In a blow to climate whiners, a new breakthrough creates crops that can grow 50% more potatoes and rice

Like clockwork, every year climate activists and their media enablers publish bold headlines claiming that global warming aka “climate change” will result in crop yield reductions, crop failures, and food shortages. Of course this sort of claim has been going on for decades, yet has never actually happened. Cue failed doomsayer Paul Ehrlich and The Population Bomb.

The most recent absurd claim is from CNN Business who says:  Climate-driven crop failures are driving up food prices.

“Climate change is coming right into our dining room tables,” said Cynthia Rosenzweig, an agronomist and climatologist.

Of course, the data for actual crop yields doesn’t support that, their claims are all based on model projections rather than real-world data. Real-world data shows ever increasing global crop yields.

As shown in the chart above, the FAO’s recent “Cereal Supply and Demand Brief” reports new global records are being set nearly every year for production of the cereal crops (corn, wheat, rice, and similar crop staples) that comprise most of global food consumption.

But, real science without any social engineering agenda has just made all of these claims moot, especially in poorer countries where rice is the main staple of the diet.

The University of Chicago (UC) recently announced breakthrough research published in Nature Biotechnology that will yield increased crop production. By doing a simple manipulation of the RNA in plant cells,  this new modification allows plants to yield dramatically more crops, as well as increased drought tolerance

According to UC, in initial tests, adding a gene encoding for a protein called FTO to both rice and potato plants increased their yield by 50% in field tests. The plants grew significantly larger, produced longer root systems and were better able to tolerate drought stress. Further analysis also showed that the plants had increased their rate of photosynthesis.

On the left, rice plants without the RNA modification. On the right, a rice plant with the RNA modification that boosts yield. Note the plant on the right has double the number of rice kernels. Image courtesy of Yu et al.

“The change really is dramatic,” said University of Chicago Prof. Chuan He, who together with Prof. Guifang Jia at Peking University led the research.

“What’s more, it worked with almost every type of plant we tried it with so far, and it’s a very simple modification to make.”

The method has created some exciting results.

UC reports the rice plants grew three times more rice under laboratory conditions. When they tried it out in real field tests, the plants grew 50% more mass and yielded 50% more rice. They grew longer roots, photosynthesized more efficiently, and could better withstand stress from drought.

The scientists repeated the experiments with potato plants, which are part of a completely different plant family. The results were the same.

Above, the potato yield from unmodified plants. Below, the yield from plants with the new RNA modification. Image courtesy of Yu et al.

The fact that the same RNA modification worked on both potatoes and rice suggests a degree of universality for the new discovery that is extremely exciting. As the researchers try other staple crops such as corn and soybeans, the results, especially for American farmers could be dramatic.

While environmentalists and food safety critic will probably try to label this improvement yet another variation of “frankenfood”, it turns out the researchers are not doing any genetic modifications (GMO) at all, but merely tapping into something already in the plant.

According to Guifang Jia, one of the UC researchers, “This is a brand new type of approach, one that could be different from GMO and CRISPR gene editing; this technique allows us to “flip a switch” in the plants at an early point in development, which continues to affect the plant’s food production even after we remove the switch.”

“It seems that plants already have this layer of regulation, and all we did is tap into it. So the next step would be to discover how to do it using the plant’s existing genetics,” he said.

According to Michael Kremer, another UC researcher,  “This is a very exciting technology and could potentially help address problems of poverty and food insecurity at a global scale.”

Indeed, once it is applied on a global scale, it would essentially negate any argument made by climate change advocates that climate change will affect food production in a negative way, but that won’t stop them from trying.


The paper: RNA demethylation increases the yield and biomass of rice and potato plants in field trials

Abstract

RNA N6-methyladenosine (m6A) modifications are essential in plants. Here, we show that transgenic expression of the human RNA demethylase FTO in rice caused a more than threefold increase in grain yield under greenhouse conditions. In field trials, transgenic expression of FTO in rice and potato caused ~50% increases in yield and biomass. We demonstrate that the presence of FTO stimulates root meristem cell proliferation and tiller bud formation and promotes photosynthetic efficiency and drought tolerance but has no effect on mature cell size, shoot meristem cell proliferation, root diameter, plant height or ploidy. FTO mediates substantial m6A demethylation (around 7% of demethylation in poly(A) RNA and around 35% decrease of m6A in non-ribosomal nuclear RNA) in plant RNA, inducing chromatin openness and transcriptional activation. Therefore, modulation of plant RNA m6A methylation is a promising strategy to dramatically improve plant growth and crop yield.

4.9 25 votes
Article Rating
208 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Rhs
September 6, 2021 9:58 am

Never fear, Greenpeace and other NGO’s will find a way to scare folks and prevethe food from being consumed.
After all, all change provided is bad!

Tom Halla
Reply to  Rhs
September 6, 2021 10:01 am

Yeah, and the Little Ice Age was a climate optimumum!/s

Smart Rock
Reply to  Tom Halla
September 6, 2021 12:07 pm

But the LIA WAS a climatic optimum from the point of view of the true believers. Crop failures, mass starvation, disease run rampant, population decline. What’s not to like for the anti-human puppet-masters behind the green brigade?

G Mawer
Reply to  Smart Rock
September 6, 2021 2:02 pm

It boggles my mind that any HUMAN could be referred to as”anti-human”!

AndyHce
Reply to  G Mawer
September 6, 2021 7:00 pm

Not so funny that it seem to be very much the case.

JEHILL
Reply to  Smart Rock
September 7, 2021 4:31 am

It is funny how they are also Wuhan Flu anti-human puppet-masters as well. They have done such a wonderful job with the mRNA vaccines lets let them flip on genes using human mRNA in plants. I mean what could go wrong?

What is the nutritional profile of these plants post gene manipulation? Is that 50% more nutrients? Do the farmers of these crops need to make modifications to soil health processes?

mark from the midwest
Reply to  Rhs
September 6, 2021 11:17 am

Funny how progressives always want change, except when it’s a change for the better.

H.R.
Reply to  mark from the midwest
September 6, 2021 12:49 pm

Very good mark! Exactly. 👍👍

Ed Reid
Reply to  mark from the midwest
September 6, 2021 12:58 pm

…and “choice”, except regarding guns, SUVs, heating fuel, etc.

Felix
Reply to  Rhs
September 6, 2021 11:53 am

They delayed Golden Rice for years. They’ve delayed GMO crops around the world. They try to cancel “deniers” and “skeptics”, including academic researchers and private industry researchers. I will not be the last surprised if they try to cancel GMO research itself, not just at universities, but everywhere, as a field. Of course it won’t stick; too many poor countries want this stuff.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Felix
September 6, 2021 12:06 pm

Of course it won’t stick; too many poor countries want this stuff.

Yeah … funny that, n’est ce pas? They like to eat every day and even the weekends. Virtue signalling … not so much.

Jay Willis
Reply to  Felix
September 6, 2021 12:28 pm

The problem with GMO is and was that corporations were attempting to patent life itself. There are some really good reasons to stop this abuse, which of course, and as usual, hits the poorest hardest. The roundup ready type of rubbish was not good for anyone. However, that is not to say GMO itself is a bad science, but I for one, will need to see some genuine benefits before I’m convinced. The study above seems excellent, on the other hand, as after a few generations the seed may revert to type and let poor farmers farm.

JBnID
Reply to  Jay Willis
September 6, 2021 1:11 pm

I used to see weeding crews of about 30 ‘mostly illegal’ Mexicans in Idaho sugar beet fields, but that was 20 years ago. GMO has changed the way they’re planted, grown and harvested. Wheat and Barley are now consistent in height of seed heads for more efficient harvesting. Silage corn retains more nutrients. God bless the Ag scientist.

