|
|
 |
" I heard it
through the
AgLine"
|
|
November 18, 2009
·
Biotech crops
spawn jump in herbicide use
·
The changing
chemistry of the US corn belt
·
GM soybeans
may substitute as fish-oil source
·
Food summit
yields ‘crumbs’ on hunger’s plate
·
Water on the moon: Can
veggies be far behind?
Biotech crops spawn jump in herbicide
use – report
(Reuters
via commondreams.org) KANSAS CITY - The
rapid adoption by U.S.
farmers of genetically engineered corn, soybeans and cotton has promoted
increased use of pesticides, an epidemic of herbicide-resistant weeds and more
chemical residues in foods, according to a report issued Tuesday by health and
environmental protection groups.
The groups said research showed that herbicide use grew by
383 million pounds from 1996 to 2008, with 46 percent of the total increase
occurring in 2007 and 2008.
The report was released by nonprofits The Organic Center
(TOC), the Union for Concerned Scientists
(UCS) and the Center for Food Safety (CFS).
The groups said that while herbicide use has climbed, insecticide
use has dropped because of biotech crops. They said adoption of genetically
engineered corn and cotton that carry traits resistant to insects has led to a
reduction in insecticide use by 64 million pounds since 1996.
Still, that leaves a net overall increase on U.S.
farm fields of 318 million pounds of pesticides, which includes insecticides
and herbicides, over the first 13 years of commercial use.
The rise in herbicide use comes as U.S. farmers increasingly adopt
corn, soy and cotton that have been engineered with traits that allow them to
tolerate dousings of weed killer. The most popular of
these are known as "Roundup Ready" for their ability to sustain
treatments with Roundup herbicide and are developed and marketed by world seed
industry leader Monsanto Co.
Monsanto rolled out the first biotech crop, Roundup Ready
soybeans, in 1996.
Monsanto officials declined to comment on the report. But
the Biotechnology Industry Organization, of which Monsanto is a member, said
the popularity of herbicide-resistant crops showed their value outweighs any
associated detriments.
"Herbicide resistance crops are incredibly popular with
farmers. They help them manage their weed problems in ways traditional crops
don't," said Mike Wach, BIO managing director of
science and regulatory affairs.
"If a farmer feels a crop is causing them more trouble
than it is worth they will stop using it," Wach
said. "Farmers are continuing to adopt these crops because they provide
benefits, not liabilities and problems."
BIO officials pointed to a report issued earlier this year
by PG Economics Ltd that said the volume of herbicides used in biotech soybean
crops globally decreased by 161 million pounds, or 4.6 percent, from 1996 to
2007.
The report by the environmental groups states that a key
problem resulting from the increase in herbicide use is the emergence of
"super weeds," which are difficult to kill because they have become
resistant to the herbicides.
"With glyphosate-resistant weeds now infesting millions
of acres, farmers face rising costs coupled with sometimes major yield losses,
and the environmental impact of weed management systems will surely rise,"
said Charles Benbrook, chief scientist of The Organic Center.
The groups additionally criticized the agricultural
biotechnology industry for claiming that higher costs for genetically
engineered seeds are justified by multiple benefits to farmers, including
decreased spending on pesticides.
The group said biotech corn seed prices in 2010 could be
almost three times the cost of conventional seed, while new enhanced biotech
soybean seed for 2010 could be 42 percent more than the original biotech
version.
"This report confirms what we've been saying for
years," said Bill Freese, science policy analyst
for the Center for Food Safety. "The most common type of genetically
engineered crops promotes increased use of pesticides, an epidemic of resistant
weeds, and more chemical residues in our foods. This may be profitable for the
biotech/pesticide companies, but it's bad news for
farmers, human health and the environment."
Return to Top
The changing chemistry of the US corn belt
(ZDNet) –
The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) says there are less toxic pesticides in America’s Corn Belt
rivers. The study released today covers the decade
ending 2006.
