Yes, we have many solutions
IITA has a pretty nice video out about controlling Banana Xanthomonas Wilt via genetic modification.
Now, don’t jump to any conclusions, I have nothing against genetic modification of banana. In fact, if you’re going to use genetic modification on anything, bananas should be right up there. No chance of that pesky transgene escaping into the wild, for a start. Although I would like to know how they’re planning to engineer resistance into the dozens of varieties that are important in East Africa. Wait, you mean they’re not going to do that? Just a few, eh?
Well, anyway. My main point is that the video gives no hint at all that, as far as BXW control is concerned at any rate, there are other, perfectly viable, options. And IITA knows this, because it has been involved in the development of a pretty effective, multi-faceted, low-cost, integrated, sustainable strategy for control. One that doesn’t involve the threat of reducing the diversity of the crop.
Of course, it would help if there were similarly nice videos about that. There are factsheets galore, true. Lots of factsheets. But videos? Well, maybe you can get them to work. And anyway they don’t really seem to be aimed at the general audience so clearly targeted by IITA’s vid. How can we make the case that there are occasionally more appropriate, sustainable solutions than GMOs when we can’t even win the battle of the videos?
Gluten free is the way to be. Or not to be.
Gluten free is the way to be….OH Hiiiiiiiiiiii http://t.co/y4LOtk1Z
— Kim Kardashian (@KimKardashian) May 4, 2012
No doubt fearing the repercussions of this and other celebrity endorsements of a wheat-free diet, 1 the National Wheat Improvement Committee has come out with a myth-busting denunciation of Dr William Davis’ monumental Wheat Belly. I wonder if Kim has seen it. Wait, let me tweet it to her…
Nibbles: CGIAR vision, GFAR vision, UNEP vision, Tree seeds, Aerial vision, Visions of potatoes, Soybeans, DNA sequencing, Rewilding
- The latest bit of CGIAR navel-gazing is about whether research should be for or in development.
- The Futures of Agriculture: Brief No. 42. No, really, 42. Love that plural, though
- And of course UNEP needs to have its say too.
- Oh, wow, someone actually doing something.
- How about a visionary use for tree seeds? Burn ’em!
- Then there are visions of potato diversity.
- And a vision of a world covered in soybeans.
- And DNA sequences as far as the eye can see. So, can we get all those wild relatives done now, just for the heck of it?
- Can you take one more vision? Here’s one of rewilded Europe.
European forest community in a frenzy
As usual, it never rains but it pours. Within a few minutes yesterday I was pointed by different sources towards the Forest Map of Europe, Tree species maps for European forests, the Condition of Forests in Europe report, a review of Dynamic Conservation of Forest Genetic Resources in 33 European Countries, and a paper on the Uses of tree saps in northern and eastern parts of Europe. Thinking that there might be something in the air, I did a quick search of my RSS feed, and found another very recent review, Translating conservation genetics into management: Pan-European minimum requirements for dynamic conservation units of forest tree genetic diversity. What’s got into the European forest conservation community? Has ash dieback got them all running scared? And is someone going to put all European forest-related maps together somewhere (eg, Eye on Earth)?