Article Higher CO2 levels decreases nutrients in crops (1 Viewer)

[Tapxe]

View: https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2018/06/19/616098095/as-carbon-dioxide-levels-rise-major-crops-are-losing-nutrients

And the effect was clear: Higher CO2 reduced multiple key measures of rice's nutritional value. Across the different types of rice, they observed average decreases of 10 percent in protein, eight percent in iron and five percent in zinc. Four important B vitamins decreased between 13 and 30 percent. The research was recently published in Science Advances.

Higher carbon dioxide is not just affecting rice. There's evidence that the scope of this is much bigger. Harvard's Sam Myers, who studies the impact of climate change on nutrition, has tested CO2's impact on the protein, iron and zinc of a number of staple crops using the same free-air CO2 enrichment technique.

This seems like a solid reason to cut CO2 emissions even if you don't believe in climate change.

 

[superchuck500]

This seems like a solid reason to cut CO2 emissions even if you don't believe in climate change.

Nah. This is just God's way of telling us to eat more rice.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

Nah. This is just God's way of telling us to eat more rice.

mysterious

 

[Saint_Ward]

Farms should plant more trees at their perimeter and a few throughout.

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

Farms should plant more trees at their perimeter and a few throughout.

i'm sure industrial farming is not helping - there's so much nutrient/soil degradation and need for industrial chemical fixes that it perverts the whole process
i doubt we can talk agri-business into old-school crop rotation, but it would be much better

 

[superchuck500]

Feeding cows seaweed helps.

California is pushing for a reduction in greenhouse gases generated from cows, and adding seaweed to the cattle's feed shows promise in reducing potent methane emissions by more than 30 percent, researchers said this week.

Based on preliminary results, the seaweed could help dairy operations cut the level of methane emissions to meet California's new standards. The state's livestock sector — mostly the dairy sector — is responsible for an estimated 55 percent of methane emissions in the state, according to a report from the California Air Resources Board.

Methane is created in cattle production when cows pass gas, belch and defecate. While methane can be short-lived as a climate pollutant, it is considered at least 25 times more potent as a heat-trapping gas than carbon dioxide.

"From the cows, half of the methane emissions is from the belching of the animal and the other half is from the manure," said Ermias Kebreab, one of the researchers behind cows consuming seaweed and an animal science professor at the University of California-Davis. "You can use additives such as seaweed to try to reduce the methane that's belched out of the animal."

California scientists hope feeding cows seaweed will make them less gassy — which could be great news for the environment

 

[Tapxe]

Feeding cows seaweed helps.



California scientists hope feeding cows seaweed will make them less gassy — which could be great news for the environment

Does this work for humans too? I'm asking for a friend.

 

[mjcouvi]

Just to be clear, they're testing the crops in amounts of CO2 that are PROJECTED for the end of the century vs levels of CO2 that they think were present in the pre-industrial age. That's a lot of built in speculation. Maybe the historical levels can be pretty accurate, but 80 years from now is another story.

Plants also grow larger faster with higher amounts of CO2, so one of the theories is that some of the nutrients are just diluted -- there might be the same total amount of nutrients in the plant, it's just that nutrients in a given unit of the larger plant might logically be lower than the smaller plant. So you may have less nutrient dense food, but also more total food -- I think this is the basic historical trend with the mass production of crops. Food has lost some of its nutrient density with mass production, but also there's so much more food that there is less worldwide hunger than ever.

 

[Tapxe]

Just to be clear, they're testing the crops in amounts of CO2 that are PROJECTED for the end of the century vs levels of CO2 that they think were present in the pre-industrial age. That's a lot of built in speculation. Maybe the historical levels can be pretty accurate, but 80 years from now is another story.

Plants also grow larger faster with higher amounts of CO2, so one of the theories is that some of the nutrients are just diluted -- there might be the same total amount of nutrients in the plant, it's just that nutrients in a given unit of the larger plant might logically be lower than the smaller plant. So you may have less nutrient dense food, but also more total food -- I think this is the basic historical trend with the mass production of crops. Food has lost some of its nutrient density with mass production, but also there's so much more food that there is less worldwide hunger than ever.

Ummmm, did you seriously accuse them of rampant speculation to cast dispersion on the findings and then wildly speculate with absolutely no basis other than "I think"?

That is some seriously impressive mental gymnastics.