The USGS says, “Declines in concentrations of the
agricultural herbicides cyanazine, alachlor and metolachlor show the
effectiveness of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulatory actions
as well as the influence of new pesticide products. In addition, declines from
2000 to 2006 in concentrations of the insecticide diazinon
correspond to the EPA’s national phase-out of nonagricultural uses.”
“Scientists studied 11 herbicides and insecticides
frequently detected in the Corn Belt region, which generally includes Illinois,
Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska and Ohio, as well as parts of adjoining states. This
area has among the highest pesticide use in the nation — mostly herbicides used
for weed control in corn and soybeans. As a result, these pesticides are
widespread in the region’s streams and rivers, largely resulting from runoff
from cropland and urban areas.
“Elevated concentrations can affect aquatic organisms in
streams as well as the quality of drinking water in some high-use areas where
surface water is used for municipal supply. Four of the 11 pesticides evaluated
for trends were among those most often found in previous USGS studies to occur
at levels of potential concern for healthy aquatic life. Atrazine,
the most frequently detected, is also regulated in drinking water.”
“Only one pesticide — simazine,
which is used for both agricultural and urban weed control — increased from
1996 to 2006. Concentrations of simazine in some
streams increased more sharply than its trend in agricultural use, suggesting
that non-agricultural uses of this herbicide, such as for controlling weeds in
residential areas and along roadsides, increased during the study period.”
“Glyphosate, an herbicide which has had rapidly increasing
use on new genetically modified varieties of soybeans and corn, and which now
is the most heavily used herbicide in the nation, was not measured until late
in the study and thus had insufficient data for analysis of trends.”
Monsanto markets glyphosate as Roundup. Roundup does not
meet with universal acceptance with some researchers questioning its safety.
The use of herbicides and pesticides is intensive in both
the food industry and the biofuel industry that uses corn to make ethanol.
Return to Top
GM soybeans may substitute as fish-oil
source
(Bloomberg)
-- Diners who’d prefer to skip the salmon may no longer miss out on the fish’s
omega-3 fatty acids, known to reduce heart disease.
Monsanto Co., the world’s largest seed producer, genetically
engineered soybean plants to produce oil that helps boost levels of one such
acid and can be added to food for a healthier diet. Results from a 157-person
study of the oil’s potential benefits were presented today at the American
Heart Association meeting in Orlando,
Florida.
Fatty fish, such as albacore tuna, mackerel, sardines and
herring, may reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease because it is high in eicosapentaenoic acid, or EPA, and docosahexaenoic
acid, or DHA, omega-3 fatty acids. Heart disease is the top cause of death
worldwide for both men and women, and the American Heart Association, based in Dallas, recommends eating
two servings of fatty fish a week.
“Without the American public really having to go out of
their way to develop a taste for fish, which they’re not going to do, we’ll put
a healthy dietary component that’s been missing into their foods,” said William
Harris, lead author of the study and professor of medicine at the University of
South Dakota’s Sanford School of Medicine, in Sioux Falls, in an interview.
The oil, whose taste is undetectable, may be incorporated
into breakfast bars and salad dressings, Harris said. The U.S. Food and Drug
Administration, based in Silver Spring,
Maryland, said in October the new
oil is generally accepted as safe.
Approval Needed
The modified soybeans still need approval from biotech
regulators at the U.S. Department of Agriculture before planting can begin,
said Ben Kampelman, a Monsanto spokesman, in an
interview. Sales should begin early in the next decade, he said.
Researchers at St. Louis-based Monsanto created the new soybean
strain by inserting genes from a fungus and another plant. Soybeans naturally
create an omega-3 fatty acid called ALA,
or alpha-linolenic acid, that
leads to creation of EPA. That process takes two steps in human bodies, the
first being a conversion to stearidonic acid, or SDA,
Harris said. Monsanto’s genetically modified soybeans skip that step, and start
with SDA, which changes more efficiently into omega-3 fatty acids.
In the study, healthy volunteers in Cincinnati,
Sioux Falls and Chicago were separated into three groups to
test the differences among oil from the new soybeans, unaltered soybeans and
EPA derived from fish. The volunteers were given gel caps and oil to put on
food. The goal was to see if the new soybean oil boosted EPA levels in participants’
red blood cells.
