Report Shines Light on Organic Egg Production Abuses

The Cornucopia Institute, a Wisconsin-based farm policy research group, will culminate in
the release of Scrambled Eggs: Separating Factory Farm Egg Production from Authentic
Organic Agriculture.

“After visiting over 15 percent of the certified egg farms in the United States, and surveying all name-brand and private- label industry marketers, it’s obvious that a high percentage of the eggs on the market should be labeled ‘produced with organic feed’ rather than bearing the USDA certified organic logo,” said Charlotte Vallaeys, the report’s lead author. According to the United Egg Producers, the industry lobby group, 80 percent of all organic eggs are produced by just a handful of its members. Most of these operations own hundreds of thousands, or even millions of birds, and have branched out into “specialty eggs,” which include organic.

Details in
http://www.acresusa.com/toolbox/reprints/Oct10_EggAbuses.pdf

Experiment demonstrates 110 years of sustainable agriculture

A plot of land on the campus of Auburn University shows that 110 years of sustainable farming practices can produce similar cotton crops to those using other methods.

In 1896, Professor J.F. Duggar at the Agricultural and Mechanical College of Alabama (now Auburn University) started an experiment to test his theories that sustainable cotton production was possible on Alabama soils if growers would use crop rotation and include winter legumes (clovers and/or vetch) to protect the soil from winter erosion.

Today, his experiment on the campus of Auburn University is the oldest, continuous cotton experiment in the world and the third oldest field crop experiment in the United States on the same site. The experiment, known as "the Old Rotation," has continued with only slight modifications in treatments and was placed on the National Register of Historical Places in 1988.

Researchers at Auburn University and at USDA-Soil Dynamics Laboratory in Auburn, AL, have prepared the first ever comprehensive research publication covering the entire 110-yr history of this experiment. It was published in the September-October issue of Agronomy Journal, and provides insight into issues both past and present that effect sustainable crop production in the South.

The thirteen plots in the Old Rotation include (i) continuous cotton, (ii) a 2-yr rotation of cotton with corn, and (iii) a 3-year rotation of cotton-corn-wheat-soybean. These crop rotations include treatments with and without winter legumes (usually crimson clover and/or vetch) and with and without fertilizer nitrogen.

After more than 110 years, the Old Rotation continues to document the long-term effects of crop rotation and winter legumes on cotton production in the Deep South. It provides growers, students, and faculty with a living demonstration of fundamental agronomic practices that result in sustainable crop production. Long-term yields indicate that winter legumes are as effective as nitrogen fertilizer in producing non-irrigated, 10-yr average cotton yields of 1,100 pounds lint per acre. Winter legumes and crop rotations contribute to increased soil organic matter. Higher soil organic matter results in higher crop yields.

In 1997, the Old Rotation entered a new era of agricultural production where boll weevil eradication, genetically modified crops, and conservation tillage almost eliminated the need for the plow and pesticides. In 2003, irrigation was added to half of each plot. Yields of cotton, corn, wheat and soybean continue to increase far beyond the yields of Professor Duggar's generation. Since initiating conservation tillage practices in 1997, all-time, non-irrigated record yields have been made on all the crops grown on the Old Rotation: 1,710 pounds cotton lint per acre in 2006, 95 bushels wheat per acre in 2001, 236 bushels corn per acre in 1999, and 67 bushels of double-cropped soybean per acre in 1997 after wheat.

Agriculture and tropical conservation: rethinking old ideas

It's a long-held view in conservation circles that rural peasant activities are at odds with efforts to preserve biodiversity in the tropics. In fact, the opposite is often true, argue University of Michigan researchers John Vandermeer and Ivette Perfecto.

Combining case studies with ecological theory, Vandermeer and Perfecto found that the peasant farming practices encouraged by grassroots movements such as Brazil's Landless Workers Movement, Mexico's Zapatistas or the international Via Campesina actually support conservation, while the practices of extremely wealthy landowners often undermine it. The researchers will present their findings Aug. 8 in two symposia at the Ecological Society of America meeting in Memphis, Tenn.

