Backyard Aquaponics
A place to discuss aquaponics

up to 400kg Now that is one big pumkin. Would love to get my hands on some of them seeds. be a bit big for my current grow beds though

yeh JP maybe but I may try 1 in GB and grow over the side, but man they are hard to get going

I am lucking out with rockmellon's let alone a 400kg pumpkin

You might want to check that statement Rupe. I'm afraid it is completely wrong.

The rollout of RR Canola in the eastern states last year has been held up as evidence that the crop technology isn't as good. We need to make two distinctions here;

1. The GM aspect of the process allows that incorporation of the glyphosate tolerance genes into the plant (1 is an alternative photosynthetic pathway and the other is a metabolic process that allows the plant to break the active down.
2. The varieties that were used were from varieties that are largely 4 to 5 years old. That's a hell of a long way in plant breeding time. The majority of the RR canola varieties are hybrids (crosses of anything up to 5 parents) that have a significant yield advantage over conventional varieties. It speaks volumes for the quality of the canola breeders in these companies that the current 'normal' varieties are up to a par with the 'best' of 5 year old plant technology. The best of the current hybrids are yielding 30% better than the current conventional canola varieties. It'll take 2 years to insert the GM genes into those varieties and catch up.

Canola is but one small part of the GM crop system. The advances that have been made in other crops are astonoshing but the delay imposed on Australian agriculture has been enormous.



I'll think you'll find that the first confirmed case of glyphosate resistance in Australia was in a vineyard. To date, there are two weeds with glyph resistance in Aus - Annual Ryegrass and Barnyard Grass. Considering that over 1000000 L of glyphosate are used in Aus every year it is a credit to farmers that there are only 50 odd individual populations of resistant grass in Aus. See link below.

http://glyphosateresistance.org.au/



Sorry, incorrect. A quick search of the APVMA website will show that there are a multitude of products that kill, for example, canola. Off the top of my head;

1. Diquat
2. Metsulfuron
3. Chlorsulfuron
4. Triasulfuron
5. Diflufenican
6. Bromoxynil
7. 2,4-D
8. Oxyflurofen
9. Carfentrazone

Not to mention the good old plough.



Sorry, off the mark again. Most farmers crop rotate so that you avoid disease build up so that you can minimise the use of fungicides and insecticides that will damage the crop. The subclinical buildup of disease costs a significant amount in yield - it is easier to rotate your crops so that disease and insect pests can't build to damaging levels. Using more chemical won't always get that yield back, not to mention costing a fortune.

Chatty

And








And one Victorian farmer puts any yield gains down to pre-emergence weed control..



While another says…






I'll think you'll find that the first confirmed case of glyphosate resistance in Australia was in a vineyard. To date, there are two weeds with glyph resistance in Aus - Annual Ryegrass and Barnyard Grass.

It would seem to be both more widely spread… and acknowledged than you state..



And more…







Guess it all depends which side of the fence you’re on….

I think you're confusing the so called Terminator gene with the Glyphosate tolerance gene here Rupe. The Terminator gene was developed so that the Biotech companies could stop growers reusing their own saved seed by rendering it dormant until activated by a product supplied by the company. Neeless to say, it is taking the potential of GM too far and abusing the IP power that these companies would have over farmers. It seems to have been howled down luckily.

Roundup Ready crops do not need to be treated with Glyphosate to grow, germinate or otherwise. There is absolutely no interaction between the RR gene and the plant's normal development.

Chatty

I'll stand corrected on the badly worded first part Chatty... although the second part qualifies it anyway I believe...

And I was under the impression that most GM seed incorporated the "terminator" gene...

Strictly true if you include the Green Revolution and the adoption of No Till farming. The impact from their widespread adoption will start to reduce as the proportion of growers utilising their benefits gets close to 100%.



See comment above. No Till has it's highest rate of adoption in Aus. Canadian and American growers are only now starting to fully realise the benefits of this technique.



The 'elite' varieties were good in the early 00's. A bit like putting Lance Armstrong onto a steel framed monster from last decade and telling him to win the Tour de France



True. Yields were poor last year over east. Once again, see comment above.



