GM Forest Trees – The Ultimate Threat

[Guest guest]

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/GMFTTUT.php

 

ISIS Press Release 28/02/05

 

 

GM Forest Trees – The Ultimate Threat

 

Genetically modified (GM) forest trees do not attract the same

immediate health concerns as GM food crops. But in reality, they pose

an even greater threat because they impact directly on natural forests

that are essential for the survival of our planet. Dr. Mae-Wan Ho and

Prof. Joe Cummins

 

A fully referenced version of this article is posted on ISIS members'

website. Details here

World status of GM forest trees

 

Most genetic modification of forest trees have been done by

Agrobacterium-mediated DNA transfer; but bombardment with DNA-coated

particles, or `biolistic transformation', has also been used. Of the

205 permit applications listed at the end of 2003, 73.5% originated in

the USA, 23% in other OECD member nations (in particular, Belgium,

Canada, France, Finland, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain and

Sweden) and 3.5% elsewhere (Brazil, China, Chile, South Africa and

Uruguay). Four traits account for 80% of the permit applications:

herbicide tolerance (32%), marker genes (27%), insect resistance

(12%), and lignin modification (9%). Of the tree species involved,

Populus, Pinus, Liquidambar (Sweet Gum Tree) and Eucalyptus account

for 85% of applications.

 

Although commercial interest was low during the first ten years of GM

trees development, it has steadily increased since the late 1990s. By

the end of 2003, 45% of the permits submitted were from industry,

mostly for transgenic poplars. But to-date there has not been a

concerted push for commercialisation of GM trees except in China,

where more than one million GM trees have been planted in

" reforestation " initiatives since commercialisation was approved by

The Chinese State Forestry Administration in 2002 (see " GM trees get

lost " , this series).

 

Several companies, including Weyerhaeuser, Shell and Monsanto, at one

time involved in GM tree research have since pulled out because it was

not economically attractive. However, the decision reached in December

2003 at the ninth Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework

Convention on Climate Change to allow Northern companies and

governments to establish plantations of GM trees in the South under

the " Clean Development Mechanism " might be the subsidy that GM

proponents need to make GM trees seem economically attractive.

The overriding importance of forests

 

Forest trees are long-lived. Their root system is extensive,

interacting with countless species in the soil biota that are crucial

for recycling, storing and keeping nutrients within the forest ecosystem.

 

Above ground, forest trees provide shelter, home and food for

indigenous peoples and between 1.5 to 2 million species of insects,

birds, mammals, other plants, epiphytes, fungi and bacteria.

 

All human beings are dependent on forests in one way or another, for

clean water, habitat, food, medicinal plants, and as recreational and

spiritual sanctuaries.

 

Most of all, forests, especially the tropical rainforests, are

essential for the water cycle that brings rain to crops; and for

regulating the temperature of the earth, preventing places from

getting too hot or too cold. Forests absorb carbon dioxide and produce

oxygen; in that respect they are the `lungs' of the living earth (see

" Why Gaia needs rainforests " , SiS 20).

 

Losing forests to GM tree plantations would spell ecological disaster

for our planet, especially as global warming is fast accelerating.

GM trees anathema to forest ecosystems

 

GM trees are designed for large monoculture plantations anathema to

the bio-diverse natural forest ecosystems. Local people's names for

industrial tree plantations are revealing. Eucalyptus is the " selfish

tree " , because eucalyptus plantations remove nutrients from the soil

and consume so much water that farmers cannot grow rice in

neighbouring fields. Mapuche Indigenous People in Chile refer to pine

plantations as " planted soldiers " , because they are green, in rows and

advancing. In Brazil, tree plantations are " green deserts " , and in

South Africa, " green cancer " . Throughout the Global South,

organisations and networks are actively opposing industrial tree

plantations on their land. GM trees will intensity both the problems

of industrial plantations and the opposition from indigenous peoples.

 

A joint report by the World Rainforest Movement (WRM) and Friends of

the Earth International (FoEI) says that the scientists claiming to

" improve " trees by genetic modification are in reality working to

" improve the profitability of the businesses " funding their research

(http://www.wrm.org.uy/subjects/GMTrees/text.pdf). It continues:

 

" But from a biological perspective there is no improvement whatsoever.

Is a tree with less lignin better or worse than a normal one? It is

clearly worse, given the resulting loss of structural strength which

makes it susceptible to extensive damage during wind storms. Is a

herbicide-resistance tree an " improvement " ? It is not, for it allows

extensive herbicide spraying that affects the soil on which it stands,

at the same time as it destroys local flora and impacts on wildlife.

Is a flowerless, fruitless and seedless tree of any use to living

beings? It does not provide food to myriad species of insects, birds

and [other] species that depend on these as food. Is a tree with

insecticide properties an improvement? It is a dangerous hazard to

many insects species, which are themselves part of larger food chains. "

GM trees violate international conventions

 

The WRM report points out that GMOs in general and GM trees in

particular, are a clear violation of the Convention on Biological

Diversity, which obliges governments to take a precautionary approach

towards GMOs that may cause serious damage to biodiversity. GM trees

also violate the spirit of the United Nations Forum on Forests, which

was set up to protect the world's forests.

