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

RNA breakthrough creates crops that can grow 50 percent more potatoes, rice

sciencedaily.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 173 posts

Re: RNA breakthrough creates crops that can grow 50 percent more potatoes, rice

#81

Post by kingkawn »

necovek wrote: post #21

While I see people worry about the nutrient content in the resulting food, I wonder more about the nutrient content of the soil after a few years of such products. While we fertilize the soil, the mention of "longer and deeper roots" means that such plants will take out more from the ground, making ground less usable for future farming. Basically, as others have said, there is an evolutionary reason plants do not nat…

There are many crops that have been modified over time to be unsustainable without human intervention. Most grains, tomato cages, etc. as long as we know what the new needs are we can supplement and adjust.

Re: RNA breakthrough creates crops that can grow 50 percent more potatoes, rice

#82

Post by sjwalter »

necovek wrote: post #21

While I see people worry about the nutrient content in the resulting food, I wonder more about the nutrient content of the soil after a few years of such products. While we fertilize the soil, the mention of "longer and deeper roots" means that such plants will take out more from the ground, making ground less usable for future farming. Basically, as others have said, there is an evolutionary reason plants do not nat…

The thing is, the nutrient content of the resulting food plays close to zero role in the creation and marketing of food. Consumers, broadly, shop on looks, and even the health-conscious consumers who eat raw, whole, organic foods might be eating nice-looking, nutrient-sparse water, and won't know anything's amiss. Health problems experienced due to this issue are unlikely to be identified as dietary issues by such consumers.

Whole Foods is stocked full of these nice-on-the-outside fruits and veggies, e.g., Driscoll's large, deep-red strawberries that lack any and all flavour and whose cross-section is mostly white, tasteless flesh.

Re: RNA breakthrough creates crops that can grow 50 percent more potatoes, rice

#84

Post by yosito »

foxyv wrote: post #40
necovek wrote: post #21

While I see people worry about the nutrient content in the resulting food, I wonder more about the nutrient content of the soil after a few years of such products. While we fertilize the soil, the mention of "longer and deeper roots" means that such plants will take out more from the ground, making ground less usable for future farming. Basically, as others have said, there is an evolutionary reason plants do not nat…

Deeper roots tend to make for healthier soil. This is why dandelions are such a boon for someone with poor soil. Their deep roots break up poorly aerated soil allowing aerobic bacteria to produce nutrients for plants. Modern farmers are keenly aware of soil quality and spend a lot of time and money to keep their farms running at top efficiency. The thing that worries me the most about modern farming is the use of pet…

Presumably if you have more productive crops, the ratio of petrochemicals to food output improves.

Re: RNA breakthrough creates crops that can grow 50 percent more potatoes, rice

#85

Post by eloff »

necovek wrote: post #21

While I see people worry about the nutrient content in the resulting food, I wonder more about the nutrient content of the soil after a few years of such products. While we fertilize the soil, the mention of "longer and deeper roots" means that such plants will take out more from the ground, making ground less usable for future farming. Basically, as others have said, there is an evolutionary reason plants do not nat…

Or a glass half full way to look at this is 50% more yield means less land area needed to produce the same amount of food. Typically also longer roots improve soil quality. There are always tradeoffs, but this looks amazingly positive.

Re: RNA breakthrough creates crops that can grow 50 percent more potatoes, rice

#86

Post by naasking »

jessaustin wrote: post #83
naasking wrote: post #50

Optimizing yield often sacrifices resilience in other ways. Let's also avoid a monoculture.

Creating new varieties is the obvious way to "avoid a monoculture".

The incentives under capitalism don't work well in that scenario though. If a variety is much better than alternatives, it will dominate and thus create a monoculture.

Same thing we saw with PPE at the beginning of COVID. Capitalist price optimization drove outsourced manufacturing which works great... Until it doesn't. Incentivizing against monoculture has to be explicit.

Re: RNA breakthrough creates crops that can grow 50 percent more potatoes, rice

#88

Post by elevaet »

9qlGq9aGgQMgaax wrote: post #9

How does this impact the soil?

This could benefit the soil as less land will be needed to produce the same amount of food. This would allow more land to lie dormant with nitrogen fixing plants, allowing wider periods between crop rotations.

The deeper roots could also benefit the soil. Wild plants tend to have deeper roots, and this brings greater biological activity in the depths of the soil - so more of the soil is 'alive'.

These deep-rooted plants are hardier, so less pesticides will be needed, which also benefits the soil. And on the same note they will need less chemical fertilizer because they can access more nutrients from the depths. Again, good for the soil.

On the other hand, if these crops are farmed overly intensely, they will just end up depleting the soil to a greater physical dept, so we'll be back at the same problem, but deeper. But in the meantime, at least we'll have crops that are accessing more soil volume.

Re: RNA breakthrough creates crops that can grow 50 percent more potatoes, rice

#89

Post by bullfightonmars »

bamboozled wrote: post #66
bullfightonmars wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not how plants work. The increased biomass comes from carbon in the air. There is already more than enough nutrients in the ground or applied as fertilizer. In fact most of the nutrients from fertilizer are lost and wash away. This will allow plants to capture more applied ferilizer. Mostly though these plants will be pulling more carbon from the atmosphere.

Is it good for humans to eat more fertiliser, pesticides etc ?

You don’t eat fertilizer in your food. It is applied to the ground before the plants fruit. It is also water soluble and quickly washes away.

Pesticides aee higly dependent on crop and really have nothing to do with this conversation.

Re: RNA breakthrough creates crops that can grow 50 percent more potatoes, rice

#90

Post by CyanBird »

bamboozled wrote: post #66
bullfightonmars wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not how plants work. The increased biomass comes from carbon in the air. There is already more than enough nutrients in the ground or applied as fertilizer. In fact most of the nutrients from fertilizer are lost and wash away. This will allow plants to capture more applied ferilizer. Mostly though these plants will be pulling more carbon from the atmosphere.

Is it good for humans to eat more fertiliser, pesticides etc ?

This is like asking if the vitamins that you give to a chicken as a chick will poison you when you eat it as adult, I am not talking of hormones or growth agents, just literal common vitamins

You don't eat "the vitamins" you eat the chicken, you don't eat the fertilizer, you eat the plant

Post reply on HN