Genetic engineers correct an ancient evolutionary defect in plants - and improve the crop by forty percent

The researchers tested their ideas in the tobacco plant, and found that the genetically engineered plants were able to grow faster in the field, reached a greater height and their total mass was about forty percent larger than that of the normal plants. The results have already been published in the prestigious scientific journal Science, and now the researchers are trying to replicate these results in soy, rice, potato, tomato and eggplant plants as well.

Genetically modified vegetables and fruits Image: from PIXABAY.COM
Genetically modified vegetables and fruits Image: from PIXABAY.COM

One of the things I've noticed after many years of writing is that we tend to get carried away with the flashiest technological developments: autonomous vehicles (wow!!), flying vehicles (like back to the future!), robots that walk like humans (the Terminator!) and so on. Of course, these developments have an important meaning for the future, but sometimes it is precisely the less sensational developments that can change the world for the better for billions of people. For example, a silly little protein called "Robusco", which causes trouble for plants all over the world - but not for much longer. And thanks to an extraordinary act of genetic engineering from the last time, we may already in the next decade increase the supply of plant food in the world by almost fifty percent.

Let's explain for a moment what "Robusco" is anyway. You should know it, because it is the most common protein on earth. It is the one that works in plants and allows them to turn carbon dioxide and water into sugars. The plant uses sugars to produce energy, and what's more - it also uses them to build the stem, seeds, flowers, leaves and all other parts of the plant. The chickens, cows and sheep eat the plant for all its sugars, and then we eat them. Vegetarians skip this mediation, and enjoy directly the natural sugars in the plant, alongside plenty of vitamin pills.

Without Rubisco, most of the plants on earth would - simply - cease to exist. That's why Rubisco is so important and common. It developed early in the evolution of plants and allowed them to succeed in what they do well today: efficiently utilize sunlight in the process of photosynthesis. But over the years, like many good artists, Robisco became his own worst enemy. It originally evolved in an environment with very little oxygen, and this is the environment in which it functions optimally. What else? In the process of photosynthesis, plants absorb carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and release oxygen. Hundreds of millions of years of plant activity has resulted in them filling the Earth's atmosphere with so much oxygen that Rubisco no longer works as well as it used to. He still tries to do his job, but his efficiency decreases under the conditions that exist in the atmosphere today, and he makes many mistakes in the assembly process of the sugars.

so what are we doing? Reengineering the whole business, of course. This is what researchers did at the Institute of Genomic Biology in Illinois, who invested their efforts in re-engineering the tobacco plant. They used advanced genetic engineering techniques to implant in the plants alternative metabolic pathways that would make it possible to easily get rid of Rubisco's mistakes. These pathways are supposed to save resources that the plant would normally divert to handle Rubisco errors.

The researchers tested their ideas in the tobacco plant, and found that the genetically engineered plants were able to grow faster in the field, reached a greater height and their total mass was about forty percent larger than that of the normal plants. The results have already been published in the prestigious scientific journal Science, and now the researchers are trying to replicate these results in soy, rice, potato, tomato and eggplant plants as well.

What will happen if they succeed?

The obvious answer is that we can produce more food, with a smaller investment of energy. After all, the re-engineering of the plants is only correcting a defect left in them from an earlier time in history. We are, in fact, improving the machines that exist in nature, and they will do the rest using sunlight and carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Even if they receive the same amount of water, the improved plants should achieve much better results than the normal plants. And so, we will be able to deal with the growing need of the world's population for food, through a more efficient use of food growing areas.

The more complex meaning is that the development may help humanity in its war on global warming. One of the main reasons for global warming is the accumulation of carbon dioxide molecules in the atmosphere. If we can develop plants capable of absorbing a larger amount of carbon dioxide, then we can minimize the concentration of the greenhouse gas in the air - and thus slow down global warming
Of course, none of this will happen tomorrow morning. The process of re-engineering the plants will require several years, and the approval processes with the legislator are expected to take many more years. Even so, if the development is successful - it will surely reach the agricultural fields sooner or later. It is hard to believe that in a hungry world, which is getting warmer every day, it would be possible to ignore a breakthrough that allows us to feed a much larger number of people, and along the way also restore the climate.

Last but not least, this development only reinforces what I have been preaching for years: be optimistic. In every generation in the last two hundred years, you could find prophets of doom and rage who claimed that humanity would soon be destroyed due to a combination of population explosion, food shortages, fuel shortages, environmental problems and a multitude of other challenges. Everyone - until now - was wrong, because they did not understand how human innovation would provide us with new and more efficient methods of producing food, mining minerals, purifying the environment and dealing with every possible problem. I'm not saying you should rest on the yeast! It is important and worthy to work hard and research to make sure that these solutions will be developed and implemented in the field. But the important thing to understand is that there is no room for pessimism about the environmental future. If we only continue to invest in science and technology - and know how to use their fruits wisely - we can save the world, and humanity together with it.

For the scientific article in Science
For the article in the blog "Another Science"

9 תגובות

  1. The optimization of the one in context A is the impairment of performance and capabilities in context B.

    In this generation, it is possible to bypass a mechanism used to control and regulate plant growth (a population explosion or excessive consumption of resources from the environment is a malfunction) to earn something, but in other conditions a source will be needed.

    And regarding the "proof of intelligent creation or its negation"... whoever speaks like that sins the sin of arrogance in a pitiable way, because human knowledge is so tiny compared to reality that it is worth adopting modesty.

  2. This is an example of a severe blow to the "theory" of intelligent design.
    This is an example of imperfection in nature because it was created by evolution with a random element. So although it tends to be optimized it is not necessarily perfect.

    It is important to note that this is not a development of the "theory" because "intelligent planning" is not scientific and does not meet the standard of a theory that can be developed. Because it is about an intelligent factor, every finding can always be attributed to his will (which we may not even understand), meaning that it can be said that the planner wanted for some reason that the plants would not work efficiently.

  3. A free man, did not mutate Robisco but engineered something new ("They used advanced genetic engineering techniques to implant in plants alternative metabolic pathways that would make it possible to easily get rid of Robisco's errors").
    And it doesn't appear in nature because it doesn't give anything to the plants themselves, but it does benefit humans.
    There are many useful things for humans that can be engineered that do not appear in nature even in millions of years of evolution

  4. free man
    You wrote "Random mutations happen all the time, so at some point this mutation will also appear in Robisco."

    This is half true - at some point she will appear (also not accurate), but not necessarily she has appeared until now.

    If this were true, it would be true for every mutation. Then the world was populated by trillions of different species. That is not the case.

  5. If the mutation that the researchers created in Rubisco is so good, how is it possible that in all the years of existence of the plants it appeared and as a result took over the genome?
    The article does not answer this basic question.
    Anyone familiar with proof by negation will understand the logic in the following proof:
    Let's say that the Robisco change produces stronger, more fertile plants.
    Random mutations happen all the time, so at some point this mutation will also appear in Robisco.
    As a result, the plant will be more fertile and stronger and will therefore be more successful than other plants.
    As a result, its population will increase and after a certain number of generations it will exterminate the plants without the mutation.
    But we do not find in nature that these plants exist.
    Therefore this mutation damages the strength of the plant and its fertility.
    QED

  6. Optimism and pessimism refer to an imagined plan. The only certainty is that we will exist until we die. how long will it take Meanwhile, our problems are piling up fast from the refinements. And the main problem - how to work together without exploitation seems very far from a solution

  7. The comment about vitamins that vegetarians should take is not related to the article, and it's a shame it was posted. She is also wrong.

Leave a Reply

Email will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to filter spam comments. More details about how the information from your response will be processed.