Felix
Reply to  Jay Willis
September 6, 2021 1:26 pm

Whether or not you believe in patenting crops (I don’t believe in patents at all), the patented and sterile crops were apparently beneficial to the farmers who thought they were worth buying.

MarkW
Reply to  Felix
September 6, 2021 1:58 pm

For the sake of the poor, we must prevent companies from profiting on their research investments.

Felix
Reply to  MarkW
September 6, 2021 4:39 pm

Not in the slightest. I just think patents are so randomly given and poorly enforced that they are as corrupt as any other crony systems. Look at the Wright Bros, who sat on their patents waiting for the royalties to come knocking. James Watt didn’t know how to make high pressure boilers well, so he went after everybody who tried to make steam locomotives, which didn’t take off until his patents expired.Bell beat Gray to the patent office by hours. There are a zillion examples. I don’t like legal systems which are so random.

MarkW
Reply to  Felix
September 7, 2021 6:03 am

Because a tiny fraction of patents are misused, all patents must be gotten rid of. Get rid of patents, and the vast majority of research comes to a halt.

TonyG
Reply to  Felix
September 7, 2021 8:15 am

I don’t like legal systems which are so random.

That seems more like a complaint with the legal system instead of the patent system.

I’ll agree the patent examination system needs to be reviewed. It’s absurd that people can patent “Method of Swinging on a Swing” (swinging sideways) or “Method of Playing With a Cat” (using a laser pointer).

But abuse does not invalidate the concept. It just means the abuse needs to be addressed.

Barry James
Reply to  MarkW
September 6, 2021 6:01 pm

Sarcasm I trust.

MarkW
Reply to  Barry James
September 7, 2021 6:02 am

Yup

Richard Patton
Reply to  MarkW
September 7, 2021 9:44 am

I assume you are in favor of not being paid for your work.

PCman999
Reply to  Felix
September 6, 2021 8:08 pm

I agree with you, sort of, half-ish. The biggest problem that I have seen with patented food is when pollen or seed drifts over to a neighbouring field that hasn’t paid for the GMO seeds. That field starts growing crops with the artificial genes, and if Monsanto gets word of it, their lawyers start suing – even though the farmer did nothing wrong. I have no problem with a company making money from their research and development, production work, but they have no right to use “lawfare” on innocent farmers, especially those in developing countries, to make up for deficiencies in their product under control.

MarkW
Reply to  PCman999
September 7, 2021 6:04 am

That’s a problem with the courts that allow such nonsense, not the patent system itself.

MarkW
Reply to  Jay Willis
September 6, 2021 1:57 pm

Total nonsense. Companies have been patenting new forms of crops for decades. GMO is nothing new.
What hits the poor hardest is not having access to new strains, which is what would happen if you change patent laws so that companies cannot protect their investment.
Nothing was ever proven to be wrong with Roundup.

You will never see any good, when you keep your eyes screwed shut.

aussiecol
Reply to  MarkW
September 6, 2021 2:54 pm

Yes, the GMO debate is just another hate ache for greens who detest multinationals like Monsanto. they just try and substitute good for greed.

James F. Evans
Reply to  MarkW
September 6, 2021 4:42 pm

Nothing wrong with round up.

A lot of juries disagree with that.

LdB
Reply to  James F. Evans
September 6, 2021 5:36 pm

Yeah because juries are the bastions of science and the lawyers can’t stack them.

aussiecol
Reply to  James F. Evans
September 6, 2021 7:59 pm

Nope, juries only listen to the corrupt WHO that has an agenda against herbicides in general and ignores countless studies that prove otherwise.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  aussiecol
September 7, 2021 4:18 am

Ive examined roundup soils under scope theyre near inert for useful soil biota

Reply to  James F. Evans
September 6, 2021 11:28 pm

“Nothing wrong with round up. A lot of juries disagree with that.”

Smart lawyers and stupid juries.

Last edited 1 month ago by Ralph Dave Westfall
Thurigner
Reply to  James F. Evans
September 6, 2021 11:50 pm

Round Up is proven to cause Lymphoma

MarkW
Reply to  Thurigner
September 7, 2021 6:08 am

Actually it hasn’t.

Mark J Boyles
Reply to  Thurigner
September 9, 2021 5:41 am

no, it is NOT proven to cause Lymphoma. A group of jurors who felt sorry for someone who had lymphoma were convinced that Roundup might have something to do with it by Lawyers and awarded money to the person who had Lymphoma.

All that proves is that the jury (chosen by the plaintiff lawyers) did not understand the evidence. Such lack of understanding is an ongoing problem litigating science with lay juries.

MarkW
Reply to  James F. Evans
September 7, 2021 6:05 am

Juries are for the most part, made up of people who weren’t smart enough to get out of jury duty.
Quite a few jurors when interviewed after the trial said they didn’t care who was at fault, they just found the victim to be sympathetic and wanted to do something for them.

TonyG
Reply to  James F. Evans
September 7, 2021 8:24 am

Because juries are always right?

Also, define “a lot”.

Richard Thornton
Reply to  MarkW
September 6, 2021 6:37 pm

Funny how these poor people end up making so many countries and entrepenuers rich. They must have some way of creating money since they suppossedly have none. Economics though at time rudimentary is still a science as well. Demand pull creating supply and profits and everyone wins. Let freedom ring!!

Gunga Din
Reply to  MarkW
September 7, 2021 4:54 pm

Reminds me of juries in malpractice lawsuits.
How come there are rarely many (if any) MDs allowed on a “jury of their peers”?
An MD might understand the evidence presented?

TonyG
Reply to  Gunga Din
September 7, 2021 5:19 pm

I’ve been called in for jury duty a few times. I can see the change in the lawyer’s (both) demeanor when they ask my occupation and I say “Software engineer”.

It’s a practical guarantee I won’t be selected.

Mark J Boyles
Reply to  TonyG
September 9, 2021 5:43 am

Same here, you say “I am an Professional Engineer” and you can be assured you will not be chosen for the jury.

guidoLaMoto
Reply to  Jay Willis
September 10, 2021 7:12 am

“…but I for one, will need to see some genuine benefits before I’m convinced”
Recombinant human insulin, for one?…GMO corn seed adds ~10c to the cost of a bu of $4 corn but helps ensure 150bu/ac yield…Hardly an economic hardship.

H.R.
Reply to  Felix
September 6, 2021 12:59 pm

“Lessee here… do we want to starve to death now or do we only want to live to 81 instead of 83?

Decisions, decisions…”


Darn straight, Felix. Most people in 3rd world countries want dinner tonight. They can’t do a thing about their overloaded bus plunging off a mountain, but that’s tomorrow’s worry.

When you live day-to-day, anything that guarantees dinner for the rest of the year takes precedence over something that may happen in 30 or 40 or 60 years… if the computer models are right (and they are not).

Mr.
Reply to  H.R.
September 6, 2021 2:07 pm

Mazlo’s “Hierarchy Of Needs” rules everything we humans do.

Let’s see how Biden’s quests for Self Actualization and Recognition slip to the bottom rung of his needs hierarchy the moment he starts to have trouble peeing.

(Can’t blame him for that though, it’s just what nature presents us with.)

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Mr.
September 6, 2021 2:51 pm

It has been years since I’ve seen someone mention Mazlo … and that’s too bad. He explained so much with such a profoundly simple concept. The main problem with socialism and all its clones is a fundamental misunderstanding of human nature and motivation. They believe that it is possible to alter our DNA with indoctrination.

