 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Millwatch Special Report November 2006
GE Trees Taking Root in the Forest Industry
Download the pdf
Definitions and Dangers
A Tree By Any Other Name
Although they are frequently used interchangeably, the terms “genetically modified,” “genetically engineered,” and “transgenic” do not entirely mean the same thing.
A genetically modified tree is one that has had its genetic material altered through any method, including conventional breeding.
A genetically engineered tree is one that has been modified using techniques that permit the direct transfer of genes to that organism. Collectively these techniques are called recombinant DNA technology.
A transgenic tree has been genetically engineered using genes from another genus.
As you can see, transgenic trees are not the same as hybrid trees. There’s a big difference.
Hybridization involves selecting trees with desirable traits and breeding them (sexual reproduction) to produce beneficial offspring. This selective cross breeding uses genetically distinct parents within the same species and genes are not individually manipulated.
Transgenic trees, however, have been genetically engineered to contain DNA from an external source. They have undergone a genetic alteration or modification whereby specific genes have been added or removed to produce a unique genetic combination that is expressed in the tree.
Genetic modification includes selecting genes from different species (or kingdoms) and re-mixing them to produce novel traits not found in the tree’s wild relatives and not previously seen in its species.
The hoped for novel traits produced in transgenic trees include:
• herbicide tolerance
• pest and viral resistance
• abiotic (i.e drought and freezing) stress tolerance
• tissue composition
• modified fibre quality and quantity
• altered growth rate
• altered reproductive development
• modified versions of fruit or flowers
7 Reasons GE Trees are dangerous to the health and eco culture of our forests
1. Uncontrollable cross-pollination
The threat of GE trees interbreeding with wild trees is extreme. Tree pollen can be blown by the wind and drift on air currents for hundreds, possibly thousands, of kilometres from its source. This can lead to unintentional but irreversible cross-pollination and the spread of genes from transgenic trees to unmodified trees, native, wild and cultivated alike. Evidence of significant cross-pollination between genetically engineered crops and wild varieties has already been shown in corn, rice and canola. Although scientists hope to create sterile GE trees to prevent pollination of native trees, it is not 100% assured.
2. Ecosystem disruption
Trees which have been genetically modified for plantation planting to produce specific commercially advantageous traits could prove devastating to natural tree populations. Subsequent offspring from cross-breeding could alter the way trees cycle nutrients and water. Genetically modified plantation trees developed for high growth rates absorb more nutrients and moisture than traditional varieties. This depletion creates a threat to the productivity of the land. Low lignin GE trees (or their hybrid offspring) would also decompose far more quickly, which would alter soil structure, ecology and fertility.
3. Toxic properties
Novel traits such as insect and fungal resistance and low lignin content produced through genetic engineering could harm natural tree species. For example, beneficial insects could be poisoned by genetically produced biopesticides and the application of stronger pesticides designed specifically for application to GE trees. Other native forest species including fungi (mushrooms), insects and birds would be negatively impacted through toxicity and food supply reductions.
4. “Super pests”
Trees bred with biopesticide properties are of particular concern to the health of the many beneficial insects living in our forests. This genetically engineered trait allows for greater tolerance to toxic pesticide use and also has the potential to lead to the creation of pesticide-resistant “super pests” that would be especially harmful to unprotected, natural plants.
5. “Super weeds”
Another novel trait manipulated in the production of some GE trees is herbicide tolerance. There are concerns that this trait would allow for and actually encourage the greater use of toxic herbicides in the growing of plantation trees. Like rampant pesticide use, the excessive application of herbicides could reduce biodiversity by killing other plants, lead to an increase in the growth of resistant types of weeds, as well as polluting soil and water.
6. Patented monopolies
Smaller wood lot managers and timber producers will be faced with the same economic risks and outcomes as those associated with growing genetically engineered agricultural crops such as corn and soy. Transgenic trees, like their bioengineered food crop counterparts, will be patented, which could quickly lead to a monopoly of large timber corporations controlling the industry.
7. Silent forests, unlivable habitat
When trees are grown purely for the sake of commercial traits, natural reproduction through seed dispersal from pine cones and similar structures is potentially eliminated. Without seeds to eat, many forest creatures have no food source. Transgenic trees with herbicide resistant traits will promote the use of stronger herbicides to eliminate forest bed undergrowth which normally provides habitat and food for a wide range of forest dwelling creatures. While herbicides and pesticides are already being used with non-GE species, it is thought that GE tree plantations will exacerbate their use. Trees engineered to produce their own pesticides will create a poisonous environment for the myriad insects and other small creatures such as spiders, litter layer crustaceans, worms and mulluscs living in association with trees. The net result? Silent, toxic, uninhabitable forests.
Millwatch is a bi-monthly newsletter on Clean Pulp and Paper Production, featuring news, analysis, resources and contacts. Produced by Reach for Unbleached since October 1995 and published on the internet and in the , BC's environmental news magazine.