Genetic pollution

Last updated

Genetic pollution is a term for uncontrolled [1] [2] gene flow into wild populations. It is defined as "the dispersal of contaminated altered genes from genetically engineered organisms to natural organisms, esp. by cross-pollination", [3] but has come to be used in some broader ways. It is related to the population genetics concept of gene flow, and genetic rescue, which is genetic material intentionally introduced to increase the fitness of a population. [4] It is called genetic pollution when it negatively impacts the fitness of a population, such as through outbreeding depression and the introduction of unwanted phenotypes which can lead to extinction.

Contents

Conservation biologists and conservationists have used the term to describe gene flow from domestic, feral, and non-native species into wild indigenous species, which they consider undesirable. They promote awareness of the effects of introduced invasive species that may "hybridize with native species, causing genetic pollution". In the fields of agriculture, agroforestry and animal husbandry, genetic pollution is used to describe gene flows between genetically engineered species and wild relatives. The use of the word "pollution" is meant to convey the idea that mixing genetic information is bad for the environment, but because the mixing of genetic information can lead to a variety of outcomes, "pollution" may not always be the most accurate descriptor.

Gene flow to wild population

Some conservation biologists and conservationists have used genetic pollution for a number of years as a term to describe gene flow from a non-native, invasive subspecies, domestic, or genetically-engineered population to a wild indigenous population. [1] [5] [6]

Importance

The introduction of genetic material into the gene pool of a population by human intervention can have both positive and negative effects on populations. When genetic material is intentionally introduced to increase the fitness of a population, this is called genetic rescue. When genetic material is unintentionally introduced to a population, this is called genetic pollution and can negatively affect the fitness of a population (primarily through outbreeding depression), introduce other unwanted phenotypes, or theoretically lead to extinction.

Introduced species

An introduced species is one that is not native to a given population that is either intentionally or accidentally brought into a given ecosystem. Effects of introduction are highly variable, but if an introduced species has a major negative impact on its new environment, it can be considered an invasive species. One such example is the introduction of the Asian Longhorned beetle in North America, which was first detected in 1996 in Brooklyn, New York. It is believed that these beetles were introduced through cargo at trade ports. The beetles are highly damaging to the environment, and are estimated to cause risk to 35% of urban trees, excluding natural forests. [7] These beetles cause severe damage to the wood of trees by larval funneling. Their presence in the ecosystem destabilizes community structure, having a negative influence on many species in the system.

Introduced species are not always disruptive to an environment, however. Tomás Carlo and Jason Gleditch of Penn State University found that the number of "invasive" honeysuckle plants in the area correlated with the number and diversity of the birds in the Happy Valley Region of Pennsylvania, suggesting introduced honeysuckle plants and birds formed a mutually beneficial relationship. [8] Presence of introduced honeysuckle was associated with higher diversity of the bird populations in that area, demonstrating that introduced species are not always detrimental to a given environment and it is completely context dependent.

Invasive species

Conservation biologists and conservationists have, for a number of years, used the term to describe gene flow from domestic, feral, and non-native species into wild indigenous species, which they consider undesirable. [1] [5] [6] For example, TRAFFIC is the international wildlife trade monitoring network that works to limit trade in wild plants and animals so that it is not a threat to conservationist goals. They promote awareness of the effects of introduced invasive species that may "hybridize with native species, causing genetic pollution". [9] Furthermore, the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, the statutory adviser to the UK government, has stated that invasive species "will alter the genetic pool (a process called genetic pollution), which is an irreversible change." [10]

Invasive species can invade both large and small native populations and have a profound effect. Upon invasion, invasive species interbreed with native species to form sterile or more evolutionarily fit hybrids that can outcompete the native populations. Invasive species can cause extinctions of small populations on islands that are particularly vulnerable due to their smaller amounts of genetic diversity. In these populations, local adaptations can be disrupted by the introduction of new genes that may not be as suitable for the small island environments. For example, the Cercocarpus traskiae of the Catalina Island off the coast of California has faced near extinction with only a single population remaining due to the hybridization of its offspring with Cercocarpus betuloides. [11]

Domestic populations

Increased contact between wild and domesticated populations of organisms can lead to reproductive interactions that are detrimental to the wild population's ability to survive. A wild population is one that lives in natural areas and is not regularly looked after by humans. This contrasts with domesticated populations that live in human controlled areas and are regularly, and historically, in contact with humans. Genes from domesticated populations are added to wild populations as a result of reproduction. In many crop populations this can be the result of pollen traveling from farmed crops to neighboring wild plants of the same species. For farmed animals, this reproduction may happen as the result of escaped or released animals.