 

Unfortunately, the inclusion of GM trees within the framework of the

Kyoto Protocol's Clean Development Mechanism means that the Climate

Change Convention not only supports the expansion of monoculture tree

plantations, but GM tree plantations supposed to act as better " carbon

sinks " .

 

The WRM and FoEI International are calling on all governments,

especially the Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change

and its Kyoto Protocol, to ban the release of GM trees. The campaign

to ban GM trees was launched in January 2004 by the Finnish People's

Biosafety Association and the Union of Ecoforestry (see " No to GM

Trees " , SiS 23).

Transgene contamination inevitable and unavoidable

 

Forest trees are tall, long-lived and produce abundant pollen and

seeds that can be carried far and wide. Forest trees also reproduce

asexually, sending out clones that spread long distances from the

mother plant, thus promoting further transgene contamination.

Contamination of native trees by GM trees is hence inevitable and

unavoidable.

Low lignin GM trees increase destruction of forests & livelihoods

 

Low lignin trees are more susceptible, not only to storm damage but

also to attacks by insects, fungi and bacteria (see " Low lignin GM

trees and forage crops " , SiS 23).

 

The reduced-lignin trait spreading to native forest trees will make

them susceptible to storm, attack by pests, and fungal and bacterial

diseases. Insect pest populations will also increase as a result.

 

While low lignin GM tree plantations may benefit the paper industry,

they will destroy local livelihoods, forcing people to move away, some

of them to new forests where they clear more land for farming. Tree

plantations often follow the destruction of native forests. In

Sumatra, for example, vast areas of forests have been cleared to feed

pulp and paper mills; the clear-cut forests being replaced by acacia

plantations.

 

The argument that planting faster growing GM trees is " growing more

wood on less land " is misleading. Producing more fibre for the pulp

industry will not change the demand for high quality decorative

tropical hardwoods for the construction industry, which come largely

from native forests. Also, the demand for timber is not the only cause

of deforestation; road-building, dams, cash crops (such as soya in

Brazil and Argentina) or cattle ranging, mining and oil extraction all

contribute to destroying native forests, and creating GM tree

plantations will do nothing to stem the destruction.

 

Fast growing GM trees will consume even more water than current

industrial tree plantations, draining the already depleted aquifers

and impacting on surrounding forests.

 

Most of the pulp produced in the South is exported to the North. Per

capita paper consumption in Germany is 70% that in the US. Vietnam

consumes on average 2% of the amount of paper consumed in the US,

despite the fact that literacy rates in the US, Germany and Vietnam

are almost identical. Nearly 40% of the paper is used for packaging,

and 60% of the space in the US newspaper is taken up by adverts.

According to Jukka Hamala, CEO of Stora Enso - the second biggest

paper, packaging and forest products company in the world, whose sales

totalled 12.4 billion in 2004 - the key factor in increased paper

demand was increased spending on advertisements in newspapers and

magazines. Thus, increasing paper consumption is neither necessary nor

desirable.

Fast growing GM trees exacerbate climate change

 

The argument that planting GM trees can reverse climate change is also

fallacious. Japanese car manufacturer Toyota started field trials of

trees genetically modified to absorb more carbon in 1993.

Unfortunately, while carbon absorption increased, it was accompanied

by a dramatic increase in water consumption.

 

Tree plantations are much less effective in sequestering carbon than

the native forest ecosystem. The biodiverse native forest ecosystem is

an effective carbon sink. It has been estimated that the neo-tropical

forests of Central and South America sequesters at least one tonne of

carbon per hectare per year in biomass increase above ground. (It is

possible that additional carbon is sequestered in the soil.) In

contrast, destroying a hectare of forest releases 200 tonnes of carbon

(see " Why Gaia needs rainforests " , SiS 23).

 

Fast-growing reduced-lignin trees will also rot more readily,

returning carbon dioxide more rapidly to the atmosphere, thereby

exacerbating global warming instead of ameliorating it.

 

Researchers used a NASA thermal infrared multispectral scanner from

the air to assess energy budgets of experimental forests in Oregon in

1989. They found that a clear-cut forest area had a surface

temperature of 51.8C, hotter than a nearby quarry, which registered

50.7C. The Douglas fir plantation with mature trees registered 29.9C,

compared to 29.4C over the natural Douglas fir forest regrowth; while

the coolest temperature of 24.7C was found over the 400 year-old

forest. The cooling effect of the natural forest ecosystem is not only

important for alleviating global warming; it is also a significant

indicator of sustainability.

Insecticidal GM trees destroy biodiversity

 

There is no doubt that the insecticidal GM trees will kill many

insects, both target pest species and non-target species; that is,

until the pests develop resistance within six or seven years,

according to the estimate of Liu Xiaofeng from Henan Agriculture

Department, a scientist critical of the GM cotton planted in China

(see " GM cotton fiascos around the world " , SiS25). At that point, more

insecticides will have to be used, especially as new kinds of pests

will have appeared.

