Hubbry Logo
AgrostisAgrostisMain
Open search
Agrostis
Community hub
Agrostis
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Agrostis
Agrostis
Agrostis
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Bentgrass
Agrostis capillaris
Scientific classification Edit this classification
Kingdom: Plantae
Clade: Tracheophytes
Clade: Angiosperms
Clade: Monocots
Clade: Commelinids
Order: Poales
Family: Poaceae
Subfamily: Pooideae
Supertribe: Poodae
Tribe: Poeae
Subtribe: Agrostidinae
Genus: Agrostis
L.
Type species
Agrostis canina
Synonyms[3]
  • Agraulus P.Beauv.
  • Agrestis Bubani
  • Anomalotis Steud.
  • Bromidium Nees & Meyen
  • Candollea Steud.
  • Chaetopogon Janch.
  • Chaeturus Link
  • Decandolia T.Bastard
  • Didymochaeta Steud.
  • Linkagrostis Romero García, Blanca & C.Morales
  • Neoschischkinia Tzvelev
  • Notonema Raf.
  • Pentatherum Nábelek
  • Senisetum Honda
  • Trichodium Michx.
  • Vilfa Adans.

Agrostis (bent, bentgrass) is a large and very nearly cosmopolitan genus of plants in the grass family, found in nearly all the countries in the world.[4][5][6][7][8][9]

Species

[edit]

As of May 2024, Plants of the World Online accepted the following species:[3]

Formerly placed here

[edit]

Hundreds of species formerly listed in the genus Agrostis have been moved to other genera, including Achnatherum, Agrostula, Aira, Alloteropsis, Alpagrostis, Apera, Arundinella, Calamagrostis, Chionochloa, Chloris, Cinna, Colpodium, Crypsis, Cynodon, Deschampsia, Dichelachne, Digitaria, Eremochloa, Eriochloa, Eustachys, Gastridium, Graphephorum, Gymnopogon, Lachnagrostis, Leptochloa, Muhlenbergia, Pentameris, Phippsia, Piptatherum, Poa, Polypogon, Puccinellia, Reimarochloa, Relchela, Schismus, Sporobolus and Zingeria.[10]

Former species include:

Uses

[edit]

Some species of bents are commonly used for lawn grass. This is a desirable grass for golf course teeing areas, fairways, and greens.

Bentgrass is used in turf applications for its numerous advantages: it can be mowed to a very short length without damage, it can handle a great amount of foot traffic, it has a shallow root system that is thick and dense allowing it to be seeded and grow rather easily, and it has a pleasing, deep green appearance. The name "bent" refers to the shallow roots, which bend just below the surface of the soil to propagate laterally.[citation needed]

Creeping bent

[edit]

Agrostis stolonifera is the most commonly used species of Agrostis. Historically, it was often called Orcheston long grass, after a village on Salisbury Plain, England. It is cultivated almost exclusively on golf courses, especially on putting greens. Creeping bent aggressively produces horizontal stems, called stolons, that run along the soil's surface. These allow creeping bent to form dense stands especially when mown at low mowing heights and outcompete bunch-type grass and broadleaf weeds. As such, if infested in a home lawn and mown at higher mowing heights, it can become a troublesome weed problem. The leaves of the bentgrass are long and slender.[citation needed] It can quickly take over a home lawn if it is not controlled and has very shallow roots.[11]

The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company and Monsanto genetically engineered creeping bent to be glyphosate-tolerant under Monsanto's Roundup Ready trademark,[12] as "one of the first wind-pollinated, perennial, and highly outcrossing transgenic crops". In 2003, Scotts planted it as part of a large (about 160 ha) field trial in central Oregon near Madras. In 2004, its pollen was found to have reached wild growing bentgrass populations up to 14 kilometres away. Cross-pollinating Agrostis gigantea was even found at a distance of 21 kilometres.[13] Scotts could not remove all genetically engineered plants and in 2007, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service fined them $500,000 for non-compliance with Plant Protection Act regulations.[14]

Common bent

[edit]

Agrostis capillaris, or colonial bent, was brought to America from Europe. This was the type of grass that was used on the lawns of most estates. It is the tallest of the bents with very fine texture and like most bent grasses grows very densely. Although this species has been used on golf courses and sporting fields it is better suited for lawns. Colonial bent is fairly easy to grow from seeds and fertilization of the lawn is not as intense. This grass also takes longer to establish than creeping bent. However it does not require the intense maintenance.[citation needed]

Velvet bent

[edit]

