Comparison photos of GM/non-GM (Was: Paying to find non-GE wild corn?)
 

Gordon Couger wrote:

From: "Brian Sandle"
: As well as looking a bit less curly your non-GM plants are a darker green,
: less yellow than the GM ones. How much of that is due to moisture storage
: by the mulch, as opposed to some sort of residual effect of the Roundup
: on the RR plants, or differences in film? I presume the film was the same.

http://www.couger.com/farm

There is no differece from the RR resistance most of the differece is one is
taken faceing west and on is take facing south and the convential till has
been out of the ground a little longer and is greener from more
photosyntisis and less disease problems.

But is the disease resulting from the need for the plant to put more
energy into making the RR metabolizing protein?

Or is the yellowness something else, too?

Where are some other honest comparison photos?

Comparison photos of GM/non-GM (Was: Paying to find non-GE wild corn?)
 

"Brian Sandle" wrote in message
...
Gordon Couger wrote:

From: "Brian Sandle"
: As well as looking a bit less curly your non-GM plants are a darker
green,
: less yellow than the GM ones. How much of that is due to moisture
storage
: by the mulch, as opposed to some sort of residual effect of the
Roundup
: on the RR plants, or differences in film? I presume the film was the
same.

http://www.couger.com/farm

There is no differece from the RR resistance most of the differece is
one is
taken faceing west and on is take facing south and the convential till
has
been out of the ground a little longer and is greener from more
photosyntisis and less disease problems.

But is the disease resulting from the need for the plant to put more
energy into making the RR metabolizing protein?

You are tying to see more than can be drawn from those pictures. They are
different varieties on different soils that were planted on different days
by different planters and the soil condition was extremely different.

Where are some other honest comparison photos?

I have never seen photos of comparing cotton that is just coming comparing
up with RR and conventional. The latest research I know of shows RR
varieties costing a few pounds of lint and BT varieties adding about twice
what RR costs. In my moisture limited conditions in south west Oklahoma no
one can see the difference.

In west Texas last year the best irrigated cotton made 5 bales to the acre
most of them are using RR cotton because of a perennial weed they call lake
weed that needs spraying with Round Up. Before RR cotton we would have to
lay out a year to get it. The few pounds RR cotton cost sure beat skipping a
year of crops to fight perennial weeds like lake weed or silver leaf night
shade.

I doubt that a set of photos on the internet exists that compares those
conditions.

The photo set I put out is to compare soil condition. Trying to stretch it
to compare RR to conventional is not possible because the there are too many
variables. I was raised in that area and all the cotton looked normal except
it was surprising to see the cotton in the conventional photo made it up
because it was planted the day it rained. The only reason it made it up was
the soil was work up so loose from trying to get rid of clods in dry weather
that the soil didn't saturate on the first rain.

You can't ever compare cotton on those two palaces on the way they come up.
Because cotton comes up slower on the soil where the no till plot is. It is
a sandy hill top that take a 2 or 3 days longer to come up than cotton on
the convention place if things are equal and the cotton is planted at the
same dept. Normal we got cotton up about the same time. He can start
planting a day or two earlier than I did and normally planted a little
shallower than I did.

The only way I ever compared cotton was to put the one I was testing in the
two out side boxes of the planter and harvest them separately. That way I
could compare them with the variety I knew all season long side by side.
Unless the fields are treated exactly the same the comparisons aren't valid.

Here are all the pictures I shot that day.
http://www.couger.com/farm/album/

Gordon

Comparison photos of GM/non-GM (Was: Paying to find non-GE wild corn?)
 

On 29 Jul 2003 03:09:42 GMT, Brian Sandle
posted:

Gordon Couger wrote:

From: "Brian Sandle"
: As well as looking a bit less curly your non-GM plants are a darker green,
: less yellow than the GM ones. How much of that is due to moisture storage
: by the mulch, as opposed to some sort of residual effect of the Roundup
: on the RR plants, or differences in film? I presume the film was the same.

http://www.couger.com/farm

There is no differece from the RR resistance most of the differece is one is
taken faceing west and on is take facing south and the convential till has
been out of the ground a little longer and is greener from more
photosyntisis and less disease problems.

But is the disease resulting from the need for the plant to put more
energy into making the RR metabolizing protein?

Brian, please look at some plant biochemistry texts and see how
glyphosate resistance works and how protein expression takes
negligible energy from the plants normal processes. That's a greenie
scare tactic.

Or is the yellowness something else, too?

Lack of sunlight by comparison to the others, as he said. Plants need
sunlight to actually make chlorophyll

Where are some other honest comparison photos?

Of what?