Literature DB >> 32435923

Using a zero-inflated model to assess gene flow risk and coexistence of Brassica napus L. and Brassica rapa L. on a field scale in Taiwan.

Yuan-Chih Su1, Po-Shung Wang1, Jhih-Ling Yang1, Hong Hong1, Tzu-Kai Lin2, Yuan-Kai Tu1,3, Bo-Jein Kuo4,5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The cropping area of genetically modified (GM) crops has constantly increased since 1996. However, currently, cultivating GM crops is associated with many concerns. Transgenes are transferred to non-GM crops through pollen-mediated gene flow, which causes environmental problems such as superweeds and introgressive hybridization. Rapeseed (Brassica napus L.), which has many GM varieties, is one of the most crucial oil crops in the world. Hybridization between Brassica species occurs spontaneously. B. rapa grows in fields as a weed and is cultivated as a crop for various purposes. Both B. rapa weeds and crops participate in gene flow among rapeseed. Therefore, gene flow risk and the coexistence of these two species should be studied.
RESULTS: In this study, field experiments were conducted at two sites for 4 years to evaluate gene flow risk. In addition, zero-inflated models were used to address the problem of excess zero values and data overdispersion. The difference in the number of cross-pollination (CP) events was nonsignificant between upwind and downwind plots. The CP rate decreased as the distance increased. The average CP rates at distances of 0.35 and 12.95 m were 2.78% and 0.028%, respectively. In our results, zero-inflated negative binomial models were comprehensively superior to zero-inflated Poisson models. The models predicted isolation distances of approximately 1.36 and 0.43 m for the 0.9% and 3% threshold labeling levels, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Cultivating GM crops is prohibited in Taiwan; however, the study results can provide a reference for the assessment of gene flow risk and the coexistence of these two species in Asian countries establishing policies for GM crops.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Coexistence; Gene flow; Genetically modified crop; Isolation distance; Rapeseed; Zero-inflated model

Year:  2020        PMID: 32435923      PMCID: PMC7239968          DOI: 10.1186/s40529-020-00294-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bot Stud        ISSN: 1817-406X            Impact factor:   2.787


  13 in total

1.  Liabilities and economics of transgenic crops.

Authors:  Stuart Smyth; George G Khachatourians; Peter W B Phillips
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 54.908

2.  Hybridization between Brassica napus and B. rapa on a national scale in the United Kingdom.

Authors:  Mike J Wilkinson; Luisa J Elliott; Joël Allainguillaume; Michael W Shaw; Carol Norris; Ruth Welters; Matthew Alexander; Jeremy Sweet; David C Mason
Journal:  Science       Date:  2003-10-09       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  A K-fold Averaging Cross-validation Procedure.

Authors:  Yoonsuh Jung; Jianhua Hu
Journal:  J Nonparametr Stat       Date:  2015-02-26       Impact factor: 1.231

4.  The effect of flowering time and distance between pollen source and recipient on maize.

Authors:  Shuo-Cheng Nieh; Wen-Shin Lin; Yung-Heng Hsu; Guang-Jauh Shieh; Bo-Jein Kuo
Journal:  GM Crops Food       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 3.074

5.  Crop-to-crop gene flow using farm scale sites of oilseed rape (Brassica napus) in the UK.

Authors:  Rebecca Weekes; Carola Deppe; Theo Allnutt; Caroline Boffey; Derek Morgan; Sarah Morgan; Mark Bilton; Roger Daniels; Christine Henry
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 2.788

6.  Assessment of potential environmental risks of transgene flow in smallholder farming systems in Asia: Brassica napus as a case study in Korea.

Authors:  Chuan-Jie Zhang; Min-Jung Yook; Hae-Rim Park; Soo-Hyun Lim; Jin-Won Kim; Gyoungju Nah; Hae-Ryong Song; Beom-Ho Jo; Kyung Hee Roh; Suhyoung Park; Do-Soon Kim
Journal:  Sci Total Environ       Date:  2018-06-02       Impact factor: 7.963

7.  Hybridization between transgenic Brassica napus L. and its wild relatives: Brassica rapa L., Raphanus raphanistrum L., Sinapis arvensis L., and Erucastrum gallicum (Willd.) O.E. Schulz.

Authors:  S I Warwick; M-J Simard; A Légère; H J Beckie; L Braun; B Zhu; P Mason; G Séguin-Swartz; C N Stewart
Journal:  Theor Appl Genet       Date:  2003-04-30       Impact factor: 5.699

8.  Gene transferability from transgenic Brassica napus L. to various subspecies and varieties of Brassica rapa.

Authors:  Ling Xiao; Changming Lu; Bing Zhang; Huijie Bo; Yuhua Wu; Gang Wu; Yinglong Cao; Deyue Yu
Journal:  Transgenic Res       Date:  2009-04-09       Impact factor: 2.788

9.  Global income and production impacts of using GM crop technology 1996-2014.

Authors:  Graham Brookes; Peter Barfoot
Journal:  GM Crops Food       Date:  2016-01-02       Impact factor: 3.074

10.  Morphological and genetic characteristics of F1 hybrids introgressed from Brassica napus to B. rapa in Taiwan.

Authors:  Yuan-Kai Tu; Han-Wei Chen; Kuang-Yu Tseng; Yen-Chun Lin; Bo-Jein Kuo
Journal:  Bot Stud       Date:  2020-01-21       Impact factor: 2.787

View more
  2 in total

1.  Incorporating the field border effect to reduce the predicted uncertainty of pollen dispersal model in Asia.

Authors:  Yuan-Chih Su; Cheng-Bin Lee; Tien-Joung Yiu; Bo-Jein Kuo
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-11-12       Impact factor: 4.379

Review 2.  Interspecific Hybridization of Transgenic Brassica napus and Brassica rapa-An Overview.

Authors:  Soo-In Sohn; Senthil Kumar Thamilarasan; Subramani Pandian; Young-Ju Oh; Tae-Hun Ryu; Gang-Seob Lee; Eun-Kyoung Shin
Journal:  Genes (Basel)       Date:  2022-08-13       Impact factor: 4.141

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.