Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-09T01:11:12.579Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reproductive abnormalities in glyphosate-resistant cotton caused by lower CP4-EPSPS levels in the male reproductive tissue

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Wendy A. Pline ,
Ryan Viator ,
John W. Wilcut ,
Keith L. Edmisten ,
Judith Thomas  and
Randy Wells
Wendy A. Pline
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
Ryan Viator
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
Keith L. Edmisten
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
Judith Thomas
Affiliation:
Department of Botany, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695
Randy Wells
Affiliation:
Department of Crop Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7620
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Glyphosate treatments to glyphosate-resistant (GR) cotton have been associated with poor pollination and increased boll abortion. Anatomical studies were conducted to characterize the effect of glyphosate treatments on the development of male and female reproductive organs of cotton flowers at anthesis. In comparison with nontreated plants, glyphosate applied at both the four-leaf stage postemergence (POST) and at the eight-leaf stage POST directed inhibited the elongation of the staminal column and filament, which increased the distance from the anthers to the receptive stigma tip by 4.9 to 5.7 mm during the first week of flowering. The increased distance from the anthers to the stigma resulted in 42% less pollen deposited on stigmas of glyphosate-treated plants than in nontreated plants. Moreover, pollen from glyphosate-treated plants showed numerous morphological abnormalities. Transmission electron microscopy showed the presence of large vacuoles, numerous starch grains, and less organized pockets of the endoplasmic reticulum containing fewer ribosomes in pollen from glyphosate-treated plants than from nontreated plants. Pollen development in glyphosate-treated plants is likely inhibited or aborted at the vacuolate microspore and vacuolate microgamete stages of microgametogenesis, resulting in immature pollen at anthesis. Although stigmas from glyphosate-treated plants were 1.2 to 1.4 mm longer than those from nontreated plants, no other anatomical differences in stigmas were visibly evident. The presence of the GR 5-enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (CP4-EPSPS) enzyme from Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4 was quantified in reproductive and vegetative tissues using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. The content of CP4-EPSPS in the stigma, anther, preanthesis floral bud (square), and flower petals was significantly less than that in the vegetative leaf tissue. Glyphosate effects on the male reproductive development resulting in poor pollen deposition on the stigma, as well as production of aborted pollen with reduced viability, provide a likely explanation for reports of increased boll abortion and pollination problems in glyphosate-treated GR cotton.

Keywords

Glyphosatecotton, Gossypium hirsutum L. ‘Delta Pine & Land 5415RR’, ‘Delta Pine & Land 50’, ‘Delta Pine & Land 90’, ‘SureGrow 125RR’Herbicide-resistant cropstransgenic cropsgametogenesismale sterileELISApollenanther
Type
Research Article
Information
Weed Science , Volume 50 , Issue 4 , August 2002 , pp. 438 - 447
Copyright
Copyright © 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