"When you talk to peasant producers in tropical areas, they're usually surprised when they hear that conservationists think that they're the enemies of conservation," said Vandermeer, who is the Margaret Davis Collegiate Professor of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. "They love their farms and all the plants and animals in the area, and they see that it's the big, rich landowners who come in and cut all the trees down and turn the land into cattle pastures. So the standard litany doesn't ring true to them."

Vandermeer and Perfecto reviewed studies of biodiversity in the Atlantic coast rainforest of Brazil, a region that is unusual in having areas of tremendous biological variety adjacent to highly developed, industrialized areas.

"The area has some of the highest biodiversity in the world, but it all occurs in fragments of forest," Vandermeer said. In one study the researchers examined, a Brazilian scientist documented in a single river valley 28,000 separate forest fragments, where vulnerable species such as muriqui monkeys live. Vandermeer and Perfecto combined observations such as these with current ecological theory.

"We know that a lot of organisms typically live in a fragmented state in nature, with subpopulations scattered around an area," Vandermeer said. Disease or predators may wipe out a particular subpopulation, but migrants from nearby subpopulations come in and establish a new subpopulation. "We now think that most high diversity situations operate this way, with a continual process of local extinction and re-migration. When you couple that ecological theory with the observation of highly fragmented forests in the Atlantic coast rainforest, the real question is not how much forest is left, but what's between those patches that are left, and will it support the necessary migrations from patch to patch as local extinctions occur, which they inevitably do?"

If forest patches are separated by barren pastures or fields of single crops, such as soybeans, then monkeys, birds, and other forest animals probably won't travel through them to repopulate areas where extinction has occurred. But that's not the case if the intervening areas are traditional "agroforests"---farms where fruit and timber trees share space with other crops, Vandermeer said. "That's the kind of agriculture that's friendly to biodiversity, and that's the kind of agriculture that peasant farmers actually do."

Vandermeer and Perfecto, a professor of natural resources and environment, visited agroforests in the Pontal de Paranapanema region of Brazil, where landless peasants organized by Catholic priests established homesteads in the 1950s and 1960s. There, the researchers saw evidence that the farms do indeed serve as thoroughfares for migrating animals. "These farmers actually have monkeys that come through their farms," Vandermeer said.

The U-M scientists and their collaborator Jefferson Ferreira Lima of Brazil's Instituto de Pesquisas Ecologicas also spoke with members of the Landless Workers' Movement (Movimento dos Trabalhadores Rurais Sem Terra, or MST), which is a member of the international peasant organization Via Campesina. "It's a political movement, but it's very pro-conservation, and they specifically understand what they're doing by creating a new kind of agriculture based on small producers using organic or semi-organic methodologies on farms with trees," Vandermeer said.

With these groups encouraging such biodiversity-friendly practices, Vandermeer said, "I think conservationists and rural peasant movements ought to be friends."

Scientists prepare for confined field trials of life-saving drought-tolerant transgenic maize

Crop specialists in Kenya and Uganda have laid the groundwork for confined field trials to commence later this year for new varieties of maize genetically modified to survive recurrent droughts that threaten over 300 million Africans for whom maize is life, according to a speech given today by the head of the African Agricultural Technology Foundation (AATF) at the World Food Prize Symposium.

Scientists working with AATF believe it's important to explore the potential of biotechnology to maintain and increase food production in Africa, given the large number of families dependent on maize, and warnings that maize yields could drop dramatically as climate change increases drought frequency and severity across the continent.

There is preliminary evidence that the Water Efficient Maize for Africa (WEMA) varieties, which were developed through a public-private partnership, could provide yields 24-35 percent higher than what farmers are now growing.

The process for testing the WEMA varieties has been informed by a series of "mock trials" conducted in 2009 in Kenya and Tanzania. The mock trials carefully simulated field conditions, procedures, and regulatory oversight that will occur in the actual trials.

"The mock trials have provided an opportunity for researchers working on the WEMA project to fine-tune the procedures of carrying out the actual transgenic trial in 2010," according to Daniel Mataruka, executive director of AATF.

The mock trials were supervised by national biosafety committees in both countries and adhered to all requirements that will apply to transgenic plants.

