Hostname: page-component-5db6c4db9b-s6gjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-03-25T23:48:39.171Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "useRatesEcommerce": false } hasContentIssue true

Seed-Mediated Gene Flow in Wheat: Seed Bank Longevity in Western Canada

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Ryan L. Nielson
Bayer CropScience Inc., Research and Development, 295 Henderson Dr., Regina, SK, Canada S4N 6C2
Marc A. McPherson
Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, 410 AgFor, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada T6G 2P5
John T. O'Donovan
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Lacombe Research Centre, 6000 C & E Trail, Lacombe, AB, Canada T4L 1W1
K. Neil Harker
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada Lacombe Research Centre, 6000 C & E Trail, Lacombe, AB, Canada T4L 1W1
Rong-Cai Yang
Alberta Agriculture and Food, 410 AgFor, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada T6G 2P5
Linda M. Hall*
Agricultural, Food and Nutritional Science, 410 AgFor, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada T6G 2P5
Corresponding author's E-mail:


Development of genetically modified (GM) wheat has raised concerns about the movement and persistence of transgenes in agroecosystems and the ability of growers to segregate GM from conventional wheat. Wheat as a crop has been studied extensively but the population biology of volunteer wheat is not well characterized. Artificial seed bank studies were conducted in western Canada to provide baseline data on volunteer wheat seed persistence. Seed from two cultivars of Canadian western red spring wheat, ‘AC Splendor’ and ‘AC Superb’, were buried in mesh bags at three depths (0, 2, and 15 cm) in two different environments in the fall of 2003 and 2004. In addition, in 2004, ‘AC Superb’ seed were separated into small and large seed lots and buried with a medium seed lot to examine the influence of seed size on seed bank persistence. Seeds were withdrawn at intervals to assess seed germination and viability and regression analysis conducted on the viable seed at each sample period, after burial. Seed viability was variable within years and sites, and declined exponentially over time. In the spring, approximately 6 mo after initiation, viable seed ranged from 1 to 43%. With the exception of a single site and year, seeds on the soil surface persisted significantly longer than buried seeds and increasing burial depth accelerated loss of viability. The maximum viability of wheat seeds at 0, 2, and 15 cm depth in the spring following planting was 43, 7, and 2%, respectively. The extinction of viability for 99% (EX99) of the seed was estimated from regression analysis. The EX99 values of seeds buried at 0, 2, and 15 cm ranged from 493 to 1,114, 319 to 654, and 175 to 352 d after planting (DAP), respectively, with the exception of one site in 2003 where burial depths were not different and all had an EX99 value of 456 DAP. Seed size and cultivar did not significantly affect persistence, with the exception of one site in 2003 where the difference in EX99 values was 20 DAP. The rapid loss of seed viability limits temporal gene flow via volunteers in years following a wheat crop. Results provide data on spring wheat biology to aid in Canadian environmental biosafety assessments of GM wheat and will be incorporated into a mechanistic model to predict wheat gene flow on the Canadian prairies.

Special Topics
Weed Science , Volume 57 , Issue 1 , February 2009 , pp. 124 - 132
Copyright © Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