TonyG
Reply to  H.R.
September 7, 2021 7:26 am

When you live day-to-day, anything that guarantees dinner for the rest of the year takes precedence over something that may happen in 30 or 40 or 60 years

A lot of people in first-world countries, activists in particular, are incredibly unaware how many people live under these circumstances. I saw a great example of this sort of cluelessness in a documentary once: the “host” was a guest in some African village where they cooked dinner over dung (because that’s all they had) and he was raving about how “sustainable” and “environmentaly friendly” it was.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Felix
September 7, 2021 4:15 am

funny india and africa dont seem to want it at all after theyve tried it. and gm/crispr fiddlin is what got us all the gain of function covid surprise
well thats been fun hasnt it?

MarkW
Reply to  ozspeaksup
September 7, 2021 6:11 am

The fact that politicians are easily swayed is not evidence of anything. Unless you are willing to believe that the fact that most politicians believe in global warming is proof of global warming.
Genetic manipulation can be misused, therefore it must be banned.

James Beaver
Reply to  Felix
September 7, 2021 6:09 pm

They didn’t cancel the GMO “Gain of Function” virus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, paid for in part by Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Fraizer
Reply to  Rhs
September 6, 2021 3:39 pm

I would be willing to wager that many if not most of the anti-GMO activists probably took the mRNA ‘vaccine’. That makes them a GMO.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Fraizer
September 7, 2021 4:21 am

you may well lose that bet
no one I know self included would accept a gmodded vax IF they give a damn about gene fiddlin

Fraizer
Reply to  ozspeaksup
September 7, 2021 5:27 am

Maybe, but I don’t believe that most GMO activists know or care much about gene fiddlin’. For many just another NGO honeypot to be exploited. For the masses just another ‘Big Corporation Bad’ mantra.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Rhs
September 7, 2021 4:13 am

so if it soups up photosynthesis and produces 2x or whatever more
the plants WILL require more water and nutrients as well
guess it will sell more chemical fertiliser for someone too?
wonder if the plants are 2x as yummy to bugs?
weaker defence against pathogens been checked yet?

Mark J Boyles
Reply to  ozspeaksup
September 9, 2021 5:48 am

All good questions, except the “more water” one which was addressed already as “more drought tolerant”. Of course all this means is the testing isn’t completed.

You might want to separate your legit questions from your unfounded conclusions though. “plant WILL require more water” for example is not consistent with the test results.

September 6, 2021 10:00 am

Greens won’t like it – genetic manipulation is a buzz word and it’s result can’t be other than bad.

Last edited 1 month ago by Krishna Gans
Robert Hanson
Reply to  Krishna Gans
September 6, 2021 10:07 am

Of course the Watermelons won’t like it, but the world’s poor will be quite happy to eat it anyway.

Reply to  Robert Hanson
September 6, 2021 10:13 am

What was with Golden Rice ?

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Krishna Gans
September 7, 2021 4:21 am

like the corn a LOT of years and money for very little result worth a damn

guidoLaMoto
Reply to  ozspeaksup
September 10, 2021 7:27 am

GMO dos not increase yields…It helps guarantee normal yields.

How long do you think manufacturers would stay in business if every few years unpredictable weather or pestilence wiped out their entire production for the year before they could sell it?

Fraizer
Reply to  Krishna Gans
September 7, 2021 5:31 am

Surprisingly, given the source, a reasonably balance article.

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

Mr.
Reply to  Robert Hanson
September 6, 2021 10:16 am

City kids these days think all food just appears at the supermarket, so they won’t know what they’re eating anyway.

But those kids do know there are numerous genders.

JBnID
Reply to  Mr.
September 6, 2021 1:12 pm

But can’t decide on their own.

Reply to  Krishna Gans
September 6, 2021 12:24 pm

EU bans genetic manipulation. What a healthy attitude!

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Curious Georgel
September 6, 2021 1:19 pm

They’d better stop eating all that highly hybridized food then. I doubt they could even find any that isn’t.

MarkW
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
September 6, 2021 2:01 pm

In the good old days, instead of targeting specific genes to modify, agricultural companies would expose seeds to mutagens. Plant the crops, then examine the ones that survive to see if they had developed any usable traits. Which genes were modified? Nobody knew.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  MarkW
September 7, 2021 4:23 am

yup the clearfield crops do that still and have the HUGE caveats and use and patents on growers too

Gunga Din
Reply to  MarkW
September 7, 2021 5:04 pm

Mendel’s Law. Good. Natural.
Man using Mendel’s Law? BAD! Unorganic!

MarkW
Reply to  Curious Georgel
September 6, 2021 2:00 pm

Why is that a healthy attitude? What’s healthy about rejecting anything new?

Reply to  MarkW
September 6, 2021 2:35 pm

It is progressive. Absolutely progressive. Ban anything new.

LdB
Reply to  Curious George
September 6, 2021 5:37 pm

Well peak humanity was back in the dark ages according to progressive lefties 🙂

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Curious George
September 7, 2021 4:23 am

new is NOT always needed OR better

MarkW
Reply to  ozspeaksup
September 7, 2021 6:12 am

In this case it is.

Fraizer
Reply to  Curious Georgel
September 6, 2021 3:41 pm

Unless it is a ‘vaccine’. Then it is mandatory.

Rah
Reply to  Curious Georgel
September 7, 2021 4:24 am

Except when it comes to modifying human mRNA by forced injections.

JEHILL
Reply to  Curious Georgel
September 7, 2021 4:43 am

And taking mRNA “vaccines”.

PaulH
Reply to  Krishna Gans
September 6, 2021 1:28 pm

I like potatoes and and I like rice, so this news is all good. 🙂

DHR
September 6, 2021 10:10 am

Is the nutritional value of the crops unaffected? Fertilization requirements?

Ben Vorlich
Reply to  DHR
September 6, 2021 11:21 am

For those in the West more roughage fewer calories might be a good inovation

Mumbles McGuirck
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
September 6, 2021 11:30 am

I’m waiting for Burger King to announce their new “Impossible Fries”.

Philip
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
September 6, 2021 2:24 pm

Made from all animal byproducts no doubt.

Bryan A
Reply to  Mumbles McGuirck
September 6, 2021 6:33 pm

Made from Beef???

n.n
Reply to  Ben Vorlich
September 6, 2021 12:03 pm

It depends, while all calories are equitable, they are not processed equally. And while dietary fat is politically congruent (“=”), it is not equal to body fat.

Reply to  DHR
September 6, 2021 2:45 pm

The entire claims of diminished micronutrients (vitamins minerals) from improved growth (either more CO2 or by genetic modifications, or both) are hogwash distractions coming from those who want the climate scam to succeed in destroying Western democratic political systems.

When people die of starvation it is for lack of calories, not micro-nutrients. Micronutrient reductions from whatever cause can, and are, easily fixed.

For example, We have had enriched wheat flour with B vitamins for almost 80 years now. This is because the milling process for wheat, especially making white flour, reduces B vitamins. Fortified flour has been around since 1998 which additionally adds in Folic Acid.

Flour enriched with iron, thiamin, riboflavin and niacin have been part of the American diet since 1941 and have helped to eradicate beriberi and pellegra from the United States. Although folic acid fortification started only in 1998, its presence in flour is responsible for the decline in the incidence of neural tube defects in babies by 23 percent in the U.S. and by 54 percent in Nova Scotia, Canada.

https://healthyeating.sfgate.com/fortified-flour-1719.html

Additionally, fortification may also add in calcium to flour as well. So the whole diminished micronutrients claims are hog wash, and are meant to confuse people ignorant of what has been done to improve nutrient value of all grain foods for many decades, and long before the climate scammers started their carnival barking alarmism.

