Skip Navigation

CRISPR-edited trees reduce the energy and water required to make paper

phys.org Building a better forest tree with CRISPR gene editing

Researchers at North Carolina State University used a CRISPR gene-editing system to breed poplar trees with reduced levels of lignin, the major barrier to sustainable production of wood fibers, while improving their wood properties. The findings—published in the journal Science—hold promise to make ...

Building a better forest tree with CRISPR gene editing
BrainWorms @lemm.ee

CRISPR-edited trees reduce the energy and water required to make paper

1 0
46 comments
  • kudzu is very fibrous it can be made into paper and it grows so fast we can’t eradicate it in the southern united states. It grows like a foot a day. I worked with a guy in mississippi he cut it back 7 feet every saturday or it would overtake his backyard.

    • I’ve been fighting kudzu for years that keeps encroaching my property from the neighbor’s yard

      by far the fastest growing plant matter I’ve ever seen

      the way it can grow underground and then pop up 10 feet away it’s like those whack-a-mole games but far less fun

      not to mention it wraps around any thing it finds so it can quickly choke out a tree

  • I, for one, am grateful for science and what we can do with it. It's crazy awesome that people figured out how to edit genes. I really liked Unatural Selection (2019) TV series.

  • Capitalism always finds a way...

    From all the uses one could find to CRISPR, this is probably one of the dumbest.

    • Is it? This seems like one of the most beneficial and least controversial uses

    • Making paper? Capitalizzum. Marx would have cried if he heard people equate economy and production with capitalism.

      • Here's my point. We live under global capitalism. It's just how things are, right?

        And capitalism, just like, say, life, has its ways. It creates an environment where certain outcomes are more likely than others.

        Making an observation about it does not make me partial to other systems. I have no such preference. What I observe is just that capitalism, just like life, always finds a way—its way.

        I heard someone mentioned the danger of using CRISPR to make better soldiers. It's crazy, right? But why isn't crazy to tinker with a tree? Yes, it may make those trees a better product. And all seems good. But once you do that to the tree, and it becomes profitable, the incentive is there to make that true for everything else.

        I think it's dumb because such power (CRISPR) should be treated with great care. Curing a disease? Go for it. But be careful. Now, to make a better product? I dunno, it just rubs me the wrong way.

        Perhaps I'm not seeing the whole picture. Or maybe I should take some bioethics class again.

        But whatever may be the case, my point is not there all proletariat the world over should unite.

    • Did you read the article? They're just reducing the lignin content in the wood so it's easier to process cellulose. I don't understand where you see the difference to let's say selective breeding to produce bigger and sweeter fruits. CRISPR is just an optimised and probably better results promising alternative to the massive amounts of trial and error we had to go through to isolate promising genetic traits.

      • Thank you for engaging! This is what makes Lemmy such a great platform. It’s people like you who engage in a meaningful way.

        Now, you raise a good point. Did I read the article? Well, I’ve cut the middleperson, and went straight to the paper. The Editor’s summary has this to say:

        This work demonstrates that genome editing can be harnessed for breeding more efficient trees, which will provide timely opportunities for sustainable forestry and a more efficient bioeconomy.

        Which means ‘more efficient’ to us. To our understanding of efficiency. At face-value, I’m sold to the benefits. Economy-wise, it looks great. But it still bothers me. Something something about ‘the greater picture’. That’s why I mentioned in another reply that I probably have to update my view on bioethics. It’s been a while since I gave it a careful consideration. I may be missing the the forest for the trees… (dad joke).

46 comments