Birds not so smart after all?

Hold the phone! A press release informs us that over two winters, using two different varieties of wheat, garden birds and lab canaries preferred conventional over organic grain. And the reason seems to be that the conventional grain contained 10% more protein. Very smart! But before word goes out to the birds of the world, consider what else the press release says:

This study is only looking at one aspect of the organic food debate – it does not take into account the long-term health implications of using chemical fertilizers and pesticides, or the often negative environmental impact of conventional farming; for example, other work has shown that pesticides can strongly reduce availability of seeds for birds. But it does raise questions about the nutritional benefits of organic food and what consumers are being led to believe.

Because consumers in the UK are choosing organic for its higher protein levels? Because they’re short of protein? More to the point, has anyone asked the birds to consider the long-term consequences of their choices, like the reduced availability of seeds, or nesting spots, or insects for their insectivorous feathered friends?

And, let’s not forget, increased levels of carbon dioxide are reducing protein levels in wheat. Another good reason to grow conventionally, whatever that means.

Gary says: [A]ll you will get from political advocates is disinformation and misinformation intended to advance their agenda.”

Nibbles: Sorghum and rice and climate change, Pacific agrobiodiversity today and yesterday, Japanese microbiota, Wolf domestication, Organic and fungi, Crop wild relatives, Bees, Hunger, Silk

Nibbles: Bees, IFPRI, Undernutrition policy, Haiti earthquake, Yeast

  • Latest news on the bee front ain’t good. Except on Isle of Man.
  • IFPRI accused of being industry shills. But where’s the evidence?
  • Commentary on Hilary Clinton’s undernutrition speech.
  • Monsanto did not donate GMO seed to Haiti. But it was hybrids, so basically a one-off. Better than nothing? Adding insult to injury? I dunno, you decide.
  • So apparently we have the unstable margins of chromosomes to thank for beer. I’ll drink to that.

Beyond the staples

I haven’t been following the Millennium Villages literature — scientific and popular — quite as assiduously as I should, but what I have read does seem to focus quite strongly on the staple crops. No doubt a sustainable increase in the production of staples is necessary to combat hunger in Africa. But is it sufficient? The impression I have taken away from my reading is that that is not a question that is accorded high priority in this literature. If I’m wrong about this, I would welcome being set right. In any case, it came as a nice surprise to read the following passage in “Tripling crop yields in tropical Africa,” a recent article in Nature Geoscience by Prof. Pedro Sanchez, one of the moving forces behind the Millennium Villages project. 1

An increase in staple crop production is only a first step towards reducing hunger in tropical Africa. The provision of wider nutritional needs, such as more protein and adequate vitamins and trace elements, coupled with a reduction in disease, is also necessary.

Unfortunately that is not followed by a call to harness agrobiodiversity to provide those wider nutritional needs. But it does open an interesting door. A door that Bonnie McClafferty of HarvestPlus had no compunction about going through at SciDev.net a couple of days back:

The enormous challenge of micronutrient malnutrition is best addressed in the long run through poverty alleviation, economic development, education, women’s empowerment, access to adequate healthcare and dietary diversification, among other things.

Now, her defence of biofortification against the charge of medicalizing micronutrient deficiency sounds a lot like “don’t let the best be the enemy of the good,” which is a bit much, as in fact if anything it has been the good that’s been the enemy of the best in this game. Surely a lot more money has been going into biofortification than into dietary diversification — where, after all, is the latter’s equivalent of HarvestPlus? But it is good to see the importance of diverse diets — and by implication agrobiodiversity — at least recognized. Perhaps the Millennium Villages project could now plan some interventions around local vegetables and fruits?

Nibbles: Allanblackia domestication, Rampion census, Mali reforestation, Indian sacred groves, Oysters, Seaweeds, Breeding organics, EMBRAPA, Fisheries bycatch, Writing NUS proposals, Nutrition mag, Biofortification