Why
the Most Powerful Thing in the World is a Seed
“The
Seed Underground” is a love letter to the quiet revolutionaries who are saving
our food heritage.
ทำไมสิ่งที่ทรงพลังที่สุดในโลก คือ เมล็ดพันธุ์หนึ่ง
“เมล็ดใต้ดิน”
เป็นจดหมายรักถึงนักปฏิวัติเงียบผู้กำลังปกป้องมรดกอาหารของเรา
โดย
แอ็บบี ควิลเลน
(Photo courtesy of IITA)
Janisse Ray celebrates the local,
organic food movement but fears we’re forgetting something elemental: the
seeds. According to Ray, what is happening with our seeds is not pretty.
Ninety-four percent of vintage open-pollinated fruit and vegetable varieties
have vanished over the last century.
จานิส
เรย์ เฉลิมฉลองขบวนการอาหารอินทรีย์ท้องถิ่น
แต่กลัวว่าพวกเราจะลืมบางอย่างที่เป็นมูลฐาน: เมล็ดพันธุ์. ตามความเห็นของเรยด์,
สิ่งที่กำลังเกิดขึ้นกับเมล็ดของเราไม่น่ารักเลย.
สายพันธุ์ของผลไม้และผักที่ผสมเกสรในที่เปิด 94% ได้สูญหายไปแล้วในศตวรรษที่ผ่านมา.
Ray begins The Seed Underground: A Growing Revolution to Save Food by explaining how we lost our seeds. Feeding ourselves has
always been a burden for humans, she explains. “So when somebody came along and
said, ‘I’ll do that cultivating for you. I’ll save the seeds. You do something
else,’ most of us jumped at the chance to be free.”
เรย์เริ่มต้น
เมล็ดใต้ดิน:
การปฏิวัติที่งอกเงยมากขึ้นเพื่อรักษาอาหาร
ด้วยการอธิบายว่า เราได้สูญเสียเมล็ดพันธุ์ไปอย่างไร. การเลี้ยงดูพวกเรากันเอง
ได้เป็นภาระสำหรับมนุษย์เสมอมา, เธออธิบาย.
“ดังนั้น เมื่อใครคนหนึ่งมาถึงแล้วบอกว่า, ‘ฉันจะทำการเพาะปลูกให้เธอ. ฉันก็จะเก็บเมล็ดของฉัน.
คุณทำอย่างอื่น’, พวกเราส่วนมากกระโดดคว้าโอกาสที่จะได้เป็นอิสระนั้น”.
But, according to Ray, when the
dwindling number of farmers who stayed on the land gave up on saving seeds and
embraced hybridization, genetically modified organisms, and seed patents in
order to make money, we became slaves to multinational corporations like
Monsanto and Syngenta, which now control our food supply.
แต่,
เรย์เห็นว่า, เมื่อจำนวนเกษตรกรที่อยู่ติดดินได้ละทิ้งการรักษาเมล็ด และ
หันไปใช้เมล็ดจดลิขสิทธิ์จากการผสมพันธุ์, ตัดแต่งทางพันธุกรรม
เพื่อทำเงินกำไรมากๆ, เรากลายเป็นทาสของบรรษัทนานาชาติ เช่น มอนซานโต และ
ซินเจนตา, ซึ่งตอนนี้ควบคุมแหล่งอาหารของเรา.
In 2007, 10 companies owned 67
percent of the seed market. These corporations control the playing field,
because they influence the government regulators. They’ve been known to snatch
up little-known varieties of seeds, patent them, and demand royalties from
farmers whose ancestors have grown the crops for centuries. The result is that
our seeds are disappearing, and we miss out on the exquisite tastes and smells
of an enormous variety of fruits and vegetables. More alarmingly, “we strip our
crops of the ability to adapt to change and we put the entire food supply at
risk,” Ray writes. “The more varieties we lose, the closer we slide to the
tipping point of disaster.”
ในปี
2007, 10
บริษัทเป็นเจ้าของตลาดเมล็ดพันธุ์ถึง 67%. บรรษัทเหล่านี้ควบคุมสนามเล่น,
เพราะพวกเขามีอิทธิพลเหนือกลไกควบคุมของรัฐ.
เป็นที่รู้กันว่า พวกเขาได้ฉกฉวยเมล็ดที่คนไม่ค่อยรู้จัก, จดลิขสิทธิ์,
และเรียกร้องค่าลิขสิทธิ์จากเกษตรกร
ผู้ซึ่งบรรพชนได้เพาะปลูกพืชมาหลายศตวรรษ.
ผลคือ เมล็ดพันธุ์ของเรากำลังสูญหายไป,
และเราก็พลาดการลิ้มรสอร่อยเลิศและกลิ่นหอมหวนของผลไม้และผักมหาศาล. ที่น่าตกใจกว่านั้น,
“เราได้ปลดเปลื้องความสามารถของพืชของเราในการปรับตัวต่อการเปลี่ยนแปลง และ
เราได้ทำให้แหล่งอาหารทั้งหมดของเราอยู่ในจุดเสี่ยง”, เรย์เขียน. “ยิ่งเราสูญเสียสายพันธุ์มากขึ้นเท่าไร,
เราก็เลื่อนเข้าไปใกล้จุดตีกลับสู่หายนะ”.
However, The Seed Underground
is not a grim story. It’s a story about seeds, after all, which Ray calls “the
most hopeful thing in the world.” Moreover, it’s a story about a handful of
quirky, charismatic, “quiet, under-the-radar” revolutionaries, who harvest and
stow seeds in the back of refrigerators and freezers across America. Sylvia
Davatz, a Vermont gardener who advocates that local food movements produce and
promote locally grown seeds, calls herself the Imelda Marcos of seeds, because
she has a thousand varieties in her closet. Yanna Fishman, the so-called
sweet-potato queen, toils over a wild garden in the highlands of western North
Carolina, where she grows 40 varieties of sweet potatoes. Dave Cavagnaro, an
Iowan photographer, teaches people to hand-pollinate squash with masking tape
to keep vintage varieties pure.