Agrostis canina gets its name for the velvet appearance that this grass produces. It has the finest texture of all the bent grasses. This grass was used in Europe for estate lawns and golf courses because it could be cut so short. Velvet bent grass requires similar upkeep and maintenance to creeping bent. Velvet bent has recently had a resurgence in the UK due to the high demands on greens from inclement weather and speed expectations. This species also has a lighter color than the two previous species.[15]

Butterfly food plant

[edit]

Butterflies whose caterpillars feed on Agrostis include:

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Agrostis

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia

Agrostis is a diverse of approximately 198 of annual and perennial grasses within the , primarily distributed in cold and temperate regions worldwide, with representatives on every continent except . These grasses are characterized by their slender culms, narrow leaves, and spikelets typically reduced to a single floret, enabling adaptation to a range of habitats from moist meadows to dry uplands and disturbed sites. Notable for their fine texture and rapid growth, several , such as creeping bentgrass (A. stolonifera), are economically significant in turfgrass applications, particularly for putting greens, where they withstand close mowing heights below 3 mm and recover from heavy foot . Additionally, Agrostis provide valuable for in pastures, maintaining and greenness through summer due to efficient water use and uptake. Ecologically, the genus plays a pioneering role in and succession on disturbed lands, though some taxa exhibit invasive tendencies in non-native ranges, displacing native vegetation through stoloniferous spread.

Taxonomy

Etymology and Historical Classification

The genus name Agrostis derives from the agrōstis (ἀγρώστis), referring to a type of wild or couch grass. first described the genus in Genera Plantarum (1737), providing a Latin based on its slender, paniculate inflorescences and one-flowered spikelets. He validly published 12 species under Agrostis in (1753), distinguishing them primarily by lemma awn length and rachilla extension, with Agrostis canina later designated as the conserved type. From its inception, Agrostis was placed within the grass family (now Gramineae), reflecting Linnaeus's broader system of classifying plants by reproductive and vegetative traits. In the 18th and 19th centuries, botanists expanded the genus through morphological comparisons, incorporating species with similar fine-textured leaves, diffuse panicles, and purplish spikelets, often grouping them in the cool-season grass clade later formalized as subfamily and tribe Poeae. Taxonomic treatments through the early 20th century, such as monographs by J. T. Henrard (1934), relied on empirical dissection of spikelet anatomy—including callus hairs, palea keels, and lodicule vestiges—to resolve inclusions and synonymies, predating that would highlight in related groups like Polypogon. These morphology-driven revisions emphasized causal links between structural adaptations and temperate habitats, though they occasionally conflated convergent traits across lineages.

Current Species Composition

The genus Agrostis currently encompasses approximately 198 , with the majority occurring in temperate and cold regions across both hemispheres. This estimate reflects ongoing taxonomic refinements, including a 2023 revision of the genus in Megamexico (encompassing and adjacent desert areas of ), which documented 20 in that zone—four endemic, three introduced—and confirmed their distributions through morphoanatomical analysis. The revision aligns with broader phylogenetic assessments emphasizing the genus's concentration in cooler climates, though some extend into subtropical or montane habitats. Prominent species include Agrostis stolonifera (creeping bentgrass), a stoloniferous perennial common in wetlands and disturbed sites, and Agrostis capillaris (common bentgrass or colonial bentgrass), which forms dense tussocks in grasslands and is frequently used in turf management. Hybridization is documented within the genus, notably between A. stolonifera and A. capillaris, producing intermediates that can complicate identification but are often sterile or low-frequency in natural settings. Over 20 interspecific hybrids involving A. stolonifera alone have been reported, highlighting reticulate evolution in the group. Molecular and morphological evidence has delineated Agrostis from segregate genera like Podagrostis, which features a palea extending ¾ to the lemma apex (versus shorter in Agrostis), smoother leaf sheaths, blades, and elements, and generally larger habit. Phylogenetic analyses corroborate this separation, placing Podagrostis as sister to Agrostis but distinct based on combined ITS and ETS sequence data alongside floral traits. Such distinctions have led to transfers of former Agrostis taxa to Podagrostis, refining the core composition of Agrostis to exclude high-elevation Neotropical elements with those diagnostic features.