"Everything we have seen in the simulated trials shows that we can safely test transgenic maize varieties in carefully controlled and confined field trials in Africa and evaluate their potential to produce high yields in drought conditions," said Dr. James Gethi, the WEMA-Kenya country coordinator.

Drought is the most important constraint to African agricultural production, and its effects are particularly severe on maize, which is the most widely-grown staple on the continent. For millions of small-scale farmers who rely on rainfall to water their crops, risk of crop failure from drought is a major barrier to the adoption of improved farming practices.

A more reliable harvest could give farmers the confidence to invest in improved techniques that could further boost their yields and incomes.

The push to develop drought-tolerant varieties has been given added urgency by threats likely to come from climate change. A study by scientists at the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) warns that by 2050, climate change could make droughts more frequent and intense, potentially causing maize yields to drop by 20 percent or more in parts of East Africa, including northern Uganda and southern Sudan, and semi-arid areas of Kenya and Tanzania. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has acknowledged biotechnology as a powerful tool in the effort to develop drought-tolerant crops.

The drought-tolerant WEMA varieties are being developed under a partnership involving AATF, the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT), Monsanto, and the national agriculture research systems in Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, South Africa and Uganda. CIMMYT has provided high-yield maize varieties adapted to African conditions, while Monsanto has provided proprietary genetic resources (germplasm), advanced breeding tools and expertise, and drought-tolerant transgenes developed in collaboration with BASF.

According to AATF, experience has shown that the gains possible through advanced breeding and biotechnology are greater and faster than those that can be achieved through breeding alone.

"There have already been positive gains made in drought tolerance using traditional breeding methods by our partners," said Mataruka. "WEMA is working to further increase those gains in drought tolerance in hybrids adapted to eastern and southern Africa through both advanced breeding techniques and biotechnology."

If the transgenic corn is found to be safe and successful, the new varieties will be made available to smallholder farmers royalty-free. Under its agreement with its partners, any approved varieties would be licensed to AATF, which would then distribute to farmers through local seed supplies at a price competitive with other types of maize seed. The project partners expect that pricing will not be influenced by the requirement to pay royalties, as none of the partners will receive any royalty payment from seed companies for the drought tolerant lines/transgenic trait incorporating their intellectual property protected technology.

Pending regulatory approval, at least 12 WEMA varieties will be tested in confined field trials (CFTs) in Kenya, Uganda, Tanzania, South Africa and Mozambique. After the trials, the transgenic corn produced in the CFTs will be destroyed in compliance with the regulations in the respective countries.

Orchid tricks hoverflies

Even Darwin was a self-admitted orchid lover. Dictionaries describe orchids as exotic ornamentals. Indeed, these plants – more than 30000 different species are thought to exist – are exotic due their extraordinary and diverse flower morphology. However, they are also exotic from a point of view other than beauty: as crafty imposters in order to achieve reproduction and to make sure that their ovaries are pollinated. Orchids depend on the assistance of pollinators, and like many other flowering plants, attract insects.

Epipactis veratrifolia, an orchid native in South Turkey, the Middle East, and Cyprus, has specialized in hoverflies. Because these insects prefer aphids as food for their larvae, the orchid produces three aphid alarm substances, α- and β-pinene, and β-myrcene and β-phellandrene, all of which attract hoverfly females. Interestingly, as the scientists observed, even male hoverflies hang around the orchids, hoping for a chance to copulate with the attracted females.

A bit of nectar as reward

"Hoverfly females as well as males enjoy the small amount of nectar the orchid flower provides. Both sexes serve as pollen transmitters," says ecologist Johannes Stökl. The alarm substances lure five of the different hoverfly species that feed on aphids. Females lay all their eggs in the flower of the orchid, although no aphids are there. "We assume that the insects are not only deceived by the aphid alarm pheromones, but also fall for the aphid-like dark warts in the orchid's flower," explains Bill Hansson, director at the Max Planck Institute.

Mass spectra and electroantennograms

The aphid species Megoura viciae preferred by Episyrphus balteatus hoverflies produces α- and β-pinene as well as β-myrcene. These volatile substances generate measurable electrical impulses in the hoverfly antennae. Behavioral experiments carried out by the research team supported the assumption that it is exactly these substances that attract hoverflies and encourage oviposition. Further analyses revealed that the orchid Epipactis veratrifolia does not mimic the alarm pheromones of just one aphid species, because the volatiles emitted by the aphids and the flower differ in amount and constitution.