Last edited 1 month ago by joelobryan
ozspeaksup
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
September 7, 2021 4:25 am

if you have to “fortify” food due to poor quality OR overprocessing then the food is NOT fit for purpose is it?

Rah
Reply to  ozspeaksup
September 7, 2021 6:18 am

So if you take vitamins or any dietary supplements, then your not fit for purpose?

MarkW
Reply to  ozspeaksup
September 7, 2021 9:35 am

So milk that is fortified with vitamin D, is not fit for purpose?
You want to believe that fortifying replaces something that was taken out.
On occasion it is, most of the time it isn’t.

Gunga Din
Reply to  ozspeaksup
September 7, 2021 5:30 pm

Doesn’t that depend on the food’s “purpose”?
I’d agree that it’s better in the long run to eat whole grain bread rather than Wonder Bread your whole life.
But that’s not what this post is about, is it?
As far as this Mr. Layman understands, it’s not mixing a gene from from plant with another different plant but rather “waking up” something that was already, naturally, there.
White flour, white sugar etc. are not the topic of the post.

Eric Vieira
Reply to  DHR
September 6, 2021 3:21 pm

Well, if they need less water and photosynthesis is more efficient, maybe fertilizers (such as CO2) are also used more efficiently..

Reply to  Eric Vieira
September 6, 2021 3:44 pm

We and every living thing on this planet are all carbon-based life forms. If you want more life, more rich diverse ecosystems, more trees, more ocean nutrients for marine life, then more CO2 must be consumed. The carbon and oxygen atoms in a CO2 molecule go directly into making more carbohydrates that is the build block of all life. It is the hydrogens (protons with electrons) that comes from splitting water then that the hydrogen comes via photsyththeis light reactions that feeds those hydrogen to reduce CO2 to carbohydrates.

And Billions of years of chlorophyll and RubisCO evolution have pretty much squeezed all the efficiencies that can be had in the various steps of photosynthesis. The only areas that may be open to genetic modification is improving RubisCO enzyme (that is key in the CO2 reduction production) is too make it less susceptible to oxygen poisoning (called photo-respiration).

bonbon
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
September 7, 2021 3:22 am

Did RubisCO predate the great oxygenation event, presumably caused by photosynthesis?

fretslider
September 6, 2021 10:13 am

More food could might may possibly likely unlikely blah blah… more humans

Whatever will St. David of Attenborough say?

Reply to  fretslider
September 6, 2021 10:20 am

Grave rotation.

Ron Long
September 6, 2021 10:20 am

Thanks, Anthony, for adding “climate whiners” to our vocabulary. This article points out the efforts at adaption/adjustment/mitigation that we humans are capable of, at least the ones not paralyzed by CAGW fear.

shivermetimbers
September 6, 2021 10:30 am

Oh oh. Greener than we think?

John Culhane
September 6, 2021 10:35 am

Sound promising, however, you don’t get something for nothing, what is the trade-off? Potatoes that growth like Kudzu ( am joking) are going to exhaust the soil much quicker, thus needing longer fallow periods for the ground to recover.

Felix
Reply to  John Culhane
September 6, 2021 11:56 am

Suppose the cost is twice the fertilizer per hectare, but the benefit is half the land. Sounds like progress.

Bryan A
Reply to  Felix
September 6, 2021 6:24 pm

Does Twice the size equate to half the nutrition, is the overall nutrition level diluted? If not then fantastic…

ozspeaksup
Reply to  Felix
September 7, 2021 4:26 am

the lands a one time cost the expensive fertiliser is yearly or more
NOt such a deal

hiskorr
Reply to  ozspeaksup
September 7, 2021 6:16 am

Planting half the land does not save yearly cost?? Get real!

Mark J Boyles
Reply to  ozspeaksup
September 9, 2021 5:56 am

I thought that one of the enviro-wackos goals was to return more land to nature. Increasing crop yields means fewer acres under cultivation and more acres returned to nature.

Further, do you not consider the farmer’s time and the fuel used to cultivate acreage to be a cost?

Eric Vieira
Reply to  John Culhane
September 6, 2021 3:24 pm

The green Marie Antoinette would say: “Let them eat grass …”

Bruce Cobb
September 6, 2021 10:36 am

“Climate change is coming right into our dining room tables,” said Cynthia Rosenzweig, an agronomist and climatologist.

Yes, no matter where you are, climate change will be there, haunting you, taunting you, and plaguing you. You can’t escape it – it’s everywhere. You can even feel it when you’re flying. It sees you when you’re sleeping, it knows when you’re awake. So you better watch out. Climate Clause is coming to town.

J Mac
September 6, 2021 10:43 am

This is very encouraging news! The potential has been demonstrated. Is it scalable to commercial farming operations? Time will tell but the ramifications of large scale success are huge!

Scissor
Reply to  J Mac
September 6, 2021 12:18 pm

Cheech and Chong are tripping with excitement to open an agronomy lab.

Reply to  Scissor
September 6, 2021 3:00 pm

There already are varieties of MJ that produce too much THC for all except the most hardened of already brain damaged tokers. And even then using those very high THC bud extracts in foods can be quite dangerous, especially in children who have no tolerance built to THC.

gringojay
September 6, 2021 10:49 am

FTO human gene tag name is an abbreviation for “fat mass & obesity [associated protein] & is microRNA de-methyl-ase (any biological term ending in “-ase” signifies it is an enzyme protein). It’s name arose because it has apparent relevance to body mass & human obesity risk, among other relevance.

It traffics in iron, but not the haem iron configuration. It is described as an alpha-keto- glutarate dependent di-oxygen-ase enzyme. Alpha-keto- glutarate is an intriguing molecule and can form intermediary molecules in energy production cycles.

[Supplemental arginine alpha-keto-glutarate is used by body builders at doses of 1.5 grams twice daily ideally in conjunction with the individual’s growth hormone cycle; ideally in the absence of simultaneous calcium intake. When the person’s circulating insulin is relatively quiescent this supplement increases human growth hormone levels. A 2020 report suggested that alpha-keto-glutarate is one of the demonstrable human longevity molecules.]

gringojay
Reply to  gringojay
September 6, 2021 12:01 pm

Plants perform oxidative phosphorylation that involve iron. In the mitochondrial 1st staging part (Complex I, having 45 separate proteins comprised of 100s of amino acids each) electrons from carbon bound hydrogen goes to an Fe 3+iron-sulphur (Fe-S) cluster(s) & as shuttles the Fe-S initially takes an electron (is “reduced” in ReDox terminology; Fe3+ become Fe2+), then subsequently the Fe-S loses an electron (is “oxidized” in ReDox terminology; Fe2+ become Fe3+).

The issue is that although these Fe-S clusters are usual 7 -14 angstroms distant from one another a few can be 18 angstroms apart [different angstrom spacings give electrons different paths via the quantum tunnels between Fe-S clusters]. When Fe2+ reacts with oxygen it can spin off oxygen in a reactive form (“ROS”) of a super-oxide oxygen (O2*-; signifying it has a single un-paired electron) &, because of the alternative angstrom distances between Fe-S clusters, the mitochondrial Complex I is the most common place where free radical oxygen O2*- leaks out.

Different plants in different circumstances naturally make an enzyme (super-oxide dismut-ase) that can eliminate the ROS O2*- super-oxide [we humans walk around with 1-2 % of all the oxygen in our cells in the form of O2*-; coping with around 50 O2*- per cell per second we live]. The complication that can can arise is when some super-oxide O2*- forms some per-oxy-nitrate (ONOO-); because ONOO- can subsequently “nitrate” DNA leading to methyl-ation of some DNA regulatory regions.

