Cytoplasmic male sterility as a biological confinement tool for maize coexistence: optimization of pollinator spatial arrangement
Heidrun Bückmann, Gemma Capellades, Kateřina Hamouzová, Josef Holec, Josef Soukup, Joaquima Messeguer, Enric Melé, Anna Nadal, Xavier Piferrer Guillen, Maria Pla, Joan Serra, Katja Thiele, Joachim Schiemannhttps://doi.org/10.17221/761/2016-PSECitation:Bückmann H., Capellades G., Hamouzová K., Holec J., Soukup J., Messeguer J., Melé E., Nadal A., Piferrer Guillen X., Pla M., Serra J., Thiele K., Schiemann J. (2017): Cytoplasmic male sterility as a biological confinement tool for maize coexistence: optimization of pollinator spatial arrangement. Plant Soil Environ., 63: 145-151.
Cytoplasmic male sterility (CMS) allows efficient biological confinement of transgenes if pollen-mediated gene flow has to be reduced or eliminated. For introduction of CMS maize in agricultural practice, sufficient yields comparable with conventional systems should be achieved. The plus-cultivar-system in maize offers a possibility for biological confinement together with high and stable yields whereas pollinator amount and distribution within the CMS crop is crucial. The aim of this EU-funded study was to identify the best proportion (10, 15, and 20%) and spatial arrangement (inserted rows, mixed seeds) of the pollinator within the CMS maize cultivar under field conditions in the Czech Republic, in Germany and in Spain. In Germany and in the Czech Republic, a pollinator proportion of 10% produced significantly lower yield than the treatments with a pollinator proportion of 15% and 20%. Differences in yield between row and mix arrangements were not detected. No differences between the tested arrangements occurred in Spain. With respect to practical conditions, a pollinator proportion of 15% can be recommended for achieving a satisfactory yield. CMS maize cultivar released no or merely a small amount of pollen and self-pollinated plants developed no or only a small number of kernels indicating that currently recommended isolation distances between genetically modified (GM) and non-GM fields can be substantially shortened if the CMS confinement tool is used.Keywords:
genetically modified maize; outcrossing potential; spatial distributionReferences:
Bückmann H., Hüsken A., Schiemann J. (2013): Applicability of cytoplasmic male sterility (CMS) as a reliable biological confinement method for the cultivation of genetically modified maize in Germany. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology A, 3: 385–403.Budar F., Touzet P., De Paepe R. (2003): The nucleo-mitochondrial conflict in cytoplasmic male sterilities revisited. Genetica, 117: 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022381016145Chase C.D., Gabay-Laughnan S. (2004): Cytoplasmic male sterility and fertility restoration by nuclear genes. In: Daniell H., Chase C.D. (eds.): Molecular Biology and Biotechnology of Plant Organelles. Dordrecht, Springer Science and Business Media B.V.Chase Christine D. (2006): Genetically engineered cytoplasmic male sterility. Trends in Plant Science, 11, 7-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tplants.2005.11.003Duvick D.N. (1965): Cytoplasmic pollen sterility in corn. Advances in Genetics, 13: 1–56.Feil B., Stamp P. (2002): Pollen-mediated flow of transgenes in maize can already be controlled by cytoplasmic male sterility. AgBiotechNet, 4: 1–4.Feil B., Weingartner U., Stamp P. (2003): Controlling the release of pollen from genetically modified maize and increasing its grain yield by growing mixtures of male-sterile and male-fertile plants. Euphytica, 130: 163–165. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022843504598Gabay-Laughnan S., Zabala G., Laughnan J.R. (1995): S-type cytoplasmic male sterility in maize. In: Levings C.S., Vasil I.K. (eds): The Molecular Biology of Plant Mitochondria. Derdrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 395–432.Gabay Laughnan S. (1997): Late reversion events can mimic imprinting of restorer-of-fertility genes in CMS-S [S-type male-sterile cytoplasm] maize [Zea mays]. Maydica, 42: 163–172.Kiesselbach T.A. (1960): The significance of xenia effects on the kernel weight of corn. Bulletin of the Agricultural Experimental Station of Nebraska, 191: 1–30.Laser Kenneth D., Lersten Nels R. (1972): Anatomy and cytology of microsporogenesis in cytoplasmic male sterile angiosperms. The Botanical Review, 38, 425-454 https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02860010Munsch M., Camp K.-H., Stamp P., Weider C. (2008): Modern maize hybrids can improve grain yield as plus-hybrids by the combined effects of cytoplasmic male sterility and allo-pollination. Maydica, 53: 261–268.Munsch M. (2009): Yield potential of modern European Plus-Hybrids and relevance of genetic diversity for xenia in maize (Zea mays L.). [Ph.D. thesis] Zürich, Federal Institute of Technology.Munsch Magali A., Stamp Peter, Christov Nikolai K., Foueillassar Xavier M., Hüsken Alexandra, Camp Karl-Heinz, Weider Christophe (2010): Grain Yield Increase and Pollen Containment by Plus-Hybrids Could Improve Acceptance of Transgenic Maize. Crop Science, 50, 909- https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2009.03.0117Schenkelaars Piet, Wesseler Justus (2016): Farm-level GM Coexistence Policies in the EU: Context, Concepts and Developments. EuroChoices, 15, 5-11 https://doi.org/10.1111/1746-692X.12112Schnable P (): The molecular basis of cytoplasmic male sterility and fertility restoration. Trends in Plant Science, 3, 175-180 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1360-1385(98)01235-7Sofi P.A., Rather A.G., Wani S.A. (2007): Genetic and molecular basis of cytoplasmic male sterility in maize. Communications in Biometry and Crop Science, 2: 49–60.Stamp P., Chowchong S., Menzi M., Weingartner U., Kaeser O. (2000): Increase in the Yield of Cytoplasmic Male Sterile Maize Revisited. Crop Science, 40, 1586- https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2000.4061586xThomison P.R., Geyer A.B. (1999): Evaluation of TC Blends® used in high oil maize production. Plant Varieties and Seeds, 12: 99–112.Thomison Peter R., Geyer Allen B., Lotz Larry D., Siegrist Howard J., Dobbels Tammy L. (2002): TopCross High-Oil Corn Production. Agronomy Journal, 94, 290- https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2002.0290Venus Thomas J., Dillen Koen, Punt Maarten J., Wesseler Justus H. H. (2017): The Costs of Coexistence Measures for Genetically Modified Maize in Germany. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 68, 407-426 https://doi.org/10.1111/1477-9552.12178Weingartner Urs, Kaeser Olivier, Long Muhua, Stamp Peter (2002): Combining Cytoplasmic Male Sterility and Xenia Increases Grain Yield of Maize Hybrids. Crop Science, 42, 1848- https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2002.1848Weingartner Urs, Camp Karl-Heinz, Stamp Peter (2004): Impact of male sterility and xenia on grain quality traits of maize. European Journal of Agronomy, 21, 239-247 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eja.2003.08.006