“Biotechnology is “a topic of obvious public importance,” says Steve Strauss, an internationally known expert on gene research in trees.

      Throughout the last half-century, the biological sciences have delved ever deeper into the very building blocks of life. Researchers have cracked the genetic code of hundreds of organisms, including human beings. Genetics research confronts society with the reality of human power over nature, and it raises difficult questions about how much power is too much.
       So it’s not surprising, says Steve Strauss, that genetics research has stirred much public interest and not a little controversy. “There are complex issues of science, public policy, economics, and ecology that need to be analyzed at length,” says Strauss, professor in the Department of Forest Science and director of the Tree Genetic Engineering Research Cooperative (TGERC) at the College of Forestry. “Hopefully we can develop a working consensus about how to proceed with forest biotechnology in a responsible way that addresses ecological and social concerns.”
      Strauss was co-organizer of a July conference that gathered scientists and environmental activists to address some of the more difficult social, scientific, and ethical concerns relating to forest biotechnology—a science that holds considerable promise to produce timber and fiber, but that

has also been the target of public criticism, protests, and even a few terrorist attacks.
       “We brought together a very knowledgeable and diverse group of experts from around the world to discuss a topic of obvious public importance,” says Strauss, an internationally known expert on the use of biotechnology in forestry. He worked with H.D. “Toby” Bradshaw, a geneticist at the University of Washington, to organize the conference, held at Skamania Lodge in southwestern Washington. The meeting drew almost 300 people, including university researchers, government regulators, business people, ethicists, ecologists, and representatives of environmental groups.
      The words “biotechnology” and “genetic engineering” are often used in the same breath, but they are not synonymous. “’Biotechnology’ has been defined in numerous ways,” says Strauss. “Its basic definition is manipulating biological systems toward human goals. This would include traditional breeding and traditional manipulation of

organisms and environments, such as silviculture.” A more
specific and modern definition, he says, would be “the use of
laboratory-based propagation, horticulture, genetic mapping, and gene transfer methods directed at improving production, quality, or environmental characteristics of biological systems.”
       Genetic engineering has a narrower definition—it is a set
of techniques used in some kinds of biotechnology research and practice. It involves the use of recombinant DNA methods, where genes are physically cut and rejoined with enzymes. The modified genes are then transferred into chromosomes asexually, without any cross-breeding.
       Genetic engineering of trees in plantations has potential to increase fiber productivity and provide other social and environmental benefits. Although biotech research in forestry lags behind that in agriculture or pharmaceuticals, it holds great promise for developing trees that can grow faster, resist insects

>> To Continue