Taxonomic Revisions and Formerly Placed Species

Since the early 2000s, molecular phylogenetic analyses employing nuclear (ITS) regions and DNA markers have demonstrated the of Agrostis sensu lato, necessitating the exclusion of several lineages to refine generic boundaries based on monophyletic clades. These studies, building on morphological traits like palea length and lemma epidermal anatomy, have driven the reinstatement and expansion of genera such as Podagrostis, originally described by Griseb. in 1879 and Scribn. & Merr. in 1901. In the Neotropics, Podagrostis has absorbed multiple species formerly placed in Agrostis, with Sylvester et al. (2020) effecting new combinations for A. exserta, A. liebmannii, A. rosei, and A. trichodes, elevating the count of recognized New World Podagrostis species to ten. Subsequent work by Molina et al. (2021) added combinations like P. meridensis (from A. meridensis Luces) and P. novogaliciana (from A. novogaliciana McVaugh), justified by shared synapomorphies including a palea extending ¾ to the lemma apex and a trichodium net on the lemma epidermis, corroborated by phylogenetic placement basal to core Agrostis. By 2025, Podagrostis encompassed 12 species, with five directly transferred from Agrostis in these revisions. European taxa have undergone parallel segregations; Peterson et al. (2020) erected Agrostula and Alpagrostis based on ITS and data resolving distinct clades sister to but divergent from Agrostis sensu stricto. Agrostula truncatula derives from the former Agrostis truncatula, while Alpagrostis incorporates four species, including A. (previously under Agrostis alpina or synonyms like Agraulus alpinus), A. setacea, A. schleicheri, and A. barceloi, characterized by alpine distributions from Iberia to the and , with smooth branches distinguishing some. These shifts exclude them from Agrostis due to reticulate evolution and morphological divergence, such as floret vestiture. In Andean regions, including Colombian páramos, revisions have reallocated species like Podagrostis bacillata (formerly under Agrostis), with taxonomic keys now distinguishing two Podagrostis from 15 Agrostis species in high-elevation habitats. Such updates mitigate misidentifications that confound ecological modeling, conservation prioritization of endemics, and agricultural assessments of or traits in temperate grasslands. Ongoing DNA-based refinements continue to refine Agrostidinae subtribe limits, emphasizing causal phylogenetic signals over historical synonymy.

Morphology and Identification

Vegetative Features

Species of Agrostis exhibit a primarily life cycle, with most forming dense tufts through cespitose growth, while select taxa such as A. stolonifera propagate via stolons and A. gigantea via rhizomes, enabling vegetative spread. Culms arise erect or geniculately from the base, typically measuring 5–100(–120) cm in height and 0.5–2 mm in diameter, with 2–6 nodes; internodes are terete and often smooth, though pubescence varies by species. Leaf blades are linear, fine-textured, and narrow, generally 1–3 mm wide and 2–15 cm long, either flat or folded, with sheaths that clasp the culm and may be smooth or scaberulous; ligules consist of a membranous collar, ranging 0.5–6 mm in length, truncate to acute or lacerate at the apex, providing a key identifier for species differentiation. Root systems are fibrous and adventitious, with stoloniferous developing at lower nodes to form sod-like mats, while tufted forms maintain shallow, extensive fibrous . Vegetative distinctions among include variations in culm height, leaf pubescence—such as scabrous margins in A. scabra—and growth form, with annual like A. micrantha showing laxer habits compared to robust perennials.

Reproductive Structures


Agrostis species produce open, diffuse panicle inflorescences that emerge from leaf sheaths, typically bearing numerous small spikelets measuring 1.5–3 mm in length. Each spikelet contains a single floret with two glumes, a lemma often bearing a short dorsal awn or awnless, and a palea; the florets are bisexual and adapted for wind pollination (anemophily). Pollination occurs via lightweight pollen dispersed by wind, facilitating outcrossing in this primarily allogamous genus. Seed production in Agrostis is prolific, with individual plants capable of generating thousands of small caryopses per , exhibiting high viability under suitable conditions. These seeds are lightweight and contribute to the genus's in varied environments. In addition to , many species, particularly invasive ones like A. stolonifera and A. capillaris, employ asexual clonal through stolons and rhizomes, which produce genetically identical ramets and enhance persistence in disturbed habitats. This dual reproductive strategy—combining high seed output with vegetative spread—distinguishes Agrostis in grass , allowing rapid colonization without reliance solely on establishment.