แต่
เมล็ดใต้ดิน ไม่ใช่นิทานเหี้ยมโหด.
มันเป็นเรื่องราวเกี่ยวกับเมล็ด, ซึ่งเรย์เรียกว่า
“สิ่งที่ให้ความหวังมากที่สุดในโลก”.
ยิ่งกว่านั้น, มันเป็นนิทานเกี่ยวกับนักปฏิวัติประหลาด, มีเสน่ห์, “เงียบกริบ, ภายใต้เรดาร์”, ผู้เก็บเกี่ยวและจัดเก็บเมล็ดในตู้เย็นและตู้แช่แข็งทั่วอเมริกา. ซิลเวีย ดาวาตซ์, นักทำสวนชาวเวอร์มอนต์
ผู้รณรงค์ในขบวนการอาหารท้องถิ่นให้ผลิตและส่งเสริมเมล็ดที่ปลูกในท้องถิ่น,
ขนานนามตัวเองว่า อิเมลดา มาร์กอสแห่งเมล็ดพันธุ์, เพราะเธอมีเมล็ดกว่าหนึ่งพันสายพันธุ์ในตู้ของเธอ. ยานนา ฟิชแมน, ที่เรียกกันว่า
ราชินีแห่งมันฝรั่งหวาน, ตรากตรำในสวนป่าในที่สูงของรัฐนอร์ทแคโรไลนา ฝั่งตะวันตก,
ที่ซึ่งเธอปลูกมันฝรั่งหวาน 40 สายพันธุ์. เดฟ คาวากนาโร, ช่างภาพชาวไอโอวา,
สอนคนให้ผสมเกสรน้ำเต้าด้วยการใช้เทปขาว เพื่อรักษาความบริสุทธิ์ของสายพันธุ์.
Seeds, it turns out, don’t just grow
plants—they build stories, heritage, and history, which tend to be shared every
time seeds pass from hand to hand. So it’s fitting that Ray, an accomplished
nature writer and activist, shares some of her own story in The Seed
Underground. When she was just a child, Ray got her first heirloom seeds
from her grandmother—Jack beans, which resembled eyeballs. At 12 she set a
brush fire trying to clear land for a garden. At 22 she joined Seed Savers Exchange.
เมล็ด
จึงไม่ได้แค่ปลูกเป็นต้นไม้—มันสร้างนิทาน, มรดก, และประวัติศาสตร์,
ซึ่งมักจะถูกแบ่งปันทุกครั้งที่เมล็ดถูกส่งผ่านจากมือหนึ่งไปอีกมือหนึ่ง. ดังนั้น จึงสมควรที่เรย์,
นักเขียนเรื่องราวธรรมชาติที่ประสบความสำเร็จและนักรณรงค์,
แบ่งปันเรื่องราวบางเรื่องของเธอเองในหนังสือ เมล็ดใต้ดิน. เมื่อเธอยังเป็นเด็ก,
เรย์ได้รับมรดาเมล็ดจากคุณย่าของเธอ—เมล็ดขนุน, ซึ่งคล้ายลูกนัยน์ตา. เมื่ออายุ 12 เธอจุดไฟที่แปรง
ด้วยความพยายามที่จะถางพื้นดินเพื่อทำสวน.
เมื่ออายุ 22
เธอเข้าร่วมกลุ่มแลกเปลี่ยนระหว่างผู้รักษาเมล็ด.
Perhaps we learn the most about Ray
from her present-day gardens at Red Earth, her Georgia farm. Ray writes that in
the garden, she is “an animal with a hundred different senses and all of them
are switched on.” She grows crops like Fife Creek Cowhorn okra, Running Conch
cowpea, and Green Glaze collard. Her barn is filled with drying seed heads; her
kitchen is stinky with seeds fermenting. “Seeds proliferate in the freezer, in
my office, in the seed bank, in the garden shed—in jars, credit card envelopes,
coffee cans, medicine bottles, recycled seed packets.”
บางที
เราอาจเรียนรู้เกี่ยวกับเรย์ได้มากที่สุดจากการทำสวนของเธอทุกวันนี้ที่ Red Earth, ฟาร์มของเธอในรัฐจอร์เจีย. เรย์เขียนว่า ในสวน, เธอเป็น
“สัตว์ตัวหนึ่งที่มีประสาทสัมผัสหลากหลายนับร้อย และทั้งหมดก็ถูกเปิด”. เธอปลูกพืช เช่น กระเจี๊ยบ Fife Creek
Cowhorn, ถั่ว Running Conch, และคะน้า Green
Glaze.
ยุ้งของเธอเต็มไปด้วยเมล็ดตากแห้ง;
ครัวของเธอฉุนไปด้วยกลิ่นเมล็ดที่กำลังบูด.
“เมล็ดเพิ่มจำนวนอย่างรวดเร็วในตู้แช่, ในห้องทำงานของฉัน, ในธนาคารเมล็ด,
ในร่มสวน—ในขวดโหล, ซองบัตรเครดิต, กระป๋องกาแฟ, ขวดยา, ซองเมล็ดใช้ใหม่”.
Ray outlines the basics of seed
saving in The Seed Underground, but it is not a how-to book. It’s a call
to action, which often reads like a lyrical love letter to the land and to
varieties of squash and peas most of us have never tasted. It’s also a love
letter to us, Ray’s readers. “Even though I may not know you, I have fallen in
love with you, you who understand that a relationship to the land is powerful,”
she writes.
