Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T18:12:42.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Outcrossed cottonseed and adventitious Btplantsin Arizona refuges

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 April 2008

Shannon Heuberger ,
Christine Yafuso ,
Gloria Degrandi-Hoffman ,
Bruce E. Tabashnik ,
Yves Carrière  and
Timothy J. Dennehy
Shannon Heuberger
Affiliation:
Dept. of Entomology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
Christine Yafuso
Affiliation:
Dept. of Entomology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
Gloria Degrandi-Hoffman
Affiliation:
Carl Hayden Bee Research Center, USDA-ARS, Tucson, AZ, USA
Bruce E. Tabashnik
Affiliation:
Dept. of Entomology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
Yves Carrière
Affiliation:
Dept. of Entomology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA
Timothy J. Dennehy
Affiliation:
Dept. of Entomology, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Outcrossing of non-Bt cotton (Gossypium hirsutum (L.)) in refuges by transgenic Bt cultivars could reduce the efficacy of refuges for delaying resistance in seed-feeding pests. Based on reports that outcrossing decreased as distance from Bt cotton increased in small-scale studies, we hypothesized that increasing refuge width or distance from Bt fields would reduce outcrossing. In a large-scale study in Arizona, we quantified Bt seed in refuges of experimental and commercial fields, comparing outcrossing between in-field (narrow) and external (wide) refuges and among rows of refuges at various distances from Bt fields. Some refuges, including those in tightly controlled experimental plots, contained up to 8% adventitious Bt plants. Some, but not all, Bt plants likely resulted from Bt seed in the non-Bt seed bags. We did not detect a difference in outcrossing between in-field and external refuges. However, statistical power was low because outcrossing was low (< 0.4% of seeds) in both treatments. Higher outcrossing levels (≤ 4.6% of seeds) were observed in the studies measuring outcrossing at various distances from Bt fields, yet outcrossing did not decrease as the distance from Bt fields increased. We hypothesize that Bt plants in refuges cross-pollinated surrounding non-Bt plants, overshadowing the expected association between distance from Bt fields and outcrossing.

Keywords

Bt cottongene flowoutcrossingadventitious plantsrefuge
Type
Research Article
Information
Environmental Biosafety Research , Volume 7 , Issue 2 , April 2008 , pp. 87 - 96
Copyright
© ISBR, EDP Sciences, 2008

