Submitted by TheLieDetectorBro t3_125pvd4 in worldnews
Comments
Senyu t1_je6zndk wrote
Cool, slap them in a hydroponics facility and there'll be even more water savings.
Coupling hydroponics with vitromeat technologies could make every major city in the world self sustaining foodwise while allowing vast amounts of traditional agricultural land to be returned to a natural ecological state.
taptapper t1_je82ji0 wrote
So you're OK in a world without root vegetables
Senyu t1_je8e36z wrote
If hydroponics cannot replicate the conditions necessary to grow root vegetables then some agricultural aspects can remain outside of the cultural preservation of the practice. If root vegetables are a necessity for the environment then they can be exceptions to the process of shifting the bulk of our agriculture to tech like hydroponics & vitromeat. Regardless, moving most of our traditional agriculture to hydroponics + vitromeat is a boon that cannot be ignored simply due to the outstanding ecological & ethical aspects. And with further development the economical aspect would be better than the traditional birth to slaughter/grow on vast amounts of land cycle that we currently use. The logistical cost reduction of making every major city self sustaining not only helps the environment but it gives us a very viable means to actually end world hunger in a more effective manner than our current processes. The benefits of shifting away from traditional agriculture for the bulk of our planet's food needs cannot be ignored.
taptapper t1_je92mkz wrote
> If root vegetables are a necessity for the environment
People in some environments eat roots, some eat seeds. Potato vs rice. There is no single ag solution that applies across the globe.
Increased rice production means nothing to areas that don't eat fucking rice
Senyu t1_jeavb9b wrote
You are greatly misunderstanding the point of coupling hydroponics and vitromeat tech if you are worried about different regional dietary practices. There is no reason why different regions of the world couldn't grow different crops and meat based off their cultural practices. Food facilities simply means more food growing options, including crops that typically aren't grown in a region because the growth environment is contained and not typically susceptible to weather. All it does is open the door to more types of food including the ones already in the region.
Arrrrrr2D2 t1_je8nefq wrote
Vitromeat will cause immense health issues. The concept of a low impact food industry is great but in practice you will see the truth of its value. I agree that the world's method of growing food is hellish but evolving it even farther from nature is not the right path.
Machiavelcro_ t1_je8sc5f wrote
Why do you think this is the case?
Created in a lab environment, isolated from dangerous contamination like e-coli and other bacteria, free from growth hormones, and with the added benefit that you can control the micronutrients in the growth medium, tweaking stuff like the amount of b12.
Let's be objective about things, not take some pseudo religious "we are steering further away from nature" mentality.
Arrrrrr2D2 t1_je8til3 wrote
My background is growing cells in mediums using controlled environments. Even in bsl3 environments contamination is still easy. If they are going to create immortal cell lines like HeLa the meat will literally be cancer cells. The chance of the nutrients being healthy are slim to none. Making a medium is not hard, but sourcing all the ingredients from natural organic sources will not happen in mass production. Religion is not the view point in this, science of man is. I know the science and because of it I'm happy to stick with creation.
Have all the lab grown meat you want.
Senyu t1_jeavt38 wrote
Which is why technology development for this kind of stuff must be aggressively persued. If we want to avoid a rapid fluctuation in our carrying capacity we must shift away from traditional agriculture and further develop our hydroponics and vitromeat technologies. The boons are too important to ignore. We can improve processes.
taptapper t1_je9379r wrote
> isolated from dangerous contamination like e-coli and other bacteria
Stop parroting pseudo science and learn the facts. Most varieties of e-coli are not harmful to people, but since it's presence indicates that harmful bacteria is present it's used as an indicator of danger.
Do you really think all of humanity's food can be grown in buildings? And "isolated"... Go watch Fantastic Fungi and educate yourself. We are part of a web of life with a proper balance between organisms. Hydro facilities spend all their time fighting infections
Arrrrrr2D2 t1_jeacmxp wrote
The truth is, lab grown mediums have to use heavy antibiotics to grow cultures. People who are concerned with antibiotic resistances should be concerned about this.
