Assessing the risks associated with the dispersion of novel genes/alleles into the

environment

Nathalie Isabel et al.

NASEM, Washington DC5 April 2018

1

2

Outline

1. Background

2. Research framework

3. Studied System: Main ResultsPoplarsLarches

4. Conclusions

Background

Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA)

The Canadian Environmental Protection ActThe Seeds Act, etc.

«… safety concerns are posed primarily by the presence of a novel trait or substance in a product, rather than how novelty wasintroduced… »

Background

Canada

reviewed by Bonfils TGG 2005 These novel traits can be introduced: biotechnology,

mutagenesis, conventional breeding techniques, and gene editing technology.

Federal Regulatory Framework

3

“Plant that contains a trait which is both new to the Canadian environment and has the potential to affect the specific use and safety of the plant with respect to the environment and human health. “

Plant with Novel Trait (PNT)

Background

http://www.inspection.gc.ca/plants/plants-with-novel-traits/eng/1300137887237/1300137939635

4

Poplars as the first candidate

2006

GM poplars

Field Trial (CFS) established in 1997

Courtesy of Armand Séguin, NRCan

Background 5

“Plant that contains a trait which is both new to the Canadian environment and has the potential to affect the specific use and safety of the plant with respect to the environment and human health. “

Plant with Novel Trait (PNT)

Background

The CFIA’s environmental safety assessment takes into account:

•the potential of the plant to become a weed

•the potential of a plant to create a weed by cross-pollinating with another plant

•the potential impact on biodiversity

Not allowed to reproduce

http://www.inspection.gc.ca/plants/plants-with-novel-traits/eng/1300137887237/1300137939635

6

Poplar with exotic component as a proxy for PNT

Background

2006

GM poplars

Field Trial (CFS) established in 1997

Courtesy of Armand Séguin, NRCan

Poplars with exotic components

7

Background

2006

GM poplars

Field Trial (CFS) established in 1997

Courtesy of Armand Séguin, NRCan

Poplars with exotic components

8

Poplar with exotic component as a proxy for PNT

Risk assessment for PNTsSteps of the introgression process

Research Framework 9

Exposure: The probability that a defined hazard will occur

Hazards: Potential of an agent or situation to cause and adverse effect

Ele

me

nts

of

ex

po

su

rea

nd

pro

gre

ss

tow

ard

sth

e h

aza

rds

Risk assessment for PNTs

Steps of the introgression process

Research Framework

Old

Natural forests

Contemporary

Plantations vs

Natural forests

10

Contact Zones

P. balsamifera

P. deltoides

P. trichocarpa

P. angustifolia

P. fremontii

PoplarsStudied systems 11

Hybrid poplars (poplars with exotic component)Studied systems 12

P. deltoidesP. balsamifera

(LN) x D L x NB x D

Native hybrid Hybrid with exotic component

Hybrid poplars (some examples)Studied systems 13

P. b

alsa

mif

era

P. d

elto

ides

SNP

Gros-Louis et al. 2005 TGG

Meirmans et al. (2007) Can J Bot

Talbot et al. (2011) Can J For Res

Isabel et al. (2013) TGG

Floate et al. (2015) New Phytol

Tools and methods

Simulations

Studied systems 14

Studied zones (poplars)Studied species

Eastern Canada

Central CanadaP. balsamifera

P. deltoides

P. trichocarpa

P. angustifolia

P. fremontii

Step Region 15

Do exotic poplars cross with native species

in natural settings?

Agroforestry lansdcape vs natural forest

Risk assessment for PNTsHybridization

16

17

Eastern Canada

500 m

• 67 mother-trees • ~ 5000 seed analysed• > 100 male clones

P. deltoides

P. balsamifera

Hybrids & Exotics

Meirmans et al. 2010 Am J Bot

Agroforestry

Forest

Hybridization Eastern Canada

Agroforestry

Forest

P. deltoides

P. balsamifera

Hybrids & exotics

P. balsamifera

20%

P. balsamifera

72%

Effect of landscape and recipient native species

Eastern Canada

More than 1000 male clonal varietiesP. deltoides

2%

Fragmented habitat Recipient (15-30-yr-old) Distance: 17-531 m

Natural forestRecipient (50-yr-old) Distance: 18-282 m

Meirmans et al. 2010 Am J Bot

Hybridization 18

19

Central Canada

• 23 mother-trees

(all P. balsamifera)

• ~ 2000 seed analysed

• 1 putative male parent (LND)

Hybridization Central Canada

Talbot et al. 2012 For Ecol Manag

Watson

0.1%

Blakley

2.4%

Talbot et al. 2012 For Ecol Manag

Hybridization

Effect of landscape and recipient genotypes

Central Canada 20

Fragmented habitatRecipient (20-50-yr-old)MulticlonalDistance: 20m - 1.5km

Talbot et al. 2011 Can J For Res

Exotic poplars in central Canada

Russian (LN) poplars

(100-yr-old)

Russian

Northwest

P. deltoides

Walker

Others

Assiniboine

Over 34 million trees distributed (1909-2006)

The Shelterbelt Centre

(Agriculture & Agri-Food Canada)

Hybridization Central Canada 21

21Density of pollen and seed production

Do hybrids establish themselves in nature?

