Log in

View Full Version : 'Doomsday' Seed Bank to open in Norway.


Taylor
02-26-2008, 06:59 PM
I think this is just the coolest thing ever (literally and not!). This can withstand floods, nuclear war, earthquakes, and more. It is the impenetrable force that is going to protect and house OVER 45 MILLION of the worlds best and most productive crop's seeds, yes, from all over the world! It is hidden deep inside a mountain that never thaws and they said that some of the seed stock in these conditions could last for over 20,000 YEARS!


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/41/Global-Seed-Vault_0844_inngansparti_kunst_F_Mari_Tefre.jpg/800px-Global-Seed-Vault_0844_inngansparti_kunst_F_Mari_Tefre.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/91/Norvay-04_copy.jpg/800px-Norvay-04_copy.jpg

Yep, Norway is definitely planning to be self-sufficient and save the world. Kudos to them!

turtile
02-26-2008, 07:05 PM
They're going to need more than that in order to start up a reliable productive crop. If all of them are identical, they will most likely all fall to disease.

Taylor
02-26-2008, 07:08 PM
I am sure they have worked it all out, I just don't know many specifics.

MediaHound
02-26-2008, 07:09 PM
Thats amazing!

cactus6103
02-26-2008, 07:50 PM
I just saw this on the news tonight. It's a pretty neat concept. They say some seeds can last 20,000 years in there. Interesting. Red

Whatever
02-26-2008, 09:14 PM
I thought I read something about a doomsday seed bank before but was different from this one. Either way its pretty cool.

momoese
02-26-2008, 11:21 PM
I hope they are saving Heirloom seeds for the future when the GM crops contaminate and destroy all the organic heirlooms.

island cassie
02-26-2008, 11:27 PM
Yes - we need someone to save uncontaminated seeds ready for when GM has destroyed all the old varieties with all their diversity - so much has gone already.

mrbungalow
02-27-2008, 01:57 AM
Doomsday is a bit dramatic....

I think Island Cassie is on the right track, when there are no more individuals of a strain or species left, they can go to this seed-bank and take a few seeds out. There are many seed and gene banks throughout the world, such as Inibap and GRIN.

I wonder if they have musa seeds in there?

Richard
02-27-2008, 03:19 AM
I hope they are saving Heirloom seeds for the future when the GM crops contaminate and destroy all the organic heirlooms.

I understand and agree with the disgust over Monsato's line of sterile crops. That's greedy and very irresponsible. But to label genetic modification (GM) bad as a whole I think is going way too far.

What is the difference between a "natural" hybridization breeding program that produces 400 million trials and eventually someone finds the white marigold -- or doing it a few times in the lab with GM and avoiding the unwanted millions of mis-crosses?

The term "organic heirloom" ... does it have a fixed meaning? "Heirloom" is a somewhat stable term: self-fertile hybrid that reproduces true to form and is no longer eligible for patent. But organic is a very ambiguous term, so I'm lost on the combination.
:o

turtile
02-27-2008, 05:07 PM
Yes - we need someone to save uncontaminated seeds ready for when GM has destroyed all the old varieties with all their diversity - so much has gone already.

According to the article, the most productive seeds are stored. That means that none of them are natural seeds. They've been selected through years to find the best of the best.

Many of the plants look much different than they did before they went into cultivation. Why would we grow any plant if we could pick the best and produce 10x the amount of food within the same space?

Richard
02-27-2008, 05:25 PM
Yes - we need someone to save uncontaminated seeds ready for when GM has destroyed all the old varieties with all their diversity - so much has gone already.

