| Well, as they say, “What a difference a day makes.” One day Darling58 is the answer, the next day it hardly exists. Whoops, it turns out the flawed Darling54 is what got studied, and TACF is not supporting ESF’s petition for Darling deregulation. What happened? Where are we? When I last wrote, we’d put what we thought was a season of frosty discontent behind us, and were looking forward to the deregulation of Darling58, the fall harvest, and our 40th Anniversary celebration.
As they also say, “Two out of three ain’t bad.” We had a great 40th Anniversary celebration and the fall harvest was fruitful enough to support anticipated free-nut distribution demand for Chapter members. But the deregulation of Darling58, if it comes, will be without any blessings from TACF. And it may only be for the benefit of SUNY-College of Environmental Science and Forestry (ESF) and its continued supporters. I’m pretty sure you’ve all consumed the news by now, so I’ll just attach a story from the Washington Post that is probably the best summary of what has happened.
https://wapo.st/4aBXdFV
But having probed as many sources of information as possible, I think facts are important, and each of you will have your own thoughts and hopes for moving forward. As our friend in Maine, Dr. Tom Klak, says, “science is two steps forward and one step backward.” We’ve just taken a step back with biotechnology. So here are what I believe to be the facts:
1. The oxalic oxidase (OXO) gene inserted in the chromosomal structure of American Chestnut is, and remains, a powerful deterrent to blight (I.e. “two steps forward”), but it’s not as simple as was hoped. Darling54, known to be an inferior Darling variety was improved upon by the Darling58 variety, based on location of the OXO gene on chromosomal structures. It was thought to be better understood too, but an acknowledged labeling mistake by SUNY-ESF as far back as 2016, had researchers believing they were studying Darling58, when in fact it was almost entirely Darling 54 being studied (i.e. “one step back”). Darling58 has hardly been studied, and very little of it actually exists.
2. An observed characteristic of both Darling54 and Darling58 is what Jared Westbrook, TACF Director of Science, analogizes as “a low-grade fever.” With both varieties, the production of (OXO) is continuous, consuming energy each tree might otherwise use to grow faster. Healthy Darling trees may be more blight resistant, but at least some of them grow slower, an undesirable trait. The OXO gene’s effect relies on a “promoter.” In Darling varieties it’s working slowly, but continuously, all the time. TACF and even SUNY-ESF have moved on to endorse the use of “wound inducible” promoters, which consume energy only when the blight is actually being deterred. In light of this, and with various forms of wound inducible promotion being studied in conjunction with OXO, it hardly seems logical (at least to TACF) to step back and restudy Darling58 itself. So TACF has pulled its support of the Darling petition for deregulation. However, ESF, the petitioner has not. The USDA, FDA and EPA, ironically, may not care. Their focus remains safety. And while they’ll take pause, they may eventually deregulate Darling.
3. Our Chapter’s focus on Germplasm Conservation Orchards (GCO) is not lost to this turn of events. There is nothing about what has happened to render the pursuit of all-American female flower production unimportant. Whether these flowers get pollinated by Darling54, Darling 58 or DarWin (wound inducible) pollen, they will advance the restoration mission. They are still the limited resource we need most.
4. Trees in breeding orchards are not considered a restoration promise in and of themselves. However, they still represent an avenue of valid pursuit. If for no other reason, some of the remaining American genome exists only in those trees. Preservation of the American chestnut genome is important. Once protected by a form of blight resistance (whether OXO or something less understood), future generations of those trees can be crossed again to reduce the percentage of Chinese traits inherent in their makeup. Whether this is worth doing in the future may depend upon the success of alternative efforts, but what has happened with Darling proves the point. Years have otherwise been lost.
So now wounds get licked. We will have a board meeting later this month or early in February (remember, anyone can attend), and among other things our Chapter will make plans to hold an annual Spring meeting in late April or early May. We will chart a course forward. More on details of our chapter’s efforts soon, but don’t be deterred in thinking what’s happened with Darling is the end of the road. It’s a pothole we’ve hit but the truck rolls on. Happy New Year, 2024 is upon us.
Evan Fox, VT/NH Chapter President
|