A popular example of this phenomenon is the gene flow between wolves and domesticated dogs. The New York Times cites, from the words of biologist Luigi Boitani, "Although wolves and dogs have always lived in close contact in Italy and have presumably mated in the past, the newly worrisome element, in Dr. Boitani's opinion, is the increasing disparity in numbers, which suggests that interbreeding will become fairly common. As a result, 'genetic pollution of the wolf gene pool might reach irreversible levels', he warned. 'By hybridization, dogs can easily absorb the wolf genes and destroy the wolf, as it is,' he said. The wolf might survive as a more doglike animal, better adapted to living close to people, he said, but it would not be 'what we today call a wolf.'" [1]

Aquaculture

Aquaculture is the practice of farming aquatic animals or plants for the purpose of consumption. This practice is becoming increasingly common for the production of salmon. This is specifically termed aquaculture of salmonoids. One of the dangers of this practice is the possibility of domesticated salmon breaking free from their containment. The occurrence of escaping incidents is becoming increasingly common as aquaculture gains popularity. [12] [13] [14] Farming structures may be ineffective at holding the vast number of fast growing animals they house. [15] Natural disasters, high tides, and other environmental occurrences can also trigger aquatic animal escapes. [16] [17] The reason these escapes are considered dangers is the impact they pose for the wild population they reproduce with after escaping. In many instances the wild population experiences a decreased likelihood of survival after reproducing with domesticated populations of salmon. [18] [19]

The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife cites that "commonly expressed concerns surrounding escaped Atlantic salmon include competition with native salmon, predation, disease transfer, hybridization, and colonization." [20] A report done by that organization in 1999 did not find that escaped salmon posed a significant risk to wild populations. [21]

Crops

Crops refer to groups of plants grown for consumption. Despite domestication over many years, these plants are not so far removed from their wild relatives that they couldn't reproduce if brought together. Many crops are still grown in the areas they originated and gene flow between crops and wild relatives impacts the evolution of wild populations. [22] Farmers can avoid reproduction between the different populations by timing their planting of crops so that crops are not flowering when wild relatives would be. Domesticated crops have been changed through artificial selection and genetic engineering. The genetic make-ups of many crops is different from those of their wild relatives, [23] but the closer they grow to one another the more likely they are to share genes through pollen. Gene flow persists between crops and wild counterparts.

Genetically engineered organisms

Genetically engineered organisms are genetically modified in a laboratory, and therefore distinct from those that were bred through artificial selection. In the fields of agriculture, agroforestry and animal husbandry, genetic pollution is being used to describe gene flows between GE species and wild relatives. [24] An early use of the term "genetic pollution" in this later sense appears in a wide-ranging review of the potential ecological effects of genetic engineering in The Ecologist magazine in July 1989. It was also popularized by environmentalist Jeremy Rifkin in his 1998 book The Biotech Century. [25] While intentional crossbreeding between two genetically distinct varieties is described as hybridization with the subsequent introgression of genes, Rifkin, who had played a leading role in the ethical debate for over a decade before, used genetic pollution to describe what he considered to be problems that might occur due to the unintentional process of (modernly) genetically modified organisms (GMOs) dispersing their genes into the natural environment by breeding with wild plants or animals. [24] [26] [27]

Concerns about negative consequences from gene flow between genetically engineered organisms and wild populations are valid. Most corn and soybean crops grown in the midwestern USA are genetically modified. There are corn and soybean varieties that are resistant to herbicides like glyphosate [28] and corn that produces neonicotinoid pesticide within all of its tissues. [29] These genetic modifications are meant to increase yields of crops but there is little evidence that yields actually increase. [29] While scientists are concerned genetically engineered organisms can have negative effects on surrounding plant and animal communities, the risk of gene flow between genetically engineered organisms and wild populations is yet another concern. Many farmed crops may be weed resistant and reproduce with wild relatives. [30] More research is necessary to understand how much gene flow between genetically engineered crops and wild populations occurs, and the impacts of genetic mixing.

Mutated organisms

Mutations within organisms can be executed through the process of exposing the organism to chemicals or radiation in order to generate mutations. This has been done in plants in order to create mutants that have a desired trait. These mutants can then be bred with other mutants or individuals that are not mutated in order to maintain the mutant trait. However, similar to the risks associated with introducing individuals to a certain environment, the variation created by mutated individuals could have a negative impact on native populations as well.

