#Irradiated Seeds Combat World's Most Serious Wheat Diseasekenyan farmers last week got a first look at two new varieties of wheat that are resistant to the number-one threat to worldwide wheat production.
They got to see resistant and non-resistant wheat side by side in fields. The Kenyan government is also giving away the first batch of seeds six metric tons of it to seed producers in hopes their fields will serve as visual persuasion to their neighbors to try the new stuff.
Wheat stem rust has the ability to turn a healthy-looking crop only one week away from harvest into a tangle of black stems Liang Qu the director of the Joint FAO/IAEA Programme
The story of how that wheat got made is a peek into the constant worldwide fight against crop diseases.
The new plants are designed to combat wheat stem rust a fungus that used to take out a fifth of the U s.'wheat crop at once during epidemics through the 1950s.
and the winner of the 1970 Nobel Peace Prize once nearly eradicated wheat stem rust by developing resistant wheat varieties.
But a generation later Borlaug's wheats don't work anymore. The rust has evolved. And as well as the new Kenyan wheats work now stem rust will evolve again.
In 1999 scientists first confirmed there was a new type of wheat stem rust that infected Borlaug's resistant wheats.
They called the new rust Ug99 after its confirmation year and country Uganda. Since then the rust which moves through the air has spread to Africa and the Middle east.
It affects 37 percent of all the wheat grown in the world the International atomic energy agency estimates.
Liang's program a collaboration between the United nations'Food and agriculture organization and the International atomic energy agency supported the Kenyan researcher who developed the new wheats.
The International atomic energy agency may be known best for dealing with nuclear disasters such as the Fukushima reactor meltdown but it also works on crop science techniques that use radiation.
To make rust-resistant wheats Miriam Kinyua a researcher at Eldoret University in Kenya sent wheat seeds popular with Kenyan farmers to the FAO/IAEA joint laboratories There the seeds got blasted
and tested the seeds for their Ug99 resistance ultimately coming up with two types of wheats that worked.
and targeted way to come up with new crops but the FAO/IAEA Joint Programme doesn't use it because the IAEA focuses on radiation technologies.
We're not saying countries should not take advantage of GMO techniques also IAEA spokesman Greg Webb says.
For small-scale Kenyan farmers planting new varieties of wheat is a better strategy than using fungicides
After their first plantings they may keep some of the grains to plant as next year's crops.
The FAO and the IAEA are excited pretty about these new wheats. They've put out press releases.
That's because they expect that wheat stem rust will eventually evolve resistance to these new wheats at
which point they'll have to create a whole new wheat variety to combat that rust.
The new wheats likely will work for three to five years Liang estimates. We have to keep an eye out he says.
Mutant wheat? Sounds like a grade B horror movie! Night of the Mutant Wheat! Joe:
We now know what's been killing off the bees but what about that family that died after eating that new Winderbread whole wheat bread?
Bubba: Winderbread? I had that for lunch. You don't mean...Joe: Yup. You'd better get to a doctor.
The least environmentally friendly part of the bookmaking process isn't necessarily the loss of trees.
Much of the wood used to make the pulp that's turned into paper is actually byproducts of wood used to make other items--a cobbled-together mush of regular wood woodchips sawdust and other wood detritus.
The trees themselves aren't of one type; partly by virtue of paper's origin in castoffs and partly because it doesn't much matter
what kind of wood pulp you use paper is made from a mix of softwood and hardwood big trees and small trees all kinds of stuff.
Conservatree estimates that it takes about 24 trees to make one ton of non-recycled printing paper
It takes a lot of energy to cut down trees process them into pulp strain them press them heat them print them
The more wood products that are used the more trees that are planted. Companies that supply wood plant more than enough trees to cover very high future growth.
It takes so long for trees to mature they really don't have a choice. If something unexpected comes along
and causes an increased demand for wood they have to be able to meet that supply
or they lose money. They can limit supply if they plant too much simply by not cutting down as fast.)
So something like this that could cause an increase in demand for paper could mean a good deal more trees planted.
Trees which will pull out CO2 over decades before they are finally cut down themselves. Calculating just how many new trees are planted over
what might not have happened without the increased demand would be extremely difficult. Also some of those trees will be cut down sooner than others
so who knows how much CO2 they will actually pull out. Etc. etc. While I read online all the time
FYI'cause you don't get out of The City much paper is made from a renewable resource called trees.
