Tree Improvement

  • Pratima Bajpai


Biotechnology is becoming an increasingly important component of the forest industry. Tree genetics offers the possibility to resolve the increased demands on forest resources through the development of trees more tolerant to diseases, pests, and chemicals, which have a detrimental impact on forest health. Phytoremediation is an unique application of genetically altered trees for cost-effective decontamination of toxic pollutants in soil. Phytoremediation depends upon the root uptake of contaminants which are then stored by the tree or degraded to less toxic compounds. Its advantages are that it works in situ using solar or green energy. The technique is less expensive than ex situ techniques, however, there may be a long time factor involved. The potential for phytoremediation includes removal of naturally occurring selenium in irrigation water and the use of genetically altered Eucalyptus trees to absorb and metabolize air pollutants. However, for phytoremediation to become a viable technology, a more complete understanding of the process is essential. End products must be identified and the mechanism by which toxic materials are converted needs to be elucidated. Biotechnology, as applied to forest trees, is still a new science that requires answers to the numerous questions it continuously unveils.


Forest industry Genetics Tree genetics Phytoremediation Selenium Pollutants Gene markers Low lignin tree 


  1. Anne SM (1996) Moving forest trees into the modern genetics era. Science 271(5250):760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anon (1996) The hazardous waste consultant. Phytoremediation gets to the root of soil contamination, May/June pp 1.22–1.28Google Scholar
  3. Baker AJM, Brooks RR (1989) Terrestrial higher plants which hyperaccumulate metallic elements. Biorecovery 1:81Google Scholar
  4. Bañuelos GS, Ajwa HA, Terry N, Zayed A (1997) Phytoremediation of selenium laden soils: a new technology. J Soil Water Conserv 52(6):426–430Google Scholar
  5. Bertolucci FLG, Penchel RM, Rezende GDSP, Claudio-da-Silva E (1999) Tree engineering at Aracruz Celulose: results, challenges and perspectives. In: 27th EUCEPA conference—crossing the millennium frontier, emerging technical and scientific challenges, Grenoble, France, 11–14 Oct 1999, pp 33–38Google Scholar
  6. Boudet AM (1996) Tree improvement through lignin engineering. In: Proceedings of the European conference on pulp and paper research: the present and the future, Stockholm, Sweden, 9–11 Oct 1996, pp 336–349Google Scholar
  7. Brunelli E (2008) Genetically modified and cross-bred trees. Ind Carta 46(4):22–25Google Scholar
  8. Burken JG, Schnoor JL (1997) Uptake and metabolism of atrazine by poplar trees. Environ Sci Technol 31(5):1399Google Scholar
  9. Chen C, Baucher M, Christensen JH, Boerjan W (2001) Biotechnology in trees: towards improved paper pulping by lignin engineering. Euphytica 118(2):185–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cunningham SD, Berti WR, Huang JW (1995) Phytoremediation of contaminated soils. Trends Biotechnol 13(9):393–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cunningham SD, Berti WR (1993) Remediation of contaminated soils with green plants: an overview. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol 29P:207–212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cyr DR, Binnie S, Grimes S, Klimaszewska K, Finstad K, Loyola I, Percy R, Quan G, Valentine A (1997) From the cradle to the forest: advances in conifer propagation. In: 1997 Biological sciences symposium, San Francisco, CA, USA, 19–23 Oct 1997, pp 199–202Google Scholar
  13. Dean JFD, Lafayette KE, Eriksson KL, Merkle SA (1997) Forest tree biotechnology. Advances in biochemical engineering, vol. 57. Springer Verlag, Berlin, p. 1Google Scholar
  14. Dimmel DR, MacKay JJ, Pullman GS, Althen EM, Sederoff RR (2000) Improving pulp production with raw material changes. In: 2000 Pulping/process and product quality conference, Boston, MA, USA, 5–8 Nov 2000, 5 ppGoogle Scholar
  15. Eriksson K-EL, LaFayette PR, Merkle SA, Dean JFD (1996) Laccase as a targt for decreasing lignin content in transgenic trees through antisense genetic engineering. In: Srebotnik E, Messner K (eds) Proceedings 6th international conference on biotechnology in the pulp and paper industry, Facultas-Universitatsverlag, Vienna, pp 310–314Google Scholar
  16. Kleiner K, Ellis D, McCown BH, Raffa K (1995) Environmental entomology, field evaluation of transgenic poplar against tenr caterpiller and gypsy moth. Environ Entomol 24(5):1358Google Scholar
  17. McIntyre T, Lewis GM (1997) The Advancement of Phytoremediation as an Innovative environmental technology for stabilization, remediation, or restoration of contaminated sites in Canada. J Soil Contam 6(3):227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Meilan R, Ma C, Eaton J, Hoien E, Taylor M, Holden L, Han K-H, James RR, Stanton BJ, (1997) Development of glyphosate-tolerant hybrid cottonwoods. In: Proceedings 1997 biological sciences symposium, Tappi, Georgia, pp 195–197Google Scholar
  19. Pullman GS, Cairney J, Peter G (1998) Clonal forestry and genetic engineering: where we stand, future prospects, and potential impacts on mill operations. Tappi J 81(2):57–64Google Scholar
  20. Rugh CL, Senecoff JF, Meagher RB, Merkle SA (1998) Development of transgenic yellow poplar for mercury phytoremediation. Nat Biotechnol 16:925Google Scholar
  21. Rulkens WH, Tichy R, Grotenhuis JTC (1998) Remediation of polluted soil and sediment: perspectives and failures. Water Sci Technol 37(8):27–35Google Scholar
  22. Salt DE, Blaylock M, Nanda Kumar PBA, Dushenkov V, Ensley BD, Chet I, Raskin I (1995) Phytoremediation: a novel strategy for the removal of toxic metals from the environment using plants. Nat Biotechnol 13:468–474Google Scholar
  23. Sorge M (1995) Toyota’s pollution solution. Automot Ind 175(12):40Google Scholar
  24. Stomp AM, Han KH, Wilbert S, Gordon MP (1993) Genetic improvement of tree species for remediation of hazardous wastes. In Vitro Cell Dev Biol 29:227–232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sykes M, Yang V, Blankenburg J, AbuBakr S (1999). Biotechnology: working with nature to improve forest resources and products. In: TAPPI International environmental conference, vol. 2. Nashville, TN, USA, 18–21 April 1999, pp 631–637Google Scholar
  26. Todd D, Pait J, Hodges J (1995) Impact and value of tree improvement in south. J Forest 83:162–166Google Scholar
  27. United States, Environmental Protection Agency (2000) Introduction to phytoremediation. National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development, Cincinnati, Ohio, USAGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhou LL, Cheng Y, Sun X Marita J, Ralph JM, Chiang VL (2003) Combinatorial modification of multiple lignin traits in trees through multigene co-transformation. PNAS 100(18):4939–4944Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pulp and Paper ConsultantKanpurIndia

Personalised recommendations