เรย์เขียนโครงร่างพื้นฐานของการรักษาเมล็ดใน
เมล็ดใต้ดิน, แต่มันไม่ใช่หนังสือสอน ทำอย่างไร. มันเรียกร้องให้ปฏิบัติการ,
ซึ่งมักอ่านคล้ายกับร้อยกรองจดหมายรัก ถึงแผ่นดิน และ ถึงน้ำเต้าและถั่วหลากหลายสายพันธุ์ที่พวกเราไม่เคยลิ้มรส. มันเป็นจดหมายรักถึงพวกเราด้วย,
ผู้อ่านของเรย์.
“แม้ว่าฉันจะไม่รู้จักคุณ, ฉันได้หลงรักคุณแล้ว, คุณผู้เข้าใจว่า
ความสัมพันธ์กับดิน ทรงพลังยิ่ง”, เธอเขียน.
The truth is, Janisse Ray is on a
mission to turn you into a quiet, under-the-radar revolutionary, and if you
read The Seed Underground, she just might succeed. At the very least, you will
look at seeds—tiny, but vital to our survival —differently.
ความจริงคือ,
เจนิส เรย์ กำลังดำเนินภารกิจหนึ่งที่เปลี่ยนคุณให้เป็นนักปฏิวัติที่เงียบกริบ
ภายใต้เรดาร์, และหากคุณอ่าน เมล็ดใต้ดิน, เธออาจทำสำเร็จ. อย่างน้อย, คุณจะมองที่เมล็ด—เม็ดเล็กๆ,
แต่สำคัญมากต่อความอยู่รอดของพวกเรา—ไม่เหมือนเดิมต่อไป.
“A seed makes itself. A seed doesn’t
need a geneticist or hybridist or publicist or matchmaker. But it needs help,”
she writes. “Sometimes it needs a moth or a wasp or a gust of wind. Sometimes
it needs a farm and it needs a farmer. It needs a garden and a gardener. It
needs you.”
“เมล็ดทำตัวของมันเอง. เมล็ดหนึ่งๆ ไม่จำเป็นต้องมีนักพันธุศาสตร์
หรือ นักผสมพันธุ์ หรือ นักประชาสัมพันธ์ หรือ แม่สื่อแม่ชัก. แต่มันต้องการความช่วยเหลือ”, เธอเขียน. “บางทีมันต้องการ ผีเสื้อราตรี หรือ ตัวต่อ
หรือ ลมแรงๆ สักวูบ. บางทีมันต้องการฟาร์ม
และ มันต้องการเกษตรกร.
มันต้องการสวนและคนทำสวน.
มันต้องการคุณ”.
This piece was written for How Cooperatives Are Driving the New Economy, the Spring 2013 issue of YES!
Magazine.
บทความชิ้นนี้
เขียนให้ สหกรณ์กำลังขับเคลื่อนเศรษฐกิจใหม่อย่างไร, ฉบับฤดูใบไม้ผลิ 2013 ของ YES! Magazine.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License
Abby
Quillen is a freelance writer in Eugene, Ore. She blogs at newurbanhabitat.com.
แอ็บบี ควิลเลน เป็นนักเขียนอิสระใน Eugene, Ore. บล็อกของเธอที่ newurbanhabitat.com.
'The relationship to the land is
powerful'
Why else would an extractive elite
scorn those who treasure the land for its social being, when all they want is
the treasure trove?
Note: In order to abscond with the
treasure trove (sans the LIVING treasure - and we see where that has gotten us)
throughout western history the peoples of the accumulated genius of hundreds
and in some cases thousands of years, thoroughly counted generations and their
experiences, the nurturing of so many seeds from so many growing conditions,
the poetic encyclopedic wisdom that is a way of life - all of which is the
deliciously rich dance with SUSTAINABLE ABUNDANCE of Mother Nature - scorned,
impoverished and demonized.
(spoke with the red wigglers last
night - now into 3rd generation of worms and first harvest of urban apartment
compost soil. Smells like heaven and seeds are coming up )
ubetcha...
thinkin of you out there on the land, and using coffee grounds to keep the
compost loose - works surprisingly well so far - we'll see how it does over
time - haven't forgotten your note about potential denseness of the compost :)
Oder 81, basically makes it illegal
for Iraqis to save seeds, making them beholden to US and Euro Multinational
Corporations, such as Monsanto and Syngenta. This is perhaps the most damaging
imperialistic over-reach since Romans plowed salt into their enemies fields.
Corporations run our government as
if it were their "Human Resources Department" designed to manage us,
the 99%, where in place of HR policies, we have laws and court decisions
written by the powerful few to control us.
We'll all just go along to get along
until the day comes when we have to choose between buying food or buying toilet
paper -- that is the time when the people of the developed world will have had
too much: "Hmmm...If I buy the food I will also need the toilet paper, if
I buy the toilet paper, it will go unused as my stomach will be empty..."
This is the logic of the next, final revolution.
Order
81 makes it illegal to harvest and plant the seeds from privatized varieties,
not illegal to "save seeds." It is the privatization of crop
varieties that is the problem.
The most powerful thing in the world
is the seed of our common humanity.
When the human community is able to
envision the power and glory of a united effort to create a just and peaceful
environment, that is a seed that will grow and thrive.
"farmers who stayed on the land
gave up on saving seeds and embraced hybridization, genetically modified
organisms, and seed patents"
This is the second time I have seen
commentary on Common Dreams refer to "hybridization" as being equal
to genetic modification. It is confusing, and to me it shows that the writers
do not fully understand what they are writing about.
Hybridization is an entirely neutral
process that breeds plants in exactly the same way that humans breed animals to
reinforce certain characteristics and diminish or eliminate others.
The only other option apart from
seeds that are a hybrid is using entirely 'species' seeds, or, what most people
call "wild" plants. They are plants that grow exactly as nature
created them. If it's not "wild," then it is a result of intentional
or accidental "hybridization." It is the difference between wild
roses, like woodsii, and a David Austin bloom that is full, fragrant, and
repeat flowering. Both are great!
