1997
DOI: 10.1007/s001220050507
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The release of genetically modified grasses. Part 1: pollen dispersal to traps in Lolium perenne

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
33
0
2

Year Published

1999
1999
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 52 publications
(36 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
1
33
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Using this function the sum of squared differences between observed and expected values of all 430 potential mating pairs was 1575. This value indicated a 51.0% better fit than the random mating model, a 44.7% better fit than the model based on the data of Giddings et al (1997a), a 28.4% better fit than the inverse distance function and a 9.5% better fit than the inverse third power distance function. When the flowering characteristics were included in the calculation of expected values, the fit of the inverse quadratic function slightly improved (Figure 3b), as the sum of squared differences reduced to 1563 (0.77%).…”
Section: Relationship Between Paternity and Field Datamentioning
confidence: 83%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Using this function the sum of squared differences between observed and expected values of all 430 potential mating pairs was 1575. This value indicated a 51.0% better fit than the random mating model, a 44.7% better fit than the model based on the data of Giddings et al (1997a), a 28.4% better fit than the inverse distance function and a 9.5% better fit than the inverse third power distance function. When the flowering characteristics were included in the calculation of expected values, the fit of the inverse quadratic function slightly improved (Figure 3b), as the sum of squared differences reduced to 1563 (0.77%).…”
Section: Relationship Between Paternity and Field Datamentioning
confidence: 83%
“…To determine expected values, proximity data and the recorded field data on flowering were used. First, published data on pollen deposition rates in relation to distance were examined (Giddings et al, 1997a), which revealed a perfect linear relationship between the inverse of pollen deposition and inter-plant distance (Figure 2). This relationship was used to estimate the relative contribution of each potential pollen donor to the pollen cloud around each of the 49 mother plants as a function of spatial arrangement, with the exception that an arbitrary minor pollen contribution by the mother plant was assumed.…”
Section: Selection Of Progeniesmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Wind-dispersed pollen has a leptokurtic dispersal distribution from point sources (4-7), and, therefore, the proportion of fertilized ovules and seed set in recipient plants decreases rapidly with distance from the pollen donor (8). Wind direction, speed, turbulence, and gravity also affect pollen deposition (9)(10)(11). The key to pollen availability is density of donor plants, again studied almost exclusively in animalpollinated systems (12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Significant pollen flow from Lolium perenne plots has been recorded by Giddings et al (1997), and developed into a landscape gene flow model by Giddings (2000). While this latter model did not incorporate the measurement of actual gene flow patterns as evidenced by pollination/hybridization events, this more precise kind of data has been generated in a landscape-level experiment on gene flow from a herbicide tolerant Agrostis stolonifera cultivar plot in the United States (Watrud et al, 2004).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%