Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Group Tries To Open Source Seeds

Posted by samzenpus on from the lettuce-for-linux dept.

jenwike writes The Open Source Seed Initiative is a passionate group that wants to ensure their seeds are never patented, but making sure seeds are free for use and distribution by anyone isn't as easy as you might think. Part of the equation are plant characteristics, like an extended head on lettuce — is that an invention? Or, would you argue that it is the product of the collective sharing of material that improves the whole crop over time? In this report, one farmer says, "If you're not exchanging germplasm, you're cutting your own throat."

4 of 100 comments (clear)

  1. Story I heard as a kid by Stargoat · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My people were farmers. There was a story I was told as a kid.

    A farmer went on a long journey. When he came back, he had a new corn seed. He planted it and had yields 50 bushels per acre higher he had last year and it was much higher than all his neighbors. His neighbors wanted to buy seed from the farmer. He refused to sell it to him.

    The next year, the farmer's yield was only 35 bushels per acre better than his neighbors. Every year it decreased, until his yield per acre was back at the original amount.

    The moral of the story is twofold. First, crops germinate.

    Second, a rising tide raises all boats if you let it. Just because your neighbors also have more grain doesn't mean you'll have less. With more grain, you can raise more head of cattle, have more chickens, reduce the amount of grain and begin raising vegetables. Even if the price of grain declines, the amount you can do with that grain should offset the decline.

    --
    Hoist Number One and Number Six.
  2. Most of the problem is Monsanto, the Great Satan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    A friend of mine was coming back from France and was grilled about bringing back non-GMO seeds. Ebola is OK to bring into the country, but not non-GMO seeds. You can thank Monsanto for that.

  3. More power to you by asliarun · · Score: 4, Interesting

    As an interested lay person, I'm thrilled to hear about this initiative. Not to sound ungrateful, but I would really really wish and hope that
    - This initiative will always retain the bazaar mindset, and not get bogged down by bureaucracy
    - This initiative will spread into the continents where this is needed the most - Asia and Africa.
    - The options for seeds grows beyond vegetables and into grains and other basic nutrition foods. Ref: http://www.opensourceseediniti...
    - They use this platform to spread awareness and accessibility to some of the really hardy native crops in various parts of the world that are dying out. Many of these are naturally drought and pest resistant, grow very easily, and in some cases, have much better nutritional value than many of the foods that are today more fashionable.

    The moringa plant, for example.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    To compare (an example):
    100 grams of moringa leaves has 9.3 g protein, 434 mg calcium, 738 g vitamin A, and 164 mg vitamin C
    100 grams of spinach leaves has 2.9 g protein, 99 mg calcium, 469 g vitamin A, and 28 mg vitamin C

    And this tree grows even in a desert. But I don't want to goo offtopic. This was just an example.

    My only hope is that a platform like this - can and should - make knowledge and seeds accessible to all. We can literally solve world hunger and world health by doing this.

    1. Re:More power to you by asliarun · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Where your link to moringa is interesting - Looking at the production of it, it sure doesn't seem like you get a lot of density in a given acre of production. For example, lets compare the nutrients produced from one acre of muringa vs. one acre of spinach (rice/wheat/corn). How many pounds of leaves can you get out of an acre of moringa, and how intense is the labor to get that acre harvested vs. one acre of spinach?

      There is a reason that we grow the crops that we do - they can be grown very densely, with the least amount of fertilizer, insecticide, water as possible as those things all take money to provide. There is also a need for the minimum amount of labor to plant, maintain and harvest the crops.

      You make a good point. But I wonder if the food we grow are always based on scientifically optimal choices or often based on other factors. Like one crop being grown more widely because it commands a higher price. Or changing food habits and inordinate preference to certain grains and veggies.

      The other thing to consider is access to information and access to grains. Are we growing or not growing (a crop like muringa) because of an informed decision, or because most of the world is not even aware of these options?

      Other things to consider are that plants like muringa will grow in most places where you wouldn't dream of growing spinach. This is not just a third world problem. Even in most developed countries, good access to irrigation and "the right climate" are often deal breakers.

      Finally, I find the tree (perennials that live for many years) vs plant (that typically die on every harvest) debate - an interesting one. It is something I feel that we need to focus on more deeply. Is it really an optimal choice to grow a plant from scratch every year? Could a tree or a perennial shrub provide better long term nutritional returns? Isn't a mature tree far hardier and less susceptible to crop loss?

      Mind you, I am not saying you are wrong. All I am saying is that we definitely need more awareness about more such options, better access to seeds and how to grow them in different climatic and soil conditions. And more informed debates. And we really need to discuss this far more than Kim Kardashian's buttocks.