 

[Saint_Ward]

Just to be clear, they're testing the crops in amounts of CO2 that are PROJECTED for the end of the century vs levels of CO2 that they think were present in the pre-industrial age. That's a lot of built in speculation. Maybe the historical levels can be pretty accurate, but 80 years from now is another story.

Plants also grow larger faster with higher amounts of CO2, so one of the theories is that some of the nutrients are just diluted -- there might be the same total amount of nutrients in the plant, it's just that nutrients in a given unit of the larger plant might logically be lower than the smaller plant. So you may have less nutrient dense food, but also more total food -- I think this is the basic historical trend with the mass production of crops. Food has lost some of its nutrient density with mass production, but also there's so much more food that there is less worldwide hunger than ever.

That's a portion of it, but the fact that the rice had less nutrients and protein as CO2 went up is a fact. What that fact means for the future is up for debate, as you are mentioning.

Abstract
Declines of protein and minerals essential for humans, including iron and zinc, have been reported for crops in response to rising atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration, [CO2]. For the current century, estimates of the potential human health impact of these declines range from 138 million to 1.4 billion, depending on the nutrient. However, changes in plant-based vitamin content in response to [CO2] have not been elucidated. Inclusion of vitamin information would substantially improve estimates of health risks. Among crop species, rice is the primary food source for more than 2 billion people. We used multiyear, multilocation in situ FACE (free-air CO2 enrichment) experiments for 18 genetically diverse rice lines, including Japonica, Indica, and hybrids currently grown throughout Asia. We report for the first time the integrated nutritional impact of those changes (protein, micronutrients, and vitamins) for the 10 countries that consume the most rice as part of their daily caloric supply. Whereas our results confirm the declines in protein, iron, and zinc, we also find consistent declines in vitamins B1, B2, B5, and B9 and, conversely, an increase in vitamin E. A strong correlation between the impacts of elevated [CO2] on vitamin content based on the molecular fraction of nitrogen within the vitamin was observed. Finally, potential health risks associated with anticipated CO2-induced deficits of protein, minerals, and vitamins in rice were correlated to the lowest overall gross domestic product per capita for the highest rice-consuming countries, suggesting potential consequences for a global population of approximately 600 million.

Carbon dioxide (CO2) levels this century will alter the protein, micronutrients, and vitamin content of rice grains with potential health consequences for the poorest rice-dependent countries

And I'll include the discussion of results.

DISCUSSION
As of 2013, approximately 600 million individuals, primarily in Southeast Asia [the countries of Bangladesh, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao People’s Democratic Republic (PDR), Madagascar, Myanmar, and Vietnam], consume ≥50% of their per capita dietary energy and/or protein directly from rice (25, 26). The data shown here provide the first integrated assessment of [CO2]-induced changes in nutritional quality (protein, minerals, and vitamins) for many of the most widely grown rice lines; as such, they indicate that, for key dietary parameters, the [CO2] likely to occur this century will add to nutritional deficits for a large segment of the global population.

In assessing the outcome of the [CO2]-induced dietary changes for rice in the current study, it is evident (Fig. 4) that the bulk of these changes, and the greatest degree of risk, will occur among the highest rice-consuming countries with the lowest GDP. However, as income increases, consumers prefer more diverse caloric sources, with a greater emphasis on protein from fish, dairy, and meat as per western foods (27). Therefore, future economic development could potentially limit future CO2-induced changes in rice nutrition. For example, in Japan, rice accounted for 62% of total food energy consumption in 1959, but that share fell to 40% by 1976 and, in recent years, is <20% (28); in South Korea, per capita rice consumption almost halved since 1975 (29). However, strong, sustained economic growth cannot be assumed for all rice-consuming countries. For example, in Bangladesh, 75% of the total caloric supply per capita came from rice in 1990; 23 years later, in 2013, it was 70% (FAOSTAT); in Madagascar, the percentage of rice consumption has increased since 1990 (25). In addition, other countries, such as Guinea, Senegal, and Côte d’Ivoire, have become more reliant on rice as a percentage of their caloric supply (20 to 40% as of 2011) (30). Overall, although the top rice-consuming countries are likely to change in the coming decades, the reliance on rice globally as a dietary staple will continue.

Specific health outcomes of consuming rice with reduced nutritional quality are also difficult to forecast. Staple foods, such as rice, are widely available and affordable for most of the world’s population, particularly the poor. It is understood that undernutrition can put people at risk in low-income countries for a wide range of other adverse health outcomes, particularly stunting, diarrheal disease, and malaria (31). For example, Kennedy et al. (15) found that the percentages of children under 5 years of age who suffer from stunting, wasting, or are underweight are generally high in countries with very high per capita rice consumption. Overall, the current data suggest that, for these countries, any [CO2]-induced change in nutritional quality would likely exacerbate the overall burden of disease and could affect early childhood development.

It is difficult, without a great deal of additional socioeconomic data at the country level (which is often unavailable), to provide exact estimates of nutritional deficits (protein, minerals, and vitamins) and associated health consequences likely to incur for rice-dependent populations. Yet, CO2-induced reductions in these qualities and associated risks of undernutrition or malnutrition are likely to transcend the entire food chain, from harvest to consumption, especially for the poorest people within a country or region.

Is there a way then to reduce—or negate—this risk? Cultivar selection, either through traditional breeding or genetic modification, to provide nutritionally superior rice with additional CO2 is an obvious strategy. The current data for a genetically diverse set of rice lines suggest that, at least for some characteristics (for example, protein and vitamin B2), many additional lines would need to be screened; furthermore, at present, it can take many years, even decades, to identify, cultivate, and distribute new cereal lines that are adapted to a changing climate (32). In addition, other aspects of climate change, especially temperature, would need to be considered. For example, previous work indicated that rising temperature per se can also reduce protein concentration in rice (33). Although the extent of future surface temperatures would vary depending on location, temperature and [CO2] should also be evaluated concurrently regarding rice nutritional impacts in future assessments.

In addition, management could include application of mineral fertilizers or postharvest biofortification. On the consumer side, education about the role of rising [CO2] on nutrition, including opportunities to implement favorable nutrition practices and food fortification, may also provide opportunities to maintain nutritional integrity. Finally, there is an obvious need for the research community, including agronomists, physiologists, nutritionists, and health care providers, to accurately quantify the exact nature of the [CO2]-induced changes in human nutritional status and their associated health outcomes.

Whereas much remains to be done, the current study provides the first evidence that anticipated [CO2] will result in significant reductions in integrated rice quality, including protein, minerals, and vitamin B, for a genetically diverse and widely grown set of rice lines. Occurrence of these nutritional deficits will most likely affect the poorest countries that are the most rice-dependent. Overall, these results indicate that the role of rising [CO2] on reducing rice quality may represent a fundamental, but underappreciated, human health effect associated with anthropogenic climate change.

I don't think the solution of this problem is that the poor should just eat more is going to be viable. Nutrient density is important.

 

[mjcouvi]

Ummmm, did you seriously accuse them of rampant speculation to cast dispersion on the findings and then wildly speculate with absolutely no basis other than "I think"?

That is some seriously impressive mental gymnastics.

I got the idea of dilution of the crop from the article. That's one of their theories. They also say in the article about how the plants grow larger with more CO2 so that part is not speculation on my part. They don't say anything about the total nutrient content of a single plant, just nutrient density. I don't have a problem with speculation. They're speculating and I'm further speculating.

 

[Tapxe]

I got the idea of dilution of the crop from the article. That's one of their theories. They also say in the article about how the plants grow larger with more CO2 so that part is not speculation on my part. They don't say anything about the total nutrient content of a single plant, just nutrient density. I don't have a problem with speculation. They're speculating and I'm further speculating.

No, you cast doubt upon their CO2 levels. Then did what you are claiming while leaving out important information such as not all nutrients are diluted.

 

[mjcouvi]

You don't doubt that they know what CO2 levels will be at the end of the century? Even if their prediction of CO2 levels are wrong though, I still think it's an interesting study. I think it's important to look at this stuff and I'm glad folks are doing it. I'm just offering up some alternative perspective.

Not all nutrients are equally diluted in the study (vitamin E went up), but for the nutrients that are less dense in the crop, dilution is one of the theories as to why that might be. This one guy in the article says that they'd expect equal dilution across the board, but (now the following is my speculation, not his) it may be that certain nutrients are impacted by larger/faster growth, others not, that's not that hard to comprehend. It's just speculation.

 

[tylertechsas]

This article is pretty interesting.

Emissions of CO2 and N2O from volcanic soil under different crop management using closed non-fixed chambers

https://iuss.org/19th WCSS/Symposium/pdf/1505.pdf

 

[guidomerkinsrules]

This article is pretty interesting.

Emissions of CO2 and N2O from volcanic soil under different crop management using closed non-fixed chambers

https://iuss.org/19th WCSS/Symposium/pdf/1505.pdf

man, you love volcanoes