Theoretical and Applied Genetics

, Volume 110, Issue 3, pp 519–526 | Cite as

Pollination between maize and teosinte: an important determinant of gene flow in Mexico

  • Baltazar M. BaltazarEmail author
  • José de Jesús Sánchez-Gonzalez
  • Lino de la Cruz-Larios
  • John B. Schoper
Original Paper


Gene flow between maize [Zea mays (L.)] and its wild relatives does occur, but at very low frequencies. Experiments were undertaken in Tapachula, Nayarit, Mexico to investigate gene flow between a hybrid maize, landraces of maize and teosinte (Z. mays ssp. mexicana, races Chalco and Central Plateau). Hybridization, flowering synchrony, pollen size and longevity, silk elongation rates, silk and trichome lengths and tassel diameter and morphology were measured. Hybrid and open-pollinated maize ears produced a mean of 8 and 11 seeds per ear, respectively, when hand-pollinated with teosinte pollen, which is approximately 1–2% of the ovules normally produced on a hybrid maize ear. Teosinte ears produced a mean of 0.2–0.3 seeds per ear when pollinated with maize pollen, which is more than one-fold fewer seeds than produced on a maize ear pollinated with teosinte pollen. The pollination rate on a per plant basis was similar in the context of a maize plant with 400–500 seeds and a teosinte plant with 30–40 inflorescences and 9–12 fruitcases per inflorescence. A number of other factors also influenced gene-flow direction: (1) between 90% and 95% of the fruitcases produced on teosinte that was fertilized by maize pollen were sterile; (2) teosinte collections were made in an area where incompatibility systems that limit fertilization are present; (3) silk longevity was much shorter for teosinte than for maize (approx. 4 days vs. approx. 11 days); (4) teosinte produced more pollen on a per plant basis than the landraces and commercial hybrid maize; (5) teosinte frequently produced lateral branches with silks close to a terminal tassel producing pollen. Collectively these factors tend to favor crossing in the direction of teosinte to maize. Our results support the hypothesis that gene flow and the subsequent introgression of maize genes into teosinte populations most probably results from crosses where teosinte first pollinates maize. The resultant hybrids then backcross with teosinte to introgress the maize genes into the teosinte genome. This approach would slow introgression and may help explain why teosinte continues to co-exist as a separate entity even though it normally grows in the vicinity of much larger populations of maize.


Maize Gene Flow Hybrid Maize Central Plateau Pollen Size 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



The authors gratefully acknowledge the time and experience provided in the field by Salvador Luna and Jesus Figueroa. We are also grateful to Dr. Suketoshi Taba, Head, CIMMYTś Maize Genetic Resources; Dr. Ganesan Srinivasan, Head, CIMMYTś International Maize Testing Unit and leader of the Subtropical Maize Sub-program, for providing landrace seed; Marc Albertsen and Carla Peterman, Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc, for providing purple genetic marker stocks to be used in the experiments.


