+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Contribution of groundkeepers vs. weed beet to gene escape from sugar beet (Beta vulgaris spp.). Consequences for growing genetically-modified sugar beet - A modelling approach



Contribution of groundkeepers vs. weed beet to gene escape from sugar beet (Beta vulgaris spp.). Consequences for growing genetically-modified sugar beet - A modelling approach



Field Crops Research 135: 46-57



Weed beet cannot be controlled by herbicides in sugar beet (except via height-selective applicators) as it is a crop relative, descending from accidentally flowering sugar beet (Beta vulgaris) crop plants either because of vernalization during cold springs, or presence of a dominant bolting allele in sugar beet seed lots due to cross-pollination by annual wild beet (B. vulgaris ssp. maritima) in seed production areas. A second, minor source of weed beet are crop roots lost during harvest. These roots ("groundkeepers") can reproduce in the year after sugar beet and potentially contribute to weed beet dynamics and gene flow. Bolting, flowering and seed production timing and potential of groundkeepers were measured in field experiments. Bolting and flowering were faster in groundkeepers vs. weed beet; flower and seed production was lower in groundkeepers but the latter were less sensitive to competitive crops. The measured parameters were used to introduce a ground-keeper life-cycle into the GENESYS-BEET model which quantifies the effects of cropping systems on weed beet in landscapes. Simulations over several years showed weed beet dynamics to be more sensitive to groundkeeper parameter values than to root loss at sugar beet harvest. Groundkeepers were identified as a key source of weed beet populations and of gene escape from novel sugar beet varieties (e.g. genetically-modified herbicide-tolerant varieties) in the absence of crop bolters. The control of the latter, either by manual weeding or by genetic improvement of sugar beet varieties, was shown to be essential for controlling weed beet populations and avoid the advent of herbicide-tolerant weed beet. reserved.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 066265108

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

DOI: 10.1016/j.fcr.2012.06.019


Related references

Sugar beet beta vulgaris l monohy 149 palestriped flea beetle pfb systena blanda melsheimer sugar beet root maggot sbrm tetanops myopaeformis roeder sugar beet insect pests control 1989. Insecticide & Acaricide Tests : 232, 1991

What makes a transgenic plant an invasive alien? - Genetically modified sugar beet and their potential impact on populations of the wild beet Beta vulgaris subspec maritima arcang. Starfinger, U , Edwards, K , Kowarik, I , Williamson, M Plant invasions: Ecological mechanisms and human responses 235-243, 1998

Comparison of chloroplast and mitochondrial DNA from five morphologically distinct Beta vulgaris cultivars: sugar beet, fodder beet, beet root, foliage beet, and Swiss chard. Tag. Theoretical and Applied Genetics. Theoretische und Angewandte Genetik 79(4): 440-442, 1990

Establishment of an Efficient Chloroplast Gene Transformation System in Sugar Beet (Beta vulgaris L.) and Obtainment of Insect and Herbicide Resistant Sugar Beet Plants. Progress in Biochemistry and Biophysics 35(12): 1437-1443, 2008

Gene escape in transgenic sugar beet: what can be learned from molecular studies of weed beet populations?. The biosafety results of field tests of genetically modified plants and microorganisms Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium, Monterey, California, USA, 13-16 November 1994: 75-87, 1994

Morphological Differences Between Sugar Beet and Weed Beet (Beta VULGARIS L.) DEPENDING ON THE SOIL. Cereal Research Communications 36: 835-838, 2008

Sugar beet beta vulgaris l beta seed kw 3265 sugar beet root aphid sra pemphigus spp sugar beet root aphid control in southern minnesota usa 1990. Insecticide & Acaricide Tests : 231-232, 1991

Electro thermal control of weed beet beta maritima and bolting sugar beet beta vulgaris. Weed Research 20(5): 311-322, 1980

Sugar beet beta vulgaris l sugar beet root maggot tetanops myopaeformis roder sugar beet root maggot control 1990. Insecticide & Acaricide Tests: 110, 1991

GeneSys-Beet A model of the effects of cropping systems on gene flow between sugar beet and weed beet. Field Crops Research 107(3): 245-256, 2008

Medicinal foodstuffs. XV. Sugar beet. (2): Structures of betavulgarosides V, VI, VII, VIII, IX, and X from the roots and leaves of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L., Chenopodiaceae). Chemical and Pharmaceutical Bulletin 46(11): 1758-1763, 1998

Influence of germinating seeds of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris) on emergence of larvae from cysts of the sugar-beet nematode (Heterodera schachtii). Plant Disease Reporter. 43: 10, 1103-1104, 1959

Responses of sugar beet beta vulgaris to deficit high frequency sprinkler irrigation ii. sugar beet development and partitioning to root growth. Agronomy Journal 78(1): 15-18, 1986

Double beet hybrids (sugar beet x white semisugar) x (sugar beet x cylindrical yellow beet) carried out in 1933-1958. Biul. Inst. Hodowl. Aklimatyz. Roslin, 2-3, 27-37, 1959

Studies on saccharases in the roots of sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.). X. Effect of nucleic acids on the solubility of cell wall-bound saccharase of sugar beet seedlings. Agricultural and Biological Chemistry 44(1): 69-72, 1980