Distribution and Habitat

Native and Global Distribution

Agrostis is native primarily to temperate, , and cool montane regions worldwide, with its approximately 198 exhibiting highest diversity in the , particularly , , and , as well as tropical high-elevation areas like the and Central American mountains. In , 21 are native, many endemic to western regions and adapted to temperate climates. Native distributions extend from to altitudes exceeding 4,500 m, such as in and Central America, where 17 of 20 recorded are indigenous, often in open areas above 1,500 m. Human activities, including , establishment, and turfgrass cultivation, have facilitated the introduction of several Agrostis to non-native regions, resulting in a nearly cosmopolitan presence on all continents except . Introduced taxa, such as A. stolonifera (native to and ) and A. capillaris, have become widespread in temperate zones of the , including (where 4 are introduced alongside 10 natives) and (with 10 indigenous plus naturalized introductions like A. stolonifera since 1878). These introductions often occur in disturbed sites, with elevational ranges from 651 m to 3,300 m in regions like Megamexico. ![Gewoon_struisgras_Agrostis_tenuis.jpg][center]

Preferred Habitats and Adaptations

Species of Agrostis predominantly occupy moist grasslands, dunes, disturbed sites, and open woodlands, favoring cool-season climates with adequate moisture. Many exhibit a preference for acidic to neutral soils, including sandy, granitic, or schist-derived substrates with pH often below 7, though adaptability extends to basic chalk and dolomite soils in species like A. capillaris. Poorly drained, fine- to medium-textured soils with moderate organic matter support growth in species such as A. stolonifera, which thrives in pH ranges of 6.5 to 7.3. Tolerance to abiotic stresses varies across species and populations, enabling habitat expansion into marginal environments. Agrostis stolonifera demonstrates tolerance influenced by ecotypic variation, with coastal populations exhibiting enhanced resistance to NaCl through ion regulation mechanisms. is evident in turf-adapted forms, where improved water retention and stability under fertilization mitigate stress. However, upland ecotypes often display lower resilience to prolonged drought and , restricting them to mesic, non-saline sites. Some populations tolerate high soil acidity and , broadening suitability for contaminated or infertile lands. Key adaptations include metal hyperaccumulation, which confers survival in polluted soils. Agrostis capillaris ecotypes from arsenic-contaminated sites regulate uptake genetically, limiting toxicity while others accumulate elevated levels for potential phytoremediation. Agrostis tenuis hyperaccumulates lead from mining substrates, reaching concentrations sufficient for bioremediation applications. Similarly, A. castellana sequesters arsenic and zinc up to 1900 mg/kg dry weight in aboveground tissues, a trait species-specific and organ-distributed. Altitudinally, Agrostis spans sea level to alpine zones exceeding 3000 m, with species like A. exarata zoning across elevations in montane grasslands and forests, adapting via compact growth to hypoxic, cold conditions.

Ecology

Ecosystem Roles

Agrostis species contribute to and in grassland ecosystems through their fibrous root systems and sod-forming growth habits, which bind surface soils and reduce runoff on slopes and disturbed sites. For example, Agrostis gigantea (redtop) establishes rapidly on moist, compacted soils, providing effective temporary in riparian zones and post-disturbance areas by forming dense mats that minimize sediment loss. Similarly, Agrostis capillaris (colonial bentgrass) enhances in acidic grasslands, with studies showing its root networks improving soil cohesion on forest road cuts and reducing formation under moderate traffic. In nutrient-poor environments, Agrostis capillaris sustains primary productivity on oligotrophic, acidic s where nutrient availability limits other vegetation, acting as a key contributor to accumulation and input in low-fertility meadows. This adaptation allows the genus to maintain function in infertile conditions, with field observations indicating its dominance correlates with low soil and levels, supporting via persistent decomposition. Competitive dynamics of Agrostis species often involve dense sward formation that alters nutrient cycling, as their efficient root uptake and high tiller density can deplete available resources, slowing decomposition rates and reducing in grasslands. In some systems, this leads to shifts in regimes by producing continuous fine fuels that promote more frequent, low-intensity burns, though empirical data from European grasslands show variable impacts depending on sward maturity. Certain species, such as Agrostis scabra (rough bentgrass), serve as pioneers in on disturbed substrates like burned or eroded sites, initiating development through early colonization and facilitation via associated microbes, as documented in post-fire chronosequences.

