6 ms·

A Race to Save the Orange by Altering Its DNA

47 points by kpozin 13y ago

gcb0 13y ago
Puffy piece? Almost all fruits have problems, but solution is limiting non native plagues. Even if it's almost impossible. Like with bananas.
- quanticle 13y ago
  And how, exactly, do you propose to "limit" non-native plagues? Do you want to shut down the ports and airports?
  - gcb0 13y ago
    It's all a trade of. They rather continue planting in a region infested with plagued but with cheap labor instead of moving to a clean area with expensive labor. Remember that the puffy piece lay the facts so that you reach the conclusion that gene changes are the only way out. Earth is huge. Cheap exploitable manpower is diminishing.
- jonknee 13y ago
  What does non-native plagues mean to a fruit that was cultivated and spread by humans? The orange is already non-native everywhere it is grown.
rogerbinns 13y ago
The real problem is that all oranges are clones - genetically identical. That means anything that can overcome one orange tree can overcome them all. Shuffling genes around will just delay the next killer. It will be interesting to see if they can come up with a way to cause sexual reproduction to happen again. The resulting genetic diversity will make oranges less of a target. Somewhat related is how they and much other modern agriculture is done - huge fields of exactly the same species only - a monoculture. This too makes it easy for invaders. The fix of multiple species being grown together is often shown to work, but makes the farming and harvesting considerably more complicated and expensive. Recommended reading is Michael Pollan whose books and articles about food are great http://michaelpollan.com/articles/ http://michaelpollan.com/articles/
- foobarbazqux 13y ago
  They're only identical within a cultivar, right? If the fruits are different (e.g. navel vs. mandarin) then the genes must be different.
  - rogerbinns 13y ago
    Yes. In the citrus estate near where I grew up they did not mix species. ie you had an orchard of orange only, next to an orchard of mandarin only, next to mineola only etc. All vegetation between the trees was also cleared except some grass appeared.
- jonknee 13y ago
  > Somewhat related is how they and much other modern agriculture is done - huge fields of exactly the same species only - a monoculture. This too makes it easy for invaders. The fix of multiple species being grown together is often shown to work, but makes the farming and harvesting considerably more complicated and expensive. It's not necessarily optional. Humans have cultivated the food supply through cross breeding since we have been around and even common foods aren't "natural" anymore. A lot of what we like to eat doesn't like to reproduce itself so we end up reproducing what we like to eat.
  - rogerbinns 13y ago
    The quoted bit was about growing conditions - ie instead of a field of only one species, combine multiple species. The species diversity helps control pests, and allows for a greater variety of birds etc. And is way harder to harvest. Your point was about reproduction. Sexual reproduction doesn't have to be out in the wild - it is offspring combining DNA from parents producing something a little different. It is possible to try and introduce genes to make out in the field reproduction more likely to happen, and also to work out some lab based way of reproduction. Admittedly it is way harder than making cuttings, but does bring benefits.
- yareally 13y ago
  Lack of genetic diversity is also the reason the banana is in danger (again). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_disease http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_disease
nakedrobot2 13y ago
I wonder if eventually an immunity to the disease will start to occur within certain trees.
- quanticle 13y ago
  It might happen. Or oranges might go extinct. There's no way to tell, and, frankly, I enjoy my orange juice.
- jonknee 13y ago
  Not very likely considering they are clones of each other. This is similar to the current dominant banana species being doomed.
nnq 13y ago
...if people wouldn't be so freaked off of GMOs and they could just push on with the science instead of considering the public reaction to everything. Heck, I'd a take a glass of oj made from fruits with pig and monkey genes in it over a "natural and non-GMO" one made from plants that need tons of herbicides and pesticides to grow. ...and if I were a producer that discovered how to make a resistant orange by genetic engineering, I'd just do my best to spread the damn disease and wipe out natural oranges together with the competition, making more money to finance more genetic engineering research, hopefully doing more interesting stuff than pest resistance genes, like actually improving the flavor and nutrient profile of grown plants.
- archgoon 13y ago
  >...and if I were a producer that discovered how to make a resistant orange by genetic engineering, I'd just do my best to spread the damn disease and wipe out natural oranges together with the competition, making more money to finance more genetic engineering research... No, you'd be thrown in jail for bioterrorism. What you propose is seriously unethical, even if it weren't criminal. Furthermore, your attitude would convince much of the populace that people who promote GMO food are completely insane and unethical.
  - davvid 13y ago
