Overblog
Seguir este blog
Edit post Administration Create my blog
El polvorín

Amaranto Inca vs Transgénicos de Monsanto

27 Enero 2011 , Escrito por El polvorín Etiquetado en #Politica

Broad use of the weedkiller glyphosphate — particularly Roundup of Monsanto — has led to the rapid growth in of herbicide-resistant weeds like edible Amaranthus palmeri, one lost crop of the Incas.

 

                         

 

 

Amaranto precolombino destruye cosechas de Monsanto, esto significa que tenemos que cuidar nuestros granos andinos porque son despensa alimentaria nuestra.

En lo que parece ser una muestra más de la sabiduría de la naturaleza abriendose camino, la especie de amaranto inca se ha convertido en una pesadilla para Monsanto. Curiosamente esta compañía conocida por sus diabólicas prácticas se refiere a esta hierba sagrada para los incas y los aztecas como una  mala hierba o una hierba maldita. El fenómeno de la expansión del amaranto en cultivos de más de viente Estados a lo largo de Estados Unidos no es nuevo, pero merece ser rescatado.

 

 

File:Amaranthus palmeri.jpg 

Las hojas, tallos y semillas del Amaranthus palmeri, como los de otros amarantos, son comestibles y muy nutritivos. [1] [2] Actualmente, las especies cultivadas y los parientes silvestres de los amarantos (quenopodios), se utilizan localmente como jataco o llipcha (verdura de hoja) en muchas comunidades del área andina. El Amaranthus palmeri  fue ampliamente cultivado y comido por los nativos americanos, tanto como vegetal verde, como por sus semillas abundantes. [2] Otras especies afines de amaranto se han cultivado por sus hojas y semillas durante miles de años en México, América del Sur, el Caribe, África, India y China.

La planta es, sin embargo, puede ser tóxica para el ganado, debido a la presencia de nitratos en las hojas. [3] Amaranthus palmeri  tiene una tendencia a absorber el exceso de nitrógeno en el suelo, y si se cultiva en suelos excesivamente fertilizados, puede contener niveles excesivos de nitratos, incluso para los seres humanos. Al igual que la espinaca y muchos otros vegetales de hojas verdes, las hojas de amaranto también contienen sales de ácido oxálico, el cual puede ser perjudicial para personas con problemas renales si se consume en exceso. [4]

 

Debido a su toxicidad para el ganado, [3] y la familiaridad escasa en los Estados Unidos con los usos del amaranto como alimento, el amaranto Palmer rara vez se consume hoy en día, a pesar de su ubicuidad y resistencia a la sequía. A diferencia de los amarantos de grano y hojas de otras regiones, no se ha cultivado o mejorado aún más mediante la cría agrícolas recientes. [5] Como resultado, la importancia económica de amaranto para los agricultores estadounidenses, ha sido una funesta importancia, como una mala hierba nociva y un competidor a cultivos más comercial, más que como cultivo en sí mismo. [1]

 

————–

 

 

Superweed Inca´s Amaranth

 

The leaves, stems and seeds of Palmer Amaranth, like those of other amaranths, are edible and highly nutritious.[1][2] Palmer amaranth was once widely cultivated and eaten by Native Americans across North America and South America, both for its abundant seeds and as a cooked or dried green vegetable.[2] Other related amaranthus species have been grown as crops for their greens and seeds for thousands of years in Mexico, South America, the Caribbean, Africa, India, and China.

The plant is however toxic to livestock animals, due to the presence of nitrates in the leaves.[3] Palmer amaranth has a tendency to absorb excess soil nitrogen, and if grown in overly fertilized soils, it can therefore contain excessive levels of nitrates, even for humans. Like spinach and many other leafy greens, amaranth leaves also contain oxalic acid, which can be harmful to individuals with kidney problems if consumed in excess.[4]

Because of its toxicity to livestock,[3] and scarce familiarity in the United States with the uses of amaranths as food, Palmer amaranth is rarely consumed nowadays, despite its ubiquity and resistance to drought. Unlike the grain and leaf amaranths of other regions, it has not been cultivated or further improved by recent agricultural breeding. [5] As a result, the primary economic importance of Palmer amaranth to American farmers has been as a noxious weed and a competitor to more marketable crops, rather than as a crop in its own right.[1]

 Notes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amaranthus_palmeri

  1. ^ a b [1], USDA PLANTS Database

    ^ a b [2], Native American Ethnobotany (University of Michigan — Dearborn) ^ a b [3], Cornell University Department of Animal Science, Plants Poisonous to Animals ^ [4], University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Low-Oxalate Diet(pdf)

 

La naturaleza contraataca: amaranto inca devora transgénicos de Monsanto

Hace un corto tiempo, me contaron del “problema” que atravesaba Monsanto, pero tambien que esta situacion constituye una prueba de la contaminacion por flujo genetico.
hoy me pasaron esta informacion: La naturaleza contraataca: amaranto inca devora transgénicos de Monsanto, misma que comparto con ustedes, porque a pesar que se guarda en secreto, esto significa que tenemos que cuidar nuestros granos andinos porque son despensa alimentaria nuestra.

