Boboro
Well-Known Member
I think its more the gene than the round up. If I rember right its a fish gene.
Question on how to kill a tobacco plant
- Thread starter USHOG
- Start date
- Status
Gibson's Farm
Banned
it is not a fish gene. This is how GMO crop breeding works.
Take a batch of seeds. Expose them to very very low doses of radiation. Plant the seeds. watch them grow and select the plants that meet your breeding requirements. take the seeds from them and replant. This process continues until you get the results desired. (this is a very shortened version and I could write 20 pages and not explain it all)
The next is to expose the seed to a chemical found in certain plants and then follow the same steps as above.
Gene splicing has not been mastered yet.
Gibson's Farm
Banned
I agree with you here for sure. This is why I grow Non-GMO crops so I don't have to worry about it. I will also be able to farm as long as my tractor has fuel and I don't have to rely on herbicides to grow crops.
I know with canolla/rapeseed here in Australia farmers can buy GM seed that is impervious to Round up so they can increase their yield. The plant the seed wait for it to emerge then spray the crop and with Round up and stop the weeds before they can compete with the seed. They can not save any of the seed to plant the following year they must buy seed from the company. Their crop is tested as the deliver and they are allowed something like 2% GM seed if they havent bought seed for the year. If above that the whole load in the truck is rejected. A case of big brother holding all the control there. Also what about hybrids they produce a bigger crop but generally the seeds dont grow true to the parent plant. Is that also refereed to as GM seed? I also liked the reference to the professor I think it was who released a paper and I must say I have a tendency to believe articles written by learned people but as was pointed out they sometimes do this for the betterment of the company they are employed with rather than an unbiased report and it leans in favour of the faction employing them or their own views. There should be some sort of come back via the learned professor types against their colleagues who do this make science non political and truthful.
Gibson's Farm
Banned
Here is how hybrid plant breeding works.
You take two inbred strains of plants and use the pollen from one to fertilizer the other plant. This first generation of off spring is called an F1 hybrid. Due to hybrid vigor the F1 generation out preforms both of the parents. So the F1 hybrid is made up of half the genes from each parent. The seeds saved from the F1 hybrid are now 1/4 of each of the first parents as well as 1/4 of each of the F1 hybrid parents. Now it gets really crazy because the original F1 may be sterile for all kinds of reason and I cant say I am a plant breeding expert. I got a C in plant breeding and genetics in college and I was happy to get a C. It is very complex.
A hybrid is not a GM plant. To be a GM plant the plant must have been bred using radiation mutagens, chemical mutagens or gene splicing ,which as of last semester has not happened yet.
I also want to add that round up is not the only herbicide used in GM crops. It is the most commonly used because round up is the cheapest herbicide available. There are GM crops that are resistant to other forms of herbicide.
Boboro
Well-Known Member
Hybrids are not GMOs. An yes Gene splicein is what GMO is. Im not sure about the fish.
Boboro
Well-Known Member
But a fish is just as likey as eney where elese to borrow a gene from.
Boboro
Well-Known Member
An to radiate a seed to make it roundup ready. Well lets think about that a little bit.
Boboro
Well-Known Member
Bahhhhha.
Boboro
Well-Known Member
Gene splicein Mite wanna check into it.
Boboro
Well-Known Member
A very nasty business. But very real.
norest
Well-Known Member
What I learned is never mention Monsanto if you don't want to do a lot of heavy reading.
Gibson's Farm
Banned
No, GMO is any plant bred using chemical, radiation or gene splicing. Don't believe me here is some sources for ya.
http://repository.ias.ac.in/37909/1/37909.pdf
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...-sales-where-monsanto-denied-commodities.html
http://jxb.oxfordjournals.org/content/60/10/2817.full
Genetically Modified Organism general info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetically_modified_organism
lawnphysics
Member
The heart of the tobacco plant (the white center), is your target, once that stub is damaged down to the root level, the plant loses it's heart and dies. Take an ax or something and damage that heart down to the root level. If you have an entire stalk there still, cut the stalk off at the top of the ground, then destroy the heart of the stub. This should eliminate the plant trying to continue to reproduce. That is one thing about tobacco, it just won't die.
