The reading passage and the professor both discuss the topic of genetic modification. However, the speaker discords with the ideas in the reading passage. He believes that the three benefits presented in the reading are questionable, offering several reasons to oppose the article.
The first reason is that the resistance of genetically modified trees. Although the article claims that genetically modified trees are more likely to survive than unmodified trees. However, the professor says such specific designed trees may be resistant to one kind of conditions, and not for all kinds of adverse situations. For example, under climate change, genetically modified planets are likely too uniform to survive than unmodified plants. That contradicts what the reading passage indicates.
Second, the speaker refutes the reading by mentioning farmers need to pay for the company, which researches and develops the genetic modification technology. Though the article states genetically modified trees promise to bring a number of economic benefits to those who grow them, the professor argues that concept ignoring the huge costs behind it. Therefore, the lecturer concludes that it is not much beneficial as it seems.
The third reason is that the genetically modified trees may grow more aggressively than the natural trees, and affects the balance of the ecosystem. While the article indicates genetically modified trees can prevent overexploitation of wild trees, the speaker points out the potential competition for survival resources between modified plants and others unmodified. Hence, the professor holds that genetically modified trees may endanger natural trees instead of reducing destroy.