En lo que parece ser una muestra más de la sabiduría de la naturaleza abriendo camino, la especie de amaranto inca se ha convertido en una pesadilla para Monsanto. Curiosamente esta compañía conocida por sus diabólicas prácticas se refiere a esta hierba sagrada para los incas y los aztecas como una  mala hierba o una hierba maldita.

El fenómeno de la expansión del amaranto en cultivos de más de viente estados a lo largo de Estados Unidos no es nuevo, pero merece ser rescatado, acaso celebrando la pericia y quizás hasta la inteligencia de esta planta guerrera que se ha opuesto al gigante de las semillas transgénicas. Desde el 2004 un agricultor en Atlanta se dio cuenta que brotes de amaranto resistían al poderoso herbicida Roundup basado en el glifosato y  devorando campos de soya transgénica. El sitio web de Monsanto recomienda a los agricultores mezclar el glifosato con  herbícidas como el 2,4-D  que fue prohibido en Escandinavia por estar haberse correlacionado con el cáncer.

Es curioso que el New York Times que hace  más de 20 años escribía que el amaranto podía ser el futuro del alimento en el mundo, ahora llama a esta planta una “superweed” o “pigweed” un término despectivo que refleja  una concepción del amaranto como una plaga.

 

Según un grupo de científicos británicos del Centro para la Ecología y la Hidrología, se ha producido una transferencia de genes entre la planta modificada genéticamente y algunas hierbas “indeseables” como el amaranto.

Este hecho contradice las afirmaciones de los defensores de los organismos modificados genéticamente (OMG): que señalan que una hibridación entre una planta modificada genéticamente y una planta no modificada es simplemente “imposible”.

 

El amaranto por cierto posee más proteínas que la soya y además contiene vitaminas A y C. Mientras tanto en Estados Unidos se preocupan de cómo eliminar esta resistente planta que supera a la tecnología de Monsanto: se reproduce en casi cualquier clima, no le afectan enfermedades ni insectos por lo cual no necesita químicos. ¿Acaso no sería mejor que escucharan este mensaje de la naturaleza e intentaran procesar alimentos de amaranto?

Casos como la satanización del amaranto nos hacen pensar que la industria de los alimentos busca simplemente mantener a la población en el peor estado físico posible para que pueda ser devorada por oscuras corporaciones e intereses políticos.

Invasion of the Superweeds

                      pigweed
Palmer amaranth, or pigweed, is a particularly tenacious Roundup-resistant pest that has been known to damage harvesting equipment.
 
It is edible.  Both the leaves, which can be cooked like spinach or made into a leaf concentrate for food, and also the grains, which can be used for baking.

American farmers’ broad use of the weedkiller glyphosphate — particularly Roundup, which was originally made by Monsanto — has led to the rapid growth in recent years of herbicide-resistant weeds. To fight them, farmers are being forced to spray fields with more toxic herbicides, pull weeds by hand and return to more labor-intensive methods like regular plowing.

 

 

weeds

What should farmers do about these superweeds? What does the problem mean for agriculture in the U.S.? Will it temper American agriculture’s enthusiasm for genetically modified crops that are engineered to survive spraying with Roundup?

 
Where Weedkiller Won’t Work
Farmers’ wide use of Roundup, also known as glyphosate, a popular herbicide, has led to the spread of Roundup-resistant weeds across the country. At least 10 species of Roundup-resistant weeds have infested millions of acres in 22 states since 2000.
 
2000
 
 
 
 
2001
 
 
 
 
2002
 
 
 
2003
 
 
 
2004
 
 
 
2005
 
 
 
2006
 
 
 
2007
 
 
 
2008
 
 
 
2009
-
-
-

Where Weedkiller Won’t Work

Farmers’ wide use of Roundup, also known as glyphosate, a popular herbicide, has led to the spread of Roundup-resistant weeds across the country. At least 10 species of Roundup-resistant weeds have infested millions of acres in 22 states since 2000.

http://roomfordebate.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/06/invasion-of-the-superweeds/?ref=energy-environment

We Knew It Was Coming

Michael Pollan

 Michael Pollan, a contributing writer for The Times Magazine and the Knight Professor of Journalism at the University of California, Berkeley, is the author, most recently, of ”Food Rules: An Eater’s Manual.”

Genetically modified crops are not, as Monsanto suggests, a shiny new paradigm. 

