Gene Flow in Wheat at the Field Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In wheat (Triticum L.), large‐scale field studies were conducted to assess the level of intra‐ and interspecific pollen‐mediated gene movement that may exist at varying distances from a pollinator source. The objectives of this research were to measure gene flow rates from a blue‐grained pollinator (T. aestivum cv. Purendo‐38) to (i) red‐grained spring wheat cv. CDC Teal (T. aestivum) over distances of 0.2 to 160 m, (ii) amber durum wheat cv. AC Navigator (T. turgidum L.) over distances of 0.2 to 260 m, and (iii) CDC Teal and AC Navigator over distances of 180 to 2760 m. In 2000 and 2001, 50‐ by 50‐m blue‐grained pollinator blocks were sown and surrounded by recipient fields of either CDC Teal or AC Navigator at Saskatoon, SK. At maturity, 0.5‐ by 4‐m strips were harvested at specified distances between 0.2 and 160 m or 260 m along eight transects (N, E, S, W, NE, SE, SW, NW) radiating out from Purendo‐38. In addition, random sampling was conducted in 2000 and 2001 from surrounding wheat fields to estimate gene flow rates over distances of 180 to 2760 m. Gene flow from Purendo‐38 to recipient plants was identified by the expression of a light‐blue pigment in the aleurone layer of F1 hybrid seed. Confirmed intra‐ and interspecific pollen‐mediated gene flow rates remained below 0.5% and declined rapidly with distance from the pollinator. Elevated gene flow rates to the N, W, and NW of the pollinator were associated with prevalent winds in 2000, but not in 2001. In 2000, long distance intraspecific gene flow was confirmed at a frequency of 0.005% at a position 300 m northwest of the pollinator. No evidence of interspecific gene flow was observed at ≥40 m from the pollinator. The results suggest that gene flow occurrence in spring wheat is relatively low but that a tolerance level of 0% transgenic wheat in nontransgenic wheat grain is unrealistic.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".