To me, this shows how little people now understand the most rudimentary information about plants and food.
To me, this shows how little people now understand the most rudimentary information about plants and food.
Hybridization"
is not so benign as you may think. You cannot really save hybrid seeds and have
a reliable result. Also, some hybrids have been twisted almost to the extent of
genetic modification.
The
term of art you're struggling to find when you refer to "wild" plants
is "open pollinated." If you want to grow out and save seed from seed
you buy, always seek "open pollinated" seed. It may be marked
as "OP" in seed catalogues. Also, avoid seed labeled "F1,"
which are hybrids that will almost certainly not be like the parent plant after
you save the seed.
To
summarize: hybrid seeds are not quite as bad as GMO seed, but they are certainly
part of the big-agribusiness industrialized food system.
Correct,
you cannot save hybrid seeds and have a reliable result. There is nothing
"hybrid" about the seeds, that is why they do not produce
"reliable" results. "Hybrid" means "variety that we
like and try to propagate." That is sometimes created intentionally by
controlled pollination. Some crops grow "true to seed" and some do
not.
Varietal
selection goes back over ten thousand years.
All
seed is "open pollinated" unless pollination has been restricted.
Tomatoes,
peppers, beans and peas are self-pollinating, Therefore, they are likely to
grow true to seed.
Plants
with separate male and female flowers, like corn and vine crops, may
cross-pollinate. Cucumbers, melons, squash, pumpkins, and gourds can all be
cross-pollinated. That means that they will not grow true to seed - the seeds
they produce will not be of the same variety as the plant that produced them.
This is also true of fruit.
Therefore,
the idea that "hybrid" seeds should be avoided, and "open
pollinated" always preferred in order to "save" anything, or in
order to get "reliable" results, is not true.
Seeds
from hybrid apples, for example, which includes some 7,000 varieties just known
in the US, and many thousands of varieties some of which go back centuries, are
open pollinated and will not produce reliable results, nor will they produce
hybrid apples, nor will they grow true to variety.
It
is possible to stabilize seeds from hybrid plants, just as we do breeds of
animals, through generations of selective breeding. You will get phenotypes
even with stable genetics from hybridized varieties, as we do with dogs. Most
farmers/breeders just pick the type they prefer and they use that for their
crop or their next papa dog.
I
can see it now, masses of well-intentioned but misinformed greenies demanding
non-hybrid seeds for their gardens.
Well,
I was farming as soon as I could walk. I do not consider myself
"misinformed." And I avoid F1 hybrids -- which are the hybrids you
get from seed catalogues.
"F1"
is the first generation seed or offspring of a hybrid plant or animal. So, it
is a second-generation hybrid plant.
The
parent of an F1 hybrid is ALSO a hybrid.
I
don't care where you buy anything. But when it comes to plants, if you are not
using seeds from "SPECIES" plants, meaning from "wild" or
"Native" plants, then your seeds are from hybrid plants.
Maybe some people only know enough to buy seeds and plant them, but good farmers know more. Good farmers have always been breeders, too.
Maybe some people only know enough to buy seeds and plant them, but good farmers know more. Good farmers have always been breeders, too.
I
see I got marked down. Was it the complexity of the information regarding
stabilizing phenotypes after generations of selective hybridization?
No,
it was because you don't feel misinformed. But you think that "F1 hybrids
-- which are the hybrids you get from seed catalogues.
A
Goldendoodle can be an F1 hybrid. If you don't know that much, and why it could
be a problem, then you shouldn't be correcting others because you don't know
enough.
Perhaps
you got marked down because you are demeaning, haughty and rude, instead of
being cheerfully informative.
However,
information, cheerful or otherwise, doesn't appear to be your strong suit.
Compared to your comment regarding "F1 hybrids - . . . you get from seed
catalogs," ANY substantive information looks haughty and demeaning.
I
didn't find your correction of me, deciding that I really meant "open
pollination" instead of "species" varieties to be so very
humble, either. It takes some real arrogance to decide that you know more what
someone else means than they do. In addition, you decide I'm
"struggling" with terms I don't understand.
*That*
is haughty and rude! Now that is arrogance!
You
are wrong with your information, you are correcting someone who is not wrong
with theirs, you know more than they do what they mean, and you characterize
them as "struggling."
You
need to work in your own garden in more ways than one.
Providing
that the plant is self-pollinating or breeding is somehow controlled, yes. If
it is subject to cross-pollination with other varieties, as is almost always
the case, then each new generation is a genetic "crap shoot."
I
always get worried when "saving" something becomes trendy. Once
something becomes an upscale suburban fad, as seed-saving has definitely
become, and the "entrepreneurs" get involved, as they always do, you
can be sure that whatever it is that is being "saved" will be placed
in great danger and soon be destroyed.
Actually,
it's how we do it. It is easiest when plants are self-pollinating. You grow the
offspring, find the ones that look most like you want them to, and
self-pollinate those, or use the parent plant again, or another seedling that
is from the same parent, there are multiple options to do it, to reduce the
genetic variety even more. Do that enough and you will get seeds that breed
true to type. Or, true enough.
It's
how we are able to produce seeds that grow plants that look like they should
when they are hybrids of some sort, which nearly all our plants are.
Otherwise,
as you know, all our seeds would be a total crap shoot beyond the original
parent plant. As you wrote above, your self-pollinating plants are more likely
to breed true to type, but if they are hybrids themselves of only a few
generations they may not at all. They may very well produce seeds that revert
back to older, previously unseen characteristics.
I've
always found the whole breeding process interesting, because people I have
talked to who have produced their own varieties of plants all work with certain
genetics that they know produce "true." Some plants, no matter how
great they are, cannot produce a similar plant. They just cannot pass their
traits on. This is true in animal husbandry, too. Some animals that are
fantastic animals cannot pass their genetic traits on. They are a one-shot
wonder.