Preventive measures

Since 2005 there has existed a GM Contamination Register, launched for GeneWatch UK and Greenpeace International that records all incidents of intentional or accidental [31] [32] release of organisms genetically modified using modern techniques. [33]

Genetic use restriction technologies (GURTs) were developed for the purpose of property protection, but could be beneficial in preventing the dispersal of transgenes. GeneSafe technologies introduced a method that became known as "Terminator." This method is based on seeds that produce sterile plants. This would prevent movement of transgenes into wild populations as hybridization would not be possible. [34] However, this technology has never been deployed as it disproportionately negatively affects farmers in developing countries, who save seeds to use each year (whereas in developed countries, farmers generally buy seeds from seed production companies). [34]

Physical containment has also been utilized to prevent the escape of transgenes. Physical containment includes barriers such as filters in labs, screens in greenhouses, and isolation distances in the field. Isolation distances have not always been successful, such as transgene escape from an isolated field into the wild in herbicide-resistant bentgrass Agrostis stolonifera . [35]

Another suggested method that applies specifically to protection traits (e.g. pathogen resistance) is mitigation. Mitigation involves linking the positive trait (beneficial to fitness) to a trait that is negative (harmful to fitness) to wild but not domesticated individuals. [35] In this case, if the protection trait was introduced to a weed, the negative trait would also be introduced in order to decrease overall fitness of the weed and decrease possibility of the individual’s reproduction and thus propagation of the transgene.

Risks

Not all genetically engineered organisms cause genetic pollution. Genetic engineering has a variety of uses and is specifically defined as a direct manipulation of the genome of an organism. Genetic pollution can occur in response to the introduction of a species that is not native to a particular environment, and genetically engineered organisms are examples of individuals that could cause genetic pollution following introduction. Due to these risks, studies have been done in order to assess the risks of genetic pollution associated with organisms that have been genetically engineered:

  1. Genetic In a 10-year study of four different crops, none of the genetically engineered plants were found to be more invasive or more persistent than their conventional counterparts. [36] An often cited claimed example of genetic pollution is the reputed discovery of transgenes from GE maize in landraces of maize in Oaxaca, Mexico. The report from Quist and Chapela, [37] has since been discredited on methodological grounds. [38] The scientific journal that originally published the study concluded that "the evidence available is not sufficient to justify the publication of the original paper." [39] More recent attempts to replicate the original studies have concluded that genetically modified corn is absent from southern Mexico in 2003 and 2004. [40]
  2. A 2009 study verified the original findings of the controversial 2001 study, by finding transgenes in about 1% of 2000 samples of wild maize in Oaxaca, Mexico, despite Nature retracting the 2001 study and a second study failing to back up the findings of the initial study. The study found that the transgenes are common in some fields, but non-existent in others, hence explaining why a previous study failed to find them. Furthermore, not every laboratory method managed to find the transgenes. [41]
  3. A 2004 study performed near an Oregon field trial for a genetically modified variety of creeping bentgrass ( Agrostis stolonifera ) revealed that the transgene and its associate trait (resistance to the glyphosate herbicide) could be transmitted by wind pollination to resident plants of different Agrostis species, up to 14 kilometres (8.7 mi) from the test field. [42] In 2007, the Scotts Company, producer of the genetically modified bentgrass, agreed to pay a civil penalty of $500,000 to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The USDA alleged that Scotts "failed to conduct a 2003 Oregon field trial in a manner which ensured that neither glyphosate-tolerant creeping bentgrass nor its offspring would persist in the environment". [43]

Not only are there risks in terms of genetic engineering, but there are risks that emerge from species hybridization. In Czechoslovakia, ibex were introduced from Turkey and Sinai to help promote the ibex population there, which caused hybrids that produced offspring too early, which caused the overall population to disappear completely. [4] The genes of each population of the ibex in Turkey and Sinai were locally adapted to their environments so when placed in a new environmental context did not flourish. Additionally, the environmental toll that may arise from the introduction of a new species may be so disruptive that the ecosystem is no longer able to sustain certain populations.

Controversy

Environmentalist perspectives

The use of the word "pollution" in the term genetic pollution has a deliberate negative connotation and is meant to convey the idea that mixing genetic information is bad for the environment. However, because the mixing of genetic information can lead to a variety of outcomes, "pollution" may not be the most accurate descriptor. Gene flow is undesirable according to some environmentalists and conservationists, including groups such as Greenpeace, TRAFFIC, and GeneWatch UK. [44] [31] [33] [45] [5] [9] [46]

"Invasive species have been a major cause of extinction throughout the world in the past few hundred years. Some of them prey on native wildlife, compete with it for resources, or spread disease, while others may hybridize with native species, causing "genetic pollution". In these ways, invasive species are as big a threat to the balance of nature as the direct overexploitation by humans of some species." [47]

It can also be considered undesirable if it leads to a loss of fitness in the wild populations. [48] The term can be associated with the gene flow from a mutation bred, synthetic organism or genetically engineered organism to a non GE organism, [24] by those who consider such gene flow detrimental. [44] These environmentalist groups stand in complete opposition to the development and production of genetically engineered organisms.