    I think a more reasonable threat would be that the company that discovers the resistant gene patents it, and then owns the entire orange market. Throw in some Monsanto-style "you cannot plant the seeds" and you have a real problem.
acheron 13y ago
I wish them good luck in overcoming the anti-scientific hysteria. But I fear relying on scientific literacy is going to end in failure. How many other advances in agriculture are we going to sacrifice to appease these superstitions? (Not to mention similar superstitions of anti-vaccine activists, who are probably the same people in many cases.)
- olouv 13y ago
  That's clearly wrong. You just have to actually read studies to find clear warnings about the toxicity of GMO. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512...
- rogerbinns 13y ago
  I don't think the hysteria is anti-scientific. It is more a suspicion of agricultural corporations, of secrecy and of American companies. The perception of Monsanto is an excellent example. Corporate paternalism is not appreciated. Consider why companies lobbied so hard for GMO to not be labelled as such. If almost every product was labelled as GMO then after a while consumers would not care. They would be able to make their own choices about "regular" versus GMO. Instead the fight has been to "trust us" and to keep GMO secret. "Known to the State of California to cause cancer" is everywhere. No one bats an eyelid any more.
  - crusso 13y ago
    The poster didn't mean that the hysteria was against Science itself, rather that it wasn't based upon any type of Scientific analysis or investigation. The fact that people will become apathetic to GMO labeling eventually doesn't mean that the industry won't fight to avoid the unwanted (and undeserved) stigma for now.
    - rogerbinns 13y ago
      > ... avoid the unwanted (and undeserved) stigma for now There is that paternalism again. It is not up to the producers of any product to decide if attention is undeserved. Consumers get to decide that. And yes some will be wrong etc. Shining a light and being truthful is the right way of doing things. The hysteria is not against science - it is against paternalism hiding itself as "trust us because science". Science requires being open and honest.
blackprawn 13y ago
When did we all become so codependent? I can grow an orange if I want to. As far as Im concerned, those folks who make their living growing oranges are responsible for their own outcomes. I dont need oranges from them. And maybe I dont even want them at all. If the growers have become so incompetent as to not be able to grow them I wont miss them. (or the oranges).
- lotu 13y ago
  What are you trying to say? Maybe you can grow an orange but I can't, I live in an apartment in New York even if I had access to the ground and room to grow an orange tree the climate is wrong. You might be able to grow your own oranges but can you make your own clothes, build your own furniture, manufacture your own car, fab your own chips, or drill your own oil? We have been codependent since whenever your ancestor stopped being subsistence farmers. This could be centuries ago if you come from an old money family, or weeks ago if you a recent immigrant from the poor rural China or India. Next it sounds like the growers are actively working on fixing the problem of a plague killing their oranges. Do you think they should be working faster or just that their isn't a problem in the first place? In the end I don't really understand your comment.
  - blackprawn 13y ago
    Im sorry you cant grow an orange, and Im not sure why you need one. Also Im saying Im not dependent in any way on citrus farms. If they fail, its their own fault, and someone, in fact anyone could do better. I guess when I think about it, a corporate citrus farm isnt much more than a hedge fund to me. Their crops dying are just a stock going down. "Oh the oranges are dying!" They will be replaced. Oranges will be here long after we are gone.
    - blackprawn 13y ago
      These downvotes are AWESOME - (hellban me I can change my IP in 30 seconds) SO, the rules of VC and SV dont apply to oranges, I assume my posts were downvoted because oranges are a "precious" resource, even though no other country in the world has problems growing them, so Im being downvoted (and HOPEFULLY hellbanned) for calling out a corrupt, piece of shit US food cartel that is committing ritual suicide in its own crops. Oh "boo fucking hoo". Fact: No one needs OJ. Fact: The idiots that have pissed on their own crops are complaining about the fact they cant do their jobs. FACT: no one in silicon valley would have the fucking balls to complain when they cant run their own business but they feel sorry for pussy farmers who CANT RUN THEIR BUSINESS. In fact if these farmers were SV startups they would be taken out and shot by their own parents and pushed into the bay in front of hungry sharks.
crusso 13y ago
Asked if tomatoes containing a gene from a fish would “taste fishy” in a question on a 2004 poll conducted by the Food Policy Institute at Rutgers University that referred to one company’s efforts to forge a frost-resistant tomato with a gene from the winter flounder, fewer than half correctly answered “no.” Genetic manipulation will define the next major shift in human progress. Computers transformed inanimate things, giving them function and pseudo-life. DNA hacking will transform living things, allowing us to customize ourselves, our pets, our food, our plants, and entirely new forms of life.