It's hard to imagine anything more sustainable than the fast growing trees used to make paper. laurenra7
What of the works by important American authors like James Baldwin that you want to pass from generation to generation?
Most of the current planetary output still occurs outside of the realm of man's agriculture.
3) It does not take into account current or future advancements in agriculture. Again assuming a sub-optimized Earth potential.
America is a net exporter of corn rice and wheat and other countries buy it. Saudi arabia is a net exporter of oil
and other countries buy it. See how that works? Food production technology continues to improve worldwide as does energy production.
Depletion of forests and associated erosion and environmental damage in developing countries is a concern.
and replant forests.)The good news is trees are a renewable resource and can be replanted.
Better agricultural techniques that accompany rising wealth lead to better land management. People are amazing at solving their own problems even collectively on a global scale without any need for the pointy-haired government bosses
Natarajan Ganesanoak there's more than enough CO2 in the atmosphere for the limited agriculture potential. Beyond that is being absorbed into the oceans and raising the ppm of the atmosphere.
The problem solvers are engineers agronomists entrepreneurs fishermen farmers bakers; everyday people who see a way to improve something
Norman Borlaug the agronomist credited with saving over a billion people from starvation was a scientist.
We deforest for everything from toilet paper to wood for infrastructure and what the article hints to is that and
and grow trees fast enough to meet the paper demands of 10 billion person population. We are generating trash at a huge rate as well.
I don't think all people are cattle but I do think a large majority of the 8. 3 Billion on this planet are in that category.
The mangroves growing along the shore around Palau are so dense that aluminum wreckage from aircraft has been found sitting on top of the tree canopy about 30 feet up.
Combing the jungle and surrounding waters they located debris from more than five dozen aircraft. Last year local spear fishermen diving on Palau's western barrier reef stumbled across one of the most impressive finds:
Bentprop calculates that eight American planes including A b-24 bomber remain hidden in Palau's western lagoon.
Several days into the expedition they head there for dinner and order a round of local Red Rooster beers.
U s. airplanes used lime-green zinc chromate; the Japanese had a red primer. The team will have to get a close look.
Though it isn't an American plane Scannon is pleased with the discovery. It's a very unusual aircraft one of the rarest archaeological planes you will find he says.
Especially when it comes to corn. As much as 88 percent of corn grown in the U s. is modified genetically.
But is that as bad as anti-GMO activists make it out to be? Over at Slate Jon Entine has a scathing critique of Elle magazine's nail-biting feature on genetically modified corn (categorized in the hair
and beauty section because uh sickness makes you ugly?)in which writer Caitlin Shetterly explores a diagnosis that her years of sickness were the result of an allergy to genetically modified corn.
The problem Entine points out is that the science to back up that claim just doesn't exist.
There has not been one study that links the genetically engineered corn or any approved genetically modified food on the market to allergies one of his sources plant geneticist Pamela Ronald told him.
I quickly discovered that blaming GMO foods for any kind of health problem is controversial in the medical
and biotech worlds Shetterly wrote in her piece though her piece does little to explain why beyond the notion that powerful agricultural corporations like Monsanto are preventing research into unknown allergens that might arise from genetic engineering.
While there's certainly a complex story to be told on the subject of GMOS Elle seems to have passed right by it into conspiracy theory territory.
because they are engineered to produce their own pesticides. Did you happen to notice how all the bees are dieing?
We eat those pesticides as well. Health side effects have occurred definitely and will into the future. Monsanto is a multi-billion dollar corporation.
It's massive. They have the pockets to spread their garbage and destroy our health with their copyright seeds.
and sale of genetically modified (GMO) seed crop regardless of any consumer health concerns. As the Washington Times points out the provision s success is viewed by many as a victory by companies like Syngenta Corp Cargill Monsanto
and FDA all acknowledge the risks involved with GMO's. Their adverse affects on environment have been shown
GMO's certainly have their place in the world but careless actions with them and legal barriers like the ones put in place by Monsanto are dangerous practices.
Joe GMO crops don't produce their own pesticide rather they are resistant to (i e. they don't die from) pest
and herbicides that are sprayed on them. Tomatoes Tomahtoes I guess since the pesticides make it onto the crops anyway.
