RNA Breakthrough Creates High-Yield, Drought-Tolerant Rice, Potatoes (upi.com) 120
"Thanks to a breakthrough in RNA manipulation, crop scientists have developed new potato and rice varieties with higher yields and increased drought tolerance," reports UPI:
By inserting a gene responsible for production of a protein called FTO, scientists produced bigger rice and potato plants with more expansive root systems. In experiments, the plants' longer roots improved their drought resistance.
Test results — detailed Thursday in the journal Nature Biotechnology — showed the RNA-manipulated plants also improved their rate of photosynthesis, boost yields by as much as 50 percent...
In the lab, the manipulated rice plants grew at three times their normal rate. In the field, the rice plants increased their mass by 50 percent. They also sprouted longer roots, increased their photosynthesis rate and produced larger yields. When they repeated the experiments with potato plants, the researchers got similar results, suggesting the new gene manipulation method could be used to bolster a variety of crops.
The researchers hope this could help crops survive climate change, and even prevent forests from being cleared for food production, according to the article. And one of the study's co-authors adds "This really provides the possibility of engineering plants to potentially improve the ecosystem as global warming proceeds."
Test results — detailed Thursday in the journal Nature Biotechnology — showed the RNA-manipulated plants also improved their rate of photosynthesis, boost yields by as much as 50 percent...
In the lab, the manipulated rice plants grew at three times their normal rate. In the field, the rice plants increased their mass by 50 percent. They also sprouted longer roots, increased their photosynthesis rate and produced larger yields. When they repeated the experiments with potato plants, the researchers got similar results, suggesting the new gene manipulation method could be used to bolster a variety of crops.
The researchers hope this could help crops survive climate change, and even prevent forests from being cleared for food production, according to the article. And one of the study's co-authors adds "This really provides the possibility of engineering plants to potentially improve the ecosystem as global warming proceeds."
No. (Score:1, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Indeed. The problem is places and people that will just have as many children as is possible and then some more. Hence if this gets adopted, it will just make things come crashing down a bit sooner and kill a bit more people.
Incidentally, the utterly destructive and selfish people with many children can also be found in the 1st and 2nd world: There is a specific type of religious fanatic that thinks they are so much better than everybody else that obviously it is ok if they take vastly more than their fair
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Special type of religious fanatic" is basically the Catholic Church. Encouraging the pumping out of kids and shipping out missionaries has been their thing for awhile.
If we want to reduce birthrates then we need to spur along industrialization of these places. Industrialized nations get lower birthrates over time, it's pretty much seen across the board. When you are poor and surviving via sustenance lifestyle more kids makes sense and is often the best option.
Re: (Score:1)
We're way over carrying capacity already, raising standards of living of the world's population to western standards will kill technological civilization long before it can save it.
The future looks grim, lets hope the poindexers create AI overlords to save us.
Re:No. (Score:4, Insightful)
Depends who you ask, most thing I have read put the carrying capacity at 9-11 billion, so at around almost 8 billion today we still have a little headroom and the rate of growth is slowing (1.05% per year (down from 1.08% in 2019, 1.10% in 2018, and 1.12% in 2017)
If industrialization isn't feasible what are the other solutions? Genocide? Forced sterilization? We're a long way from being able to ship people off-planet. You can incentivize people to have less children but the "incentivize" is the key part, you have to improve their living conditions. Either this is a problem that needs a solution or it's not.
Re: (Score:2)
I pray for singularity, a massive leap in technological progress thanks to the invention of friendly true AI. The biggest hurdle for sustainability at the moment is our complete and utter inability to recycle, we need a huge jump in tech very soon to save us from peak fucking everything. Assuming nukes or biological weapons don't destroy civilization first.
If we can achieve 99+% recyclability then together with renewable or nuclear energy we can raise the standards of living of everyone, otherwise I think w
Re: (Score:2)
Sure, I also pray nuclear fusion becomes feasible and provides free energy as well, but we can't exactly make future plans around it. Also the benefits of an AI like that will end up assisting the developed nations first and will mainly help by discovering new science like what TFA is about. Will still take a lot of human manpower and funds to implement this stuff on a global scale.
