IS THAT DANGEROUS ENGINEERING?

[canadamike]

Look this one up...tell me what you think

www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090302120106.htm

[ottawagardener]

Don't worry about the potential problem of corn fed cattle because they now have the alterantive: Corn stock fed beef, the new 'grass' fed? The assumption that annual is better than perennial grazing grasses because you might have to rotate the fields if there is a pest or a disease is goofy sounding to me.

Not the kind of genetic change you want floating out there making other ears of corn smaller... then again, I don't know if this occurs in natural populations as I don't know that much about corn breeding/genetics.

[plantsnobin]

These guys have to keep coming up with something to justify their existence, and their research and grant money. I don't really even think that they are evil, and I do think that some of them may actually think they are helping mankind. I won't deny that there is some potential for useful things from genetic engineering, but nothing that we can't get by without. Looking at it from the researchers perspective, I am sure it is pretty cool to be able to do all they do with the manipulations. Heck, can you imagine what Alan might do if he had all that stuff at his fingertips? The problem is, as almost always is the case, unintended consequences. Did all these corporations start out to take over the world? I doubt it, but that is what ends up happening. Ever more competition to gain market share, satisfy the investors. The stakes are constantly raising, and this is where it has lead. Too many people have no reason to question this kind of stuff, because they have no idea where food comes from anyway. They don't understand there are unanswered questions about the safety/wisdom of these experiments. Just show some malnourished kids somwhere and tell them that the only way to save them is modern agribusiness. Who could possibly not be in favor of an 'enhanced' rice that will prevent blindness in all those poor people? You know, instead of maybe just giving them some carrot seed so they can grow their own vitamins.
And I don't care what this researcher says about his corn fodder yields, there is no way it is going to outproduce miscanthus. You can't kill that stuff.

[mjc]

I have two questions....why? and are you sure this is actually being done by 'engineering'?

There are already some old corn varieties that express all the characteristics it seems this guy is after...

As the engineering side of things...you can breed for certain traits fairly easily, but I suspect doubling just one gene would be very difficult using conventional techniques, but not impossible. And with a 'marker assist' I imagine it would be easier. Even if it is 'cut and splice' engineering...at least it is corn to corn.

[darwinslair]

I have seen photos of corn that gets 25' tall. Is this just a way to patent something that exists already?

And what does pulling this much nutrients out of the soil do to the soil?

Weird. We had 10X the number of buffalo living on a smaller percentage of land than is now being used to grow crops to just feed cattle. You would think they could look at how things worked before they started mucking with it and come up with ways that actually work long term.

Tom

[paquebot]

From a dairy farmer's view, I'd love it. Most corn has always been developed for the ears rather than silage. Equipment was always set up for about an 8' plant. Knotter on a binder couldn't be set any higher to reach the center of gravity of the bundle if it were taller. Wagons were also 8' wide. Lanes and gates were also set to handle that width. As an FFA member, I was given enough of an experimental King Cross silage corn in 1955 to plant about 10 acres. It easily topped 10' but was a bear to handle. That was before field choppers. That is now the average height and all equipment is set up for that. Anything bigger would mean a new line of equipment would be needed to handle it.

As for the buffalo grazing, they ate about as much as cattle and in the same way. Only difference is that when they ate one area to the ground they simply migrated to another area.

Martin

[darwinslair]

Yes, but there was no tilling, no planting, no chemicals, no feedlots, and they fed on perennial prairie grasses, not cultivated annuals.

Tom

[plantsnobin]

Exactly.

[paquebot]

And one dead buffalo fed everyone within 10 square miles for a month.

Martin

[Alan]

I'm not sure if this is a GMO or not, but a few points to be made, some of which have already been made here.

-if it is a GMO but contains only corn genes (marker assisted breeding) I can deal with it, otherwise it's a step in the wrong direction.
-There are many old OP silage varieties already adapted well to cattle raising regions
-Depending on the initial germplasm and metabolism, this thing could be a nitrogen and water eating monster which is useless in a sustainable system when there are already so many other options out there.

Lots to take into consideration for sure.

[kctomato]

just a point here

"marker assisted breeding" is a board term and does not always imply engineering