Impact of Interspecific Hybridization between Crops and Weedy Relatives on the Evolution of Flowering Time in Weedy Phenotypes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Like conventional crops, some GM cultivars may readily hybridize with their wild or weedy relatives. The progressive introgression of transgenes into wild or weedy populations thus appears inevitable, and we are now faced with the challenge of determining the possible evolutionary effects of these transgenes. The aim of this study was to gain insight into the impact of interspecific hybridization between transgenic plants and weedy relatives on the evolution of the weedy phenotype. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Experimental populations of weedy birdseed rape (Brassica rapa) and transgenic rapeseed (B. napus) were grown under glasshouse conditions. Hybridization opportunities with transgenic plants and phenotypic traits (including phenological, morphological and reproductive traits) were measured for each weedy individual. We show that weedy individuals that flowered later and for longer periods were more likely to receive transgenic pollen from crops and weed × crop hybrids. Because stem diameter is correlated with flowering time, plants with wider stems were also more likely to be pollinated by transgenic plants. We also show that the weedy plants with the highest probability of hybridization had the lowest fecundity. CONCLUSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Our results suggest that weeds flowering late and for long periods are less fit because they have a higher probability of hybridizing with crops or weed × crop hybrids. This may result in counter-selection against this subset of weed phenotypes, and a shorter earlier flowering period. It is noteworthy that this potential evolution in flowering time does not depend on the presence of the transgene in the crop. Evolution in flowering time may even be counter-balanced by positive selection acting on the transgene if the latter was positively associated with maternal genes promoting late flowering and long flowering periods. Unfortunately, we could not verify this association in the present experiment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".