I also think just pulling the stub is your best bet. I have sandy-loam soil here, and they just pull right out if I want to examine the root system of my crop.
As a farmer, I rid of the stalk stubs in our fields with a disk harrow shortly after harvest. Sometimes I have to go over the field twice. A freeze definitely will stop the sucker growth you are getting from the plant stub, but you have done said you do not get a freeze in your location. You can also take a tiller over the stalks. The goal is to destroy the heart of the plant, that way the nutrients will stop getting to the sucker growth.
Also, from experience, I plow up stubs from two or three crop years earlier every year. They are dead, but they just take awhile to decompose, but they will eventually.
I also think just pulling the stub is your best bet. I have sandy-loam soil here, and they just pull right out if I want to examine the root system of my crop.
As a farmer, I rid of the stalk stubs in our fields with a disk harrow shortly after harvest. Sometimes I have to go over the field twice. A freeze definitely will stop the sucker growth you are getting from the plant stub, but you have done said you do not get a freeze in your location. You can also take a tiller over the stalks. The goal is to destroy the heart of the plant, that way the nutrients will stop getting to the sucker growth.
Also, from experience, I plow up stubs from two or three crop years earlier every year. They are dead, but they just take awhile to decompose, but they will eventually.
DonH
Well-Known Member
You're missing my main point which is that Glyphosate is harmful to humans. So if the strains are engineered to survive higher levels of Roundup then we are consuming more Glyphosate.
There is no tobacco that you can spray Glyphosate on after planting or even close to planting time .
How ever I have seen some sweet corn that you can grow and spray with Glyphosate .
Now that is some corn I would not want to eat .
How ever I have seen some sweet corn that you can grow and spray with Glyphosate .
Now that is some corn I would not want to eat .
Gibson's Farm
Banned
I am not disagreeing with you about the potential for glyphosate to harm humans. I am just tired of all these organic farmers and others that spread miss information about organic practices vs conventional farming. I am a sustainable farmer who farms without GMO crops and very limited use of herbicides and pesticides. I have used herbicides and pesticides once in the last 3 years and I did this after the crops were harvested.
Glyphosate has not been found to be harmful to humans and does not have residual properties on plant matter. With that being said, Studies conducted by the USDA on contamination of ground water by herbicides is substantial. They studied over 700 well sights across the mid west corn belt. Something like 85% were contaminated with compounds that are derived from herbicedes that have broken down and leached threw the soil. Some of these compounds are in fact carcinogenic.
Currently only includes glyphosate (ROUNDUP) herbicide
Postemergent, non-selective, apoplastically & symplastically translocated herbicide
Very important herbicide in many crop productionsystems, due to low toxicity, effectiveness against creeping perennials andalmost non-existent soil residual
Generally more effective against monocots thandicots
Ability to move in symplast makes it an importanttool in controlling creeping perennial weeds—johnsongrass, in particular, butalso quackgrass, bindweeds, canada thistle (though not as effective againstcreeping perennial broadleaves as grasses—usually requires several years ofrepeated application to control creeping perennial broadleaves)
Inhibits formation of essential amino acids with benzene rings,(tryptophan, tyrosine and phenylalanine—these are also called the aromatic amino acids)