TestaOnFire t1_jea9rkc wrote
>Hydro facilities spend all their time fighting infections
You mean depuration center or hydroponic?
Machiavelcro_ t1_je9jczp wrote
You sound irrational. Not engaging
GforceDz t1_je922lz wrote
Just thinking about some of the cheap junk food snacks that are made, imagine the meat version of that.
You know how they say banana flavor is based on how bananas used to taste.
Bananas are essentially cloned now and at risk of dying out because of a lack of resistance to disease.
Imagine this happening to lab grown meat.
TestaOnFire t1_jeaalu9 wrote
>Bananas are essentially cloned now
Because banana are sterile. The wild variety have this big seeds that cannot be eaten.
Plus, we still can create resistance to desease in bananas... GMO is the easiest one.
Senyu t1_jeawd03 wrote
Why not have cell stock refreshed now and then so we aren't dependent on a single cell lineage forever? However long a stock cycle may be, we can develop processes that periodically draw fresh cell sources from animals. It's not like farm animals are simply going to disapear, but ideally we can reduce the vast number of farm animals necessary to sustain our planet's food needs.
TestaOnFire t1_jea99i8 wrote
Hello, i am a uni student in agronomy (i dont know if this is the right translation from the italian word "Agronomo, which is basically the expert of vegetable production)
The concept was discussed first by Normann and Vought. The first wanted to basically create an enviroment where vegetable could be grown to the maximum, the second wanted a return to the "nature" of agricolture (putting a cap on the human population).
I personally dont side... But what you claim is totally stupid in any way. There is nothing natural in agricolture if we want to see it from the prospective of "nature".
Arrrrrr2D2 t1_jeabyjw wrote
I didn't say that the world's system of agriculture was natural. Your disrespect is noted.
You are free to defend the progression towards fifteen minute cities. I am free to defend the original growth of plants and animals.
We reap what we sow.
TestaOnFire t1_jeadb41 wrote
>We reap what we sow.
In your case... Nothing, because you cant feed the current population with just gathering erbs in the wild.
Arrrrrr2D2 t1_jeal6ft wrote
WE reap what WE sow.
I think your understanding of that is "We are entitled to other people's work.".
TestaOnFire t1_jeam3jb wrote
Explain the "WE", because you really sound like someone who didnt go to place where famine is a problem.
It's very easy talking about "Oh we should just produce things with the Biological metod" when you live in a country where you dont have to suffer food crysis... But trust me, the problem doesn't end an YOUR steps.
Start by buying only at biological supermarket, let's see if it is really that easy as you claim it is.
Arrrrrr2D2 t1_jeasgyb wrote
I live on a farm. So I can skip the supermarket at will and it is that easy.
"We" is a collective of people.
I am aware of famines. I am also aware of governments playing their part in the bounty of food not reaching those in need. While I don't agree with farming methods or gmo, I do know there is more than enough food to feed people.
What I am calling out as extremely foolish is getting rid of farms (which are the reason you are even alive currently) and believing that a city run industrial farming system will sustain you. What happens when something contaminates or corrupts the food systems? Talk about a food crisis. And that is besides the fact that the food will be extremely unhealthy and cancer causing to the human body.
The truth speaks for itself, and one day you will see the system you are fighting for let you down.
Senyu t1_jeb4u6p wrote
I don't see how food facilities in cities wouldn't be better than vast swaths of farmland that must transport its good. Sure, you raise an important point that there are real risks that must be addressed and of course any facility could have issues. But if the majority of the major cities in the world had food facilities then the issues of one become minimal until it's resolved given there is an overall larger net production of food.
The amount of land used by farms must decrease. While farms won't vanish entirely simply for cultural reasons they must not be solely relied on for feeding the planet in the future. Improving the food quality comes tech improvements, but farmland alone is not sufficient for our current population trajectory.
Arrrrrr2D2 t1_jeb62kf wrote
Prove the nutrition and health of the new technologies before you rush headstrong into it. There are red flags already. Look into the logistics of the new technologies from start to finish also. I do not understand why humanity is wanting to fix nature when it is not broken. Big agriculture is broken. If individuals became stewards of the earth at their own homes, reliance on external food sources would be extremely diminished.
You believe in science and humanity, it is clear.
It is an honor to receive your thoughts in a respectful manner.
Senyu t1_jeb9tr6 wrote
I agree that proof of nutrition and health must be ensured and verified before rollout. All new technological progress comes with hurdles, I have no disillusion that hydroponics and vitromeat tech has its own obstacles. However, I have faith in humanity's ability to solve those problems. I do not believe we can effectively becomes stewards of the Earth at a food production level without drastic population reduction. Our society & infrastructure is simply not geared to supporting individual made food production to meet the planet's needs. We must further develop and implement hydroponics & vitromeat in order to sustain the bulk of our population's food needs with minimal ecological costs to the planet. It has nothing to do with nature being broken or not, it's merely logistics of having a multi-billion sized population. Big Agra is most definitely broken, but even if that was resolved we still have vast amounts of people to feed and the ecological costs of traditional agriculture cannot be ignored simply because it's the way we've always done it.
We can become more effective stewards of the Earth in a general sense if we can off-load the bulk of our food needs to facilities located in every major city of the world. Traditional agriculture will still exist, most likely in a cultural preservation sense. But swaths of traditional agricultural land could be return to a natural ecological state if we implement hydroponics and vitromeat at scale.
TestaOnFire t1_jebuv0y wrote
>I live on a farm.
Good. Now give me some of the vegetable you grow and what system you use... Dont worry, i study this things, so if you want to be specific i can understand.
>What I am calling out as extremely foolish is getting rid of farms
No one wants to get rids of farms. They are not just place to produce foods... Or at least they shouldn't. They should be a part of the society and ecosystem.
>What happens when something contaminates or corrupts the food systems? Talk about a food crisis. And that is besides the fact that the food will be extremely unhealthy and cancer causing to the human body.
This happen faaaaaar more often in uncontrolled enviroment such as Farms... Hey, did you follow all the steps to be sure your soil doesn't have an excess in N? Because that might create a build up of carcinogenic substance in vegetable... But if you stay too low the N will be removed by water being drained...
You know what could solve this problem? If the water wouldn't go away... Oh that's right, a hydroponic.
[deleted] t1_jeca55i wrote
[removed]
Arrrrrr2D2 t1_je8mwik wrote
I feel old knowing how much better plants that grow organically in the ground taste.
chainsaw_monkey t1_je5g0g4 wrote
I have these. Definitely survive better through summer stress but they do not taste as good.
af_echad t1_je69ucr wrote
Where'd you get them? I've been growing a few tomato plants since I was a kid. Used to get great crops but the last few years I feel like the weather has been so wonky that they don't do as well as they used to. Might be fun to play around with these.
LloydAtkinson t1_je6nceo wrote
How do they compare when cooked and in sauces though, that's the important question?
taptapper t1_je82bf5 wrote
Badly
Mellevalaconcha t1_je5vf5v wrote
I've never liked tomatos, so that wouldn't be an issue for others like me
Chiraq_eats t1_je6de31 wrote
Why don't you like tomatoes? Do you like pizza and lasagna, but not raw tomatoes?
Thedudewhosmokedpot t1_je6ej87 wrote
I like pizza and ketchup. Hate raw tomatoes.
838h920 t1_je7c58g wrote
I also prefer them as sauce and not raw.
Mellevalaconcha t1_je8cc7s wrote
Raw tomatos make me gag, can't help it
[deleted] t1_je67kel wrote
[deleted]
HikeEveryMountain t1_je6bwpl wrote
You can probably get seeds now, because if they're expected to hit supermarket shelves in the next year then they must already be growing out huge amounts of seed to sell to farmers. It takes a long time to go from a small amount of seeds to a commercial quantity, multiple plant generations. Home gardeners get access to new varieties sooner because they only need a few seeds, but a commercial farmer probably won't grow them until the seed is easier to get in large quantities.
[deleted] t1_je6cev1 wrote
[deleted]
Horror-Childhood6121 t1_je7f0le wrote
The variety doesnt even have a name yet.
_skank_hunt42 t1_je6q9ik wrote
What is the variety called? Where did you source the seeds? I grow several heat resistant varieties and I’m always looking to expand my seed collection.
Horror-Childhood6121 t1_je7ewvl wrote
Where did you get them? The variety doesn't even hsve a name yet.
SnooTomatoes1445 t1_je7ip45 wrote
My friend who grows Roma tomatoes gets his grafted with roots of something similar to withstand the summer heat.
ArchitectNebulous t1_je5fgtu wrote
I hope we can develop more crops like this. We will need them and alternatives like them in the coming years.
pzkkdr t1_je6wdnl wrote
Are BDS advocates going eat these or?
TheLieDetectorBro OP t1_je6wmpj wrote
Well they have no problems enjoying Israeli technology, Israeli medicine and more... 🤷♂️
howiecash t1_je79wjo wrote
Israeli innovation 💪🏼
autotldr t1_je58wyj wrote
This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 87%. (I'm a bot)
> Israeli researchers have developed a new variety of tomato that is more resistant to drought conditions and could help farmers cope with the destructive impact of climate change.
> An in-depth genetic analysis led by the Hebrew University of Jerusalem's Shai Torgeman and Professor Dani Zamir identified interactions between two areas of the tomato's genome that lead to increased yield and resistance to dry conditions.
> "There is global warming and farmers need tomatoes that can cope with these changing weather conditions," Torgeman explained.
Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: tomato^#1 Torgeman^#2 conditions^#3 tomatoes^#4 genome^#5
underscore_the_42 t1_je7p06j wrote
best title misread I've done...
Israeli scientist develop drought-resistant tornadoes
was thinking, that's odd, I guess there is a use case.
Turnips45 t1_je8ujwb wrote
I misread the title as 'thought-resistant tomatoes'.
ParaMike46 t1_je6r64i wrote
Going to taste like wet red balls right? It’s already difficult to find tasty tomatoes.
GearhedMG t1_je8h5bi wrote
Did they splice it with the genes from a tobacco plant?
HiHoJufro t1_je8wdft wrote
Heh, according to wiki they made the tomacco a real thing in '03.
killerbanshee t1_je74aco wrote
Oh boy, Tatos are becoming a real thing!
taptapper t1_je8274l wrote
I bet they taste like ass. Tomatoes are so tolerant of getting fucked with, it's led to a world of people who don't know what a good tomato tastes like. This will be one of those rock-hard orange things that squish out of BK Whoppers
[deleted] t1_je5ch04 wrote
[removed]
jaybleeze t1_je6na2q wrote
Isn’t this the start of Left Behind?
FrankieBatts t1_je6nk4i wrote
Fascinating research but I’m actually frightened by the prospect of scientists tampering with a tomato genome segment that, when modified through genetic engineering techniques, activates a primitive tomato defense mechanism.
[deleted] t1_je6sb7w wrote
[deleted]
TheLieDetectorBro OP t1_je6sska wrote
And if all fails, mass extinction by tomatoes is at least pretty funny.
FrankieBatts t1_je7d0py wrote
Yes! Attack of the Killer Tomatoes! Late 70s B-movie parody tried to warn us. 😁
FrankieBatts t1_je7wd7q wrote
I was actually referring to the threat of these tomatoes gaining sentience and turning on their former captors (tongue-in-cheek). But your post is genuinely informative. Appreciate the info. 🙏
Horror-Childhood6121 t1_je7fale wrote
No tampering, just cross breeding varieties.
"To achieve this, scientists crossbred two species of tomatoes – a wild variety that comes all the way from the deserts of western Peru, with a common commercial cultivar that is widely available."
[deleted] t1_je8297y wrote
[removed]
superanxietyrabies t1_je6uy04 wrote
I would assume tomatoes were actually chosen partially due to this. They are nightshades, so if something goes wrong they will be incredibly and obviously poisonous, rather than leaving anyone guessing.
TheLieDetectorBro OP t1_je57k5l wrote
> The new variety, expected to hit supermarket shelves in the near future, can grow with half as much water;