Governmental definition

From a governmental perspective, genetic pollution is defined as follows by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations:

"Uncontrolled spread of genetic information (frequently referring to transgenes) into the genomes of organisms in which such genes are not present in nature." [49]

Scientific perspectives

Use of the term 'genetic pollution' and similar phrases such as genetic deterioration, genetic swamping, genetic takeover, and genetic aggression, are being debated by scientists as many do not find it scientifically appropriate. Rhymer and Simberloff argue that these types of terms:

...imply either that hybrids are less fit than the parentals, which need not be the case, or that there is an inherent value in "pure" gene pools. [47]

They recommend that gene flow from invasive species be termed genetic mixing since:

"Mixing" need not be value-laden, and we use it here to denote mixing of gene pools whether or not associated with a decline in fitness. [47]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified organism</span> Organisms whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering methods

A genetically modified organism (GMO) is any organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques. The exact definition of a genetically modified organism and what constitutes genetic engineering varies, with the most common being an organism altered in a way that "does not occur naturally by mating and/or natural recombination". A wide variety of organisms have been genetically modified (GM), including animals, plants, and microorganisms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hybrid (biology)</span> Offspring of cross-species reproduction

In biology, a hybrid is the offspring resulting from combining the qualities of two organisms of different varieties, subspecies, species or genera through sexual reproduction. Generally, it means that each cell has genetic material from two different organisms, whereas an individual where some cells are derived from a different organism is called a chimera. Hybrids are not always intermediates between their parents such as in blending inheritance, but can show hybrid vigor, sometimes growing larger or taller than either parent. The concept of a hybrid is interpreted differently in animal and plant breeding, where there is interest in the individual parentage. In genetics, attention is focused on the numbers of chromosomes. In taxonomy, a key question is how closely related the parent species are.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Selective breeding</span> Breeding for desired characteristics

Selective breeding is the process by which humans use animal breeding and plant breeding to selectively develop particular phenotypic traits (characteristics) by choosing which typically animal or plant males and females will sexually reproduce and have offspring together. Domesticated animals are known as breeds, normally bred by a professional breeder, while domesticated plants are known as varieties, cultigens, cultivars, or breeds. Two purebred animals of different breeds produce a crossbreed, and crossbred plants are called hybrids. Flowers, vegetables and fruit-trees may be bred by amateurs and commercial or non-commercial professionals: major crops are usually the provenance of the professionals.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Feral</span> Wild-living but normally domestic animal or plant that has returned to the wild.

A feral animal or plant is one that lives in the wild but is descended from domesticated individuals. As with an introduced species, the introduction of feral animals or plants to non-native regions may disrupt ecosystems and has, in some cases, contributed to extinction of indigenous species. The removal of feral species is a major focus of island restoration.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gene flow</span> Transfer of genetic variation from one population to another

In population genetics, gene flow is the transfer of genetic material from one population to another. If the rate of gene flow is high enough, then two populations will have equivalent allele frequencies and therefore can be considered a single effective population. It has been shown that it takes only "one migrant per generation" to prevent populations from diverging due to drift. Populations can diverge due to selection even when they are exchanging alleles, if the selection pressure is strong enough. Gene flow is an important mechanism for transferring genetic diversity among populations. Migrants change the distribution of genetic diversity among populations, by modifying allele frequencies. High rates of gene flow can reduce the genetic differentiation between the two groups, increasing homogeneity. For this reason, gene flow has been thought to constrain speciation and prevent range expansion by combining the gene pools of the groups, thus preventing the development of differences in genetic variation that would have led to differentiation and adaptation. In some cases dispersal resulting in gene flow may also result in the addition of novel genetic variants under positive selection to the gene pool of a species or population

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Introduced species</span> Species introduced by human activity

An introduced species, alien species, exotic species, adventive species, immigrant species, foreign species, non-indigenous species, or non-native species is a species living outside its native distributional range, but which has arrived there by human activity, directly or indirectly, and either deliberately or accidentally. Non-native species can have various effects on the local ecosystem. Introduced species that become established and spread beyond the place of introduction are considered naturalized. The process of human-caused introduction is distinguished from biological colonization, in which species spread to new areas through "natural" (non-human) means such as storms and rafting. The Latin expression neobiota captures the characteristic that these species are new biota to their environment in terms of established biological network relationships. Neobiota can further be divided into neozoa and neophyta (plants).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Domestication of vertebrates</span>

