Beer, the third most consumed beverage in the world, contains a variety of different proteins from a couple of plants. Aside from the 40 yeast proteins found in beer, the drink also contains 20 barley proteins and 2 proteins from corn. These proteins can play many different roles, such as assisting in fermentation or maintaining the attractive foam that is found atop the golden beverage.

A more detailed understanding of beer’s proteome has some implications. For example, controlling which proteins are expressed when could change the taste or texture of the beer. In addition, introduction of proteins into beers could provide nutritional value or increase the efficiency of beer production. Further understanding beer’s proteome could only assist in the ability to engineer optimal beers for the future.

Discussion Question: What benefits could you imagine that engineered brews would have?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100929105642.htm
Journal Article: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/pr100551n

White clovers are especially seen as lawn weeds in backyards and woods. While three-leaf clovers are commonly found in nature, four-leaf clovers are the ones you really want to come across. Four- leaf clovers have been considered a symbol of good luck and fortune and when you find one, you have the “Luck o’ the Irish.”

Scientists are currently looking into how exactly the common three-leaf clover can be found with four-leaves. They discovered that there is a specific gene underlying this remarkable change. With the help of new molecular technology, further experiments were conducted and researchers were able to work with the gene of interest in the white clover.

Scientists studied two populations of white clover plants, raised them in different environments, and analyzed the DNA. By understanding the varying breeding methods of the plant and examining new generations of clovers for qualities of interest, researchers are able to speed up the process of white clover cultivars.

Additionally, by looking at the inheritance pattern of the white clover, scientists at the University of Georgia are closer to uncovering the genetic workings of four leaves in clovers. Genetic modifications of current three-leaf white clovers could lead to more four-leaf clovers and more luck for everyone.

Discussion Question: What other plants do you know that are believed to bring good fortune?

News article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/06/100624141000.htm
Journal article: https://www.crops.org/publications/cs/abstracts/50/4/1260

The particular species of fungus that caused the Irish potato famine is Phytophthora infestans.  However, other species of Phytophthora infect potatoes, soybeans, and ornamental plants.  Despite modern pesticide use, scientists acknowledge that the disease caused by the fungus is still extremely difficult to control.

In a promising avenue of research, scientists are working on making a synthetic form of a fungus hormone, alpha-1, that could prevent fungus growth.  While still in its preliminary stages, it is hoped that advances in the production of this hormone will ultimately reduce crop damage costs and potentially prevent another epidemic.

Discussion Question: Do you know of any other plant diseases that have caused starvation or took the lives of many people due to crop damage?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101117121811.htm
Journal Article: http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ol102177j

While we are still a few days away from Saint Patrick’s Day, tonight my family and I are sitting down to a hearty meal of corned beef and cabbage to celebrate the occasion, and if I have my way at all, we will all have a nice pint of Guinness  in front of us to round out the meal. My true motive here could be something less than respectable (it is St. Patty’s Day after all), but the argument I’ll make comes straight from that old Guinness ad campaign—“Guinness is Good For You!”
And this is no half-truth. Studies within the past decade have shown that consuming alcoholic beverages in moderation—especially dark beer or red wine—reduces the occurrence of coronary artery disease due to the presence of polyphenolic compounds that are found in many alcoholic beverages. These compounds contribute to certain biologic factors that help to slow down the deposit of harmful cholesterol on artery walls, a condition known as atherosclerosis. Polyphenols improve the function of the endothelium (a group of cells comprising the inner lining of our blood vessels), which benefits our vascular health by inhibiting platelet activity and vascular smooth muscle cell proliferation and migration, two conditions known to contribute to atherosclerotic development.
But don’t think that any drink from your local Irish pub will get you this kind of bang for your buck. As mentioned above, dark-colored beers and red wine seem to provide most vascular protection as compared to white wine and liquor. While the alcohol content per serving is roughly equivalent among the various drinks, the findings suggest that alcohol itself is not what accounts for all of the health benefits, but rather it is the polyphenols found within only certain types of alcoholic drinks.
And yes, if you were wondering, the volume consumed does make a difference, too (perhaps unfortunately for some). The research suggests that the beneficial effects are most pronounced when consumption of alcoholic beverages is done in moderation. To put that in numbers, researchers from the University of Wisconsin suggested that 24 fluid ounces of Guinness—a pint and a half—at mealtimes is the most beneficial.
So this Saint Patrick’s Day, don’t feel bad if you throw back one or two in recognition of this old Irish holiday, for a pint a day will keep the heart trouble away. But remember, the key is in moderation. As for me, I most definitely plan on a pint (and a half!) of Guinness with my traditional Irish dinner tonight. As the saying goes, drink to your health!
Discussion Question: A “full Irish breakfast” consists of several courses including a starter of fruit, followed by cereal, a main course of fried eggs and bacon, tea with milk, and toast. We know Guinness is good for you, but what parts of this other Irish staple might help (or hurt) our health from what you can find on the Greenseedling website?

