Fifty years of relentless development has forced China’s forests into retreat. Inevitable environmental consequences such as desertification and flash floods have resulted in China becoming a net importer of wood. The Great Green Wall project (2001) sponsored by the Government aims at planting a 2800-mile long shelterbelt of trees across the northwest rim skirting the Gobi desert. This is intended to combat sandstorms blowing closer to Beijing, at a cost of 96.2b yen.
Over one million GM trees have been planted in "reforestation" initiatives since commercialisation was approved by The Chinese State Forestry Administration in 2002. In the northwest regions of Xinjiang province 8 000 square kilometres of farmlands are given over to GM tree mono-plantations. A further 400 000 GM poplars planted around the headlands of the Yellow and Yangtze Rivers continue to be plagued by insect pests although they are engineered to be pest resistant. GM trees introduced into the environment without any proper controls have subsequently been "lost" to monitoring.
Wang Huoron from the Chinese Academy of Sciences told the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) in 2003 that the GM poplars "are so widely planted in China that pollen and seed dispersal cannot be prevented." He also reported to the FAO that without any licensing system and exchanges between nurseries of traditional and GM plant varieties has made it "extremely difficult to trace" the location of GM trees.
Poplars, whether GM or non-GM, are susceptible to pathogens and the more varieties of poplars introduced into forests, the greater the risk of pathogens. Leaf rust is the most significant disease of poplars worldwide. Yousry-El-Kassaby, a forest geneticist at the University of British Columbia response to China’s rapid reforestation projects was cautious, he said "Instead of going through the more labourious process of traditional breeding for disease and pest resistances, these quick fix, single-gene technologies are really attractive, in the same way they are for [GM] crops."
The Chinese State Forestry Bureau effectively has no licensing system over GM trees and The Department of Agriculture is powerless to control GM trees because they are not classified as crops. According to the Nanjing Institute of Environmental Sciences there is an urgent need for communication between the two government departments as genes from GM poplars have transferred to nearby natural trees.
GM trees are engineered to grow faster than native counterparts and produce up to 50% less lignin, which is the substance of wood (see "GM trees alert", http://www.i-sis.org.uk/GMtrees.php ). Removing lignin makes the tree less fibrous and cheaper to pulp for industry. But it also reduces the trees’ fitness in the environment and leads to decreased biomass and degraded biodiversity. (See "Low lignin in GM trees and forest crops" http://www.i-sis.org.uk/LLGMT.php)
Genetic modifications like reduced lignin may also weaken the trees capacity to withstand high winds and flooding, negating explicit reasons for GM trees planted in China as a buffer against environmental forces. A four-year GM tree trial by agribusiness Syngenta established that reducing lignin increased growth rates, but failed to investigate ecological impacts.
So far, nearly two-thirds of research on GM trees for forests has taken place in the USA according to UN FAO statistics. Experiments have taken place on restricted test sites only, with the exception of the orchard papaya, engineered to resist the insect-borne ringspot virus, which was engineered and released by the University of Hawaii and contaminated non-GM seeds stocks, organic farms, backyard gardens and wild trees across the country. (See "GM battles rage worldwide", SIS 24).
Forestry is a global growth industry and corporations are keen to be involved in research on GM trees directly as well as sponsoring public sector research. International Paper (a partner in ArborGen, the world’s largest GM tree company) and the biggest producers of papers and packaging, Westvaco, (a US company owning 1.5 million acres of industrial tree plantations in the US and Brazil) and Monsanto support research on GM trees at Oregano and Washington Universities. Not one of these projects involves recycling paper or reducing the use of paper for packaged products.
Over one million GM trees have been planted in "reforestation" initiatives since commercialisation was approved by The Chinese State Forestry Administration in 2002. In the northwest regions of Xinjiang province 8 000 square kilometres of farmlands are given over to GM tree mono-plantations. A further 400 000 GM poplars planted around the headlands of the Yellow and Yangtze Rivers continue to be plagued by insect pests although they are engineered to be pest resistant. GM trees introduced into the environment without any proper controls have subsequently been "lost" to monitoring.
Wang Huoron from the Chinese Academy of Sciences told the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) in 2003 that the GM poplars "are so widely planted in China that pollen and seed dispersal cannot be prevented." He also reported to the FAO that without any licensing system and exchanges between nurseries of traditional and GM plant varieties has made it "extremely difficult to trace" the location of GM trees.
Poplars, whether GM or non-GM, are susceptible to pathogens and the more varieties of poplars introduced into forests, the greater the risk of pathogens. Leaf rust is the most significant disease of poplars worldwide. Yousry-El-Kassaby, a forest geneticist at the University of British Columbia response to China’s rapid reforestation projects was cautious, he said "Instead of going through the more labourious process of traditional breeding for disease and pest resistances, these quick fix, single-gene technologies are really attractive, in the same way they are for [GM] crops."
The Chinese State Forestry Bureau effectively has no licensing system over GM trees and The Department of Agriculture is powerless to control GM trees because they are not classified as crops. According to the Nanjing Institute of Environmental Sciences there is an urgent need for communication between the two government departments as genes from GM poplars have transferred to nearby natural trees.
******
GM trees are engineered to grow faster than native counterparts and produce up to 50% less lignin, which is the substance of wood (see "GM trees alert", http://www.i-sis.org.uk/GMtrees.php ). Removing lignin makes the tree less fibrous and cheaper to pulp for industry. But it also reduces the trees’ fitness in the environment and leads to decreased biomass and degraded biodiversity. (See "Low lignin in GM trees and forest crops" http://www.i-sis.org.uk/LLGMT.php)
Genetic modifications like reduced lignin may also weaken the trees capacity to withstand high winds and flooding, negating explicit reasons for GM trees planted in China as a buffer against environmental forces. A four-year GM tree trial by agribusiness Syngenta established that reducing lignin increased growth rates, but failed to investigate ecological impacts.
So far, nearly two-thirds of research on GM trees for forests has taken place in the USA according to UN FAO statistics. Experiments have taken place on restricted test sites only, with the exception of the orchard papaya, engineered to resist the insect-borne ringspot virus, which was engineered and released by the University of Hawaii and contaminated non-GM seeds stocks, organic farms, backyard gardens and wild trees across the country. (See "GM battles rage worldwide", SIS 24).
Forestry is a global growth industry and corporations are keen to be involved in research on GM trees directly as well as sponsoring public sector research. International Paper (a partner in ArborGen, the world’s largest GM tree company) and the biggest producers of papers and packaging, Westvaco, (a US company owning 1.5 million acres of industrial tree plantations in the US and Brazil) and Monsanto support research on GM trees at Oregano and Washington Universities. Not one of these projects involves recycling paper or reducing the use of paper for packaged products.
0 Comentarios:
Publicar un comentario
Suscribirse a Comentarios de la entrada [Atom]
<< Página Principal