The key concept is methylated DNA can suppress that DNA’s transcription (activity) level & the Original Post’s wonder worker is a de-methyl-ase that counteracts methyl-ation. And apparently in such a way that a plant’s pro-growth regulatory regions of it’s DNA are actively “on” more than otherwise (in part I presume because not getting phase methylated “off” by perfectly natural features of ROS dynamics [ROS perform a natural role as signal molecules] ).

Last edited 1 month ago by gringojay
Fran
Reply to  gringojay
September 8, 2021 3:48 pm

What I find interesting is that it works in both C3 and C4 photosynthesizers. This would suggest that the two types share regulatory sequences.

Steve Fitzpatrick
September 6, 2021 10:52 am

From the Article: “Any increase in plant growth must be accompanied by increased carbon acquisition. Indeed, we found that FTO-expressing plants exhibited ~36% higher net photosynthetic efficiency than WT or FTOmut plants in the field”

OK, so modify trees between 30N and 60N in the same way, and start to draw down “excess” atmospheric CO2.

n.n
Reply to  Steve Fitzpatrick
September 6, 2021 12:06 pm

More green, less Green.

Dean
Reply to  Steve Fitzpatrick
September 7, 2021 6:08 am

I cannot think of a more dangerous thing to do than draw down CO2, the basis of our food supply.

Rich Davis
September 6, 2021 11:01 am

More food with less agricultural land. World population leveling off. Poverty being dramatically reduced. It’s a nightmare scenario. The only way to forestall this is to end the use of fossil fuels!

H.R.
Reply to  Rich Davis
September 6, 2021 5:21 pm

Rich: The only way to forestall this is to end the use of fossil fuels!”

And raise taxes, redistribute wealth, form a One-World government, and have everyone eat vegan.

It’s the same solution for every problem, innit?


Oh, and everyone gets paid the same even if they are unable or unwilling to work. Sorry. Forgot that bit.

LdB
Reply to  H.R.
September 6, 2021 5:40 pm

You forgot we redistribute wealth we can’t have poor nations.

DocSiders
September 6, 2021 11:02 am

This will put lots of Farmers out of business… unless we make another 100 billion gallons of ethanol from these mega-harvests.

Scissor
Reply to  DocSiders
September 6, 2021 12:23 pm

I saw a chart recently that showed that ethanol got down to about $0.30/L for a short while last year.

PCman999
Reply to  DocSiders
September 6, 2021 9:05 pm

?????
Are you insane? Solutions like this will allow even the most poor country to feed itself, ending hunger – even if the local government is a cleptocracy.
Rich western countries with bountiful harvests because of the current state of the art, can’t find enough farm workers locally and sponsor migrant workers to come and work the fields.

That said, maybe with this and other gene techniques, plus of course the effects of the steadily increasing CO2, producing bumper crops, then just maybe ethanol might be able to hold its own against gasoline. I’m not holding my breath or care, but it might make sense for those countries that lack their own oil and have balance of trade and employment considerations.

Earthling2
September 6, 2021 11:06 am

There are many improvements (such as this) that can enhance agricultural output, as we have seen the last 75 years with huge improvements made to basic agriculture. However, In third world countries, storage of grains and rice have high losses to rot, molds, insects, vermin etc, due to lack of proper storage. And food waste post cooking is exceedingly high in first world countries, up to 30%-40% of all foods go to waste somewhere along the line. But there is really no food shortage even with nearly 8 billion people on the planet, except for political reasons why some regions starve. There is enough food grown on the planet to feed everyone as it is.

Just think what we will be able to grow when we unleash the ability to irrigate marginal soils and apply fertilizers, when energy is cheap and abundant enough to desalinize sea water. Or vertical green housing and hydroponics. Look what the Dutch have done, mostly below sea level, producing more food per capita than anywhere else on the good Earth. And flowers on top of that. Or the Israeli’s for that matter. This technology will add to long term food security.

Loren C. Wilson
September 6, 2021 11:12 am

Like golden rice, it will be vilified by the misanthropes who don’t have to worry about starvation.

InterestedBystander
Reply to  Loren C. Wilson
September 6, 2021 11:35 am

Much like irradiation of food to keep it fresh in places where refrigeration is scarce. The the house has been available for nearly 100 years but he ignoramus fear mongers have scared the public off of it.

Rud Istvan
September 6, 2021 11:13 am

Paper is paywalled beyond abstract. But I looked up human FTO. Is is an rna demethylase gene associated with obesity and osteoporosis. It apparently makes rice and potatoes ‘obese’.
In this work, a human gene ‘FTO’ is being expressed in plants, so they are most definitely ‘GMO’. Just like golden rice, this will bring ‘green’ controversy.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Rud Istvan
September 6, 2021 1:26 pm

But… SCIENCE!

MarkW
Reply to  Rud Istvan
September 6, 2021 2:05 pm

Sharing a common gene does not make a plant GMO.

Gordon A. Dressler
September 6, 2021 11:13 am

Strange how many people have forgotten that Gregor Mendel showed in his 1865 paper Experiments on Plant Hybridization how plants could be “engineered”, on the basis of considerations of dominant and recessive genes, for beneficial purposes.

In a very real sense, GMO’s have been with us since the dawn of human civilization and human “breeding” of crops to produce maximum beneficial yields.

InterestedBystander
Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
September 6, 2021 11:37 am

Selective breeding isn’t the same as putting a gene from an unrelated species into another species. For example the frost resistant tomatoes that had a mouse gene inserted into their DNA. Good product that failed because of the fear mongers.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  InterestedBystander
September 6, 2021 12:23 pm

Selective breeding is almost exactly the same. It’s just less precise and does cause problems. Evolution shows that all life shares genes … all species are related. Scientific nomenclature is just our way to make sense of nature. A gene is a gene … a chemical code. Humans share approximately half of our DNA with bananas and 40% with apples. Anti GMO is irrational.

Last edited 1 month ago by Rory Forbes
H.R.
Reply to  Rory Forbes
September 6, 2021 5:38 pm

Rory: Humans share approximately half of our DNA with bananas […]”

I wish my mother had known that. It would have explained a lot of things she didn’t understand about my brothers and me. She did keep us all out of prison, so I’ll give her that. 😜

Rory Forbes
Reply to  H.R.
September 6, 2021 6:29 pm

I can always count on a few laughs every time I come to WUWT … who knew? 🙂

AndyHce
Reply to  Rory Forbes
September 6, 2021 7:21 pm

“Humans share approximately half of our DNA with bananas […]”
Maybe some humans have even more banana DNA .. that could explain Extinction Rebellion.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  AndyHce
September 6, 2021 8:45 pm

Gawd I love the humour in this place … made my day.

I just had a thought that perhaps ER don’t share any of our DNA … scary thought.

H.R.
Reply to  Rory Forbes
September 6, 2021 8:58 pm

Not quite. ER shares most of their DNA with nuts.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  H.R.
September 6, 2021 9:19 pm

Agreed … 🙂

TonyG
Reply to  Rory Forbes
September 7, 2021 8:59 am

“perhaps ER don’t share any of our DNA”

Good point, Rory – perhaps the reason they don’t take the lead in extincting the human race is that they really aren’t human? Maybe they’re aliens who want humans extinct so they can take over the planet?

Rory Forbes
Reply to  TonyG
September 7, 2021 11:11 am

Scary thought.