Literature Cited

[AARD] Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development 2006. Wheat Crop Establishment: Seeding Rate and Depth and Row Spacing. Accessed: April 17, 2008.Google Scholar
[AARD] Alberta Agriculture and Rural Development 2008. Crop Information Portal: Superb Hard Red Spring Wheat. Accessed: April 17, 2008.Google Scholar
Anderson, R. L. and Soper, G. 2003. Review of volunteer wheat (Triticum aestivum) seedling emergence and seed longevity in soil. Weed Technol. 17:620626.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batlla, D. and Benech-Arnold, R. L. 2007. Predicting changes in dormancy level in weed seed soil banks: implications for weed management. Crop Protect. 26:189197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Batlla, D., Kruk, B. C., and Benech-Arnold, R. L. 2004. Modeling changes in dormancy in weed soil banks: implications for the prediction of weed emergence. Pages 245264. in Benech-Arnold, R. L. and Sánchez, R. A. Handbook of Seed Physiology: Applications to Agriculture. New York Haworth.Google Scholar
Beckie, H. J. and Hall, L. M. 2008. Simple to complex: modeling crop pollen-mediated gene flow. Plant Sci. 175:615628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckie, H. J. and Owen, M. D. K. 2007. Herbicide-resistant crops as weeds in North America. CAB Rev. 044:122.Google Scholar
Benech-Arnold, R. L., Sanchez, R. A., Forcella, F., Kruk, B. C., and Ghersa, C. M. 2000. Environmental control of dormancy in weed seed banks in soil. Field Crops Res. 67:105122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benvenuti, S. 2007. Natural weed seed burial: effect of soil texture, rain and seed characteristics. Seed Sci. Res. 17:211219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benvenuti, S., Macchia, M., and Miele, S. 2001. Quantitative analysis of emergence of seedlings from buried weed seeds with increasing soil depth. Weed Sci. 49:528535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berwald, D., Carter, C. A., and Gruère, G. P. 2006. Rejecting new technology: the case of genetically modified wheat. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 88:432447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blackshaw, R. E. and Harker, K. N. 2002. Selective weed control with glyphosate in glyphosate-resistant spring wheat (Triticum aestivum). Weed Technol. 16:885892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnside, O. C., Wilson, R. G., Weisberg, S., and Hubbard, K. G. 1996. Seed longevity of 41 weed species buried 17 years in eastern and western Nebraska. Weed Sci. 44:7486.Google Scholar
Carter, C. A. 2004. The Market Effect of a Food Scare: The Case of Genetically Modified StarLink Corn. Davis, CA Giannini Foundation for Agricultural Economics 04-012.Google Scholar
Cavers, P. B. and Benoit, D. L. 1989. Seed banks in arable land. Pages 309328. in Leck, M. A., Parker, V. T., and Simpson, R. L. Ecology of Soil Seed Bank. 1st ed. San Diego, CA Academic.Google Scholar
Clarke, J. M. 1985. Harvesting losses of spring wheat in windrower combine and direct combine harvesting systems. Agron. J. 77:1317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conn, J. S., Beattie, K. L., and Blanchard, A. 2006. Seed viability and dormancy of 17 weed species after 19.7 years of burial in Alaska. Weed Sci. 54:464470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cromar, H. E., Murphy, S. D., and Swanton, C. J. 1999. Influence of tillage and crop residue on post dispersal predation of weed seeds. Weed Sci. 47:184194.Google Scholar
De Corby, K. A., Van Acker, R. C., Brûlé-Babel, A. L., and Friesen, L. F. 2007. Emergence timing and recruitment of volunteer spring wheat. Weed Sci. 55:6069.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demeke, T., Perry, D. J., and Scowcroft, W. R. 2006. Adventitious presence of GMOs: scientific overview for Canadian grains. Can. J. Plant Sci. 86:123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritz, S. and Lukaszewski, A. 1989. Pollen longevity in wheat, rye and triticale. Plant Breed. 102:3134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gulden, R. H., Shirtliffe, S. J., and Thomas, A. G. 2003a. Harvest losses of canola (Brassica napus) cause large seedbank inputs. Weed Sci. 51:8386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gulden, R. H., Shirtliffe, S. J., and Thomas, A. G. 2003b. Secondary seed dormancy prolongs persistence of volunteer canola in western Canada. Weed Sci. 51:904913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustafson, D. I., Horak, M. J., Rempel, C. B., Metz, S. G., Gigax, D. R., and Hucl, P. 2005. An empirical model for pollen-mediated gene flow in wheat. Crop Sci. 45:12861294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hanson, B., Mallory Smith, C., Shafii, B., Thill, D., and Zemetra, R. 2005. Pollen-mediated gene flow from blue aleurone wheat to other wheat cultivars. Crop Sci. 45:16101617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harker, K. N., Clayton, G. W., Blackshaw, R. E., et al. 2005a. Glyphosate-resistant wheat persistence in western Canadian cropping systems. Weed Sci. 53:846859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harker, K. N., Clayton, G. W., Blackshaw, R. E., et al. 2005b. Glyphosate-resistant spring wheat production system effects on weed communities. Weed Sci. 53:451464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harker, K. N., Clayton, G. W., Blackshaw, R. E., et al. 2006. Persistence of glyphosate-resistant canola in western Canadian cropping systems. Agron. J. 98:107119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harker, K. N., Thomas, A. G., Clayton, G. W., Blackshaw, R. E., O'Donovan, J. T., and Kirkland, K. J. 2002. Managing volunteer wheat. Pages 147150. in. Proceedings of the 2002 National Meeting. Saskatoon, SK Canadian Weed Science Society—Société canadienne de malherbologie.Google Scholar
Harrison, S. K., Regnier, E. E., Schmoll, J. T., and Harrison, J. M. 2007. Seed size and burial effects on giant ragweed (Ambrosia trifida) emergence and seed demise. Weed Sci. 55:1622.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hucl, P. 1996. Out-crossing rates for 10 Canadian spring wheat cultivars. Can. J. Plant Sci. 76:423427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacob, H., Minkey, D., Gallagher, R., and Borger, C. 2006. Variation in postdispersal weed seed predation in a crop field. Weed Sci. 54:148155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kershen, D. L. and McHughen, A. 2005. Adventitious presence: inadvertent commingling and coexistence among farming methods. CAST Commentary QTA. 2005-1:14.Google Scholar
Lafond, G. P. and Baker, R. J. 1986. Effects of genotype and seed size on speed of emergence and seedling vigor in nine spring wheat cultivars. Crop Sci. 26:341346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leon, R. G. and Owen, M. D. K. 2004. Artificial and natural seed banks differ in seedling emergence patterns. Weed Sci. 52:531537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
López-Granados, F. and Lutman, P. J. W. 1998. Effect of environmental conditions on the dormancy and germination of volunteer oilseed rape seed (Brassica napus). Weed Sci. 46:419423.Google Scholar
Masin, R., Zuin, M. C., Otto, S., and Zanin, G. 2006. Seed longevity and dormancy of four summer annual grass weeds in turf. Weed Res. 46:362370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matus-Cádiz, M. A., Hucl, P., and Dupuis, B. 2007. Pollen-mediated gene flow in wheat at the commercial scale. Crop Sci. 47:573581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mauchline, A., Watson, S., Brown, V., and Froud Williams, R. 2005. Post-dispersal seed predation of non-target weeds in arable crops. Weed Res. 45:157164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McPherson, M. A., Yang, R., Good, A. G., Nielson, R. L., and Hall, L. M. 2008. Potential for seed-mediated gene flow in agroecosystems from transgenic safflower (Carthamus tinctorius L.) intended for plant molecular farming. Transgenic Res. In press.Google ScholarPubMed
O'Rourke, M., Heggenstaller, A., Liebman, M., and Rice, M. 2006. Post-dispersal weed seed predation by invertebrates in conventional and low-external-input crop rotation systems. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 116:280288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pickett, A. A. 1989. A review of seed dormancy in self-sown wheat and barley. Plant Var. Seeds. 2:131146.Google Scholar
Porter, R. H., Durrell, M., and Romm, H. J. 1947. The use of 2, 3, 5-triphenyl-tetrazoliumchloride as a measure of seed germinability. Plant Physiol. 22:149159.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
SAS Institute Inc 2007. SAS/STAT User's Guide: Statistics. Version 9.1. Cary, NC SAS Institute.Google Scholar
Schmitz, T. G., Schmitz, A., and Moss, C. B. 2005. The economic impact of StarLink corn. Agribusiness. 21:391407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schweizer, E. E. and Zimdahl, R. L. 1984. Weed seed decline in irrigated soil after six years of continuous corn (Zea mays) and herbicides. Weed Sci. 32:7683.Google Scholar
Schweizer, E. E., Zimdahl, R. L., and Zorner, P. S. 1984. Effect of depth and duration of seed burial on kochia (Kochia scoparia). Weed Sci. 32:602607.Google Scholar
Simpson, R. L., Leck, M. A., and Parker, V. T. 1989. Seed banks: general concepts and methodological issues. Pages 38. in Leck, M. A., Parker, V. T., and Simpson, R. L. Ecology of Soil Seed Banks. San Diego, CA Academic.Google Scholar
Statistics Canada 2007. Table 001–0015: Exports of Grains, by Final Destination, Monthly (Tonnes) (Table), CANSIM (Database). Accessed: Feb 1, 2008.Google Scholar
Thomas, A. G., Derksen, D. A., Blackshaw, R. E., Van Acker, R. C., Legere, A., Watson, P. R., and Turnbull, G. C. 2004. A multistudy approach to understanding weed population shifts in medium- to long-term tillage systems. Weed Sci. 52:874880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, K. and Grime, J. P. 1983. A comparative study of germination responses to diurnally fluctuating temperatures. J. Appl. Ecol. 20:141156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Acker, R. C. and Entz, M. 2001. Agronomic benefits and risks of using Roundup Ready wheat in western Canada. Accessed: May 14, 2008.Google Scholar
Van Mourik, T. A., Stomph, T. J., and Murdoch, A. J. 2005. Why high seed densities within buried mesh bags may overestimate depletion rates of soil seed banks. J. Appl. Ecol. 42:299305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westerman, P. R., Liebman, M., Heggenstaller, A. H., and Forcella, F. 2006. Integrating measurements of seed availability and removal to estimate weed seed losses due to predation. Weed Sci. 54:566574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, W. W., Janzen, E. L., and Dahl, B. L. 2003. Issues in development and adoption of genetically modified (GM) wheats. AgBioForum. 6:101112.Google Scholar