The idea isn't really to provide everyone immediately a lifestyle equivalent to Europe or America but when peoples basic need
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a pessimist, prayer for a miracle is the best I can do.
Demographic collapse among high attainment cultures and other dysgenic forces, peak fucking everything and associated resource wars, proliferation of nuclear and biological weapons ... shit's fucked.
PS. I don't mention climate change not because I don't believe in it, but because I think it will come too late to make as much of an impact as other forces in the destruction of civilization.
Re: (Score:2)
We already have "free" energy from nuclear fusion (the Sun). People are deploying this all over the planet. No need for new technology breakthroughs.
Yes, you are right that improving education (especially for women), healthcare and nutrition leads to lower population growth and we are well on our way to stabilizing the population.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: No. (Score:2)
Solar energy is free. Panels are much cheaper than any nuclear.
Re: (Score:2)
I also pray nuclear fusion becomes feasible and provides free energy as well,
Energy might by cheap some day, but not free.
Nearly half of the energy price are grid costs.
And just because we have "fusion", does not mean we do not need some fuel that needs to be extracted from sea water.
The lowest thinkable electricity price, regardless from which source, is perhaps around 30% - 35% of your current price, depending where you live a bit lower perhaps (e.g. Germany)
Re: No. (Score:3)
AI is already starting to affect food production.
Greenhouse cultivation is a complex balancing act of what conditions to provide in what stages (heat, light, CO2, different nutrients, pruning decisions, etc), vs. what external conditions, with respect to what these things cost, relative to yield, yield timing, quality, etc. Huge time-dependent feedback-laden optimization problem.
In the Netherlands there have been experiments with handing control of these decisions over to neural nets (trained on the data of
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
We are vastly over carrying capacity. All the idiots that say the planet could carry more completely ignore that this would require a drastic, infeasible change in management style. Carrying capacity is determined by what can be managed given actual management capacities. Theoretical claims assuming perfect management only provide an upper bound. They cannot be reached in practice.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
You're forgetting entire swaths of Christendom such as the Quiverfull, Mormons, etc... it's true the Catholic Church is against birth control but they're definitely not the only ones encouraging large families. I wouldn't be surprised if the number of strongly Catholic families practicing this in the first world is lower than the total of the others actively breeding.
Re: (Score:2)
Very true but those are pretty distinctly American sub-genres of the OG baby religion.
First world families are definitely smaller in size and growth, mainly from being "first world" which comes with the territory. Also religiosity drops in industrialized nations as well.
I mainly called out the Catholic church as it tends to establish itself in undeveloped nations. The majority of Catholics are no longer in North America and Europe but Latin America, Sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. Undeveloped countries is h
Re: (Score:3)
it's true the Catholic Church is against _artificial_ birth control
No they are not really, that was long ago. While that old popes "verdict", never got revoked, no one really follows it.
Emphasized mine.
Re: (Score:3)
Catholics on average have the same number of kids as evangelical Protestants, according to the Pew Forum [pewforum.org] (search for "family size"). The largest families are Mormons, followed by "historically Black" Protestant denominations, although the latter are not much bigger than evangelicals or Catholics.
If you broke out the quiverfull Protestants (think the Duggars), they would probably take first place by a comfortable margin. That's who the OP was probably talking about. They're very much not the Catholics you
Re: (Score:1)
"Special type of religious fanatic" is basically the Catholic Church.
They are a huge offender, but they are by far not the only one. Mist religions and for sure all large ones do this. The prevalence of weak-minded people that are hence susceptible to religion is one of the main reasons for the whole problem.
Overpopulation isn't a problem in places (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
How would you suggest doing that? It's not like they are colonies any more.
There was a chance after WW2 perhaps, but between the hurried decolonization and the US pushing questionable regimes and Islam in the cold war, society has not progressed for a long time. It's only technology which has still allowed increased living standards despite increased corruption and more regressive cultures.
