生物多样性 ›› 2021, Vol. 29 ›› Issue (4): 488-494.DOI: 10.17520/biods.2020295

• 研究报告: 动物多样性 • 上一篇    下一篇

BPH9Bar基因抗褐飞虱耐除草剂水稻‘H23’对非靶标生物的影响

李三和, 刘凯, 闸雯俊, 徐华山, 李培德, 周雷, 游艾青()   

  1. 湖北省农业科学院粮食作物研究所/粮食作物种质创新与遗传改良湖北省重点实验室, 武汉 430064
  • 收稿日期:2020-07-23 接受日期:2020-09-16 出版日期:2021-04-20 发布日期:2021-04-20
  • 通讯作者: 游艾青
  • 基金资助:
    国家转基因重大专项(2018ZX0800101B)

Effects of transgenic rice H23 with BPH9 and Bar genes resistant to brown planthopper and herbicide on non-target organisms

Sanhe Li, Kai Liu, Wenjun Zha, Huashan Xu, Peide Li, Lei Zhou, Aiqing You()   

  1. Food Crops Institute, Hubei Academy of Agricultural Sciences / Hubei Key Laboratory of Food Crop Germplasms and Genetic Improvement, Wuhan 430064
  • Received:2020-07-23 Accepted:2020-09-16 Online:2021-04-20 Published:2021-04-20
  • Contact: Aiqing You
  • About author:* E-mail: aq_you@163.com

摘要:

为探明转BPH9Bar基因抗褐飞虱耐除草剂水稻‘H23’对非靶标生物安全性的影响, 本文以‘H23’的非转基因亲本改良的‘广占63-4S’为对照, 比较二者对二化螟(Chilo suppressalis)、大型蚤(Daphnia magna)和赤子爱胜蚓(Eisenia foetida)的影响。其中, 对二化螟采用水稻稻苗饲养法, 观察接虫后6 d二化螟的存活情况, 并称取活虫体重; 对大型蚤采用水稻粉液饲喂法, 考察28 d大型蚤的存活率、繁殖数等指标; 对赤子爱胜蚓则用添加水稻秸秆的人工土壤培养法, 考察28 d内赤子爱胜蚓的存活、体重和行为情况。结果表明, 与受体对照‘广占63-4S’相比, 转BPH9Bar基因抗褐飞虱耐除草剂水稻‘H23’对二化螟、大型蚤和赤子爱胜蚓均无显著影响, 可以认为, 短期内转BPH9Bar基因水稻‘H23’对这3种非靶标生物无明显的生态风险。

关键词: 转基因水稻‘H23’, 二化螟, 大型蚤, 赤子爱胜蚓, 生态风险

Abstract

Aim: In order to investigate the effects of transgenic rice H23 with BPH9 and Bar genes resistant to brown planthopper and herbicide on the safety of non-target organisms, we used Chilo suppressalis, Daphnia magna and Eisenia foetida as environmental bio-indicators.

Methods: The survival and weight of C. suppressalis was examined on the 6th day after infestation at the tillering and jointing stage. Under indoor conditions, the survival rate and reproduction number of D. magna was investigated by feeding them H23 rice powder. We also measured the survival, weight and behavior of E. foetida after being fed with transgenic rice straw in artificial soil for 28 days. As control for these trials, we fed each species non-transgenic rice Guangzhan 63-4S.

Results: The survival and single weight of C. suppressalis, the survival rate and reproduction number of D. magna, the survival, weight and behavior of E. foetida had no significant difference between H23 and Guangzhan 63-4S. H23 had no significant effect on the growth of all three organisms, as compared with that of the nontransgenic control.

Conclusion: Transgenic rice H23 did not pose an ecological risk to C. suppressalis, D. magnaand E. foetida after short-term exposure.

Key words: transgenic rice H23, Chilo suppressalis, Daphnia magna, Eisenia foetida, ecological risk