Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T12:45:53.200Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Environmental implications of gene flow from sugar beetto wild beet - current status and future research needs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 June 2003

Detlef Bartsch
Affiliation:
Robert Koch Institute - Center for Gene Technology, Nordufer 20, 13533 Berlin, Germany
Joel Cuguen
Affiliation:
Laboratoire de Génétique et Évolution des Populations Végétales, UMR CNRS 8016 - FR CNRS 1818, Université de LILLE 1, 59655 Villeneuve d'Ascq, France
Enrico Biancardi
Affiliation:
Istituto Sperimentale per le Colture Industriali, Viale Amendola 82, 45100 Rovigo, Italy
Jeremy Sweet
Affiliation:
NIAB, Huntingdon Road, Cambridge CB3 0LE, United Kingdom

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.

Gene flow via seed or pollen is a basic biological process in plant evolution. The ecological and genetic consequences of gene flow depend on the amount and direction of gene flow as well as on the fitness of hybrids. The assessment of potential risks of transgenic plants should take into account the fact that conventional crops can often cross with wild plants. The precautionary approach in risk management of genetically modified plants (GMPs) may make it necessary to monitor significant wild and weed populations that might be affected by transgene escape. Gene flow is hard to control in wind-pollinated plants like beet (Beta vulgaris). In addition, wild beet populations potentially can undergo evolutionary changes which might expand their geographical distribution. Unintended products of cultivated beets pollinated by wild beets are weed beets that bolt and flower during their first year of planting. Weed beets cause yield losses and can delay harvest. Wild beets are important plant genetic resources and the preservation of wild beet diversity in Europe has been considered in biosafety research. We present here the methodology and research approaches that can be used for monitoring the geographical distribution and diversity of Beta populations. It has recently been shown that a century of gene flow from Beta vulgaris ssp. vulgaris has not altered the genetic diversity of wild Beta vulgaris L. ssp. maritima (L.) Arcang. in the Italian sugar beet seed production area. Future research should focus on the potential evolution of transgenic wild beet populations in comparison to these baseline data. Two monitoring models are presented describing how endpoints can be measured: (1) “Pre-post” crop commercialization against today's baseline and (2) “Parallel” to crop commercialization against GMP free reference areas/populations. Model 2 has the advantage of taking ongoing changes in genetic diversity and population dynamics into account. Model 1 is more applicable if gene flow is so strong that most areas/populations contain GMPs. Important traits that may change the ecology of populations are genes that confer tolerance to biotic and abiotic stress. An assessment of environmental effects can realistically only be based on endpoints and consequences of gene introgression, which may include economic values of biodiversity in littoral and other ecosystems containing wild beet. In general, there is still a great need to harmonize worldwide monitoring systems by the development of appropriate methods to evaluate the environmental impact of introgressed transgenes.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© ISBR, EDP Sciences, 2003

