Enable All Plants To Fix Nitrogen From The Air???
 

World changing technology enables crops to take nitrogen from the air.

Like legumes,and without altering the plants DNA.

Whatcha Think??


http://phys.org/news/2013-07-world-t...-nitrogen.html

Professor Edward Cocking, Director of The University of Nottingham's Centre for Crop Nitrogen Fixation, has developed a unique method of putting nitrogen-fixing bacteria into the cells of plant roots. His major breakthrough came when he found a specific strain of nitrogen-fixing bacteria in sugar-cane which he discovered could intracellularly colonise all major crop plants. This ground-breaking development potentially provides every cell in the plant with the ability to fix atmospheric nitrogen. The implications for agriculture are enormous as this new technology can provide much of the plant's nitrogen needs.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2013-07-world-t...rogen.html#jCp




I had to read before commenting, of course.
So they don't monkey with the DNA, just add a nitrogen fixing bacteria to the crop. I guess they could spray it on the soil when they sow, or the plants as they grow.

Some questions come to mind.
Would it attach itself to weeds as well? My weeds don't need any help growing as it is now.
Although nitrogen is the majority chemical in the air on this planet, has he done any math on how a worldwide change might affect that balance? IOW, if the % of N in the air starts dropping, what else happens?
And the question that always comes to mind when scientists come up with something new and improved.
Why didn't God, or Mother Nature if you prefer, think of that?
(Or maybe they already did)............

Fascinating. Thanks for sharing this!

The bacteria is coated on the seed before it goes into the ground. I honestly expected to see a downside to this, but after reading the article I haven't found any. This could be a very good development both from an environmental standpoint and as a major cost savings for farmers.

Reality check. Here is the summary text of Prof. Cocking, et al, research, as published. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1079%2FIVP2005716

So far, he has discovered that a certain bacterium, which, by the way is non-nodulating, penetrates the root cells of certain plants and seems to be able to live there and may have the potential to enable all the cells of that plant to create, or synthesize nitrogen.

No field trials, no yield studies, no crop safety experiments have been done.

No cellular studies have been made of the added nitrogen within the plant cells and what will happen to the plant--will it be poisoned by the nitrogen? Or, the reverse, will there even be enough nitrogen produced to obtain a yield equal to applied nitrogen?

There is also no basic research cited as to why, if this bacterium was found in sugar cane, didn't it synthesize nitrogen in that plant. Sugar cane requires huge additions of nitrogen to make it grow, too......

Prof. Cocking and his associates have set up their own corporation, of course, to exploit the possibilities of seed coating and inoculation, should it prove to be valuable in the future. That, in my thinking, means that eventually there may be a trade-off for the farmer. He will pay an equivalent amount for inoculation as he now pays for applied nitrogen.

The argument that this will prevent pollution could be bogus. Continual inoculation and nitrogen fixation in, corn, for example could lead to increased nitrogen in the crop residues left in the ground after harvest. All plant material with nitrogen sources is eaten by microorganisms. when they die, the nitrogen converts to NO3, which is water soluble. More nitrogenous residue left in the field will increase the chances of water pollution by runoff as that residue decomposes.

Don't you just love it when a free-lance writer gets hold of a scientific publication and runs with it?

geo

The law of unintended consequences, almost always starts out with this phrase.

Obviously, the jury is still out on this one. I'm always cautious about things of this nature, but the bacterium is not new and is present in other crops so it doesn't seem to be an issue. There is no genetic modification going on, which is a good thing. Caution is needed, but not so much that we reject an idea that might safely change the way we grow crops for the better.

No, I think we better start hating it now and avoid the rush...

And Monsanto has been working on this for several years.:rock:

every time man tries to make things better, things just get Worst! as with everything else I see problems down the road!
God's design was perfect, why do we think we can do better!

I don't know, God's design seems to have included smallpox, polio, and many childhood diseases that mankind has wiped out or seriously curtailed. I can think of a truck load of other examples, but I'll not bore you with them.

Don't think God ever intended Adam or Eve to have all those deseases. Think they just developed them on there own as hundreds of years went b y before they and succeeding generations came on the scene.

AS AN ASIDE. Did I here Monsanto has givin up on GMO grains?

may seem cruel but I see that as survival of the fittest. suppose wolfs should dine on the best of the crowd rather then the least of them...

Got to have a check some where, I cant with good consequence decide which of my brethren lives or dies , think its best to leave it to higher powers.

if wild critters an and stock need management , why not people?

Nature will take care of nature, you can connect good or not to it ... still how it"s going to go will go.

This would be breaking news if it were true. Beware when something of this significance is first reported on some obscure science website,

Have we not been doing this with inoculants already?

Nope, not for mankind till they ett the apple and was cast out of the disease free garden.They brungest disease and hard work on to us all.:awh::nana:

Interesting, but seems pretty week and not really working at this point in time.

The holy grail of farmers since the 1950s, a grass crop that would fix its own N. That would be big big news.

Of course anyone that develops such a thing, naturally or GMO, would be able to charge a premium price for the seed or coating. That is how things work.

Seems all the reports on this the past 10 years have been pretty negative - as in it just doesn't seem to work. Neither the seed coats nor the gmo attempts have lead to anything promising at this time. I'm sure all avenues will continue to be tried.

Paul

The legume crops use them, and the coatings on the seed helps make sure those little critters are there and ready to go, instead of waiting and hoping for some to be around in the soil you plant in. But they still only work with legumes.

Soybeans, for example, use a lot more N that corn does. But, the soybean uses the little critter to fix N for them, so we don't need any added N to produce those legume crops.

N more or less = protein, you will notice most of our high protein crops are a legume - beans, alfalfa, and so forth.

A real deal thing would be to develop a way for a grass crop (corn, wheat, oats, grass hay, barley, milo, etc) to also be able to fix its own N, or use the same sort of symbiotic relationship legumes use.

Paul

To borrow a line from an old commercial; "Its not nice to fool with Mother Nature!"

Prof. Cocking did use corn, wheat, and rice in his research. They all showed an ability to accept the bacteria into their root systems and some colonization.

geo

Prof. Cocking did use corn, wheat, and rice in his research. They all showed some ability to accept the bacteria into their root systems and colonize there.

geo