Free Access
Environ. Biosafety Res.
Volume 5, Number 1, January-March 2006
Page(s) 15 - 25
Published online 19 September 2006
  • Agrawal AA (1998) Induced responses to herbivory and increased plant performance. Science 279: 1201–1202 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Arnold ML, Hodges SA (1995) Are natural hybrids fit or unfit relative to their parents? Trends Ecol. Evol. 10: 67–71 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Bardner R, Fletcher KE (1974) Insect infestations and their effects on the growth and yield of field crops: A review. B. Entomol. Res. 64: 141–160 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Cartwright B, Kok LT (1990) Feeding by Cassida rubiginosa (Coleoptera: Chrysomelidae) and the effects of defoliation on growth of musk thistles. J. Entomol. Sci. 25: 538–547 [Google Scholar]
  • Davenport IJ, Wilkinson MJ, Mason DC, Charters YM, Jones AE, Allainguillaume J, Butler HT, Raybould AF (2000) Quantifying gene movement from oilseed rape to its wild relatives using remote sensing. Int. J. Remote Sens. 21: 3567–3573 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Davis JM, Svendsgaard DJ (1990) U-shaped dose-response curves: their occurrence and implications for risk assessment. J. Toxicol. Env. Heal. 30: 71–83 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Downey RK, Klassen AJ, Stringham GR (1980) Rapeseed and mustard. In Fehr WR, Hadley HH, eds, Hybridization of crop plants. American Society of Agronomy, Madison, Wisconsin, pp 495–509 [Google Scholar]
  • Gavloski JE, Lamb RJ (2000a) Compensation for herbivory in cruciferous plants: Specific responses to three defoliating insects. Environ. Entomol. 29: 1258–1267 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gavloski JE, Lamb RJ (2000b) Compensation by cruciferous plants is specific to the type of simulated herbivory. Environ. Entomol. 29: 1273–1282 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gressel J (2002) Molecular Biology of Weed Control. Taylor and Francis, London [Google Scholar]
  • Guéritaine G, Bazot S, Darmency H (2003) Emergence and growth of hybrids between Brassica napus and Raphanus raphanistrum. New Phytol. 158: 561–567 [Google Scholar]
  • Halfhill MD, Millwood RJ, Raymer PL, Stewart CN (2002) Bt-transgenic oilseed rape hybridization with its weedy relative, Brassica rapa. Environ. Biosafety Res. 1: 19–28 [Google Scholar]
  • Halfhill MD, Zhu B, Warwick SI, Raymer PL, Millwood RJ, Weissinger AK, Stewart CN (2004) Hybridization and backcrossing between transgenic oilseed rape and two related weed species under field conditions. Environ. Biosafety Res. 3: 73–81 [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Halfhill MD, Sutherland JP, Moon HS, Poppy GM, Warwick SI, Weissinger AK, Rufty TW, Raymer PL, Stewart CN (2005) Growth, fitness, and competitiveness of introgressed weedy Brassica rapa hybrids with Bt cry1Ac and gfp transgenes. Mol. Ecol. 14: 3177–3189 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Hansen LB, Siegismund HR, Jørgensen RB (2001) Introgression between oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) and its weedy relative B. rapa L. in a natural population. Genet. Resour. Crop Ev. 48: 621–627 [Google Scholar]
  • Hauser TP, Østergård H (1999) Precocious germination of Brassica rapa × B. napus seeds within pods. Hereditas 130: 89–93 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hauser TP, Shaw RG, Østergård H (1998a) Fitness of F1 hybrids between weedy Brassica rapa and oilseed rape (B. napus). Heredity 81: 429–435 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hauser TP, Jørgensen RB, Østergård H (1998b) Fitness of backcross and F2 hybrids between weedy Brassica rapa and oilseed rape (B. napus). Heredity 81: 436–443 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Jørgensen RB, Andersen B (1994) Spontaneous hybridization between oilseed rape (Brassica napus) and weedy B. campestris (Brassicaceae): A risk of growing genetically modified oilseed rape. Am. J. Bot. 81: 1620–1626 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Jørgensen RB, Andersen B, Landbo L, Mikkelsen TR (1996) Spontaneous hybridization between oilseed rape (Brassica napus) and weedy relatives. Acta Hort. 407: 193–200 [Google Scholar]
  • Jørgensen RB, Andersen B, Snow A, Hauser TP (1999) Ecological risks of growing genetically modified crops. Plant Biotechnol. 16: 69–71 [Google Scholar]
  • Karban R, Baldwin IT (1997) Induced responses to herbivory. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, USA [Google Scholar]
  • Klinger T, Ellstrand NC (1994) Engineered genes in wild populations: Fitness of weed-crop hybrids of Raphanus sativus. Ecol. Appl. 4: 117–120 [Google Scholar]
  • Landbo L, Andersen B, Jørgensen RB (1996) Natural hybridisation between oilseed rape and a wild relative: hybrids among seeds from weedy B. campestris. Hereditas 125: 89–91 [Google Scholar]