Regardless I'm neither for or against GMO crops what I'm against is stated what you in the latter part of your post;
namely the bullying of small farmers by large agro companies like monsanto. The cross-pollination bit is the perhaps the most disturbing thing but
I head somewhere that recently they prohibited agro companies from suing farmers that accidentally grow GMO crops that got there by cross pollinationalso the article says that theres nothing thats been published to support the notion of any health detriments (or benefits) from GMO crops...
ok but how many studies have been done at all? I could be wrong but I'm guessing that it isnt that many Its one thing to call someone a moron
because their claims are disproven by multiple studies. Its another thing to call someone a moron
The whole thing brings to mind big tobacco during the 50s and 60s; everyone knew that smoking was bad for you
but the tobacco companies kept on saying that there weren't any studies to support those claims...
Not saying this is the case with GMO crops but large agro can't make a claim of safety until independent studies have been conducted.
@Moose2823-Im sorry but they do produce pesticides. Not only are they tolerant of pesticides/herbicides they also produce pesticides themselves through the use of fungus
and bacteria to deliver the genes into the corn so that it can produce Delta Endotoxin.
Read below: University of Kentucky study on GMOS: Bt Delta Endotoxin-The Bt delta endotoxin was selected
because it is highly effective at controlling Lepidoptera larvae caterpillars. It is during the larval stage
The protein is very selective generally not harming insects in other orders (such as beetles flies bees and wasps.
For this reason GMOS that have the Bt gene are compatible with biological control programs
because they harm insect predators and parasitoids much less than broad-spectrum insecticides. The Bt endotoxin is considered safe for humans other mammals fish birds and the environment because of its selectivity.
Bt has been available as a commercial microbial insecticide since the 1960s and is sold under many trade names.
and can be used on many crops until the day of harvest. Bt-corn is a type of genetically modified organism termed GMO.
A GMO is a plant or animal that has been modified genetically through the addition of a small amount of genetic material from other organisms through molecular techniques.
Currently the GMOS on the market today have been given genetic traits to provide protection from pests tolerance to pesticides
or improve its quality. Examples of GMO field crops include Bt-potatoes Bt-corn Bt-sweet corn Roundup Ready soybeans Roundup Ready Corn
and Liberty Link corn. www2. ca. uky. edu/entomology/entfacts/ef130. aspsincerely-Joe www. joesid. comunfortunately nature is winning.
The majority of GMO plants are made to resist you know who's herbicide. The local plants are now growing immune to the herbicide.
II doubt this massive experiment will prove any better than lead paint or asbestos. Contrary to what poor old misguided Joe up there says there have been over 600 studies published over a 30 year period in numerous respected scientific journals by various experts in the relevant field in good standing.
The scientific consensus is that all GMO products currently on the market are as safe or in many cases safer than conventionally grown food.
Also contrary to popular belief organic food is in many ways worse for your health your wallet the environment and humanity at large.
Further reading on those studies mentioned: www. gmopundit. blogspot. ca/p/450-published-safety-assessments. htmla useful article about pros cons and (mis) conceptions of GMOSNATTUSAYS. wordpress. com/2011/03
And thank you Empmortakaten for pointing out that there is greater public health risk from so-called organic foods than from GMO foods.
It is telling that so many anti-GMO acolytes focus on the money trail that they imagine leads to promoters or defenders of GMO crops.
They rarely provide studies of GMO foods that show measurable harm (because there aren't any)
Like it or not GMO foods are here to stay and all the studies so far show that they are just as safe as non-GMO foods.
Empmortakaten you're information source is this: www. axismundionline. com/blog/the-new-is-gm-food-safe-meme/www. axismundionline. com:
Sincerely-Joehttp://www. joesid. comso TANGSTEN point us to a study not tainted by seed dispensary money that shows that GMO foods are measurably more dangerous than non-GMO foods.
or pesticide allergies that falls within the margin of error or uncertainty. laurenra7 It would be my pleasure to enlighten you and the rest of public.
and Chemical Toxicology found that rats fed on a diet of 33 per cent NK603 corn
and digestive problems. www. english. rfi. fr/americas/20120920-monsanto-gm-maize-may-face-europe-ban-after-french-study-links-cancersincerely-Joewww. joesid. compoor rats...
and Empmortakaten. www. businessinsider. com/monsantos-roundup-and-resistant-corn-found-to-be-toxic-2012-9sincerely-Joewww. joesid. comtangsten thank you for the link.
