The fascinating early history of corn

Genetic modification of corn goes back a very long time...

From the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/25/science/25creature.html

Comments

  1. AnonymousJune 1, 2010 at 6:51 PM

    You muddy the waters by calling this "genetic modification".

    Traditional crop breeding/improvement has virtually none of the downsides of GMOs.
    Of course it could be argued that there are benefits to GMOs. Just don't call it all genetic modification.

    Below from Human Genome Project Information

    Controversies
    * Safety
    o Potential human health impacts, including allergens, transfer of antibiotic resistance
    o Potential environmental impacts, including: unintended transfer of transgenes through cross-pollination, unknown effects on other organisms (e.g., soil microbes), and loss of flora and fauna biodiversity
    * Access and Intellectual Property
    o Domination of world food production by a few companies
    o Increasing dependence on industrialized nations by developing countries
    o Biopiracy, or foreign exploitation of natural resources
    * Ethics
    o Violation of natural organisms' intrinsic values
    o Tampering with nature by mixing genes among species
    o Objections to consuming animal genes in plants and vice versa
    o Stress for animal
    * Labeling
    o Not mandatory in some countries (e.g., United States)
    o Mixing GM crops with non-GM products confounds labeling attempts
    * Society
    o New advances may be skewed to interests of rich countries

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Nonlinear Temperature Effects Indicate Severe Damages to U.S. Crop Yields Under Climate Change

Image
It's been a long haul, but my coauthor Wolfram Schlenker and I have finally published our article with the title of this blog post in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences . We've been told that it would show up on the early-edition website this week. It hasn't shown up there yet so I guess it will come out tomorrow [Friday 8/28], probably late afternoon EST. UPDATE: You can find the article here . We set out to develop a better statistical model linking weather and U.S. crop yields for corn, soybeans and cotton, the largest three crops in the U.S. in production value. Our major new finding is that (by far) the best predictor of yield is a measure of extreme heat: how much temperatures exceed about 29C (84F) during the growing season. The threshold varies somewhat by crop--29C is the threshold for corn. Below this threshold, warmer temperatures are more beneficial for yields, but the damaging effects of temperatures much above 29C are staggeringly large. A
Read more

Renewable energy not as costly as some think

Image
The other day Marshall and Sol took on Bjorn Lomborg for ignoring the benefits of curbing greenhouse gas emissions.  Indeed.  But Bjorn, among others, is also notorious for exaggerating costs.  That fact is that most serious estimates of reducing emissions are fairly low, and there is good reason to believe cost estimates are too high for the simple fact that analysts cannot measure or imagine all ways we might curb emissions.  Anything analysts cannot model translates into cost exaggeration. Hawai`i is a good case in point.  Since moving to Hawai`i I've started digging into energy, in large part because the situation in Hawai`i is so interesting.  Here we make electricity mainly from oil, which is super expensive.  We are also rich in sun and wind.  Add these facts to Federal and state subsidies and it spells a remarkable energy revolution.  Actually, renewables are now cost effective even without subsidies. In the video below Matthias Fripp, who I'm lucky to be working w
Read more

Answering Matthew Kahn's questions about climate adaptation

Matt has taken the bait and asked me a five good questions about my snarky, contrarian post on climate adaptation.    Here are his questions and my answers. Question 1.    This paper will be published soon by the JPE. Costinot, Arnaud, Dave Donaldson, and Cory B. Smith. Evolving comparative advantage and the impact of climate change in agricultural markets: Evidence from 1.7 million fields around the world. No. w20079. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2014.    http://www10.iadb.org/intal/intalcdi/PE/2014/14183.pdf It strongly suggests that adaptation will play a key role protecting us. Which parts of their argument do you reject and why? Answer:    This looks like a solid paper, much more serious than the average paper I get to review, and I have not yet studied it.    I’m slow, so it would take me awhile to unpack all the details and study the data and model.    Although, from a quick look, I think there are a couple points I can make right now.    First, and mo
Read more