Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T12:53:53.807Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genetic Analysis of Glufosinate Resistance in Crosses Between Transformed Rice (Oryza sativa) and Red Rice (Oryza sativa)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Sujatha Sankula ,
Michael P. Braverman  and
James H. Oard
Sujatha Sankula
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology and Crop Physiology, 302, Life Sciences Building
Michael P. Braverman
Affiliation:
Department of Plant Pathology and Crop Physiology, 302, Life Sciences Building
James H. Oard
Affiliation:
Department of Agronomy, 104, M. B. Sturgis Hall, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA 70803
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Reciprocal controlled crosses were made in the greenhouse between Gulfmont rice transformed with the bialaphos resistance (BAR) gene and red rice and BAR-transformed Koshihikari rice and red rice to assess the inheritance of glufosinate resistance. All F1 plants were resistant to 2.2 kg ai/ha glufosinate. Ammonia accumulation as a measure of glufosinate resistance in the F1 hybrids was assayed at 4 and 8 days after treatment (DAT). Ammonia accumulation in hybrids 4 DAT was similar to glufosinate treated, transformed rice, while treated nontransformed plants accumulated 14 to 23 times more ammonia compared with the hybrids. The nature of inheritance of glufosinate resistance in F2 rice plants was studied by a glufosinate dip test, a spray test, and ammonia assay. All three tests confirmed that glufosinate resistance, as influenced by the BAR gene, segregated in a 3 (resistant): 1 (susceptible) ratio.

Keywords

Glufosinate, 2-amino-4-(hydroxymethylphosphinyl)butanoic acidred rice, Oryza sativa L. #3 ORYSArice, Oryza sativa L. ‘Gulfmont’ and ‘Koshihikari.'Ammonia assayBAR geneherbicide-resistant cropsinheritancetransformed riceORYSABAR, bialaphos resistanceDAT, days after treatmentGUS, galacturonidaseHm, hygromycin resistance genePAT, phosphinothricin acetyl transferaseWAT, weeks after treatment
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 12 , Issue 2 , June 1998 , pp. 209 - 214
Copyright
Copyright © 1998 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

Agracetus, Inc. 1991. Institutional Biosafety Reports. Construction and Use of Dominant Selectable Markers for Use in Transformation of Plant Cells. Updated Appendum. Middleton, WI: Agracetus. pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
Arnold, M. L. and Hodges, S. A. 1995. Are natural hybrids fit or unfit relative to their parents? Trends Ecol. Evol. 10:67–71.Google Scholar
Boudry, P., Morchen, M., Saumitou-Laprade, P., Vernet, P., and Dijk, H. V. 1993. The origin and evolution of wild beets: consequences for the breeding and release of herbicide resistant transgenic sugar beets. Theor. Appl. Genet. 87:471–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braverman, M. P. 1997. Competitive ability of rice (Oryza sativa L.) transformed with the bar gene. Weed Sci. Soc. Am. Abstr. 37:92.Google Scholar
Brown, J., Thill, D. C., Brown, A. P., Mallory-Smith, C. A., Brammer, T. A., and Nair, H. S. 1995. Proceedings of the CSREE Risk Assessment Conference, College Park, MD. p. 29.Google Scholar
Burnside, O. C. 1992. Rationale for developing herbicide-resistant crops. Weed Technol. 6:621–625.Google Scholar
Coble, H. D. and Mortensen, D. A. 1992. The threshold concept and its application to weed science. Weed Technol. 6:191–195.Google Scholar
Colwell, J. K., Norse, E. A., Pimentel, D., Sharpels, F. E., and Simberloff, D. 1985. Genetic engineering in agriculture. Science 229:111–112.Google Scholar
De Block, M., Botterman, J., Vandewiele, M., et al. 1987. Engineering herbicide resistance in plants by expression of a detoxifying enzyme. EMBO J. 6:2513–2518.Google Scholar
D'Halluin, K., De Block, M., Janssens, J., Leemans, J., Reynaerts, A., and Botterman, J. 1992. The bar gene as a selectable marker in plant engineering. Methods Enzymol. 216:415–441.Google Scholar
Hoffman, C. A. 1990. Ecological risks of genetic engineering of crop species. BioScience 40:434–437.Google Scholar
Jorgensen, R. B., Hauser, T., Mikkelsen, T. R., and Ostergard, H. 1996. Transfer of engineered genes from crop to wild plants. Trends Plant Sci. 1:356–358.Google Scholar
Keeler, K. H. 1989. Can genetically engineered crops become weeds? Bio/ Technol. 1:1134–1139.Google Scholar
Knake, E. L. 1992. Technology transfer for herbicide-tolerant weeds and herbicide-tolerant crops. Weed Technol. 6:662–664.Google Scholar
Langevin, S. A. 1988. Hybridization between a crop and a weed: cultivated rice and red rice (Oryza sativa L.). . Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA. p. VI.Google Scholar
Morishima, H., Oka, H. I., and Chang, W. T. 1961. Directions of differentiation in populations of wild rice, Oryza perennis and O. sativa f. spontanea. Evolution 15:326–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oard, J. H., Linscombe, S. D., Braverman, M. P., et al. 1996. Development, field evaluation, and agronomic performance of transgenic herbicide resistant rice. Mol. Breed. 2:359–368.Google Scholar
Oka, H. I. and Chang, W. T. 1959. The impact of cultivation on populations of wild rice, Oryza sativa f. spontanea. Phyton. 13:105–117.Google Scholar
Sankula, S. and Braverman, M. P. 1996. Differential response to ignite (glufosinate) between flooding regime and rice cultivars. Proc. South. Weed Sci. Soc. 49:24.Google Scholar
Sankula, S., Braverman, M. P., and Linscombe, S. D. 1997. Response of BAR-transformed rice (Oryza sativa) and red rice (Oryza sativa) to glufosinate application timing. Weed Technol. 11:303–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulz, A., Wengenmeyer, F., and Goodman, H. M. 1990. Genetic engineering of herbicide resistance in higher plants. Plant Sci. 9:1–15.Google Scholar
Strickberger, M. W. 1976. Probability and statistical testing. In Genetics. New York: MacMillan. pp. 146–151.Google Scholar
Tiedje, J. M., Colwell, R. K., Grossman, Y. L., Hodson, R. E., Lenski, R. E., Mack, R. N., and Regal, P. J. 1989. The planned introduction of genetically engineered organisms: ecological considerations and recommendations. Ecology 70:298–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilcut, J. W., Coble, H. D., York, A. C., and Monks, D. W. 1996. The niche for herbicide resistant crops in U.S. agriculture. In Duke, S. O., ed. Herbicide Resistant Crops. Boca Raton, FL: Lewis Publishers. pp. 213–230.Google Scholar
Williamson, M. 1991. Assessment of hazards from genetically engineered plants: the work of the advisory committee on genetic manipulation intentional introduction subcommittee. In Caseley, J. C., Cussans, G. W., and Atkin, R. K., eds. Herbicide Resistance in Weeds and Crops. Boston, MA: Oxford Publishers. pp. 375–386.Google Scholar
Williamson, M. 1993. Risks from the release of GMO's: ecological and evolutionary considerations. Environ. Update 1:5–9.Google Scholar