No abstract

1000I.1000II.1001III.1014IV.1015V.10161016References1016 Summary Genetic engineering (GE) can be used to improve forest plantation productivity and tolerance of biotic and abiotic stresses. However, gene flow from GE forest plantations is a large source of ecological, social and legal controversy. The use of genetic technologies to mitigate or prevent gene flow has been discussed widely and should be technically feasible in a variety of plantation taxa. However, potential ecological effects of such modifications, and their social acceptability, are not well understood. Focusing on Eucalyptus, Pinus, Populus and Pseudotsuga – genera that represent diverse modes of pollination and seed dispersal – we conducted in‐depth reviews of ecological processes associated with reproductive tissues. We also explored potential impacts of various forms of reproductive modification at stand and landscape levels, and means for mitigating impacts. We found little research on potential reactions by the public and other stakeholders to reproductive modification in forest plantations. However, there is considerable research on related areas that suggest key dimensions of concern and support. We provide detailed suggestions for research to understand the biological and social dimensions of containment technologies, and consider the role of regulatory and market restrictions that obstruct necessary ecological and genetic research.

No abstract

This article examined trust, perceived risks and benefits, and normative acceptance associated with using breeding and genetic engineering (GE) to restore American chestnut (AC) trees. Questionnaires were completed by a random representative sample of the public in the United States (n = 278) and a purposive sample of forest interest groups (FIG) such as scientists and managers (n = 195). These concepts were examined in relation to breeding (breed the AC with chestnut trees from Asia) and GE (add the oxalate oxidase [OxO] gene from bread wheat to the AC) approaches for mitigating chestnut blight and restoring AC trees. The public sample considered adding the gene from bread wheat (GE) to be more beneficial and slightly more acceptable, but also slightly riskier, compared to the breeding approach. The FIGs viewed the breeding approach to be more acceptable, less risky, and more beneficial than the GE approach. The FIGs viewed both approaches as less risky, more beneficial, and more acceptable than did the public sample. Path analysis showed that: (i) perceived environmental benefits were the strongest predictors of normative acceptance of both approaches for the public sample, (ii) perceived environmental risks were the strongest predictors of acceptance of both approaches for the FIGs, (iii) human benefits and risks were mostly unrelated to acceptance, and (iv) trust in government agencies charged with managing forests was only weakly associated with benefits, risks, and acceptance. Implications of these results for both research and management were discussed.

No abstract