|
|
|
| Authored by: Chromatix on Saturday, June 30 2012 @ 08:00 AM EDT |
| Dominant traits are simply expressed 75% of the time if there is a random
50%
distribution of a dominant and a recessive gene. Unless the dominant
gene
confers a reproductive advantage, that 50% distribution will not increase
over
time and so neither will the 75%. The geographical spread will tend to
increase over time though.
However, when the distribution is not fully
random, interesting effects can
arise. For example, if an entire field of
natural corn is pollinated entirely by a
nearby field of GM corn, the resulting
seeds will have 50% GM genes but will
*all* show the dominant characteristic
because they all have one each of the
genes. This is an extreme form of
geographical spread.
On the other hand, if the grandparent's analysis (and
the underlying decision)
is correct, then the dominant characteristic *did*
effectively confer a
reproductive advantage, via the farmer. This allows the
gene population to
grow from a small proportion to a larger one over time.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Wol on Saturday, June 30 2012 @ 03:28 PM EDT |
Doing simple maths ... if the prevailing wind is from the GM crop ...
What percentage of the non-GM crop will be pollinated by GM pollen? 10%? 20%? So
the non-GM crop will be reduced by that percentage each year. At 10% then 1/3
the non-GM crop will be contaminated in 4 years. It's amazing how quickly the
figures mount up.
Surely the farmer could/should have appealed based on the fact the Judge ruled
"on facts not in evidence" which were in fact wrong.
(Add in that weedkiller is routinely used on field edges, which will add further
selection pressures for the GM seed, even if it's not strong.)
Cheers,
Wol[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Saturday, June 30 2012 @ 07:15 PM EDT |
But you ignore, straight from the opinion,
"[126] Other farmers who found volunteer Roundup
tolerant plants in their fields, two of whom testified at
trial, called Monsanto and the undesired plants were
thereafter removed by Monsanto at its expense."
all he had to do was call Monsanto and get it cleaned up.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