Re:Overpopulation isn't a problem in places (Score:4, Insightful)
We would have to do something about the military industrial complex though. It's responsible for a huge number of good paying middle class jobs in America and we'd have to replace that. The left has been trying to do that with a green New deal, but the laughter dumb as a bag of fucking hammers so of course in the preamble bill they put some nonsense about racial Justice in there that's pissed off the right wing, would otherwise be forced to support it because of all the jobs that would create for the blue collar voters they cater to. So the other thing I would do is get the American left wing to stop being so God damn stupid and start focusing not on the people who already agree with them but on the people who they're trying to convince.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What's done is done.
Not meddling in the ME isn't suddenly going to make them progressive, not meddling in Africa isn't suddenly going to make them non corrupt. Progress isn't something which automagically occurs when white men stop interfering. Iran before the Shah was already the result of diffusion of European culture and economic colonization.
One of the big reasons Iran embraced a parliament in the first place was the strength of Europe, not just militarily and economically but also ideologically. Secure
Sure it is (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
True on the root cause, false on that anything meaningful can be done about it in the time remaining.
Well, humanity will get a great die-off all of its own. But I expect that if anybody is left afterwards, they will fail to learn from it.
Re: (Score:2)
"The real elephant in the room with climate change is population size."
No, the real elephant is the indirect consequences of our actions that help maintain populations in poverty and suffering through the world.
Curb taking advantage of captive populations for economic reasons. Curb supporting of dictators, for same. Curb the promotion of us and them attitudes. Promote democracy even if that means it will lower your economic opportunities.
"The problem is places and people that will just have as many children
Re: (Score:1)
Too late for all of that. There is no time left.
But population sizes and birth rates _will_ go down. Large global long-term catastrophes have that effect.
Re: (Score:2)
Large global long-term catastrophes have that effect. :P
Population size, yes. Birthrates not so much
Re: (Score:2)
"Too late for all of that."
Of course it's not 'too late'. Lots of sane ways to work on it, and policy changes can lead to rapid, systemic, and very large changes. Population growth predictions also depend on assumptions that are being put into question more and more and that even if nothing else changes.
"...There is no time left."
I covered that with "Avoid promoting nihilistic attitudes".
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, but available data says it is too late to avoid a really, really large catastrophe. You are putting your head in the sand. Also, you seem to be mistaken about the definition of "Nihilism".
Re: (Score:2)
I'm using a more common everyday use of nihilism: values and beliefs are unfounded and that existence is senseless and useless. Like what's the point of X, we're all going to die eventually anyway.
With that in mind an observation like "it is too late to avoid a really really large catastrophe", whether it's true, half true, or not true at all, definitely doesn't mean it's too late to do what I mentioned. So predictions can be wrong to various degrees, acting can also lead to unexpected positive consequence
Re: (Score:2)
I'm using a more common everyday use of nihilism:
Also known as: "I am using terminology to manipulate people." Nice. I am done with you.
Re: (Score:2)
"Also known as: "I am using terminology to manipulate people." Nice. I am done with you."
That's ok, but if you don't want to explain yourself further or link to any data, you could have just said so rather than trying to claim that using the most common usage of a term is manipulation:
https://www.merriam-webster.co... [merriam-webster.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Curb taking advantage of captive populations for economic reasons.
Can you name a "captive population" that was better off before it was captured? India? China? Africa? They all have problems today, but nothing like the problems they had in the past.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed, the birth rate in the UK is low and this has been called a 'crisis' even though the population is growing fast due to immigration. Meanwhile the birth rate in India and many developing countries is high and we're told this isn't a problem. I fail to see how rising populations isn't a problem when our lifestyles are massively unsustainable in countless ways.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That's because fertility rates don't work the way you expect them to, humans are not rabbits and will in fact plan further ahead than the next m
Global Population Growing (Score:3)
You might not be able to think of ecosystem that does not increase population when you increase food supply, but the global human population is still a perfect example of such an ecosystem.
