Slashdot Mirror


Scientists Have 'Hacked Photosynthesis' To Boost Crop Growth By 40 Percent (npr.org)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from NPR: There's a big molecule, a protein, inside the leaves of most plants. It's called Rubisco, which is short for an actual chemical name that's very long and hard to remember. Rubisco has one job. It picks up carbon dioxide from the air, and it uses the carbon to make sugar molecules. It gets the energy to do this from the sun. This is photosynthesis, the process by which plants use sunlight to make food, a foundation of life on Earth. "But it has what we like to call one fatal flaw," Amanda Cavanagh, a biologist and post-doctoral researcher at the University of Illinois, says. Unfortunately, Rubisco isn't picky enough about what it grabs from the air. It also picks up oxygen. "When it does that, it makes a toxic compound, so the plant has to detoxify it."

Plants have a whole complicated chemical assembly line to carry out this detoxification, and the process uses up a lot of energy. This means the plant has less energy for making leaves, or food for us. Cavanagh and her colleagues in a research program called Realizing Increased Photosynthetic Efficiency (RIPE), which is based at the University of Illinois, have spent the last five years trying to fix Rubisco's problem. "We're sort of hacking photosynthesis," she says. They experimented with tobacco plants, just because tobacco is easy to work with. They inserted some new genes into these plants, which shut down the existing detoxification assembly line and set up a new one that's way more efficient. And they created super tobacco plants. "They grew faster, and they grew up to 40 percent bigger" than normal tobacco plants, Cavanagh says. These measurements were done both in greenhouses and open-air field plots.
The scientists are trying to apply this technique to other plants, like tomatoes, soybeans, and black-eyed peas, which are a staple food crop for a lot of farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. Cavanagh and her colleagues published their work this week in the journal Science.

9 of 280 comments (clear)

  1. Call it hacking by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Call it hacking and it's good, call it GMO and it's bad.

    "This one simple trick a woman discovered in her lab!"

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:Call it hacking by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Call it hacking and it's good, call it GMO and it's bad.

      GMOs aren't bad, it's the modifications that are made that are bad.

      Growing faster with fewer resources = good modification.
      Able to resist being covered in increasingly caustic pesticides = bad modification.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    2. Re:Call it hacking by Daemonik · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If only it were that simple. Frankly the paranoia and misinformation of liberals on the topic of GMO vs Organics is about as bad as conservatives and Global Warming.

      I've tried to explain to people that food irradiation is a safe method of preservation for instance, and been told that they don't want "radioactive" food. Explain to them that bananas are radioactive and they will, with a straight face, tell you that it's "natural" radiation so it's healthy. Try to explain that "organic" food uses some truly scary pesticides or that all foods have chemicals in them and it goes right over their heads.

      As far as GMO for Roundup goes, that stuff is expensive and nobody is out there replacing water with it like it's Brawndo. It's highly targeted spraying. However I do think that using GMO to lock seeds up behind copyrights and such is wrong. Modified life forms should be open source so we can all monitor and benefit from them equally.

    3. Re: Call it hacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Bullshit they should be tithing their entire r&d budget to the church. Create food and water is a low level spell and since we are discussing fantasy, we should end up with clerics long before replicators let alone warp drive.

  2. Photosynthesis is complex by aberglas · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There is a light dependent reaction that creates ATP, which is the energy source for the light independent Calvin cycle which actually reduces CO2.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    I am not sure what they have hacked, but it is more complex than the summary suggests. And it would be an amazing achievement to be able to improve a system perfected by 4 billion years of evolution without any down side. I suspect there is a downside, maybe a need for more water etc.

    Well done anyway, if true.

    1. Re:Photosynthesis is complex by belg4mit · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Evolution hasn't perfected anything,* it is a fundamentally conservative process circuit-bending existing hardware and occasionally developing something new. If changes help, they spread, if they hurt, their prevalence diminishes but rarely to zero, and if they're neutral they persist as well. Hardly the features of something that's guaranteed to make the best thing possible, but rather, like many software developers, something that's just good enough :-P

      * A standard example being laryngeal nerves in giraffes.

      --
      Were that I say, pancakes?
  3. 4 billion years of evolution doesn't necessarilly by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    make the best thing. It makes the most successful thing among other things, but that's not "best". Ever wonder why we get scurvy? We have a defective gene that prevents us from making Vitamin C. We compensated in other ways, but that doesn't mean we're the "best", just better than the alternatives.

    Same deal here. Think of all the energy wasted out there and imagine if we didn't waste it. Look at bananas. They start out barely edible and end up as convenient as anything you'd buy in a plastic bag.

    Now, there are potential downsides to a mono-culture, but then if we can tweak genes at will we don't have to have a mono-culture, do we?

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  4. And here it is by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Informative

    I find it a bit amusing that you proceeded to ALSO not give us the actual name despite complaint...

    It is:

    Ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase

    I agree, it was not THAT long. Probably whatever grammar checker system they had refused to let it pass. Or like you say he was just lazy and thought all his readers were morons. Either way, not a good look.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  5. Re:preliminary findings by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Informative

    Some plants HAVE evolved ways of improving CO2 capture.

    The evolution of the C4 pathway happened in grasses, and they spread around the world about 6-7 million years ago. Tropical savanna replaced woodland in Africa, as the grasses outcompeted forests via more efficient photosynthesis. Hominids moved out of the forest into the expanding savanna, learning to walk upright, freeing up their hands to use tools.

    The C4 pathway also meant plants could pull more CO2 out of the atmosphere, lowering global temperatures. The spread of C4-capable grasses may have been the main trigger for the ice ages.

    Corn is one of the few food crops that uses the newer C4 photosynthesis engine.

    Another big C4 crop is sugar cane. Millet and sorghum are also C4.