The study cited in the article was a 2-year toxicology study of rats fed Monsanto's Roundup-resistant NK103 maize (corn) and the herbicide Roundup.
The author of the study is Gilles-Eric SÃ Â ralini a notable critic of GMO crops. http://www. sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637here is a summary
www. businessinsider. com/monsantos-roundup-and-resistant-corn-found-to-be-toxic-2012-9it says:
Six French Science Academies Dismiss Study Finding GM Corn Harmed Ratshere is attached the link to the comment:
http://dotearth. blogs. nytimes. com/2012/10/19/six-french-science-academies-dismiss-study-finding-gm-corn-harmed-rats/?
âÂ#Âoethere has not been one study that links the genetically engineered corn or any approved genetically modified food on the market to allergies.
It is possible that specific GMO foods in the future--ones not studied and certified yet--may turn out to be more harmful than their non-GMO counterparts.
However the ones that have been certified so far have undergone pretty extensive testing and found to be at least as safe for consumptions as non-GMO foods.
Environmental concerns remain to be tested more fully perhaps but so far so good. Also to address your misconception about chemical weapons in Iraq.
Pigs! In this study they found major health issues to the pigs'uteri and stomach. That's one of the very few long term experiments conducted
and the case has been highlighted because of the use of rats. The Sprague-Dawley (SD) rat strain that SÃ Â ralini used is used also in long-term 2-year toxicity
and carcinogenicity studies by industry and academic scientists as well as in 90-day studies on GMOS.
Now to the pigs Conclusion Pigs fed a GMO diet exhibited heavier uteri and a higher rate of severe stomach inflammation than pigs fed a comparable non-GMO diet.
Given the widespread use of GMO feed for livestock as well as humans this is a cause for concern.
The results indicate that it would be prudent for GM CROPS that are destined for human food
Humans have a similar gastrointestinal tract to pigs and these GM CROPS are consumed widely by people particularly in the USA
if the findings of this study are applicable to humans. www centerforfoodsafety. org/press-releases/2291/new-peer-reviewed-study-on-gmo-pig-feed-reveals-adverse-effectsthe case study:
when billions of you are hanging GMO algae food sustenance bags off the sides of your houses
Coffee-sized machines 3d-print algae foodstuffs-precursor so we can handle the texture-hurdle. z=textstyle-frac {3}
when his fields were contaminated by a neighbor's GMO crop? I'll wait. JRS ONE I didn't want to keep you waiting.
if any would be appropriate to address economic losses by farmers in which the value of their crops is reduced by unintended presence of genetically engineered (GE) material (s)?
http://thinkprogress. org/health/2012/11/21/1224761/farmers-insurance-sued-by-corporations/Monsanto claims not to sue farmers who have been cross pollinated by their neighbor's crops
Sincerely-Joewww. joesid. comeven with Monsanto's disturbing sphere of influence both inside and outside government it is still surprising to see such disbelief that GMO's negatively impact health.
A study was published recently examining adverse effects of Bacillus thuringensis (aka the Bt toxin) that Monsanto builds into their corn and soy.
and other companies to label GMO's on their products? What are they afraid of?
Here's the documented from just one GMO crop. First Long term Study Released on Pigs Cattle Who Eat GMO Soy
and Corn Offers Frightening Results www. nationofchange. org/first-long-term-study-released-pigs-cattle-who-eat-gmo-soy
-and-corn-offers-frightening-results-13723stunning Corn Comparison: GMO versus NON GMO www. momsacrossamerica. com stunning corn comparison gmo versus non gmoknown to Kill Cows Castrate Wildlife Induce Spontaneous abortion in Lab Rats...
And it's Likely in Your Water articles. mercola. com/sites/articles/archive/2012/07/19/gmo-corn-resulting-livestock-deaths. aspx?
e cid=20120719 dnl artnew 24 More Damning Studies on GMO Corn: 1. A 2008 long-term study commissioned by the Austrian Agency for Health and Food safety looked at how Monsanto s genetically modified corn currently eaten
and sold in the world today affects the fertility of mice. The mice which were fed the GMO corn had significantly lower fertility rates than the mice fed natural non-GMO corn.
Disturbingly this declining ability to have continued babies down through future mouse generations as well. ÃÃÚÂ Ã 2. A comparative analysis published in the International Journal of Biological sciences examined the health effects of three different varieties of Monsanto-developed GMO corn on mice.