Biological Interactions

Agrostis species form mutualistic symbiotic associations with arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi (AMF), which facilitate enhanced uptake of nutrients such as and improve tolerance to environmental stresses in nutrient-limited soils. Field studies on A. capillaris reveal colonization by diverse AMF taxa, correlating with increased establishment and growth under varying conditions. Long-term herbivory modifies the structure of root-associated fungal communities in Agrostis spp., shifting dominance among fungal groups without substantially impairing host biomass accumulation. These grasses host a range of herbivores, serving as food sources for larval stages of various , including skipper butterflies such as Amblyscirtes vialis (common roadside skipper), Hesperia leonardus (Leonard's skipper), and Hylephila phyleus (). Root-feeding larvae of crane flies () graze on A. capillaris, influencing AMF patterns and potentially modulating plant-fungal . Other herbivores, including , sawflies, and leaf-mining flies, target Agrostis tissues, with silica content in leaves acting as a physical defense against folivore damage. In grassland communities, Agrostis engages in antagonistic interactions through direct competition with co-occurring native grasses for light, water, and soil resources, contributing to shifts in species composition. Indirect effects arise via predator-mediated apparent competition, as seen with introduced A. capillaris elevating invertebrate predator densities that suppress herbivores on associated native ferns like Botrychium australe. Grazing tolerance in Agrostis allows persistence under vertebrate herbivory pressure, influencing local community structure by favoring resilient competitors over less tolerant species.

Human Uses

Turfgrass Applications

Creeping bentgrass () dominates turfgrass applications on putting greens and tees, valued for its fine leaf texture, dense growth habit, and tolerance for mowing heights as low as 0.25 inches (6.4 mm), which supports smooth ball roll and aesthetic uniformity. This species exhibits aggressive stoloniferous spread, enabling rapid recovery from divots and traffic wear, with optimum growth temperatures between 16–24°C (60–75°F). Prominent cultivars include Penncross, released in 1954 by the Pennsylvania Agricultural Experiment Station, which gained widespread adoption for outperforming earlier selections in putting green quality, density, and disease resistance under intensive management. Modern trials, such as those evaluating over 20 creeping bentgrass entries, confirm superior performance metrics like turf density ratings above 8.0 on a 1–9 scale and sustained quality under simulated sports traffic. Maintenance demands are intensive to optimize these traits: nitrogen fertilization at 0.45–1.0 kg actual per 100 m² annually, depending on site conditions; consistent to maintain without excess thatch accumulation; and daily mowing at 0.1–0.15 inches (2.5–3.8 mm) with vertical mowing or topdressing to control lateral growth and promote tillering. These practices yield high playability, as evidenced by agronomic studies showing clipping yields of 1.5–2.5 g/m²/day under nitrogen rates of 20–40 kg /ha monthly, correlating with economic efficiencies in establishment via seeding rates as low as 1.5–2.0 kg/ha for cost-effective .

Forage and Agricultural Uses

Agrostis gigantea, commonly known as redtop, serves as a grass in pastures and hay production, particularly in moist, acidic, or poorly drained soils where more palatable struggle. Its exhibits moderate , averaging 14.8% crude protein, 27.1% crude , and 44.7% nitrogen-free extract on a basis. is fair to good for during spring and early summer growth stages, declining sharply after seed maturity due to increased and lignification. Hay quality improves when redtop is mixed with or other grasses like timothy, yielding acceptable feed for and sheep, though pure stands produce lower-quality compared to modern alternatives. Agrostis capillaris, or common bent, provides palatable in extensive pastures on nutrient-poor, acidic grasslands across , thriving under pressure with tolerance for low soils (down to 4.5). It supports production through its fine-leaved growth, which maintains digestibility in mixed swards, and is occasionally harvested for hay in upland or marginal areas. Protein content varies seasonally but typically ranges from 8-12% in mature stands, sufficient for maintenance rations in sheep and on unimproved lands. Both species contribute to agricultural reclamation of marginal lands, such as eroded or waterlogged sites, where A. gigantea aids and revegetation efforts, historically seeded in North American wetlands post-1900 for and low-input . In European contexts, A. capillaris has played a role in sustaining systems on acidic uplands since , enabling production without heavy fertilization. Breeding programs have targeted enhanced digestibility and resistance to fungal diseases like in select lines, though forage-focused improvements lag behind turfgrass selections, with gains in yield and persistence documented at 1-2% annually in mixed trials.

Environmental Impact

Invasiveness and Competition with Natives

Certain species within the Agrostis genus, notably A. stolonifera (creeping bentgrass), exhibit invasive potential in disturbed or managed habitats, where they form dense mats via stolons and seeds, outcompeting native grasses through shading and resource dominance. In wetlands and riparian zones, A. stolonifera aggressively invades escaped turf areas, rapidly filling gaps between native bunchgrasses and preventing their regeneration, as documented in Garry ecosystems where it establishes faster than surrounding vegetation. This , combined with high and tolerance to mowing or flooding, facilitates establishment in moist, disturbed sites. A. gigantea (redtop) similarly displaces natives in unmanaged grasslands and wetlands via rhizomatous spread and prolific seeding, leading to reduced cover in invaded patches; empirical observations note its early spring growth advantage, allowing it to preempt resources from slower-establishing perennials. Studies in the classify it as a medium- to low-impact non-native, with hybridization potential amplifying and competitive edges in disturbed soils. However, invasiveness varies by context; for instance, A. capillaris rarely forms monocultures or significantly alters , lacking the aggressive spread of congeners. Quantified effects include biodiversity declines in invaded wetlands, where A. stolonifera densities can exceed 50% cover, suppressing native diversity indices by up to 30% in experimental plots, though such impacts are site-specific and less pronounced in undisturbed or arid habitats. The IUCN does not list Agrostis species as globally invasive, reflecting their opportunistic rather than transformative role in most ecosystems, with competition amplified primarily by anthropogenic disturbances like agriculture or erosion control plantings.

