3 ms·

One of the big complaints I hear about Monsanto is that using their seeds forces farmers to throw away their seeds each year (cannot use the seeds that their cr

by giarc 12y ago

One of the big complaints I hear about Monsanto is that using their seeds forces farmers to throw away their seeds each year (cannot use the seeds that their crops produce). I spoke with a farmer about this once, and he said they almost always throw away their seeds, regardless of supplier. Using those seeds would result in variable growing since you have no clue what cross pollination happened in the previous season. Any experience farmers or biogeneticists care to comment?

pchristensen 12y ago
Not a farmer, but this was in the article: "Even before biotech seeds came on the market, corn farmers tended not to save seeds, since store-bought hybrids delivered higher yields, but the technology agreement farmers sign when buying Monsanto’s biotech seeds forbids them from doing it."
- giarc 12y ago
  I didn't get that far I guess. So if I read this correctly, the only difference from pre-GMO days and now is that the common practice of buying new seeds every year is in a contract rather than just "common behaviour".
Blahah 12y ago
Plant geneticist here. For the vast majority of Monsanto-licensed crops grown, the seed itself is the crop (e.g. maize). The farmers aren't throwing it away, they sell it as food. For most of the remainder, although the seed isn't the crop, the fruit, which contains the seeds, is the crop (e.g. aubergine, cotton). So farmers throwing away seed is unlikely. Additionally, the previous most productive system of farming (and still very popular) was to use first-generation hybrids (the offspring of breeding two different strains together). Due to a phenomenon known as hybrid vigour, first-generation hybrids often have more desirable growth characteristics (like higher yield, bigger seeds, etc.). However, the effect only lasts one generation. Try to plant the second generation seeds and you'll get relatively pathetic plants. But the hybrid breeding process is incredibly complex and hard to do at scale, so it's worth paying a seed company to do it, even if that means buying the seed every year. The license protection for GMOs serves a similar purpose: developing GM lines is really, really hard and expensive. If Monsanto and other producers couldn't sell the seeds each year the technology simply wouldn't happen - the licenses allow them to profit despite the massive R&D cost.
gusfoo 12y ago
> One of the big complaints I hear about Monsanto is that using their seeds forces farmers to throw away their seeds each year Everyone throws their seed away ever year, because genetic monocultures have a 30% lower yeild than bought-in fresh genetic material. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vigor#In_plants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vigor#In_plants (The exception is rice, which can be bred time and time again)

by giarc 12y ago

pchristensen 12y ago

Not a farmer, but this was in the article: "Even before biotech seeds came on the market, corn farmers tended not to save seeds, since store-bought hybrids delivered higher yields, but the technology agreement farmers sign when buying Monsanto’s biotech seeds forbids them from doing it."

giarc 12y ago
I didn't get that far I guess. So if I read this correctly, the only difference from pre-GMO days and now is that the common practice of buying new seeds every year is in a contract rather than just "common behaviour".

Blahah 12y ago

Plant geneticist here. For the vast majority of Monsanto-licensed crops grown, the seed itself is the crop (e.g. maize). The farmers aren't throwing it away, they sell it as food. For most of the remainder, although the seed isn't the crop, the fruit, which contains the seeds, is the crop (e.g. aubergine, cotton). So farmers throwing away seed is unlikely. Additionally, the previous most productive system of farming (and still very popular) was to use first-generation hybrids (the offspring of breeding two different strains together). Due to a phenomenon known as hybrid vigour, first-generation hybrids often have more desirable growth characteristics (like higher yield, bigger seeds, etc.). However, the effect only lasts one generation. Try to plant the second generation seeds and you'll get relatively pathetic plants. But the hybrid breeding process is incredibly complex and hard to do at scale, so it's worth paying a seed company to do it, even if that means buying the seed every year. The license protection for GMOs serves a similar purpose: developing GM lines is really, really hard and expensive. If Monsanto and other producers couldn't sell the seeds each year the technology simply wouldn't happen - the licenses allow them to profit despite the massive R&D cost.

gusfoo 12y ago

> One of the big complaints I hear about Monsanto is that using their seeds forces farmers to throw away their seeds each year Everyone throws their seed away ever year, because genetic monocultures have a 30% lower yeild than bought-in fresh genetic material. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vigor#In_plants https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_vigor#In_plants (The exception is rice, which can be bred time and time again)