Study Findings
At 12 weeks, the new oil boosted EPA levels with about 18
percent of the efficiency of pure EPA, according to the research.
Subjects taking the modified soybean oil were given more
than those in the fish-derived EPA group. The former took 15 grams of the new
soybean oil and 1 gram of regular soybean oil in the form of gel caps a day,
while those in the EPA group were given one gram of EPA in gel caps and 15
grams of regular soybean oil daily. The group given unaltered soybean oil had
15 grams of oil and 1 gram in gel caps a day.
EPA levels rose 18 percent in the group taking the new
soybean oil, compared with 20 percent in the pure-EPA group, according to the
report. The regular soybean oil didn’t raise cellular EPA levels at all, the
results showed.
More tests are needed to ensure the oil has the same effect
once put into foods, Harris said.
As the oil gets incorporated into foods, “the background
levels of omega-3 in the population will rise,” Harris said. The oil will take
pressure off fish populations and be free from contaminants such as mercury and
dioxins that can be found in fish.
“It’s virtually an inexhaustible source if it works out,”
Harris said.
Monsanto has worked since 2007 with St. Louis-based Solae
Co., owned 72 percent by DuPont Co. of Wilmington, Delaware, to create foods from omega-3
soybeans.
Return to Top
Food summit yields ‘crumbs’ on hunger’s
plate
(AP
via Yahoo! News) ROME
– The head of a U.N. food agency expressed regret Wednesday that an anti-hunger
summit failed to result in precise promises of funding, and critics said the
meeting had only thrown crumbs to the world's 1 billion people without enough
to eat.
The three-day summit at the U.N. Food and Agriculture
Organization headquarters in Rome ended with little new headway in efforts for
a new strategy to help farmers in poor countries produce enough to feed their
people.
The summit was quickly labeled a failure at the outset
Monday when delegates from 192 nations rejected U.N. appeals to commit
themselves to $44 billion annually in agricultural development aid.
As the summit closed, the international aid agency Oxfam
denounced the gathering as a "lackluster" effort that wound up
offering what it called "crumbs" for the world's hungry, estimated at
one of every six people on Earth.
Jacques Diouf, the director
general of the Food and Agriculture Organization, said in his closing speech
that countries had taken "important steps" by pledging in the final
summit declaration to increase aid to agriculture.
But, "alas, I note that this declaration does not
contain any quantified objectives, nor any precise deadline," said Diouf shortly before a final news conference. The United
Nations had hoped the summit would commit to eradicating hunger by 2025.
Oxfam joined a loud chorus of critics who questioned the
value of the summit's outcome.
"A single meeting can't solve world hunger, but we
certainly expected far more than this," said Oxfam spokesman Gawain Kripke.
Apart from Italian Premier Silvio
Berlusconi, who chaired the opening session, no other Group of Eight leaders
attended.
"The near total absence of rich country leaders sent a
poor message from the beginning. The summit offered few solid
accomplishments," said Kripke.
Although the summit endorsed a strategy shift to put the
emphasis on making developing countries self-sufficient in agriculture, factors
such as wars, droughts and flooding, as well as the global financial crisis,
still mean emergency food aid is needed.
On the summit sidelines Wednesday, U.N. officials said such
factors have made the Horn of Africa one of the world's most critical hunger
areas, with some 23 million people short of food.
The World Food Program will need $1 billion to provide food
aid in the next six months in the region that includes Ethiopia, Somalia and other countries. More
than half of those hungry are in Ethiopia, and include some 4
million to 5 million children under five.
Return to Top
Water on the moon: Can veggies be far behind?
(Los
Angeles Times) – Scientists have found "significant" amounts of
water in a crater at the moon's south pole, a major
discovery that will dramatically revise the characterization of the moon as a
dead world and likely make it a more attractive destination for future human
space missions.
"The moon is alive," declared Anthony Colaprete, the chief scientist for the Lunar Crater
Observation and Sensing Satellite mission.