The domestication of vertebrates is the mutual relationship between vertebrate animals including birds and mammals, and the humans who have influence on their care and reproduction.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetic use restriction technology</span> Methods for controlling the use of GMOs

Genetic use restriction technology (GURT), also known as terminator technology or suicide seeds, is designed to restrict access to "genetic materials and their associated phenotypic traits." The technology works by activating specific genes using a controlled stimulus in order to cause second generation seeds to be either infertile or to not have one or more of the desired traits of the first generation plant. GURTs can be used by agricultural firms to enhance protection of their innovations in genetically modified organisms by making it impossible for farmers to reproduce the desired traits on their own. Another possible use is to prevent the escape of genes from genetically modified organisms into the surrounding environment.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Introgression</span> Transfer of genetic material from one species to another

Introgression, also known as introgressive hybridization, in genetics is the transfer of genetic material from one species into the gene pool of another by the repeated backcrossing of an interspecific hybrid with one of its parent species. Introgression is a long-term process, even when artificial; it may take many hybrid generations before significant backcrossing occurs. This process is distinct from most forms of gene flow in that it occurs between two populations of different species, rather than two populations of the same species.

A transgene is a gene that has been transferred naturally, or by any of a number of genetic engineering techniques, from one organism to another. The introduction of a transgene, in a process known as transgenesis, has the potential to change the phenotype of an organism. Transgene describes a segment of DNA containing a gene sequence that has been isolated from one organism and is introduced into a different organism. This non-native segment of DNA may either retain the ability to produce RNA or protein in the transgenic organism or alter the normal function of the transgenic organism's genetic code. In general, the DNA is incorporated into the organism's germ line. For example, in higher vertebrates this can be accomplished by injecting the foreign DNA into the nucleus of a fertilized ovum. This technique is routinely used to introduce human disease genes or other genes of interest into strains of laboratory mice to study the function or pathology involved with that particular gene.

Genetic erosion is a process where the limited gene pool of an endangered species diminishes even more when reproductive individuals die off before reproducing with others in their endangered low population. The term is sometimes used in a narrow sense, such as when describing the loss of particular alleles or genes, as well as being used more broadly, as when referring to the loss of a phenotype or whole species.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Plant genetics</span> Study of genes and heredity in plants

Plant genetics is the study of genes, genetic variation, and heredity specifically in plants. It is generally considered a field of biology and botany, but intersects frequently with many other life sciences and is strongly linked with the study of information systems. Plant genetics is similar in many ways to animal genetics but differs in a few key areas.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hybrid swarm</span> Population of hybrids beyond first hybrid generation

A hybrid swarm is a population of hybrids that has survived beyond the initial hybrid generation, with interbreeding between hybrid individuals and backcrossing with its parent types. Such population are highly variable, with the genetic and phenotypic characteristics of individuals ranging widely between the two parent types. Hybrid swarms thus blur the boundary between the parent taxa. Precise definitions of which populations can be classified as hybrid swarms vary, with some specifying simply that all members of a population should be hybrids, while others differ in whether all members should have the same or different levels of hybridization.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified fish</span>

Genetically modified fish are organisms from the taxonomic clade which includes the classes Agnatha, Chondrichthyes and Osteichthyes whose genetic material (DNA) has been altered using genetic engineering techniques. In most cases, the aim is to introduce a new trait to the fish which does not occur naturally in the species, i.e. transgenesis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of genetic engineering</span>

Genetic engineering is the science of manipulating genetic material of an organism. The concept of genetic engineering was first proposed by Nikolay Timofeev-Ressovsky in 1934. The first artificial genetic modification accomplished using biotechnology was transgenesis, the process of transferring genes from one organism to another, first accomplished by Herbert Boyer and Stanley Cohen in 1973. It was the result of a series of advancements in techniques that allowed the direct modification of the genome. Important advances included the discovery of restriction enzymes and DNA ligases, the ability to design plasmids and technologies like polymerase chain reaction and sequencing. Transformation of the DNA into a host organism was accomplished with the invention of biolistics, Agrobacterium-mediated recombination and microinjection. The first genetically modified animal was a mouse created in 1974 by Rudolf Jaenisch. In 1976, the technology was commercialised, with the advent of genetically modified bacteria that produced somatostatin, followed by insulin in 1978. In 1983, an antibiotic resistant gene was inserted into tobacco, leading to the first genetically engineered plant. Advances followed that allowed scientists to manipulate and add genes to a variety of different organisms and induce a range of different effects. Plants were first commercialized with virus resistant tobacco released in China in 1992. The first genetically modified food was the Flavr Savr tomato marketed in 1994. By 2010, 29 countries had planted commercialized biotech crops. In 2000 a paper published in Science introduced golden rice, the first food developed with increased nutrient value.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genetically modified tree</span> Tree whose DNA has been modified using genetic engineering techniques