47 points by kpozin 13y ago

gcb0 13y ago

Puffy piece? Almost all fruits have problems, but solution is limiting non native plagues. Even if it's almost impossible. Like with bananas.

quanticle 13y ago
And how, exactly, do you propose to "limit" non-native plagues? Do you want to shut down the ports and airports?
- gcb0 13y ago
  It's all a trade of. They rather continue planting in a region infested with plagued but with cheap labor instead of moving to a clean area with expensive labor. Remember that the puffy piece lay the facts so that you reach the conclusion that gene changes are the only way out. Earth is huge. Cheap exploitable manpower is diminishing.
jonknee 13y ago
What does non-native plagues mean to a fruit that was cultivated and spread by humans? The orange is already non-native everywhere it is grown.

rogerbinns 13y ago

The real problem is that all oranges are clones - genetically identical. That means anything that can overcome one orange tree can overcome them all. Shuffling genes around will just delay the next killer. It will be interesting to see if they can come up with a way to cause sexual reproduction to happen again. The resulting genetic diversity will make oranges less of a target. Somewhat related is how they and much other modern agriculture is done - huge fields of exactly the same species only - a monoculture. This too makes it easy for invaders. The fix of multiple species being grown together is often shown to work, but makes the farming and harvesting considerably more complicated and expensive. Recommended reading is Michael Pollan whose books and articles about food are great http://michaelpollan.com/articles/ http://michaelpollan.com/articles/

foobarbazqux 13y ago
They're only identical within a cultivar, right? If the fruits are different (e.g. navel vs. mandarin) then the genes must be different.
- rogerbinns 13y ago
  Yes. In the citrus estate near where I grew up they did not mix species. ie you had an orchard of orange only, next to an orchard of mandarin only, next to mineola only etc. All vegetation between the trees was also cleared except some grass appeared.
jonknee 13y ago
> Somewhat related is how they and much other modern agriculture is done - huge fields of exactly the same species only - a monoculture. This too makes it easy for invaders. The fix of multiple species being grown together is often shown to work, but makes the farming and harvesting considerably more complicated and expensive. It's not necessarily optional. Humans have cultivated the food supply through cross breeding since we have been around and even common foods aren't "natural" anymore. A lot of what we like to eat doesn't like to reproduce itself so we end up reproducing what we like to eat.
- rogerbinns 13y ago
  The quoted bit was about growing conditions - ie instead of a field of only one species, combine multiple species. The species diversity helps control pests, and allows for a greater variety of birds etc. And is way harder to harvest. Your point was about reproduction. Sexual reproduction doesn't have to be out in the wild - it is offspring combining DNA from parents producing something a little different. It is possible to try and introduce genes to make out in the field reproduction more likely to happen, and also to work out some lab based way of reproduction. Admittedly it is way harder than making cuttings, but does bring benefits.
yareally 13y ago
Lack of genetic diversity is also the reason the banana is in danger (again). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_disease http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_disease

nakedrobot2 13y ago

I wonder if eventually an immunity to the disease will start to occur within certain trees.

quanticle 13y ago
It might happen. Or oranges might go extinct. There's no way to tell, and, frankly, I enjoy my orange juice.
jonknee 13y ago
Not very likely considering they are clones of each other. This is similar to the current dominant banana species being doomed.

nnq 13y ago

...if people wouldn't be so freaked off of GMOs and they could just push on with the science instead of considering the public reaction to everything. Heck, I'd a take a glass of oj made from fruits with pig and monkey genes in it over a "natural and non-GMO" one made from plants that need tons of herbicides and pesticides to grow. ...and if I were a producer that discovered how to make a resistant orange by genetic engineering, I'd just do my best to spread the damn disease and wipe out natural oranges together with the competition, making more money to finance more genetic engineering research, hopefully doing more interesting stuff than pest resistance genes, like actually improving the flavor and nutrient profile of grown plants.

archgoon 13y ago
>...and if I were a producer that discovered how to make a resistant orange by genetic engineering, I'd just do my best to spread the damn disease and wipe out natural oranges together with the competition, making more money to finance more genetic engineering research... No, you'd be thrown in jail for bioterrorism. What you propose is seriously unethical, even if it weren't criminal. Furthermore, your attitude would convince much of the populace that people who promote GMO food are completely insane and unethical.
- davvid 13y ago
  I think a more reasonable threat would be that the company that discovers the resistant gene patents it, and then owns the entire orange market. Throw in some Monsanto-style "you cannot plant the seeds" and you have a real problem.

