On Nov 6, 2014, at 9:08 PM, Elizabeth Hilborn wrote:
> They are apparently transgenic with a wheat oxalate oxidase gene which renders the trees resistant to fungal-associated pathology. They make the point that these new trees have more American Chestnut genetic material than the complex hybrids such as Dunstan.
From the article:
> This gene doesn't hurt the fungus, but instead detoxifies the acid used by the fungus to attack the tree, essentially changing the fungus from a pathogen to a saprophyte that lives on the bark of the tree without causing significant harm.
So these trees will continue to host the fungus, thereby remaining a permanent locus for infection. In many parts of the country, the fungus seems to be persistent in any case; but I'm not sure that it's not an issue everywhere.
I wonder why they didn't take the resistance genes from the Chinese chestnut, instead of from a plant as distantly related as wheat? I don't know whether the Chinese chestnut genes allow the tree to continue hosting the fungus or not -- does anyone else?
-- Rivka; Finger Lakes NY, Zone 6A now I think
Fresh-market organic produce, small scale
__________________
nafex mailing list
nafex@lists.ibiblio.org
Northamerican Allied Fruit Experimenters
subscribe/unsubscribe|user config|list info|make a donation toward list maintenance:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/nafex
message archives
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/nafex
Google message archive search:
site: lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/nafex [searchstring]
nafex list mirror sites:
http://ifneb.blogspot.com IFNEB Blog
http://groups.google.com/group/permaculturelist
http://groups.google.com/group/nafexlist
https://sites.google.com/site/nafexmailinglist
Avant Geared http://www.avantgeared.com
No comments:
Post a Comment