That mission used a rocket Oct. 9 to punch a hole about 100
feet across in the moon's surface, then measured about
25 gallons of water in the form of vapor and ice. While that's not even enough
to swim in, it could indicate sufficient water in permanently shaded craters at
the poles for future astronauts to live off the land.
NASA's plans, currently under review by the Obama
administration, call for a return to the moon at the end of the next decade,
and construction of a lunar base in which astronauts could live and work for
months at a time.
The presence of large quantities of water would make that
plan more practical, since water could be used for drinking, breathing and even
making rocket fuel.
A resource-rich moon could also serve as the perfect
low-gravity launchpad for missions that would carry
astronauts and their families elsewhere in the solar system, fulfilling the
dreams of generations of science-fiction writers and visionaries.
"This is painting a surprising new picture of the moon.
This is not your father's moon," said Greg Delory,
a space scientist at UC Berkeley.
After the Apollo missions of the 1960s and '70s, the moon
was regarded as a dead, forbidding place with little to offer future explorers.
"What's really exciting is we've only hit one
spot," said Peter Schultz, a geology professor at Brown University
and a co-investigator on the mission. "It's kind of like when you're
drilling for oil. Once you find it in one place, there's a greater chance
you'll find more nearby."
The $79-million lunar crater mission was launched in June to
try to uncover the source of large quantities of hydrogen that had been
measured in lunar craters at the poles. If there was water on the moon,
scientists reasoned, it would be in these shadowed craters, which haven't seen
sunlight in billions of years.
The satellite targeted the Cabeus
crater at the south pole, first steering its companion
Centaur rocket into the surface.
Then the satellite flew through the cloud of debris and dust
kicked up by Centaur, using its near-infrared and visible light spectrometers,
along with other instruments, to read the contents of the debris cloud.
Spectrometers identify compounds by analyzing the light they emit or absorb.
No cloud showed up at first, causing some scientists to
worry that the Centaur had hit rock. But members of the scientific team became
excited when they started looking at the data transmitted back to Earth just
before the satellite crashed as planned a short distance from Centaur.
The "eureka" moment came in recent weeks when the
team realized that a strong signature for water had been picked up by more than
one instrument. "It's a pretty tight fit for water vapor and ice," Colaprete said in a briefing at Ames
Research Center
in Mountain View, Calif., which managed the mission.
This is not the first discovery of water on the moon.
Several weeks ago, India's
Chandrayaan 1 spacecraft found clear signs of a
microscopic film of water mixed in with lunar soils over large areas of the
moon.
But those amounts were so insignificant that it is unlikely
the water would be useful to future colonists.
This latest discovery, however, is a potentially significant
source of water, the scientists said.
It's unlikely the water, at least at this site, is in the
form of an ice sheet, Colaprete said. It's more
likely to be mixed in with the soil.
The question now is, where did the
water come from? Possible sources include comets and asteroids, which are
considered likely sources of the water on Earth.
It's also possible the hydrogen was delivered by solar wind
to the lunar surface, where it was converted to water. In shadowed craters, the
water could be stored as ice for billions of years.
Polar craters on the moon are some of the coldest places in
the solar system, dipping below minus-360 degrees.
The scientists hinted that other surprises may be coming in
the next few months. "The full understanding of the LCROSS data may take
some time. The data is that rich," Colaprete
said.
This new picture of a dynamic moon comes as the Obama administration
is reconsidering the future of the human space flight program. The Vision for
Space Exploration announced by the Bush administration in 2004 called for a
return to the moon by 2020 and the eventual colonization of Mars.
But the Augustine Commission,
appointed by Obama to review those plans, reported just weeks ago that NASA
will not get back to the moon anytime soon unless it gets a lot more money, at
least $3 billion a year.
The commission also questioned whether the moon is a worthy
goal, citing the "been there, done that" factor.
These new discoveries could be game changers, since they
raise the possibility that a colony on the moon could be virtually
self-sustaining.
Obama has given no indication yet as to what he intends to
do.
Return to Top
End Transmission