I'll think you'll find that the one thing that saved the bacon of the Vic farmers last year was being able to sow on time and then clean the paddocks up with a post emergent application of glyphosate.



Why would he say that? Because by using the GM technology he is able to clean the paddocks up (when other options that can be used in conventional canola would fail) and he can grow a clean crop. Thus, he can grow a weed free and profitable wheat crop.



We are talking about Aus here aren't we Rupe? Yep, there are other species OS that exhibit glyph resistance but we'll keep it local. Their use patterns of glyph have for one reason or another been different - crop, farming method, labour costs etc - which make those examples entirely noteworthy but not necessarily applicable to Aus.



Hence the use of integrated weed management techniques - catching and destroying weed seed at harvest, using other chemicals, bringing livestock back into the farming system - the list goes on.



Monsanto and Bayer don't need to participate in any trials. The technology will either be adopted by farmers or sunk by farmers. If it is doesn't do the job they'll walk away from it. If it does do the job they'll adopt it widely. The comment regarding post emergent weed control is spot on, and also goes against your example above citing the comments from the Vic grower.



True, Bayer realise this and that's why there are no plans at this stage to bring Liberty Link into Aus. It is approved for release by the way if they wanted to.



Glyph resistance is a serious problem, not for the magnitude of the problem but for the serious restriction it would place on our ability to practice No Till farming. See selection of chemicals mentioned above for the control of canola. 2,4-D is one such possibility. One of many. Glyph isn't super on radish. True. But then canola isn't radish. Radish is a much harder weed to kill than a canola plant, regardless of the herbicide used. The poor control of radish with glyphosate cannot be used as an example for how hard canola is to kill.



Hold up there. No post emergent option in canola here. Bloody heaps of options for killing radish and canola post emergent in wheat and barley. True, markets hate it. It should be mentioned here that there are no confirmed cases of glyph resistant radish in Australia. There are however, plenty of populations resistant to multiple herbicides of other groups



Untrue. I have seen Roundup Ready kill radish the size of dinner plates. I'd call that pretty effective. I think you'll find that it is on the label.

http://www2.dpi.qld.gov.au/extra/asp/in ... code=54112

Page 9 shows the label claims for the weeds controlled. You'll note that radish is there. that means they can demonstrate a 90% kill or better. Repeatedly.



No reference here to the fact that half of the northern wheat belt in WA already has Atrazine resistant radish.



True. Crop yields also drop bloody significantly if the crop sowing time is delayed waiting for a germination of weeds that can be killed. The beauty of RR is that you can put the crop in and as soon as the weeds emerge they can be controlled. All of them.



The chemical they're talking about in that comment is trifluralin. It has the ability to control ryegrass. Not radish. Triazines cannot be used in RR canola. Also, Atrazine is highly sensitive to soil moisture levels - a semi dry start means the herbicide (root absorbed) doesn't do its job. If you miss the boat on that, you only have one more option and the level of resistance to that chemical i reckon would be at about 15 - 20% and rising very rapidly.

With all this talk of glyphosate resistance Rupe, i'd have sworn that you want us to keep using glyphosate for ever!! Wouldn't it be better for everyone to develop resistance so we can't use the stuff ever again?

Chatty

Not true.

Most of what you say in the previous post ... would seem to be an endorsment of glyphosate... rather than any endorsment of GM crops...

Perhaps, in fact we don't need GM seed at all ... just the glyphosate...

Given the predominance of grains in almost all our food stuffs... and the "unknown" affect of GM plant stuff... perhaps it is the lesser of two evils...

And the developing resistance may be a good thing leading to development of better, and substantively tested alternatives....

I don't hide my opposition to the patenting of genetics in general... or my dispise of Monsanto in particular...

I think their approach the genetics is unethical in concept... and their business model and practices unethical to the point of evilness...