Pollutant Tolerance and Phytoremediation

Certain species within the genus Agrostis, such as A. tenuis and A. capillaris, exhibit notable tolerance to , enabling survival and growth on contaminated soils derived from and industrial activities. This tolerance is often linked to ecotypic variations evolved , where populations from polluted sites demonstrate reduced symptoms and maintained biomass compared to non-tolerant genotypes. For instance, A. tenuis populations from lead-contaminated areas in the have shown resistance mechanisms that allow root and shoot growth at lead concentrations up to 10,000 mg/kg , with genetic patterns indicating polygenic control. In experimental settings, A. tenuis has demonstrated hyperaccumulation of lead, with shoots accumulating up to 1,500 mg/kg dry weight in hydroponic trials at 500 mg/L Pb exposure, and field simulations on mine tailings revealing extraction efficiencies of 5-10% of lead over one growing season. Similarly, A. capillaris ecotypes from arsenic-polluted historical mining sites in exhibit genotypic diversity correlating with uptake capacity, absorbing up to 200 mg/kg in shoots under controlled conditions mimicking 100-500 mg/kg levels, with tolerance linked to enhanced activity and compartmentalization in vacuoles. These traits position Agrostis as candidates for phytoextraction, where repeated harvesting removes accumulated metals, though uptake rates vary with pH, organic amendments, and co-contaminants like or . Phytoremediation applications of Agrostis have been tested on mine tailings and post-industrial sites, with A. capillaris stabilizing -laden soils in Romanian mining districts, achieving 15-20% reduction in bioavailable after two years of growth in field plots. For lead remediation, A. tenuis trials on UK spoil heaps reported biomass yields of 200-300 g/m² annually, facilitating gradual metal depletion without synthetic chelators, though slower than hyperaccumulators like Thlaspi caerulescens. Benefits include cost-effective revegetation and , but risks involve potential metal transfer to herbivores or if not managed, necessitating site-specific monitoring and harvest protocols to outweigh dissemination concerns in non-target areas.

Biotechnology and Controversies

Genetic Engineering Developments

Genetic engineering efforts in the genus Agrostis have primarily targeted Agrostis stolonifera (creeping bentgrass), a key turfgrass species, to introduce traits enhancing agronomic performance such as herbicide tolerance. These developments leverage transformation techniques like Agrobacterium-mediated or biolistic methods to insert genes conferring resistance to specific herbicides, facilitating weed management in seed production fields and turf settings without broad-spectrum chemical reliance. A prominent example is the glyphosate-tolerant event ASR368, developed collaboratively by The Scotts Company and Monsanto Company. This transgenic line incorporates the CP4 EPSPS gene from Agrobacterium species, enabling survival under glyphosate application rates up to 5-10 times standard field doses while maintaining normal growth and reproduction. Following confined field trials and environmental assessments, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service granted ASR368 nonregulated status on January 18, 2017, confirming it posed no greater plant pest risk than non-transgenic counterparts. Additional transgenic lines in A. stolonifera have achieved tolerance to via the bar gene from , expressed through biolistic transformation as early as , with resistance verified at five times field rates. Such modifications not only control weeds but also indirectly suppress fungal diseases like dollar spot (Clarireedia spp.) by allowing precise timing that minimizes turf stress, leading to improved stand density and reduced disease incidence by 50-70% in managed plots. Since the early 2000s, molecular markers including and miniature inverted-repeat (MITE)-anchored markers have supported breeding programs in Agrostis by identifying quantitative trait loci for traits like tolerance and resistance, accelerating selection without direct transgenesis. For instance, microsatellite markers developed around 2010 enable maternal lineage tracking in hybrids, aiding of engineered traits into elite cultivars. These tools have facilitated verifiable improvements, such as 20-30% enhanced stress resilience in marker-assisted lines compared to conventional selections.

