Plants to which a gene was added that makes them glow in the sky, were grown on the space station and surprisingly - the roots were down and the leaves were up despite the minuscule gravity
The world is changing. Greenhouse gases accumulate in the atmosphere, the global temperature is constantly increasing. Sea level is gradually rising as the polar ice retreats. Edible plants are now growing in new places.
The question is, can life adapt to change?
A number of genetically modified plants grown for about two years on the International Space Station may help answer this question.
"Our environment on Earth is changing, so we want to examine how plants adapt to a new environment," says Anna Lisa Paul, a molecular biologist at the University of Florida. "Flight in space is beyond the range of evolutionary experience of any living being. Learning how plants respond to the unique environment can also tell us how plants respond to new challenges on Earth."
The video published by NASA in the ScienceCast series describes how plants that glow in the dark can survive in space
Powell and her colleague Rob Pearl are the principal investigators of an experiment on the space station known as TAGES, Transgenic Arabidopsis Gene Expression System. For the past two years, they have grown a bed of Arabidopsis thaliana (Arabidopsis thaliana) in a growth chamber on the International Space Station. Using cameras, they have followed the rate of growth, the pattern of the roots and the strange green glow.
"We made a genetic change of the plant so that it will be careful when it is under stress" Paul explains. "This can tell us a lot about how the white tern adapts to a microgravity environment."
Learning how plants adapt to a new situation is essential to climate change research. In terms of total biomass on Earth, plants exceed the total mass of mammals by a thousand times. They are a dominant component of the biosphere and play a key role in the carbon cycle.
Scientists and farmers have been experimenting with plants for hundreds of years, but at the basic, molecular level, much is still unknown. This is why Paul and Pearl exposed them to different conditions including heat and cold, as well as drought conditions. Most of their work was done on Earth, but some of the experiments could only be done in space.
"Removing gravity from the equation reveals unique aspects of cell growth and development that we cannot discover in any other way," says Pearl. "The International Space Station is an excellent place to do such an experiment."
In an article in the journal Plant Biology, Paul and her colleagues compare how plants grow in space compared to growth on the ground. "We saw some things that surprised us," Paul reports.
Paul and Pearl inserted a luminescent "marker gene" into the DNA of Todarnit that was activated by the plant hormone auxin. Auxin is a hormone that activates the response of plants to their environment. By viewing parts of the plant in the light, they located the action of the hormone at the cellular level without analyzing the plants.
"We expected to find auxin signals in the gravity-sensing cells at the tip of the roots. Instead, it appeared in a stem-like area between the roots and the leaves (hypocotyl)," she says.
A bigger surprise was in the 'tending ability' - that pattern of the movement of the roots in the soil on the surface of the earth allows them to bypass barriers such as sticks stuck in the ground or stones in search of water and nutrients. Paul recalls that she was with Rob when the pictures from the space station arrived. "Do those roots tend?" a question. This pattern was there despite the absence of gravity.
"It was quite exciting," she says. "This is something we thought only occurred in the presence of gravity." The two say that the light served as a substitute for gravity and hinted to the plants what was up and what was down. "With bulbs shining from above, roots grew in a separate direction from the leaves, just like on Earth."
"The white terrarium has demonstrated a wonderful ability to adapt to the space environment," notes Perl.
The reason for this is still not fully clear but thanks to the Tages trial, data at the cellular and genetic level are now available for research.
10 תגובות
Spring.
I know the article here is a translation of a NASA journal article, meaning you didn't add the mention of global warming as a reason to justify the study of plants in space. I checked the newspaper article in English before commenting, I didn't check the words of the researchers themselves because it is complicated or not possible. But – – – whoever is responsible for the strange mention of global warming, the NASA journalist or the researchers themselves, whoever initiated the strange mention underestimates the intelligence of the readers. If someone wanted to give a reason to justify the research they could find better reasons. An example of better reasoning is the intention in the future to establish a research human colony outside the Earth.
Please contact NASA with complaints (go to the link to the article on the NASA website and you will see that I did not make it up)
Regardless of the question of accuracy in predicting global warming. There is no connection between growing plants in space and global warming. Therefore the very mention of global warming as a prelude to research on growing plants in space sounds, to put it mildly, a *very strange* mention.
I hope the researchers did not mean to say: in the event that the Earth burns with heat or is flooded with sea water, they plan for humanity to move to live in the pleasant living environment of outer space, therefore the research examines the possibility of growing food plants in space.
Miracles - if only someone who understood the field would talk about it (and I'm not talking here on the Internet - but in front of a large audience)
So many on your side of the debate, many need to be silent and not just Gabi Avital who, although some of his points I think are important, he is quite creative and probably first shot the arrow and only then marked the target.
- Regarding "warming"
Again - it is quite possible that the last decade will be by and large the warmest in a century - and still that warming will slow down -
There is a difference between a value - and the derivative of the value. And you should know this - few claim that it is not relatively hot right now -
The point is that most of the alarmists' models simply missed this slowdown.
And that means they don't understand the climate that much and therefore their warnings should be taken with a limited guarantee.
Asaf
Gabi Avital is an idiot with certificates (and he has no certificate in the field of climate). I would not bring him to strengthen any claim...
I also felt discomfort with the first paragraph. I'm not an expert, but I heard a lecture by Dr. Gabi Avital on the subject. Also, the connection between the sentences is weak. What is the relationship between the state of the climate, sea level and plant growth? Where did the phrase "edible plants grow today in new places" come from? And in addition, there are many spelling errors throughout the article. "Hasbahba" "Hakim"
David:
What exactly did you expect?
There are several options:
One is the one my father resorted to - to contradict the claim using the facts.
The second is to delete the angry comment.
The third is to ignore her.
The third option is the worst because it creates the impression that the ranting claim is true.
That's why I didn't take this option also regarding your response, which apart from baseless provocation has no content.
The second option is reserved for more serious cases.
The first option remains.
In the claims that all this senseless conversation developed, the claims should not be made except to the brawlers themselves.
Haha, father, show him what this is, it's a boxing ring, not a content site in the field of science and technology
The facts probably won't help, the Republicans have decided to insist on a figure, and they base it on the fact that people don't know statistics. What do you think if you tell a lie a million times it will become the truth? After all, the last decade was the hottest in history, what are you talking about?
They lie about the first sentence. I stopped reading from there.
'Greenhouse gases are accumulating in the atmosphere, the global temperature is constantly rising'
The 'greenhouse gases' have been rising and rising, and the temperature has been stable for 15 years.