China Drone Attack on Crop-Eating ‘Monster’ Shows 98% Kill Rate • Hacker News Board

Re: China Drone Attack on Crop-Eating ‘Monster’ Shows 98% Kill Rate

#51

Post by btilly » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 6:44 PM UTC

wysifnwyg wrote: post #10

b_tterc_p wrote: post #8

There are reasonable concerns about using genetic modifications to kill things like mosquitos, but why don’t we use this tech against invasive species which we want to be absolutely removed from an ecosystem?

It's due to the concerns that a genetically modified species may return to the native ecosystem and decimating their natural habitat.

It would be simple to solve that with a breeding population kept isolated. If the genetic modification wipes out the wild population, you reintroduce it.

For species that reproduce quickly, such as insects, this is reasonable.

That said the mosquito trick is that we can produce drones whose babies are also only drones with the same genetic malfunction. The number of drone-only mosquitoes expands exponentially until they are most of the males, then most of the population, and then in a couple of more generations, the population is wiped out for lack of females.

I'm not sure that this would work as well for a species that moves more slowly. Or whether we know how to do the trick for species other than mosquitoes.

Re: China Drone Attack on Crop-Eating ‘Monster’ Shows 98% Kill Rate

#52

Post by Animats » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 7:18 PM UTC

goda90 wrote: post #38

Animats wrote: post #36

Are they just aerial spraying, like crop-dusting, or are they identifying individual army worms and zapping them?

Aerial spraying at night which is when the worms feed. Normal insecticide application happens during the day and to be effective they spray a lot more.

That makes sense. Especially if you're not farming big flat fields, where a pickup truck and a spray rig can do the job at night. China has limited arable land, and farms terrain no one would bother with in the US.

Re: China Drone Attack on Crop-Eating ‘Monster’ Shows 98% Kill Rate

#53

Post by bthecohen » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 7:19 PM UTC

zupzupper wrote: post #48

seszett wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess most people just know best about what pests affect their area. Here in France, phylloxera is well known for having decimated our vines after having arrived from America (what saved the French wine industry was grafting our species on the roots of phylloxera-resistant but unpalatable American vines). Same for the Argentinian ants that have founded the supercolony along the Mediterranean coast.

> phylloxera-resistant but unpalatable American vines Hey now. You send me a palatable French wine and I'll send you a palatable American one =)

This is actually referring to different species of grapes, and has nothing to do with winemaking technique or prowess.

Virtually every type of "quality wine" that is consumed in the world comes from the old world species vitis vinifera. This includes basically every variety you've heard of: Chardonnay, Cabernet Sauvignon, Pinot Noir, Syrah, Merlot, just to name a few French varieties (but the same applies to Italian, Spanish, German, etc. wines). Any American winemakers making those kinds of wines (and I agree that many New World wines go toe-to-toe with the best France has to offer!) are using grape vines that were originally imported from Europe.

In addition, there are several species of grapes that are native to North America, the best known of which is probably the Concord grape. Unfortunately, due to their flavor profiles these species don't tend to be used for winemaking (one exception being Manischewitz and other sweet ritual wines). However, they have a natural resistance to phylloxera, which saved vitis vinifera from decimation and likely extinction through the grafting technique.

Re: China Drone Attack on Crop-Eating ‘Monster’ Shows 98% Kill Rate

#54

Post by seszett » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 7:22 PM UTC

zupzupper wrote: post #48

seszett wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess most people just know best about what pests affect their area. Here in France, phylloxera is well known for having decimated our vines after having arrived from America (what saved the French wine industry was grafting our species on the roots of phylloxera-resistant but unpalatable American vines). Same for the Argentinian ants that have founded the supercolony along the Mediterranean coast.

> phylloxera-resistant but unpalatable American vines Hey now. You send me a palatable French wine and I'll send you a palatable American one =)

American wines are made from European Vitis vinifera, grafted on the roots of American species just like in France.