Gene Flow and Regulatory Debates

In field trials conducted by Scotts Miracle-Gro in from 2001 to 2005, pollen from glyphosate-resistant transgenic creeping bentgrass ( event ASR368) dispersed beyond containment boundaries, with initial detections of hybrid plants up to 3.5 kilometers away by 2004. Monitoring intensified after 2010, revealing transgenic presence up to approximately 10 kilometers from trial sites by 2011, primarily through wind-mediated flow in this anemophilous . However, empirical surveys indicated low establishment rates, with populations consisting of small numbers of individuals that exhibited no enhanced fitness over non-transgenic conspecifics in unselected environments, leading to limited persistence without application. Subsequent studies quantified pollen-mediated gene flow at landscape scales, with detections up to 21 kilometers in wind-favorable conditions, but confirmed that transgene frequency declined rapidly in wild populations due to segregation, pollen competition, and absence of selective pressure. This contrasts with precautionary narratives of inevitable uncontrollability, as field data from Oregon eradication efforts—where escaped transgenics appeared in irrigation ditches—showed successful containment through targeted herbicide applications, with no documented shifts in native Agrostis community dominance or biodiversity loss in unmanaged habitats. Scotts reported over 90% reduction in feral populations by 2017 via ongoing monitoring and removal protocols, underscoring that gene flow, while detectable, did not result in self-sustaining invasions. Regulatory debates centered on Scotts' 2015 petition for , prompting USDA APHIS to issue a in November 2016, which assessed risks and concluded the event posed no greater plant pest potential than non-transgenic A. stolonifera, favoring non-regulated status based on empirical . Critics, including environmental NGOs, argued for perpetual citing dispersal models predicting broader spread, yet the EIS prioritized verifiable field outcomes over simulations, weighing turf industry efficiencies—such as reduced maintenance costs—against negligible ecological trade-offs in this already widespread species. proceeded in 2017, with mandatory monitoring retained to track any persistence, reflecting a shift toward rather than zero-tolerance for in perennials.

