mostly OT: genetically engineered trees

Page 1 of 2  

I have to do a presentation on genetically modified trees for work, and I'm wondering what woodworker's opinions are on GE or GM trees. None have been released to the wild yet, but there are several being studied. Faster growth rates and timber production in pines, disease-resistant elms and chestnuts, etc. What do you think?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I think all trees growing know have been genetically engineered by the infinite number of monkeys routine.
Giving direction rather than random chance could work to our advantage more rapidly.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
George wrote:

I think you mean non-selective random breeding. :-) Right: :-)

Selective breeding or modification of a gene by direct manipulation? Mostly we have used selective breeding to date. At least on animals and plants that I know of... (Of course we have the Canola (Rape Seed) litigation...
Not worried about Frankentrees? :-))
I can see it now Red White and Blue Pine Cones for Patriotic Christmas Tress.

-- Will R. Jewel Boxes and Wood Art http://woodwork.pmccl.com The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. George Bernard Shaw
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Not worried about Frankentrees? :-))
Not really. More likely for a genetic mutation to go unnoticed in the wild and march toward domination than something produced under observation in a laboratory.
Though some trees I've harvested have had bolts in them....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
it's that law of unintended conscequences. the gene shift that gives resistance to borer beetle and faster growth, coupled with agressive government/corporate "forest management" programs replace all or most of the non-modified trees.... then it turns out that this monoculture "forest" has no resistance at all to the latest andean root rot, or whatever....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
bridger wrote:

Actually, you raise the primary concern I have--reducing genetic diversity by overuse of hybrids or other monocultural practices.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
George wrote:

True. I worry about that on my walks. :-)

I think that genetic mutation occurred in humans. <grin>
It's the "protect a tree -- kill a sawyer gene" -- little understood as of yet.

-- Will R. Jewel Boxes and Wood Art http://woodwork.pmccl.com The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. George Bernard Shaw
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
WillR wrote: ...

...
Well, the Ents were good guys, best I can remember... :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Duane Bozarth wrote:

But the Trolls were created to mock the Ents -- hence "Frankentrees". :-)
I'm thinking of some Trollwood Jewel boxes. Should be big sellers amongst the Tolkien Fans.
-- Will R. Jewel Boxes and Wood Art http://woodwork.pmccl.com The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. George Bernard Shaw
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Well, hybrid and grafted trees have been with us for centuries, and people don't seem to have a problem with those modifications. If it gets me interesting lumber to work with, great. As with anything else, invasive tendancies would be my concern. But, I find it amusing that people can get worked up about genetic engineering of plants, when we've been doing it for centuries or more.
Dave Hinz
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Andy wrote:

A square cross-section would sure minimize waste...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Ron Hock wrote:

As would a non-tapering trunk cross-sectional area w/ height... :)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Ages ago someone (Burpee?) hybridized cylindrical tomatoes, on the theory that they'd be easier to can (it didn't catch on - neither did his spineless cactus, intended for cattle feed).
More recently, someone in Japan has come up with cubical watermelons, intended to fit into a fridge/freezer more easily.
John
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Andy wrote:

mixed blessing. we get elm trees back, which were wiped out by human misbehavior. we are also likely to see corporate interests decide that their patented super fast growth pine tree should be the only conifer standing in north america.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
bridger wrote:

Not really...elm disease would have spread eventually, anyway.

Again, not likely imo. There's far more "non-cultivated" acreage than controlled and there are needs for more than a single species besides.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Duane Bozarth wrote:

across oceans? maybe, but I have my doubts.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
bridger wrote:

I suppose you're implying Chris (and Eric ahead of him) should have just stayed home?
My point is it was inevitable, not a specific "misbehavior" unless one takes a really narrow view of what proper behavior would have been.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Andy wrote:

Actually, for "serious" woodworking, I'm not sure it will make a significant difference at all. The re-introduction of the chestnut may eventually result in an availability of that wondrous wood again, but it isn't going to be in my lifetime.
OTOH, what work that is being done as far as I know is concentrated on pulp and lumber species or for enhancing nut/fruit production, not to make high quality furniture woods. But, that possibly could be something I just haven't seen published research on--you have any specifics in mind or information?
It seems to me unlikely that the production of high-growth-rate trees will lead to anything except even more open-grain, soft and poor quality lumber as compared with old, virgin growth forests. Hopefully, that is wrong, and I stand to be corrected.
I really doubt it will be found to be possible to produce a fast-growing specimen of mahongony, say, w/ 36" wide planks and the grain of 200 years ago in a 50-yr old or less log.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Duane Bozarth wrote:

lyptus.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
For what its worth I work for one of those "Corporate" Tree Farms and we alter the genetics through tree selection, i.e. cones from the best trees and again from those trees and so on. This year we planted 500 thousand Douglas-fir, 500k Hemlock, 20k red-cedar and a mixed bag of red-alder and pine, hardly a mono culture.
The fast growing species you are refering to are primarily for pulp.
Schroeder
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.