NASEM Study Statement of Task Examine the potential use of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

• Examine the potential use of biotechnology for

mitigating threats to forest tree health

• Identify the ecological, economic, social implications of

deploying biotechnology in forests

• Develop a research agenda to address knowledge gaps

about its application

• Focus on trees - at least two cases that consider the use
• f biotechnology to protect a tree species from an

insect and/or disease that has negative consequences for forest health

1

NASEM Study Statement of Task

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) Mission – To protect the health and value of American agriculture and natural resources

• APHIS Plant Protection and Quarantine (PPQ) forest pest mitigation,

research, and outreach

• APHIS Biotechnology Regulatory Service (BRS) biotech regulatory

framework

• APHIS BRS regulation of genetically engineered (GE) trees and other
• rganisms and biotech approaches that could impact forest health
• APHIS BRS evaluation process for deregulation
• How APHIS could use this study to support regulatory and non-regulatory

approaches that better support forest health.

2

Overview

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

• Asian Longhorned Beetle
• >15 hardwoods at risk

3

APHIS PPQ Forest Pest and Disease Programs Examples

Non-native, wood-boring beetles:

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/planthealth/plant-pest-and-disease-programs/pests-and-diseases

• Emerald Ash Borer
• 16 native ash species at risk

Other forest pests:

• Pine Shoot Beetle
• Gypsy Moth

Forest diseases:

• European Larch Canker
• Sudden Oak Death

https://www.aphis.usda. gov/aphis/resources/pes ts-diseases/asian- longhorned-beetle USDA APHIS PPQ EAB

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

• Sirex woodwasp
• Threat to native pine forests in northeast US
• Research with a nematode biocontrol agent

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/plant_health/ea/downloads/SirexEA-final-northeast.pdf

• Ambrosia beetles & Shot hole borers
• Mostly polyphagous weevils
• Tunnel mostly into stressed trees and cultivate fungi
• Fungi can cause vascular tissue disease e.g. Redbay Laurel wilt

http://www.plantheroes.org/polyphagous-shot-hole-borer; http://plantheroes.org/redbay-ambrosia-beetle

• Rapid O’hia Death
• Fungal disease of ʻōhiʻa trees in Hawaii
• >90% mortality in 3 yrs.

http://www.plantheroes.org/rapid-%C5%8Dhia-death ; https://cms.ctahr.hawaii.edu/rod/TheDisease.aspx 4

Emerging Pests and Diseases

• f Concern to APHIS PPQ

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

5

APHIS Biotech Regulation Related to Forest Health

USDA APHIS

• Laws
• Plant Protection Act of 2000:

‒Consolidated from Plant Quarantine Act (PQA), Federal Plant Pest Act (FPPA), and Noxious Weed Act.

• Biotechnology Regulations - 7 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)

part 340

• Regulated Article:

‒Organism has been altered or produced through GE, and ‒The organism is produced using plant pests (i.e. as a donor, recipient or vector) or ‒There otherwise is a reason to believe the organism is a plant pest.

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

6

What does APHIS BRS regulate?

• Authorizations are required for regulated articles for:
• Viable GE plants or parts, pests, or pathogens for…
• Interstate movement or Importation, and
• Release (confined trials) - permits to 3 yrs., renewable
• BRS authorizations are not required if:
• a petition for nonregulated status is granted or
• if a GE organism falls outside the scope of 7 CFR part
• 340. View Letters at - https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/biotechnology/am-i-

regulated/regulated_article_letters_of_inquiry/regulated_article_letters_of_inquiry

