Heterogeneity in the distribution of genetically modified and conventional oilseed rape within fields and seed lots
Tóm tắt
The implementation of co-existence in the commercialisation of GM crops requires GM and non-GM products to be segregated in production and supply. However, maintaining segregation in oilseed rape will be made difficult by the highly persistent nature of this species. An understanding of its population dynamics is needed to predict persistence and develop potential strategies for control, while to ensure segregation is being achieved, the production of GM oilseed rape must be accompanied by the monitoring of GM levels in crop or seed populations. Heterogeneity in the spatial distribution of oilseed rape has the potential to affect both control and monitoring and, although a universal phenomenon in arable weeds and harvested seed lots, spatial heterogeneity in oilseed rape populations remains to be demonstrated and quantified. Here we investigate the distribution of crop and volunteer populations in a commercial field before and during the cultivation of the first conventional oilseed rape (winter) crop since the cultivation of a GM glufosinate-tolerant oilseed rape crop (spring) three years previously. GM presence was detected by ELISA for the PAT protein in each of three morphologically distinguishable phenotypes: autumn germinating crop-type plants (3% GM), autumn-germinating ‘regrowths’ (72% GM) and spring germinating ‘small-type’ plants (17% GM). Statistical models (Poisson log-normal and binomial logit-normal) were used to describe the spatial distribution of these populations at multiple spatial scales in the field and of GM presence in the harvested seed lot. Heterogeneity was a consistent feature in the distribution of GM and conventional oilseed rape. Large trends across the field (50 × 400 m) and seed lot (4 × 1.5 × 1.5 m) were observed in addition to small-scale heterogeneity, less than 20 m in the field and 20 cm in the seed lot. The heterogeneity was greater for the ‘regrowth’ and ‘small’ phenotypes, which were likely to be volunteers and included most of the GM plants detected, than for the largely non-GM ‘crop’ phenotype. The implications of the volunteer heterogeneity for field management and GM-sampling are discussed.
Tài liệu tham khảo
AGBIOS (2007) GM Crop Database. http://www.agbios.com/dbase.php. Cited 28 March 2007
Beckie HJ, Warwick SI, Nair H (2003) Gene flow in commercial fields of herbicide-resistant canola (Brassica napus). Ecol Appl 13:1276–1294
Begg GS, Hockaday S, McNicol JW, Askew M, Squire GR (2006) Modelling the persistence of volunteer oilseed rape (Brassica napus). Ecol Model 198:195–207
Begg GS, Cullen DW, Iannetta PPM, Squire GR (2007a) Sources of uncertainty in the quantification of genetically modified oilseed rape contamination in harvested seed lots. Transgenic Res 16:51–63
Begg GS, Elliott MJ, Squire GR, Copeland J (2007b) Final report of the DEFRA project: prediction, sampling and management of GM impurities in fields and harvested yields of oilseed rape, VS0126. Defra, London
Blanco-Moreno JM, Chamorro L, Sans FX (2006) Spatial and temporal patterns of Lolium rigidum-Avena sterilis mixed populations in a cereal field. Weed Res 46:207–218
Cardina J, Johnson GA, Sparrow DH (1997) The nature and consequence of weed spatial distribution. Weed Science 45:364–373
Colbach N, Clermont-Dauphin C, Meynard JM (2001) GENESYS: a model of the influence of cropping system on gene escape from herbicide tolerant rapeseed crops to rape volunteers – I. Temporal evolution of a population of rapeseed volunteers in a field. Agr Ecosyst Environ 83:235–253
Cousens R, Croft AM (2000) Weed populations and pathogens. Weed Res 40:63–82
Cresswell JE, Hoyle M (2006) A mathematical method for estimating patterns of flower-to-flower gene dispersal from a simple field experiment. Funct Ecol 20:245–251
