The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Do escaped transgenes persist in nature? The case of an herbicide resistance transgene in a weedy Brassica rapa population
Abstract
The existence of transgenic hybrids resulting from transgene escape from genetically modified (GM) crops to wild or weedy relatives is well documented but the fate of the transgene over time in recipient wild species populations is still relatively unknown. This is the first report of the persistence and apparent introgression, i.e. stable incorporation of genes from one differentiated gene pool into another, of an herbicide resistance transgene from Brassica napus into the gene pool of its weedy relative, Brassica rapa, monitored under natural commercial field conditions. Hybridization between glyphosate‐resistant [herbicide resistance (HR)]B. napus and B. rapa was first observed at two Québec sites, Ste Agathe and St Henri, in 2001. B. rapa populations at these two locations were monitored in 2002, 2003 and 2005 for the presence of hybrids and transgene persistence. Hybrid numbers decreased over the 3‐year period, from 85 out of ~200 plants surveyed in 2002 to only five out of 200 plants in 2005 (St Henri site). Most hybrids had the HR trait, reduced male fertility, intermediate genome structure, and presence of both species‐specific amplified fragment length polymorphism markers. Both F 1 and backcross hybrid generations were detected. One introgressed individual, i.e. with the HR trait and diploid ploidy level of B. rapa, was observed in 2005. The latter had reduced pollen viability but produced ~480 seeds. Forty‐eight of the 50 progeny grown from this plant were diploid with high pollen viability and 22 had the transgene (1:1 segregation). These observations confirm the persistence of the HR trait over time. Persistence occurred over a 6‐year period, in the absence of herbicide selection pressure (with the exception of possible exposure to glyphosate in 2002), and in spite of the fitness cost associated with hybridization.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The evolutionary origins of pesticide resistance
Hawkins, N. J., Bass, C., Dixon, A., & Neve, P. (2019) · Biological Reviews · doi:10.1111/brv.12440 · Cited by 836
Guidance on the environmental risk assessment of genetically modified plants
(GMO), E. P. O. G. M. O. (2010) · EFSA Journal · doi:10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1879 · Cited by 428
An overview of the last 10 years of genetically engineered crop safety research
Nicolia, A., Manzo, A., Veronesi, F., & Rosellini, D. (2014) · Critical Reviews in Biotechnology · doi:10.3109/07388551.2013.823595 · Cited by 413
Introgression of Crop Alleles into Wild or Weedy Populations
Ellstrand, N. C., Meirmans, P., Rong, J., Bartsch, D., Ghosh, A., de Jong, T. J., Haccou, P., Lu, B.-R., Snow, A. A., Neal Stewart, C., et al. (2013) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110512-135840 · Cited by 233
An overview of general features of risk assessments of genetically modified crops
Craig, W., Tepfer, M., Degrassi, G., & Ripandelli, D. (2008) · Euphytica · doi:10.1007/s10681-007-9643-8 · Cited by 172
Metadata
- Authors
- WARWICK, S. I., LÉGÈRE, A., SIMARD, M. ‐., & JAMES, T.
- Venue
- Molecular Ecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2007-10-29
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1387-1395
- ISSN
- 0962-1083 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-294X
- OpenAlex
- W2130839784
- Cited by
- 298
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 26.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Do escaped transgenes persist in nature? The case of an herbicide resistance transgene in a weedy Brassica rapa population. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2007.03567.x
- The paper
- WARWICK, S. I., LÉGÈRE, A., SIMARD, M. ‐., & JAMES, T. (2008). Do escaped transgenes persist in nature? The case of an herbicide resistance transgene in a weedy Brassica rapa population. Molecular Ecology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294x.2007.03567.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.