You might want to look more closely at that ecosystem. It's true that the local populations in developed countries are reproducing below the level of replacement but, because those countries all have plentiful access to food, their populations are still growing thanks to immigration from poorer nations whose populations are growing rapidly. Hence the global human population is still growing rapidly thanks to the availability of food.
Re: Global Population Growing (Score:2)
Those countries are growing in population due to lack of prosperity, that is his point. If you helped them prosper they would not have people having more kids than they can afford.
Re: (Score:2)
Those countries are growing in population due to lack of prosperity, that is his point.
His point, as stated, was that the _global_ human population was an example where an increase in food does not lead to an increase in population but this is simply not true because there are poorer nations where population growth is dependant on available food and immigration from these countries is driving population growth even in wealthy counties.
The link is definitely diluted because only part of the human population responds in this way but it is wrong to say that it is not there. I absolutely agre
Re: (Score:2)
Hence the global human population is still growing rapidly thanks to the availability of food.
The global population is not growing "rapidly", since decades.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Human population is not limited by food but by:
* education
* having a healthcare and pension system/fund
* availability of contraception
* TV (yes, in Africa the biggest impact on birthes was introduction of the TV, people had now other things to do then "only sex" at night/in the evening)
There is not really anyone on the planet who is starving but has access to contraception. That would be the only one affected by more food, who could say: "oh, now as I have more food, I can have a child"
Re: (Score:2)
What is "GOT style"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
but what is "GOT"?
Shilthole countries ... (Score:2)
... where the average life expectancy is dropping ... .... like the USA?
Sorry, could not resist (but it's true, look it up!)
But are you aware that there is not a single country in the world where the average number of children per woman is > 2? So the current rise in population is due to more children growing up and getting their own <= 2 kids rather than having many kids. Which means that population will soon reach a peak and drop after that.
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect that the current drop in fertility is due to environmental pollution with estrogen mimic chemicals. But it's also true that there are lots of places where the weather has become a lot less predictable. (I'm talking about how much to plant of what early enough in the year to make a difference.) The monsoon has failed more than once recently. The US has experienced extended droughts. (Well, that was predictable, but the extent of the droughts was surprising.) Europe seen both unexpected heat w
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect that the current drop in fertility is due to environmental pollution with estrogen mimic chemicals.
Unlikely, given the trend to smaller family sizes with economic progression was clear well before such chemicals were used. Maybe there is a small contributory element at most.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Simple answer: no.
More complex answer: you are an idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
I quote:
In 2020, the population of Africa grew by 2.49 percent compared to the previous year. The population growth rate in the continent has been constantly over 2.45 percent from 2000 onwards
Source: https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]
Yep, that's the definition of exponential growth.
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, that's the definition of exponential growth.
Yes, it is. And you are to stupid to grasp the point I make:
it is _only_ 2.49 percent.
And it gets down year by year.
And who cares anyway? Africa is huge, no one cares if they get 100,000,000 million more people over the next 50 years. And then: their population grows will be -0.2%, like everywhere else.
Re: (Score:2)
it is _only_ 2.49 percent.
That's a doubling every 30 years or so. In 100-200 years, things could get messy, not necessarily because of lack of space, but resources.
And then: their population grows will be -0.2%, like everywhere else.
That's pretty optimistic. I tend to think the growth rate will remain around 2.5% until the inevitable crash, but we'll see. I'll reply in 10 years from now and we can see what the numbers are like then.
Re: Shilthole countries ... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If that were the case, the world's population would already be falling, and it's not [geoba.se]. Nearly half the world's countries and territories are above the replacement fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman of child-bearing age. They include Niger (6.68), Nigeria (4.82), Afghanistan (4.72), Rwanda (4.12), Sudan (3.96), Zimbabwe (3.38), Philippines (2.80), Egypt (2.64), Israel (2.44), and S
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Indeed, because we also forgot about
- Many cultivars of vegetables and fruit are much less nutritious than they were even 50 and 100 years ago because we made them more attractive to eat (bigger and less ugly), but they still only have the nutrition level of the original small plant.