Other
plants may be very marginal in their own right, but they can be relied upon to
confer certain very desirable traits upon their offspring. As garden specimens
or a fruit (like a berry), or a vegetable, they are terrible. But they are a
component in many other, far better plants.
Some
plants are great as "mothers" (pollen receivers and where the seed
will be produced) but terrible as "fathers" (pollen contributors),and
vice versa, regardless of any other characteristics they may have.
So,
when we get a great variety of a plant that is a hybrid but also breeds true to
type, we have something that some real work has gone into.
A
great trivia thing I learned from Mr. Moore at his nursery that was among the
most interesting of the things he told me was that his tiniest miniatures,
often called "micro" miniatures, all have within their genetic heritage
one of the largest climbing roses on the planet, one so large it can reach over
20 and 30 feet and is in fact a "rambler," the largest type of
climbing rose. This huge rose, which is a species rose, when bred, produces the
smallest of miniatures. (You just never know until it grows!)
He
also told me - for all you rosarians out there - that his original breeding
stock did NOT come from rouletti, as is commonly reported in virtually all the
literature. The common belief in even authoritative tomes on roses is that all
miniatures known today came from a single miniature rose ~ rouletti. Mr. Moore,
the first modern breeder of miniature roses, told me that his original breeding
stock came from rosa chinesis minima or minimus, a species rose from China.
It
is not saving seeds that is "trendy." Humans have been saving
seed for some 10,000 years or more. It's only been since the widespread
adoption of fossil sunlight that buying seeds has become "trendy."
A
reversion to the mean is inevitable.
The
seed saving fad and traditional seed saving are two different things with
little if any connection to one another.
There
is nothing magical about taking the seeds from your own crop as opposed to
picking it up at the local seed coop.
We
get heirloom seeds every year from a company in Maine, Fedco.
"Welcome
to Fedco Seeds, your source for cold-hardy selections especially adapted to our
demanding Northeast climate. Each year we observe hundreds of varieties,
selecting only the best for inclusion in our catalogs. Through our product
lines and cultural hints, we encourage sustainable growing methods. We offer a
large selection of certified organic cultivars and regional heirloom
varieties."
"We
are a cooperative, one of the few seed companies so organized in the United
States. Because we do not have an individual owner or beneficiary, profit is
not our primary goal. Consumers own 60% of the cooperative and worker members
40%. Consumer and worker members share proportionately in the cooperative’s
profits through our annual patronage dividends."
"Our
cooperative structure gives workers a real voice in running the company and a
real stake in its success, enabling us to attract and retain talented workers.
Year after year our staff turnover has been very low."
Should
we stop supporting that company and spend hundreds of hours extracting,
cleaning, and storing seeds from our own crops so that we can be "seed
savers?"
Spring
has finally come to this part of the world and I've been doing the usual hard
labor -- much loved despite the aches and pains and blisters -- to prepare for
the next nature-given bounty. So with a little hesitation -- because there is
no more private means of talking with you -- I relay to you a conventional rule
of quotation which may make things easier for you in the future: When quoting
extensively, place quotation marks at the beginning of each paragraph, but not
at the end of each paragraph, until you arrive at the final paragraph, and then
use a closing quotation mark. This is picayune, irrelevant to content, but it
is a convention that may lend more authority to your well-thought-out views.
Happy spring, Two Americas. May all of your gardens always grow bountifully.
Happy spring, Two Americas. May all of your gardens always grow bountifully.
Thanks.
Yes, I know better. Good catch.
Snow
today, frost tonight,. Spring will be here soon.
Happy
spring to you, as well, and a bountiful season for you.
No,
the term I am not struggling to find is "open pollinated."
I
refer to "wild' plants as exactly what they are - they are
"species," or "landrace," or "native" or other terms
that are used to describe original varieties. They are
"open-pollinated" if that is the type of plant they are, but so are
many hybridized plants. And yes, you are correct, you won't get the exact same
plant from a hybridized seed *unless* it has had several generations of
development to stabilize the genetics. But to say that seeds from hybridized
plants never produce reliable phenotypes is wildly incorrect.
Hybridization
is the purposeful cross-pollination of two varieties of plants to create a third.
Nearly all, if not virtually all of our edibles are hybrid plants of some sort.
Heirloom tomatoes and potatoes are all hybrid plants. None of them are species
varieties.
If
it is not a native/species/wild plant, it is a hybrid of some sort. It may have
been stabilized through generations of development to produce relilable
phenotypes, but it is a hybrid plant variety.
Hybridization,
as with fruit and roses, is not always the result of purposeful
cross-pollination of two varieties. Cross-pollination is going on all the time,
and each and every seed represents a potential new and different hybrid. Many
varieties arise as "pippins" on their own, and are then discovered,
selected and propagated.
TA,
I think that hybridization is usually considered purposeful cross-pollination.
Cross-pollination can occur naturally or artifically, but hybridization is
purposeful. I could be wrong on that, but all the definitions I find indicate
that "hybridization" is cross-pollination with intent.
However,
the results, whether accidental or on purpose, are always "hybrids."
I
go back to my main point being the lack of understanding among most people
about basic agriculture and horticulture - the thing we need to feed ourselves.
I
really appreciate your contributions here and the wonderful information you
provided about plants in your posts. Roses and fruit trees are great examples
of common plants we use that are almost all hybridized varieties.
Roses,
of course, can be self-pollinated or cross-pollinated. Even self-pollinated
roses, however, will throw new varieties unless it is a wild rose, because all
our roses are hybrids of other varieties, almost always other hybrid roses. I'm
not aware of any wild roses, actually, that are used in the development of new
roses.
