollen viability, pollen diameter and sterility of MGX-L with the wild type. The weediness potential of MGX-L was evaluated based on the above results.【Result】There were no significant differences between transgenic wheat MGX-L and the wild type in plant height, spike number per hectare and per spike grain. The 1000-grain weight and yield of the transgenic wheat MGX-L were higher than that of the recipient variety Jimai 22. However, the 1000-grain weight and yield of the transgenic wheat MGX-L were lower than that of conventional wheat varieties or no significant difference. There were no significant differences between transgenic wheat MGX-L and the wild type in survival ability in the cultivated lands. Some wheat seeds could geminate and obtain seeds of next generation in abandoned lands. However, its propagation coefficient was less than 1 and the population size of transgenic wheat declined after the first year as a result of increased competition from native perennial plants. The transgenic wheat population couldn’t persist in abandoned lands like its conventional counterpart. There were no significant differences in seed shattering ability and volunteer plants rate between the transgenic wheat and the wild type. When buried under soil 20 cm, the seeds of transgenic wheat and the wild type were all rotted. When buried under soil 3 cm, the seeds of transgenic wheat and the wild type were rotted or sprouted. There were no intact seeds buried under soil. So there was no significant difference between the transgenic wheat and the wild type in seed persisting ability. 【Conclusion】 It was concluded that the transgenic drought-tolerant wheat MGX-L had the lowest potential weediness like the non-transgenic wheat varieties, based on the assessment of survival ability, seed shattering ability, volunteer plants rate and seed persisting ability.

