h a l f b a k e r yThunk.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
there is an organization harvestplus that
is devoted to creating plants with higher
micronutrient content with support from
the bill n melinda gates foundation; from
viewing wheatgrass nutrient label
content that compares size of plant with
age of plant I think that plant nutrient
density
goes with root surface area (RSA)
rather than accumulation. I think at wheatgrass multiple
months
of growth have much less effect on
measured nutrient content than plant
size.
The technique is just to have farmers view
the rooty mass of a few hundred plants
from their favorite plant species then
keep n propagate those with higher root surface area.
this is the same ancient strategy
associated with breeding plants visually
just applied to a part of the plant that
gives nutrition to the plant
I think fertilizer could plump up the
edible part of the plant if the larger RSA
had a metabolic value
the people at the plant micronutrient
research group were developing varieties
then suggesting farmers use them This
technique gives the farmers an
opportunity to develop material wherever
they are a little like crowdsourcing
harvestplus
http://www.harvestplus.org/
HarvestPlus is a global alliance of institutions and scientists seeking to improve human nutrition by breeding new varieties of staple food crops consumed by the poor that have higher levels of micronutrients, through a process called biofortification. [beanangel, Apr 05 2008]
[link]
|
| |
Ah. So we're not taling about encrypting vegetables? |
|
| |
Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir, Len Adelman? I am all for extending the use of primes to our understanding of the universe. We measure in units and any unit measurement will encounter primes, and associated patterns. But this is insane. |
|
| |
More seriously, the big work has already been done by nature. No use fighting it. Root systems adapt to extract maximum benefit for least construction cost. Roots have a duel role. Extraction and anchoring. Exemplified by rain basin jungles/forests having no tap rooting systems, etc. |
|
| |
Hydroponics is only a way of saying: "for your (y) root structure we give you (x) artificial support and maximum nutrients. And we expect maximum conversion from base elements to product." These are well known priciples. |
|
| |
The high cost (both financially and from an administrative/intellectual point) of "super-cultivation" eliminates the people to whom you have directed this idea. With the exception of fuel crops, who couldn't give a <strikethrough> fuck <\strikethrough> about nutrients over carbohydrates. |
|
| |
Chronic, blubonic, chocolate Thai stick, you want it
Jamaican green, silver haze, the Northern Lights get ya ass in a daze
Purple hydro, Indonesian skunks, you can tell by the funk
All we need is some 'o dat micronutrient stuff... |
|
| |
I got quite a chuckle from the capital T used on the word *This* in the middle of a sentence. I like your freeform writing [Treon]. |
|
| |
I never thought I'd miss Treon. It's a
priviledge to be able to bone another one. |
|
| |
My thoughts exactly, MB, especially after the deluge of prostercal that's been washing through here recently (you made that word up, didn't you? Not that that will stop me using it meaningfully in conversation from now on anyway). |
|
| |
"the big work has already been done by nature. No use fighting it" |
|
| |
most ornamentals as well as fruits are the the product of guided evolution this technique goes with effective RSA optimization as well |
|
| |
I'd like to thank you, [Treon], for two things. |
|
| |
(1) for, as [Maxwell] articulates, and as I annotated in one of those horrid "ideas" that we have recently had, gracing us once again with your at the very least interesting and mind-occupying thought-jumbles, and |
|
| |
(2) perhaps more importantly (though I may be wrong, I will assume it was purposeful), for making the effort to not delete and edit [4whom]'s annotation, as we have requested. I hereby request of [4whom], out of respect at least for the effort, that he/she edit it himself/herself to remove the expletive, which perhaps in the past caused the condition we all were objecting to. Yes? |
|
| |
Can anyone spot which two items on the
following list are similar? |
|
| |
2) The contents of an industrial vacuum
cleaner. |
|
| |
What is being suggested is that we selectively breed plants to improve their properties, but pick a slightly unusual metric as it is possible that this will be better than just breeding for size? |
|
| |
[marked-for-deletion] almost as old as the wheel. |
|
| |
Incidentally, we're basing this fundamental shift on a random thought based on the nutritional information found on the label of a wheatgrass packet? |
|
| |
//Roots have a duel role//
Playing banjo, or shooting at each other with pistols? |
|
| |
'Privilege', [MB], 'Privilege'. |
|
| |
I think [coproflubabfloop] meant to say |
|
| |
Roots have a duel role - shooting at each other with *pistils*... |
|
| |
expletive eliminated as per request. |
|
| |
dual - duel, my appologies. But it makes node ifference. The idea that fibrous, or adventitious, root systems, or any other trait, can be selectively bred is old. Mostly because the difference in root structure, bears its fruits, so to speak, visually. Maybe someone will rhizome new insights, though. |
|
| |
Tuber, or not tuber. That is the question. |
|
| |