The concept of "GM destroying old varieties" ... is it based on
1. Monsanto's sterile crop program? -- in that case I agree there is a problem
2. Mass destruction of natives for crops -- an ancient, irresponsible practice
3. Mass plantings of a single cultivar? -- an old practice, can be responsible
4. Something else?

island cassie
02-27-2008, 09:47 PM
Yes Richard - all monoculture scenarios reduce the gene field -historically it was hit and miss in that it wasn't all pervasive. Once you get mass plantings with gm plants and the crossover into native plants, then when mass spraying of herbicides/pesticides and the excess spray that extends into neighbouring areas - nowhere is safe from the blight!! The problem is that it cannot be contained!! If one farmer wanted to grow gm crops and it was contained - there would be no problem! But this is not the case! We who do not want it, have no choice as the likes of Monsanto force it upon us. Plus we cannot tell which of our foods contain this poison!!!

island cassie
02-27-2008, 09:48 PM
Sorry for the rant!!!

Bananaman88
02-27-2008, 10:20 PM
My wife is in plant research (on rice) and she is sending me a link about the work that is being done on Musa for this project. I'll try to post it tomorrow if I have time so you all can read it. She was reading me some of it earlier tonight and it sounded very interesting.

Tropicallvr
02-27-2008, 10:32 PM
What is the difference between a "natural" hybridization breeding program that produces 400 million trials and eventually someone finds the white marigold -- or doing it a few times in the lab with GM and avoiding the unwanted millions of mis-crosses?


:o

From what I have gather genetic modification is rather trial and error also. Say like when some scientists mixed cod(fish) genes with a tomato to make a more cold hardy tomato, they got many "freaks" and then they had to discard many unuseful plants.

Richard
02-27-2008, 10:55 PM
Cassie, your comments do not sound like ranting to me. I'm trying to understand your concerns.

... We who do not want it, have no choice as the likes of Monsanto force it upon us. Plus we cannot tell which of our foods contain this poison!!!

If you are referring to sterile crops, by definition they do not mix with others.

What do you mean by poison?

Richard
02-27-2008, 11:01 PM
From what I have gather genetic modification is rather trial and error also.

That scenario is very experimental! I am more familiar with very specific crossing at the molecular level of one crop plant with known genetic markers, and the rRNA (molecular) section of another with desirable markers missing in the first.

island cassie
02-27-2008, 11:17 PM
When plants are "crossed" with genes from different species like jellyfish - who knows what is being introduced into the mix to allow commercial exploitation!

Richard
02-27-2008, 11:37 PM
When plants are "crossed" with genes from different species like jellyfish - who knows what is being introduced into the mix to allow commercial exploitation!

Suppose you want to introduce a genetic marker that is not present in a subsection of the genetics (rRNA subsection) of the target plant. However, you find an otherwise identical subsection in another organism. You then use tools (proteins, really) that will perform this replacement surgery for you.

One variety of very sweet, high-protein white corn that has been a lifesaver in 3rd world countries was produced this way by "borrowing" subsections from the genetics of a wheat variety and another sweet corn variety.

momoese
02-28-2008, 12:00 AM
Suppose you want to introduce a genetic marker that is not present in a subsection of the genetics (rRNA subsection) of the target plant. However, you find an otherwise identical subsection in another organism. You then use tools (proteins, really) that will perform this replacement surgery for you.

One variety of very sweet, high-protein white corn that has been a lifesaver in 3rd world countries was produced this way by "borrowing" subsections from the genetics of a wheat variety and another sweet corn variety.

Richard, I have had this conversation Frank(bigdog) and others before. I didn't say all GMO's are bad, I have no proof of that, but I do not condone them. That's my opinion and it's based on common sense.

Cross pollination from GMO crops is indisputable period.

Just remember that all seeds that are being modified with what ever have you were once heirloom seeds. I can't stress enough the importance of saving the heirloom strains for the future, whether it be for more GMO testing or to correct the damage that GMO may cause to the human food chain.

And I'll say this again, if we need GMO crops to support human life then we just have to many people here. It's pretty simple!

island cassie
02-28-2008, 12:19 AM
Richard - are you sure that this "sweet high protein" corn has been the lifesaver that it is supposed to be? So often the downsides are ignored in the interests of corporate publicity.

Richard
02-28-2008, 12:24 AM
Mitchel, you are misunderstanding me.