With
the legalization of cannabis in Washington and Colorado, I think there's going
to be a boom in hybridizing new varieties of marijuana, I mean beyond what
already exists. ;)
My
knowledge and experience is mostly with fruit, so I will stick to that. Tree
fruit species are in the rose family, so much of this applies to roses as well.
Most
fruit is not self-fertile, that is to say that not only will a fruit tree not
fertilize itself, it won't fertilize another tree of the same variety. Two or
more varieties must be planted in close proximity to one another in order for
the trees to bear.
We
can take an example, let's say the "Northern Spy" apple variety. That
variety was originally discovered as a "chance seedling," (called a
"pippin" in England) in New York state about 250 years ago, if memory
serves. Every Northern Spy apple tree today is directly from that one original
tree, and this is true of all varieties. Propagation is through grafting, so in
essence every tree of the same variety is the same organism, or a clone of that
original tree. The variety will not pollinate and fertilize itself, nor any
other Northern Spy tree, and every seed from every apple produced by those
trees is different - is a different variety. None of those seeds from a
Northern Spy apple will grow a Northern Spy apple tree.
Many,
many fruit varieties originated as chance seedlings.
Intentional
breeding is done by restricting pollination so that it only happens between two
varieties. This is a time-consuming and laborious process. A block of trees is
covered with netting so that only the pollen from the two varieties can be
interchanged during bloom. Then, the seeds are taken from the resultant fruit
and those seeds are planted. Each of those seeds grows a different variety,
different from one another and different from both of the parents. Each of
those offspring trees will bear fruit of unique qualities, different from all
of the other trees even though they all have the same parents.
With
apples, Spartan, Macoun, Honeycrisp, Pink Lady, and Gala are some examples of
varieties from breeding programs. McIntosh, Golden Delicious, and Jonathon are
examples of chance seedlings.
All
of them are "hybrids" regardless of how they arose.
I
knew that about apples, that you need two varieties, but I have never grown
apples and am not familiar as you are.
Yes,
they are all hybrids regardless of whether it was intentional or not. That is
why the seeds won't be exactly true to type.
The
same is true of roses, as I wrote above, that the seeds will produce a
different plant as you describe with apples, even if it is a self-pollinated
rose. That is because of the genetic diversity in its background.
We
call new varieties of roses that come about that way "sports," if
they occur naturally, and some sports are superior to the parent plant, but
very, very few. Most are inferior. If you read rose catalogs, however, they
usually tell the reader if a variety is a sport, or they provide the plant's
parentage if known.
I
once visited the public nursery of a very famous rose hybridizer - Ralph Moore,
the first modern breeder of miniature roses. I got unbelievably lucky and
happened to encounter a very elderly Mr. Moore whose house was on the grounds.
I told him I was visiting central California from Alaska and I had driven over
70 miles from where I was staying to visit his greenhouse. When Mr. Moore heard
this he very generously took me on a personal tour that lasted about an hour
and a half and gave me a wealth of information about his own work and its
history, some history of roses that I did not know and would not be able to find
anywhere, and information on all the famous rose hybridizers around the world
at that time, including Sam McGredy and others (McGredy has produced some of
the most beautiful modern roses in existence). He showed me very rare species
roses he had collected and that existed nowhere now but his greenhouse, and
some roses he had in development.
It
was so awesome. This encounter took place in the mid-90s. Mr. Moore had been
developing roses since the 30s and before! He was one of the giants of the
field, and I count my time with him one of my best experiences ever.
Thanks
for the interesting stories.
We
have "sports" in fruit, as well. They occur pretty frequently -
sometimes one branch will have fruit on it that is quite different from that on
the rest of the tree. The nurseries are always looking for "high
color" sports, and then trademarking and marketing them. Often the
"improved" appearance - brighter color - comes at the expense of
flavor and nutrition. But the entire industry is still locked into a certain
mindset about that. Europeans say that people in the US judge and select food
with their eyes, and not their taste buds.
Seeds
from hybrid plants are not bad at all. You can take all those F1 seeds that
likely won't breed true to type and plant them. If you get any that look good,
breed those to each other, back to the parent plant, or, if self-pollinating,
breed them to themselves. Do it a few times. Soon, if you are lucky, and a
little skilled, you will have your own variety of plant that does breed true to
type.
It
is normal that F1 plants won't breed true to type, but that does not mean it's
a scam by industrialized food. Think of dogs and the new designer breeds, like
a labradoodle. A labradoodle is a true "hybrid." It is an even cross
of two different breeds.
Two
"hybrid labradoodles" bred together will produce an "F1 hybrid
labradoodle," or a first generation beyond the initial hybrid dog. What
happens at the F1 point? Remember the Mendel experiment with peas? If we follow
Mendel the odds are at the F1 point, if our litter is comprised of four dogs,
two dogs will look like true crosses - labradoodles, one will be more poodle,
and one will be truer to the lab breed.
This
is because at this point an offspring takes half its genetic material from each
hybrid parent, and that half may not be half of each half. In other words, an
F1 puppy will not necessarily receive equal amounts of poodle and lab from each
of the hybrid parent dogs. A puppy from two hybrid dogs may receive
predominately only the poodle or the lab, creating a dog that is, in fact,
about 3/4 of one breed and about 1/4 of the other, or even nearly all one breed
or all kinds of other combinations. It is, as Two Americas wrote, a crap shoot.
At that point other genetic characteristics that are far back may appear, and
you might start to find traits that don't appear in either breed of dog, but
exist in their ancestry.
Seeds
work much the same way and this is why F1 seeds may not give you a plant you
want in the same way that an F1 labradoodle might look almost exactly like a
lab and almost nothing at all like a poodle, and you were asking for something
with more poodle in it.
