4.7 Article

Pollen Flow of Winter Triticale (x Triticosecale Wittmack) Investigated with Transgenic Line Expressing β-Glucuronidase Gene

期刊

AGRONOMY-BASEL
卷 11, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/agronomy11030431

关键词

aerobiology; GM plants; risk assessment; pollen transfer; transgenic winter triticale

资金

  1. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study on transgenic winter triticale in field experiments in central Poland reveals that factors such as temperature increase, wind strength, and direction have a positive impact on pollen grain dispersal. Lower amounts of transgenic pollen grains were observed at a distance of 85 meters, with potential migration distances up to 100 meters in extreme atmospheric conditions.
A transgenic winter triticale line expressing the uidA gene, encoding beta-glucuronidase, was used to assess the pollen flow in field experiments over two consecutive vegetation seasons in central Poland. The experimental design included two variants of mixed transgenic and non-transgenic lines. Pollen grains were collected using passive traps located at 0, 10, 30, 60 and 85 m from the transgenic line. GM pollen grains were detected histochemically by staining with x-Gluc. A positive effect of temperature increase, as well as the strength and direction of the wind on the number and spread of pollen grains was observed. Regardless of the experiment year and variant, only few pollen grains were observed at a distance of 85 m. In the first year of the study the amount of pollen grains at 85 m was 300-fold lower than at the source and 140-fold lower in the second year. The number of transgenic pollen grains was two times lower when the field with the transgenic triticale was surrounded by a non-transgenic line, compared to an empty field. On the basis of the obtained results, we suggest 100 m as the distance for triticale pollen migration, although longer flight incidents are possible in extreme atmospheric conditions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据