acheron 13y ago

I wish them good luck in overcoming the anti-scientific hysteria. But I fear relying on scientific literacy is going to end in failure. How many other advances in agriculture are we going to sacrifice to appease these superstitions? (Not to mention similar superstitions of anti-vaccine activists, who are probably the same people in many cases.)

olouv 13y ago
That's clearly wrong. You just have to actually read studies to find clear warnings about the toxicity of GMO. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512...
rogerbinns 13y ago
I don't think the hysteria is anti-scientific. It is more a suspicion of agricultural corporations, of secrecy and of American companies. The perception of Monsanto is an excellent example. Corporate paternalism is not appreciated. Consider why companies lobbied so hard for GMO to not be labelled as such. If almost every product was labelled as GMO then after a while consumers would not care. They would be able to make their own choices about "regular" versus GMO. Instead the fight has been to "trust us" and to keep GMO secret. "Known to the State of California to cause cancer" is everywhere. No one bats an eyelid any more.
- crusso 13y ago
  The poster didn't mean that the hysteria was against Science itself, rather that it wasn't based upon any type of Scientific analysis or investigation. The fact that people will become apathetic to GMO labeling eventually doesn't mean that the industry won't fight to avoid the unwanted (and undeserved) stigma for now.
  - rogerbinns 13y ago
    > ... avoid the unwanted (and undeserved) stigma for now There is that paternalism again. It is not up to the producers of any product to decide if attention is undeserved. Consumers get to decide that. And yes some will be wrong etc. Shining a light and being truthful is the right way of doing things. The hysteria is not against science - it is against paternalism hiding itself as "trust us because science". Science requires being open and honest.

blackprawn 13y ago

When did we all become so codependent? I can grow an orange if I want to. As far as Im concerned, those folks who make their living growing oranges are responsible for their own outcomes. I dont need oranges from them. And maybe I dont even want them at all. If the growers have become so incompetent as to not be able to grow them I wont miss them. (or the oranges).

lotu 13y ago
What are you trying to say? Maybe you can grow an orange but I can't, I live in an apartment in New York even if I had access to the ground and room to grow an orange tree the climate is wrong. You might be able to grow your own oranges but can you make your own clothes, build your own furniture, manufacture your own car, fab your own chips, or drill your own oil? We have been codependent since whenever your ancestor stopped being subsistence farmers. This could be centuries ago if you come from an old money family, or weeks ago if you a recent immigrant from the poor rural China or India. Next it sounds like the growers are actively working on fixing the problem of a plague killing their oranges. Do you think they should be working faster or just that their isn't a problem in the first place? In the end I don't really understand your comment.
- blackprawn 13y ago
  Im sorry you cant grow an orange, and Im not sure why you need one. Also Im saying Im not dependent in any way on citrus farms. If they fail, its their own fault, and someone, in fact anyone could do better. I guess when I think about it, a corporate citrus farm isnt much more than a hedge fund to me. Their crops dying are just a stock going down. "Oh the oranges are dying!" They will be replaced. Oranges will be here long after we are gone.
  - blackprawn 13y ago
    These downvotes are AWESOME - (hellban me I can change my IP in 30 seconds) SO, the rules of VC and SV dont apply to oranges, I assume my posts were downvoted because oranges are a "precious" resource, even though no other country in the world has problems growing them, so Im being downvoted (and HOPEFULLY hellbanned) for calling out a corrupt, piece of shit US food cartel that is committing ritual suicide in its own crops. Oh "boo fucking hoo". Fact: No one needs OJ. Fact: The idiots that have pissed on their own crops are complaining about the fact they cant do their jobs. FACT: no one in silicon valley would have the fucking balls to complain when they cant run their own business but they feel sorry for pussy farmers who CANT RUN THEIR BUSINESS. In fact if these farmers were SV startups they would be taken out and shot by their own parents and pushed into the bay in front of hungry sharks.

crusso 13y ago

Asked if tomatoes containing a gene from a fish would “taste fishy” in a question on a 2004 poll conducted by the Food Policy Institute at Rutgers University that referred to one company’s efforts to forge a frost-resistant tomato with a gene from the winter flounder, fewer than half correctly answered “no.” Genetic manipulation will define the next major shift in human progress. Computers transformed inanimate things, giving them function and pseudo-life. DNA hacking will transform living things, allowing us to customize ourselves, our pets, our food, our plants, and entirely new forms of life.