MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009368406 · doi:10.2135/cropsci2004.1273

Extent of Cross‐Fertilization in Maize by Pollen from Neighboring Transgenic Hybrids

2004· article· en· W2009368406 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCrop Science · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicGenetically Modified Organisms Research
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersPioneer Hi-Bred
KeywordsBiologyPollenHybridAgronomyBacillus thuringiensisGenetically modified maizePollen sourcePopulationHuman fertilizationZea maysPollinationBotanyGenetically modified cropsTransgenePollinator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is an increasing concern about the preservation of genetic identity of conventional maize ( Zea mays L.) and of distance required to segregate non‐genetically modified (non‐GM) from GM grain production since the introduction of Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) and other transgenic events into commercial hybrids. Field experiments were conducted at three sites in Ottawa, Canada, for 3 yr to determine (i) the extent of cross‐fertilization of a maize genotype by foreign pollen of neighboring hybrids and (ii) the practical distance required to isolate conventional maize hybrids from neighboring GM maize fields. At each site, yellow‐kernel Bt maize was planted in the center (27 by 27 m) of a field surrounded in all directions by the distance equivalent to 24 or 48 rows (37 m) of white‐kernel maize, and a 200‐m non‐maize crop was maintained in all directions. Phenology and weather conditions were closely monitored during the tasseling and silking period. At maturity, a thorough examination on the cross‐fertilization was conducted in the white maize population. Our results showed that the rate of cross‐fertilization in maize was dependent upon the distance from the pollen source, wind direction and synchronization of silking and pollen shedding of the two genotypes involved. Up to 82% out‐cross was measured in the first row adjacent to the Bt maize. The level of out‐cross was <1% beyond the 37th border row (28 m) downwind and the 13th row (10 m) upwind in all site‐years. An exponential decline model was fitted well ( P < 0.01) to the cross‐fertilization data as a function of distance from the yellow maize pollen source with R 2 up to 0.64. Our data suggested that it is possible to produce non‐GM maize grains by removing the outside rows of non‐GM maize plants (about 30 m) neighboring the GM maize field in concern if the acceptance level is set at ≤1% out‐cross. The generally recommended 200‐m distance between two genotypes (inbreds, populations, hybrids, and wild relatives) appears to be appropriate for Bt or other GM maize, as well.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it