References

  1. https://phytokeys.pensoft.net/article/105878/
  2. https://floranorthamerica.org/Agrostis
  3. https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/graminoid/agrsto/all.html
  4. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.1079/cabicompendium.3830
  5. https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/graminoid/agrsca/all.html
  6. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Agrostis
  7. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10439499/
  8. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jse.13175
  9. https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/downloads/0k225f59w
  10. https://research.fs.usda.gov/feis/species-reviews/agrsto
  11. https://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/eflora_display.php?tid=10111
  12. https://www.aphis.usda.gov/sites/default/files/03_10401p_ra.pdf
  13. https://phytokeys.pensoft.net/article/50538/
  14. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340817864_New_combinations_and_updated_descriptions_in_Podagrostis_Agrostidinae_Poaceae_from_the_Neotropics_and_Mexico
  15. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7695677/
  16. https://annals.mobot.org/index.php/annals/article/view/642
  17. https://phytokeys.pensoft.net/article/50042/
  18. https://phytokeys.pensoft.net/article/55171/
  19. https://wfoplantlist.org/taxon/wfo-4100000788-2024-06
  20. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7329918/
  21. https://seedidguide.idseed.org/fact_sheets/agrostis-l-spp/
  22. https://plants.usda.gov/plant-profile/AGST2
  23. http://www.efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=3&taxon_id=200024787
  24. http://efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=3&taxon_id=200024812
  25. https://gobotany.nativeplanttrust.org/species/agrostis/stolonifera/
  26. https://cales.arizona.edu/yavapaiplants/SpeciesDetailGrass.php?genus=Agrostis&species=stolonifera
  27. https://plants.usda.gov/plant-profile/agsc5
  28. http://efloras.org/florataxon.aspx?flora_id=3&taxon_id=200024797
  29. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5336273/
  30. https://www.iucngisd.org/gisd/species.php?sc=1365
  31. https://digitalcommons.humboldt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=botany_jps
  32. https://powo.science.kew.org/taxon/urn:lsid:ipni.org:names:325863-2
  33. https://profiles.ala.org.au/opus/foa/profile/Agrostis
  34. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/0028825X.1991.10416717
  35. https://nph.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1469-8137.1981.tb02328.x
  36. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0098847204000218
  37. https://www.umces.edu/sites/default/files/Upland-bentgrass-summary.pdf
  38. https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/plantmaterials/idpmctn10749.pdf
  39. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-024-63830-1
  40. https://environmentalsystemsresearch.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40068-022-00279-z
  41. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/004896979490300X
  42. https://research.fs.usda.gov/feis/species-reviews/agrexa
  43. https://nrcs.usda.gov/plantmaterials/idpmcpg9616.pdf
  44. https://research.fs.usda.gov/feis/species-reviews/agrgig
  45. https://andrewsforest.oregonstate.edu/pubs/pdf/pub494.pdf
  46. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S000632079700178X
  47. http://faculty.washington.edu/moral/publications/2010%2520JVSRdMJSJNE.pdf
  48. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/10742649_Diversity_of_arbuscular_mycorrhizal_fungi_colonising_roots_of_the_grass_species_Agrostis_capillaris_and_Lolium_perenne_in_a_field_experiment
  49. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11104-025-07605-1
  50. https://www.illinoiswildflowers.info/plant_insects/plants/agrostis_spp.html
  51. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0038071706000265
  52. https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2656.2006.01082.x
  53. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229984361_Predator-mediated_apparent_competition_between_an_introduced_grass_Agrostis_capillaris_and_a_native_fern_Botrychium_australe_Ophioglossaceae_in_New_Zealand
  54. https://pfaf.org/user/Plant.aspx?LatinName=Agrostis%20capillaris
  55. https://content.ces.ncsu.edu/creeping-bentgrass
  56. https://journals.ashs.org/view/journals/hortsci/58/4/article-p410.xml
  57. https://archive.lib.msu.edu/tic/turfx/article/1995mar4.pdf
  58. https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/imported/030108.pdf
  59. https://extension.psu.edu/evaluation-of-bentgrass-cultivars-for-putting-greens/
  60. https://extension.psu.edu/evaluation-of-bentgrass-cultivars-for-golf-course-fairways-and-tees/
  61. https://www.oasisturf.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Penncross-2021.pdf
  62. https://www.usga.org/content/usga/home-page/course-care/green-section-record/61/issue-12/the-ins-and-outs-of-managing-creeping-bentgrass-putting-greens.html
  63. https://acsess.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.2134/agronj2011.0369
  64. https://gcmonline.com/course/environment/news/creeping-bentgrass-putting-green
  65. https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/graminoid/agrgig/all.html
  66. https://www.cal-ipc.org/plants/profile/agrostis-stolonifera-profile/
  67. https://goert.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/IS-factsheet-agrostis-stolonifera.pdf
  68. https://www.iucngisd.org/gisd/pdf.php?sc=1375
  69. https://vegetation.cnps.org/alliance/579
  70. https://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/GreatLakes/FactSheet.aspx?SpeciesID=2683
  71. http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0006-82412021000200007
  72. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/297729083_Assessing_the_invasive_risk_of_two_non-native_Agrostis_species_on_sub-Antarctic_Macquarie_Island
  73. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/381374643_Arsenic_uptake_by_Agrostis_capillaris_as_related_to_its_genotypic_diversity_in_the_area_of_historical_ore_mining_and_processing
  74. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1964.tb01569.x
  75. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7464124/
  76. https://sropaj.ro/documente/ro/revista/articole/RJGFC-27-2023_art-3.pdf
  77. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0269749199002626
  78. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5756550/
  79. https://www.nature.com/articles/nbt0994-919
  80. https://www.intechopen.com/chapters/44983
  81. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/01/18/2017-01077/the-scotts-co-and-monsanto-co-determination-of-nonregulated-status-of-creeping-bentgrass-genetically
  82. https://www.aphis.usda.gov/sites/default/files/15_30001p_fpra.pdf
  83. https://wssa.net/wp-content/uploads/WSSAbentgrass.pdf
  84. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0171183
  85. https://www.fs.usda.gov/pnw/pubs/journals/pnw_2010_zapiola001.pdf
  86. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23009646/
  87. https://www.opb.org/news/article/gmo-grass-oregon-creeping-bent-scotts-monsanto/
  88. https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1365-2664.2007.01430.x
  89. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0173308
  90. https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2018/06/26/viewpoint-how-scotts-and-monsanto-got-off-the-hook-for-oregon-gmo-bentgrass-mishap/
  91. https://capitalpress.com/2017/07/18/scotts-claims-significant-progress-in-killing-ge-bentgrass-in-oregon/
  92. https://www.aphis.usda.gov/sites/default/files/15_30001p_feis.pdf
  93. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/08/03/2016-18421/the-scotts-co-and-monsanto-co-notice-of-intent-to-prepare-an-environmental-impact-statement-for
  94. https://www.aphis.usda.gov/sites/default/files/15_30001p_rod.pdf
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.