Actually, the surprise would have been if these weeds didn’t show up — the only thing in doubt was the timing. The theory of natural selection predicts that resistance will appear whenever you attempt to eradicate a pest or a bacteria using such a heavy-handed approach. And in fact the rise of Roundup resistant weeds was predicted by Marion Nestle in her 2003 book “Safe Food” and by the Union of Concerned Scientists. At the time, Monsanto rejected such predictions as “hypothetical.”

———————————————

Saving Glyphosate Is Essential

Stephen Powles

Stephen Powles is a professor of plant biology at the University of Western Australia.

Yet glyphosate is failing in corn, soybean and cotton crops in the American Midwest and South because of massive overuse. This is also happening in Argentina and Brazil. For some U.S. grain and cotton producers it is already too late: over-reliance on glyphosate has led to the evolution of glyphosate-resistant weeds, and alternative chemical and non-chemical solutions will be required.

—————————

Switch the System

Anna Lappé

 Anna Lappé is the author, most recently, of “Diet for a Hot Planet” and co-founder of the Small Planet Institute and the Small Planet Fund.

Times reporters William Neuman and Andrew Pollack investigate a dangerous and underreported consequence of genetically engineered crops: “tenacious new superweeds.” But the spread of superweeds should surprise no one.

We need to manage weeds and pests through natural processes, not toxic chemicals. 

In 1999, my late father, scientist Marc Lappé and colleague Britt Bailey explained the threat of these superweeds, which “could require greater amounts of more toxic pesticides to manage, and threaten extinction for rare plants and their weedy relatives relied upon for crop and plant biodiversity.” Many others raised this red flag. Their concerns were largely dismissed as the rantings of Luddites or the hand wringing of elites.

———————————–

Diagnosing the Enemy

Scott Swinton

Scott M. Swinton is a professor of agricultural, food and resource economics at Michigan State University. He developed WEEDSIM, a computer program to help farmers choose profitable weed control strategies.

Roundup Ready™ crops let corn and soybean farmers rely on a single weapon. A single weapon is predicable, and any warrior who is predictable is open attack by opponents that can adjust. Roundup resistant weeds have done just that.

A choice between higher environmental costs and higher food costs for nonchemical weed control. 

To overcome these new “super weeds,” farmers need to take a leaf from Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War”: study the opponent and find its weaknesses. The past 30 years of research into weed management have yielded two important keys to understanding the weaknesses of weeds.

The first key is to study the weeds in the crops. How many weeds are there? Just a few weeds may not cause enough crop damage to be worth the effort and cost of weed control. Which weed species are present? All weeds are not equal. Some weeds get bigger and do more damage than others.

—————————————

Diversify Weed Management

Micheal D. K. Owen

Micheal D. K. Owen is a professor of agronomy and an extension weed scientist at Iowa State University. He is the co-author of “The Impact of Genetically Engineered Crops on Farm Sustainability in the United States.”

Weeds, like all organisms, respond to selection pressures imposed by the environment. In this case, the primary selective pressure is the repeated use of one specific herbicide: glyphosate.

If farmers adjust their approach to weed control, they’ll be fine. 

The solution to the problem for farmers who have yet to cause the evolution of glyphosate-resistant weeds is to adopt a more diverse weed management program that includes tactics other than glyphosate. By altering the selection pressure on the weeds, glyphosate resistance will be slow to evolve.

For those increasing number of farmers who have glyphosate-resistant weeds, the solution is similar but more difficult: adopt alternative tactics that will control those weeds. Of course, often these weeds have also evolved resistance to other herbicides, which, again, is attributed to the historic use of one herbicide as the sole management tactic. In this case, weed control may be more challenging and costly.

———————————-

Monsanto now controls 90% + of corn grown in USA by enforcing their patent on the genetically altered corn seeds. Dow Chemical is developing corn and soybeans resistant to 2,4-D, a component of Agent Orange, the defoliant used in the Vietnam War. Giving chemical companies a monopoly on what is planted for the most basic food crops in America seems to me a very, very bad idea. Forget about the weeds, potential water runoff contamination, and the fact that eating genetically altered foods has not been tested long term, spraying defoliants like 2,4-D on cropland will alter human genetics, and not for the good.

Patent protection by Monsanto has been so rigorous that out of the thousands of corn seed extraction machines once available to US farmers, only a few a left according to a recent PBS documentary. And people are afraid to even use those from fear of facing Monsanto lawyers. Is the U.S. government monitoring this at all?

—–

Cultivos Andinos FAO – INTRODUCCION Actualmente, las especies y parientes silvestres se utilizan localmente como jataco o Representación de la planta de quinua (Chenopodium quinoa Willd.
www.rlc.fao.org/es/agricultura/produ/…/cap1.htm

-----

Escribió Malcolm Allison

Compartir este post

Comentar este post