Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A variety of corn has evolved a way to make its own nitrogen (2018)

smithsonianmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 91 posts

Re: A variety of corn has evolved a way to make its own nitrogen (2018)

#11

Post by mohaine »

mcgt wrote: post #9

There's a better way to add nitrogen to soil and it's through the nitrogen cycle. The US Midwest (which grows a lot of corn) used to be highly populated with ruminants who did exactly this. We killed them all (well, most) and now grow corn which we use most to finish off cattle, which is also a ruminant. Maybe a better solution would be to feed the ruminants off the land now used by the corn? Imagine what that might…

This IS a nitrogen cycle. Sure it would be great to utilize waste nitrogen as well but that doesn't take away from this.

Btw this is how lagumes fix nitrogen. This nothing new but since it is already in maze it can probably be crossbred into production corn lines without that toxic GMO label.

Re: A variety of corn has evolved a way to make its own nitrogen (2018)

#13

Post by mulmen »

rmason wrote: post #10

This is an extremely hard problem. I've been following efforts to replace nitrogen for around forty years. It's part of a bigger trend of the seed industry grabbing a larger portion of the crop production dollar. It's the science of GMO's. We've replaced some insecticides by letting the plants produce their own. We've eliminated some herbicides (weed sprays) by producing resistance in the plant to first Roundup and l…

I find this post insightful generally but I don't think the last sentence was necessary. It is possible to be an organic advocate irrespective of "listening to the scientists" on this or any other topic. Constructing and attacking this straw man doesn't really add anything to your post.

Re: A variety of corn has evolved a way to make its own nitrogen (2018)

#14

Post by danielheath »

henearkr wrote: post #12

With all this mucus dripping, won't it need even more water? Wouldn't that be a problem in the dry future?

Compared to the the problem of nitrogen fixing in a future without haber-bosch fertilizer plants, water use barely registers.

Re: A variety of corn has evolved a way to make its own nitrogen (2018)

#15

Post by eloff »

mulmen wrote: post #13
rmason wrote: post #10

This is an extremely hard problem. I've been following efforts to replace nitrogen for around forty years. It's part of a bigger trend of the seed industry grabbing a larger portion of the crop production dollar. It's the science of GMO's. We've replaced some insecticides by letting the plants produce their own. We've eliminated some herbicides (weed sprays) by producing resistance in the plant to first Roundup and l…

I find this post insightful generally but I don't think the last sentence was necessary. It is possible to be an organic advocate irrespective of "listening to the scientists" on this or any other topic. Constructing and attacking this straw man doesn't really add anything to your post.

I think it's true though. The opposition to GMO foods is typically reflexive and unthinking. It's not grounded in logic or science. That's not to say throw all caution to the wind, but I've yet to hear anyone make a sound argument in this case. And there are at least good arguments to be made on both sides referencing the existing literature.

Re: A variety of corn has evolved a way to make its own nitrogen (2018)

#16

Post by fouc »

I'm wondering if there are other plants with "Aerial root mucilage" also?

The wikipedia page on aerial roots [0] needs some love. There's also another similar article about this corn [1].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerial_root

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/08/amaizeba...

Re: A variety of corn has evolved a way to make its own nitrogen (2018)

#17

Post by fouc »

henearkr wrote: post #12

With all this mucus dripping, won't it need even more water? Wouldn't that be a problem in the dry future?

I wouldn't be surprised if the gel/mucus produced was water absorbent and most of the water used in the mucus actually came from external sources.

Re: A variety of corn has evolved a way to make its own nitrogen (2018)

#18

Post by nelaboras »

rmason wrote: post #10

This is an extremely hard problem. I've been following efforts to replace nitrogen for around forty years. It's part of a bigger trend of the seed industry grabbing a larger portion of the crop production dollar. It's the science of GMO's. We've replaced some insecticides by letting the plants produce their own. We've eliminated some herbicides (weed sprays) by producing resistance in the plant to first Roundup and l…

It's not so straightforward. Those with financial interests in the matter manipulate opinion and pay for lopsided science. That's why many globally and especially in the US still 'doubt' climate change. The evidence today is overwhelming but 20 years ago was still more muddled as Shell & co were funding biased studies, while experts and environmentalists were screaming for action and simply ignored. And still today there are media (in the US) telling their audience that it's not real, pointing to some pseudoscience to make this claim. Science is messy, can be biased and we have to rely on third parties to communicate it.

The same problem for nuclear: it's not self-contradictory to be eager for low-co2 energy and oppose nuclear due to its large-scale damage in case of an incident (and with Fukushima, 3Mile, Tchernobyl and various smaller incidents it's not like this is just theory).

It's similar with GMO: there are some studies showing risks and various GMO plants have been stopped due to concerns they could be harmful. Roundup is not exaxtly harmless but rather leaves ecological deserts behind - even if you are in favour of GMOs (like golden rice) you might still oppose some of them (like roundup ready plants), specifically because of doubts about the corporate-funded science by the agri-businesses behind them. Or you might oppose them on economic/social grounds, e.g. the practice of sterilising seeds which already has driven many farmers in level 1 and 2 (aka developing) countries into economic disaster.

Trust the science? Most environmentalists will agree. Trust the science funded by and the actual implementation by Monsanto? A much harder sell, akin to trusting BP's studies on climate and emissions.

Re: A variety of corn has evolved a way to make its own nitrogen (2018)

#19

Post by ABCLAW »

rmason wrote: post #10

This is an extremely hard problem. I've been following efforts to replace nitrogen for around forty years. It's part of a bigger trend of the seed industry grabbing a larger portion of the crop production dollar. It's the science of GMO's. We've replaced some insecticides by letting the plants produce their own. We've eliminated some herbicides (weed sprays) by producing resistance in the plant to first Roundup and l…

Not supporting Monsanto's business model isn't the same thing as not 'listen[ing] to scientists'.

The issues with blanket application of Glysophate combined with roundup resistant crops are real; application volumes have ballooned and we still don't have a scientific consensus on it's effects on humans. Ignoring, in the immediate, the potential health effects of the molecule, it is also a driving force in the expansion of monoculture techniques rather than more sustainable polycultures.

Monocultural key foodcrops are a long-tail risk to food security. The Irish potato famine, the lightning quick elimination of the Gros Michel clones, etc.

I won't get into the myriad legal issues surrounding Roundup, terminator seeds, etc. but they aren't theoretical either.

This isn't to say there's no benefit from Glyphosate application. It's to say opposition towards it is not driven by scientific illiteracy. Quite the opposite.

Re: A variety of corn has evolved a way to make its own nitrogen (2018)

#20

Post by etaioinshrdlu »

rmason wrote: post #10

This is an extremely hard problem. I've been following efforts to replace nitrogen for around forty years. It's part of a bigger trend of the seed industry grabbing a larger portion of the crop production dollar. It's the science of GMO's. We've replaced some insecticides by letting the plants produce their own. We've eliminated some herbicides (weed sprays) by producing resistance in the plant to first Roundup and l…

I think GMO's are disliked not just because of gene editing, but the decidedly non-organic way that GMO's are typically grown. My understanding is that GMOs are typically used on industrial scale monocrop farms, with pesticides. So it gets tarnished by association.
Post reply on HN