Gunga Din
Reply to  TonyG
September 7, 2021 5:42 pm

Ever watch “They Live”?
(Anybody ever see any of the Big Tech guy’s through sunglasses? 😎

ATheoK
Reply to  InterestedBystander
September 6, 2021 5:33 pm

From agriculture’s earliest beginnings, mankind has watched crops carefully.

Natural mutations appear, whether caused by local radiation or high energy particles from a fusion source, they are still genetic mutations.

Any mutations observed by mankind that had any beneficial traits were isolated and carefully bred into the food source.
Corn, potatoes, rice, wheat, broccoli, lettuce, tomatoes, peppers, etc. etc. the list goes on to include every significant plant food source.

Man has been eating genetically modified crops for 6,000 to 10,000 years. It is what made farming viable.

Waving your hands and wailing about modern genetically modified foods is irrational. Genetically modified is genetically modified.

Which means if you want to avoid GMO foods, you need to stop eating every commercially viable crop and to start foraging in the wilderness. Where, if you are absurdly lucky the food never underwent genetic modification, a near impossibility.

MarkW
Reply to  ATheoK
September 7, 2021 6:18 am

Genetic mutations can also occur from mistakes in copying the genome.

aussiecol
Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
September 6, 2021 8:09 pm

There is a big difference between genetic selection and GMO. For example, engineering canola genes so they are impervious to herbicides, like roundup, is different to selecting genes to get the best yield.

MarkW
Reply to  aussiecol
September 7, 2021 6:19 am

Genes are genes. Different genes do different things.
Why is modifying one group of genes good, while modifying another group of genes evil?

aussiecol
Reply to  MarkW
September 7, 2021 2:35 pm

Because greens hate the concept of altering a genetic structure and will go to any length to discredit any good that GMO’s may provide

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  aussiecol
September 8, 2021 9:53 am

Given enough centuries and continued stress from herbicides, like Roundup, I have absolutely no doubt that canola would eventually naturally evolve (via genetic variations over many generations) to become resistance to the (given) herbicide, like Roundup.

As stated in the movie “Jurrassic Park”, life will find a way (to survive) . . . see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oijEsqT2QKQ

mwhite
September 6, 2021 11:16 am

While environmentalists and food safety critic will probably try to label this improvement yet another variation of “frankenfood”,”

They could just get a genetically modified virus injected into their arms?

Rory Forbes
Reply to  mwhite
September 6, 2021 12:31 pm

They could just get a genetically modified virus injected into their arms?

And we really have no idea what the long term or even mid-term effects will be. Why would a private company provide a total cure when they are in business to make money from repeat business? Wouldn’t a treatment that suppresses natural immunity, requiring continuous boosters, be a better business model? Pharmaceutical companies are not altruistic.

mark from the midwest
September 6, 2021 11:16 am

The most recent absurd claim is from CNN Business who says: Climate-driven crop failures are driving up food prices.

The price of diesel fuel and nitrogen is driving up food prices. This year we’re paying almost 30% more for diesel than over the last 4 years (a tip of the hat to JoBydun).

Mark J Boyles
Reply to  mark from the midwest
September 9, 2021 6:08 am

Hmmm, envirowackos:

Step 1: block pipelines, drilling and fracking
Step 2: fuel prices rise due to supply constraints
Step 3: fuel price increases cause food production costs to rise
Step 4: Increased production cost causes food prices to rise
Step 5: Blame increased food prices on Man made Climate Change
Step 6: return to step 1.

David Roger Wells
September 6, 2021 11:27 am

Now we know why the same people who scaremonger about fossil fuels and Co2 scaremonger about GM crops because if we can grow more food using less water land and fertiliser that is another arm of their fanaticism that gets chopped off. Proving beyond reasonable doubt environmentalism is not about conservation its about the promotion of an ideology which demands coercion and servitude to survive. What I fail to understand is how or why they appear unable to comprehend the reality that if we all succumb to their ideology their lives cease to exist as well. Is that their plan that the planet is sovereign and humanity merely by existing poses a threat to that sovereignty and therefore the only solution is to rid the planet of humanity even if that means their demise. Barking mad.

David Roger Wells
September 6, 2021 11:32 am

Politicians are relying on increasing the size of hedgerows and technology to be Net Zero whilst technology is advancing so fast in areas which they care to ignore which invalidate their posturing about Net Zero being necessary to make sure we can grow enough food. What I would like to know is exactly what Net Zero is supposed to achieve as regards temperature climate and weather, I keep asking the questions but I never get an answer. I still don’t know what skills we need to teach our children to stop the climate from changing.

Fraizer
Reply to  David Roger Wells
September 6, 2021 3:48 pm

They don’t have any answers. It is a sophistry. But is is a means to increase their personal wealth and control.

michael hart
September 6, 2021 11:59 am

“Prof. Guifang Jia at Peking University led the research.”

Peking! Hey, well done someone.
Most of us here probably can’t read, write, or understand much spoke Chinese. But standing up for pronunciations of foreign words translated to your mother tongue is nothing to be ashamed of.

Everyone who knows a bit of French also knows that the capitol of France is pronounced “Paree” in their language. But any Frenchman, or woman, who takes offence at Anglophones calling it “Paris” when speaking with other Anglophones will often be given the treatment they deserve.

Earthling2
Reply to  michael hart
September 6, 2021 12:26 pm

It actually is called Peking University. Founded in 1898, formally known as Imperial University of Peking. I don’t know why they kept the romanized version of Beijing, but they did.

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

Just as the Beijing airport code is PEK probably because that was formalized before Beijing became the official name for the city/capital of China. I recall as a youngster that Peking was the only name we knew for ‘Beijing’ which is now the formal name.

Vuk
Reply to  Earthling2
September 6, 2021 12:51 pm
Fraizer
Reply to  Vuk
September 6, 2021 3:50 pm

LOVE Peking duck – especially the crispy duck skin wraps.

[please fix the incorrect email address that keeps getting autofilled by your browser-mod]

Vuk
Reply to  Fraizer
September 6, 2021 11:57 pm

Much tastier than force fed turkey.

Last edited 1 month ago by Vuk
Fraizer
Reply to  Fraizer
September 7, 2021 5:35 am

OH! sorry. Thanks for pointing it out.

Robert Alfred Taylor
Reply to  michael hart
September 6, 2021 4:36 pm

Several decades ago I knew a Chinese woman who grew up in a town outside of “Peking.” She said that was close to the actual pronunciation at the time.

QQBoss
Reply to  Robert Alfred Taylor
September 7, 2021 11:05 pm

Living in Beijing, but having learned my Chinese first from Wade-Giles, pre-Hanyu Pinyin, I know Peking and Tsinghua Universities are both old enough that their names were established pre-Hanyu Pinyin which would have them be Beijing and Qinghua, respectively.

But the primary reason it was called Peking originally is because anyone visiting the capitol in the 1800’s (except for Russians and Japanese) would have likely come from the south where the Cantonese pronunciation of ‘Bak ging’ was understood as Peking by gweilo ears. Also why you might enjoy ‘gai lan’ (Chinese broccoli) at a meal instead of ‘jia lan’, ‘bok choy’, etc…. Most of the words the West got from China 70+ years ago came via Cantonese speakers. Most of it stuck.

n.n
September 6, 2021 12:00 pm

A blow to climate whiners (looking for the proverbial pot of secular lucre, “gold”, at the end of the rainbow) and to planned parent/hood fiends (sic) of humanity.

