Re: [apple-crop] arctic apples
Bill, Good point re GM hybridizing being faster than traditional methods. I hadn't thought about that important difference. I assume the scientists still have to do observation trials for a few years after selecting the potential hybrids. I'm wondering what the turn around time is for GM trials compared to decades for conventional hybridizing? Your idea of identifying an apple variety that already has the gene that imparts the trait that is wanted and then using conventional hybridizing to develop a new cultivar from that makes good sense. FYI An interesting piece of history from here in NB that is relevant to this topic. Francis Peabody Sharp of Woodstock, NB was doing true scientific hybridizing in the 1850s and he sped up his trials by cutting off the tips of the hybridized seedlings/whips and grafting them onto mature, bearing trees. One mature tree might have a dozen or more trial hybrids grafted onto it. The resulting hybrids when grafted onto a mature tree would bear their first apples in 3 to 4 years rather than waiting for the experimental seedlings to grow to bearing age (6 to 10 years). Is that also being done today in experimental stations? It's an area of horticulture I'm not very familiar with. Daryl Hunter On Fri, 2/27/15, Fleming, William w...@montana.edu wrote: Daryl, The reason they breed by manipulating genes rather than conventional breeding is because it only takes years rather than decades to come up with the desirable result.While I don’t have a strong opinion either way on GMOs what I feel is a better use of the technology is to identify the gene with the trait you desire and what variety has that gene naturally then use conventional breeding for the desired new fruit.Seems that might go over better with the public once it’s explained, plus the crop wouldn’t have to be labeled GMO if that ever comes around.Bill FlemingMontana State UniversityWestern Ag Research Center580 Quast LaneCorvallis, MT 59828 -Original Message- From:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net [mailto:apple-crop-boun...@virtualorchard.net] On Behalf Of Daryl Hunter Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2015 9:09 PM To: Apple-crop discussion list Subject: Re: [apple-crop] arctic apples Keeping with the Arctic Apple discussion. The Arctic Apple is supposed to be like no other apple in that they have turned off a gene so that it does not turn brown like all other apples. That statement is misleading since there are apple varieties/cultivars among the thousands of varieties that can be sliced and the pieces do not turn brown. These are natural bee pollinated genetics, not scientifically manipulated. I wonder why they would spend so much money developing a non-browning apple when they could easily do it the benign way? I think there is more cost in marketing hype here than in the actual genetic work. For example, here in New Brunswick, Canada we have the Tangowine apple, dark purplish skin, snow white sweet flesh with attractive pink streaks, and cut pieces can be set on a table for days without turning brown. It is also very resistant to scab. It was an open pollinated apple found growing in a gravel pit. In their promotion of the Arctic apple they added a challenge, Now if we could just get rid of the seeds! Well, we have seedless apples here in New Brunswick too. Daryl Hunter apple-crop mailing list apple-crop@virtualorchard.net http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop ___ apple-crop mailing list apple-crop@virtualorchard.net http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop ___ apple-crop mailing list apple-crop@virtualorchard.net http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop
Re: [apple-crop] arctic apples
While we're speaking of amusing correlations, check out this one. Perhaps organic food also causes autism? :) http://geneticliteracyproject.org/2015/01/05/will-my-child-be-born-autistic-if-i-eat-gmos-a-scientists-view/ http://geneticliteracyproject.org/2015/01/05/will-my-child-be-born-autistic-if-i-eat-gmos-a-scientists-view/ Randall Steffens II Weimar College Weimar, California On Feb 27, 2015, at 5:16 AM, Ginda Fisher l...@ginda.us mailto:l...@ginda.us wrote: On Feb 26, 2015, at 10:34 PM, Jon Clements wrote: ... 6.) What ever happened to BST/BGH push-back and labeling? Ginda, I will let you look that one up. ... Jon I don't need to look that one up, because I've followed it. The differences between the milk and meat of BST/BGH-treated cows is too small to be conclusively measured (higher levels of this and that, but within the normal range) HOWEVER, the incidence of mastitis and other maladies is significantly higher in cows treated with BST than in untreated cows. So, just as the roundup ready gene doesn't affect how your body interacts with food, but the greater residue of roundup might be a concern, the hormonal changes in the milk are probably unimportant, but you are probably exposed to more antibiotic residue (and anti-biotic-resistant bacterial contamination) from the milk (and meat) of treated cows. It's been outlawed in Canada, the EU, and several other first-world countries, mostly on animal welfare grounds. It remains legal in the US, but most of the milk in my supermarket says our farmers pledged not to use BST. Checking with wikipedia, this isn't just a yuppie phenomenon, a large number of major brands of milk, including Costco's Kirkland brand, Walmart's Great Value brand, and many more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_somatotropin http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bovine_somatotropin The wikipedia article doesn't have any recent data on how commonly it is used, but says: From 2000-2005 the USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) survey of dairy producers found that about 17% of producers used rBST.[23] The 2010 USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service survey of Wisconsin farms found that about 18% of dairy farms used rBST.[24] So it's still out there, but most of our milk supply is from untreated cows. ... John, your first link in both intriguing and scary. 1.) I would be a lot more worried about this http://www.the-open-mind.com/mit-estimates-half-of-all-children-autistic-in-10-years-due-to-monsanto-1/#fsWKjef2oeh3k4OW.01 ... Do you know anything about how reliable the author is? She uses a lot of graphs of correlations, that I find very unconvincing. There are all manner of things that correlate, and most of them aren't causal. Some are both causally related to a third factor, and some are completely random. If you want to see some fun, random correlations, check out this link. http://www.tylervigen.com/ Ginda Fisher ___ apple-crop mailing list apple-crop@virtualorchard.net http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop ___ apple-crop mailing list apple-crop@virtualorchard.net http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop
[apple-crop] Company Responsible For First GMO Apples Is Sold (for 41 million dollars!)
In case you did not see this: http://www.goodfruit.com/intrexon-to-acquire-okanagan-specialty-fruits-for-41-million/ http://www.growingproduce.com/fruits/apples-pears/company-responsible-for-first-gmo-apples-is-sold/ -- Jon Clements aka 'Mr Honeycrisp' UMass Cold Spring Orchard 393 Sabin St. Belchertown, MA 01007 413-478-7219 umassfruit.com ___ apple-crop mailing list apple-crop@virtualorchard.net http://virtualorchard.net/mailman/listinfo/apple-crop