News Article: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3266819.stm
Research Article: http://www.pathophysiologyjournal.com/article/S0928-4680(03)00052-X/abstract

Despite this former ease of shopping for produce, today’s consumers must now gear up for the battle of organic vs. non-organic before biting into that red delicious apple.  So, when faced with this additional choice, should consumers stick to the conventional fruits and vegetables or go organic?

The organic foods craze originated with the birth of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and various food protection and food quality acts.  Over the years, researchers have correlated pesticide usage with adverse health effects such as neurodevelopmental disorders and higher incidences of learning disabilities in children exposed to greater amounts of pesticides.  Thus, one might believe consuming organic foods to be healthier because of the food’s lack of exposure to chemicals during the cultivation process.  This particular pesticide limiting theory may hold true; however, when it comes to the taste of organic foods vs. conventional foods, which is better?

According to an article from Natural-Health-Guide.com, organic food may actually taste better than conventionally produced food.  They attribute this taste difference to the water content of the produce.  Because conventional fertilizers include nitrogen, the plant will have a tendency to absorb more water, causing the fruit or vegetable to have a somewhat diluted taste.  Organic produce seems to have a more concentrated flavor because of the greater percentage of dry components.

In addition to their stronger taste, organic produce may provide consumers with a fresher alternative.  Many organic farms operate on a small scale and actually ship their produce to buyers soon after harvesting.  As opposed to some conventional produce that may have a longer journey from the field to the kitchen, the hasty shipment methods of organic foods may attribute to the increased freshness and improved taste.

The Department of Crop and Soil Sciences from Washington State University also found a significant taste difference in organic produce.  In their study of organic, conventional, and integrated apple orchards, researchers concluded organic apples to have a sweeter taste and to be firmer than the conventional or the integrated apples.

While many individuals may not possess the ability to choose the organic food over the conventional food in a blind taste test, the overall taste preference for organic produce may lie in the eye of the beholder.  For those individuals striving to limit their intake of environmental pollutants, they may perceive organic foods to taste significantly better than conventional foods.   Ultimately, without a ban on the use of pesticides and insecticides during farming, consumers have the right to choose the type of produce they wish to consume, regardless of the freshness or taste.

Discussion Question:  Would the overall health of society improve if the government only allowed for organic farming?  Do your own taste test:  what taste differences, if any, do you notice between conventional and organic produce?  Send us your findings!

Links to Sources:
http://www.natural-health-guide.com/benefits-of-organic-food.html
http://www.plantmanagementnetwork.org/pub/cm/symposium/organics/Reganold/

The study, led by John Reganold of Washington State University, exclusively used commercial farms in California for its data collection; researchers conducted the fruit and soil collection from 2004 to 2005.  Strawberries collected from organic farms yielded smaller fruits with greater dry weight than conventional strawberries; organic strawberries also lost less fresh weight when harvested and tested for shelf-life.  The study did not measure overall yield per acre of the farms.

Additionally, researchers found that organic strawberries had higher concentrations of ascorbic acid (vitamin C) and phenolics and higher antioxidant activity.  Organic strawberries contained less potassium and phosphorus, but the authors of the study note that strawberries are not the best sources of either element and claim that lower phosphorus concentrations may be beneficial in light of increasing phosphorus consumption in the United States.

Researchers also analyzed environmental effects of farming conditions by collecting surface and bottom soils and testing for concentrations of certain elements and nutrients, as well as microbial biomass and genetic diversity.  While the soils had generally similar levels of nutrients, organic soils contained more nitrogen and carbon, which can improve soil fertility and water storage.  Microbes in the organic soils showed greater biomass, genetic diversity, and essential enzymatic activity, such as the ability to convert nitrogen into a form useable by plants and animals.

This strawberry study is unique in its testing of an abundance of quality indicators, as well as its use of a large number of commercial farms.  In nearly all categories, organic farming came out on top, at least in its effects on strawberries.

Discussion question: What are some differences between tests conducted in a lab environment and those done in the field?

News article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100901171553.htm
Journal article: http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0012346

Photo: kai-Martin Knaak, GNU Free Documentation License

Although there have been many positive effects associated with the use of natural pesticides and Bt crops, there are also drawbacks. Production of organic insecticides can often be costly or inefficient, while Bt crops face an entirely different problem. In a recent study done by researchers at the University of Notre Dame, remnants of Bt crops have been shown to flow downstream and into areas where Bt crops are not normally found.