Vuk
September 6, 2021 12:05 pm

Hot off the press
Britain forced to fire up coal plants
amid record power prices and winter squeeze
Two coal facilities taken off standby as the amount of electricity coming from wind farms falls dramatically

“National Grid ESO warned in July that Britain needed to prepare for a squeeze on energy supplies this winter as two nuclear plants shut down and workers return to the office.
It comes as gas, which produces more than 35pc of UK electricity across the year, trades at more than three times normal rates amid a global supply crunch.
The UK day-ahead power price jumped 75pc to a record £219.46 pounds per megawatt-hour on Monday morning, Bloomberg reported. Prices are also soaring in Germany.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/09/06/britain-forced-fire-coal-plant-amid-record-power-prices/

Current grid load
https://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk
Gridwatch” is a registered trademark of Templar Consultancy Limited:

Last edited 1 month ago by Vuk
Scissor
Reply to  Vuk
September 6, 2021 12:30 pm

Similarly, sales of backup diesel generators has been growing for years, driven by green policy.

Vuk
Reply to  Vuk
September 6, 2021 12:38 pm

UK’s energy rationing fearedas Russia’s gas squeeze exposes the UK’s perilously low reservesVladimir Putin’s geostrategic squeeze has thrown Europe’s energy system into chaos.
Mr Putin’s objective is to force German and EU regulators to swallow terms that would breach EU energy law and the “solidarity” principle of Article 194 in the Lisbon Treaty, leaving East European states vulnerable to energy blackmail.  
“The UK is more vulnerable to a gas supply crisis than other Western European countries. It has way too little storage and it is buying more Russian gas than it realises through the Netherlands,” said Marco Alverà, chief executive of the Italian pipeline.
Energy experts warn that British consumers could face de facto rationing, or a price shock big enough to cause serious distress and force changes in behaviour. “I can’t ever remember a situation like this over the last twenty years. We’re looking at potential shutdowns and demand destruction,” said Adam Lewis from energy consultants Hartree Solutions. 
East Asian demand has pushed the spot price to all time highs $20 per MMBtu, an eye-watering level for what should be the low season. The UK will have to compete with China and the rest of Asia in extreme circumstances. “Heading into the winter season, the LNG market’s fuse has been lit,” said Bank of America’s Mr Blanch.
What Russia is doing is becoming so blatant that Europe will have to react,” said Prof Riley. Germany and other countries could reactivate nuclear plants in the process of being decommissioned, although that would be technically difficult and cause a political storm.
 
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2021/09/05/energy-rationing-feared-russias-gas-squeeze-exposes-uks-perilously/

MarkW
Reply to  Vuk
September 6, 2021 2:08 pm

Russia will do whatever it takes to re-build it’s empire.

Reply to  MarkW
September 6, 2021 3:31 pm

Putin’s got a Build Back Better plan that makes Dementia Joe’s Build Back Better plan look like something 3rd graders put together for a class project.

H.R.
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
September 6, 2021 6:08 pm

Well said, except it’s not Zho Baiden’s plan.

He’s not even in charge of planning his naps and pudding cup snacks.

PCman999
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
September 6, 2021 9:51 pm

Don’t insult 3rd graders like that! Even they know enough not to use crayons and finger paint for a serious project!

AndyHce
Reply to  Vuk
September 6, 2021 7:25 pm

See! Greening is working!

John F Hultquist
September 6, 2021 12:20 pm

All this extra grain can be used for ethanol-to-electric production needed for the society of the future.
Americans don’t need more food. Search-up images of ‘ obese americans ‘

Reply to  John F Hultquist
September 6, 2021 3:11 pm

Liquid hydrocarbon-based fuels only make sense for transportation uses. And we don’t get that extra corn to make more ethanol without copious use of natural gas (fertilizers, pesticides) and propane and diesel (mechanical vehicles and heated dryers). It has only been because natural gas and propane prices have stayed historically low that subsidized ethanol production (for mandated gasoline addition) can even make a profit for the producers of that product. Skyrocketing natural gas prices will make fertilizer prices skyrocket, which would then force ethanol producers into non-viable economic situations.

Last edited 1 month ago by joelobryan
John F Hultquist
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
September 6, 2021 6:01 pm

I see a Rube Goldberg solution. If DRAX can burn wood pellets shipped across an ocean, then grains can be burned to produce electricity. Nothing else follows “then a miracle happens” to make all the EVs plausable.

AndyHce
Reply to  John F Hultquist
September 6, 2021 7:27 pm

Or to make more vodka.

Thomas Gasloli
September 6, 2021 12:41 pm

Color me skeptical. These increases, 3x in lab, 50% in field, are not credible.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Thomas Gasloli
September 6, 2021 3:02 pm

That isn’t skepticism. That’s doubt. Doubt is a feeling. Skepticism is a rational evaluation of available facts.

TonyG
Reply to  Thomas Gasloli
September 7, 2021 7:55 am

“These increases … are not credible”

Why do you think they are not credible?

AWG
September 6, 2021 1:12 pm

I don’t want to hear any more whining about GMO food from those who exalt the CoViD mRNA injections.

I certainly don’t want to see the pushback similar to what Golden Rice and AquaBounty suffered from the activists and corrupt politicians (BIRM).

Its bad enough that politicians, Malthusians, neo-Luddites and ZPG types terrorize the ignorant public into living lives of deprivation and worry, yet they also work tirelessly to knee cap human flourishing through their alarmist propaganda, lawsuits and regulatory abuse.

OTOH, I’m amazed at how technology and ingenuity keep appearing to save us from the dark times prophesized by models. A huge advancement was the discovery of how mixing certain microbes with seeds results in plants that can extract necessary nitrogen from the atmosphere as opposed to dependency on massive soil fertilization efforts.

Jeff Alberts
September 6, 2021 1:13 pm

Alarmism-driven Covid nonsense is what’s driving up food prices.

Reply to  Jeff Alberts
September 6, 2021 3:17 pm

There have been very real world-wide logistics disruptions to supply chains around the world due to COVID related shutdowns across many countries. Including dock workers, stevadors, and factory workers ordered to stay home, which have ships left anchored in ports unable to unload. This supply chain disruptions has idled factories that make manufactured goods that then cause further supply chain problems on down the line.
These Ripple effects and knock-on ripple effects will be felt for at least several more years assuming there a no more shocks to the international trade systems that we all depend on.

The shutdowns were of course political orders, not as a result of some cold virus. And the NWO adherents have realized themselves now tools with try to impose their desired Great Resets, and “Build Back Better” schemes to impose socialism.

Last edited 1 month ago by joelobryan
PCman999
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
September 6, 2021 10:00 pm

If was OK to make everyone stay home, why was it not ok to let them go to work, eventually get covid, stay home a few days and then back to work with the free natural inoculation? Instead of 4 waves of poverty and isolation?
Granted the seniors homes, etc., would have needed a strict regimen.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  PCman999
September 6, 2021 11:10 pm

Lockdowns and isolation only delayed the inevitable. Stupid.

Mark J Boyles
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
September 9, 2021 6:15 am

^THIS^

I am a vaccine fan in general. But our reaction to a virus that when the data is evaluated critically, is not generally more fatal than a bad flu year has been completely irrational.

Spetzer86
September 6, 2021 1:24 pm

Well, the Phillipines approved Golden Rice in July. I mean, it was only after extensive effort and approvals are slow in coming, but still.

Gregory Woods
September 6, 2021 1:24 pm

Beware of Grotesque Mutant Organisms, they will get you if Climate Doom doesn’t….

LdB
Reply to  Gregory Woods
September 6, 2021 5:42 pm

That is a harsh description of climate activists 🙂

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
September 6, 2021 2:06 pm

Interesting. There’s been a project to engineer C4 rice since 2006, with some funding from the Gates Foundation among others. Their stated goal is to increase yields by 50%.

