Herbicide resistance might provide advantages to plants in the wild.
Credit Xiao Yang
One of the most common methods employed to make crops resistant to herbicides was shown to offer advantages over the weedy varieties of rice. This suggests that such genetic modifications could also have the potential to have an impact on wild animals.
There are https://www.ponparemall.com/word/除草剤 ラウンドアップ 業務用/ of plants are genetically modified to be resistive to glyphosate. Roundup was the first herbicide that was marketed. This glyphosate resistance enables farmers to eliminate the majority of plants without causing damage to their crop.
Glyphosate blocks an enzyme called EPSP synthase, which is responsible for the production of specific amino acids and various other molecules. It also can hinder plant growth. https://www.jacom.or.jp/nouyaku/news/2019/10/191024-39457.php -modification method, employed for Roundup Ready crops by Monsanto (based in St Louis in Missouri) involves inserting genetic material in a plant to boost EPSP synthase production. ラウンドアップ are typically derived usually from bacteria that infect plants.
The plant is able to withstand the effects of glyphosate because of the addition of EPSP synthase. Biotechnology labs have also attempted to use plants’ genes to increase the EPSP synthase enzyme, in part to exploit an American loophole which permits the approval of regulatory authorities of transgenes that are not derived from bacterial pests.
Few studies have investigated the possibility that transgenes, such as glyphosate-resistant ones can — once introduced to weedy or wild plants via cross-pollination enhance the competition of plants in reproduction, survival and growth. “The common belief is that any transgene will confer disadvantage in the wild, in the absence of any selection pressure because the extra machinery would reduce the fitness,” says Norman Ellstrand, a plant geneticist at the University of California in Riverside.
Lu Baorong is an ecologist in Fudan University Shanghai. His study shows that resistance to glyphosate is a major fitness benefit, even if it’s not used.
In the study which was published this month in New Phytologist 1, Lu and his colleagues modified the genetics of the rice cultivar to overexpress its own EPSP synthase. They crossed the altered rice with a weedy cousin.
https://auctions.yahoo.co.jp/search/search?rkf=2&p=%E3%83%A9%E3%82%A6%E3%83%B3%E3%83%89%E3%82%A2%E3%83%83%E3%83%97&aucmaxprice=999999999&thumb=1&s1=score2&o1=a&isdd=1&ei=utf-8&fixed=3&nockie=1&isnext=1&ex_cat=2084006160,2084008038,2084034075&rewrite_ok_wand_re_search=1 permitted breeding offspring that were cross-bred with one another to create second-generation hybrids. These were genetically identical with the exception of the number and count of EPSP synthase gene. Likely, the ones with more copies expressed greater amounts of the enzyme and produced more of the amino acid tryptophan than their non-modified counterparts.
Researchers also discovered that the hybrids with transgenic genes had greater rates of photosynthesis, grew more shoots and flowers and produced 48-125percent more seeds than the non-transgenic hybridswith or without the chemical glyphosate.
ラウンドアップ believes that making rice that is weedy less competitive might make it more difficult for farmers who have their plots affected by pests.
Brian Ford-Lloyd is a UK plant geneticist. He states, “If the EPSP synthase gene becomes present in wild rice species their genetic diversity could be threatened which is really important because the genotype with transgene is superior to the natural species.” “This is an example of the highly plausible negative impacts of GM plantson our environment.”
The public has a perception that genetically engineered crops that have additional copies of microorganisms’ genes are safer than ones that only contain their own genes. Lu declares, “Our study shows this is not the case.”
According to some research this research suggests that any future regulation for genetically engineered crops should be reviewed. Ellstrand states “Some people think that the biosafety regulations should be eased.” Ellstrand says: The study showed that new products need to be evaluated carefully.