• PPQ authorizations may still apply

Photo: USDA Plants Database

www.aphis.usda.gov

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

7

BRS Regulated Releases of GE Forest Trees

Common Name Timespan

• f Permits

Common Traits - Pest Resistance or Other Relevant Traits Total Acres

American Chestnut 2003 - 2017 Fungal resistance: Chestnut blight, Phytophthora 79 American Elm 2004 - 2014 Fungal resistance: Dutch Elms disease, Elm Yellows 5 Eucalyptus 2002 – 2020 Cold tolerance, Altered fertility, lignin, growth rate 1149 Persimmon 1999 - 2013 Insect resistance, cold tolerance, drought tolerance 5 Pine - Loblolly, Monterey, hybrids 1993 - 2017 Insect resistance: Lepidoptera; Altered growth rate, fertility, terpene & lignin biosynthesis, wood quality 693 Poplars (Black & Eastern Cottonwood, Aspen, Hybrids) 1989 - 2017 Fungal and Insect Resistance; Herbicide and Stress Resistance; Drought tolerance; Altered lignin, biomass, wood development, fertility; Root sucker inhibition; Phytoremediation 1043 Sweetgum 1995 - 2017 Altered growth rate, lignin biosynthesis, plant development, and fertility; herbicide tolerance 40 Walnut 1990 - 2016 Insect resistance: Lepidoptera, Pathogen resistance: Phytopthora, Crown gall; and Altered polyphenol oxidase 28

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

8

Confinement of GE Forest Tree Field Trials and Adaptive Management

• Confinement eliminates or minimizes inadvertent escape and persistence
• f GE traits/organisms, and
• Limits potential adverse impacts to plant health, environment, T&E spp.
• Permit conditions, inspections, and reporting requirements are used to

avoid, report, and mitigate potential confinement breaches or impacts.

• Permit conditions
• Flexible, implementable, enforceable and risk-based
• Allow for collection of meaningful data to inform adaptive

management

• Consider many factors, e.g. plant biology, outcrossing, persistence, GE

trait, trial site, land use history, ecological interactions, management

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

9

Challenges Unique to GE Forest Tree Trials

Challenging Characteristics of GE Forest Tree Trials American Chestnut Pinus spp. (Loblolly) Poplar spp. Medium to Long- lived tall perennial Y Y Y Juvenile period 8-10 Yrs >12-50 Yrs 4-15 Yrs Prolonged reproductive stage Y Y Y Long distance pollen dispersal N Y Y Mostly outcrossing – gene flow possible Y (low) Y Y Prolific seed production N Y Thousands Y Millions Long distance seed dispersal N N Y Miles Vegetative Reproduction stump sprouts N root suckers Environmentally significant interactions, birds, wildlife, protected species, hydrology Habitat, nuts Habitat for endangered spp. Riparian communities Greater Public Interest Y Y Y

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

10

GE Tree Poplar Field Trial Challenges

USDA APHIS

Suckers emerge where roots were dug out. Suckers emerge

• utside the

deer fence. Suckers can survive herbicide sprays

USDA APHIS photos

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

11

Other Unique Challenges and Opportunities

Guiding Question (3) What other unique challenges and opportunities are posed by the development of a genetically engineered product for a non-commercial, public good such as forest health? Possibilities include:

• Soft funding sources to cover research and regulatory obligations
• Public trust and engagement in the process
• Partnerships and Cooperative agreements
• APHIS can use this information to look for opportunities to address these

challenges during the development phase.

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

12

Evaluations for Unconfined Release

Petition Process for Nonregulated Status

• Petition Evaluation - Comprehensive scientific review
• Crop biology and taxonomy
• Genotypic and phenotypic differences
• Field test reports for APHIS authorized releases
• Data and publications relevant to a determination
• Plant Pest Risk Assessment (PPRA) - (Plant Protection Act)
• Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement

(EIS) - (National Environmental Policy Act; NEPA)

• Biological Assessment (BA) - (Endangered Species Act)

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

13

Potential for Biotechnology to Improve Forest Health

Guiding Questions (1) What is the current state of the science regarding the potential for using genetic engineering and similar technologies in trees to improve forest health? (4) What research is needed to fill knowledge gaps about developing and using genetic engineering as a tool to protect forest health? Possible considerations (also relevant to APHIS PPRAs):