A genetically modified tree is a tree whose DNA has been modified using genetic engineering techniques. In most cases the aim is to introduce a novel trait to the plant which does not occur naturally within the species. Examples include resistance to certain pests, diseases, environmental conditions, and herbicide tolerance, or the alteration of lignin levels in order to reduce pulping costs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gene drive</span> Way to propagate genes throughout a population

A gene drive is a natural process and technology of genetic engineering that propagates a particular suite of genes throughout a population by altering the probability that a specific allele will be transmitted to offspring. Gene drives can arise through a variety of mechanisms. They have been proposed to provide an effective means of genetically modifying specific populations and entire species.

Local adaptation is a mechanism in evolutionary biology whereby a population of organisms evolves to be more well-suited to its local environment than other members of the same species that live elsewhere. Local adaptation requires that different populations of the same species experience different natural selection. For example, if a species lives across a wide range of temperatures, populations from warm areas may have better heat tolerance than populations of the same species that live in the cold part of its geographic range.

Genetic rescue is seen as a mitigation strategy designed to restore genetic diversity and reduce extinction risks in small, isolated and frequently inbred populations. It is largely implemented through translocation, a type of demographic rescue and technical migration that adds individuals to a population to prevent its potential extinction. This demographic rescue may be similar to genetic rescue, as each increase population size and/or fitness. This overlap in meaning has led some researchers to consider a more detailed definition for each type of rescue that details 'assessment and documentation of pre- and post-translocation genetic ancestry'. Not every example of genetic rescue is clearly successful and the current definition of genetic rescue does not mandate that the process result in a 'successful' outcome. Despite an ambiguous definition, genetic rescue is viewed positively, with many perceived successes.

