volume 85 issue 2 pages 149-184

Risk Analysis of Gene Flow from Cultivated, Addictive, Social-Drug Plants to Wild Relatives

Publication typeJournal Article
Publication date2019-03-18
scimago Q1
wos Q2
SJR1.076
CiteScore9.8
Impact factor3.0
ISSN00068101, 18749372
Plant Science
Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Abstract
Addictive “social drugs” that are derived from plants range from reputable stimulants (e.g., coffee and tea) to stigmatized and dangerous preparations (e.g., ephedrine and cocaine). Both legal and illicit global trade has increased the geographic distribution of plants from which the principal social drugs are obtained. In turn, this range expansion increased opportunities to transfer genes controlling production of high levels of secondary chemicals because of increases in overlapping geographic distributions with sexually compatible domesticated, wild, and weedy relatives. We review the literature for evidence that the introduction of these chemicals into ecosystems could occur through gene flow in ten common, addictive, social drug crops: coca, coffee, cola, ephedra, khat, marijuana, opium poppy, tea, tobacco and yerbe maté. From the published literature of the potential evolutionary and environmental consequences of gene flow from popular social drug crops, we also analyse the subsequent unintended ecological or evolutionary consequences, such as increased weediness, loss of genetic diversity in sexually compatible wild relatives, or health and fitness consequences for herbivores of these crops. Given the rapid industrialization of many of these crops, we identify knowledge gaps and call for renewed attention to the study of their ecology and evolution.
Found 
Found 

Top-30

Journals

1
Plant Ecology
1 publication, 11.11%
Biological Conservation
1 publication, 11.11%
Evolution Letters
1 publication, 11.11%
Evolution; international journal of organic evolution
1 publication, 11.11%
Botanical Journal of the Linnean Society
1 publication, 11.11%
Global Ecology and Conservation
1 publication, 11.11%
Discover Sustainability
1 publication, 11.11%
Canadian Journal of Zoology
1 publication, 11.11%
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
1 publication, 11.11%
1

Publishers

1
2
3
Wiley
3 publications, 33.33%
Springer Nature
2 publications, 22.22%
Elsevier
2 publications, 22.22%
Canadian Science Publishing
1 publication, 11.11%
The Royal Society
1 publication, 11.11%
1
2
3
  • We do not take into account publications without a DOI.
  • Statistics recalculated weekly.

Are you a researcher?

Create a profile to get free access to personal recommendations for colleagues and new articles.
Metrics
9
Share
Cite this
GOST |
Cite this
GOST Copy
Campbell L., Blanchette C. M., Small E. Risk Analysis of Gene Flow from Cultivated, Addictive, Social-Drug Plants to Wild Relatives // The Botanical Review. 2019. Vol. 85. No. 2. pp. 149-184.
GOST all authors (up to 50) Copy
Campbell L., Blanchette C. M., Small E. Risk Analysis of Gene Flow from Cultivated, Addictive, Social-Drug Plants to Wild Relatives // The Botanical Review. 2019. Vol. 85. No. 2. pp. 149-184.
RIS |
Cite this
RIS Copy
TY - JOUR
DO - 10.1007/s12229-019-09206-x
UR - https://doi.org/10.1007/s12229-019-09206-x
TI - Risk Analysis of Gene Flow from Cultivated, Addictive, Social-Drug Plants to Wild Relatives
T2 - The Botanical Review
AU - Campbell, L.G.
AU - Blanchette, C M
AU - Small, E
PY - 2019
DA - 2019/03/18
PB - Springer Nature
SP - 149-184
IS - 2
VL - 85
SN - 0006-8101
SN - 1874-9372
ER -
BibTex |
Cite this
BibTex (up to 50 authors) Copy
@article{2019_Campbell,
author = {L.G. Campbell and C M Blanchette and E Small},
title = {Risk Analysis of Gene Flow from Cultivated, Addictive, Social-Drug Plants to Wild Relatives},
journal = {The Botanical Review},
year = {2019},
volume = {85},
publisher = {Springer Nature},
month = {mar},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s12229-019-09206-x},
number = {2},
pages = {149--184},
doi = {10.1007/s12229-019-09206-x}
}
MLA
Cite this
MLA Copy
Campbell, L.G., et al. “Risk Analysis of Gene Flow from Cultivated, Addictive, Social-Drug Plants to Wild Relatives.” The Botanical Review, vol. 85, no. 2, Mar. 2019, pp. 149-184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12229-019-09206-x.