References

Bartsch, D, Brand, U (1998) Saline soil condition decreases rhizomania infection of Beta vulgaris. J. Plant Pathol. 80: 219-223
Bartsch, D, Ellstrand, NC (1999) Genetic evidence for the origin of Californian wild beets (genus Beta). Theor. Appl. Genet. 99: 1120-1130 CrossRef
Bartsch, D, Schmidt, M (1997) Influence of sugar beet breeding on populations of Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima in Italy. J. Veg. Sci. 8: 81-84 CrossRef
Bartsch, D, Schuphan, I (2002) Lessons we can learn from ecological biosafety research. J. Biotechnol. 98: 71-77 CrossRef
Bartsch, D, Schmidt, M, Pohl-Orf, M, Haag, C, Schuphan, I (1996) Competitiveness of transgenic sugar beet resistant to beet necrotic yellow vein virus and potential impact on wild beet populations. Mol. Ecol. 5: 199-205 CrossRef
Bartsch, D, Lehnen, M, Clegg, J, Pohl-Orf, M, Schuphan, I, Ellstrand, NC (1999) Impact of gene flow from cultivated beet on genetic diversity of wild sea beet populations. Mol. Ecol. 8: 1733-1741 CrossRef
Bartsch, D, Brand, U, Morak, C, Pohl-Orf, M, Schuphan, I, Ellstrand, NC (2001) Biosafety of hybrids between transgenic virus-resistant sugar beet and Swiss chard. Ecol. Appl. 11: 142-147 CrossRef
Boudry, P, Mörchen, M, Saumitou-Laprade, P, Vernet, P, Van Dijk, H (1993) The origin and evolution of weed beets, consequences for the breeding and release of herbicide-resistant transgenic sugar-beets. Theor. Appl. Genet. 87: 471-478 CrossRef
Boudry, P, McCombie, H, Van Dijk, H (2002) Vernalization requirement of wild beet Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima: among population variation and its adaptive significance. J. Ecol. 90: 693-793 CrossRef
Braun, R (2002) People's concerns about biotechnology: some problems and some solutions. J. Biotechnol. 98: 3-8 CrossRef
Champion, GT (2000) The biology of weed beet. Brit. Sugar Beet Rev. 68: 53-55.
Crawley, MJ, Brown, SL, Hails, RS, Kohn, D, Rees, M (2001) Transgenic crops in natural habitats. Nature 408: 682-683 CrossRef
Darmency, H (1994) The impact of hybrids between genetically modified crop plants and their related species: introgression and weediness. Mol. Ecol. 3: 37-44 CrossRef
Darmency H (1997) Gene flow between crops and weeds: Risk for new herbicide resistances weeds? In De Prado R, Jorrin J, Garcia-Torres L, eds, Weed and Crop Resistance to Herbi- cides. Kluver Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp 239-248
Desplanque, B, Boudry, P, Broomberg, K, Saumitou-Laprade, P, Cuguen, J, Van Dijk, H (1999) Genetic diversity and gene flow between wild, cultivated and weedy forms of Beta vulgaris L. (Chenopodiaceae), assessed by RFLP and microsatellite markers. Theor. Appl. Genet. 98: 1194-1201 CrossRef
Desplanque, B, Viard, F, Forcioli, D, Bernard, J, Saumitou- Laprade, P, Cuguen, J, Van Dijk, H (2000) The linkage disequilibrium between cpDNA and mtDNA haplotypes in Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima (L.): the usefulness of both genomes for population genetic studies. Mol. Ecol. 9: 141-154 CrossRef
Desplanque, B, Hautekeete, N, Van Dijk, H (2002) Transgenic weed beets: possible, probable, avoidable? J. Appl. Ecol. 39: 561-571 CrossRef
Doney, DL, Whitney, ED, Terry, J, Frese, L, Fitzgerald, P (1990) The distribution and dispersal of Beta vulgaris L. ssp. maritima germplasm in England, Wales, and Ireland. J. Sugar Beet Res. 27: 29-37 CrossRef
Driessen, S, Pohl, M, Bartsch, D (2001) RAPD-PCR analysis of the genetic origin of sea beet (Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima) at Germany's Baltic Sea coast. Basic Appl. Ecol. 2: 341-349 CrossRef
Ellstrand, NC, Prentice, HC, Hancock, JF (1999) Gene flow and introgression from domesticated plants into their wild relatives. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 30: 539-563 CrossRef
Eriksson, O (1996) Regional dynamics of plants: a review of evidence for remnant, source-sink and metapopulations. Oikos 77: 248-258 CrossRef
Ford-Lloyd BV (1986) Infraspecific variation in wild and cultivated beets and its effect upon infraspecific classification. In Styles BT, ed, Infraspecific classification of wild and cultivated plants. Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp 331-334
Ford-Lloyd, BV, Hawkes, JG (1986) Weed beets, their origin and classification. Acta Horticultura 82: 399-401 CrossRef
Ford-Lloyd, BV, Williams, JT (1975) A revision of Beta section Vulgares (Chenopodiaceae), with new light on the origin of cultivated beets. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 71: 89-102 CrossRef