While the specific effects differed depending upon the variety of GMO corn that was eaten the dose that was consumed
and the sex of the mammal all three varieties of GMO corn caused damage to the animals major detoxifying organs namely the liver and the kidneys.
Other effects were also found in the heart adrenal glands spleen bone marrow lymph nodes and other blood-making organsã¢Â#Âll of which are signs of severe toxicity. 3. This past year Food Chemical Toxicology published the results of a two-year study conducted by scientists at the University of Caen
Institute of Biology in France looking at the effects of genetically modified corn. The research showed that in both male
and female rats the death rates for the animals fed GMO corn was two to three times higher than the animals eating non-GMO corn.
The GMO-fed mice were also four times more likely to develop tumors. GMO-eating females developed more mammary tumors as well as pituitary gland and hormonal abnormalities.
GMO-eating males developed significantly more cases of liver damage liver failure and severe kidney malfunctions. 4. Profit Pro a crop analysis
and management company recently released a report that showed staggering nutritional deficiencies in GMO corn
when compared to non-GMO corn. For example while average non-GMO corn contains 6130 ppm of calcium GMO corn contains 14 ppm four hundred-and-thirty-seven times less than the original vegetable.
Non-GMO corn contains 113 ppm of magnesium and GMO corn contains 2 ppm which is fifty-six times less.
Non-GMO corn contains 14 ppm of manganese while GMO corn contains 2 ppm. Deficiencies in these vital nutrients are associated with increased rates of osteoporosis cancer and other diseases.
Monsanto s GMO corn is engineered to be immune to glyphosate-based weed-killers such as Monsanto s trademarked Roundupãherbicide used on crops and fields nationwide.
This saves farmers the trouble of having to till their soil and de-weed their fields first allowing them to bathe their lands with abundant amounts of glyphosate herbicides in the presence of corn without concern that their corn crops will be killed.
However this also means that modern corn is laced with extensive glyphosate residues that we eat on a regular basis. Research shows that regular long-term intake of glyphosate is linked to increased risks of gastrointestinal disorders obesity diabetes heart disease
depression autism infertility cancer and Alzheimer s disease. ÃÚ à The glyphosate-resistance of GMO corn has encouraged such an over-abundance of glyphosate-based herbicides to be dumped into the environment worldwide that nature has started to respond in kind with the evolution of âÂ#Âoesuperweeds.
âÂ# A report published by the National Academy of Sciences Board on Agriculture
and Natural resources found at least nine species of weeds that have evolved naturally to withstand glyphosate weed-killers.
Other studies are beginning to discover certain insects that are adapting to GMO corn s inherent insecticide abilities.
As nature starts to catch up to our laboratory antics the agricultural and economic advantages of GMO corn are starting to become obsolete
and are forcing farmers to dump even more varieties of toxic chemical herbicides and pesticides on our foods in order to stay ahead of nature s race.
GMO corn contains an extremely high level of formaldehyde a chemical linked to adverse health effects and various forms of cancer.
While one study found that 0. 97 ppm of formaldehyde is toxic to mammals GMO corn was found to contain 200 times that amount. these comments...
just lol...to sides arguing whos right-pro and anti gmo people. And both are blind to the opposite side facts.
Its the same problem as the political views-you grow to favor one (or even religion) if you were exposed to it
since ur birth and you are physically uncapeable to accept the opposite. GMO foods got sideeffects
-if they arent carefully made and tested yet they can also be healthy and better if doen right.
Organic foods can often be way more dangerous -but who cares right..as long as its not gmo.
How do you expect to feed 7 billion people (with soo many starving already) with natural expensive and organic foods?
You may have the money and luxury to not eat the chemicals and GMO foods-but if you have to choose inbetween GMO food
and starvation for a month-there is nothing to choose. If yo uare soooo against GMO-then please find a better alternative.
Laurenra7 I hope you come back to discuss what tangsten posted about the long-term studies. It does seem to be damning.
But you had some backup to his previous claims. Although you are arguing with each other
and probably are annoyed by each other I appreciate the effort you are both putting into this argument.
They are already working on better solutions than GMO foods. 3-D printers can now print food that provides everything you need to survive.
The only reason this hasn't completely solved our food problem already is that the technology is fairly new
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011