by Anastasia on 14 October 2008 One topic of this blog is the graduate student experience, with the aim of passing on a little advice to prospective graduate students. The lesson for today is: stand up for yourself.
Today was the Seventh Annual Norman Borlaug Lectureship Poster Competition For Graduate and Undergraduate Students. I was very excited about the competition this year, because my research is very important to world food issues. The poster is: Characterizing seed storage proteins in teosinte and tripsicum, with the objective statement “To find unique seed storage proteins in relatives of maize that might be used to improve maize nutritional qualities.” I like to imagine that Norm Borlaug would approve. I purposefully chose a table at the opening of the room, just as I did last year, so I would be easily noticeable. I even brought samples of the seed so people could see for themselves how different teosinte and tripsicum are from maize, because everyone likes hand-on science. I thought I did all the right things to make a good showing, even if my poster wasn’t the best. Unfortunately, the judging was less than smooth.
Continue reading…
by Anastasia on 23 September 2008 In Reducing the environmental impact of farming, I talked about Nathan Pelliter’s work on Agricultural Life Cycle Analysis as a way to evaluate which farming methods have the least environmental impact. While the ideas apply to any type of farming (or really to the production of anything), his main work is actually on animal agriculture.
The return on investment of most types of animal agriculture is small compared to that of plant agriculture. For example, cattle require about 6 pounds of feed to produce 1 pound of muscle. All of the water, fertilizer, and pesticides required to grow 1 pound of plant material is thus multiplied by 6 to produce 1 pound of beef. Granted, it isn’t quite that simple, as parts of plants that aren’t used for human food can be fed to animals, but the point holds, even in organic systems.
Continue reading…
by Anastasia on 12 September 2008 Atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gasses are rising, but reducing them isn’t as simple as taking cars off the road. A significant part of the problem rests is agriculture. What is it about agriculture that is such a problem and how can we develop changes that will have the most benefit?
Agricultural Life Cycle Analysis is a useful tool in collecting information and making decisions. LCAs take every input and every output into consideration including difficult to consider ouputs like greenhouse gas emissions.
Nathan Pelletier from Dalhouse Uni in Nova Scotia presented his work on ag LCAs at Iowa State recently. He explains that actually conducting LCAs can be difficult. First, we need to define the scope of the analysis. For example, if we consider milk production, we should likely include the cow herself, food, water, and waste. We probably should include all of the inputs and outputs associated with feed production and transportation. We might include the inputs and outputs of pasteurizing and transporting the milk. Also difficult is actually quantifying all of the inputs and outputs to air, soil, and water. Finally, it is difficult to complete a meaningful impact assessment including the identification of “hotspots” or most negative impacts. Despite the difficulties, LCAs are worth the effort. Nathan reminds us that agriculture produces 1/3 of global warming emissions. The demand for food will will double by 2050, so we need to half the impact to continue a constant level of damage.
Continue reading…
by Anastasia on 29 April 2008  There’s been a bit of controversy lately at Iowa State on the subject of “intellectual suppression” of intelligent design. Some pent-up drama from Dr. Guillermo Gonzalez’s tenure denial is still around, and Expelled brought the beast back to life. Of course, having Dr. Hector Avalos here helps to keep things interesting. The first ISU Daily article in this round, “Avalos: ‘Expelled’ wrong on Holocaust” has accrued almost as many comments and letters to the editor as the articles about Gay Pride week. The whole subject is frustrating, because I don’t think there is a controversy. No one should dictate what religious beliefs a person can or can not have.
In this country, separation of church and state is a necessity (due to the many faiths or absence of faith present). Therefore, religion can not be taught in state funded schools. Period. If people want to study things other than approved evidence based curricula, they are welcome to do so at home. Dr. Gonzalez is also welcome to study these things, but not while he is on the payroll of a public university to study science. If he was a religious studies professor, things would have been entirely different. The NY Times reports today about Dr. Francisco Ayala, a former Dominican priest and current evolutionary biologist and geneticist at UC, Irvine. Dr. Ayala’s thoughts on the ID / Evolution controversy are amazing, unlike any I have every seen. The article is: “Roving Defender of Evolution, and of Room for God”, which I learned about from the Knight Science Journalism Tracker.
Continue reading…
|
About Biofortified Biofortified's volunteer authors are devoted to providing factual information and fostering discussion about agriculture, especially plant genetics and genetic engineering. The site is written by grad students, professors, and guest experts. Meet our authors on the Authors page.
|
Brain doping to further science
The 10 April Nature presents the results of a survey that aimed to determine how many scientists are using cognition enhancing drugs. Caffeine is of course the most widely used stimulant, but it seems that quite a few people are using other substances to improve concentration.
For those who choose to use, methylphenidate was the most popular: 62% of users reported taking it. 44% reported taking modafinil, and 15% said they had
Continue reading…