Do they reproduce?

Under which conditions?

Risk assessment for PNTsBackcrossing to recipient species

Backcrossing to recipient

22

23

• 108 trees sampled, ~280 km2

• 4.6% (5/108), female parent: donor

Saskatchewan

Central Canada

Backcrossing to recipient Central Canada

Ronald & Steele 1974 Can J Bot

Manitoba

23Density of pollen and seed production

(S. DiFazio 2004)

Fragmented habitatRecipient (30-50-yr-old) Distance: up to 1 km

Backcrossing to recipient Eastern Canada 24

P. deltoides

P. balsamifera

P. nigra

hybrides

Québec

Chicoutimi

Sherbrooke

15 pops

635 samples

2.4%

Thompson et al. 2010 Mol Ecol

Impact of disturbancesBackcrossing to recipient Eastern Canada 25

Natural to disturbed habitats

Recipient (50-yr-old) Distance: 18-282 m

Hybrids and fitnessBase-de-plein-air Sainte-Foy

Eastern CanadaFitness

• B = P. balsamifera

• D = P. deltoides

• N = Natural hybrids (DxB)

• X = Exotic hybrids (BxN, DNxB, etc.)

• Leaf & flowering phenology• Reproductive fitness• Disease susceptibility• Etc

26

Disturbed habitatRecipient (20-50-yr-old)Distance: from 100m to few km

19.6% (27/138)

2009

Ex: Disease susceptibility

No significant difference between native and hybrids

• Melampsora larici-populina (Mlp)

• M. medusae (Mmd)Rust susceptibility

Ure

dia

/ c

m2

Roe et al. 2014 Ecol & Evol a, b

Hybrids and fitnessEastern CanadaFitness 27

28

1. Does spontaneous hybridization occur between exotic and

native species in natural settings?

2. If spontaneous hybrids do form, are they viable?

Do they reproduce ? Where?

3. Are they more fit than their parental species?

Yes, genotypes/recipient species, environment

Yes, seed mediated gene flow, disturbed habitats

Summary - Poplars

For many characters they are intermediate

Do exotic larches reproduce with native speciesin natural settings?

Risk assessment for PNTs

Recipient species Donor species

L. decidua

L. kaempferi

L. sibirica

& hybrids

Studied systems 29

Effect of landscape and recipient species

Bonaventure

Lotbinière

Seeds

0.9%Recruits

2.8%

Seeds

3.2%Recruits

1.5%

5000 seed, 1000 recruits

30

Risk assessment for PNTs

Steps of the introgression process

Research Framework

Contemporary

Plantations vs

Natural forests

31

Contact Zones

Long distance gene flow Recipient species

Fct: 0.063100 nuclear SNPs1200 individualsMeirmans et al. 2017 JEB

Populus balsamifera

32

Risk assessment for PNTs

Steps of the introgression process

Research Framework

Old

Natural forests

Contemporary

Plantations vs

Natural forests

33

Contact Zones

Oldman River and Red Deer River

34

P. balsamifera

P. deltoides

P. angustifolia

Central CanadaBiotic interactions

35

Floate et al. 2016 New Phytol.

Oldman River

Central CanadaBiotic interactions

The framework

Patrick Meirmans et al. 2009 Evol Appl

Amanda Roe et al. 2014a,b Ecol Evol

Patrick Meirmans et al. 2010 Am J Bot

StaceyThompson et al. 2010 Mol Ecol

Patricia Talbot et al. 2012 For Ecol Manag

Patrick Meirmans et al. 2013 TGG

Jared LeBoldus et al. 2013 Plos One

Kevin Floate et al. 2015 New Phytologist

36

Meirmans et al. 2017 JEB

Julie Godbout et al. unpublished

Conclusions

Social licensing, Economical values & Ecosystem services

Missing piece37

Howlett & Migone 2010 Technology in Society

Conclusions

38

Julie GodboutManuel LamotheMarie-Claude Gros-LouisAudrey LachanceEric DussaultDaniel PlourdePhilippe TanguayJosyanne LamarcheAmanda RoeChris McQuarrieTannis BeardmoreDale Simpson

Bill SchroederKevin Floate

Jared LeBoldus

Patrick Meirmans

Jean BousquetDamase Khasa

Barb ThomasPeter Blemis

Pierre Périnet’s teamMartin Perron’ team

Stewart Rood

Tom WhithamMatt Lau