Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One of the most common reasons for grafting is the propagation of hybrids. Many hybrids, fruit trees especially, will not breed true. In other words, the seeds of a hybrid fruit tree will produce fruit trees, but the fruit trees will not resemble the parent. To reproduce the hybrid, grafting on sturdy stock is performed, usually on the trunk just above the roots, leading the tree to produce the desired hybrid fruit.
the bold portion indicates that the genetics have changed, however slightly, but there is in fact a change.
You're trying to compare selective breeding to genetic engineering--they aren't the same thing. The problem with genetic engineering is that they introduce genes into the plant that may not be found in nature. I don't know if genetically altered crops are completely safe or dangerous to people and the environment--no one does at this point. That's the problem. When I was growing up, my neighbors started using bovine growth hormone (BGH--another genetically engineered product) at their dairy, and we fed antibiotics to our animals--it was all considered completely safe. Now we're finding growing antibiotic resistance from the antibiotics and data that indicates there's a real link between cancer and BGH. I grew up thinking those products were just fine, and now I won't feed them to my kids. If we're going to continue to introduce these products, I want to at least have the information available to me so I can avoid them if I choose.
Actually, the dangers of genetically modified crops is absolutely known. The magnitude of the impending disaster is the only thing that cannot be fully calculated at this time.
1) In India, thousands of sheep, buffalo and goats died after consuming Bt cotton plants.
2) Over 50% of the offspring of laboratory rats fed GMO soy died within three weeks after birth.
3) The vast majority of hamsters fed GMO soy in testing were totally sterile after just three generations
4) In animal studies, consuming GMO showed organ lesions, altered liver and pancreas cells, changed enzyme levels, and increases in toxicity.
5) Study concludes that the three main varieties of GMO corn caused liver and kidney problems
6) Both lab animals and domestic livestock have suffered major issues with virtually every internal organ as a result of consuming GMO. Increased mortality rates ... low birth rates ... sterilization ... organ failure and death have all been attributed to GMO feed.
7) Non-targeted insect death from GMO pollen contamination of other plants has been measured, and many scientists consider the "colony collapse" syndrom affecting bees could be the result of GMO toxins, which could have devastating impact to agriculture due to the loss of bees polinating crops.
These are just some of the known dangers that have been discovered in short term. Long term impact is unkown, but include the development of pesticide resistent super bugs .... long term DNA damage ... and unchecked GMO contamination of the entire biosphere, with unknown consequences.
The list of "reasons" and "benefits" of GMO are totally false ... their use do not increase yeilds .... their use is shown to require more pesticide use over the long term ... widespread use of single strain GMO could suffer global collapse in a particular crop if a resistent strain of a pathogen or pest emerges ... just to name a few.
The reality is, GMO has already shown to be a disaster, and that's just in the short term. The long term disaster is impossible to predict at this point, but measured against the short term effects already seen, the news can be nothing but gravely concerning.
Location: In a place with little freedom (aka USA)
712 posts, read 1,365,341 times
Reputation: 261
Quote:
Originally Posted by nightflight
Its not nice to say your product is this when it in fact is that!
Welcome to the world of marketing/advertising. They are the second oldest profession in the world. It is how they sell bottled water and things like milk. They have to lie to the people and say "its good for you".
Why even bother with that kashi crap? It doesnt have an american sounding name and it's DEFINITELY NOT better than raw fruits & veggies.
the bold portion indicates that the genetics have changed, however slightly, but there is in fact a change.
what you highlight there is a by-product of the hybridization process, not of grafting.
Quote:
When populations hybridize, often the first generation (F1) hybrids are very uniform. Typically, however, the individual members of subsequent hybrid generations are quite variable. High levels of variability in a natural population, then, are indicative of hybridity.
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,298 posts, read 14,144,732 times
Reputation: 8104
Quote:
Originally Posted by rbohm
it actually does;
the bold portion indicates that the genetics have changed, however slightly, but there is in fact a change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by uggabugga
what you highlight there is a by-product of the hybridization process, not of grafting.
Uggabugga is right. First the hybrid is made, and about half the offspring will be a mix of genes from the parents. Then the hybrid is grafted onto the rootstock, which might be from a third variety - for an example with grapes, you might have a hybrid between a European grape and an Australian grape (producing a new variety which has shuffled the genes), and that hybrid might be grafted onto an American rootstock that has immunity to pest or fungus in the ground. But the hybrid top and the American rootstock do not change their genetics after the grafting.
But your original point, rbohm, was that foods have been genetically modified since the beginning of agriculture, and that's true. It was done through selective breeding rather than hybridization alone. Any crop is going to have a few mutants, say with carrots for an example: a wild carrot is quite small, but some early farmer came across a bigger one, and he used the seeds from that exclusively in planting. Each generation, the farmer would let the largest carrots go to seed and use them for planting the next season. Do that selection for a few hundred years, and you get a consistently larger-than-wild carrot with slightly different genetics from the wild variety.
Last edited by Woof; 05-21-2012 at 04:53 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
