Researchers Find Wood-Digesting Enzyme In Bacteria

AffidavitDonda writes with news that University of Warwick and University of British Columbia researchers have "identified the gene for breaking down lignin in a soil-living bacterium called Rhodococcus jostii. Although such enzymes have been found before in fungi, this is the first time that they have been identified in bacteria. The bacterium's genome has already been sequenced which means that it could be modified more easily to produce large amounts of the required enzyme. In addition, bacteria are quick and easy to grow, so this research raises the prospect of producing enzymes which can break down lignin on an industrial scale. By making woody plants and the inedible by-products of crops economically viable the eventual hope is to be able to produce biofuels that don't compete with food production."

Comments

Termites?

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

Haven't termite gut bacteria been known to digest wood for years?

Re:Termites?

[rubycodez]

they were well characterized, in the 1970s when oil embargo caused huge interest in alternate energy including plant matter conversion to biofuel. And no, you don't get a link since most human knowledge is NOT on the internet (try your local University library instead).. Being nearly 50, I'm amazed at the "new discoveries" that are repeats of the same shit, different decade.

Re:Termites?

[bill_mcgonigle]

Nearly every major historic scientific publication can be found on the internet nowadays.

Stop eating my lawn!

Soil depletion

[macraig]

So what will be left from crop harvests to fold back into the soil and preserve some bare shred of soil fertility if we even harvest the "inedible by-products"? Why do people overlook soil in the lifecycle? Soil contains chemicals, which plants take up and use to construct themselves; if you remove the entire plant and don't fold something truly equivalent back into the soil, then over time the soil becomes depleted of chemicals needed to sustain the process.

Re:Soil depletion

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry we have plenty of oil based fertilizers for that!

Re:Soil depletion

[macraig]

For the time being we do. If Peak Oil comes and goes, will we favor making fertilizer, plastics, or fuel with what's left? Where do we make those 'budget cuts'? They're gonna hurt.

(I know, you were being sarcastic.)

Re:Soil depletion

[macraig]

I don't agree that process is sustainable. You think that what's removed is trivial and unimportant to sustainability and long-term - multi-generational - soil fertility, and I disagree; I think it all matters and is non-trivial, which is precisely why ecological processes have evolved the way they have. Also, not to nitpick *too* much but hydrocarbons and 'carbos' aren't actually energy, they're potential energy... which is why we use them as food and fuel to release actual energy.

Re:Soil depletion

[Troggie87]

I can't speak for the large operations, but on the small (thousand-ish) acre farm where I grew up we baled cornstalks just like hay or straw. The big cornstalk bales are piled off to the side where they are used as animal bedding (either in the feedlot sheds or pushed around in the fields for the roaming herds). It gives the animals a warm comfortable place to sleep, mostly just during the winter. Once it thaws or becomes too messy the shed is cleaned into a manure spreader, and flung onto fields that need it (either visibly or based on a soil analysis). Generally this results in the poo+cornstalks being plowed back in at the start of spring.

I know its not popular on here, but there is a point at which you just have to accept that humans change their environment, and there will be casualties. Rather than wasting a bunch of money fighting and regulating every industry on the planet, its probably more realistic to regulate enough to make the environment safe for people and buy separate reserves to set aside for animal habitat. Its not a solution I like either, but turning back the clock on over a hundred years of industrial progress just isn't going to happen.

Not to mention there is a law of diminishing returns on farm regulation: past a certain point, regulation make small scale farming infeasible. But large scale farms are far and away more likely to use "unfriendly" farming methods, largely because the connection to the land isn't there. If you over regulate (and its already happening) small farmers who are likely to care about the land get bought out by superfarms. Superfarms typically don't care about sustainability or the landscape. Two farms near us recently went under, and when they were purchased all the wooded areas that had been used for grazing were chopped and plowed under. The regulations that were supposed to help protect wildlife ended up doing tremendous harm.

Another example is Monarch Butterflies. Monarchs feed exclusively on milkweed, and the best place to find milkweed as I grew up was on fence lines (typically between cow-pastures). As farms merge and pasture is being plowed in favor of large straight fields that giant farm implements can drive easily, these areas are vanishing (the idea that the price of corn is diving these changes isn't entirely true, the fact is that even if corn was dirt cheap its more cost effective for a large farm to grow it in giant straight fields with giant implements). Not surprisingly, experts are now worried about declining Monarch populations. Food for thought, I hope.

Re:dandelions?

[mrchaotica]

Dandelions aren't supposed to be weeds; they were brought to the New World by European colonists on purpose, as a food crop. Every part of a dandelion is edible.

Re:dandelions?

[Hopium]

and delicious as well, some dandelion soup on cool night by a fire. mmmmmmmmmmm

Re:Ruminants.

[macraig]

Cellulose != lignin. Lignin is a much nastier polymer to digest.

Re:Oh joy, more bio fuel. Lets burn things life ne

[codepunk]

"I'm aware that by manipulating electro magnetism, you can propel vehicles without producing exhaust pollution of any kind"

Well you had better hurry up and patent that shit because nobody else has been able to do it. Where do you think the electricity comes from that produces said magnetism?

Re:Oh joy, more bio fuel. Lets burn things life ne

[introcept]

Burning things is bad. No, seriously, we don't have engines that burn clean enough to not produce pollutants.

Uhh, no. This is like saying "chemicals are bad" or "radiation is bad". You need to look at what you're burning. The great thing about bio-mass fuels is the concept of "carbon neutral" combustion. You grow a bunch of plants/trees which take carbon -out- of the atmosphere, turn those plants into fuel and a year or so later release the same amount of carbon back into the atmosphere when you burn the fuel. There is no net increase in CO2 levels which means there is no contribution to the greenhouse effect.

On a macro scale there is little to no pollution, even if there appears to be because "burning things is bad". This is exactly the kind of hippy bullshit that holds back the development truly green technologies

Re:dandelions?

[jimmydevice]

Even that fluffy shit on the top? I tried it as a kid, and NO, Not edible. Bullshit.

Re:Corn ethanol doesn't compete with food producti

[Ardeaem]

Because corn isn't food.

Tell that to all the people in the world to whom it is a staple. When prices go up, people suffer. Just because you don't think corn ethanol should complete with food production doesn't mean it doesn't compete, here in the real world.