Frese L, Desprez B, Ziegler D (2001) Potential of genetic resources and breeding strategies for base-broadening in Beta. In Cooper HD, Spillane C, Hodgkin T, eds, Broadening the genetic base of crop production. IPGRI/FAO, Rome, 2001, pp 295-309
Hautekeete, N, Piquot, Y, Van Dijk, H (2002) Life span in Beta vulgaris maritima: the impacts of disturbance and of age at first reproduction. J. Ecol. 90: 508-516 CrossRef
Lange, W, Brandenburg, WA, de Bock, TSM (1999) Taxonomy and cultonomy of beet (Beta vulgaris L.). Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 130: 81-96 CrossRef
Laporte, V, Viard, F, Béna, G, Valero, M, Cuguen, J (2001) The spatial structure of sexual and cytonuclear polymorphism in the gynodioecious Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima at a local scale. Genetics 157: 1699-1710
Letschert, JPW (1993) Beta section Beta: biogeographical patterns of variation and taxonomy. Wageningen Agricultural University Publications 93: 1-153
Mücher, T, Hesse, P, Pohl-Orf, M, Ellstrand, NC, Bartsch, D (2000) Characterization of weed beets in Germany and Italy. J. Sugar Beet Res. 37: 19-38 CrossRef
Nickson, TE, Head, GP (1999) Environmental monitoring of genetically modified crops. J. Environ. Monit. 1: 101-105 CrossRef
Ober, E, Luterbacher, M (2002) Genotypic variation for drought tolerance in Beta vulgaris. Ann. Bot. 89: 917-924 CrossRef
Pohl-Orf M, Morak C, Wehres U, Saeglitz C, Driessen S, Lehnen M, Hesse P, Mücher T, von Soosten C, Schuphan I, Bartsch D (2000) The environmental impact of gene flow from sugar beet to wild beet - an ecological comparison of transgenic and natural virus tolerance genes. In Fairbairn C, Scoles G, McHughen A, eds, Proceedings of the 6th International Symposium on the Biosafety of Genetically Modified Organisms, July 2000, Saskatoon, Canada, pp 51-55
Raybould, AF, Gray, AJ (1993) Genetically modified crops and hybridization with wild relatives: a UK perspective. J. Appl. Ecol. 30: 199-219 CrossRef
Raybould, AF, Mogg, RJ (1996) The genetic structure of Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima (sea beet) populations: RFLPs and isozymes show different patterns of gene flow. Heredity 77: 245-250 CrossRef
Raybould, AF, Mogg, RJ, Gliddon, CJ (1997) The genetic structure of Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima (sea beet) populations. II. Differences in gene flow estimated from RFLP and isozyme loci are habitat-specific. Heredity 78: 535-538 CrossRef
Raybould, AF, Mogg, RJ, Aldam, C, Gliddon, CJ, Thorpe, RS, Clarke, RT (1998) The genetic structure of sea beet (Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima) populations. III. Detection of isolation by distance at microsatellite loci. Heredity 80: 127-132 CrossRef
Reboud X, Gasquez J, Darmency H (1999) A multisite-cooperative research programme on risk assessment of transgenic crops. In Ammann K, Jacot Y, Simonsen V, Kjellsson G, eds, Methods for Risk Assessment of Transgenic Plant III. Ecological risks and prospects of transgenic plants, where do we go from here? A dialogue between biotech industry and science. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, pp 17-20
Saeglitz C, Bartsch D (2002) Gene flow from transgenic plants. AgBiotechNet 4: ABN 084
Saeglitz, C, Pohl, M, Bartsch, D (2000) Monitoring gene escape from transgenic sugar beet using cytoplasmic male sterile bait plants. Mol. Ecol. 9: 2035-2040 CrossRef
Soukup J, Holec J, Vejl P, Skupinova S, Sedlak P (2002) Diversity and distribution of weed beet in the Czech Republic. Journal of Plant Diseases and Protection (z pflanzenkr pflanzenschutz) 18: 67-74
Stevanato P (1999) Ottavio Munerati - 50 anni dopo. Proceedings Accademia dei Concordi: 1-83
Suter GW (1993) Environmental surveillance, In Suter GW, ed, Ecological Risk Assessment. Lewis Publishers, Chelsea, MI, pp 377-383
Tufto, J, Raybould, AF, Hindar, K, Engen, S (1998) Analysis of Genetic Structure and Dispersal Patterns in a Population of Sea Beet. Genetics 149: 1975-1985
Van Dijk, H, Boudry, P, McCombie, H, Vernet, P (1997) Flowering time in wild beet (Beta vulgaris ssp. maritima) along a latitudinal cline. Acta Oecologia 18: 47-60 CrossRef
Viard, F, Bernard, J, Desplanque, B (2002) Crop-weed interactions in the Beta vulgaris complex at a local scale: allelic diversity and gene flow within sugar beet fields. Theor. Appl. Genet. 104: 688-697 CrossRef