Once a defining tree of eastern forests, the American chestnut was nearly erased by a foreign fungus within a few human generations. A genetically engineered line known as Darling 54 has now pushed the species to the edge of an unusual experiment: using targeted genetic changes to help restore a long-lost forest giant.
At the center of that experiment is a question with wide implications: if scientists give Castanea dentata a specific defense against blight, should regulators and the public treat it like any other wild tree? The answer will shape not only the future of the American chestnut, but also how far society is willing to go to repair damage from past species introductions and a rapidly changing climate.
The blight that felled a giant
Long before anyone talked about genetic engineering, the American chestnut’s downfall was already a human story of unintended consequences. Research from the Official USDA Forest Service reports that by about 1950 the American chestnut was nearly eliminated by blight across its eastern range, leaving only scattered, often stunted survivors in forests it once dominated as Castanea dentata, according to a Forest Service summary on chromosomal differences and blight resistance.
The blight is caused by the fungus Cryphonectria parasitica, which kills stems and trunks even when roots resprout. Over time, that cycle traps American chestnut in a perpetual sapling stage, with limited chances for its genes to recombine into more resistant forms. The Forest Service summary links this vulnerability to specific chromosomal differences affecting blight resistance, suggesting that the species’ own genome holds both the memory of its dominance and structural weaknesses that let the pathogen spread so quickly in the first half of the 20th century.
How Darling 54 rewrites the script
Rather than relying on rare natural mutations, researchers turned to genetic engineering to give chestnut a new tool. A peer-reviewed study in Molecular Plant Pathology examined transgenic American chestnut that expresses a wheat oxalate oxidase gene, often shortened to OxO, and tested those trees against Cryphonectria parasitica in controlled assays. Lead author William A. Powell and colleagues showed that pathogen-induced expression of the transgene allowed chestnut tissues to break down oxalic acid, a compound the fungus uses to damage host cells, and they reported that blight lesions were significantly smaller on OxO-expressing stems than on non-transgenic controls in their laboratory experiments.
That OxO strategy is central to the line now known as Darling 54. A notice in the Federal Register describes the organism under review as blight-tolerant Darling 54 American chestnut, explicitly identifying it as Castanea dentata developed using genetic engineering. The same document links the tree to a revised petition from the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry, which is seeking a determination of nonregulated status so that Darling 54 can be planted without case-by-case permits across suitable habitat, as outlined in the official Federal Register notice.
Regulators weigh a genetically engineered forest tree
For a food crop, deregulation of a single engineered trait has become routine over several decades. For a long-lived forest tree, it is still close to experimental. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) has signaled how unusual this case is by seeking public input on draft environmental documents for deregulation of an American chestnut developed using genetic engineering, and by reopening public comment on those draft assessments. In a program update, APHIS describes these documents as a draft environmental impact statement and a draft plant pest risk assessment, both of which must address how Darling 54 might spread, hybridize, or affect other organisms if it is no longer treated as a regulated article, according to the agency’s public update.
The Federal Register listing for the 2025 notice confirms that these draft documents are tied directly to the revised petition from the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry. That petition asks for a determination of nonregulated status for the blight-tolerant Darling 54 American chestnut, and the notice describes the organism as developed using genetic engineering and carrying the specific Darling 54 designation. In practical terms, a nonregulated decision would treat Darling 54 seedlings more like other nursery stock, leaving state agencies, landowners, and conservation groups to decide where and how widely to plant them within the legal framework set out in the availability notice.
Field performance and the limits of early data
Laboratory assays are one thing; survival in real forests is another. A peer-reviewed article in Forest Ecology and Management, identified by DOI 10.1016/j.foreco.2025.123302, evaluates field performance of blight-tolerant American chestnut varieties, including both transgenic and non-transgenic comparisons, under open-field and shelterwood silvicultural conditions. The authors report that these field trials allowed them to compare growth, survival, and blight symptoms across different genetic backgrounds and management settings, turning Darling 54 and related material into restoration candidates tested under realistic conditions in their field study.
Early data suggest that, at least in managed plots, blight-tolerant trees can grow alongside other hardwoods without clear performance penalties tied to the engineered trait. The trials remain limited in duration and geography, so they cannot yet capture long-term interactions with pollinators, soil microbes, or wildlife that might rely on chestnut nuts or foliage over many decades. Because of these limits, the field results should be read as preliminary rather than as proof that Darling 54 will behave exactly like historical American chestnut across its former range.
Climate squeeze and the case for targeted genetics
Even if Darling 54 passes regulatory review and performs well in current forests, climate change is narrowing the space where American chestnut can thrive. A species distribution modeling study in Biodiversity and Conservation used future climate projections to estimate habitat and found that, consistent with other models for North American trees, climatically suitable habitat for American chestnut is projected to contract by the year 2080 under the scenarios it examined, according to the authors’ modeling work.
This climate squeeze strengthens the argument for treating genetic engineering as one tool among many rather than a cure-all. If suitable habitat is shrinking, then every planted tree carries more weight, and a blight-tolerant genotype could help ensure that limited planting sites become mature, nut-producing stands instead of short-lived sprouts. At the same time, a single transgene like OxO does not address drought, new pests, or shifting competitors, so restoration plans still need to consider broader ecological pressures and not rely on genetics alone.
More from Morning Overview
*This article was researched with the help of AI, with human editors creating the final content.