  • Lewontin R (2004) Building a science of population biology. In Singh RS, Uyenoyama MK, eds, The Evolution of Population Biology. Cambridge University Press, pp 7–20 [Google Scholar]
  • Linder CR, Schmitt J (1994) Assessing the risks of transgene escape through time and crop-wild hybrid persistence. Mol. Ecol. 3: 23–30 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Linder CR, Schmitt J (1995) Potential persistence of escaped transgenes: Performance of transgenic, oil-modified Brassica seeds and seedlings. Ecol. Appl. 5: 1056–1068 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Mauricio R, Bowers MD, Bazzaz FA (1993) Pattern of leaf damage affects fitness of the annual plant Raphanus sativus (Brassicaceae). Ecology 74: 2066–2071 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Poppy GM (2004) Geneflow from GM plants – towards a more quantitative risk assessment. Trends Biotechnol. 22: 436–438 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Rabinovitch PS (1994) Flow cytometry. Method. Cell. Biol. 41: 264–496 [Google Scholar]
  • Raldugina GN, Gorelova SV, Kozhemyakin AV (2000) Stability and inheritance of inserted genes in rapeseed plants. Russ. J. Plant Phys. 47: 386–393 [Google Scholar]
  • Raybould AF, Gray AJ (1994) Will hybrids of genetically modified crops invade natural communities? Trends Ecol. Evol. 9: 85–89 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Raybould AF, Moyes CL, Maskell LC, Mogg RJ, Warman EA, Wardlaw JC, Elmes GW, Edwards ML, Cooper JI, Clarke RT, Gray AJ (1999) Predicting the ecological impacts of transgenes for insect and virus resistance in natural and feral populations of Brassica species. In Ammann K, Jacot Y, Kjellsson G, Simonsen V, eds, Methods for Risk Assessment of Transgenic Plants. III. Ecological risks and prospects of transgenic plants, where do we go from here? Birkhauser Verlag, pp 3–15 [Google Scholar]
  • Rees M, Long MJ (1992) Germination biology and the ecology of annual plants. Am. Nat. 139: 484–508 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Scheffler JA, Dale PJ (1994) Opportunities for gene-transfer from transgenic oilseed rape (Brassica napus) to related species. Transgenic Res. 3: 263–278 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Scott SE, Wilkinson MJ (1998) Transgene risk is low. Nature 393: 320–320 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Stewart CN, Adang MJ, All JN, Raymer PL, Ramachandran S, Parrott WA (1996) Insect control and dosage effects in transgenic canola containing a synthetic Bacillus thuringiensis crylAc gene. Plant Physiol. 112: 115–120 [Google Scholar]
  • Stewart CN, All JN, Raymer PL, Ramachandran S (1997) Increased fitness of transgenic insecticidal rapeseed under insect selection pressure. Mol. Ecol. 6: 773–779 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Strauss SY, Agrawal AA (1999) The ecology and evolution of plant tolerance to herbivory. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14: 179–185 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Sutherland JP, Poppy GM (2005) Quantifying exposure. In Poppy GM, Wilkinson MJ, eds, Gene Flow from GM Plants. Blackwell Publishing, pp 186–212 [Google Scholar]
  • Sylvester-Bradley R, Makepeace RJ, Broad H (1984) A code for stage development in oilseed rape (Brassica napus L.) – Agronomy, physiology, plant breeding and crop protection of oilseed rape. Aspect. Appl. Biol. 6: 399–419 [Google Scholar]
  • Talekar NT, Shelton AM (1993) Biology, ecology and management of the diamondback moth. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 38: 275–301 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Trumble JT, Kolodny-Hirsch DM, Ting IP (1993) Plant compensation for arthropod herbivory. Annu. Rev. Entomol. 38: 93–119 [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Watkinson AR, Freckleton RP, Robinson RA, Sutherland WJ (2000) Predictions of biodiversity response to genetically modified herbicide-tolerant crops. Science 289: 1554–1557 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Warwick SI, Simard MJ, Légère A, Beckie HJ, Braun L, Zhu B, Mason P, Séguin-Swartz G, Stewart CN, Jr (2003) Hybridization between transgenic Brassica napus L. and its wild relatives: B. rapa L., Raphanus raphanistrum L., Sinapsis arvensis L., and Erucastrum gallicum (Willd.) O.E. Schulz. Theor. Appl. Genet. 107: 528–539 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Weis AE (2005) Assessing the ecological fitness of recipients. In Poppy GM, Wilkinson MJ, eds, Gene Flow from GM Plants. Blackwell Publishing, pp 143–168 [Google Scholar]
  • Wilkinson MJ, Elliott LJ, Allainguillaume J, Shaw MW, Norris C, Welters R, Alexander M, Sweet J, Mason DC (2003a) Hybridization between Brassica napus and B. rapa on a national scale in the United Kingdom. Science 302: 457–459 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Wilkinson MJ, Sweet J, Poppy GM (2003b) Risk assessment of GM plants: Avoiding gridlock? Trends Plant Sci. 8: 208–212 [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]