Abstract
Creeping bentgrass (Agrostis stolonifera L.) is a commercially important turfgrass used principally on golf courses. Weed control is one of the major problems encountered in golf course maintenance, largely because the major weed, Poa annua L., is another grass species with herbicide responses similar to creeping bentgrass. Development of creeping bentgrass cultivars expressing one of the herbicide resistance genes would provide an effective solution. The prospects of commercialization of transgenic cultivars of creeping bentgrass have raised questions about the potential for pollen-mediated gene flow to related Agrostis spp. In a field study we have measured the frequency of interspecific hybridization between transgenic creeping bentgrass and four related species, A canina L., A castellana Boiss. and Reut, A gigantea Roth, and A capillaris L. Interspecific transgenic hybrids were recovered between creeping bentgrass and A capillaris and A castellana at frequencies of 0.044 and 0.0015%, respectively, which were considerably lower than intraspecific transgenic progeny recovery in the same experimental plots (0.631%). No interspecific transgenic hybrids were recovered with A gigantea or A canina
Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗
The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.
Claims 5
Claim · model-written summary
Transgenic creeping bentgrass produced interspecific hybrids with A capillaris at 0.044% in a field study.
- Taxon
- creeping bentgrass
Agrostis stoloniferae1 - Interactor
- A capillaris
Agrostis capillarise1other - Outcome
- Interspecific transgenic hybridse1
- Value
- 0.044e1
- Setting
- field studye3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Interspecific transgenic hybrids were recovered between creeping bentgrass and A capillaris and A castellana at frequencies of 0.044 and 0.0015%, respectively, which were considerably lower than intraspecific transgenic progeny recovery in the same experimental plots (0.631%)”
e3“In a field study we have measured the frequency of interspecific hybridization between transgenic creeping bentgrass and four related species”
Claim · model-written summary
Transgenic creeping bentgrass produced interspecific hybrids with A castellana at 0.0015% in a field study.
- Taxon
- creeping bentgrassAgrostis stoloniferae1
- Interactor
- A castellana
Agrostis castellanae1other - Outcome
- Interspecific transgenic hybridse1
- Value
- 0.0015%e1
- Setting
- field studye3
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Interspecific transgenic hybrids were recovered between creeping bentgrass and A capillaris and A castellana at frequencies of 0.044 and 0.0015%, respectively, which were considerably lower than intraspecific transgenic progeny recovery in the same experimental plots (0.631%)”
e3“In a field study we have measured the frequency of interspecific hybridization between transgenic creeping bentgrass and four related species”
Claim · model-written summary
Intraspecific transgenic progeny recovery of creeping bentgrass in the same experimental plots was 0.631%.
- Taxon
- creeping bentgrassAgrostis stoloniferae1
- Outcome
- intraspecific transgenic progeny recoverye1
- Value
- 0.631%e1
- Setting
- experimental plotse1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Interspecific transgenic hybrids were recovered between creeping bentgrass and A capillaris and A castellana at frequencies of 0.044 and 0.0015%, respectively, which were considerably lower than intraspecific transgenic progeny recovery in the same experimental plots (0.631%)”
Claim · model-written summary
Interspecific transgenic hybrid recovery was considerably lower than intraspecific transgenic progeny recovery in creeping bentgrass.
- Taxon
- creeping bentgrassAgrostis stoloniferae1
- Outcome
- Interspecific transgenic hybridse1
- Direction
- considerably lowere1
- Comparator
- intraspecific transgenic progeny recoverye1
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e1“Interspecific transgenic hybrids were recovered between creeping bentgrass and A capillaris and A castellana at frequencies of 0.044 and 0.0015%, respectively, which were considerably lower than intraspecific transgenic progeny recovery in the same experimental plots (0.631%)”
Claim · model-written summary
No interspecific transgenic hybrids of creeping bentgrass were recovered with A gigantea or A canina.
- Taxon
- creeping bentgrassAgrostis stoloniferae3
- Interactor
- A gigantea
Agrostis giganteae2other - Second interactor
- A canina
Agrostis caninae2other - Outcome
- interspecific transgenic hybridse2
Not reportedDirection
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e2“No interspecific transgenic hybrids were recovered with A gigantea or A canina”
e3“In a field study we have measured the frequency of interspecific hybridization between transgenic creeping bentgrass and four related species”