4 ms·

Wow - So are you saying this is a case for GMO (create a resistant banana) or against it (for killing biodiversity)? It's a shame because bananas are very chea

Wow - So are you saying this is a case for GMO (create a resistant banana) or against it (for killing biodiversity)? It's a shame because bananas are very cheap. On the one hand they're cheap enough to double in cost and many can handle it. On the other hand, they're a cheap staple for low income folks.

pygy_ 13y ago
There's no biodiversity in bananas. All Cavendish plants are sterile genetic clones. It was the same for Gros Michel. Edit: what more, GMO are not inherently bad. Monsanto gave them a bad name, because of their commercial practice (terminator gene), and the catastrophic environmental consequences of glyphosate-resistant crops. They can be used wisely. For example, did you know that the insulin diabetics use is produced by GM yeast?
- jurjenh 13y ago
  Yes, but that's not the only way bananas propagate. The fruit is how genetic variability gets introduced, but they also develop shoots from the root system, which eventually grow into trees themselves. I believe traditionally bananas are grown as the main trunk, then 2 baby shoots at differing maturity. Once the main stem has fruited, it is removed and the next one takes over, at which point another shoot is allowed to develop. The extra shoots that are removed can be used to start another "family" elsewhere, but has the risk of spreading disease. These days tissue culturing is used, with a much lower risk of spreading disease.
  - pygy_ 13y ago
    Offshoots are non-artificial clones. They are genetically identical to the main stem... It's just the same plant.
    - mathattack 13y ago
      I'm impressed with the bananaknowledge here. Is there a limited amount of times you can do this?
      - jurjenh 13y ago
        I don't think there's a limit, as its part of the natural growth pattern of bananas. Some other species have similar habits - I believe there's an entire forest that is one plant - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree)
tzs 13y ago
> It's a shame because bananas are very cheap Why they are cheap is interesting: http://freakonomics.com/2008/06/19/the-economics-of-bananas/ http://freakonomics.com/2008/06/19/the-economics-of-bananas/
- mathattack 13y ago
  That's a pretty damning article. I know the history was bad. Is it still that way?
logfromblammo 13y ago
I don't think I'd have a problem with GMO that inserted genes from one Musa cultivar into another. You could find a natural strain with resistance, isolate the resistance genes, and insert them into the production monoculture strain in a manner that is impossible for traditional techniques to accomplish, because the production cultivars are seedless and triploid. I am much less accomodating for inserting genes from a completely different kingdom, like the Bt gene and associated promoters. Also, since the triploid bananas are sterile, there is a smaller likelihood that the alterations will escape into the wild and ruin fertile diploid bananas.
- pygy_ 13y ago
  > You could find a natural strain... The way "natural" is commonly defined is misleading. Humans are apes, mammals, animals. We're part of nature, and so is everything we create and produce. Artificial is a subset of natural.
  - omaranto 13y ago
    I know which meaning of natural you are talking about and it would indeed include everything artificial, but I disagree that that is the common meaning of natural! I hear natural more often used to mean "not caused or created by humans". Isn't that the definition people usually have in mind?
    - pygy_ 13y ago
      > I hear natural more often used to mean "not caused or created by humans". Isn't that the definition people usually have in mind? I find the common definition misleading, because it implies that humanity is not part of nature. It is technically false, and causes confusion in the mind of most people. The "natural good, artificial bad" meme needs to die. We're currently facing ecological problems of immense scale, and not having a proper basic mental model of the situation is detrimental.
      - jacobolus 13y ago

pygy_ 13y ago

There's no biodiversity in bananas. All Cavendish plants are sterile genetic clones. It was the same for Gros Michel. Edit: what more, GMO are not inherently bad. Monsanto gave them a bad name, because of their commercial practice (terminator gene), and the catastrophic environmental consequences of glyphosate-resistant crops. They can be used wisely. For example, did you know that the insulin diabetics use is produced by GM yeast?

jurjenh 13y ago
Yes, but that's not the only way bananas propagate. The fruit is how genetic variability gets introduced, but they also develop shoots from the root system, which eventually grow into trees themselves. I believe traditionally bananas are grown as the main trunk, then 2 baby shoots at differing maturity. Once the main stem has fruited, it is removed and the next one takes over, at which point another shoot is allowed to develop. The extra shoots that are removed can be used to start another "family" elsewhere, but has the risk of spreading disease. These days tissue culturing is used, with a much lower risk of spreading disease.
- pygy_ 13y ago
  Offshoots are non-artificial clones. They are genetically identical to the main stem... It's just the same plant.
  - mathattack 13y ago
    I'm impressed with the bananaknowledge here. Is there a limited amount of times you can do this?
    - jurjenh 13y ago
      I don't think there's a limit, as its part of the natural growth pattern of bananas. Some other species have similar habits - I believe there's an entire forest that is one plant - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pando_(tree)

tzs 13y ago

> It's a shame because bananas are very cheap Why they are cheap is interesting: http://freakonomics.com/2008/06/19/the-economics-of-bananas/ http://freakonomics.com/2008/06/19/the-economics-of-bananas/

mathattack 13y ago
That's a pretty damning article. I know the history was bad. Is it still that way?

logfromblammo 13y ago

I don't think I'd have a problem with GMO that inserted genes from one Musa cultivar into another. You could find a natural strain with resistance, isolate the resistance genes, and insert them into the production monoculture strain in a manner that is impossible for traditional techniques to accomplish, because the production cultivars are seedless and triploid. I am much less accomodating for inserting genes from a completely different kingdom, like the Bt gene and associated promoters. Also, since the triploid bananas are sterile, there is a smaller likelihood that the alterations will escape into the wild and ruin fertile diploid bananas.

pygy_ 13y ago
> You could find a natural strain... The way "natural" is commonly defined is misleading. Humans are apes, mammals, animals. We're part of nature, and so is everything we create and produce. Artificial is a subset of natural.
- omaranto 13y ago
  I know which meaning of natural you are talking about and it would indeed include everything artificial, but I disagree that that is the common meaning of natural! I hear natural more often used to mean "not caused or created by humans". Isn't that the definition people usually have in mind?
  - pygy_ 13y ago
    > I hear natural more often used to mean "not caused or created by humans". Isn't that the definition people usually have in mind? I find the common definition misleading, because it implies that humanity is not part of nature. It is technically false, and causes confusion in the mind of most people. The "natural good, artificial bad" meme needs to die. We're currently facing ecological problems of immense scale, and not having a proper basic mental model of the situation is detrimental.
    - jacobolus 13y ago