References

Abel, CA, Adamczyk, JJ Jr (2004) Relative concentration of Cry1A in maize leaves and cotton bolls with diverse chlorophyll content and corresponding larval development of fall armyworm (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) and Southwestern corn borer (Lepidoptera: Crambidae) on maize whorl leaf profiles. J. Econ. Entomol. 97: 1737–1744 CrossRef
Adamczyk, JJ Jr, Meredith, WR (2006) Selecting for efficacy of Bollgard cotton cultivars against various Lepidoptera using forward breeding techniques. J. Econ. Entomol. 99: 1835–1841 CrossRef
Adamczyk JJ Jr, Adams LC, Hardee DD (2001) Field efficiency and seasonal expression profiles for terminal leaves of single and double Bacillus thuringiensis toxin cotton genotypes. J. Econ. Entomol. 94: 1589–1593
Anklam E, Heinze P, Kay S, Vanden Eede G (2002) Validation studies and proficiency testing. J. AOAC Int. 85: 809–815
California Crop Improvement Association (2007) Seed certification standards in California: Cotton. http://ccia.ucdavis.edu/seed_cert/cotton.htm
Carrière Y, Sisterson MS, Tabashnik BE (2004a) Resistance management for sustainable use of Bacillus thuringiensis crops. In Horowitz AR, Ishaaya I, eds, Insect pest management: field and protected crops, Springer, New York, pp 65–95
Carrière Y, Dutilleul P, Ellers-Kirk C, Pedersen B, Haller S, Antilla L, Dennehy TJ, Tabashnik BE (2004b) Sources, sinks, and the zone of influence of refuges for managing insect resistance to Bt crops. Ecol. Appl. 14: 1615–1623
Carrière Y, Ellers-Kirk C, Kumar K, Heuberger S, Whitlow M, Antilla L, Dennehy TJ, Tabashnik BE (2005) Long-term evaluation of compliance with refuge requirements for Bt cotton. Pest Manag. Sci. 61: 327–330
Chilcutt, CF, Tabashnik, BE (2004) Contamination of refuges by Bacillus thuringiensis toxin genes from transgenic maize. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101: 7526–7529 CrossRef
DeGrandi-Hoffman G, Morales F (1989) Identification and distribution of pollinating honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) on sterile male cotton. J. Econ. Entomol. 82: 580–583
Free JB (1970) Insect pollination of crops. Academic Press, New York, pp 151–167
Friesen LF, Nelson AG, Van Acker RC (2003) Evidence of contamination of pedigreed canola (Brassica napus) seedlots in western Canada with genetically engineered herbicide resistance traits. Agron. J. 95: 1342–1347
Gaines T, Preston C, Byrne P, Henry WB, Westra P (2007) Adventitious presence of herbicide resistant wheat in certified and farm-saved seed lots. Crop Sci. 47: 751–756
Gould F (1998) Sustainability of transgenic insecticidal cultivars: integrating pest genetics and ecology. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 43: 701–726
Heuberger S, Ellers-Kirk C, Yafuso C, Gassmann AJ, Tabashnik BE, Dennehy TJ, Carrière Y (2008) Effects of refuge contamination by transgenes on Bt resistance in pink bollworm (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae). J. Econ. Entomol. 101: 504–514
Hutmacher RB, Vargas RN (2006) Methods to enable the coexistence of diverse cotton production systems. University of California, Davis, Agricultural Biotechnology in California Series, Pub. 8191
Jayaraman KS (2005) Monsanto's Bollgard potentially compromised in India. Nat. Biotechnol. 23: 1326
Kranthi, KR, Dhawad, CS, Naidu, S, Mate, K, Patil, E, Kranthi, S (2005) Bt-cotton seed as a source of Bacillus thuringiensis insecticidal Cry1Ac toxin for bioassays to detect and monitor bollworm resistance to Bt-cotton. Curr. Sci. 88: 796–798
Llewellyn D, Fitt G (1996) Pollen dispersal from two field trials of transgenic cotton in the Namoi Valley, Australia. Mol. breed. 2: 157–166 CrossRef
Llewellyn D, Tyson C, Constable G, Duggan B, Beale S, Steel P (2007) Containment of regulated genetically modified cotton in the field. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 121: 419–429
Ma BL, Subedi KD, Reid LM (2004) Extent of cross-fertilization in maize by pollen from neighboring transgenic hybrids. Crop Sci. 44: 1273–1282
Matten, SR, Reynolds, AH (2003) Current resistance management requirements for Bt cotton in the United States. J. New Seeds 5: 137–178 CrossRef
McGregor, SE (1959) Cotton-flower visitation and pollen distribution by honey bees. Science 129: 97–98 CrossRef
Mellon M, Rissler J (2004) Gone to seed: Transgenic contaminants in the traditional food supply. Union of Concerned Scientists, Cambridge
Pla M, La Paz J, Peñas G, García N, Palaudelmàs M, Esteve T, Messeguer J, Melé E (2006) Assessment of real-time PCR based methods for quantification of pollen-mediated gene flow from GM to conventional maize in a field study. Transgenic Res. 15: 219–228
Rieger MA, Lamond M, Preston C, Powles SB, Roush R (2002) Pollen-mediated movement of herbicide resistance between commercial canola fields. Science 296: 2386–2388
Roberts G, Kerlin S, Hickman M (2002) Controlling volunteer cotton. WEEDpak, Australian Cotton Cooperative Research Centre, Narrabri, New South Wales. http://cotton.crc.org.au/files/d3a83b8a-0eed-4167-bd73-992b01125337/WPf4.pdf
Sachs, ES, Benedict, JH, Stelly, DM, Taylor, JF, Altman, DW, Berberich, SA, Davis, SK (1998) Expression and segregation of genes encoding Cry1A insecticidal proteins in cotton. Crop Sci. 38: 1–11 CrossRef
Sims SR, Berberich SA (1996) Bacillus thuringiensis Cry1A protein levels in raw and processed seed of transgenic cotton: determination using insect bioassay and ELISA. J. Econ. Entomol. 89: 247–251
Tabashnik BE, Carrière Y (2007) Evolution of insect resistance to transgenic plants. In Tilmon K, ed, Specialization, speciation, and radiation: the evolutionary biology of herbivorous insects University of California Press, Berkeley, pp 267–279
Tabashnik BE, Gould F, Carrière Y (2004) Delaying evolution of insect resistance to transgenic crops by decreasing dominance and heritability. J. Evol. Biol. 17: 904–912
Umbeck PF, Barton KA, Nordheim EV, McCarty JC, Parrott WL, Jenkins JN (1991) Degree of pollen dispersal by insects from a field test of genetically engineered cotton. J. Econ. Entomol. 84: 1943–1950
United States Environmental Protection Agency (2006) Introduction to biotechnology regulation for pesticides: gene flow for plant-incorporated protectants. http://www.epa.gov/pesticides/biopesticides/regtools/biotech-reg-prod.htm
University of California Integrated Pest Management Program (1996) Integrated pest management for cotton in the western region of the United States, 2nd edition. Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources, Publication 3305, 16 p
Watrud LS, Lee EH, Fairbrother A, Burdic C, Reichman JR, Bollman M, Storm M, King G, Van de Water PK (2004) Evidence for landscape-level, pollen-mediated gene flow from genetically modified creeping bentgrass with CP4 EPSPS as a marker. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101: 14533–14538
Zhang B, Guo T, Wang Q (2000) Inheritance and segregation of exogenous genes in transgenic cotton. J. Genet. 79: 71–75
Zhang, B, Pan, X, Guo, T, Wang, Q, Anderson, TA (2005) Measuring gene flow in the cultivation of transgenic cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). Mol. Biotechnol. 31: 11–19 CrossRef