Inhibits aromatic amino acid synthesis byinhibiting the enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate (EPSP) enzyme in the Shikimic Acid Pathway) so eventually, protein and enzyme and otherplant metabolite activity fails
Death appears to be due to lack of aromatic ringstructures and carbon drain from other systems by building up precursors ofaromatic rings, instead of the aromatic rings which are further converted tohormones, alkaloids, flavanoids, phenolic compounds, plastoquinone receptorsand so on, besides the lack of aromatic structures for amino acids, proteins andenzymes
Addition of aromatic amino acids back to plantsdoes not overcome effect of glyphosate, so other functions, not yet determined,are disrupted by glyphosate as well
New growth stops soon after application, butyellowing of entire plant, starting with new growth, may take 4-7 days forannual grasses to 10-20 days for less susceptible species (usuallybroadleaves); sometime purpling of grass foliage occurs before browning anddeath
Death is slow—1-2 weeks for annuals, 2-4 weeks forperennials, due to cascading effect of lack of essential amino acids
After treatment with ROUNDUP, woody plant regrowthis often deformed—with white marks or lines on the leaves, and often a “witchesbroom” effect of multiple shoots developing at nodes
Inhibition is at a single gene site (ESPSenzyme), so several major agronomic crops—corn, soybeans, cotton, wheat,with others on the way (potatoes, sugarbeets, bentgrass)—have beengenetically-engineered to be resistant to glyphosate—allows glyphosate to beonly and very effective means of weed control, at least for awhile
o Two sites of resistance, the ESPS enzyme site andinsertion of an enzyme to break down glyphosate, are being used in crops—mostcurrently are the ESPS enzyme site
Herbicide resistance in previouslysusceptible weed species: Beginningto see a lot more emergence of ROUNDUP-resistant biotypes in areas whereRoundup-resistant crops are grown continuously, or where ROUNDUP has been usedfor many years—annual ryegrass, goosegrass, horseweed, apple-of-peru; other weedsshow much higher tolerance to Roundup, and need higher rates than are safe forRoundup-resistant crops—field bindweed, birdsfoot trefoil, giant ragweed,pokeweed; Resistance is due to either different action at ESPSenzyme site, or varying tolerance of ESPS enzyme in different species, ordifferent populations within species for Roundup; other mechanisms ofresistance to Roundup also seem to be appearing
Important to rotate weed control practices to useother than Roundup for weed control, to avoid development of resistantbiotypes, and to control any resistant biotypes before they can spread
non-selective; preplant for many crops; can be safely used as aselective herbicide in crops that are geneticially modified to be resistant toglyphosate (ROUNDUP
postemergent weed control of all weeds; grasses more sensitive; someweeds becoming resistant
900,000 ppm water solubility, but strongly bound to soil; biodegraded;47 day half-life; Class I soil mobility
Inhibits aromatic (ring-containing) amino acid synthesis by inhibitingEPSP enzyme; death takes 2-4 weeks; very low mammalian toxicity, since aromaticring synthesis occurs only in plants
Can be moderately corrosive to iron and galvanized metals. A number of agronomic crops (soybeans,cotton, wheat) have been genetically engineered to be resistant to Roundup, sothe herbicide is used as only needed weed control in engineered crops; someweed resistance appearing in these crops;
Glyphosate has not been found to be harmful to humans and does not have residual properties on plant matter. With that being said, Studies conducted by the USDA on contamination of ground water by herbicides is substantial. They studied over 700 well sights across the mid west corn belt. Something like 85% were contaminated with compounds that are derived from herbicedes that have broken down and leached threw the soil. Some of these compounds are in fact carcinogenic.
