GM Toxicity Study

My (very expensive) Lenovo laptop just committed suicide after a year and 1 month (which is ironic since I thought that buying computers more expensive than Dell would help them to last longer than the typical 2-3 years). Hopefully I can manage to keep posting regularly with my work computer or (god forbid) my phone.

Anyway...

I was asked about the recent GM toxicity study where researchers re-analyzed Monsanto toxicity data and came to a different conclusion. It's a good example of how the Truth in science lies in the tiny details.

I (along with other) responded to this question recently on U.S. Food Policy.

Other scientists wade in on blogs compiled in the AgBioWorld mailing list.

For example? The "Impact Factor" of scientific journals is rated based on how many people use and cite the articles within. Prestigious journals with huge audiences (e.g. Science and Nature) have Impact Factors in the high teens, twenties and up. Very good journals with small, specialized audiences often have Impact Factors above 5. Journals with Impact Factors below 4 are usually mediocre, specialized journals or (more often) lousy journals. The International Journal of Biological Sciences is not even rated (though they assign themselves their own number of 3.24!).

On the Road + Open Source Seeds

Well, I'm packing for the PAG conference...

Goal 1: Learn some new statistical/ecological genomics

Goal 2: Get some leads for a real job

It's a pretty long conference, so I'll have plenty of downtime to work on my backlog of manuscripts and job applications (and get my fill of Mexican food!). Hopefully when I get back we'll get our LCMS pipeline patched back up and I can run through the rest of our 2009 field samples.

At any rate, I'm excited that I got my 2010 Seed Savers Exchange catalog in the mail today! I'll spend part of my plane ride looking forward to moving somewhere I'll hopefully have a yard.

On a related note, Joseph is instigating some participatory amateur breeding over at Greensparrow Gardens (which I think is brilliant!). Does anyone know if there's much of an amateur breeding movement out there? I've only ever known one amateur (rose) breeder, but I'd love to hear if there was some interest out there.

I picture a wiki where amateur breeders could set up pages for their creations (with pedigrees, characteristics, etc.) and trade seeds, pollen and tips...

Roundup Ready Patent Expires!

Monsanto's patent on its first generation herbicide resistant Roundup Ready soybean is about to expire!

They had originally planned to force farmers to destroy all their first generation seed as they released their second generation (newly patented) Roundup Ready seed, but backed away from this stance, possibly under pressure from a Justice Department investigation. The original Roundup Ready trait will now be in the public domain and available to farmers and breeders (a very exciting development!).

Patent law and copyrights are critical to facilitate technological and cultural progress but it's a HUGE pet peeve of mine when organizations try to extend their claim beyond what's precedented. (If you're not fired up by this like me, download Free Culture, by Lawrence Lessig).*

At any rate, I'm glad that public opinion and government regulation continue to keep the big seed companies this side of evil.** Now if we could just do the same for the pharmaceutical and entertainment industries we'd be all set...

h/t: U.S. Food Policy

* Companies like Disney flaunt the public domain by continually lobbying congress for absurd extensions on their "ownership" of things like Mickey Mouse
** We'd be even better off (more competition, more disruptive technologies) if we loosened up genetic engineering regulation and let the small guys play

The Decline of Ag Research

Q: "no one really does field agricultural research anymore" Really? I would love to hear more about this. Thank you.

A: money, money and money!

1) Agriculture is not prestigious and undergrads don't pay the big tuition bucks to go to a great ag school. Logically, UC Davis and Cornell both seem less interested in maintaining their status as world-famous ag research institutes, than in cultivating their second and third rate med schools. The past decade has seen a huge consolidation and defunding of agricultural research departments - especially with this past year's economic troubles.

2) Agricultural research (just like other applied fields, e.g. transportation) is supported by small, mostly local organizations (e.g. USDA and farmer organizations) not the powerhouse government research funding agencies (e.g. NIH, NSF, DOE), and is therefore less valuable to universities (which make money by skimming up to 50% of incoming grants). 50% of $10 million keeps the lights on a lot longer than 50% of $3,000. (see answer 1)

3) When most Americans worked in agriculture, it made sense to spend a decent chunk of taxes paying local scientists and extension agents to help their communities farm successfully. Since agriculture became highly consolidated and incorporated, it makes less sense to assist them with special research programs - besides, big farms are perfectly capable of hiring their own private plant doctors to solve problems. They're also not tied to the land in the same way as a post-colonial family farm. I remember standing in an onion field in the Central Valley that was slowly being consumed with a devastating fungal pathogen. The farm operators explained that instead of fighting the infection, they would simply move on to a new plot of land when the yield fell below their economic threshold. (I think this fungus is part of the reason Gilroy is now the Garlic Capital of the World in name only).

Still, agriculture is one of the U.S.'s most important industries and it makes sense to fund it better than we currently are. The good news is that the repeated pleas by ag scientists (along with increased public interest in food and environmental issues) have finally caught some traction - notably with the creation of the new National Institute of Food and Agriculture, which will increase research funding for the environmental and economic sustainability of our communities.