An evolutionary dead end?

Is Epipactis veratrifolia a ruthless imposter? Johannes Stökl answers: "At least the plant provides a small amount of nectar for the deceived hoverflies. This is comparable to two related species, the wasp-pollinated orchids E. helleborine and E. purpurata, which lure stingy insects by mimicking their prey, mostly butterfly larvae. However, unlike Epipactis veratrifolia these species reward their pollinators by providing large amounts of nectar."

Nevertheless, the scientist would classify the Eastern marsh helleborine as a treacherous imposter, because hoverfly larvae hatching from the eggs laid in its flowers won't find any food there and must die. From an evolutionary perspective this seems to be a contradiction: If hoverfly larvae die, the population of this species is decimated and as a consequence the number of pollinators decreases.

"We cannot provide a coherent explanation of this conflict. However, we can imagine where the mimicry of the alarm pheromone is originated," says Bill Hansson. The plant is remarkably aphid-free, probably due to the emission of α- and β-pinine. These two volatiles are produced by aphids in case of danger. Therefore aphids avoid everything that smells of α- and β-pinine. Both substances may have originally been used by the Eastern marsh helleborine as a defense against aphids. Once hoverflies were fooled and mistook the volatiles for aphids, they also served the purpose of attracting pollinators. [JWK, AO]

Code RED for biodiversity

While not an outright failure, a 2010 goal set by the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) for staunching the loss of the world's species fell far short of expectations for "The International Year of Biodiversity."

What does this mean for the 20 proposed 2020 goals being considered by the 10th conference of parties at the Convention on Biological Diversity in Nagoya, Japan, on Oct. 18-29, 2010?

In the article "Ecosystem Services for 2020," published Oct. 15, 2010 in the journal Science, some of the world's foremost biodiversity experts assembled by the Paris-based international program of biodiversity science DIVERSITAS offer a strategic approach to the 2020 goals -- one that incorporates trade-offs, timing and complexity.

Feasible goals

"While there is still time, it is critical to design the 2020 targets and their indicators in ways that give them a reasonable chance of success," argues ecoservices expert Charles Perrings of Arizona State University. The DIVERSITAS team, led by Perrings, includes ASU scientist Ann Kinzig and 16 other leading biodiversity experts from the United States, Argentina, Sweden, Chile, Japan, England, France and Germany.

The team lauds the convention for increased efforts to address the most serious aspects of global change, climate and biodiversity, through pursuit of 20 "SMART" (specific, measurable, ambitious, realistic and time-bound) targets to be achieved by 2020. However, the group also argues that it is not enough for the targets to be SMART.

"The 2010 CBD goal was unrealistic," says Perrings, a professor in ASU's School of Life Sciences and co-director of the ecoSERVICES group in ASU's College of Liberal Arts and Sciences.

"And while the 20 proposed goals for 2020 are more specific about where to go to reduce the rate of loss of biodiversity, there are critical oversights that need to be considered by the Nagoya conference delegates."

For example, the 2020 target that "all people are aware of the values of biodiversity and the steps they can take to conserve and use it sustainably" seems unrealistic. In addition, a 2020 target for the sustainability of agriculture, aquaculture and forestry asserts that doing this will automatically assure conservation of biodiversity, yet scientific evidence does not support this, according to the authors. Both the extensive and the intensive growth of agriculture —expansion of the area committed to the production of crops or livestock, increased use of pesticides and herbicides—come at a cost to non-farmed species.

One issue with the 2020 targets, the authors point out, is that many of them are interdependent. Some are likely to be mutually inconsistent, meaning achieving one compromises achievement of another. Others are contingent, meaning achieving one is conditional on achievement of another. It will be important to adopt indicators that recognize the interdependence of targets.

"We are also fishing out oceans, one stock at a time. Often there are no real instruments for protection and those that do exist have no teeth. There are lots of reasons, reasonable ones, for people making private decisions that lead to biodiversity loss, but they cost us all collectively."

