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

A street snack that has baffled botanists

atlasobscura.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 204 posts

Re: A street snack that has baffled botanists

#61

Post by wombatmobile »

rsynnott wrote: post #8
MattGaiser wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of "baffled scientists for decades" is more that the scientists know about it but have never taken time to look as there are other things to do. It is a ridiculous spin.

Except, as mentioned in the article, they _did_ look into it, to the extent of DNA testing it! And still didn't come to a particularly satisfactory conclusion. "It might be an agave, but also the agave expert says agaves aren't like that" is about as far as anyone seems to have gotten.

> Except, as mentioned in the article, they _did_ look into it, to the extent of DNA testing it!

What do your experts make of this wikipedia article?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maerua_oblongifolia

Re: A street snack that has baffled botanists

#62

Post by acchow »

esjeon wrote: post #31

The whole business sounds very shady. It's likely that the plant is sourced from the side of roads, untended fields, forests, construction companies (selling anything they find for coffee money), etc. It's a completely black area, outside of food regulations, so they can't expose the actual source, no matter what. This can also explain the confusing reports from multiple researchers, because academic "species" don't…

With multiple layers of middlemen, it's possible the vendors don't even know what the source is.

Re: A street snack that has baffled botanists

#65

Post by apocolyps6 »

wombatmobile wrote: post #61
rsynnott wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except, as mentioned in the article, they _did_ look into it, to the extent of DNA testing it! And still didn't come to a particularly satisfactory conclusion. "It might be an agave, but also the agave expert says agaves aren't like that" is about as far as anyone seems to have gotten.

> Except, as mentioned in the article, they _did_ look into it, to the extent of DNA testing it! What do your experts make of this wikipedia article? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maerua_oblongifolia

If you read 4 paragraphs into that article, you will find out

Re: A street snack that has baffled botanists

#67

Post by wombatmobile »

> Wikipedia identified the scientific name of the plant as Maerua oblongifolia, but had no photos of it.

How about this photo?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maerua_oblongifolia#/media/Fil...

In this Wikipedia article

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maerua_oblongifolia

Maerua oblongifolia (syn. Maerua arenaria, Niebhuria arenaria) is a low woody bushy under-shrub sometimes scandent to 2–3 meters high, with a thick root stock and thick leaves, and strongly scented flowers, occurring in India, Pakistan, Africa and Saudi Arabia. In Telugu this plant is called by name Bhoochakra gadda (In Telangana) and Bhoochakra dumpa (In Andhra). In Tamil this plant is called by name Poomicchakkarai Kizhangu (பூமிச் சர்க்கரைக் கிழங்கு). This is a tuber that naturally grows in areas closer to fountains, especially in hills. Tribes and others collect the tubers, which are sold as a quick street food, in many Indian cities and towns.

Re: A street snack that has baffled botanists

#68

Post by derefr »

hyperpallium2 wrote: post #24
a_bonobo wrote: post #20

Isn't it a bit... terrifying to buy and eat food, when nobody wants to tell you what that food actually is??

coke secret recipe, KFC secret herbs and spices

For both of those, you can put them through some chromatography/spectrography/etc. and figure out essentially what's in them — what ingredients, in what ratios. What you won't find out is the particular process required to get those ingredients "formatted" the right way to taste like the result.

(E.g. Coke apparently does some fancy, hard-to-replicate-at-home kind of micronized emulsification to the flavoring oils that go into it, to get them into suspension in a water-based drink in a way that results in a smooth—but not viscous or lingering—mouth-feel. That process doesn't change what's in Coke; it just changes how it's in there.)

Also, in both of those cases, FDA inspectors know not only the what but also the how, as they check the manufacturing process to ensure that they're putting in what they (privately) claim to be putting in, no more and no less. And we can then trust the FDA to not let them put anything too "weird" in there, while they can also trust the FDA to not tell everyone what they know about the process.

Re: A street snack that has baffled botanists

#69

Post by hug »

wombatmobile wrote: post #61
rsynnott wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except, as mentioned in the article, they _did_ look into it, to the extent of DNA testing it! And still didn't come to a particularly satisfactory conclusion. "It might be an agave, but also the agave expert says agaves aren't like that" is about as far as anyone seems to have gotten.

> Except, as mentioned in the article, they _did_ look into it, to the extent of DNA testing it! What do your experts make of this wikipedia article? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maerua_oblongifolia

Well, the experts which were consulted by the writer of the article have this to say:

> I had a breakthrough a few months later when I came across a thesis paper by Dr. MS Rathore, who had propagated Maerua oblongifolia in the lab in 2011. He had seen the tree many times in the desert state of Rajasthan. “But I haven’t heard or seen anybody eating the root,” the scientist said over a call, sounding puzzled.

> “Its roots are sparse and inedible,” added Dr. NS Shekhawat, his thesis adviser and a retired professor of botany. “Growing in dry regions, where will it have so much water to develop big roots and be fat and juicy? [The snack] can’t be Maerua oblongifolia.”

Which seems to provide a little bit of a counterpoint.

Re: A street snack that has baffled botanists

#70

Post by [deleted] »

esjeon wrote: post #31

The whole business sounds very shady. It's likely that the plant is sourced from the side of roads, untended fields, forests, construction companies (selling anything they find for coffee money), etc. It's a completely black area, outside of food regulations, so they can't expose the actual source, no matter what. This can also explain the confusing reports from multiple researchers, because academic "species" don't…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN