The roundup resistant super weeds... the studies continue

[vfem]

http://www.cals.ncsu.edu/agcomm/new...ntinues-on-managing-the-weed-palmer-amaranth/

Roundup-resistant weeds, like the voracious Palmer amaranth, have left growers with few tools to keep weeds out of their fields. In some cases, these resistant weeds are so invasive they even cut into crop yields. N.C. State weed scientist Dr. Alan York estimates that about half of all Palmer amaranth populations in eastern North Carolina are resistant to glysophate, and about half show resistance to another class of herbicides, ALS (acetolactate sythase) inhibitors. A quarter of all Palmer is believed to be resistant to both types of herbicides.

 

[seedcorn]

So what did they control it with in the past? What ever it was, use it again, end of problem. Did read where they used ALS chemicals and it developed resistance to that series of chemicals.

In 1980, people said, Herbicide resistance is never going to be a problem.

What "people" is he talking about? No one in Agriculture thought that. Glysophates were never potrayed as the forever chemical. Other than that, good article explaining how glysophates work and why they are looking into this current "weed".

 

[vfem]

Iowa finds several roundup resistant weeds:

http://www.extension.iastate.edu/CropNews/2011/0120hartzler.htm

Here's some fabulous documentation and what the foods commercialized by Monsanto actually do for the 'hungry' people of the world. Just found some great information throughout, including resistance claims by Monsanto in 1998.

http://www.ukabc.org/ge_wfs.html

 

[seedcorn]

Having glysophate resistant weeds should make you happy. If glysophates don't work, people won't use it.

As far as the "fabulous documentation", now that is funny. Usual vegetarian argument vs. those of us that eat meat. Article basis is world doesn't need to eat meat, eat grains. No thank you. I'll take my piece of meat with my grains/vegetables.

As far as GMO's haven't increased the supply before GMO's average corn production was under 100 bu/A, now close to 160 bu/A. Too bad these "fair minded" people refuse to acknowledge this piece of info. or even address it.

 

[vfem]

Having glysophate resistant weeds should make you happy. If glysophates don't work, people won't use it.

As far as the "fabulous documentation", now that is funny. Usual vegetarian argument vs. those of us that eat meat. Article basis is world doesn't need to eat meat, eat grains. No thank you. I'll take my piece of meat with my grains/vegetables.

As far as GMO's haven't increased the supply before GMO's average corn production was under 100 bu/A, now close to 160 bu/A. Too bad these "fair minded" people refuse to acknowledge this piece of info. or even address it.

They acknowledged the information just fine, they also pointed out the increase in yield mainly only supplied the fast food industry & animal feed.

These super foods that are sooooo wonderful have grown bigger, and less healthy... but they can withstand and cook brilliantly in a vat of oil.

Maybe if you sat and read some of the information... they did an excellent job in crediting ever bit of their information and where it was found.

I don't know why you have to be so judgmental.

As for the thread, it does point out there is your 'non-existent' super weeds.

 

[wifezilla]

So what did they control it with in the past?

Amaranth is an edible grain and the greens are edible too. I imagine they would just eat it since it was FREE.

 

[seedcorn]

I don't know why you have to be so judgmental.

Now that is funny. I read the same old tired arguments:

Develop super weeds; GMO's are going to cause mutant humans/animals; cancer rate is going to skyrocket; corn can't be fed/eaten; humans should eat grains, no meat; NONE of which are true.

Just because (this thread's reason to be alive) a weed is resistant to glysophate makes it no more a super weed than I'm able to beat a 2 year old in basketball makes me a NBA player.

I imagine they would just eat it since it was FREE.

Way to avoid the question. or are you volunteering to pick every plant before it reaches 1" tall so that it isn't a problem.

 

[wifezilla]

I wasn't avoiding the question (which was how did they control it in the past) just making an observation that things people try to wipe out are often nutritious. Dandelions and purslane are a good examples.

If you don't have a monoculture mindset, what some call weeds, others call free animal feed or dinner.

 

[seedcorn]

A weed is a plant growing in the wrong area, thus needs to be replaced with a preferred plant.

When people will pay farmers for "weeds", we will happily grow them. Until then, you can call it delicious and we'll call them weeds (& kill them).

 

[vfem]

Issue is there were thousands of years where spraying with a vat of chemicals wasn't an option. Wife is right, people figured out what they could forage for quite a bit. Some people still forage for 'weeds' all around the world and they are considered 'gourmet' in super markets and other parts of the world. All while we shoot to kill quickly and efficiently because we have no thought for consequence. Its all for profit, and not for the sake of health.

If there were health and eco friendly options forced on the world... you'd have to think of something else. Of course you'd complain because the work became 'hard' again.

Just because something is easy, doesn't mean its right. I was taught not to take the easy way out... and when I see a problem with something, I point it out.

Work it work, and it pays for itself.