Gene-edited bacteria are being marketed as a cleaner alternative to synthetic fertilizer. But farmers and consumers need to know how well they work and what their long-term impacts are
They genetically modify the bacteria so they can patent it and sell it. Otherwise, you cant patent a natural microbe. Find some smart people to find out what these microbes are and find a work around. Otherwise, turn all farms into regenerative farms, and let nature do its job. I highly suggest a documentary called Biggest Little Farm. They turned baron, dead soil into a garden of Eden.
Thank you for this clear and thoughtful article. We need more scrutiny and deeper analysis within the USDA and EPA before allowing gene-editing technology to be deployed wholesale in the real world. We're so much better off working cooperatively with the natural world, as regenerative ag is doing.
Thank you for the heads up. The questions about how it will affect other bacteria, the food supply, groundwater, etc. are legitimate, and should be answered first. But I don’t understand the reference to the study that found that the bacteria did not increase the yields any more than nitrogen alone. Doesn’t that mean that it is a viable substitute, if proven to be safe, for nitrogen fertilizer without losing yield?
They genetically modify the bacteria so they can patent it and sell it. Otherwise, you cant patent a natural microbe. Find some smart people to find out what these microbes are and find a work around. Otherwise, turn all farms into regenerative farms, and let nature do its job. I highly suggest a documentary called Biggest Little Farm. They turned baron, dead soil into a garden of Eden.
Sarcasm: Of course this has been thoroughly tested for several years, so what could possibly go wrong??
"Safe and effective!"
Yes—it seems good to ask these questions at the inception.
Horrifying.
How has the production strain of Klebsiella variicola been assessed for potential virulence, and for soil and water persistence?
Thank you for this clear and thoughtful article. We need more scrutiny and deeper analysis within the USDA and EPA before allowing gene-editing technology to be deployed wholesale in the real world. We're so much better off working cooperatively with the natural world, as regenerative ag is doing.
Thank you for the heads up. The questions about how it will affect other bacteria, the food supply, groundwater, etc. are legitimate, and should be answered first. But I don’t understand the reference to the study that found that the bacteria did not increase the yields any more than nitrogen alone. Doesn’t that mean that it is a viable substitute, if proven to be safe, for nitrogen fertilizer without losing yield?