"Species"
is a science and biology term that means a wild, native or otherwise
uncultivated and unhybridized plant. "Open pollinated" is a plant
that is pollinated by other plants by wind, animal, or insect, etc. Hybrid
plants can be open pollinated, as can species plants, or they may not. One
characteristic is not dependent on the other.
Open
pollinated plants may not breed true to type at all! It depends on the pollen
they are pollinated with. If you have a neighbor with a very different kind of
tomato and a bee travels from your neighbor's yard to yours and pollinates your
plants, your seeds will not produce the plants you expect. Mostly, however, if
you have an open pollination crop and you have sufficient distance from your
neighbors, you should be able to save seeds indefinitely with an occasional
cross that you don't want, or maybe you do!
Hybrid
plants cannot be "twisted almost to the extent of genetic modification."
Genetic modification as we use the term in connection with Monsanto and others
concerns splicing genes and other alterations that could never occur in nature.
In
fact, it is the exact opposite, and hybrid plants as well as animals often show
"hybrid vigor" that enhances the very best of the traits received
from both parents.
Hybridization
is the entirely natural process of simply cross-pollinating similar plants to
produce a new variety. Cross-pollination happens in nature without our help all
the time. When we are farmers or gardeners beyond the most rudimentary basics,
we will all be on the lookout for that chance seedling that is stronger,
bigger, earlier, and better tasting than the rest of the crop. Farmers have
been doing this for thousands of years, whether they understood the mechanics
or did it on purpose or not. It's why none of our current commercial crops for
anything, just about, are made up of "species" varieties of plants.
We are all eating plants that are hybrids of one sort or another with every
mouthful.
When
you save seeds from your desirable plants and plant them, you are reinforcing
the genetics and the type of plant you want. Whether the plants are
self-pollinated or pollinated by other plants of the same variety does not
matter. At that point you are reinforcing the variety characteristics and
reducing genetic variation even more.
Give
a little more thought to the process, learn a little more, given that you're
already saving seeds, and you might create your own variety of garden vegetable
or flower that you can name after your loved ones. Learn to strip the pollen
from one flower and introduce it to another. Plant the seeds of your favorite
F1 plants that aren't stable and see if you can, in a few generations, get
something that is.
Heck,
you might become the next David Austin of green beans! And that would be about
as cool as it gets. I would rather be David Austin than a movie star. The money
might actually be better, and the lifestyle is sublime.
Yes.
I never understood this "seed saving" mania, other than that is has
great appeal to upscale suburbanites and has become quite a cash industry. It
has some child like magical appeal.
What
is being saved by serious people, including an important project at Oregon
State University is varieties, which are of course hybrids. Many crop varieties
- fruit for example - do not grow true to variety from seed.
"Open
pollinated" is nothing to "save" since by definition it means a
variety of undetermined qualities.
I
don't know where people imagine seeds are in danger of "going" so
that they need "saving." What would happen to seeds if they were not"saved?"
Lost to the universe? I guess if they were not "saved" then they
would be left just laying around on the ground. In the modern suburban
mentality something left laying around on the ground is "wasted" and
needs to be "saved." But in reality, seeds left laying around on the
ground become part of the seed bank and plants grow from that.
Part
of the excellent argument against plant patents is that Monsanto and others
have not created their seeds from species varieties at all. They have taken
seeds from popular and successful varieties that have been developed over
generations, usually by many, many farmers. They then add one thing. Then, they
own it all.
Not
right, it's not. Not right at all.
And
the gene(s) they add are dangerous. Even if rats weren't dying from tumors when
fed GMO food, many of the "species" can withstand lots of Roundup or
other pesticide, which means we get more pesticide in our food.
Or
the plant makes its own pesticide, which we eat.
As
you say, not right at all.
Absolutely
correct! Thank you.
Why
the disparaging comments about people who save seeds? I may be misinterpreting
your tone, but it sounds holier than thou, or in this case "smarter than
thou" to me. Could you clarify what your objection is? Thanks.
I
think you both have points, and benefits of seed saving aren't always equal,
depending on the plant and the property and the person.
We
need to save seeds, or, as Two Americas writes, at least have someone who is
very good at it do it for us. And while I do believe that the very best farmers
are also breeders, the truth is farming and plant breeding and seed development
are two different skill sets that actually require different spaces and
different knowledge. A good farmer knows her crop, her soil, her growing
conditions, pest and disease management, yield objectives and requirements, the
plant's moisture and nutrient needs, etc.
Someone
who understands seeds, however, knows which ones breed "true," and
which characteristics are dominant when, the genetics and history of the variety,
and other things that have nothing to do with actually growing the plant.
It
also depends on your growing motives and set-up. It depends on how your crop is
pollinated, how close your neighbors are and what they are growing, and what
your objectives are.
Typically,
in the past at least, small-scale subsistence farmers who produced crops for
themselves and a limited market were more involved in seed saving. Those
earlier small farmers were very careful with the seeds they chose to keep.
However, if a grower is not really knowledgeable about plant hybridization,
saving their own seeds from open-pollinated plants can lead to worse plants,
not better. They do not have any way of being certain as to what pollen has
landed on their outdoor plants. No matter how many seeds you save you have
limited space in which to plant them and you will only use a fraction of what
is possible, so you want to know that your seeds will produce what you expect.
And
some genuinely skilled farmers just don't want to be bothered. They want to
grow stuff, not breed plants or protect their seed stock (which can be
difficult with any crop grown outdoors), and they want Jack and Jill nursery
down the street to do all their seed stuff for them, and that is okay. They are
more likely to be commercial farmers, because anyone who does it as a lifestyle
almost cannot help trying to improve their little crops. It's just too much fun
and it is how most plant variety improvements came about in the past back to
the dawn of agriculture!
There
is nothing at all wrong with saving seeds. But seed saving might not meet all
your needs. If you are serious about growing plants for any reason, a far
greater understanding of horticulture and how plant varieties develop is
needed, or your ability to save the best seeds or protect your seeds from
corruption will be diminished.