Re: China Drone Attack on Crop-Eating ‘Monster’ Shows 98% Kill Rate

#55

Post by RealityVoid » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 7:30 PM UTC

ScoJoh wrote: post #43

Bjorkbat wrote: post #26

Don't get too excited. We don't know the full story on the 2% that lived. For all we know, they could become tomorrow's 20% that developed pesticide resistance and rampaged through China's countryside.

That was exactly my thought. It's like DDT on Mosquitoes. The ones that survived were resistant, so when they bred, all their offspring were resistant. Could end up being the same issue here, so this could easily become a FAR FAR worse issue in the next generation or two of these worms.

Is it _far far_ worse though? It seems to me it should become just as worse as without any woking pesticide, only later.

Re: China Drone Attack on Crop-Eating ‘Monster’ Shows 98% Kill Rate

#56

Post by RealityVoid » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 7:32 PM UTC

yowlingcat wrote: post #41

pugworthy wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't buy one big one and have it do your whole field. You buy lots of them and have them do the field as a swarm. Consider that a row-crop tractor can cost $100-300,000 (see footnote). You can buy A LOT of little drones for that much money. Or a smaller number of drones and a number of swappable battery packs. $300,000 worth of spraying drones could cover a huge amount of area in a lot less time, and with a lot…

Probably more reliable to maintain, too. A single drone or even a substantial minority failing only lowers swarm throughput rather than completely taking the whole thing out of commission.

I honestly doubt it. Flight life expectancy for drones must not be great and fixing a drone can use quite a bit of time, depending on what is wrong with it.

I say that as someone who worked with drones. They are, honestly, a pain.

Re: China Drone Attack on Crop-Eating ‘Monster’ Shows 98% Kill Rate

#57

Post by sjg007 » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 7:35 PM UTC

unnouinceput wrote: post #42

So how this compares with having a very low tech solution instead, like the one using pipes in the field that can spray the insecticide in the same amount as a drone does?

Pipe in the field can be damaged during farm operations like field prep, planting and harvesting etc... they also get clogged by dirt and in many jurisdictions you can't send pesticide down a water irrigation pipe for example. For some farms that would also be a lot of pipe to lay. So overall just a really bad idea.

Re: China Drone Attack on Crop-Eating ‘Monster’ Shows 98% Kill Rate

#58

Post by wysifnwyg » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 7:37 PM UTC

btilly wrote: post #51

wysifnwyg wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's due to the concerns that a genetically modified species may return to the native ecosystem and decimating their natural habitat.

It would be simple to solve that with a breeding population kept isolated. If the genetic modification wipes out the wild population, you reintroduce it. For species that reproduce quickly, such as insects, this is reasonable. That said the mosquito trick is that we can produce drones whose babies are also only drones with the same genetic malfunction. The number of drone-only mosquitoes expands exponentially until t…

Reintroduction takes time, time which those species that depend on it as prey (or are kept in check by it if it's a predator) will die out.

Re: China Drone Attack on Crop-Eating ‘Monster’ Shows 98% Kill Rate

#59

Post by arcticfox » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 7:41 PM UTC

RealityVoid wrote: post #56

yowlingcat wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably more reliable to maintain, too. A single drone or even a substantial minority failing only lowers swarm throughput rather than completely taking the whole thing out of commission.

I honestly doubt it. Flight life expectancy for drones must not be great and fixing a drone can use quite a bit of time, depending on what is wrong with it. I say that as someone who worked with drones. They are, honestly, a pain.

Have you worked with large numbers? I feel like industrial scale drone swarms would be much different than the consumer ones we're used to. Even military ones that are individually very valuable.

Re: China Drone Attack on Crop-Eating ‘Monster’ Shows 98% Kill Rate

#60

Post by bdamm » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 7:48 PM UTC

unnouinceput wrote: post #42

So how this compares with having a very low tech solution instead, like the one using pipes in the field that can spray the insecticide in the same amount as a drone does?

Consider that for many fields hiring out powerful airplanes flown by actual humans to drop pesticide is economical, would inform me that using pipes in the field is not as low-tech or as economical as you might expect.