  1. Baltazar BM, Schoper JB (2001) Maize pollen biology, pollen drift and transgenes. In: Proc 56th Corn and Sorghum Seed Res Conf. Chicago Google Scholar
  2. Baltazar BM, Schoper JB (2002) Crop-to-crop gene flow: dispersal of transgenes in maize, during field tests and commercialization. In: Proc 7th Int Symp Biosafety Genet Modified Organisms. Beijing, China
  3. Castillo GF, Goodman MM (1997) Research on gene flow between improved land races. In: Serratos JA, Willcox MC, Castillo-Gonzalez F (eds) Proc Forum: gene flow among maize landraces, improved maize varieties, and teosinte: implications for transgenic maize”. CIMMYT, El Batan, Mexico, pp 67–72Google Scholar
  4. Cervantes MJE (1998) Infiltracion genetica entre variedades locales e introducidas de maiz de sistema tradicional de Cuzalapa, Jalisco. PhD thesis, Colegio de Postgraduados, Montecillo-Texcoco, Edo. de México, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  5. Di-Giovanni F, Kevan PG (1991) Factors affecting pollen dynamics and its importance to pollen contamination: a review. Can J For Res 21:1155–1170Google Scholar
  6. Di-Giovanni F, Kevan PG, Nasr ME (1995) The variability in settling velocities of some pollen and spores. Grana 34:39–44Google Scholar
  7. Eubanks MW (2001) The mysterious origin of maize. Econ Bot 55:492–514Google Scholar
  8. Evans MMS, Kermicle JL (2001) Teosinte crossing barrier1, a locus governing hybridization of teosinte with maize. Theor Appl Genet 103:259–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Kato YTA (1997) Review of introgression between maize and teosinte. In: Serratos JA, Willcox MC, Castillo F (eds) Proc Forum: gene flow among maize landraces, improved maize varieties, and teosinte: implications for transgenic maize. CIMMYT, Mexico City, pp 44–53Google Scholar
  10. Kato YTA, Sanchez GJJ (2002) Introgression of chromosome knobs from Zea diploperennis into maize. Maydica 47:33–50Google Scholar
  11. Kermicle J (1996) Cross compatibility within the genus Zea. In: Serratos JA, Willcox MC, Castillo F (eds) Proc Forum: Gene flow among maize landraces, improved maize varieties, and teosinte: implications for transgenic maize. CIMMYT, Mexico City, pp 43–47Google Scholar
  12. Kiesselbach TA (1999) The structure and reproduction of corn, 50th anniversary. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring HarborGoogle Scholar
  13. Louette D (1996) Seed exchange among farmers and gene flow among maize varieties in traditional agricultural systems. In: Serratos JA, Willcox MC, Castillo-Gonzalez F (eds) 1997. Proc Forum: Gene flow among maize landraces, improved maize varieties, and teosinte: implications for transgenic maize. CIMMYT, Mexico City, pp 56–66Google Scholar
  14. Luna VS, Figueroa JM, Baltazar BM, Gomez RL, Townsend R, Schoper JB (2001) Maize pollen longevity and distance isolation requirements for effective pollen control. Crop Sci 41:1551–1557Google Scholar
  15. Nelson OE (1996) The gametophyte factors of maize. In: Freeling M, Walbot V (eds) The maize handbook. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, pp 496–503Google Scholar
  16. Rhymer JM, Simberloff D (1996) Extinction by hybridization and introgression. Annu Rev Ecol SST 27:83–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Sanchez G JJ, Kato YTA, Aguilar MSM, Hernandez CJM, Lopez CAR, Ruiz JAC (1998) Distribución y caracterización del teocintle. Libro Técnico No. 2 del Instituto Nacional de Investigaciones Forestales, Agrícolas y Pecuarias (INIFAP)Google Scholar
  18. Stewart CN Jr, Halfhill MD, Warwick IS (2003) Transgene introgression from genetically modified crops to their wild relatives. Nat Rev 4:806–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Wellhausen EJ, Roberts LM, Hernandez EX, Mangelsdorf PC (1952) Razas de maiz en Mexico. Foll Tecnico No. 5, Oficina de Estudios Especiales, S.A.G. MexicoGoogle Scholar
  20. Wilkes HG (1977) Hybridization of maize and teosinte, in Mexico and Guatemala and the improvement of maize. Econ Bot 31:254–293Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Baltazar M. Baltazar
    • 1
    Email author
  • José de Jesús Sánchez-Gonzalez
    • 2
  • Lino de la Cruz-Larios
    • 2
  • John B. Schoper
    • 3
  1. 1.Pioneer Hi-Bred InternationalTapachulaMexico
  2. 2.Centro Universitario de Ciencias Biológicas y AgropecuariasUniversidad de GuadalajaraLas Agujas, Mpio. de ZapopanMexico
  3. 3.Pioneer SementesUnidade de BrasíliaPlanaltina-Brasilia-DFBrazil

Personalised recommendations