Given the improvment of yields through selective breeding and "no till" methodologies.... any further gains through GM would perhaps appear merely motivated by an unsustainable greed that verges on or exceeds any regard for public safety IMO...

the way things are going, the chemical companies are going to take control, they are doing similar things with live stock I beleive, where the pigs etc have to be feed grain supplied by the chemical companies, some genetic thing, but will do more homework before I open my mouth further, I heard some talk down the local a few weeks ago on the subject

I'm with you on the patent situation rup, taking a gene sequence that has evolved over a 1000 years and making some trival change and claiming the whole lot as your own isn't fostering innovation as the patent system is susposed to.

however i can't understand the fears around genetics. you need to outline some clear concerns rather then just throw out "but what if something bad happens" because it sounds like an irrational fear of the unknown.

Is fear of death an unrational fear. I mean to say I am yet to die , so it is an unknown.

Fear of the unknown and comfort with what we are use to is and will always be a one of our greatest survival instincts.

Then again , if they can genetically modify brussel sprouts to taste like Crayfish , I won't be complaining:)

Very good point, - and there is indeed a difference between unknown and irrational - both aren't mutually inclusive! During Roosevelt's campaign against Herbert Hoover in the 1930s he said: “The Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself”. But in fact there was much more to fear as the fear itself. There were numerous concrete political and social issues and problems at that time. While this abstraction sounded like a relief to many, it was just a rhetorical fallacy to cover-up the fact that depression had reached its depth.

What is to fear with GM crops?
1.There are truly to many unknown unknowns about consequences through possible genetic contaminations and mutations on the short or long run. This is actually not a irrational fear, because:

2. Some (actually many) genetically modified crops are modified to be "resistant" to specific herbicides, which doesn't mean that they don't absorb them with- or without metabolizing them. The target is to sell and legitimate herbicides and pesticides and monopolize seeds that are "resistant" to specific poisons.

3. Worst of all:genetically modified crops are contaminating other crops around the world. Contaminations with genetically modified corn has been detected through many regions of Mexico, where it infected, many local heirloom corn varieties already. Same for soy beans in many countries. These crops are anyway spoilt now, no matter of any subjectivism about possible genetic consequences.

4. I keep that stuff far away from my home, family and entourage! In many countries as in mine, genetically modified crops and vegetables are strictly forbidden for these simple reasons.

PS: I've seen a recent BBC report, where scientist now use "global warming" for a reason to go for genetical manipulations of crops. They simply claim that it would take decades of "traditional" cross-breading to finalize heat resistant wheat and other crops - and that time runs out. They have shown the process of cross breading and how difficult it is to even isolate breeds (results from first and second generation cross-breading) that have the wanted genetic qualities, - only to legitimate GMs of that sort. There is a whole lot of brain washing going on, -even via such (formerly) politically neutral channels. While the average TV-watcher is getting smarter and more skeptical, - the brain washers are even smarter, using nicely smelling, but even stronger bleach that goes deeper and deeper!

Always be watchful and vigilant for all sorts of new fallacies! "They" not only have methods to make you talk - they also have neat-ones to get your attention and make you believe almost any c**p!

Cheers,
Luches

Let me add a few more things here: (correction it should be cross-breeding of course)!

The normal process of "human selection" of breeding and cross-breeding (intentional or "accidental") teaches us, that you can't ever assemble all wanted qualities in a single breed. No matter what you cross-breed, and no matter how long it takes. Simply because nature and evolution doesn't work that way. It's not about perfection of a "singularity", as some may have suspected - it always is about (great) variety! The variety does actually the deal in nature and assures balance and a kind of an harmony in every "kingdom"!

And whatever you may develop, either by selection, cross-breeding or desperately by genetic manipulation, you can't ever reach any real perfection in such way. Perhaps not even real improvement in the long run or in respect of the bigger picture. You just fool yourself by following the idea of being able of developing a perfect single variety. Just because any improvement of some quality, automatically brings some deficiency or disadvantage to some point or extend. You can always compromise, right - but thats what you always have to keep in mind. The compromise you'd make in some case, could perfectly well be a number of unknown unknowns (I love this expression)!