• GE tree biology and traits to improve forest health
• GE tree pests, pathogens, symbionts, or biocontrol agents
• New techniques e.g. gene drives or targeted gene editing, deletions, or silencing
• Specificity, efficacy and durability of resistance traits or pest suppression
• Variability and prevalence of pest, pathogen, host and environmental interactions
• Off-target effects
• Impacts on agricultural practices and IPM approaches
• Geneflow and weediness impacts from inheriting the engineered trait

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

14

APHIS Information Needs and Research

• APHIS can use information from the NASEM study to inform

data for regulatory decisions, as well as priorities for research

• r support documents.

Examples include:

• OECD consensus documents on biology of forest trees
• OECD consensus documents on ecological risk assessment
• USDA NIFA and BRAG program grants
• Farm Bill supported suggestions under Section 10007

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

15

Developing a Risk Framework for Forest Health

Guiding Questions (5 & 6)

• In what ways does the current regulatory system include forest health in evaluating the

ecological and environmental risks of deploying GE trees?

• How does this compare with regulatory evaluation of impacts for other methods used to

address forest health threats e.g. non-GE trees or biological control or pesticides?

• What information or analysis is needed to inform a risk framework that provides

assurances for minimizing the risks of using GE while increasing benefits to forest health?

• What characteristics of forest health are central to a risk framework?
• How can adaptive management be used to enable realistic testing and assessment of

biotech approaches for mitigating forest health threats?

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

16

Forest Health is Declining!

Risks

Benefits

GE vs Traditional Tree GE Pest or Pathogen Biocontrol Pesticide

Rapid ʻŌhiʻa Death – rapid browning of tree crown

Photo by J. B. Friday University

• f Hawaii College
• f Tropical

Agriculture and Human Resources

‘Ōhi‘a blossoms on healthy tree - NPS Photo

Mitigation Environmental Impacts Socio-economic Impacts Quarantines

https://w ww.nps.go v/havo/le arn/natur e/rapid-

• hia-

death.htm

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

17

Developing a Risk-Based Regulatory Framework for Forest Health

• APHIS can use this information to improve a risk-based regulatory

framework for forest health

• Reconsider critical information needed to inform APHIS regulatory

decisions in PPQ and BRS and supporting risk assessments, environmental documents, and monitoring

• How is forest health measured and what standards should apply
• How best to obtain and analyze the information
• Harmonize, generate or share data, or cooperate with other agencies
• n assessments and scoping for GE trees or other organisms

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

18

Interagency Cooperation on Risk Assessments for Forest Health

USDA-Forest Service provided scientific and editorial assistance and three technical reports for the Environmental Impact Statement for the GE-Freeze Tolerant Eucalyptus (FTE) petition:

• Projecting potential adoption of GE-FTE plantations
• Implications for expansion of GE-FTE plantations on water

resources

• Evaluation of potential fire behavior in GE-FTE plantations
• f the Southern U.S.

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

19

Socio-Economic Implications of Biotech Approaches for Forest Health

Guiding Question (2) What are the potential ecological and economic impacts of deploying trees protected from pests and pathogens using biotechnology?

• Consider agencies’ legal authority, obligations, and options
• Economic and trade implications

(7) What does existing research reveal about public views on the use of biotechnology to improve forest health?

• Will society be more accepting in the absence of viable alternatives?
• Will this affect the ultimate use of these approaches?
• APHIS can use this information to improve scoping and analysis of socio-

economic implications of action alternatives in our NEPA documents.

United States Department of Agriculture Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

• Contact:
• Susan.M.Koehler@aphis.usda.gov
• (301) 851-3918
• APHIS-BRS website for permit and petition-related documents:

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/biotechnology

• See APHIS-PPQ, Plant Health Programs website for information
• n plant pest and disease programs:

https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/ourfocus/planthealth/plant- pest-and-disease-programs/pests-and-diseases

20

Questions?