- Most of the stuff we eat has been devastated by the first point, and more nutritious, tasty foods have gone extinct in the process.
- In some cases we have bred genetic diversity so far out of the original plant, that the plant
Re: (Score:2)
There are vegetables that literately taste like dirt and fertilizer because their taste has been obliterated (eg lettuce, celery and cucumbers tend to taste like dirt.)
You forgot tomatoes.
Despite all attempts to put better tasting tomatoes into stores: they are all uneatable.
I'd probably eat chili more if opening the can's you get from the store didn't stink like dogfood.
That is simple. Cook the beans yourself.
Buy dried beans, put them into water over night, throw away the water next day, then cook them slo
Re: (Score:2)
That must suck, to come to Slashdot and read about technological advances all the time. Pretty much any of them (except maybe advances in weapons, assuming they aren't dual-use) would be the same trigger.
Re: (Score:2)
We act just like viruses do...
Spotted the fascist greenshirt. "Humans are like viruses" arguments to justify genocide.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No. (Score:5, Informative)
They are using DNA manipulation to manipulate RNA.
We think of DNA and RNA as digital, base 4, 3x base-4 bits per byte. But cells also use a lot of out-of-band information, like metadata, and there's a number of chemical modifications that can be made to mRNA to change how it's read, metabolized, etc. They've inserted a gene (DNA) for human RNA demethylase FTO to increase modification of mRNA (N6-methyladenosine modificactions), one of these "metadata" changes, and it led to a 3x increase in yield ingreenhouse cultivation and a 50% increase in field conditions.
I hope these changes hold up in further research; leaps in productivity this large are not common.
mRNA vs DNA? (Score:2)
So they added DNA to create the demethylase protein that then does stuff to mRNA?
To all RNA or just specific bits? How does a protein know what to do? It seems amazing to me that such ham fisted approaches do not just kill the cells.
Why not just modify the DNA that creates the mRNA that they are interested in. Directly controlled, specific, relatively simple?
Re: (Score:3)
This isn't directly my field (I'm hort sci, though we deal with biology), but my understanding is that RNA demethylase FTO is a generalized nonselective RNA demethylation enzyme and demethylates m6A broadly within cells. This contrasts with more selective methylation by RNA methyltransferases.
But if there's a biologist here who would like to correct / expound on this, please speak up :)
Fat mass- and obesity-associated protein (Score:2)
Wow that's a really great name for a protein to put in GMOs, fat mass- and obesity-associated protein ... lol.
Fantastic (Score:2)
Now the egg-laying-wool-milk-pig and we're good.
Re: (Score:1)
The power of zero. (Score:2)
Drought-resistant for those areas that have some water left. Maybe plant in China or Germany. Plenty of water.
Re: (Score:2)
Germany is actually converting into a drought zone slowly.
One of the reasons why the floods were so devastating: the ground was dried out.
Last 3 years we had a summer drought, partly with forrest fires in the east. Did not check how big the harvesting losses where. I think two or three years ago it was in so far oki, that many things already could be harvested end of May: new record.
GMO! Eeek! (Score:5, Funny)
This will help feed the world. Because so many people won't eat GMO crops there will be more food left for the rest of us.
Re: (Score:2)
The only question needing to be asked. That protein, how edible is it because like GLUTEN https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] is a protein. https://www.kelloggsawayfromho... [kelloggsawayfromhome.com] read the brochure ouch saturation marketing, yuck.
So LTO proteins, your guess is as good as mine, sort of loosely reads as plant based proteins, so basically, no information at all. Is the actually protein healthy, how is bound to the carbohydrates, any hormonal key and pathway crap going on, is the actual protein, you have not detailed
So will it be Bayer or Monsanto? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
That is the very first question we should be asking.