Invasion genetics is the area of study within biology that examines evolutionary processes in the context of biological invasions. Invasion genetics considers how genetic and demographic factors affect the success of a species introduced outside of its native range, and how the mechanisms of evolution, such as natural selection, mutation, and genetic drift, operate in these populations. Researchers exploring these questions draw upon theory and approaches from a range of biological disciplines, including population genetics, evolutionary ecology, population biology, and phylogeography.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 Boffey PM (December 13, 1983). "Italy's Wild Dogs Winning Darwinian Battle". The New York Times . Although wolves and dogs have always lived in close contact in Italy and have presumably mated in the past, the newly worrisome element, in Dr. Boitani's opinion, is the increasing disparity in numbers, which suggests that interbreeding will become fairly common. As a result, genetic pollution of the wolf gene pool might reach irreversible levels, he warned. By hybridization, dogs can easily absorb the wolf genes and destroy the wolf, as it is, he said. The wolf might survive as a more doglike animal, better adapted to living close to people, he said, but it would not be what we today call a wolf.
  2. ↑ Ellstrand NC (2001). "When Transgenes Wander, Should We Worry?". Plant Physiol . 125 (4): 1543–1545. doi:10.1104/pp.125.4.1543. PMC   1539377 . PMID   11299333.
  3. ↑ "the definition of genetic pollution". Dictionary.com. Archived from the original on 2018-04-30. Retrieved 2018-04-30.
  4. 1 2 Waller, Donald M. (June 2015). "Genetic rescue: a safe or risky bet?". Molecular Ecology. 24 (11): 2595–2597. Bibcode:2015MolEc..24.2595W. doi: 10.1111/mec.13220 . ISSN   1365-294X. PMID   26013990. S2CID   11573077.
  5. 1 2 3 Butler D (18 August 1994). "Bid to protect wolves from genetic pollution". Nature. 370 (6490): 497. Bibcode:1994Natur.370..497B. doi: 10.1038/370497a0 .
  6. 1 2 Potts BM, Barbour RC, Hingston AB, Vaillancourt RE (2003). "Corrigendum to: TURNER REVIEW No. 6 Genetic pollution of native eucalypt gene pools—identifying the risks". Australian Journal of Botany. 51 (3): 333. doi:10.1071/BT02035_CO.
  7. ↑ Haack, Robert A., et al. Managing Invasive Populations of Asian Longhorned Beetle and Citrus Longhorned Beetle: A Worldwide Perspective. vol. 55, Annual Review of Entomology, 2010, Managing Invasive Populations of Asian Longhorned Beetle and Citrus Longhorned Beetle: A Worldwide Perspective.
  8. ↑ 2011, Invasive Plants Can Create Positive Ecological Change.
  9. 1 2 "When is wildlife trade a problem?". TRAFFIC.org, the wildlife trade monitoring network, a joint programme of WWF and IUCN. The World Conservation Union. Archived from the original on 24 December 2007.
  10. ↑ Effects of the introduction of invasive/non-native species - Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC), a statutory adviser to Government on UK and international nature conservation. Accessed on November 25, 2007. : "Occasionally non-native species can reproduce with native species and produce hybrids, which will alter the genetic pool (a process called genetic pollution), which is an irreversible change."
  11. ↑ Levin DA, Francisco-Ortega J, Jansen RK (1996-02-01). "Hybridization and the Extinction of Rare Plant Species". Conservation Biology . 10 (1): 10–16. Bibcode:1996ConBi..10...10L. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10010010.x. ISSN   1523-1739.
  12. ↑ Anderson R (3 September 2017). "More than 160,000 non-native Atlantic salmon escaped into Washington waters in fish farm accident". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved 2018-04-30.
  13. ↑ "'Environmental Nightmare' After Thousands Of Atlantic Salmon Escape Fish Farm". NPR.org. Retrieved 2018-04-30.
  14. ↑ Scotti A. "Thousands of salmon escape from fish farm, and no one knows what will happen next". nydailynews.com. Retrieved 2018-04-30.
  15. ↑ "Escapes: Net-pens are poor containment structures and escaped farmed salmon can compete with wild salmon for food and spawning habitat". Living Oceans. 2013-03-12. Retrieved 2018-04-30.
  16. ↑ Montanari S. "How Did The Eclipse Let Thousands Of Farmed Salmon Escape?". Forbes. Retrieved 2018-04-30.
  17. ↑ "Spill of farmed Atlantic salmon near San Juan Islands much bigger than first estimates". The Seattle Times. 2017-08-24. Retrieved 2018-04-30.
  18. ↑ Braun, Ashley. "Farmed and Dangerous? Pacific Salmon Confront Rogue Atlantic Cousins". Scientific American. Retrieved 2018-05-01.
  19. ↑ video, tronc. "Farmed salmon escape into Washington state waters". chicagotribune.com. Retrieved 2018-05-01.
  20. ↑ "Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) - Aquatic Invasive Species | Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife". wdfw.wa.gov. Retrieved 2018-05-01.
  21. ↑ Appleby, Kevin H. Amos and Andrew. "Atlantic Salmon in Washington State: A Fish Management Perspective - WDFW Publications | Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife". wdfw.wa.gov. Retrieved 2018-05-01.
  22. ↑ Ellstrand, Norman C.; Prentice, Honor C.; Hancock, James F. (1999). "Gene Flow and Introgression from Domesticated Plants into Their Wild Relatives". Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 30 (1): 539–563. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.30.1.539.
  23. ↑ Carroll, Sean B. (2010-05-24). "Tracking the Ancestry of Corn Back 9,000 Years". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331 . Retrieved 2018-05-01.