As
I suspected, "seed saving" is becoming a trendy fad, an increasingly
commercialized fad, connected to personal belief systems and emotions. That is
the only way that someone could read my comments as "disparaging people
who save seeds," as though I were personally insulting someone.
Historically,
saving seeds, especially with grain and some vegetables, was for the purpose of
limiting genetic diversity to get more reliable results. In gardening, as
described by jane tao, seed saving is used to create and propagate desirable bloom
qualities. I am not disparaging anyone who does those things.
The
word "saving" in "seed saving" means owning, controlling,
limiting and profiting. It means trying to preserve certain desirable qualities
in plants. It should not be presented as an alternative to modern agriculture.
It is the foundation of modern agriculture - attempts to control plant
genetics. It should not be presented as an alternative to "hybrids."
It should not be presented as though it were saving species. It should not be
presented as though it were preserving genetic diversity.
Just
because I am trying to encourage some intelligent and knowledgeable discussion
on this topic does not mean I am trying to be "smarter than thou,"
whatever that means. The poster jane tao knows a lot more about rose
propagation and breeding than I do. I am grateful for her comments, and don't
think she is trying be "smarter than thou."
Historically,
saving seeds, especially with grain and some vegetables, was for the purpose of
limiting genetic diversity to get more reliable results.
Huh?
I thought it was for the purpose of planting next year's crop. At least, that's
why my Dad saved and re-planted seeds when I was a kid.
The
word "saving" in "seed saving" means owning, controlling,
limiting and profiting.
Not
according to Wikipedia,
nor according to any of the half-million
Google hits I looked at. These pages speak of
"self-reliance" and "self-sufficiency" for your "home
and community" and for "peoples world-wide." None of the links I
looked at had anything to do with "owning, controlling, limiting and
profiting."
It
seems to me that you have made up your own definition of "seed
saving" that is not supported in the vernacular.
Would
you be so kind as to look over some of the links on "seed saving,"
and explain how you come by your stance?
Of
course. It has become a fad and Google results become packed with sites that
reflect that. I don't know how you could miss that phenomenon with Google. In
order to get decent results one needs to be aware of that. "Self
sufficiency" is a nice-sounding liberal buzzword. This "self
sufficiency" individualism idea stands in stark contrast to traditional cooperative
and communal agricultural activities.
The
"vernacular," the popular buzz in the US is created and controlled by
marketers and hucksters and propagandists. It is not trustworthy.
I
spent the morning reading all of the sites that were top results in Google from
the search criteria "seed saving."
Yes,
saving seed is for the purpose of planting next year's crop with the desired
qualities. That means controlling and limiting genetic diversity, by
definition. That means "owning, controlling, limiting and profiting."
Of course. I am sure your Dad thought of that seed as "his" - he owned
it. I am sure that his goal was to control which seeds germinated. I am
sure that he wanted to limit the varieties that he planted and tended to
those with the desired qualities. I am sure that he hoped to sell his crop at a
profit.
My,
my. You are "sure" of so many things! It must be nice. The older I
get, the more things I'm less sure of!
We're
going to have to agree to disagree.
What
do we disagree about?
"Feeding ourselves has always
been a burden for humans, she explains. “So when somebody came along and said,
‘I’ll do that cultivating for you. I’ll save the seeds. You do something else,’
most of us jumped at the chance to be free.”
The same reasoning applies to
governing ourselves. We jumped at the chance to be free by turning government
over to corrupted politicians. There are no longer technical reasons we cannot
govern ourselves by electronic consensus, as grassroots as is possible.
One of my best finds once at an
estate sale in the 80s was a box on the free pile of old seeds in jars and
envelopes. It appears grandma saved seeds and the kids thought they had no
value. I would have paid for them. But since it was on the free pile I snagged
them and they are safely rescued. I've since shared them with friends that
promised to let at least part of the crop seed and save the seeds. Grandma
didn't know the names of a lot of the seeds and made up labels like fast
growing red flower, etc.. Having a horticultural background I could identify
them once they came up. There were some marvelous things in that box. Some not
so marvelous like kudzu.
LOL
Kudzu
is most DEFINITELY not so marvelous. Having spent most of my life in the south,
I can attest to it! From late spring to early fall, this non-native invasive
vine grows up to a foot every day. I've seen it completely envelope large
buildings in a single summer. What WAS Charles Pleas thinking?
You
southerners kill me.Do you know how many uses there are for kudzu? You treat it
like a weed. It produces more food per acre than most crops, and it is
medicinal. Plus you can make booze out of it if I remember correctly. If kudzu
is eating the south, the south should eat it back.
I
grew up down south, and I ate the hell out of that stuff.
You
can make hooch from kudzu? Who'd a thunkit?
I knew kudzu was a good livestock feed, but since I'm neither a goat nor a cow (despite what some folks may say to the contrary), I've never eaten it. Do you have to cook it like poke salat (which I love!), or can it be eaten raw in a salad? I will have to try some. Heaven knows there's a healthy kudzu crop growing on the ridge across from mine. I've watched it "progress" day by day...by day...by day...since a sprig of it "accidently" hitchhiked in (I suspect) on a piece of logging equipment about five years ago.
I knew kudzu was a good livestock feed, but since I'm neither a goat nor a cow (despite what some folks may say to the contrary), I've never eaten it. Do you have to cook it like poke salat (which I love!), or can it be eaten raw in a salad? I will have to try some. Heaven knows there's a healthy kudzu crop growing on the ridge across from mine. I've watched it "progress" day by day...by day...by day...since a sprig of it "accidently" hitchhiked in (I suspect) on a piece of logging equipment about five years ago.
"
If kudzu is eating the south, the south should eat it back. "
That's cute. Good comment.
That's cute. Good comment.
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น