Cross-pollination from sterile crops does not occur, but I agree that cross-pollination from non-sterile GM plants is occurring and in some cases harmful.

I disagree that all seeds being modified were once heirloom seeds, certainly some of them were. Of the over 200 plants I am growing, about 1/2 are heirloom, the other 1/2 still on patents, 100% of them are hybrids, and 0% are GM. I do eat GM corn on a monthly basis though.

I agree that there are too many people on the planet. I don't think that implies anything one way or the other about GM.

I don't think there will be adequate safe-guards in place for GM until the unbridled fears have all but gone away and we can focus on specific, tangible problem areas.

Richard
02-28-2008, 12:27 AM
Richard - are you sure that this "sweet high protein" corn has been the lifesaver that it is supposed to be? So often the downsides are ignored in the interests of corporate publicity.

It was not developed by a corporation, and there were no corporate stakeholders in that project last I read (~fall 2004).

momoese
02-28-2008, 09:36 AM
I disagree that all seeds being modified were once heirloom seeds, certainly some of them were.


They all have roots that date back to Heirloom varieties. You can't have Hybrid seeds without first having heirlooms. This is not the chicken or the egg first question! :D

Tropicallvr
02-28-2008, 10:16 AM
That scenario is very experimental! I am more familiar with very specific crossing at the molecular level of one crop plant with known genetic markers, and the rRNA (molecular) section of another with desirable markers missing in the first.

That makes sense,
what really pops into in my mind when I think of genetic manipulation is the really wild experiments that I heard are going on with different animal species, and animals and plants.

Richard
02-28-2008, 12:24 PM
They all have roots that date back to Heirloom varieties. You can't have Hybrid seeds without first having heirlooms. This is not the chicken or the egg first question! :D

Heirloom is a marketing term used to distinguish hybrids that are both
1. stable -- they reproduce true from their own seed
2. no longer proprietary

Hybridization is a natural process and occurs quite frequently unattended in the wild. Consider the natural seedless hybrid papaya relative, the Babaco. Several seedless banana varieties have occurred the same way.

Some fruiting species hybridize so easily and often in the wild that what might be considered the original is long gone. Tomatoes and peppers fall into this category.

momoese
02-28-2008, 03:26 PM
Perhaps I'm mixing up my terminology, but I think you know what I mean.

You forgot to mention that Heirlooms are always open pollinated, usually regional, and almost always isolated. The same heirloom variety will differ from place to place depending on which seeds were saved, local climates, soil, etc. I think 50 years old is generally the rule for age.

My point of this discussion is that we need to save Heirloom seeds for future generations. If we have to save 1 variety of Heirloom seed from a 100 locations than so be it.

It would nice to know that if something catastrophic were to happen there would be some good seed saved.

Richard
02-28-2008, 04:51 PM
Perhaps I'm mixing up my terminology, but I think you know what I mean.

I'm getting closer to understanding :) I really appreciate your patience.

I believe the terminologies you are looking for are synthetic vs. non-synthetic generation.

Examples of synthetic generation are:
1. exposure of plant material (often seeds) to radioactive sources - beyond what occurs at natural outcrops of radioactive rocks (e.g., in Africa and NE Canada).
2. genetic modification via micro-biological intervention.

Did you know that there are plant cultivars originally produced by radiative treatment that are now considered heirlooms? This is because the patents have expired (all plant patents do) and they are now in the public domain. Ten years from now there will also be some plants produced by GM that are sold as heirlooms.

There is no rule for the pollination method or age of an heirloom -- other than patent expiration and it self-reproduce true-to-type.

"Open pollination in isolation" has always struck me as an odd concept. I'm trying to imagine the labor involved in escorting bees straight from the hive in the morning into the isolated area, then getting them all out again. Or do they just kill the bees? Hand pollination in an isolated environment is far less costly and labor intensive. A 10 x 12 greenhouse of tomato plants will can produce anywhere from 10,000 to 100,000 viable seeds depending on type. With many wildflowers, 4 plants in a cloque can yield 500,000 seeds.