Dieleman JA, Mortensen DA (1999) Characterizing the spatial pattern of Abutilon theophrasti seedling patches. Weed Res 39:455–467
European Commission (2007) Community Register of GM Food and Feed. http://ec.europa.eu/food/dyna/gm_register/index_en.cfm. Cited 11 April 2007
FAOSTAT (2006) Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. http://faostat.fao.org/. Cited 15 December 2006
Fargue A, Meynard JM, Colbach N, Vallee P, Grandeau G, Renard M (2004) Contamination of rapeseed harvest by volunteers of other varieties: a study of intergenotypic competition. Eur J Agron 21:193–207
González-Andújar JL, Perry JN, Moss SR (1999) Modeling effects of spatial patterns on the seed bank dynamics of Alopecurus myosuroides. Weed Sci 47:697–705
Graef F, Zughart W, Hommel B, Heinrich U, Stachow U, Werner A (2005) Methodological scheme for designing the monitoring of genetically modified crops at the regional scale. Environ Monit Assess 111:1–26
Gruber S, Pekrun C, Claupein W (2004) Seed persistence of oilseed rape (Brassica napus): variation in transgenic and conventionally bred cultivars. J Agr Sci 142:29–40
Heard MS, Hawes C, Champion GT, Clark SJ, Firbank LG, Haughton AJ, Parish AM, Perry JN, Rothery P, Scott RJ, Skellern MP, Squire GR, Hill MI (2003) Weeds in fields with contrasting conventional and genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. I. Effects on abundance and diversity. Philos T Roy Soc B 358:1819–1832
Humston R, Mortensen DA, Bjornstad ON (2005) Anthropogenic forcing on the spatial dynamics of an agricultural weed: the case of the common sunflower. J App Ecol 42:863–872
Lutman PJW, Berry K, Payne RW, Simpson E, Sweet JB, Champion GT, May MJ, Wightman P, Walker K, Lainsbury M (2005) Persistence of seeds from crops of conventional and herbicide tolerant oilseed rape (Brassica napus). Proc R Soc B – Biol Sci 272:1909–1915
Monzeglio U, Stoll P (2005) Spatial patterns and species performances in experimental plant communities. Oecologia 145:619–628
Nickson TE, Head GP (1999) Environmental monitoring of genetically modified crops. J Environ Monitor 1:101N–105N
Paoletti C, Donatelli M, Kay S, Van den Eede G (2003) Simulating kernel lot sampling: the effect of heterogeneity on the detection of GMO contaminations. Seed Sci Technol 31:629–638
Paoletti C, Heissenberger A, Mazzara M, Larcher S, Grazioli E, Corbisier P, Hess N, Berben G, Lubeck PS, De Loose M, Moran G, Henry C, Brera C, Folch I, Ovesna J, Van den Eede G (2006) Kernel lot distribution assessment (KeLDA): a study on the distribution of GMO in large soybean shipments. Eur Food Res Technol 224:129–139
Pekrun C, Lane PW, Lutman PJW (2005) Modelling seed bank dynamics of volunteer oilseed rape (Brassica napus). Agr Syst 84:1–20
Perry JN, Rothery P, Clark SJ, Heard MS, Hawes C (2003) Design, analysis and statistical power of the farm-scale evaluations of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. J App Ecol 40:17–31
Rew LJ, Cousens RD (2001) Spatial distribution of weeds in arable crops: Are current sampling and analytical methods appropriate? Weed Res 41:1–18
Simard M, Légère A, Pageau D, Lajeunesse J, Warwick S (2002) The frequency and persistence of volunteer canola (Brassica napus) in Québec cropping systems. Weed Technol 16:433–439
Squire GR, Brooks DR, Bohan DA, Champion GT, Daniels RE, Haughton AJ, Hawes C, Heard MS, Hill MO, May MJ, Osborne JL, Perry JN, Roy DB, Woiwod IP, Firbank LG (2003) On the rationale and interpretation of the Farm Scale Evaluations of genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. Philos T Roy Soc B 358:1779–1799
Stoll P, Prati D (2001) Intraspecific aggregation alters competitive interactions in experimental plant communities. Ecology 82:319–327
Wallinga J (1995) The role of space in plant population dynamics: annual weeds as an example. Oikos 74:377–383