Led by the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI), the project seeks to create “C4 rice” – rice with a built-in fuel injector to better convert sunlight into grain, potentially resulting in up to 50% higher production all while using less water and nutrients.

Project home is here.

Looks like this group found a simpler way to get the same results — “obese” rice instead of “C4 rice”.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
September 6, 2021 3:06 pm

It was found that obesity in adults causes fat cells to grow in size, but not in number. However, in young children, obesity does cause an increase in number too.

Reply to  Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7
September 6, 2021 3:56 pm

Rice Crispies vs Corn Pops.

We have C4 rice. It’s called corn (and sorghum). And the kernals are much bigger and starchier (is that a word?). Makes for nice popcorn and corn pops cereal.

Jeff Alberts
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
September 6, 2021 11:12 pm

corn pops”

Uh oh! you just triggered sniffin’ Joe!

Mark J Boyles
Reply to  Jeff Alberts
September 9, 2021 6:17 am

Old Joe is probably out looking for a 8 yr old to sniff even as we speak.

ATheoK
September 6, 2021 4:29 pm

According to UC, in initial tests, adding a gene encoding for a protein called FTO to both rice and potato plants increased their yield by 50% in field tests. The plants grew significantly larger, produced longer root systems and were better able to tolerate drought stress. Further analysis also showed that the plants had increased their rate of photosynthesis.”

All of this benefit, so easily?

Besides smacking of too good to be true, one wonders why no plants in nature have not already flipped this switch?

One suspects that at double the starch production, water and nutrient uptakes must double at a minimum. Raising concerns about the claims for increased drought stress.

AndyHce
Reply to  ATheoK
September 6, 2021 7:31 pm

It is only easy in retrospect — and if you have the technological tools to do it.

Mark J Boyles
Reply to  ATheoK
September 9, 2021 6:19 am

“water and nutrient uptakes must double at a minimum”

Did you read the article where it says “ could better withstand stress from drought.”

Eric Stevens
September 6, 2021 5:59 pm

The one thing I haven’e seen anyone comment upon is the possible effect on the soil. Plant growth is a part of a cycle in which the plants mine minerals and organic nutrients from the soil. Their continued growth relies on the supply of necessary minerals and nutrients being maintained. Genetic modifications of plants which lead to larger and more efficient root systems must inevitably require that the other parts of the plant life cycle be similarly strengthed. My question is what effect does this activated FTO have on the demands that are placed on the soil? I’m not arguing against the use of thes plants, but I am wondering what problems are we creating for ourselves further down the line.

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Eric Stevens
September 6, 2021 9:33 pm

Sounds like simply increase rates of fertilization

I have some nice potash stocks I’ve been holding onto…..

colin smith
Reply to  Pat from kerbob
September 7, 2021 10:04 am

Assuming the fertiliser is available and money to pay for it. Likely for the developed world but perhaps less so for poorer countries.
And for the seed too.
Every silver lining has a cloud as they say.
Wholly admire the ingenuity nonetheless.

Merrick
September 6, 2021 6:47 pm

Can I get Scotts to add this gene to my Kentucky Bluegrass?

J.R.
September 6, 2021 6:48 pm

I’m reminded of Woody Allen’s movie “Sleeper,” the scene in which he came across a farm (sort of) that featured 10-foot bananas, celery, and other things. That was set 200 years in the future. Given the rate of technological advancement, perhaps Woody was onto something.

Mike Maguire
September 6, 2021 10:26 pm

Wonderful points Anthony!

Death by Greening!
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/

Another secret about fossil fuels: Haber Bosch process-fertilizers feeding the planet using natural gas-doubling food production/crop yields.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/39215/

All the inputs with world food production:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/73349/#73351

Screenshot 2021-09-07 at 00-24-36 Perspective - Fun with Numbers - MarketForum.png
griff
September 7, 2021 12:13 am

climate change absolutely WILL result in more crop failures etc.

so while this is good news, is it enough to offset climate effects?

what, we should ignore climate impacts entirely because this may deliver (some) more food?

2hotel9
Reply to  griff
September 7, 2021 4:06 am

You keep spewing these lies, lie spewing liar.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
September 7, 2021 6:23 am

What climate change?
According to the catastrophists, something bad is always just over the horizon.
If don’t believe me, just ask my model.

Reply to  griff
September 7, 2021 6:47 am

Griff
Please point to the “crop failures” that happened in earth’s history at atmospheric CO2 of 500, 1000, 3000, 10,000 ppm CO2.
There are none.
CO2 will only continue to benefit the phytosphere, as it is doing now with record harvests paralleling the record temperatures.

Mike Maguire
Reply to  griff
September 7, 2021 11:02 am

“climate change absolutely WILL result in more crop failures etc.
so while this is good news, is it enough to offset climate effects?
what, we should ignore climate impacts entirely because this may deliver (some) more food?”

griff,
You are just repeating that because it’s what you read/were told.

I predict crop yields/production based on weather/climate/CO2 for a living.

Empty your head of the anti agronomy manufactured realities for a minute and just look at the direction we’ve taken the last 40 years……..straight up, right.

Is this from technological advances?

Then why is the entire planet greening up at the same time? Why do the models show that the planet will get even greener thru this century?

Have humans replaced all the plants and trees around the world with genetically superior plants and trees?
No!
Are humans fertilizing all the forests and plants?
Yes they are…………..with CO2 fertilizer.

Increasing CO2 also means plants/crops don’t need to open their stomata as wide to get essential CO2 and they lose less moisture from transpiration. This makes them more drought tolerant. Increasing CO2 also makes them more heat tolerant.

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/66878/#66881

The optimal level of CO2 for plants is indisputably more than double the current level. Why wouldn’t they/crops continue to be more productive as CO2 increases?
Oh, yeah, that pesky climate change problem.

1-2 deg. C of additional warming is going to offset all the massive benefits of CO2(when so far, the warming has been PART OF the benefits)???

That doesn’t even make sense dude.

https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/#69259

regional_cmip_2100.png
Mark J Boyles
Reply to  griff
September 9, 2021 6:27 am

Climate change, that is always taking place (and always has), will result in some crops in some places doing more poorly and some crops in some places doing better.

IF the primary driver of climate change is the actions of man (a highly doubtful assertion) then we need to balance the benefits of energy use and technology to deal with the problems vs. the widespread starvation and poverty that would come with forgoing those benefits.

My personal evaluation indicates that envirowackos can be processed into biodiesel and fertilizer providing a clean source of energy and increasing the average world IQ level quite handily.

RayB
September 7, 2021 12:56 am

Please don’t try to insert human proteins to cabbages…. Body Snatchers???

220px-Donald_Sutherland_bodysnatchers_scream.jpg
Rah
September 7, 2021 3:11 am

Wanna bet that the majority of the people that stress over Genetically modified crops are proponents for taking the jabs which modify their mRNA?

2hotel9
Reply to  Rah
September 7, 2021 4:05 am

Proponents? They are the ones who want everyone else injected with that sh*t.

buckeyebob
September 7, 2021 3:54 am

So much for Malthus and Ehrlich.

2hotel9
September 7, 2021 4:04 am

More and healthier food? That has got to be pissing the leftards off no end, they have worked so hard to spread famine and disease to the Third World and beyond!

ozspeaksup
September 7, 2021 4:10 am

manipulation of the RNA in plant cells,
adding a gene encoding for a protein called FTO to both rice and potato plants
hmm seems a LOT like “modification” to me!
and of course patentable so seed or whatever will be costly
wish they stop screwing round with our food

September 7, 2021 6:41 am

Good news for the human race.
Bad news for the Khmer Vert.

%d bloggers like this: