Valentines Surprise: Genetically Modified Roses
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto on 02.12.07
If you see a blue rose, then it has been dyed. If you get a red rose for Valentines Day, it probably doesn't smell like roses used to- "there is a trade-off between the energy that plants spend on making the complex, volatile chemicals that attract women and insects alike, and that available for making and maintaining pretty-coloured petals. So, by artificially selecting big, long-lasting flowers, breeders have all but erased another desirable characteristic."
Now, through the wonders of genetic modification, Yoshi Tanaka of Suntory has engineered a blue rose that should be a hot item in 2010. Others are figuring out how to adjust the smells: "Dr Dudareva is measuring how quickly the enzymes in scent-production pathways work, in order to identify bottlenecks and thus places where her metabolic-engineering efforts would best be concentrated."
This Valentine's day, why not try one of Kara's TreeHugger-friendly ideas instead. ::Economist
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- An Organic Cash Crop in the Galapagos?
- The Strange, Sexy Dance of the Blue-Footed Boobies
- The Wilting Flower and The FlowerPod: Two Budding Concepts for Visualizing Home Energy Use
- Psyched by Cutting Edge Science? Watch Science Channel’s Brink Premiere This Friday
"Night Wind" Project to Test Electricity Storage in Refrigerated Warehouses
|
Tell Congress to Support Clean Energy
|
Why don't we ask the Union Of Concerned Scientists what they think of Genetic Engineerin, according to some of the less "cubicle"-minded pioneers at UCSB, a "danger that will make even nuclear energy dwarf by comparison"
Who will speak for the 200.000 new creatures created in labs worldwide in the year 2000 alone, by insane people like ourselves - where is their lobby?
Will a chimera have a representative, like some endangered southland migratory bird has?
I believe that when God plays God, he/she does so responsibly. We don't.
How cute, a blue rose. It's aberration stands for me as an indicator of our own, self-destructive mental abberation.
I want no part of it.
Agreed Ride, genetically engineering something for trivial purposes such as this blue rose just for novelties sake is too much. There needs to be stricter controls on GMO's in general.
I wonder what the religious rights view is on GMO's and "playing God".
I just wonder what kind of precautions, if any, have been considered or taken given the sensitivity of GMing and the future ramifications if something goes wrong? Super pine trees chocking out all other tree species anyone?
"I wonder what the religious rights view is on GMO's and "playing God".
Why? Do you think they'd be even more attavistic than you?
hey, anonymous, if you're going to try to be pedantic, at least do yourself the favor of spelling your big word correctly.
2 suggestions:
- Treehugger.com might want to incorporate a spell-checker into their comment system.
- CTP might want to look up the word "pedantic" in the dictionary, so that in the future, he might apply it correctly.
i think i'd freak out if i ever receive a chemically infused blue rose.