When these insecticidal byproducts of Bt crops infiltrate other ecosystems, they could cause multiple problems. First of all, the insects in these areas can be directly impacted by the transgenic remains. As a result of directly lowering the fitness of non-resistant insects, insects resistant to Bt crops could become more prevalent. As mentioned in the second referenced article above, Bt crops planted in one field can also help minimize the damage done to non-Bt crops in adjacent fields because insects cannot differentiate between Bt and non-Bt fields. With the migration of Bt remnants downstream into other ecosystems, the delicate balance of non-Bt and Bt crops could be thrown off, resulting in the evolution of Bt-resistance in insects.
With this in mind, do Bt crops really provide a significant advantage over traditional and natural pesticides? In fact, could transgenic Bt crops actually accelerate the evolution of Bt-resistance in insects more quickly than spraying Bt toxin on crops? Further research will be key to answering these important questions, but we must also focus our attention on preventing the migration of transgenic remnants into other areas.

Discussion Question: What is one possible method for minimizing the migration of transgenic parts of crops to other ecosystems?

News Article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100928111128.htm
Journal Article: http://www.pnas.org/content/107/41/17645

Before we start criticizing GM advocates for patting themselves on the back, though, it is important to realize that there is a good amount of truth behind these claims. It goes without saying that the use of pesticides has dropped drastically since genetically modified crops became commercially available in the 1990s. The ability to develop crops resistant to certain pests has helped farmers reduce the amount of herbicides and insecticides necessary to successfully raise a crop. Residual pesticides that remain active in soils well after their application (the main problem) have been reduced to a minimum with the advent of plants that are able to withstand the more controlled use of popular contact pesticides like glyphosate, more commonly known as “Roundup.” Research in the late-2000s demonstrated the positive environmental improvements that came from a widespread switch to plants able to survive more local applications of herbicides. With this in mind, we should not fail to realize that pest-resistant GM plants have allowed us to come a long way in terms of pesticide use in agriculture.

Though we have seen that there are real benefits to GM crops, mounting evidence in the past several years has begun to demonstrate that the matter is not quite settled yet. While many may think that genetically modified foods that either resist or produce their own pesticides have largely solved the problem, a recent study has shown that insecticides from genetically modified corn has a high probability of finding its way into streams adjacent to fields used for GM corn production. The plant under examination is a widely used variety of corn commonly referred to as Bt corn that has been engineered to resist the European corn borer through the release of Cry1Ab, an insecticidal protein. But this protein, found in the tissues of the plant like the stalk, leaves, husks, and cobs, are capable of being leached from the plant into waterways through runoff or by presence of the plant parts in the stream water itself. It goes without saying that this indirect distribution of the insecticidal proteins does not bode well for the health of stream ecosystems.

Nor does it bode well for the future of genetically modified Bt corn, by far the largest GM variety of corn in use in the United States at 63% of all corn crops. The research indicated that all Cry1Ab protein contamination was found in waterways that were located within 500 meters of a field utilized for corn production; and what is more, judging by current agricultural use patterns, the researchers determined that 91% of all streams and rivers in Iowa, Indiana, and Illinois—the area of the study—are within this 500 meter reach. Obviously, this situation has the potential to have far reaching impacts.

So the jury is still out on GM foods. Whether or not they completely solve the problem of harmful pesticide use is a question that has still yet to be answered, and if the above research is any indicator, it looks as if their impacts will only come under more and more scrutiny. For now, organic foods still hold the crown for pesticide use, or that is to say, the lack of pesticide use.

Discussion Question: In terms of minimizing the impact of pesticide use, will genetically modified foods ever measure up to the environmental standard set by organic foods?

News Articles:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100927155324.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080422103853.htm
Journal Article:
http://www.pnas.org/content/107/41/17645
http://jeq.scijournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/37/2/401

Every year in the U.S., families and friends get together to express their thankfulness and gratitude for each other. Not only do they convey their affection, but they may also be thankful for the wonderful food sitting in front of them. And, as you sit down to eat your meal this Thanksgiving, before devouring that delicious homemade food, you may want to take a minute to consider the content of your food and how exactly it got there.

The yummy mashed potatoes, mouthwatering corn on the cob, flavorful green been casserole and delectable sweet potato pie are all foods that contain cultivated crops. While conventional farming methods are becoming more and more commonly used, we are becoming less aware of the reality of the techniques. While organic farming methods limit the use of pesticides, traditional farming approaches involve manipulating the plant or animal with certain pest-resistant traits, leading to potential health and environmental complications. In fact, the vegetables that we regularly eat are developed with an enormous amount of pesticides. Specifically, 10 out of 12 of the most harmful, existing chemicals happen to be these toxic pesticides. Researchers studying the potentially dangerous chemicals have found that approximately 1.1 billion pounds of pesticides were used in 90% of households in 2002 and more than 16,000 pesticides are currently being marketed by companies in the United States. Despite the fact that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) does its part by regulating the amount of pesticides that humans can use, we still see an increase in toxicity and contamination.