Glyphosate
WSSA Group 9, HRACGroup G
ROUNDUP, ACCORD, RODEO,
Postemergent, non-selective, apoplastically & symplastically translocated herbicide
Very important herbicide in many crop productionsystems, due to low toxicity, effectiveness against creeping perennials andalmost non-existent soil residual
Generally more effective against monocots thandicots
Ability to move in symplast makes it an importanttool in controlling creeping perennial weeds—johnsongrass, in particular, butalso quackgrass, bindweeds, canada thistle (though not as effective againstcreeping perennial broadleaves as grasses—usually requires several years ofrepeated application to control creeping perennial broadleaves)
Inhibits formation of essential amino acids with benzene rings,(tryptophan, tyrosine and phenylalanine—these are also called the aromatic amino acids)
Inhibits aromatic amino acid synthesis byinhibiting the enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate (EPSP) enzyme in the Shikimic Acid Pathway) so eventually, protein and enzyme and otherplant metabolite activity fails
Death appears to be due to lack of aromatic ringstructures and carbon drain from other systems by building up precursors ofaromatic rings, instead of the aromatic rings which are further converted tohormones, alkaloids, flavanoids, phenolic compounds, plastoquinone receptorsand so on, besides the lack of aromatic structures for amino acids, proteins andenzymes
Addition of aromatic amino acids back to plantsdoes not overcome effect of glyphosate, so other functions, not yet determined,are disrupted by glyphosate as well
New growth stops soon after application, butyellowing of entire plant, starting with new growth, may take 4-7 days forannual grasses to 10-20 days for less susceptible species (usuallybroadleaves); sometime purpling of grass foliage occurs before browning anddeath
Death is slow—1-2 weeks for annuals, 2-4 weeks forperennials, due to cascading effect of lack of essential amino acids
After treatment with ROUNDUP, woody plant regrowthis often deformed—with white marks or lines on the leaves, and often a “witchesbroom” effect of multiple shoots developing at nodes
Inhibition is at a single gene site (ESPSenzyme), so several major agronomic crops—corn, soybeans, cotton, wheat,with others on the way (potatoes, sugarbeets, bentgrass)—have beengenetically-engineered to be resistant to glyphosate—allows glyphosate to beonly and very effective means of weed control, at least for awhile
o Two sites of resistance, the ESPS enzyme site andinsertion of an enzyme to break down glyphosate, are being used in crops—mostcurrently are the ESPS enzyme site
Herbicide resistance in previouslysusceptible weed species: Beginningto see a lot more emergence of ROUNDUP-resistant biotypes in areas whereRoundup-resistant crops are grown continuously, or where ROUNDUP has been usedfor many years—annual ryegrass, goosegrass, horseweed, apple-of-peru; other weedsshow much higher tolerance to Roundup, and need higher rates than are safe forRoundup-resistant crops—field bindweed, birdsfoot trefoil, giant ragweed,pokeweed; Resistance is due to either different action at ESPSenzyme site, or varying tolerance of ESPS enzyme in different species, ordifferent populations within species for Roundup; other mechanisms ofresistance to Roundup also seem to be appearing
Important to rotate weed control practices to useother than Roundup for weed control, to avoid development of resistantbiotypes, and to control any resistant biotypes before they can spread
non-selective; preplant for many crops; can be safely used as aselective herbicide in crops that are geneticially modified to be resistant toglyphosate (ROUNDUP
postemergent weed control of all weeds; grasses more sensitive; someweeds becoming resistant
900,000 ppm water solubility, but strongly bound to soil; biodegraded;47 day half-life; Class I soil mobility
Inhibits aromatic (ring-containing) amino acid synthesis by inhibitingEPSP enzyme; death takes 2-4 weeks; very low mammalian toxicity, since aromaticring synthesis occurs only in plants
Can be moderately corrosive to iron and galvanized metals. A number of agronomic crops (soybeans,cotton, wheat) have been genetically engineered to be resistant to Roundup, sothe herbicide is used as only needed weed control in engineered crops; someweed resistance appearing in these crops;
Birage
Well-Known Member
No, they aren't that separate, because GMO foods are designed to be glyphosate resistant, therefore the fields are sprayed heavily on to the food producing plant meaning more glyphosate in your food. I am not going to immerse myself heavily into the debate, but there is a ton of well studied and empirical evidence that this chemical is not good for the human body. It doesn't take a genius to see that cancers and disease have increased since the industriall revolution and that chemicals in our food, air, and water are responsible for a large part of these diseases. If you like glyphosate, bon appetite!!
Birage
Well-Known Member
http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/ For the record, Dr. Seneff is not just an engineer.......see anyone can massage the facts.
- Status
