Seed-Mediated Gene Flow in Wheat: Seed Bank Longevity in Western Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Development of genetically modified (GM) wheat has raised concerns about the movement and persistence of transgenes in agroecosystems and the ability of growers to segregate GM from conventional wheat. Wheat as a crop has been studied extensively but the population biology of volunteer wheat is not well characterized. Artificial seed bank studies were conducted in western Canada to provide baseline data on volunteer wheat seed persistence. Seed from two cultivars of Canadian western red spring wheat, ‘AC Splendor’ and ‘AC Superb’, were buried in mesh bags at three depths (0, 2, and 15 cm) in two different environments in the fall of 2003 and 2004. In addition, in 2004, ‘AC Superb’ seed were separated into small and large seed lots and buried with a medium seed lot to examine the influence of seed size on seed bank persistence. Seeds were withdrawn at intervals to assess seed germination and viability and regression analysis conducted on the viable seed at each sample period, after burial. Seed viability was variable within years and sites, and declined exponentially over time. In the spring, approximately 6 mo after initiation, viable seed ranged from 1 to 43%. With the exception of a single site and year, seeds on the soil surface persisted significantly longer than buried seeds and increasing burial depth accelerated loss of viability. The maximum viability of wheat seeds at 0, 2, and 15 cm depth in the spring following planting was 43, 7, and 2%, respectively. The extinction of viability for 99% (EX 99 ) of the seed was estimated from regression analysis. The EX 99 values of seeds buried at 0, 2, and 15 cm ranged from 493 to 1,114, 319 to 654, and 175 to 352 d after planting (DAP), respectively, with the exception of one site in 2003 where burial depths were not different and all had an EX 99 value of 456 DAP. Seed size and cultivar did not significantly affect persistence, with the exception of one site in 2003 where the difference in EX 99 values was 20 DAP. The rapid loss of seed viability limits temporal gene flow via volunteers in years following a wheat crop. Results provide data on spring wheat biology to aid in Canadian environmental biosafety assessments of GM wheat and will be incorporated into a mechanistic model to predict wheat gene flow on the Canadian prairies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".