The journal article points out that the proposed 2020 CBD goals also need also to tap into the benefits that biodiversity provides to humanity, in addition to recognizing trade-offs between benefits.

Codes for success

The DIVERSITAS team assessed the 2020 targets and challenges to their implementation using the ecosystem services framework developed by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, an effort led by the United Nations in 2001-2005 to "analyze the capacity of the world's ecosystems and assess the consequences of ecosystem change for human well-being."

The authors' resulting roadmap for 2020 recommends a hierarchical approach, one that is sensitive to the timing and sequence of targets. Some targets concern issues that need to be addressed before 2020 (DIVERSITAS codes urgent targets "red"), and other targets concern issues that need to be implemented in sequence ("enabling conditions" are coded "blue"). Moreover, many of the traditional conservation targets (coded "green") involve trade-offs with red and blue targets that will play out over much longer timescales.

The 2020 targets to be negotiated at the Nagoya convention are a significant improvement over the 2010 target. They address the international community's traditional conservation goals – to reduce the pressures on biodiversity and to safeguard ecosystems, species and genetic diversity. But they also address the underlying causes of biodiversity loss, its sustainable use, and the capacity and knowledge building that need to be done to if the targets are to be successfully implemented.

The scientists argue that while the 2020 targets could be strengthened, Nagoya could well be a turning point for the Convention on Biological Diversity. "The development of a strategic plan supported by targets, indicators and actions is a very positive step," Perrings says.

The convention, together with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), also established in 1992, represent the commitment of nations to secure global commitments to address the most serious aspects of global change: climate and biodiversity. The UNFCCC was the focus of much attention in 2009. Combined with the establishment of an Intergovernmental Science Policy Platform for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), to be brought before the U.N. General Assembly this session, Perrings and his team believe that the convention in Nagoya, Japan, may mark the first serious attempt by the international community to deal with the second of the world's two greatest environmental problems: biosphere change.

Scientist: We Have Proof That The Chicken Came Before The Egg

"It had long been suspected that the egg came first, but now we have the scientific proof that shows that in fact the chicken came first," says Dr. Colin Freeman, from Sheffield University. Here's the explanation.

When scientists from Sheffield University and Warwick University used a supercomputer called HECToR to take a close look at egg shells, they discovered that a protein "called ovocledidin-17 (OC-17) acts as a catalyst to speed up the development of the shell." They realized that this protein is crucial to actually forming an egg shell. They also realized that this protein is found in a chicken's ovaries. Based on this, these scientists decided that the chicken must have come before the egg.

What they found was a specific molecule called ovocleidin which is a member of a family of C-type lectin-like proteins. These things are all over the place; they're cell adhesion molecules, some are involved in cell signaling, some function in modulating the immune system and blood clotting pathways. They're even found in snake venoms. They're found in everything from C. elegans to mammals. Their key property is that they bind calcium.

In birds, these proteins have been coopted to regulate egg shell formation. They bind calcium and can seed the crystallization of calcium carbonate, and also control the rate of crystal formation. Chickens have ovocleidin, but geese have an ortholog, ansocalcin, and ostriches have struthiocleidin. There seems to be a lot of lability in what particular calcium-binding protein is used in shell formation, and it's probably the case that most of the sequence is free to mutate without affecting the nucleating function.

You simply can't make the conclusion the reporter was making here. The species ancestral to Gallus gallus laid eggs, the last common ancestor of all birds laid eggs, the reptiles that preceded the birds laid eggs…the appearance of egg laying was not coincident with the evolution of ovocleidin. The first chicken that acquired the protein we call ovocleidin now by mutation of a prior protein also hatched from an egg.

Chicken Nuggets Are Made From This Pink Goop

This is mechanically separated chicken. Chickens are turned into this goop so we can create delicious chicken nuggets and juicy chicken patties. It's obscenely gross and borderline alien but it's not going to stop me from eating nuggets. They're too good.

The process works a little something like this:

There's more: because it's crawling with bacteria, it will be washed with ammonia, soaked in it, actually. Then, because it tastes gross, it will be reflavored artificially. Then, because it is weirdly pink, it will be dyed with artificial color.