  24. 1 2 3 "Gene flow from GM to non-GM populations in the crop, forestry, animal and fishery sectors". Background document to Conference 7: May 31 - July 6, 2002; Electronic Forum on Biotechnology in Food and Agriculture. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO).
  25. ↑ Rifkin J (1998). The Biotech Century: Harnessing the Gene and Remaking the World . J P Tarcher. ISBN   978-0-87477-909-7.
  26. ↑ Quinion M. "Genetic Pollution". World Wide Words.
  27. ↑ Otchet A (1998). "Jeremy Rifkin: fears of a brave new world". an interview hosted by The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO).
  28. ↑ Waltz, Emily (June 2010). "Glyphosate resistance threatens Roundup hegemony". Nature Biotechnology. 28 (6): 537–538. doi:10.1038/nbt0610-537. ISSN   1087-0156. PMID   20531318.
  29. 1 2 Krupke, C. H.; Holland, J. D.; Long, E. Y.; Eitzer, B. D. (2017-05-22). "Planting of neonicotinoid-treated maize poses risks for honey bees and other non-target organisms over a wide area without consistent crop yield benefit". Journal of Applied Ecology. 54 (5): 1449–1458. Bibcode:2017JApEc..54.1449K. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12924 . ISSN   0021-8901.
  30. ↑ Brown, Paul (2005-07-25). "GM crops created superweed, say scientists". the Guardian. Retrieved 2018-05-01.
  31. 1 2 "Illegal Genetically Engineered Corn from Monsanto Detected in Argentina". GM Contamination Register. Archived from the original on 2011-06-22. Retrieved 2010-07-08.
  32. ↑ "Brazil – Illegal Roundup Ready cotton grown on 16,000 hectares". GM Contamination Register. Archived from the original on 2017-02-12. Retrieved 2010-07-08.
  33. 1 2 "GM Contamination Register". Archived from the original on 2005-06-05. Retrieved 2010-07-06.
  34. 1 2 Sang, Yi; Millwood, Reginald J.; Neal Stewart Jr, C. (2013-06-04). "Gene use restriction technologies for transgenic plant bioconfinement". Plant Biotechnology Journal. 11 (6): 649–658. doi: 10.1111/pbi.12084 . ISSN   1467-7644. PMID   23730743.
  35. 1 2 Gressel, Jonathan (2014-08-15). "Dealing with transgene flow of crop protection traits from crops to their relatives". Pest Management Science. 71 (5): 658–667. doi:10.1002/ps.3850. ISSN   1526-498X. PMID   24977384.
  36. ↑ Crawley MJ, Brown SL, Hails RS, Kohn D, Rees M (8 February 2001). "Biotechnology: Transgenic crops in natural habitats". Nature. 409 (6821): 682–683. doi:10.1038/35055621. PMID   11217848. S2CID   4422713.
  37. ↑ Quist D, Chapela IH (November 2001). "Transgenic DNA introgressed into traditional maize landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico". Nature. 414 (6863): 541–3. Bibcode:2001Natur.414..541Q. doi:10.1038/35107068. PMID   11734853. S2CID   4403182.
  38. ↑ Christou P (2002). "No Credible Scientific Evidence is Presented to Support Claims that Transgenic DNA was Introgressed into Traditional Maize Landraces in Oaxaca, Mexico". Transgenic Research. 11 (1): 3–5. doi:10.1023/A:1013903300469. PMID   11874106. S2CID   12294956.
  39. ↑ Metz M, Fütterer J (April 2002). "Biodiversity (Communications arising): suspect evidence of transgenic contamination". Nature. 416 (6881): 600–1, discussion 600, 602. Bibcode:2002Natur.416..600M. doi:10.1038/nature738. PMID   11935144. S2CID   4423495. Archived from the original on October 31, 2008.
  40. ↑ Ortiz-García S, Ezcurra E, Schoel B, Acevedo F, Soberón J, Snow AA (August 2005). "Absence of detectable transgenes in local landraces of maize in Oaxaca, Mexico (2003-2004)". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 102 (35): 12338–43. Bibcode:2005PNAS..10212338O. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0503356102 . PMC   1184035 . PMID   16093316.
  41. ↑ "'Alien' genes escape into wild corn". New Scientist. 18 February 2009.
  42. ↑ Watrud LS, Lee EH, Fairbrother A, Burdick C, Reichman JR, Bollman M, Storm M, King G, Van de Water PK (October 2004). "Evidence for landscape-level, pollen-mediated gene flow from genetically modified creeping bentgrass with CP4 EPSPS as a marker". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 101 (40): 14533–8. Bibcode:2004PNAS..10114533W. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0405154101 . PMC   521937 . PMID   15448206.
  43. ↑ "USDA Concludes Genetically Engineered Creeping Bentgrass Investigation".
  44. 1 2 GE agriculture and genetic pollution Archived 2010-04-11 at the Wayback Machine web article hosted by Greenpeace.org
  45. ↑ "Say no to genetic pollution". Greenpeace.
  46. ↑ Greenpeace. "Genetic Pollution a Multiplying Nightmare" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2018-05-01. Retrieved 2018-04-30.
  47. 1 2 3 Rhymer JM, Simberloff D (1996). "Extinction by Hybridization and Introgression". Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 27: 83–109. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.27.1.83.
  48. ↑ Milot E, Perrier C, Papillon L, Dodson JJ, Bernatchez L (April 2013). "Reduced fitness of Atlantic salmon released in the wild after one generation of captive breeding". Evolutionary Applications. 6 (3): 472–85. Bibcode:2013EvApp...6..472M. doi:10.1111/eva.12028. PMC   3673475 . PMID   23745139.
  49. ↑ Zaid A, Hughes HG, Porceddu E, Nicholas F (26 October 2007). Glossary of Biotechnology for Food and Agriculture - A Revised and Augmented Edition of the Glossary of Biotechnology and Genetic Engineering. A FAO Research and Technology Paper. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. ISBN   978-92-5-104683-8. Archived from the original on 26 October 2007.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.