Allison, D. C. and Fisher, W. D. 1964. A dominant gene for male sterility in upland cotton. Crop Sci. 4:548–549.Google Scholar
Anderson, N. O. and Ascher, P. D. 1994. Erosion of style/anther length integrity in introgressive Lythrum hybrids. Pages 268–271 In Stephenson, A. G. and Kao, T., eds. Pollen-Pistil Interactions and Pollen Tube Growth. Rockville, MD: American Society of Plant Physiology.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1999. Food Ingredient Testing Soya Kit User's Guide. Rev. 1117991, version 2.0. Part number 3099992. Newark, DE: Strategic Diagnostics Inc.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 2001. Roundup Ultra Supplemental Label 21137X3-20. St. Louis, MO: Monsanto Co.Google Scholar
Askew, S. D. and Wilcut, J. W. 1999. Cost and weed management with herbicide programs in glyphosate-resistant cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 13:308–313.Google Scholar
Bowman, D. T., Weaver, J. B., and Walker, D. B. 1978. Analysis of a dominant male sterile character in upland cotton I. Cytological studies. Crop Sci. 18:730–738.Google Scholar
Culpepper, A. S. and York, A. C. 1999. Weed management and net returns with transgenic herbicide-resistant, and nontransgenic cotton (Gossypium hirsutum). Weed Technol. 13:411–420.Google Scholar
Edmisten, K. L. 2001. Suggestions for Pix use. Pages 52–59 In North Carolina Cotton Production Guide. Raleigh, NC: North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service.Google Scholar
Elmore, R. W., Roeth, F. W., Nelson, L. A., Shapiro, C. A., Klein, R. N., Knezevic, S. Z., and Martin, A. 2001. Glyphosate-resistant soybean cultivar yields compared with sister lines. Agron. J. 93:408–412.Google Scholar
Frankel, R. and Galun, E. 1977. Allogamy. Pages 79–233 In Frankel, R., Gall, G.A.E., Grossman, M., Linskens, H. F., and de Zeeuw, D., eds. Pollination Mechanisms, Reproduction and Plant Breeding. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Gougler, J. A. and Geiger, D. R. 1981. Uptake and distribution of N-phosphonomethylglycine in sugarbeet plants. Plant Physiol. 68:668–672.Google Scholar
Iyengar, N. K. 1938. Pollen-tube studies in Gossypium hirsutum . J. Genet. 37:69–107.Google Scholar
Jensen, W. A., Fisher, D. B., and Ashton, M. E. 1968. Cotton embryogenesis: the pollen cytoplasm. Planta 81:206–228.Google Scholar
Jones, M. A. and Snipes, C. E. 1999. Tolerance of transgenic cotton to topical application of glyphosate. J. Cotton Sci. 3:19–26.Google Scholar
Mauney, J. R. 1966. Floral initiation of upland cotton Gossypium hirsutum L. in response to temperatures. J. Exp. Bot. 17:452–459.Google Scholar
McDowell, E. M. and Trump, B. F. 1976. Histological fixatives suitable for diagnostic light and electron microscopy. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 100:405–414.Google Scholar
McGregor, S. E. 1976. Crop plants and exotic plants. Pages 179–184 In Insect Pollination of Cultivated Crop Plants. Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service.Google Scholar
Mollenhauer, C., Smart, C. C., and Amrhein, N. 1987. Glyphosate toxicity in the shoot apical meristem of the tomato plant. I. Plastid swelling is the initial ultrastructural feature following in vivo inhibition of 5-enolpyruvylshikimic acid 3-phosphate synthase. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 29:55–65.Google Scholar
Nida, D. L., Kolacz, K. H., Buehler, R. E., et al. 1996. Glyphosate-tolerant cotton: genetic characterization and protein expression. J. Agric. Food Chem. 44:1960–1966.Google Scholar
Niester-Nyveld, C., Haubrich, A., Kampendonk, H., Gubatz, S., Tenberge, K. B., Rittscher, M., Wilmesmeier, S., and Wiermann, R. 1997. Immunocytochemical localization of phenolic compounds in pollen walls using antibodies against p-coumaric acid coupled to bovine serum albumin. Protoplasma 197:148–159.Google Scholar
Pihakaski, S. and Pihakaski, K. 1980. Effects of glyphosate on ultrastructure and photosynthesis of Pellia epiphylla . Ann. Bot. 46:133–141.Google Scholar
Pline, W. A., Edmisten, K. L., Oliver, T., Wilcut, J. W., Wells, R., and Allen, N. S. 2002a. Use of digital image analysis, viability stains, and germination assays to estimate conventional and glyphosate-resistant cotton pollen viability. Crop Sci. In press.Google Scholar
Pline, W. A., Price, A. J., Wilcut, J. W., Edmisten, K. L., and Wells, R. 2001. Absorption and translocation of glyphosate in glyphosate-resistant Gossypium hirsutum as influenced by application method and growth stage. Weed Sci. 49:460–467.Google Scholar
Pline, W. A., Wilcut, J. W., Duke, S. O., Edmisten, K. L., and Wells, R. 2002b. Tolerance and accumulation of shikimic acid in response to glyphosate applications in glyphosate-resistant and conventional cotton (Gossypium hirsutum L.). J. Agric. Food Chem. 50:506–512.Google Scholar
Quintanilha, A., Salazar, D’Eca L., and Cabral, A. 1962. Desenvolvimeto do butao flora do algodoeiro em funaco do tempo. Bol. Soc. Broteriana 36:189–215.Google Scholar
Raghavan, V. 2000. Microsporogenesis and formation of the male gametophyte. Pages 186–215 In Developmental Biology of Flowering Plants. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Reynolds, E. S. 1963. The use of lead citrate at high pH as an electron opaque stain in electron microscopy. J. Cell Biol. 17:208–212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sandberg, C. L., Meggitt, W. F., and Penner, D. 1980. Absorption, translocation and metabolism of 14C-glyphosate in several weed species. Weed Res. 20:195–200.Google Scholar
[SAS] Statistical Analysis Systems. 1990. SAS/STAT User's Guide. Version 6, 4th ed. Cary, NC: Statistical Analysis Systems Institute. 1030 p.Google Scholar
Sawhney, V. K. and Bhadula, S. K. 1988. Microsporogenesis in the normal and male-sterile stamenless-2 mutant of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum). Can. J. Bot. 66:2013–2021.Google Scholar
Scott, G. H., Askew, S. D., Bennett, A. C., and Wilcut, J. W. 2001. Economic evaluation of HADSS™ computer program for weed management in nontransgenic and transgenic cotton. Weed Sci. 49:549–557.Google Scholar
Spurr, A. R. 1969. A low-viscosity epoxy resin embedding medium for electron microscopy. J. Ultrastruct. Res. 26:31–43.Google Scholar
Uotila, M., Evjen, K., and Iversen, T. H. 1980. The effects of glyphosate on the development and cell ultrastructure of white mustard (Sinapis alba L.) seedlings. Weed Res. 20:153–158.Google Scholar
Vandermeer, I. M., Stam, M. E., Vantunen, A. J., Mol, J.N.M., and Stuitje, A. R. 1992. Antisense inhibition of flavonoid biosynthesis in petunia anthers results in male-sterility. Plant Cell 4:253–262.Google Scholar
Vargas, R. N., Wright, S., and Martin-Duvall, T. M. 1998. Tolerance of Roundup Ready cotton to Roundup Ultra applied at various growth stages. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 1:847–848.Google Scholar
Vaughn, K. C. and Duke, S. O. 1986. Ultrastructural effects of glyphosate on Glycine max seedlings. Pestic. Biochem. Physiol. 26:56–65.Google Scholar
Viator, R. P., Underbrink, S. M., Jost, P. H., Whitten, T. K., and Cothren, J. T. 2000. Factors affecting Roundup Ready cotton fruit retention and yields. Proc. Beltwide Cotton Conf. 1:689–690.Google Scholar
Wetzel, C.L.R. and Jensen, W. A. 1992. Studies of pollen maturation in cotton: the storage reserve accumulation phase. Sex. Plant Reprod. 5:117–127.Google Scholar
Ye, G. N., Hajdukiewicz, P.T.J., Broyles, D., Rodriguez, D., Xu, C. W., Nehra, N., and Staub, J. M. 2001. Plastid-expressed 5-enolpyruvylshikimiate-3-phosphate synthase genes provide high level glyphosate tolerance in tobacco. Plant J. 25:261–270.Google Scholar