Re: (Score:2)
The linked article (most of which is paywalled) names a corporation who owns the patent (not Bayer or Monsanto). It remains to be seen what the licensing terms will be. Hopefully small local farms will be able to afford it, but I'm not optimistic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Monocultures (Score:3)
Monocultures are a better way to end up with a famine than is "climate change."
Re: (Score:2)
Who is advocating monoculture? What does this tech have to do with monoculture?
Drought resistance and rice seem at odds... (Score:2)
Rice grows pretty much in a muddy swamp. What does drought resistance even mean for rice?
And potatoes are mostly water in the first place. Better root systems means it can search deeper for that water, and won't die if the top layers dry out, but it still needs the same amount of water to form the potatoes.
Having the plants survive brief drought periods is good, but we're looking at no water, instead of low levels of it for a time.
Re:Drought resistance and rice seem at odds... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
We have a virtually unlimited supply of water on the planet. All we need to do is desalinate it like Israel does. The only thing preventing us from providing all the water we need is the will to do it.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/israel-proves-the-desalination-era-is-here/
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And energy to do it with, good luck getting California to build nuclear plants to do the work.
That will not be a problem. Arizona will build the nukes for desalination in California. The energy can then be traded for California's inland water rights.
Re: (Score:2)
The energy required for desalinization is now low, due to the invention of temperature swing solvent extraction. The waste heat from industrial processes, or even solar power, would suffice. Them chemicals used for this process are not dangerous or difficult to synthesize. It's truely a great advance.
Re: Drought resistance and rice seem at odds... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Flooding of rice paddies is used for weed control because rice is water tolerant. That's convenient if you are growing in a location with excess water. Rice itself consumes roughly the same about of water as a comparable amount of wheat. Rice can be grown without flooding, or the water used for flooding can be reused afterwards.
Won't solve anything. (Score:1, Redundant)
What could possibly go wrong.
No, it won;t end hunger, poverty, prevent deforesation, etc. Because, it will simply enable more third world population growth in the third world that will outrun any gain that it provides. It may also not lead to increased health or nutrition that is being caused by soil nutrient depletion due to poor agricultural techniques caused by the big business interests behind GMO. That is the lack of closed nutrient cycle where nutrients from plants end up back in the soil through comp
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Lefties would rather see Brown people starve to death than eat GMO food.
If a lefty eats GMO food, how does that make a brown survive?
You are just silly.
What actually has GMO food to do with left or right anyway?
You must have pretty stupid idea what left, right, liberal, GMO actually is or means.
Re: (Score:2)
There is a lot of hubris with this GMO stuff...
Which is good. SpaceX shows us what we could accomplish if we applied more technological hubris. The solution isn't "spend less in space so we can spend more on Earth," but to solve terrestrial problems by applying SpaceX-level hubris on Earth.
China is doing exactly that right now: high-speed rail, massive clean energy projects, adventurous infrastructure of all kinds.
The Day (Score:1)
IANAG but don't want to eat that! (Score:2)
It looks like a super powerful gene with unknown full ramifications but a strong impact on human metabolism. Will this cure diabetes or kill you if you have it? etc. I am guessing the scientists know what they are doing but hope it will not find its way into the open air until super heavily tested..
Entrez Gene Summary for FTO Gene
This gene is a nuclear protein of the AlkB related non-haem iron and 2-oxoglutarate-dependent oxygenase superfamily but the exact physiological function of this gene is not known.
Re: (Score:2)
Not a biologist or chemist, I see. You ought to be on Fox, they go for your sort of shooting from the hip to hit your foot.
Re: (Score:2)
Whoosh!
Re: This is how the depopulation of the world star (Score:2)
Why then do the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines need injecting rather than swallowing as a drink or pill?
Re: (Score:2)
people will have this same RNA enter their body during digestion.
Nope.
Idiot.
Re: (Score:3)
"And needs 10 times as much fertilizer."
Yes, they obviously need a lot more to support themselves. There's also the question of nutritional value, what's it like compared to common rice and potatoes.
Also how would the new plants affect the health of the supporting ecosystems, soil, microorganisms, worms, etc.