Key words: transgenic drought-tolerant wheat, weediness, safety assessment

[1]    James C. Global Status of Commercialized Biotech/GM Crops: 2014. ISAAA Briefs no. 47. ISAAA, Ithaca, New York.
[2]    James K. Could transgenic super crops one day breed super weeds. Science, 1996, 274(5285): 180-181.
[3]    陆群峰, 肖显静. 转基因作物环境风险争论综述. 山东科技大学学报: 社会科学版, 2009, 11(5): 8-15.
Lu Q F, Xiao X J. A summary oil the debates of environmental risks of genetically modified crops. Journal of Shandong University of Sciences & Technology: Social Science, 2009, 11(5): 8-15. (in Chinese)
[4]    Ellstrand N C, Heredia S M, Leak-Garcia J A, Heraty J M, Burger J C, Yao L, Nohzadeh-Malakshah S, Ridley C E. Crops gone wild: Evolution of weeds and invasives from domesticated ancestors.Evolutionary Applications, 2010, 3(5/6): 494-504.
[5]    Wozniak C A, Martinez J C. U.S. EPA regulation of plant-incorporated protectants: Assessment of impacts of gene flow from pest-resistant plants. Journal of Agricultral Food Chemistry, 2011, 59(11): 5859-5864.
[6]    贾士荣. 转基因植物的环境及食品安全性. 生物工程进展, 1997, l17(6): 36-42.
Jia S R. Environment and food biosafety assessment of transgenic plants. Progress in Technology, 1997, 117(6): 36-42. (in Chinese)
[7]    Yang X, Xia H, Wang W, Wang F, Su J, Snow A A, Lu B R. Transgenes for insect resistance reduce herbivory and enhance fecundity in advanced generations of crop-weed hybrids of rice. Evolutionary Applications , 2011, 4(5): 672-684.
[8]    宋小玲, 强胜, 彭于发. 抗草甘膦转基因大豆(Glycine mac (L.) Merri)杂草性评价的试验实例. 中国农业科学, 2009, 42(1): 145-153.
Song X L, Qiang S, Peng Y F. An experimental case of safety assessment of weediness of transgenic glyphosate-resistant soybean (Glycine mac (L.) Merri). Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2009, 42(1): 145-153. (in Chinese)
[9]    Conner A J, Glare T R, Nap J P. The release of genetically modified crops into the environment: Part II. Overview of ecological risk assessment. The Plant Journal, 2003, 33: 19-46.
[10]   Hall L, Topinka K, Huffman J, Davis L, Good A. Pollen flow between herbicide-resistant Brassica napus is the cause of multiple-resistant B. napus volunteers. Weed Science, 2000, 48: 688-694.
[11]   Beckie H J, Hall L M, Warwick S I. Impact of herbicide-resistant crops as weeds in Canada. Proceedings Brighton Crop Protection Conference - Weeds, 2001, 1: 135-142.
[12]   Orson J. Gene stacking in herbicide tolerant oilseed rape: Lessons from the North American experience. English Nature Research Reports, 2002, 443: 1-17.
[13]   Crawley M J, Brown S L, Hails R S, Kohn D D, Rees M. Transgenic crops in natural habitats. Nature, 2001, 409(6821): 682-683.
[14]   郑庆伟. 中国农业科学院培育出抗旱节水转基因小麦新品种. 农药市场信息, 2014, 19: 41.
Zheng Q W. Chinese Academy of Agricultural Science made new progress in drought-tolerant transgenic wheat research. Pesticide Market News, 2014, 19: 41. (in Chinese)
[15]   李博, 陈家宽, 沃金森AR. 植物竞争研究进展. 植物学通报, 1998, 15(4): 18-29.
Li B, Chen J K, Watkinson AR. A literature review on plant competition. Chinese Bulletin of Botany, 1998, 15(4): 18-29. (in Chinese)
[16]   彭少麟, 向言词. 植物外来种入侵及其对生态系统的影响. 生态学报, 1999, 19(1): 561-569.
Peng S L, Xiang Y C. The invasion of exotic plants and effects of ecosystems. Acta Ecologica Sinica, 1999, 19(1): 561-569. (in Chinese)
[17]   周骏, 王长永, 陈建群. 转基因植物入侵性评价指标初探. 农村生态环境, 2003, 19(2): 61-64.
Zhou J, Wang C Y, Chen J Q. Indexes for assessment of genetically modified plants invasiveness. Rural Eco-Environment, 2003, 19(2): 61-64. (in Chinese)
[18]   Yang Y,He J,Dong B,Xu H,Fu Q,Zheng X, Lin Y, Lu Z. Effects of twoBtrice lines T2A-1 and T1C-19 on the ecological fitness and detoxification enzymes of Nilaparvata lugens(Hemiptera: Delphacidae) from different populations.Journal of Economic Entomology, 2013, 106: 1887-1893.
[19]   Jiang Q Y, Hou J, Hao C Y, Wang L F, Ge H M, Dong Y S, Zhang X Y. The wheat (T. aestivum) sucrose synthase 2 gene (TaSus2) active in endosperm development is associated with yield traits. Funct Integr Genomics, 2011, 11: 49-61.
[20]   强胜. 杂草学. 北京: 中国农业出版社, 2000: 8-14.
Qiang S. Weed Science. Beijing: China Agriculture Press, 2000: 8-14. (in Chinese)
[21]   Cai H W, Morishima H. Genomic regions affecting seed shattering and seed dormancy in rice. Theoretical and Applied Genetics, 2000, 100(6): 840-846.
[22]   Baker H G. The evolution of weeds. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 1974, 5: 1-24.
[23]   Andrsson L, Milberg P, Schutz W, Steinmetz O. Germination characteristics and emergence time of annual Bromus species of differing weediness in Sweden. Weed Research, 2002, 42: 135-147.
[24]   刘谦, 朱鑫泉. 生物安全. 北京: 科学出版社, 2002: 67-73.
Liu Q, Zhu X Q. Biosafety. Beijing: Science Press, 2002: 67-73. (in Chinese)
[25]   Lu Z B, Liu Y E, Han N S, Tian J C, Peng Y F, Hu C, Guo Y Y, Ye G Y. Transgenic cry1C or cry2A rice has no adverse impacts on the life-table parameters and population dynamics of the brown planthopper, Nilaparvata lugens (Hemiptera: Delphacidae). Pest Management Science, 2014, doi: 10.1002/ps.3866.
[1] CHEN Liang, HUANG Qing-hua, MENG Li-hui, XING Huan, YAO Bin, YANG Xiao-guang, ZHANG Hong-fu. Safety Evaluation of Feeds from Genetically Modified Crops on Livestock and Poultry [J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2015, 48(6): 1205-1218.
[2]

. An Experimental Case of Safety Assessment of Weediness of Transgenic Glyphosate-Resistant Soybean (Glycine mac (L.) Merri)
[J]. Scientia Agricultura Sinica, 2009, 42(1): 145-153 .
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
No Suggested Reading articles found!