 

The far greater threat to biodiversity is the spread of the

insecticidal traits to natural forests. Laboratory feeding experiments

have shown that Bt toxins produced in GM crops can harm beneficial

predators that feed on insect pests, even when the pests themselves

are not affected by the toxins. One class of Bt toxins (Cry1A) was

found to harm butterflies, lacewings and mice. Another class (Cry3A)

acts against insects belonging to the Order Coleoptera (beetles,

weevils and stylopids), which contains some 28 600 species. Bt toxins

are known to leach out of the roots into the soil, with potentially

huge impacts on the soil biota.

 

Reduction of insect populations will in turn impact on birds and

mammals that feed on insects.

Herbicide-tolerant GM trees make green deserts

 

GM trees have been made tolerant to broad-spectrum herbicides that

kill all other plants. If that is not bad enough, they are also

harmful to all species of animal wildlife including human beings

(reviewed in The Case for a GM-Free Sustainable World, ISP Report).

Plantations of herbicide-tolerant GM trees are really green deserts,

and collateral damage to nearby forests and crops from spraying

herbicides is inevitable, as is the pollution of drinking water.

 

Glyphosate is the most frequent cause of complaints and poisoning in

the UK. Disturbances of many body functions have been reported after

exposure at normal use levels. It nearly doubled the risk of late

spontaneous abortion, and children born to users had elevated

neurobehavioral defects. Roundup (Monsanto's formulation of

glyphosate) caused cell division dysfunction that may be linked to

human cancer. Glyphosate caused retarded development of the foetal

skeleton in laboratory rats. It inhibits the synthesis of steroids and

is genotoxic in mammals, fish and frogs. It is lethal and highly toxic

to earthworms.

 

Glufosinate ammonium is linked to neurological, respiratory,

gastrointestinal and haematological toxicities and birth defects in

humans. It is toxic to butterflies and a number of beneficial insects,

also to the larvae of clams and oysters, Daphnia, some fresh water

fish such as the rainbow trout. It inhibits beneficial soil bacteria

and fungi, especially those that fix nitrogen.

Health hazards

 

The health hazards of GM trees are common to those of other GM crops,

but they will be exaggerated. Two of these in particular are worth

mentioning.

 

Agrobacterium, used in the vector system for creating many GM trees,

is a soil bacterium that causes tumours to grow on infected plants and

is now known to be capable of transferring genes into animal and human

cells (See " Common plant vector injects genes into human cells "

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/Agrobacterium.php). Scientists have warned

that the Agrobacterium is extremely difficult to eradicate from the

transgenic plants created, and can therefore serve as a potential

vehicle for unintended horizontal gene transfer to soil bacteria and

all other species, including human beings, that come into contact with

the transgenic crops. This danger is greatly increased in GM trees,

especially on account of its extensive root system. The rhizosphere –

plant root system - is a known hotspot for horizontal gene transfer.

 

The potential of Agrobacterium to mediate horizontal gene transfer,

and the resulting hazards of spreading antibiotic resistance marker

gene to pathogens; creating new bacteria and viruses that cause

diseases; and causing cancer in animals including humans were reviewed

in Chapter 11 of ISP report (www.indsp.org).

 

Another source of health hazard is the Bt toxins and other transgenes,

which could be spread far and wide in the pollen of GM trees. All Bt

toxins used as transgenes as well as the transgenes conferring

glyphosate tolerance were found to have similarities to known

allergens, and are hence suspected allergens (see " Are transgenic

proteins allergenic? " ISIS report 05/01/ 2005

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/ATPA.php).

 

 

printer friendly version

RELEVANT LINKS

from the ISIS website

 

(see all articles on the SITE MAP)

 

Why Gaia Needs Rainforests

 

GM Trees Alert

 

Low Lignin GM Trees and Forage Crops

 

More CO2 Could Mean Less Biodiversity and Worse

 

The Need for Another Research Paradigm

 

Common Plant Vector Injects Genes into Human Cells

 

Open Letter from World Scientists to All Governments

 

GM Trees Lost in China's Forests

 

Recent action on genetic engineering (TABLE)

 

Recent Publications

 

The Rainbow and the WormThe Rainbow and the Worm

Mae-Wan Ho

250 pages, optional cd-rom

Buy Now.

 

The Fluid GenomeThe Fluid Genome

Mae-Wan Ho

220 pages, optional cd-rom

Buy Now.

 

The Case for a GM-free Sustainable WorldThe Case for a GM-free

Sustainable World - Report by the Independent Science Panel

Buy Now.

 

Science in Society magazine The only radical science magazine on earth

Science in Society 25 OUT NOW! Order your copy from our online store.

 

Join the I-SIS mailing list; enter your email address html asci

 

I-SIS is a not-for-profit organisation, depending on donations,

membership fees, subscriptions, and merchandise sales to continue its

work. Find out more about membership here

 

 

 

 

The Institute of Science in Society, PO Box 32097, London NW1 OXR

telephone: [44 1994 231623] [44 20 8452 2729] [44 20 7272 5636]