Remember when people believed that 90% of DNA is junk? Or that the human appendix is totally useless? Now we know better. So when photosynthesis is "inefficien

Remember when people believed that 90% of DNA is junk? Or that the human appendix is totally useless? Now we know better. So when photosynthesis is "inefficient" after billions years of evolution, surely we would be more careful with the conclusions. "Photosynthesis is only 1% efficient" sounds a bit like "we only use 10% of our brain" (according to some measurement). > Photorespiration wastes little energy and instead enhances nitrate assimilation, the process that converts nitrate from the soil into protein, according to a new study. > Most plants, contrary to popular belief, do not waste over 30% of their photosynthate in a futile cycle called photorespiration. Rather, the photorespiratory pathway generates additional malate in the chloroplast that empowers many energy-intensive chemical reactions, such as those involved in nitrate assimilation. Thus, the balance between carbon fixation and photorespiration determines the plant carbon–nitrogen balance and protein concentrations. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41477-018-0191-0 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41477-018-0191-0