There are many classes of pesticides such as insecticides, rodenticides, fungicides, biocides and herbicides. While herbicides are used to kill undesirable plants, they can sometimes carry many drawbacks with them. A study conducted at Texas A&M University discovered that poisoning from herbicide toxicity occurs after skin contact or upon consumption of the food item. Skin irritations and major stomach discomfort are only a couple of the many harmful effects of these chemicals. Additionally, glyphosate, the most common herbicide used in the USA is a non-selective pesticide that can kill all surrounding vegetation rather than just the selected weed. The unwanted chemicals leach into the soil and through the leaves and roots of the crops we eat, negatively effecting wildlife, the environment and our bodies.  Researchers at the University of Adelaide have uncovered that the principal weed, ryegrass, has attained pest-resistance to the herbicide glyphosate and paraquat. Though the plant achieves resistance to the toxins, the human body does not.

The health risks that arise from the use of pesticides are significant. According to the Centers for Disease Control, a urine test reveals that children have higher levels of pesticide metabolites in their bodies than adults. Additionally, an increase in asthma and cancer is observed upon pesticide exposure. There is also a correlation between learning disabilities and pesticides. An LA Times article displays that certain farm sprays may raise the possibility of acquiring Autism. Simultaneously, these pesticides can result in ample neurologic effects such as olfactory and behavioral deficits and sensor neuropathy. A study at Stanford University’s School of Medicine discovered that Parkinson’s Disease can develop upon exposure to one of the most commonly used pesticides worldwide, paraquat. Another common chemical, Atrazine, is used in pesticides and has the potential to reach waterways, contaminating the water we drink. Studies have shown that Atrazine can disturb the function of the sex organs in unborn children. So, should we be worried from all these findings?

While our Thanksgiving food may be genetically modified or altered with the use of such toxins, they still seem so tasty.  I urge you to take a minute and reconsider the quality of the food, because some of these appetizing foods have the hidden potential to pose such a critical threat to our health.

Discussion Question: Besides the pesticides used in the crops that we eat, do you know of any household chemicals that have possible hazardous effects?

Source Links:
http://www.gardenguides.com/101281-herbicide-pros-cons.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pesticide#cite_note-OGY2010-21
http://www.gardenguides.com/101281-herbicide-pros-cons.html
http://www.livestrong.com/article/267686-what-are-the-dangers-of-herbicides-in-food/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbicides
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/10/101019121810.htm
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1552-6909.2009.01092.x/abstract;jsessionid=F0DCCF4E2A20C55493822BD1A08A826E.d03t02
http://www.cdc.gov/nceh/hsb/pesticides/activities.htm
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jul/30/local/me-autism30
http://www.greenseedling.com/2010/10/26/superweeds/

A recent study from the British Journal of Psychiatry suggests that cannabidiol, one of the two active cannabinoids in marijuana, may act to alleviate the memory-impairing effects of THC, the other active cannabinoid.

The experimental design was cavalier in that researchers went to the homes of their 134 volunteer subjects and asked them to smoke their personal stash, as well as give the researchers a small sample for analysis—in the US, only marijuana provided by the government’s National Institute on Drug Abuse is approved for research purposes. Different strains of illicitly produced and sold marijuana can vary greatly in THC and cannabidiol, allowing researchers to search for a relationship between relative compound concentrations and effects on cognitive function.

Subjects were asked to perform cognitive tasks such as prose recall when sober and high and to report their mood.  Researchers then compared the performance of individuals who had smoked marijuana strains containing consistent THC levels but varying cannabidiol levels; they concluded that subjects who smoked marijuana containing greater levels of cannabidiol did not experience memory impairment and suffered less anxiety when high than low-cannabidiol users did.

The researchers concluded that using marijuana containing higher levels of cannabidiol was more advisable than low cannabidiol and warn that the trend in illicit production of the drug has been toward high THC, low cannabidiol strains in recent years.  Finally, they claim that the study suggests potential therapeutic uses for cannabidiol.

Discussion question: What are some of the differences among the sample population that could have influenced the researchers’ results?

News article: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=marijuana-memory
Journal abstract: http://bjp.rcpsych.org/cgi/content/short/197/4/285?rss=1

Image credit: Drug Enforcement Administration/Public Domain